MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of Biologic Initiation on New-onset of Corticosteroid-related Adverse Effects in Patients With Severe Asthma

2025· article· en· W4410274621 on OpenAlexaff
David Price, B. Emmanuel, G. Scelo, Alan Altraja, Belinda Cochrane, Wenjia Chen, Mariko Siyue Koh, I. Solarte Rodriguez, Ming‐Ju Tsai, Charlotte Suppli Ulrik, Céline Bergeron, George Christoff, Athena Gogali, Susanne Hansen, Mark Hew, Rohit Katial, Francesca Puggioni, Adeeb A. Bulkhi, Aurore Côté, Cathy Emmas, Liam G. Heaney, Laura Gonzalez-Maldonado, Patrick Mitchell, Andriana Ι. Papaioannou, Florence Schleich, Chau‐Chyun Sheu, Jorge Máspero, P.G. Gibson, Carlos A. Torres‐Duque, Celeste Porsbjerg, Arnaud Bourdin, Giorgio Walter Canonica, Enrico Heffler, Takashi Iwanaga, Désirée Larenas‐Linnemann, Piotr Kuna, Riyad Al‐Lehebi, Chin Kook Rhee, Borja G. Cosío, Diahn‐Warng Perng, Bassam Mahboub, John Busby, David J. Jackson, P.H. Patel, Paul Pfeffer, Kirsty Fletton, R. Murray, John Townend, T.N. Tran

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCorticosteroidAsthmaAdverse effectIntensive care medicineAdrenal cortex hormonesImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract RATIONALE: Use of oral corticosteroids (OCS), both as maintenance treatment and for exacerbations, is associated with serious adverse effects (AEs). Biologic use decreases the need for OCS in patients with severe asthma and therefore could reduce the risk of OCS-related AEs. Exploring this relationship could inform treatment decisions and highlight the benefits of biologics beyond asthma control. METHODS: Longitudinal data from adult patients with severe asthma were pooled from two real-world data sources: the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR, 16 countries) and the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD, the United Kingdom). For biologic initiators, the index date was date of biologic initiation. For non-initiators, the index date was the date of enrollment into the registry for ISAR and a random medical appointment date for OPCRD. Index dates and end of follow-up spanned from 2008 to 2024. We compared the risk of developing type-2 diabetes mellitus, a major cardiovascular event (heart failure, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accident), sleep apnea, pulmonary embolism, anxiety/depression, osteoporosis, renal failure, peptic ulcer, cataract, glaucoma, and pneumonia between biologic initiators and non-initiators. Time at risk was censored at 5 years. We used inverse probability for treatment weighting to improve the balance between comparison groups for potential confounders. Weighted Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of being diagnosed with new-onset OCS-related AEs. RESULTS: The study population included 5,690 biologic initiators and 37,218 non-initiators, followed for a median of 2.1 years (interquartile range: 1.0-3.9). The proportions of long-term OCS users (daily intake for ≥90 consecutive days in the year preceding index date) were 27.3% and 4.7% in biologic initiators and non-initiators, with a mean prednisolone-equivalent daily dose of 10.2 mg and 6.2 mg, respectively. The risk of any AE was lower in biologic initiators than in non-initiators (HR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.72-0.93) (Figure). This overall risk reduction was mainly driven by a reduction in the risk of diabetes (HR=0.62, 0.45-0.87), major cardiovascular events (HR=0.65, 0.44-0.97), and anxiety/depression (HR=0.68, 0.55-0.85). We did not detect an association between initiating biologics and the risk of osteoporosis (HR=0.96, 0.65-1.42), sleep apnea (HR=0.82, 0.58-1.15), pneumonia (HR=1.05, 0.78-1.40), or less frequent AEs included in our analysis (renal failure, peptic ulcer, cataract, and glaucoma). CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of biologics in patients with severe asthma was associated with reduction in their risk of new-onset OCS-related AEs, including diabetes, anxiety/depression, and major cardiovascular events.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→