Asthma is a highly heterogeneous respiratory disease that, in its severe forms, is characterized by persistent symptoms, frequent exacerbations, and a significant impact on patients’ quality of life. Despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting bronchodilators, a subset of patients remains uncontrolled, necessitating advanced therapeutic strategies. The advent of biologic therapies has revolutionized the management of severe asthma, offering targeted interventions based on the underlying inflammatory endotypes, primarily T2-high and T2-low. However, selecting the most appropriate biologic remains challenging due to overlapping phenotypic features and the limited availability of validated biomarkers. This narrative review explores the clinical utility of key biomarkers, including blood eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), periostin, and total and specific IgE, in guiding biologic therapy. All the information provided is based on an extensive literature search conducted on PubMed. We also examine the clinical characteristics and comorbidities that influence therapeutic choices. Furthermore, we present a practical decision-making platform, including a clinical table matching phenotypes with biologic agents, such as omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab. By integrating biomarker analysis with clinical assessment, based on current guidelines and our extensive real-life experience, we aim to offer a logical framework to help clinicians select the most suitable biologic treatment for patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. Future research should focus on identifying novel biomarkers, refining patient stratification, and evaluating long-term outcomes to further advance precision medicine in the management of severe asthma.

Background/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI), machine-learning (ML), and deep-learning (DL) models are increasingly used for prognostic prediction in intensive care unit (ICU) sepsis, but their clinical readiness remains uncertain. This systematic review aimed to evaluate AI-, ML-, and DL-based models for mortality and clinically relevant outcome prediction in adult ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to April 2026. Eligible studies included adult ICU sepsis or septic shock cohorts evaluating AI/ML/DL-based prognostic models. Screening, full-text assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Outcomes, model families, validation strategies, discrimination, calibration, clinical utility, explainability, comparative performance versus conventional severity scores, risk of bias, and reporting completeness were synthesized. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST domains supplemented by PROBAST + AI considerations, and reporting completeness was evaluated according to TRIPOD/TRIPOD + AI domains. Results: Seventy-five studies were included, comprising 50 PubMed-derived and 25 additional Scopus-derived studies. AUROC or C-statistic was extractable in 64 studies, external validation was reported in 27, prospective evaluation in three, calibration in 38, decision-curve analysis or clinical utility assessment in 37, and explainability in 64. Across 17 directly extractable within-study comparisons from nine studies, AI/ML models usually, but not uniformly, achieved higher discrimination than conventional severity scores, with a median paired ΔAUROC of +0.108 (IQR, +0.082 to +0.148; range, −0.013 to +0.203). Externally validated fixed-horizon models showed clinically relevant but heterogeneous discrimination across sepsis phenotypes, with stronger evidence in selected sepsis-induced coagulopathy cohorts and more variable transportability in respiratory and liver-injury subgroups. However, 45 studies were judged at high risk of bias, mainly because of limitations in the analysis domain. Conclusions: AI/ML models for adult ICU sepsis show a recurrent signal of prognostic discrimination and often perform comparably to or better than conventional severity scores in directly extractable within-study comparisons; however, this signal should be interpreted cautiously given clinical and methodological heterogeneity, limited prospective validation, incomplete calibration, and frequent high risk of bias. The strongest evidence comes from externally validated, phenotype-specific models, although routine clinical implementation remains limited by heterogeneous endpoints, incomplete calibration, insufficient prospective validation, and scarce workflow-level evaluation. Future studies should shift from retrospective AUROC optimization toward calibrated, externally validated, clinically actionable, and workflow-integrated decision-support tools tested in prospective ICU settings.

The nasal mucosa functions as a highly specialized barrier that integrates epithelial, stromal, neuronal, and immune signals to maintain homeostasis and mount rapid responses to environmental challenges. Among its resident immune populations, innate lymphoid cells—particularly type 2 ILCs (ILC2s)—play a pivotal role in orchestrating type 2 inflammation driven by epithelial-derived alarmins such as IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP. Upon activation, ILC2s release IL-5 and IL-13, promoting eosinophilic inflammation, goblet cell hyperplasia, mucus hypersecretion, and tissue remodeling, all central features of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and severe allergic rhinitis. Recent advances have revealed substantial ILC plasticity, the presence of nasal-resident ILC progenitors, and the influence of metabolic and neuroimmune cues in shaping ILC activation and persistence. Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-4Rα, has emerged as a highly effective therapy, providing unique mechanistic insight into the epithelial–ILC axis. By blocking IL-4/IL-13 signaling, dupilumab dampens ILC2 effector functions, reduces IL-5/IL-13 output, restores epithelial barrier integrity, interrupts alarmin-driven amplification loops, and rebalances innate and adaptive immune networks. Clinical and translational studies indicate that baseline ILC2 phenotypes—particularly inflammatory ILC2 subsets—may predict treatment responsiveness, positioning ILC profiling as a promising biomarker strategy. This review synthesizes current knowledge of ILC classification, plasticity, progenitor biology, and epithelial–ILC communication in the nasal mucosa, while integrating emerging evidence on dupilumab-mediated immunomodulation. Collectively, these insights highlight ILCs as central drivers of type 2 inflammation and key targets for precision immunomodulation, offering a framework for personalized treatment approaches in CRSwNP and allergic rhinitis.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has several benefits in patients affected by different forms of acute respiratory failure, based on its own mechanisms. We postulated that HFNC may have some advantages over conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on the heart function in patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with concomitant pulmonary hypertension (PH). We therefore designed this retrospective observational study to assess if HFNC improves the right and left ventricle functions and morphologies, arterial blood gases (ABGs), and patients’ dyspnea, compared to COT. We enrolled 17 hospitalized patients receiving HFNC, matched with 17 patients receiving COT. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed at the time of admission (baseline) and 10 days after (T₁₀). HFNC showed significant improvements in right ventricular morphology and function, and a reduction in sPAP. However, there were no significant changes in the left heart measurements with HFNC application. Conversely, COT did not lead to any modifications in echocardiographic measurements. In both groups, oxygenation significantly improved from baseline to T₁₀ (in the HFNC group, from 155 ± 47 to 204 ± 61 mmHg while in the COT group, from 157 ± 27 to 207 ± 27 mmHg; p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). In conclusion, these data suggest an improvement of oxygenation with both treatments; however, only HFNC was able to improve the right ventricular morphology and function after 10 days from the beginning of treatment in a small cohort of patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with PH.

