Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Dec;22(1):2449889.
doi: 10.1080/15412555.2025.2449889. Epub 2025 Jan 29.

Biologic Therapies for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Affiliations
Free article

Biologic Therapies for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Tyler Pitre et al. COPD. 2025 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Despite limited breakthroughs in COPD pharmacotherapy, recent trials have shown promising results for biologics in COPD patients. However, robust evidence synthesis in this area is currently lacking.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to July 17, 2024, to identify randomized trials of biologic medications in patients with COPD. We performed a random effects frequentist network meta-analysis and present the results using relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the GRADE framework to rate the certainty of the evidence. Outcomes of interest included exacerbations, change in FEV1, change in quality of life, and serious adverse events.

Results: Dupilumab reduced exacerbations as compared to placebo (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.59 to 0.79]) (high certainty). Benralizumab (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.78 to 1]), itepekimab (RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.61 to 1.07]) and tezepelumab (RR 0.83 [95% CI 0.61 to 1.12]) may reduce exacerbations as compared to placebo (all low certainty). Dupilumab probably reduced exacerbations more than mepolizumab (RR 0.74 [95% CI 0.62 to 0.89]) (moderate certainty). Dupilumab may reduce exacerbations more than tezepelumab (RR 0.82 [95% CI 1.14]) (low certainty). For all patients, no treatment improved FEV1 above the pre-specified minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.1 L. Dupilumab probably has no meaningful effect on FEV1 compared to placebo (MD 0.07 [95% CI 0.02 to 0.13]) (moderate certainty). However, in the subgroup of patients with blood eosinophils ≥300/mcL, both tezepelumab (MD 0.15 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.26]) and dupilumab (MD 0.13 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.19]) probably improved FEV1 above the MCID.

Conclusion: Dupilumab is effective at improving patient-relevant outcomes in COPD with higher eosinophil levels. Other biological therapies, including tezepelumab, have no important effect on patient-relevant outcomes.

Keywords: COPD; biologics; network meta‑analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources