## 3 Results  
A cohort of 66 patients (54 males and 12 females, median age 58 [47.3-64.8] years) undergoing dupilumab treatment as add-on therapy were included in the present study. Patients' demographics and both PROMS and CROMS at baseline (T0) are reported in Table 1. In total, 52 patients reached the 12-month follow-up, while 29 patients reached the 2-year follow-up threshold. A significant decrease in both NPS and M-LKS was observed (\(p<0.001\)) throughout the study period (Figure 2). No statistically significant differences were observed when comparing the two endoscopic scores decrease (\(p=0.2\)). A similar trend was observed for all the considered PROMs (SNOT-22, VAS-NO, VAS-Smell, VAS-Rhinorrhea, VAS-facial pain, and ACT), with a significant reduction throughout the study period (\(p<0.001\)) (Figure 3). Additionally, all the other relevant CROMs (such as SSIT and PNIF) improved during the treatment (\(p<0.001\)) (Figure 3). We further considered the correlations between each endoscopic score (NPS and M-LKS) and the main PROMs and CROMs affected in CRSwNP patients [19]. In particular, no statistically significant correlation was found between SNOT-22 and both NPS and M-LKS. When considering the CROMs (SSIT and PNIF), a significant negative correlation was observed between PNIF and both M-LKS (r = \(-0.005\), \(p=0.009\)) and NPS (r = \(-0.006\), \(p<0.001\)). Similarly, SSIT negatively correlated with NPS (r = \(-0.8\), \(p=0.04\)) and showed a statistical trend with M-LKS (r = \(-0.997\), \(p=0.06\)), without differences between the two endoscopic scores (\(p>0.05\)) (Table 2). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Demographics**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Sex**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Median} & \multirow{3}{*}{**BMI**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Asthma, n (\%)**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**N-ERD, n (\%)**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Inhalants, n (\%)**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Smokers, n (\%)**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**OCS \({}^{*}\)**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**ESS, Median**} \\  & & **Age, yr** & & & & & & & **Median** \\  & & **[IQR]** & **[IQR]** & **[IQR]** & **(\%)** & **(\%)** & **n (\%)** & **(\%)** & **IQR]** & **IQR]** \\ \cline{2-11}  & \(54\) M (82\%) & \(58\) & \(25.3\) & \(41\) & \(17\) & \(33\) & \(7\) & \(2\) & \(1\) \\  & \(12\) F (18\%) & (47–65) & (23–27.8) & (62.1\%) & (25.8\%) & (50\%) & (10.6\%) & (1.7–2.2) & (1–2) \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**PROMs and**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**VAS-NO, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**VAS-smell, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**VAS-sleep, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**SNOT-22, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**PNIF**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**SSIT, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**NPS, median**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**LKS, median**} \\  & & **[IQR]** & **[IQR]** & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-11}  & \(7.5\) & \(10\) & \(5\) & \(6\) & \(56\) & \(120\) & \(3\) & \(6\) & \(6\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & (6–9) & (9–10) & (2–8) & (2–5–7.5) & (39.2–68) & (75–157.5) & (3–6) & (5–6) & (4–8) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Patients’ main clinical characteristics at baseline: PROMs, patient’s reported outcome measures; CROMs, clinician’s reported outcome measures; yr, years; IQR, interquartile range; BMI, body mass index; N-ERD, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs exacerbated respiratory disease; OCS, oral corticosteroids; ESS, endoscopic sinus surgery; VAS, visual analogue scale; -NO, nasal obstruction; SNOT-22, Sinonasal Outcome Test-22; SSIT, Sniffin’ Sticks identification test; NPS, nasal polyp score; LKS, Lund–Kennedy endoscopic score; *: OCS short course per year. Figure 3: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinician-reported outcome measures (CROMs) changes during the study period. SNOT-22, Sinonasal Outcome Test-22; VAS, visual analog scale; NO, nasal obstruction; PNIF, peak nasal inspiratory flow; SST, Sniffin’ Sticks identification test. Figure 2: NPS and M-LKS changes during the study period. NPS, nasal polyp score; M-LKS, modified, Lund–Kennedy endoscopic score.