The anti-IgE antibody omalizumab reduces exacerbations and steroid requirement in allergic asthmatics

Predictors of reversible airway obstruction with omalizumab in severe asthma: a real-life study

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab may modulate airway remodeling in severe asthma. Using forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) as a surrogate of airway remodeling, we aimed to investigate if an omalizumab add-on in severe allergic asthma may lead to a persistent reversal of airway obstruction and to evaluate the potential biomarkers of airway obstruction reversibility.

METHODS

Data were collected before (T0) and after omalizumab add-on for 1 year (T1, 32 patients), 2 years (T2, 26 patients) and 4 years (T4, 13 patients). All patients had baseline FEV1 below 80 % predicted (60.5 ± 12.5 %). After omalizumab, 18 patients showed FEV1 normalization (reversible airway obstruction; RAO+) already at T1 (88.7 ± 14.9 %, p < 0.0001) that persisted up to T4 (83.2 ± 7.9, p < 0.01), while 14 patients (RAO-) had FEV1 persistently decreased, from T1 (65.2 ± 8.4%, p < 0.05) up to T4 (61.4 ± 6.2%, not significant). Both groups had significant improvement of symptoms and exacerbations after omalizumab at T1, which persisted up to T4. The comparison between pretreatment characteristics of the two groups showed that RAO+ patients, had higher values of circulating eosinophils, exhaled nitric oxide (FENO), prevalence of rhinitis and nasal polyps, need of oral corticosteroids, shorter asthma duration, higher FEV1 and response to albuterol test. The optimal cut-off points predicting FEV1 normalization after omalizumab add-on were 30.5 ppb for FENO and 305 cells/µl for eosinophils.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that omalizumab add-on contributes to the persistent reversal of airway obstruction in a consistent number of patients with severe allergic asthma, and this beneficial effect is predicted by elevated pretreatment FENO and circulating eosinophils.

Overlapping Effects of New Monoclonal Antibodies for Severe Asthma

Among the monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) developed for severe asthma treatment, three have already been marketed. Omalizumab was the first, more than 10 years ago; today, mepolizumab and reslizumab are also available in the European Union and the US. Omalizumab blocks free immunoglobulin E (IgE), mepolizumab and reslizumab block an interleukin (IL-5). In the near future, dupilumab and benralizumab are expected to emerge as two new alternatives. Benralizumab blocks the receptor for IL-5 (IL5-Rα) and has a direct cytotoxic effect on eosinophils, and dupilumab blocks the α-unit of the heterodimeric receptor for IL-4 and IL-13 (IL-4Rα); as a result, dupilumab can block both IL-4 and IL-13. The purpose of this manuscript is to present the pathophysiology of some immunological aspects of severe asthma, describe the adaptive and innate immunity arms as well as their interrelations (stressing the subordination of the adaptive arm to the innate arm), outline the pharmacologic effects of these mAbs, clarify the overlapping effects of the different mAbs, and discuss the differences between mAbs based on their target molecules. Based on the data presented, I propose omalizumab for patients with an allergic phenotype regardless of their peripheral eosinophilic count, and anti-IL-5 as an alternative in allergic patients with blood eosinophilia in which omalizumab has failed; anti-IL5 for patients with an eosinophilic phenotype and omalizumab as an alternative in patients in whom anti-IL5 fails and IgE ≥30 IU/mL (compassionate use). Omalizumab is also proposed for patients with severe chronic asthma allergic to seasonal allergens.

An evaluation of fevipiprant for the treatment of asthma: a promising new therapy?

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease characterized by chronic airway inflammation that affects more than 230 million people worldwide. Current guidelines recommend an escalating stepwise decision model for the management of asthma. However, disease control continues to be a challenge, particularly in patients with severe asthma. Biologics have proven to be an effective add-on treatment especially in eosinophilic or type 2 airway disease. Comparatively, pre-biologics may represent a successful novel therapy. Fevipiprant (QAW039) is a selective, reversible, antagonist of the prostaglandin D₂ receptor (DP₂). Areas covered: The authors review the mechanism of action of fevipiprant as well as its pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, tolerability, efficacy, and safety. Comparative therapies are also described. A comprehensive literature review was performed using: the PubMed central database, U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine database (NIH/NLM) and the NLM clinical trials database. Expert opinion: Fevipipiprant is a promising prebiologic therapy with convenient dosing, oral administration, and an acceptable safety profile. However, the spectrum of asthmatic patients that may benefit from this therapy is somehow limited to (i.e. moderate to severe eosinophilic asthma). Results from phase III clinical trials are needed to assess whether fevipiprant would lead to a reduction in exacerbation rates and perhaps broaden the target population.

