Background: Severe asthma exacerbations (SAEs) significantly contribute to asthma-related morbidity, mortality, and healthcare burden. Despite therapeutic advances, a subset of patients remains exacerbation-prone. This review aims to summarize current evidence on risk factors, phenotypes, and biomarkers associated with SAEs, and explore personalized strategies for their acute management. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature review focusing on clinical, inflammatory, and environmental drivers of SAE. Special attention was given to Type 2 (T2) biomarkers—blood eosinophil count (BEC) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO)—as tools for phenotyping and treatment guidance. Emerging evidence on the use of biologics during exacerbations was also analyzed. Results: SAEs are heterogeneous in etiology and inflammatory profile. Respiratory infections, allergen exposure, obesity, and comorbidities increase exacerbation risk. T2-high SAEs respond well to corticosteroids and biologics, whereas T2-low SAEs show limited treatment benefit. BEC and FeNO reliably predict exacerbation risk and corticosteroid responsiveness. Recent case reports suggest potential roles for anti-IL-5 and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) biologics in acute care. Conclusions: Biomarker-guided management of SAEs may enhance therapeutic precision and avoid overtreatment. Integrating phenotypic (observable characteristics) and endotypic (biological markers) assessment into acute care could improve patient outcomes and optimize resource use. Prospective trials are needed to confirm these approaches.

Background/Objectives: Achieving disease control is the main goal in asthmatic patients in order to prevent future risks and exacerbations. There are several clinical guidelines that set different definitions of asthma control, and these differences may affect management and treatment in many patients. Our aim was to describe asthma control patterns according to the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2023 in patients considered to have uncontrolled asthma as per previous GINA 2010 guidelines. Methods: A total of 1299 patients from the COAS study were analyzed. The COAS study was a cross-sectional multicenter study conducted in routine clinical practice that included patients with uncontrolled asthma according to GINA 2010. These patients were then re-classified using the now updated GINA 2023 asthma control criteria. Results: After applying GINA 2023 control criteria, previously uncontrolled patients were now classified as having controlled asthma in 24.3% of cases and partially controlled asthma in 16.3% of cases. Only 59.4% maintained their previous diagnosis of uncontrolled asthma. ACT in the uncontrolled patients remained similar after re-classification, as did the percentage of active smokers, respiratory allergy, rhinitis, and lung function. Conclusions: Changes in clinical guideline criteria affect the definition of asthma control. When excluding pulmonary function abnormalities in GINA 2023 asthma control criteria, the percentage of controlled patients greatly increased.

The relationship between asthma, infections, and immunodeficiencies is complex and affects disease progression. Immune deficiencies can occur independently or because of the inflammatory processes associated with asthma. Early viral infections like respiratory sinticial virus and rhinovirus trigger asthma attacks, while bacteria such as Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Chlamydia pneumoniae worsen airway inflammation. People with asthma often have defects in innate (mucociliary clearance, interferons, defensins, NK cell, and eosinophils) and adaptive immunity such as immunoglobulin (Ig) deficiencies, making them more vulnerable to lung infections. Combined and selective deficiencies of IgA, IgG, IgM, and IgE are linked to higher asthma rates and reduced effectiveness of treatments, but immunoglobulin therapy can help control symptoms. Biologic therapies also decrease asthma exacerbations during periods of high viral activity by boosting immune responses and airway defenses. However, the link between asthma and higher infection risk is not well studied or understood, so guidelines do not recommend routinely checking for immunodeficiencies in cases of poor treatment response. Further investigation is required to elucidate these relationships and enhance management approaches.

The relationship between asthma, infections, and immunodeficiencies is complex and affects disease progression. Immune deficiencies can occur independently or because of the inflammatory processes associated with asthma. Early viral infections like respiratory sinticial virus and rhinovirus trigger asthma attacks, while bacteria such as Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Chlamydia pneumoniae worsen airway inflammation. People with asthma often have defects in innate (mucociliary clearance, interferons, defensins, NK cell, and eosinophils) and adaptive immunity such as immunoglobulin (Ig) deficiencies, making them more vulnerable to lung infections. Combined and selective deficiencies of IgA, IgG, IgM, and IgE are linked to higher asthma rates and reduced effectiveness of treatments, but immunoglobulin therapy can help control symptoms. Biologic therapies also decrease asthma exacerbations during periods of high viral activity by boosting immune responses and airway defenses. However, the link between asthma and higher infection risk is not well studied or understood, so guidelines do not recommend routinely checking for immunodeficiencies in cases of poor treatment response. More research is needed to clarify these connections and improve management strategies.