TY - JOUR
T1 - Attitudes and practices regarding dosing interval extension of biologics in severe asthma
T2 - a nationwide survey and real-world data from the Dutch RAPSODI registry
AU - Marijnissen, Camiel J M
AU - Sont, Jacob K
AU - Meulmeester, Fleur L
AU - Wouters, Michel W J M
AU - Braunstahl, Gert-Jan
AU - Aldenkamp, Arnoud F
AU - Hashimoto, Simone
AU - Kroes, Johannes A
AU - van den Akker-van Marle, M Elske
AU - Steyerberg, Ewout W
AU - van Bodegom-Vos, Leti
AU - van Bezouw, Maarten J
AU - Hilvering, Bart
AU - Weersink, Els J M
AU - van der Sar-van der Brugge, Simone
AU - Fieten, Karin B
AU - Beukert, Annelies
AU - Retera, Jeroen M A M
AU - Oud, Karen T M
AU - van der Meer, Renske
AU - Patberg, Kornelis W
AU - Macken, Thomas
AU - de Visser, Veerle L
AU - Conemans, Lennart H
AU - van Velzen, Edwin
AU - van Veen, Ilonka H
AU - van Huisstede, Astrid
AU - Romme, Elisabeth A P M
AU - Amelink, Marijke
AU - van Ruitenbeek, Charlotte A
AU - Ten Brinke, Anneke
AU - Kappen, Jasper H
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2026 The Authors
PY - 2026/7
Y1 - 2026/7
N2 - Background: Biologics in severe asthma are an effective but costly treatment. A personalized dosing strategy could reduce treatment burden and improve cost-effectiveness. Objective: To explore physician attitudes and real-world practices regarding dosing interval extensions for biologics in severe asthma. Methods: We assessed attitudes to dosing interval extension among Dutch pulmonologists prescribing biologics through a 28-item nationwide e-survey and investigated clinical practices using data from the Dutch severe asthma registry RAPSODI (Dutch Registry of Adult Patients with Severe asthma for Optimal DIsease management). Results: Of 50 pulmonologists, 39 (78%) reported extending dosing intervals, primarily due to good clinical response (95%) and treatment costs (77%). Most required at least 1 year of stable asthma (82%), which respondents defined as 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score less than 1.5, stable lung function, absence of exacerbations, and no maintenance oral corticosteroids. Reported success rates exceeded 50% for 62% of respondents, with failures mainly due to exacerbations or worsening symptoms. Interval extension was more frequent among physicians treating more than 25 patients with severe asthma (P < .01). Major barriers included lack of evidence (63%) and experience (52%), yet 91% expressed a wish to extend intervals more often. In RAPSODI (n = 1603), 159 interval extensions were recorded in 138 patients across 14 hospitals. Median increase in interval relative to the standard interval was 50% (range, 12.5%-300%) with multiple sequential extensions in 14% of patients. In 2024, the annual incidence of extensions was 5.2%, and the prevalence was 11.4%. Conclusions: A vast majority of Dutch pulmonologists already apply dosing interval extension of biologics in severe asthma, however on a limited scale. Although the frequency is increasing, clinicians are reluctant to apply extension broadly due to limited experience and evidence, highlighting the need for evidence-based guidelines.
AB - Background: Biologics in severe asthma are an effective but costly treatment. A personalized dosing strategy could reduce treatment burden and improve cost-effectiveness. Objective: To explore physician attitudes and real-world practices regarding dosing interval extensions for biologics in severe asthma. Methods: We assessed attitudes to dosing interval extension among Dutch pulmonologists prescribing biologics through a 28-item nationwide e-survey and investigated clinical practices using data from the Dutch severe asthma registry RAPSODI (Dutch Registry of Adult Patients with Severe asthma for Optimal DIsease management). Results: Of 50 pulmonologists, 39 (78%) reported extending dosing intervals, primarily due to good clinical response (95%) and treatment costs (77%). Most required at least 1 year of stable asthma (82%), which respondents defined as 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score less than 1.5, stable lung function, absence of exacerbations, and no maintenance oral corticosteroids. Reported success rates exceeded 50% for 62% of respondents, with failures mainly due to exacerbations or worsening symptoms. Interval extension was more frequent among physicians treating more than 25 patients with severe asthma (P < .01). Major barriers included lack of evidence (63%) and experience (52%), yet 91% expressed a wish to extend intervals more often. In RAPSODI (n = 1603), 159 interval extensions were recorded in 138 patients across 14 hospitals. Median increase in interval relative to the standard interval was 50% (range, 12.5%-300%) with multiple sequential extensions in 14% of patients. In 2024, the annual incidence of extensions was 5.2%, and the prevalence was 11.4%. Conclusions: A vast majority of Dutch pulmonologists already apply dosing interval extension of biologics in severe asthma, however on a limited scale. Although the frequency is increasing, clinicians are reluctant to apply extension broadly due to limited experience and evidence, highlighting the need for evidence-based guidelines.
KW - Biologics
KW - Dosing interval extension
KW - Personalized dosing
KW - Real-world practice
KW - Severe asthma
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105038131269
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2026.03.029
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2026.03.029
M3 - Article
C2 - 41936913
SN - 2213-2198
VL - 14
SP - p1612-1619.e3
JO - The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
JF - The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
IS - 7
ER -