• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美国哮喘生物试验的入选资格和真实世界结局。

Asthma biologic trial eligibility and real-world outcomes in the United States.

机构信息

Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

出版信息

J Asthma. 2022 Dec;59(12):2352-2359. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2021.2010749. Epub 2021 Dec 6.

DOI:10.1080/02770903.2021.2010749
PMID:34818955
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9575703/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of real-world patients who would have been eligible for asthma biologics to those who would not have been eligible.

METHODS

We used data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (OLDW) to categorize patients into eligible and ineligible groups based on clinical trials ( = 19 trials) used for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. We then compared the change in the number of asthma exacerbations before and after biological initiation between the two groups.

RESULTS

The percentage of people who would have been eligible for asthma biologic clinical trials ranged from 0-10.2%. The eligible group had a greater reduction in number of asthma exacerbations compared to the ineligible group based on eligibility criteria from 1 omalizumab trial (1.52, 95% CI 1.25, 1.8 in eligible vs. 0.47, 95% CI 0.43, 0.52 in ineligible) and from 1 dupilumab trial (1.6, 95% CI 0.92, 2.28 in eligible vs. 0.52, 95% CI 0.38, 0.65 ineligible). Notably, 15 of the 19 trials had fewer than 11 eligible people, limiting additional comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than 1 in 10 people in the United States treated with asthma biologics would have been eligible to participate in the trial for the biologic they used. Where comparisons could be made, trial eligible people have a greater reduction in exacerbations.

UNLABELLED

Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2021.2010749 .

摘要

目的

比较符合和不符合哮喘生物制剂适应证患者的真实世界结局。

方法

我们使用 OptumLabs 数据仓库(OLDW)的数据,根据食品和药物管理局(FDA)批准的临床试验( = 19 项)将患者分为符合和不符合适应证的组。然后,我们比较了两组患者在开始使用生物制剂前后哮喘恶化次数的变化。

结果

符合哮喘生物制剂临床试验的患者比例为 0-10.2%。根据 1 项奥马珠单抗试验(符合适应证组为 1.52,95%CI 1.25,1.8;不符合适应证组为 0.47,95%CI 0.43,0.52)和 1 项度普利尤单抗试验(符合适应证组为 1.6,95%CI 0.92,2.28;不符合适应证组为 0.52,95%CI 0.38,0.65)的入选标准,符合适应证组的哮喘恶化次数减少幅度大于不符合适应证组。值得注意的是,19 项试验中有 15 项的符合适应证人数少于 11 人,限制了进一步比较。

结论

在美国接受哮喘生物制剂治疗的患者中,不到 1/10 的人有资格参加他们所使用的生物制剂的临床试验。在可以进行比较的情况下,符合适应证的患者的恶化减少幅度更大。

未加标签内容

本文的补充数据可在 https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2021.2010749 在线获取。

相似文献

1
Asthma biologic trial eligibility and real-world outcomes in the United States.美国哮喘生物试验的入选资格和真实世界结局。
J Asthma. 2022 Dec;59(12):2352-2359. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2021.2010749. Epub 2021 Dec 6.
2
Comparative Impact of Asthma Biologics: A Nationwide US Claim-Based Analysis.哮喘生物制剂的比较影响:一项基于全美索赔数据的分析。
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2024 Jun;12(6):1558-1567. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2024.02.029. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
3
Biologic treatment eligibility for real-world patients with severe asthma: The IDEAL study.重度哮喘真实世界患者的生物治疗适用性:理想研究
J Asthma. 2018 Feb;55(2):152-160. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2017.1322611. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
4
Severe asthma and eligibility for biologics in a Brazilian cohort.巴西队列中严重哮喘和生物制剂的适应证。
J Asthma. 2021 Jul;58(7):958-966. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2020.1748049. Epub 2020 Apr 9.
5
Global Variability in Administrative Approval Prescription Criteria for Biologic Therapy in Severe Asthma.全球变异性:严重哮喘生物治疗的行政审批处方标准
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 May;10(5):1202-1216.e23. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.12.027. Epub 2022 Jan 3.
6
Biologics and Bronchial Thermoplasty for severe refractory asthma treatment: From eligibility criteria to real practice. A cross-sectional study.生物制剂和支气管热成形术治疗严重难治性哮喘:从入选标准到实际应用。一项横断面研究。
Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Feb;60:101874. doi: 10.1016/j.pupt.2019.101874. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
7
Biologic use and outcomes among adults with severe asthma treated by US subspecialists.美国专科医生治疗的重度哮喘成年患者的生物制剂使用情况及治疗结果。
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2022 Oct;129(4):467-474.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2022.06.012. Epub 2022 Jun 19.
8
Asthma biologics: Comparing trial designs, patient cohorts and study results.哮喘生物制剂:比较试验设计、患者队列和研究结果。
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2020 Jan;124(1):44-56. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2019.10.016. Epub 2019 Oct 23.
9
Pairwise indirect treatment comparison of dupilumab versus other biologics in patients with uncontrolled persistent asthma.在未控制的持续性哮喘患者中,度普利尤单抗与其他生物制剂的两两间接治疗比较。
Respir Med. 2022 Jan;191:105991. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2020.105991. Epub 2020 Apr 29.
10
Real-World Studies of Biologics for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Asthma.生物制剂治疗中重度哮喘的真实世界研究。
Immunol Allergy Clin North Am. 2024 Nov;44(4):737-750. doi: 10.1016/j.iac.2024.07.007.

引用本文的文献

1
Effectiveness and Safety of Tezepelumab in a Diverse Population of US Patients with Severe Asthma: Initial Results of the PASSAGE Study.tezepelumab在美国不同严重哮喘患者群体中的有效性和安全性:PASSAGE研究的初步结果
Adv Ther. 2025 Jul;42(7):3334-3353. doi: 10.1007/s12325-025-03231-6. Epub 2025 May 19.
2
Roles of real-world evidence in severe asthma treatment: challenges and opportunities.真实世界证据在重度哮喘治疗中的作用:挑战与机遇。
ERJ Open Res. 2023 Apr 11;9(2). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00248-2022. eCollection 2023 Mar.