Sustained improvement of asthma control over 6 months of benralizumab treatment in Canadians with severe asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Background:</b> In Canada nearly 8% of patients with asthma have severe disease. Benralizumab is an anti-IL-5Rα antibody for add-on maintenance therapy of severe eosinophilic asthma. <b>Objective:</b> To describe the change in asthma control in the first 6 months of benralizumab treatment. <b>Methods:</b> POWER is a prospective observational study (NCT03833141; POWER, part of XALOC). Patients were recruited from 23 clinics across Canada from 2019, with an inclusion criteria of blood eosinophils ≥300c/µL, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6) score ≥1.5, and benralizumab naïveté. Treatment response to benralizumab was assessed via patient-reported ACQ-6 at baseline and 24 weeks following first treatment. Asthma control status was reported by full control (mean<0.75), partial control (0.75-1.5), and poor control (>1.5). Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in ACQ-6 is a change of 0.5 units. <b>Results:</b> 88 patients were included in this interim analysis. At week 24, the change in ACQ-6 met the MCID regardless of control status. The mean change for the full cohort was -1.5 (95%CI: -1.8, -1.2), triple the MCID (Figure 1). <b>Conclusion:</b> Patients demonstrated a significant and clinically meaningful difference in asthma control 6 months after initiating treatment with benralizumab. These results show a sustained and impactful benefit in patients initiating therapy with benralizumab.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".