Long-Term Safety of Dupilumab in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Asthma: TRAVERSE Continuation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous clinical trials have demonstrated dupilumab efficacy and safety in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe asthma for up to 3 years. OBJECTIVE: The TRAVERSE continuation study (NCT03620747), a single-arm, open-label study, assessed safety and tolerability of dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks up to an additional 144 weeks (∼3 years) in patients with moderate to severe asthma who previously completed TRAVERSE (NCT02134028). METHODS: Primary end points were incidence and event rates per 100 patient-years of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Secondary end points included adverse events (AEs) of special interest, serious AEs, and AEs leading to study discontinuation. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients participated in the TRAVERSE continuation study (cumulative dupilumab exposure, 431.7 patient-years; median treatment duration, 309 days). A total of 29 patients (7.4%) received more than 958 days of treatment. A total of 214 (54.5%) patients reported at least 1 TEAE (event rate: 171.4); 37 (9.4%) experienced at least 1 treatment-related TEAE, none of which were considered severe; 2 patients reported 6 TEAEs of moderate intensity. A total of 22 (5.6%) patients reported serious AEs (event rate: 6.9). AEs of special interest were reported in 24 patients (6.1%; event rate: 6.0). Five (1.3%) deaths occurred (event rate: 1.2) following serious AEs of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related pneumonia (3 patients), pancreatitis (1 patient), and pulmonary embolism (1 patient). None of the TEAEs leading to death were considered treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment was well tolerated for up to an additional 3 years. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of dupilumab. These findings further support the long-term use of dupilumab in patients with moderate to severe asthma.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".