Benralizumab, an add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma: evaluation of exacerbations, emergency department visits, lung function, and oral corticosteroid use

There are now multiple monoclonal antibodies targeting different inflammatory pathways of severe asthma. Benralizumab is a recently approved monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma by targeting a subunit of the IL-5 receptor. Treatment with benralizumab results in significant reductions of blood and tissue eosinophils. Early studies report that this therapy has an adequate safety profile, and this was confirmed in later trials. Phase III studies have shown that benralizumab is effective in reducing the rate of exacerbations and improving asthma symptoms and quality of life in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. Additionally, treatment with benralizumab has resulted in important reductions in the use of chronic oral corticosteroids. In this review, we evaluate the evidence up to date on the efficacy of benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma and explore the implications of this therapy in the ever-growing landscape of therapies for severe asthma.

Tolerability of Omalizumab in Asthma as a Major Compliance Factor: 10-Year Follow Up

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data related to real life, long-term safety, tolerability and compliance of omalizumab treatment in asthma patients beyond 6 years.

AIM

Study aimed to assess safety, tolerability, compliance and all reasons for treatment discontinuation during 10 years on omalizumab.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

This is a retrospective, observational study of uncontrolled asthma patients receiving omalizumab for the last 10 years. All data were collected from patients' files (demographics, adverse events, comorbidities, compliance index, reasons for discontinuation of omalizumab). Reactions to omalizumab were classified as local and systemic, and their severity as mild, moderate or severe. Reactions were either immediate (minutes to hours after drug administration) or delayed (after days). Compliance to omalizumab, defined as Compliance index (CI), was calculated by comparing milligrams of given to milligrams of prescribed dose/ per year.

RESULTS

Out of 35 patients receiving omalizumab, 15 drop out at different time points mostly due to treatment efficacy or appearance of new comorbidities. Patients who continue for the next ten years had mild to moderate adverse events related to omalizumab. There was no increased risk of severe adverse events during 10 years on omalizumab. Patient's treatment tolerability, despite mild to moderate adverse events, is in favour of compliance.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with omalizumab mildly decreased over 10 years but was not affected by severe adverse events of treatment or new comorbidities. Although, omalizumab is safe medicine appearance of new comorbidities has to be closely followed up.

Endotypes of severe allergic asthma patients who clinically benefit from anti-IgE therapy

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab, a recombinant monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, was developed for the treatment of severe allergic asthma. Not all these patients respond to omalizumab.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate whether the proinflammatory cytokine profiles in the severe allergic asthma patients were different between who responded and nonresponded to omalizumab therapy.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted to examine type 2 cytokines and epithelium-derived cytokines in the bronchial tissues by immunohistochemistry, Western blot and PCR analysis among patients with severe allergic asthma before and after omalizumab therapy.

RESULTS

Fourteen of 23 patients with unstable severe allergic asthma improved their asthma control after 4 months of omalizumab treatment (Responders), while nine failed to improve (Non-Responders). Most of Responders were type 2-high endotype (12/14) with upregulated expression of IL-33, IL-25 and TSLP in their bronchial tissues, while most of Non-Responders were type 2-low endotype (8/9). Repeated bronchoscopic biopsy was done in nine responders after omalizumab treatment and showed a decline in IL-13, IL-33, IL-25 and TSLP expression in the bronchial tissues. Among 14 Responders who continued omalizuamb treatments to a total 12 months, six patients achieved a well control of asthma (ACT ≥ 23), while eight patients required additional treatment for asthma symptoms and had more rhinosinusitis comorbidities and a mixed eosinophilic and neutrophilic inflammation in their bronchial tissues.

CONCLUSION

Most of the severe allergic asthma patients who benefited from omalizumab treatment were IL-33, IL-25 and TSLP aggravated type 2-high endotype. Rhinosinusitis or with a mixed eosinophilic and neutrophilic airway inflammation should be evaluated in patients who partially responded to omalizumab treatment.

Monitoring of omalizumab therapy in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is a successfully implemented supplementary therapy for improving asthma control in children aged 6 years and older with severe persistent allergic asthma. The dosage of omalizumab depends on body weight and IgE level, yet no parameter has been established to guide dosage changes during therapy. Clinical studies in patients with allergic asthma or allergic rhinitis revealed a clinically relevant improvement by using omalizumab leading to concentrations of free serum IgE reported to be lower than 50 ng/ml. Therefore, only the question concerning the concentrations of free IgE used in a therapy with omalizumab is regarded of clinical importance, while total IgE (free and omalizumab-bound IgE) increases during treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten patients, 8 to 17 years of age, received therapy with omalizumab due to severe allergic asthma. In addition, the patients had pronounced rhinoconjunctivitis, food allergy, insect sting allergy, and/or neurodermitis. The total IgE in the serum was measured in the patients 3 - 6 months before each omalizumab injection as a potential progress parameter (Sandwich-Immunoassay ADVIA Centaur).

