减少严重哮喘治疗的最新证据。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-28 DOI:10.1097/MCP.0000000000001156
Eric Merrell, Sandhya Khurana
{"title":"减少严重哮喘治疗的最新证据。","authors":"Eric Merrell, Sandhya Khurana","doi":"10.1097/MCP.0000000000001156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Biologics have proven safe and effective for severe asthma. Their introduction has offered hope for patients and prescribers with a growing list of novel medications and indications. While 'step-up' indications for biologic initiation are well described in guidelines, 'step-down' strategy remains poorly understood and thus guidance is limited. In this opinion article we aim to focus on recent practice changing evidence for stepping-down severe asthma management, tools for the assessment of biologic efficacy, propose a framework for the step-down of biologic and nonbiologic therapies and suggest topics of interest for future research.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Clinical tools have been developed to aid in assessing biologic response. Some patients experience marked improvement and may enter a period of clinical remission or even complete remission. Following positive response, add-on therapy may safely be approached for taper or withdrawal.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>There is limited consensus but growing evidence for stepping-down therapies in patients who achieve clinical response and/or remission after biologic initiation. Further structured guidance would benefit clinicians who face clinical uncertainty when deciding to step-down therapy in patients with well controlled asthma.</p>","PeriodicalId":11090,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"294-301"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recent evidence for stepping down severe asthma therapies.\",\"authors\":\"Eric Merrell, Sandhya Khurana\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCP.0000000000001156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Biologics have proven safe and effective for severe asthma. Their introduction has offered hope for patients and prescribers with a growing list of novel medications and indications. While 'step-up' indications for biologic initiation are well described in guidelines, 'step-down' strategy remains poorly understood and thus guidance is limited. In this opinion article we aim to focus on recent practice changing evidence for stepping-down severe asthma management, tools for the assessment of biologic efficacy, propose a framework for the step-down of biologic and nonbiologic therapies and suggest topics of interest for future research.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Clinical tools have been developed to aid in assessing biologic response. Some patients experience marked improvement and may enter a period of clinical remission or even complete remission. Following positive response, add-on therapy may safely be approached for taper or withdrawal.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>There is limited consensus but growing evidence for stepping-down therapies in patients who achieve clinical response and/or remission after biologic initiation. Further structured guidance would benefit clinicians who face clinical uncertainty when deciding to step-down therapy in patients with well controlled asthma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"294-301\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCP.0000000000001156\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCP.0000000000001156","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:生物制剂已被证明对严重哮喘是安全有效的。它们的引入为患者和处方医生带来了希望,因为他们有越来越多的新药物和适应症。虽然指南中对生物起始的“逐步”适应症有很好的描述,但“逐步”策略仍然知之甚少,因此指南是有限的。在这篇观点文章中,我们的目标是关注最近的实践改变严重哮喘管理的证据,评估生物疗效的工具,提出生物和非生物治疗的框架,并提出未来研究的兴趣主题。最近的发现:临床工具已经开发出来,以帮助评估生物反应。有些患者症状明显改善,可能进入临床缓解期,甚至完全缓解期。积极反应后,附加治疗可以安全地逐渐减少或停药。总结:对于在生物起始治疗后达到临床反应和/或缓解的患者,目前的共识有限,但证据越来越多。进一步的结构化指导将使临床医生在决定对控制良好的哮喘患者减少治疗时面临临床不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Recent evidence for stepping down severe asthma therapies.

Purpose of review: Biologics have proven safe and effective for severe asthma. Their introduction has offered hope for patients and prescribers with a growing list of novel medications and indications. While 'step-up' indications for biologic initiation are well described in guidelines, 'step-down' strategy remains poorly understood and thus guidance is limited. In this opinion article we aim to focus on recent practice changing evidence for stepping-down severe asthma management, tools for the assessment of biologic efficacy, propose a framework for the step-down of biologic and nonbiologic therapies and suggest topics of interest for future research.

Recent findings: Clinical tools have been developed to aid in assessing biologic response. Some patients experience marked improvement and may enter a period of clinical remission or even complete remission. Following positive response, add-on therapy may safely be approached for taper or withdrawal.

Summary: There is limited consensus but growing evidence for stepping-down therapies in patients who achieve clinical response and/or remission after biologic initiation. Further structured guidance would benefit clinicians who face clinical uncertainty when deciding to step-down therapy in patients with well controlled asthma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine is a highly regarded journal offering insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews, covering key subjects such as asthma; cystic fibrosis; infectious diseases; diseases of the pleura; and sleep and respiratory neurobiology. Published bimonthly, each issue of Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine introduces world renowned guest editors and internationally recognized academics within the pulmonary field, delivering a widespread selection of expert assessments on the latest developments from the most recent literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信