Clinical Remission in Severe Asthma: A Comparative Analysis of Patients with and Without Biologics from the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry.

Background: Severe asthma is a complex chronic airway disease. Biologic therapies are targeted monoclonal antibody treatments used in patients with uncontrolled, severe asthma, but real-world data from long-term registries and on patients who remain biologic-naïve are limited. This study compared severe asthma patients with and without biologic therapy and identified predictors of key clinical remission components. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis of adult patients from the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry (SSAR), we compared patients treated with a biologic for ≥6 months to biologic-naïve patients (never exposed to biologics). Baseline characteristics were summarized descriptively. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of four remission components: good asthma control (ACT ≥ 20), absence of exacerbations, no maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, and preserved lung function (FEV1 > 80% predicted). Results: Of 394 patients, 298 (75.6%) were biologic-treated and 96 (24.4%) were biologic-naïve. Biologic-treated patients more often had allergic asthma and type-2-related comorbidities, and showed better outcomes, including fewer exacerbations (0.49 vs. 1.09/year; p < 0.001) and higher ACT scores (20.0 vs. 17.2; p < 0.001). Biologic therapy was independently associated with higher odds of asthma control (OR 3.96; p = 0.006), no exacerbations (OR 5.11; p = 0.001), no OCS use (OR 6.27; p = 0.002), and FEV1 > 80% predicted (OR 4.42; p = 0.011). Overall, 24.2% of biologic-treated patients and 6.2% of biologic-naïve patients fulfilled all four remission components. Conclusions: In this real-world registry cohort, biologic-treated patients were more likely to meet individual and composite remission criteria than biologic-naïve patients. The relatively low proportion of patients achieving all four stringent criteria highlights the need to revisit current remission definitions and to adopt individualized, multidimensional treatment goals in severe asthma.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2025-12-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/93533
Primary Topic
Asthma and respiratory diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clinical Remission in Severe Asthma: A Comparative Analysis of Patients with and Without Biologics from the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry.

Florian Charbonnier, Nikolay Pavlov, Tsogyal D. Latshang, Jörg D. Leuppi et al.
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Asthma and respiratory diseases
article

Clinical Remission in Severe Asthma: A Comparative Analysis of Patients with and Without Biologics from the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry.

Florian Charbonnier, Nikolay Pavlov, Tsogyal D. Latshang, Jörg D. Leuppi, Fabienne Jaun, Christian Friedrich Clarenbach, Maria Boesing, Christophe von Garnier, Lukas Kern, Giorgia Lüthi-Corridori, Jean-Marc Fellrath, Pietro Gianella, Anja Jochmann, Pierre-Olivier Bridevaux
article en

Abstract

Background: Severe asthma is a complex chronic airway disease. Biologic therapies are targeted monoclonal antibody treatments used in patients with uncontrolled, severe asthma, but real-world data from long-term registries and on patients who remain biologic-naïve are limited. This study compared severe asthma patients with and without biologic therapy and identified predictors of key clinical remission components. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis of adult patients from the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry (SSAR), we compared patients treated with a biologic for ≥6 months to biologic-naïve patients (never exposed to biologics). Baseline characteristics were summarized descriptively. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of four remission components: good asthma control (ACT ≥ 20), absence of exacerbations, no maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, and preserved lung function (FEV1 > 80% predicted). Results: Of 394 patients, 298 (75.6%) were biologic-treated and 96 (24.4%) were biologic-naïve. Biologic-treated patients more often had allergic asthma and type-2-related comorbidities, and showed better outcomes, including fewer exacerbations (0.49 vs. 1.09/year; p < 0.001) and higher ACT scores (20.0 vs. 17.2; p < 0.001). Biologic therapy was independently associated with higher odds of asthma control (OR 3.96; p = 0.006), no exacerbations (OR 5.11; p = 0.001), no OCS use (OR 6.27; p = 0.002), and FEV1 > 80% predicted (OR 4.42; p = 0.011). Overall, 24.2% of biologic-treated patients and 6.2% of biologic-naïve patients fulfilled all four remission components. Conclusions: In this real-world registry cohort, biologic-treated patients were more likely to meet individual and composite remission criteria than biologic-naïve patients. The relatively low proportion of patients achieving all four stringent criteria highlights the need to revisit current remission definitions and to adopt individualized, multidimensional treatment goals in severe asthma.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
University Clinic of Pulmonary and Allergic Diseases Golnik (SI)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 31%
Asthma and respiratory diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.