RESULTS

Six months after beginning of the therapy with omalizumab, a significant decrease of the total IgE concentration was found, in comparison to the baseline values (p < 0.003). In all patients the tolerability of omalizumab was very good: there was a reduction in the frequency of the asthma exacerbations and rescue medications. All patients reported a clearly improved quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

A general increase in IgE was not observed in any of the children we treated with omalizumab. Apart from the development of routine assays to determine free serum IgE levels, the significance of the total serum IgE as a suitable control of an omalizumab therapy should be further investigated in controlled studies with regard to sensitivity and specificity. In order to only administer the lowest necessary dose of omalizumab especially in children and adolescents, the establishment of laboratory parameters (free IgE and/or total IgE) to adequately monitor the therapy is urgently needed. Patients undergoing an omalizumab therapy require medical supervision at close intervals.

Nontuberculous mycobacterial disease managed within UK primary care, 2006-2016

Previous UK studies investigating nontuberculous mycobacteria have been limited to reporting isolation from culture, not burden of disease. We assessed the burden of nontuberculous mycobacterial disease (NTMD) in UK primary care from 2006 to 2016. Using electronic healthcare records, we identified patients with NTMD using a strict definition including patients with guideline-directed treatment/monitoring. We described treatment regimens and incidence/prevalence in the general population and in patients with underlying chronic respiratory diseases. Incidence of primary care-managed NTMD in the general population decreased (2006 to 2016 rates per 100,000 person-years, 3.85 to 1.28). Average annual prevalence of NTMD in the general population was 6.38 per 100,000. Around 85% were taking antimycobacterial therapy; 53.2% were taking a guideline-recommended regimen. Incidence of NTMD in patients with respiratory disease decreased (2006 to 2016 rates per 100,000 person-years, 12.5 to 7.40). Average annual prevalence of NTMD in patients with respiratory disease was 27.7 per 100,000. This is the first UK study using nationally representative data to investigate the burden of NTMD managed within primary care. Incidence and prevalence of managed NTMD within primary care is gradually declining. Increasing complexity in the management of NTMD may be driving a shift in care to secondary settings.

The use of intravenous versus subcutaneous monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of severe asthma: a review

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) approved for use as add-on therapy in patients with severe asthma target the underlying pathogenesis of asthma.

MAIN BODY

Omalizumab binds immunoglobulin E (IgE), thereby inhibiting its interaction with the high-affinity IgE receptor and reducing the quantity of free IgE available to trigger the allergic cascade. Anti-interleukin (IL)-5 mAbs mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab block the interaction between IL-5 and its receptor on eosinophils, thus targeting the eosinophilic pathway in asthma. Most mAbs are available as intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) formulations, as their high molecular weight and gastric degradation preclude oral administration. This review compares the pharmacology, efficacy, immunogenicity, injection- and infusion-related adverse drug reactions of subcutaneously administered omalizumab and mepolizumab with the intravenously administered reslizumab. In terms of pharmacokinetics, IV route of administration appears to be superior to the SC route due to quicker absorption, greater bioavailability, shorter time to maximum serum concentration and similar elimination half-life. Route of administration does not appear to translate into striking differences in efficacy and safety of mAbs used for the treatment of severe asthma, as all are generally considered to be effective and well tolerated. Hypersensitivity and administration-related reactions have been described with both IV and SC mAbs.

CONCLUSION

mABs are effective and have low immunogenicity due to their nature as humanised antibodies. Evidence on the use of mAbs in indications other than severe asthma suggest that both the SC and the IV routes of administrations have their respective advantages and disadvantages; but their full utility remains to be elucidated.

Selecting the right biologic for your patients with severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

Severe asthma affects 5% to 10% of the adult asthma population and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and consumption of health care resources. Recently, several biologic medications have been approved for use in severe asthma. These medications target the type 2 inflammatory pathway, which is characterized by activation of cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13, which results in eosinophilia, high FeNO, and atopic features. The objective of this review was to provide clinicians with key points to assist in selecting the best biologic medication for each patient.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive literature search was performed, and data were reviewed from basic science articles of inflammatory mediators in type 2 airway inflammation, and clinical trials of biologic medications in patients with severe asthma.

STUDY SELECTIONS

These studies analyzed outcomes of biologic medications in type 2-high severe asthma including clinical biomarkers, exacerbation rates, lung function, and quality of life measures.

RESULTS

Biologic mediations in type 2-high severe asthma improve outcomes, including clinical biomarkers, exacerbation rates, lung function, and quality-of-life measures.

CONCLUSION

When choosing a biologic medication for patients with severe asthma, asthma endotype, clinical biomarkers, and patient-centered factors should be taken into account.

