Dupilumab Efficacy in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) With Type 2 Inflammation Across Baseline Eosinophil Counts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract RATIONALE: Type 2 (T2) inflammation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is evidenced by elevated blood eosinophil counts (BEC), often correlating with higher risk for exacerbations. In the BOREAS and NOTUS trials, add-on dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w) vs placebo significantly reduced exacerbation rates and improved lung function in patients with COPD and T2 inflammation. This post-hoc analysis of pooled data from BOREAS and NOTUS evaluated efficacy of dupilumab in patients stratified by baseline BEC of ≥150 cells/µL or ≥300 cells/µL. METHODS: BOREAS (NCT03930732) and NOTUS (NCT04456673), both phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, enrolled 1,874 patients (40-85 years) with COPD, moderate-to-severe airflow limitation, and T2 inflammation. The inclusion criterion was screening BEC ≥300 cells/µL (at Visit 1, 1-4 weeks before randomization). Baseline BEC was measured at day of randomization. Patients were randomized to dupilumab 300 mg or placebo q2w for 52 weeks. This analysis included patients from the intention-to-treat (ITT) population of BOREAS and NOTUS, stratified by baseline BEC ≥150 cells/µL, 150-300 cells/µL or ≥300 cells/µL (at randomization). Endpoints assessed included annualized moderate-to-severe exacerbation rate, change from baseline to Week 52 in pre- and post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score. RESULTS: Of 1,873 patients, 1,703 (dupilumab n = 855; placebo n = 848) had baseline BEC ≥150 cells/µL, and 1,135 (dupilumab n = 573; placebo n = 562) still had baseline BEC ≥300 cells/µL. Dupilumab vs placebo reduced annualized exacerbation rates by up to 36.9%. At Week 52, dupilumab vs placebo improved pre-bronchodilator FEV1 by (least squares [LS] mean difference [95% CI]) 0.07 (0.04, 0.11) L in the ITT population, 0.08 (0.04, 0.11) L in patients with baseline BEC ≥150 cells/µL, and 0.09 (0.05, 0.13) L in those with baseline BEC ≥300 cells/µL. Similar results were observed for changes in post-bronchodilator FEV1. Dupilumab also reduced SGRQ total scores at Week 52 by (LS mean [95% CI]) −3.37 (−4.95, −1.78) (ITT population), −3.07 (−4.7, −1.44) (baseline BEC ≥150 cells/µL), and −3.98 (−6.01, −1.95) (baseline BEC ≥300 cells/µL). Overall study safety of BOREAS and NOTUS was consistent with known dupilumab profile. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD and T2 inflammation, dupilumab reduced annualized exacerbation rates, and improved lung function and quality of life in patients in ITT and across baseline BEC of ≥150 cells/µL and ≥300 cells/µL, with slightly greater treatment effects observed in patient with higher baseline BEC.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".