Anuradha Nalika Godallage, Dil Afrose, Melika Valizadeh, Augusta Beech, Jens-Ulrik S Jensen, Pradeesh Sivapalan
{"title":"Blood eosinophil count as a biomarker for therapy guidance in COPD and asthma exacerbations.","authors":"Anuradha Nalika Godallage, Dil Afrose, Melika Valizadeh, Augusta Beech, Jens-Ulrik S Jensen, Pradeesh Sivapalan","doi":"10.1183/20734735.0329-2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This Journal club evaluates recent evidence on the role of blood eosinophil count (BEC) as a biomarker to guide therapy in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD and asthma. The review focuses on three studies with different methodological approaches: a biomarker-directed corticosteroid trial (Bafadhel <i>et al</i>., 2012), an acute biologic therapy trial using benralizumab (ABRA, 2025) and a long-term biologic therapy trial using mepolizumab (COPD-HELP, 2025). The biomarker-directed corticosteroid study demonstrated non-inferior symptom improvement while reducing steroid exposure, highlighting the potential to personalise therapy based on BEC. The ABRA trial showed that a single injection of benralizumab reduced treatment failure, prolonged time to exacerbation and improved symptom scores in patients with high eosinophils. By contrast, the COPD-HELP trial found no significant effect of mepolizumab on readmission or mortality, despite substantial eosinophil reduction. Limitations include small sample sizes, heterogeneous populations and reliance on surrogate end-points in some studies. These findings support the use of BEC-guided therapy in acute settings but suggest that long-term biologic treatment post-exacerbation may not improve hard outcomes. Future research should focus on precision medicine strategies targeting eosinophilic exacerbations and identifying patient subgroups who benefit most from biomarker-guided interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9292,"journal":{"name":"Breathe","volume":"22 2","pages":"250329"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13077450/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breathe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/20734735.0329-2025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This Journal club evaluates recent evidence on the role of blood eosinophil count (BEC) as a biomarker to guide therapy in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD and asthma. The review focuses on three studies with different methodological approaches: a biomarker-directed corticosteroid trial (Bafadhel et al., 2012), an acute biologic therapy trial using benralizumab (ABRA, 2025) and a long-term biologic therapy trial using mepolizumab (COPD-HELP, 2025). The biomarker-directed corticosteroid study demonstrated non-inferior symptom improvement while reducing steroid exposure, highlighting the potential to personalise therapy based on BEC. The ABRA trial showed that a single injection of benralizumab reduced treatment failure, prolonged time to exacerbation and improved symptom scores in patients with high eosinophils. By contrast, the COPD-HELP trial found no significant effect of mepolizumab on readmission or mortality, despite substantial eosinophil reduction. Limitations include small sample sizes, heterogeneous populations and reliance on surrogate end-points in some studies. These findings support the use of BEC-guided therapy in acute settings but suggest that long-term biologic treatment post-exacerbation may not improve hard outcomes. Future research should focus on precision medicine strategies targeting eosinophilic exacerbations and identifying patient subgroups who benefit most from biomarker-guided interventions.