Real-world safety and efficacy of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma: A long-term post-marketing study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab (anti-IgE monoclonal antibody) is an approved add-on therapy for Japanese patients with severe allergic asthma. As directed by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare Japan, a post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study on omalizumab was conducted between 2009 and 2017.

METHODS

The PMS observed safety and efficacy of omalizumab in patients treated with open-label omalizumab for 52 weeks (with optional 2-year extension period). Primary safety outcomes included incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Primary efficacy outcomes included physician-assessed global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE). Asthma-exacerbation-related events including requirement for additional systemic steroid therapy, hospitalization, emergency room visits, unscheduled doctor visits, and absenteeism were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 3893 patients registered, 3620 (age [mean ± SD] 59.3 ± 16.11 years) were evaluated for 52 weeks; 44.12% were aged ≥65 years and 64.45% were women. Overall, 32.24% reported AEs and 15.30% reported serious AEs. ADRs were seen in 292 (8.07%) patients. GETE results showed that the majority of patients experienced clinical improvements (58.29% at 16 weeks and 62.40% at 52 weeks). Nearly half of all patients (47.96%) were free from asthma exacerbations after therapy. Omalizumab also reduced all events related to asthma exacerbations. No specific ADRs were observed in the elderly population.

CONCLUSIONS

This post-marketing study confirmed the clinically meaningful benefits of omalizumab in a majority of patients from Japan, and showed safety and efficacy in a real-life clinical setting to be consistent with previous reports.

Long-Term Omalizumab Treatment: A Multicenter, Real-Life, 5-Year Trial

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab has demonstrated therapeutic benefits both in controlled clinical trials and real-life studies. However, research concerning the long-term effects and tolerability of omalizumab is needed. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of treatment with omalizumab for up to 5 years.

METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective, chart-based study was carried out to compare documented exacerbations, hospitalizations, systemic steroid requirement, FEV1, and asthma control test (ACT) results during 1 year prior to omalizumab treatment versus at 1, 3, and 5 years of treatment. Adverse events and reasons for discontinuation were also recorded at each time point.

RESULTS

Four hundred and sixty-five patients were enrolled in the study. Outcome variables had improved after the 1st year and were sustained after the 3rd and 5th years of treatment with omalizumab. Omalizumab treatment reduced the asthma exacerbation rate by 71.3% (p < 0.001) at 1 year, 64.3% (p < 0.001) at 3 years, and 54.8% (p = 0.002) at 5 years. The hospitalization rate also decreased; by the 5th year of the treatment no patients were hospitalized. ACT results had also improved significantly: 12 (p < 0.001) at 1 year, 12 (p < 0.001) at 3 years, and 12 (p = 0.002) at 5 years. Overall, 12.7% of patients reported adverse events (most of these were mild-to-moderate) and the overall dropout rate was 9.0%.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab had a significant effect on asthma outcomes and this effect was maintained over 5 years. The drug was found to be generally safe and treatment compliance was good.

Biomarkers for severe allergic asthma in children: could they be useful to guide disease control and use of omalizumab?

INTRODUCTION

Although symptom controls in asthmatic children can be achieved through compliant use of conventional medication, some children have uncontrolled severe persistent asthma, especially if they are allergic. For these children, omalizumab (approved by the EMA and FDA in children aged > 6 years) could be a therapeutic option. However, response to omalizumab varies from one child to another. Predictive biomarkers of omalizumab effectiveness could be useful to monitor response to treatment. Area covered: The authors searched in the PubMed database for publications related to the use of biomarkers in allergic asthma. Supported by their own experience in phenotyping asthma in children, they analyzed whether these biomarkers could be useful in assessing response to omalizumab. Expert commentary: Th2 inflammation in children with allergic asthma can be assessed by measuring several biomarkers (blood eosinophil, serum ECP or periostin, FeNO). While a single measurement may be insufficient, a combination of biomarkers assessments may improve the follow-up of children treated by omalizumab.

Antibody therapy for the management of severe asthma with eosinophilic inflammation

One of the characteristic features of asthma is chronic airway inflammation typically with eosinophil infiltration. Most asthmatics can be treated successfully with conventional treatment appropriate for their severity, but in some severe cases, asthma cannot be well controlled even with thorough treatment and this condition is known as 'refractory asthma'. To overcome severe refractory asthma, a new therapeutic strategy with biologics has been developed based on the knowledge of molecular mechanisms of airway inflammation in asthma, induced by the condition of high Th2-type responses and activation of eosinophils as well as allergic reactions. Humanized anti-human IgE antibody (anti-IgE; omalizumab) was the first biological preparation approved for treating asthma. Based on clinical evidence, treatment with anti-IgE (anti-IgE therapy) has been accepted as a new therapeutic approach for severe allergic asthma in adults since 2009 and in children since 2012 and has been shown to have ~60% efficacy. More recently, a humanized anti-IL-5 antibody (anti-IL-5; mepolizumab) was launched in June 2016 and has attracted great interest due to its potential effects. Several clinical studies are also ongoing to evaluate the biological preparations targeting IL-5 receptor α (IL-5Rα), IL-4 receptor α (IL-4Rα), which is shared by IL-4 and IL-13, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) and IL-33. The new strategy with biologics targeting eosinophilic airway inflammation might open a new array for us to overcome severe refractory asthma in the future.

