ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
New perspectives in the treatment of chronic eosinophilic pneumonia in the era of targeted therapies.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP) is a rare, idiopathic inflammatory lung disease characterized by subacute symptoms such as cough, dyspnea, and fever; abnormal chest imaging findings; peripheral eosinophilia; and eosinophilic infiltration of the pulmonary interstitium and alveoli. Eosinophils interact with multiple T helper 2 (Th2) cellular pathways; however, eosinophil recruitment to the lung is primarily mediated by interleukin (IL)-5 and the eotaxin subfamily of chemokines. Standard treatment consists of systemic corticosteroids; however, relapse is frequent after tapering the corticosteroid dose, leading to long-term steroid therapy and its associated adverse effects, including diabetes mellitus, infections, glaucoma, and osteoporosis. Objective: This narrative review aims to summarize the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of anti-IL-5 biologic therapies (mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab) in the management of CEP and as steroid-sparing strategies, with particular focus on their role in relapse prevention, which occurs in nearly 50% of cases during systemic corticosteroid tapering. Methods: A narrative review was conducted to identify the real-world advances of anti-IL-5 treatments in CEP. Most of the available literature consists of case series, case reports and observational studies, owing to the lack of controlled clinical trials and guidelines involving this disease and anti-IL-5 therapies. Results: The available evidence suggests that anti-IL-5 therapies are effective in controlling disease activity, reducing relapse rates, and enabling corticosteroid tapering or discontinuation. Conclusions: All the treatments considered were safe and well tolerated, and their use provided significant benefits in terms of symptom control, despite the limited impact on pulmonary function. Owing to their steroid-sparing effects, these agents are useful in reducing the adverse effects associated with long-term corticosteroid use. Anti-IL-5 biologics represent a promising therapeutic option for patients with relapsing or corticosteroid-dependent CEP. Despite encouraging results, larger prospective studies are needed to better define their role in the long-term management of this disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.