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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.280 | 0.182 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".