Ear, nose, & throat journal · 2026
Is Switching Biologics in CRSwNP Promising? Real-World Evidence for Clinical Outcome Measures in Comparison.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jonas Kornmann, Benedikt Kramer, Nicole Rotter, Elena Seiz, Claudia Scherl, Lena Zaubitzer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Biologics are well established in treating severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Most patients benefit from the first chosen biologic agent, in a few cases switching biologics can be a further therapeutic strategy.
METHODS: In this monocentric retrospective study, patients with CRSwNP and biologic therapy were compared with respect to Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) score, bilateral nasal polyp score (NPS), and change in biologic agent as primary variables. Statistical analysis was performed using independent sample t-tests or Welch's t-tests for continuous variables and Pearson's chi-squared test for categorical data.
RESULTS: A total of 48 patients with CRSwNP who received biologic therapy between 2020 and 2024 were included in this study. During the course of treatment, 10 patients (20.4%) required a switch to a different biologic agent. A significant reduction in both the SNOT-22 score and NPS was observed in patients regardless of whether a biologic switch occurred, following a minimum post-treatment observation period of 6 months. No significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between patients who switched biologics and those who continued with their initial agent.
CONCLUSIONS: Most patients switched from anti-immunoglobulin E or anti-IL-5 treatment to anti-IL-4/-IL-13, with good improvement in therapy control. Notably, symptom control after switching biologics does not differ significantly from that achieved in patients who remained on their initial biologic therapy.
METHODS: In this monocentric retrospective study, patients with CRSwNP and biologic therapy were compared with respect to Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) score, bilateral nasal polyp score (NPS), and change in biologic agent as primary variables. Statistical analysis was performed using independent sample t-tests or Welch's t-tests for continuous variables and Pearson's chi-squared test for categorical data.
RESULTS: A total of 48 patients with CRSwNP who received biologic therapy between 2020 and 2024 were included in this study. During the course of treatment, 10 patients (20.4%) required a switch to a different biologic agent. A significant reduction in both the SNOT-22 score and NPS was observed in patients regardless of whether a biologic switch occurred, following a minimum post-treatment observation period of 6 months. No significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between patients who switched biologics and those who continued with their initial agent.
CONCLUSIONS: Most patients switched from anti-immunoglobulin E or anti-IL-5 treatment to anti-IL-4/-IL-13, with good improvement in therapy control. Notably, symptom control after switching biologics does not differ significantly from that achieved in patients who remained on their initial biologic therapy.