MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415098082 · doi:10.3389/falgy.2025.1680703

Real-life evaluation of the effectiveness of biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Europe: a Delphi study to define key variables for the INVENT registry

2025· article· en· W4415098082 on OpenAlexaff
Vibeke Backer, Eugenio De Corso, G. Mortuaire, Emmanuel Prokopakis, Anette Drøhse Kjeldsen, Philippe Gevaert, Adam Chaker, Luísa Azevedo, Christian von Buchwald, Émilie Béquignon, Eliza Brożek-Mądry, Jannis Constantinidis, Marjolein Cornet, Wytske J. Fokkens, Peter G. Gibson, Aleksander Grande Hansen, Joaquim Mullol, Sietze Reitsma, Sanna Toppila‐Salmi, Michael B. Soyka, Martin Wagenmann, Peter W. Hellings

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Allergy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
FundersRegeneron PharmaceuticalsSanofi
KeywordsChronic rhinosinusitisDelphi methodNasal polypsDelphiKey (lock)MEDLINESet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a persistent inflammatory condition often associated with type 2 inflammation. While biologics are a promising treatment for patients with uncontrolled CRSwNP, real-world evidence is needed to optimize their use. The InternatioNal seVerE CRSwNP (INVENT) registry aims to consolidate data on biologic use in CRSwNP from local and national registries. This study describes the identification of mandatory and optional variables for inclusion in the INVENT registry using a modified Delphi process. Methods: A narrative literature review was performed to identify variables reported in real-world studies of biologic treatment for CRSwNP. A modified Delphi study was conducted between December 2024 and March 2025 involving 23 experts from Europe and Australia. Experts rated the clinical relevance of candidate variables in two online survey rounds using 9-point Likert scales. A positive response was defined as ≥70% of respondents rating a variable 7-9 and ≤15% rating it 1-3. Final agreement on mandatory and optional variables was reached through panel discussion. A validation survey was then conducted across registry centers to assess the feasibility of collecting the selected variables. Results: The Delphi process resulted in consensus on a core set of mandatory and optional variables across nine domains: demographics, medical history, previous and current biologic therapy, biomarkers, comorbidities, asthma, CRSwNP-specific outcomes, and follow-up variables. The validation survey confirmed that most mandatory variables were available or obtainable across participating centers, supporting the feasibility of data collection. Conclusions: This international Delphi study identified a consensus-based set of clinically-relevant and feasible variables for inclusion in the INVENT registry. The selected variables reflect current best practices in the management of CRSwNP and will enable robust comparisons of biologic effectiveness in real-world settings. The INVENT registry is well-positioned to inform treatment decisions, optimize use of biologics, and support a personalized approach to CRSwNP care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueFrontiers in AllergySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207