Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 319

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Astegolimab (anti-ST2) efficacy and safety in adults with severe asthma: A randomized clinical trial

Open access
Kelsen, Steven G., Agache, Ioana O., Soong, Weily, Israel, Elliot, Chupp, Geoffrey L., Cheung, Dorothy S., Theess, Wiebke, Yang, Xiaoying, Staton, Tracy L., Choy, David F., Fong, Alice, Dash, Ajit, Dolton, Michael, Pappu, Rajita, Brightling, Christopher E.·2021·Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: mAb, selectively inhibits the IL-33 receptor, ST2. Approved biologic therapies for severe asthma mainly benefit patients with elevated blood eosinophils (type 2-high), but limited options are available for patients with low blood eosinophils (type 2-low). Inhibiting IL-33 signaling may target pathogenic pathways in a wider spectrum of asthmatics. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated astegolimab efficacy and safety in patients with severe asthma. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study (ZENYATTA [A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of MSTT1041A in Participants With Uncontrolled Severe Asthma]) randomized 502 adults with severe asthma to subcutaneous placebo or 70-mg, 210-mg, or 490-mg doses of astegolimab every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AER) at week 54. Enrollment caps ensured ∼30 patients who were eosinophil-high (≥300 cells/μL) and ∼95 patients who were eosinophil-low (<300 cells/μL) per arm. RESULTS: Overall, adjusted AER reductions relative to placebo were 43% (P = .005), 22% (P = .18), and 37% (P = .01) for 490-mg, 210-mg, and 70-mg doses of astegolimab, respectively. Adjusted AER reductions for patients who were eosinophil-low were comparable to reductions in the overall population: 54% (P = .002), 14% (P = .48), and 35% (P = .05) for 490-mg, 210-mg, and 70-mg doses of astegolimab. Adverse events were similar in astegolimab- and placebo-treated groups. CONCLUSIONS: Astegolimab reduced AER in a broad population of patients, including those who were eosinophil-low, with inadequately controlled, severe asthma. Astegolimab was safe and well tolerated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaci.2021.03.044

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 319

Metadata

Authors
Kelsen, S. G., Agache, I. O., Soong, W., Israel, E., Chupp, G. L., Cheung, D. S., Theess, W., Yang, X., Staton, T. L., Choy, D. F., Fong, A., Dash, A., Dolton, M., Pappu, R., & Brightling, C. E.
Venue
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
148
Issue
3
Pages
790-798
ISSN
0091-6749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3152867209
Cited by
319
References
42
FWCI
24.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Astegolimab (anti-ST2) efficacy and safety in adults with severe asthma: A randomized clinical trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jaci.2021.03.044
The paper
Kelsen, S. G., Agache, I. O., Soong, W., Israel, E., Chupp, G. L., Cheung, D. S., Theess, W., Yang, X., Staton, T. L., Choy, D. F., Fong, A., Dash, A., Dolton, M., Pappu, R., & Brightling, C. E. (2021). Astegolimab (anti-ST2) efficacy and safety in adults with severe asthma: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2021.03.044

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.