New and Anticipated Therapies for Severe Asthma

Asthma is frequently undertreated, resulting in a relatively high prevalence of patients with uncontrolled disease, characterized by the presence of symptoms and risk of adverse outcomes. Patients with uncontrolled asthma have a higher risk of morbidity and mortality, underscoring the importance of identifying uncontrolled disease and modifying management plans to improve control. Several assessment tools exist to evaluate control with various cutoff points and measures, but these tools do not reliably correlate with physiological measures and should be considered a supplement to physiological tests. When attempting to improve control in patients, nonpharmacological interventions should always be attempted before changing or adding pharmacotherapies. Among patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, individualized treatment based on asthma phenotype and eosinophil presence should be considered. The efficacy of the anti-IgE antibody omalizumab has been well established for patients with allergic asthma, and novel biologic agents targeting IL-5, IL-13, IL-4, and other allergic pathways have been investigated for patients with allergic or eosinophilic asthma. Fevipiprant (a CRT_H2 [chemokine receptor homologous molecule expressed on Th2 cells] antagonist) and imatinib (a tyrosine kinase inhibition) are examples of nonbiologic therapies that may be useful for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. Incorporation of new and emerging treatment into therapeutic strategies for patients with severe asthma may improve outcomes for this patient population.

New biologics for allergic diseases

INTRODUCTION

Allergic conditions such as asthma and atopic dermatitis have a high prevalence but represent a heterogeneous group of diseases despite similar clinical presentation and underlying pathophysiology. A better understanding of the phenotypes and endotypes of these diseases has driven rapid development of biologic medications targeting many steps of the inflammatory pathways. Areas covered: There are 2 major inflammatory pathways that drive allergic diseases: Type-2 (Th-2) inflammation and non-type 2 inflammation. All of the biologic medications currently approved for use, and most of the biologic medications under development for allergic diseases have focused on the Th-2 inflammatory pathway. Biologic targets along this pathway include Anti-Immunoglobulin E (IgE), Anti-Interleukin 5 (IL-5), Anti-IL 4, and Anti-IL 13. Although the most study has been done in the realm of severe asthma, biologic targets for other allergic diseases including atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, chronic idiopathic urticaria, eosinophilic esophagitis, and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis are also discussed. Expert commentary: Novel biologic therapies have emerged over the last several years that have revolutionized the management of patients with refractory allergic disease.

Novel targets of omalizumab in asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Omalizumab is a recombinant humanized anti-IgE monoclonal antibody approved in the US for moderate to severe persistent allergic asthma (severe persistent asthma in the European Union), uncontrolled despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2 agonists. It reduces asthma exacerbations, symptoms, oral corticosteroid doses, and improves quality of life.

RECENT FINDINGS

Omalizumab may have an antiviral effect when used as a preventive therapy for fall exacerbations in children and teenagers. Two proof-of-concept studies have evaluated omalizumab in nonatopic asthma and showed that it is safe and possibly efficacious in some patients. Omalizumab has been successfully studied as add-on to specific immunotherapy in moderate allergic asthma. Its safety in pregnancy has been assessed in the EXPECT registry. Case series also report positive effects in cases of allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, and in nasal disorders frequently associated with asthma. Last, omalizumab may have corticosteroid-sparing effect in a subset of patients with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (formerly Churg-Strauss syndrome).

SUMMARY

Recent studies argue in favor of positive effects of omalizumab beyond its current indications in asthma. Well-designed studies are needed in order to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of omalizumab in these possible novel indications.

Role of biologics targeting type 2 airway inflammation in asthma: what have we learned so far?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome that can be classified into distinct phenotypes and endotypes. In the type 2 (T2)-high endotype, multiple cytokines are produced that lead to eosinophilic inflammation. These cytokines and their receptors are targets for biologic therapies in patients with severe asthma who do not respond well to standard therapy with inhaled corticosteroids.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last decade, an increasing number of biologic therapies have been developed targeting T2 inflammation. Clinical trials of therapies targeting immunoglobulin E as well as the T2 cytokines interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13 have demonstrated that these treatments improve asthma-related clinical outcomes and/or have steroid-sparing properties. The use of biomarkers of T2 inflammation can help to identify the subset of patients in whom these therapies may be most efficacious. Multiple biologic agents that are directed at other targets are currently in development, including thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), prostaglandin (PG)D2 receptor, IL-25, and IL-33.

