Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 901

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploring the Effects of Omalizumab in Allergic Asthma: An Analysis of Biomarkers in the EXTRA Study

Hanania, Nicola A., Wenzel, Sally, Rosén, Karin, Hsieh, Hsin-Ju, Mosesova, Sofia, Choy, David F., Lal, Preeti, Arron, Joseph R., Harris, Jeffrey M., Busse, William·2013·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

RATIONALE: For many patients with asthma, allergic airway inflammation is primarily a Th2-weighted process; however, heterogeneity in patterns of inflammation suggests phenotypic distinctions exist that influence disease presentation and treatment effects. OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FE(NO)), peripheral blood eosinophil count, and serum periostin as biomarkers of Th2 inflammation and predictors of treatment effects of omalizumab. METHODS: The EXTRA omalizumab study enrolled patients (aged 12-75 yr) with uncontrolled severe persistent allergic asthma. Analyses were performed evaluating treatment effects in relation to FE(NO), blood eosinophils, and serum periostin at baseline. Patients were divided into low- and high-biomarker subgroups. Treatment effects were evaluated as number of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations during the 48-week treatment period (primary endpoint). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 850 patients were enrolled. Data were available from 394 (46.4%), 797 (93.8%), and 534 (62.8%) patients for FE(NO), blood eosinophils, and serum periostin, respectively. After 48 weeks of omalizumab, reductions in protocol-defined exacerbations were greater in high versus low subgroups for all three biomarkers: FE(NO), 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37-70; P = 0.001) versus 16% (95% CI, -32 to 46; P = 0.45); eosinophils, 32% (95% CI, 11-48; P = 0.005) versus 9% (95% CI, -24 to 34; P = 0.54); and periostin, 30% (95% CI, -2 to 51; P = 0.07) versus 3% (95% CI, -43 to 32; P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in exacerbation frequency between omalizumab and placebo was greatest in the three high-biomarker subgroups, probably associated with the greater risk for exacerbations in high subgroups. Additional studies are required to explore the value of these biomarkers in clinical practice. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00314574).

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 · 10.1164/rccm.201208-1414oc

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 901

Metadata

Authors
Hanania, N. A., Wenzel, S., Rosén, K., Hsieh, H.-J., Mosesova, S., Choy, D. F., Lal, P., Arron, J. R., Harris, J. M., & Busse, W.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2013-04-15
Volume
187
Issue
8
Pages
804-811
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2121954044
Cited by
901
References
4
FWCI
42.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Exploring the Effects of Omalizumab in Allergic Asthma: An Analysis of Biomarkers in the EXTRA Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.201208-1414oc
The paper
Hanania, N. A., Wenzel, S., Rosén, K., Hsieh, H.-J., Mosesova, S., Choy, D. F., Lal, P., Arron, J. R., Harris, J. M., & Busse, W. (2013). Exploring the Effects of Omalizumab in Allergic Asthma: An Analysis of Biomarkers in the EXTRA Study. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201208-1414oc

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.