Early response to benralizumab in Canadian patients with severe eosinophilic asthma: Interim results from a prospective observational cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: There is a need to characterize the real-world impact of benralizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 receptor alpha antibody, for add-on maintenance therapy of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma.OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to assess change in patient-reported outcomes following initiation of benralizumab, focusing on asthma control, quality of life (QoL), and work and activity impairment.METHODS This is an interim analysis of the prospective, single-arm, multi-center, observational POWER study. Eligible patients were recruited from 20 clinics across Canada from 2019 to 2022, had an Asthma Control Questionnaire, 6 Item (ACQ-6) score ≥1.5 and were benralizumab-naïve.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 131 patients had baseline assessments at the 24-week interim analysis. Asthma control was assessed with ACQ-6 (minimum clinically important difference: change of 0.5 units), and stratified into well-controlled (<0.75), partial control (0.75–1.5) and poor control (>1.5). Improvements in asthma control were observed as early as one week following benralizumab initiation. At 24 weeks, mean change in ACQ-6 was −1.46 (95% confidence interval: −1.71, −1.21), and 47% achieved well-controlled or partial control. Mean EuroQol 5 Dimension, 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) utility score increased nearly 10% from baseline (0.09; standard deviation 0.2). Absenteeism and presenteeism decreased from baseline (20% and 39%, respectively) to 24 weeks (2% and 21%, respectively).CONCLUSION Patients reported meaningful improvements in asthma control, quality of life (QoL) and work and activity impairment 24 weeks after initiating benralizumab, highlighting its positive impact in patients with severe asthma. One- and two-year follow-up are planned to assess exacerbations, healthcare resource use and sustainability of observed benefits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".