MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411257249 · doi:10.1016/j.anai.2025.06.011

Triple therapy vs dual inhaler therapy for moderate-to-severe asthma

2025· article· en· W4411257249 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Rayner, Layla Bakaa, Flavia Hoyte, Tamara T. Perry, Katherine Rivera‐Spoljaric, Kaharu Sumino, Bradley E. Chipps, John Oppenheimer, Sharmilee M. Nyenhuis, Elliot Israel, Ellen McCabe, Paul M. O’Byrne, Lindsay Shade, Valerie G. Press, Gordon H. Guyatt, Susana Rangel, Dia Sue-Wah-Sing, Lisa Hall, H. C. Orr, Angel Melendez, Tonya Winders, Donna D. Gardner, Matthew A. Rank, Leonard B. Bacharier, Giselle Mosnaim, Derek K. Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityOntario Clinical Oncology GroupWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthIncyteSanofiCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRegeneron PharmaceuticalsTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesGenentechAstraZenecaAmerican Academy of Allergy Asthma and ImmunologyMcMaster UniversityAmerican College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology
KeywordsMedicineInhalerAsthmaMeta-analysisIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists are typically added to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β-agonists (LABA) for asthma management. OBJECTIVE: To systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of triple therapy (ICS/LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonists) compared with dual therapy (ICS/LABA) for asthma management across key subpopulations as part of developing linked American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology guidelines. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from January 1, 2020 to February 1, 2025, for randomized trials comparing inhaled triple therapy to dual therapy for asthma to update our previous systematic review. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses assessed asthma control (asthma control questionnaire-7; 0-6), asthma-related quality of life (asthma quality of life questionnaire; 1-7), prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second, severe exacerbations, and serious adverse events. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach informed the certainty of evidence. Open Science Framework Registration (https://osf.io/u8t4q/). RESULTS: A total of 26 trials randomized 12,431 participants. Compared with dual therapy, triple therapy reduces severe exacerbations in patients at high risk for future exacerbation (relative risk 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.90; risk difference 5.3% fewer; high certainty), with trivial improvement in asthma control (mean difference [MD] -0.04, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.00, moderate certainty; lower better), quality of life (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.14, moderate certainty; higher better), and prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.05-0.09; high certainty), without increase in serious adverse events (moderate certainty). The effects were consistent across age, body mass index, and exacerbation history. CONCLUSION: In patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, triple therapy, compared with dual therapy, reduces severe exacerbations in patients at high risk for future exacerbation with minimal harm.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Allergy Asthma & ImmunologySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207