SUMMARY

Biologics are emerging as a key component of severe asthma management. In patients with T2-high severe asthma, the addition of treatments targeting immunoglobulin E and IL-5 to standard therapy may lead to improvement in clinical outcomes. Other biologic therapies have shown promising preliminary results and need to be studied in further clinical trials. These biologic therapies in conjunction with biomarkers will lead to tailored therapy for asthma.

Pediatric severe asthma: a case series report and perspectives on anti-IgE treatment

Background

The primary goal of asthma management is to achieve disease control for reducing the risk of future exacerbations and progressive loss of lung function. Asthma not responding to treatment may result in significant morbidity. In many children with uncontrolled symptoms, the diagnosis of asthma may be wrong or adherence to treatment may be poor. It is then crucial to distinguish these cases from the truly “severe therapy-resistant” asthmatics by a proper filtering process. Herein we report on four cases diagnosed as difficult asthma, detail the workup that resulted in the ultimate diagnosis, and provide the process that led to the prescription of omalizumab.

Case presentation

All children had been initially referred because of asthma not responding to long-term treatment with high-dose inhaled steroids, long-acting β₂-agonists and leukotriene receptor antagonists. Definitive diagnosis was severe asthma. Three out four patients were treated with omalizumab, which improved asthma control and patients’ quality of life. We reviewed the current literature on the diagnostic approach to the disease and on the comorbidities associated with difficult asthma and presented the perspectives on omalizumab treatment in children and adolescents. Based on the evidence from the literature review, we also proposed an algorithm for the diagnosis of pediatric difficult-to-treat and severe asthma.

Conclusions

The management of asthma is becoming much more patient-specific, as more and more is learned about the biology behind the development and progression of asthma. The addition of omalizumab, the first targeted biological treatment approved for asthma, has led to renewed optimism in the management of children and adolescents with atopic severe asthma.

Response to omalizumab using patient enrichment criteria from trials of novel biologics in asthma

Background

Recent efficacy studies of asthma biologics have included highly enriched patient populations. Using a similar approach, we examined factors that predict response to omalizumab to facilitate selection of patients most likely to derive the greatest clinical benefit from therapy.

Methods

Data from two phase III clinical trials of omalizumab in patients with allergic asthma were examined. Differences in rates of asthma exacerbations between omalizumab and placebo groups during the 16‐week inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose‐stable phase were evaluated with respect to baseline blood eosinophil counts (eosinophils <300/μL [low] vs ≥300/μL [high]) and baseline markers of asthma severity (emergency asthma treatment in prior year, asthma hospitalization in prior year, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁; FEV₁ <65% vs ≥65% predicted], inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate dose [<600 vs ≥600 μg/day], and long‐acting beta‐agonist [LABA] use [yes/no]).

Results

Adults/adolescents (N = 1071) were randomized to receive either omalizumab (n = 542) or placebo (n = 529). In the 16‐week ICS dose‐stable phase, rates of exacerbations requiring ≥3 days of systemic corticosteroid treatment were 0.066 and 0.147 with omalizumab and placebo, respectively, representing a relative rate reduction in omalizumab‐treated patients of 55% (95% CI, 32%‐70%; P = .002). For patients with eosinophils ≥300/μL or with more severe asthma, this rate reduction was significantly more pronounced.

Conclusion

In patients with allergic asthma, baseline blood eosinophil levels and/or clinical markers of asthma severity predict response to omalizumab.

Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus omalizumab for uncontrolled allergic asthma in US

BACKGROUND

A significant minority of asthma patients remain uncontrolled despite the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA). A number of add-on therapies, including monoclonal antibodies (namely omalizumab) and more recently tiotropium bromide have been recommended for this subgroup of patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus omalizumab as add-on therapies to ICS + LABA for patients with uncontrolled allergic asthma.

METHODS

A probabilistic Markov model of asthma was created. Total costs (in 2013 US $) and health outcomes of three interventions including standard therapy (ICS + LABA), add-on therapy with tiotropium, and add-on therapy with omalizumab, were calculated over a 10-year time horizon. Future costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at the rate of 3%. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at willingness-to-pay value of $50,000.

RESULTS

The 10-year discounted costs and QALYs for standard therapy were $38,432 and 6.79, respectively. The corresponding values for add-on therapy with tiotropium and with omalizumab were $41,535 and 6.88, and $217,847 and 7.17, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of add-on therapy with tiotropium versus standard therapy, and omalizumab versus tiotropium were $34,478/QALY, and $593,643/QALY, respectively. The model outcomes were most sensitive to the costs of omalizumab but were robust against other assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although omalizumab had the best health outcomes, add-on therapy with tiotropium was a cost-effective alternative to omalizumab and standard therapy for uncontrolled allergic asthma at willingness-to-pay of $50,000/QALY.

