Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,986

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dupilumab Efficacy and Safety in Moderate-to-Severe Uncontrolled Asthma

Open access
Castro, Mario, Corren, Jonathan, Pavord, Ian D., Maspero, Jorge, Wenzel, Sally, Rabe, Klaus F., Busse, William W., Ford, Linda, Sher, Lawrence, FitzGerald, J. Mark, Katelaris, Constance, Tohda, Yuji, Zhang, Bingzhi, Staudinger, Heribert, Pirozzi, Gianluca, Amin, Nikhil, Ruddy, Marcella, Akinlade, Bolanle, Khan, Asif, Chao, Jingdong, Martincova, Renata, Graham, Neil M.H., Hamilton, Jennifer D., Swanson, Brian N., Stahl, Neil, Yancopoulos, George D., Teper, Ariel·2018·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is a fully human anti-interleukin-4 receptor α monoclonal antibody that blocks both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling. We assessed its efficacy and safety in patients with uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: in patients with a blood eosinophil count of 300 or more per cubic millimeter. Asthma control and dupilumab safety were also assessed. RESULTS: had increased by 0.32 liters in patients assigned to the lower dose of dupilumab (difference vs. matched placebo, 0.14 liters; P<0.001); similar results were seen with the higher dose. Among patients with a blood eosinophil count of 300 or more per cubic millimeter, the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.37 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.48) among those receiving lower-dose dupilumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.38) among those receiving a matched placebo (65.8% lower rate with dupilumab than with placebo; 95% CI, 52.0 to 75.6); similar results were observed with the higher dose. Blood eosinophilia occurred after the start of the intervention in 52 patients (4.1%) who received dupilumab as compared with 4 patients (0.6%) who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, patients who received dupilumab had significantly lower rates of severe asthma exacerbation than those who received placebo, as well as better lung function and asthma control. Greater benefits were seen in patients with higher baseline levels of eosinophils. Hypereosinophilia was observed in some patients. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02414854 .).

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa1804092

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,986

Metadata

Authors
Castro, M., Corren, J., Pavord, I. D., Maspero, J., Wenzel, S., Rabe, K. F., Busse, W. W., Ford, L., Sher, L., FitzGerald, J. M., Katelaris, C., Tohda, Y., Zhang, B., Staudinger, H., Pirozzi, G., Amin, N., Ruddy, M., Akinlade, B., Khan, A., Chao, J., Martincova, R., Graham, N. M. H., Hamilton, J. D., Swanson, B. N., Stahl, N., Yancopoulos, G. D., & Teper, A.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2018-06-28
Volume
378
Issue
26
Pages
2486-2496
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2803941918
Cited by
1,986
References
2
FWCI
113.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Dupilumab Efficacy and Safety in Moderate-to-Severe Uncontrolled Asthma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1804092
The paper
Castro, M., Corren, J., Pavord, I. D., Maspero, J., Wenzel, S., Rabe, K. F., Busse, W. W., Ford, L., Sher, L., FitzGerald, J. M., Katelaris, C., Tohda, Y., Zhang, B., Staudinger, H., Pirozzi, G., Amin, N., Ruddy, M., Akinlade, B., Khan, A., . . . Teper, A. (2018). Dupilumab Efficacy and Safety in Moderate-to-Severe Uncontrolled Asthma. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1804092

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.