Background/Objectives: Patients with eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often remain symptomatic despite optimized triple inhaled therapy. Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the IL-4 receptor alpha subunit, thereby inhibiting IL-4 and IL-13 signaling. Evidence from randomized trials supports dupilumab for add-on treatment of type 2-high COPD, but data referring to short-term effectiveness in clinical practice are quite limited. Methods: We conducted an observational, compassionate-use study enrolling 13 consecutive outpatients with eosinophilic COPD (blood eosinophils ≥ 300 cells/µL) receiving add-on biologic therapy with dupilumab 300 mg every two weeks. Clinical (CAT, mMRC), functional (spirometry and body plethysmography), and inflammatory parameters (blood eosinophils/basophils, fibrinogen, FeNO) were evaluated at baseline and after four weeks of treatment. Safety was monitored after injection in a clinical setting, as well as via weekly phone follow-up. Results: Participants (84.6% male; mean age 67.08 ± 11.42 years) experienced rapid and clinically meaningful improvements at four weeks. CAT score decreased from baseline 21.40 ± 6.22 to 14.00 ± 5.58 (p < 0.001) and mMRC scale from 2.90 ± 0.73 to 1.80 ± 0.63 (p < 0.0001), respectively. Pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ increased from baseline 1.35 ± 0.65 L to 1.59 ± 0.84 L (p < 0.05), and FVC from 2.36 ± 0.92 L to 2.83 ± 1.11 L (p < 0.01). A marked lung deflation was observed: indeed, residual volume declined from baseline 4.17 ± 1.98 L to 3.47 ± 2.07 L (p < 0.05), with a concomitant reduction in specific effective airway resistance (from baseline 3.15 ± 1.77 to 2.43 ± 1.44 kPa·s; p < 0.05) associated with significant increases in mid-expiratory flow (FEF₂₅₋₇₅: from baseline 0.62 ± 0.38 to 0.86 ± 0.71 L/s; p < 0.05) and peak expiratory flow (3.80 ± 1.40 to 4.48 ± 1.79 L/s; p < 0.01). Type 2 inflammatory biomarkers changed as follows: blood eosinophil count fell from baseline 390.0 ± 43.75 to 190.0 ± 65.47 cells/µL (p < 0.001); blood basophil number decreased from baseline 37.50 ± 13.89 to 26.25 ± 13.02 cells/µL (p < 0.001); plasma fibrinogen lowered from baseline 388.4 ± 54.81 to 334.9 ± 72.36 mg/dL (p < 0.01); FeNO levels dropped from baseline 23.95 ± 18.10 to 14.00 ± 2.04 ppb (p < 0.0001). Dupilumab was well tolerated, and no treatment-related serious adverse events or discontinuations were detected. Conclusions: Within an exploratory context of daily medical activity referring to eosinophilic COPD already treated with maximal inhaled therapy, we found relevant therapeutic effects of a four-week add-on treatment with dupilumab. In particular, our patients manifested rapid improvements in symptoms, airflow limitation, and lung hyperinflation, paralleled by significant decrements of type 2 inflammatory signatures. Such encouraging results were associated with a favorable short-term safety profile. However, larger and longer studies are necessary to corroborate these preliminary findings.

Background: Asthma is a heterogeneous chronic airway disease characterized by inflammation, airflow obstruction, hyperresponsiveness, and remodeling. Severe eosinophilic asthma is driven by eosinophilic inflammation, which contributes to tissue damage, recurrent exacerbations, and progressive impairment of airway structure and function. Eosinophils play a central role through the release of cytokines, cytotoxic granule proteins, and extracellular traps, and their persistence in the airways is sustained by type 2 inflammatory pathways, particularly interleukin-5-mediated signaling. A better understanding of eosinophil biology has promoted the development of targeted therapies, including anti-interleukin-5/interleukin-5 receptor agents and biologics that indirectly modulate eosinophilic inflammation, such as anti-interleukin-4 receptor alpha and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin antibodies. Aim: This narrative review summarizes the immunopathology of eosinophilic asthma and links eosinophil biology to current and emerging pharmacological strategies. We discuss biologics that directly target the IL-5/IL-5 receptor axis, as well as agents that indirectly modulate eosinophilic inflammation, including IL-4 receptor alpha and TSLP blockade. We also review the clinical positioning of available biologics, focusing on blood eosinophils, FeNO, exacerbation history, oral corticosteroid exposure, lung function, type 2 comorbidities, treatment response, remission and switching. Conclusions: Overall, eosinophilic inflammation remains a central therapeutic target and a key component of precision medicine in severe asthma, but biologic selection should be individualized and reassessed through multidomain clinical outcomes.