A randomised clinical trial of feedback on inhaler adherence and technique in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma

In severe asthma, poor control could reflect issues of medication adherence or inhaler technique, or that the condition is refractory. This study aimed to determine if an intervention with (bio)feedback on the features of inhaler use would identify refractory asthma and enhance inhaler technique and adherence.Patients with severe uncontrolled asthma were subjected to a stratified-by-site random block design. The intensive education group received repeated training in inhaler use, adherence and disease management. The intervention group received the same intervention, enhanced by (bio)feedback-guided training. The primary outcome was rate of actual inhaler adherence. Secondary outcomes included a pre-defined assessment of clinical outcome. Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis.The mean rate of adherence during the third month in the (bio)feedback group (n=111) was higher than that in the enhanced education group (intention-to-treat, n=107; 73% versus 63%; 95% CI 2.8%-17.6%; p=0.02). By the end of the study, asthma was either stable or improved in 54 patients (38%); uncontrolled, but poorly adherent in 52 (35%); and uncontrolled, but adherent in 40 (27%).Repeated feedback significantly improved inhaler adherence. After a programme of adherence and inhaler technique assessment, only 40 patients (27%) were refractory and adherent, and might therefore need add-on therapy.

Patient-reported outcomes in moderate-to-severe allergic asthmatics treated with omalizumab: a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have established the safety and efficacy of omalizumab on clinical parameters, and have also evaluated its impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The purpose of this systematic literature review was to review published data based on PRO endpoints in order to determine the benefit of omalizumab as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted of reference databases and recent conferences. RCTs of add-on omalizumab therapy in adults, adolescents, and children with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma were included. Two researchers independently screened and reviewed articles with regards to inclusion and exclusion criteria for relevant studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-six trials met the criteria for inclusion. Of these, PRO measures were included in 19 trials to capture the impact of omalizumab on symptoms, 11 assessed patients for health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL), and four evaluated asthma control. Other PROs related to global evaluation of treatment effectiveness and work productivity. Overall, results demonstrated a significant difference across most PROs in favor of omalizumab add-on therapy vs placebo or comparators.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs are an integral part of outcome assessment in clinical trials related to asthma. The RCTs reviewed demonstrate that omalizumab treatment improves PROs in patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma, particularly symptom control and HRQoL.

Omalizumab, the first available antibody for biological treatment of severe asthma: more than a decade of real-life effectiveness

Omalizumab was the first, and for a long time the only available monoclonal antibody for the add-on treatment of severe allergic asthma. In particular, omalizumab selectively targets human immunoglobulin (Ig)E, forming small-size immune complexes that inhibit IgE binding to its high- and low-affinity receptors. Therefore, omalizumab effectively blunts the immune response in atopic asthmatic patients, thus significantly improving the control of asthma symptoms and successfully preventing disease exacerbations. These very positive effects of omalizumab make it possible to drastically decrease both referrals to the emergency room and hospitalizations for asthma exacerbations. Such important therapeutic actions of omalizumab have been documented by several randomized clinical trials, and especially by more than 10 years of real-life experience in daily clinical practice. Omalizumab can also interfere with airway remodelling by inhibiting the activation of IgE receptors located on structural cells such as bronchial epithelial cells and airway smooth muscle cells. Moreover, omalizumab is characterized by a very good safety and tolerability profile. Hence, omalizumab represents a valuable therapeutic option for the add-on biological treatment of severe allergic asthma.

Revisiting Type 2-high and Type 2-low airway inflammation in asthma: current knowledge and therapeutic implications

Asthma is a complex respiratory disorder characterized by marked heterogeneity in individual patient disease triggers and response to therapy. Several asthma phenotypes have now been identified, each defined by a unique interaction between genetic and environmental factors, including inflammatory, clinical and trigger-related phenotypes. Endotypes further describe the functional or pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying the patient's disease. type 2-driven asthma is an emerging nomenclature for a common subtype of asthma and is characterized by the release of signature cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13 from cells of both the innate and adaptive immune systems. A number of well-recognized biomarkers have been linked to mechanisms involved in type 2 airway inflammation, including fractional exhaled nitric oxide, serum IgE, periostin, and blood and sputum eosinophils. These type 2 cytokines are targets for pharmaceutical intervention, and a number of therapeutic options are under clinical investigation for the management of patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. Anticipating and understanding the heterogeneity of asthma and subsequent improved characterization of different phenotypes and endotypes must guide the selection of treatment to meet individual patients' needs.

Lung function parameters in omalizumab responder patients: An interesting tool?

