Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2025
Bronchial Thermoplasty: A Novel Therapeutic Approach to Severe Asthma
Published on: November 4, 2010
A comparison of the effectiveness of biologic therapies for asthma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
Tyler Pitre1, Tanvir Jassal2, Albi Angjeli3
1Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Background:
Trials have not directly compared biologics for the treatment of asthma.
Objective:
To compare the relative efficacy of biologics in asthma.
Methods:
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to May 31, 2022 for randomized trials addressing biologic therapies for asthma. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. We present dichotomous outcomes as absolute risk differences per 1000 patients and relative risk with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) and 95% CI.
Results:
We identified 64 trials, including 26,630 patients. For patients with eosinophilic asthma, tezepelumab (329 fewer exacerbations per 1000 [95% CI, 272.6-366.6 fewer]) and dupilumab (319.6 fewer exacerbations per 1000 [95% CI, 272.6-357.2 fewer]) reduce exacerbations compared with placebo (high certainty). Tezepelumab (MD, 0.24 L [95% CI, 0.16-0.32]) and dupilumab (0.25 L [95% CI, 0.21-0.29]) improve lung function compared with placebo (high certainty). Both tezepelumab (110.97 fewer hospital admissions per 1000 [95% CI, 94.53-120.56 fewer]) and dupilumab (97.27 fewer hospitalizations [4.11-124.67 fewer]) probably reduce hospital admissions compared with placebo (moderate certainty). For patients with low eosinophils, biologics probably do not improve asthma outcomes. For these patients, tezepelumab (MD, 0.1 L [95% CI, 0-0.19]) and dupilumab (MD, 0.1 L [95% CI, 0-0.20]) may improve lung function (low certainty).
Conclusion:
Tezepelumab and dupilumab are effective at reducing exacerbations. For patients with low eosinophils, however, clinicians should probably be more judicious in using biologics, including tezepelumab, because they probably do not confer substantial benefit.
Related Concept Videos
01:25Antiasthma Drugs: β2-Adrenoceptor Agonists
One class of bronchodilators includes β2-adrenoceptor agonists. These agents target the β2-adrenoceptors located on bronchial smooth muscle cells. By stimulating these receptors, β2-agonists induce...
01:25Antiasthma Drugs: Mast Cell Stabilizers and Anti-IgE Drugs
Mast cell stabilizers, such as cromolyn (also known as sodium cromoglycate) and nedocromil (Tilade), are effective drugs in asthma management. These stabilizers hinder histamine release by skillfully obstructing the activation of mast cells and other cellular entities. Notably, they navigate this task without...
01:25Antiasthma Drugs: Inhaled Corticosteroids and Glucocorticoids
ICS work through a multifaceted mechanism of action. They suppress the inflammatory response caused by the proliferation of TH cells. They also reduce the transcription of the IL-2 gene, which is involved in the...
01:30Asthma-IV: Diagnostic and Management
Clinical Assessment for Asthma:
This is the first step in diagnosing and managing asthma. It includes:
01:20Asthma: Pathogenesis and Management
Asthma is classified as allergic and non-allergic. Allergens such as dust mites, pollen, and pet dander trigger allergic asthma, while factors like cold air, intense emotions, or exercise can induce non-allergic asthma.
01:19Antiasthma Drugs: Leukotriene Modifiers
Leukotriene modifiers work through two distinct mechanisms: