Evidence mapPaperPMID 40125574Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in pulmonary medicine2025

Non-T2 asthma.

Emily K Duffus, Fernando Holguin, Deepa Rastogi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emily K DuffusRutgers University, Newark, New Jersey.
Fernando HolguinUniversity of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado.
Deepa RastogiThe Children's Hospital at Montefiore, Bronx, New York, USA.

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL129198NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL132550NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI152504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review provides a comprehensive overview of the non-T asthma phenotypes. Asthma is an umbrella term that defines a complex group of heterogenous airway disorders, which are broadly categorized into predominantly T2 or non-T2 phenotypes depending on the presence and levels of airway and systemic biomarkers associated with a T2 inflammatory response. Individuals with predominant T2 asthma have greater numbers of peripheral blood eosinophils, exhaled nitric oxide and IgE. These patients have more atopy and earlier onset asthma. In contrast, the absence or low levels of these biomarkers define non-T2 asthma. This is a heterogenous group with a later onset of asthma that is also more commonly associated with obesity and with females. RECENT

findingsThis article summarizes new information regarding the plasticity that exists between T2 and non-T2 mechanisms, including their role in exacerbation-prone and nonexacerbating asthma, and many of the risk factors associated with the non-T2 phenotype, such as viral infections, ambient air pollution exposure, smoking, genetic and metabolic factors. It also provides new information on the immunological and metabolic mechanisms associated with non-T2 asthma. We also discuss how to manage this asthma phenotype and how treatment responses differ for these patients. SUMMARY: Non-T2 asthma defines a heterogenous group of asthma phenotypes. However, acknowledging that the absence of T2 biomarkers is influenced by several factors is important and can longitudinally change in relation to exacerbations, particularly in children.

Indexed as

AsthmaBiomarkersDisease ProgressionEosinophilsFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin ENitric OxidePhenotypeRisk FactorsBiomarkersImmunoglobulin ENitric Oxide

Identifiers

PMID40125574
PMCPMC11949703

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.