MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405982556 · doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2024.104596

Baseline disease characteristics by surgery history among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) in the global AROMA registry

2025· article· en· W4405982556 on OpenAlexaff
Shigeharu Fujieda, Jayant M. Pinto, David W. Jang, Joseph K. Han, James L. Mims, Eugenio De Corso, Martin Wagenmann, Changming Xia, Thomas Plucinak, Mark Corbett, Scott D. Nash, Amr Radwan

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Otolaryngology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic rhinosinusitisNasal polypsBaseline (sea)DiseaseSinusitisInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The global Assessing long-teRm Outcomes in dupiluMAb (AROMA) registry study aims to characterize the long-term, real-world use of dupilumab in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This paper reports interim analysis of the baseline characteristics for the first 303 patients enrolled in AROMA. METHODS AND MATERIALS: AROMA is currently ongoing in adult patients with CRSwNP who initiated dupilumab for up to 36 months. This interim analysis describes baseline demographics; systemic/oral corticosteroid (SCS/OCS) and antibiotic use; disease burden; healthcare resource utilization; and medical history. All outcomes are summarized descriptively. RESULTS: As of February 2023, AROMA had enrolled 303 patients; 61.7 % had ≥1 prior surgery and 38.3 % were surgery naive. Disease burden at baseline was greatest among patients with prior surgery vs the surgery-naive group: 72.2 % vs 62.9 % had used SCS/OCS, mean University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test scores were 10.9 vs 19.2, 31.0 % vs 27.6 % of patients reported severe symptoms, and 47.6 %/16.6 % vs 39.7 %/16.4 % of patients were classified as having severe/very severe disease according to global physician assessment scores. Otolaryngologist/ear, nose, throat and allergist/immunologist were the most common specialties seen regularly by CRSwNP patients (52.8 % and 48.2 %, respectively) and surgery-naive patients were more likely to have visited an allergist than those with prior surgery (66.4 % vs 36.9 %). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CRSwNP in AROMA show considerable disease burden at baseline prior to treatment. Those with prior surgery had worse olfaction and an overall worse burden of disease. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a condition characterized by at least 12 weeks of symptoms such as nasal congestion and loss of smell, along with the presence of nasal polyps. Treatment for CRSwNP includes intranasal steroids, but if these cannot control disease, systemic steroids or sinus surgery may be required. Systemic steroids have known side effects and only provide temporary symptom improvement. Following surgery, patients may experience both symptom and polyp recurrence. Dupilumab is a monoclonal antibody that is approved for the treatment of inadequately controlled CRSwNP and can improve disease symptoms such as nasal congestion and loss of smell. This article presents the initial findings from a large global study called AROMA, which observes patients in real-world medical practice for 3 years after initiating dupilumab for CRSwNP. This analysis compares the characteristics of those in the registry who had and had not undergone prior sinonasal surgery for CRSwNP. In this analysis, patients who had previously undergone surgery to remove nasal polyps were more likely to have used steroids for CRSwNP treatment and were in worse health because of their CRSwNP condition despite having similar severity of symptoms at baseline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of OtolaryngologySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207