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab, an anti-IgE antibody, is used to treat patients with severe allergic asthma. The evolution of lung function parameters over time and the difference between omalizumab responder and nonresponder patients remain inconclusive. The objective of this real-life study was to compare the changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) of omalizumab responders and nonresponders at 6 months.

METHODS

A multicenter analysis was performed in 10 secondary and tertiary institutions. Lung function parameters (forced vital capacity (FVC), pre- and postbronchodilator FEV1, residual volume (RV), and total lung capacity (TLC) were determined at baseline and at 6 months. Omalizumab response was assessed at the 6-month visit. In the omalizumab responder patients, lung function parameters were also obtained at 12, 18, and 24 months.

RESULTS

Mean prebronchodilator FEV1 showed improvement in responders at 6 months, while a decrease was observed in nonresponders (+0.2±0.4 L and -0.1±0.4 L, respectively, P<.01). After an improvement at 6 months, pre- and postbronchodilator FEV1 remained stable at 12, 18, and 24 months. The FEV1/FVC remained unchanged over time, but the proportion of patients with an FEV1/FVC ratio <0.7 decreased at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months (55.2%, 54.0%, 54.0%, and 44.8%, respectively, P<.05). Mean RV values decreased at 6 months but increased at 12 months and 24 months (P<.05). Residual volume/total lung capacity (RV/TLC) ratio decreased at 6 months and remained unchanged at 24 months.

CONCLUSION

After omalizumab initiation, FEV1 improved at 6 months in responder patients and then remained stable for 2 years. RV and RV/TLC improved at 6 months.

Asthma biomarkers in the age of biologics

The heterogeneous nature of asthma has been understood for decades, but the precise categorization of asthma has taken on new clinical importance in the era of specific biologic therapy. The simple categories of allergic and non-allergic asthma have given way to more precise phenotypes that hint at underlying biologic mechanisms of variable airflow limitation and airways inflammation. Understanding these mechanisms is of particular importance for the approximately 10% of patients with severe asthma. Biomarkers that aid in phenotyping allow physicians to "personalize" treatment with targeted biologic agents. Unfortunately, testing for these biomarkers is not routine in patients whose asthma is refractory to standard therapy. Scientific advances in the recognition of sensitive and specific biomarkers are steadily outpacing the clinical availability of reliable and non-invasive assessment methods designed for the prompt and specific diagnosis, classification, treatment, and monitoring of severe asthma patients. This article provides a practical overview of current biomarkers and testing methods for prompt, effective management of patients with severe asthma that is refractory to standard therapy.

Baseline asthma burden, comorbidities, and biomarkers in omalizumab-treated patients in PROSPERO

BACKGROUND

Patients included in clinical trials do not necessarily reflect the real-world population.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the characteristics, including disease and comorbidity burden, of patients with asthma receiving omalizumab in a real-world setting.

METHODS

The Prospective Observational Study to Evaluate Predictors of Clinical Effectiveness in Response to Omalizumab (PROSPERO) was a US-based, multicenter, single-arm, and prospective study. Patients (≥12 years of age) with allergic asthma initiating omalizumab treatment based on physician-assessed need were included and followed for 12 months. Exacerbations, health care use, adverse events, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores were assessed monthly. Biomarkers (blood eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and periostin) were evaluated and patient-reported outcomes (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire for 12 Years and Older [AQLQ+12] and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Asthma questionnaire [WPAI:Asthma]) were completed at baseline and months 6 and 12. The Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ) was completed at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

Most of the 806 enrollees (91.4%) were adults (mean age 47.3 years, SD 17.4), white (70.3%), and female (63.5%). Allergic comorbidity was frequently reported (84.2%), as were hypertension (35.5%) and depression (22.1%). In the 12 months before study entry, 22.1% of patients reported at least 1 asthma-related hospitalization, 60.7% reported at least 2 exacerbations, and 83.3% reported ACT scores no higher than 19 (uncontrolled asthma). Most patients had low biomarker levels based on prespecified cut-points. Baseline mean patient-reported outcome scores were 4.0 (SD 1.4) for AQLQ+12, 2.7 (SD 1.4) for MiniRQLQ, and 47.7 (SD 28.9) for WPAI:Asthma percentage of activity impairment and 33.5 (SD 28.7) for percentage of overall work impairment.

CONCLUSION

The population initiating omalizumab in PROSPERO reported poorly controlled asthma and a substantial disease burden.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01922037.

Real-world health care utilization and effectiveness of omalizumab for the treatment of severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe asthma. There is limited observational evidence on the costs and effectiveness of omalizumab.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the costs and effectiveness of omalizumab for treatment of severe asthma relative to nonusers.

METHODS

We conducted a within-person repeated-measures matched cohort study in Ontario, Canada from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2014. Continuous users of omalizumab were matched with up to 4 nonusers according to age, sex, recent specialist visits, oral corticosteroid use, asthma severity, and Charlson comorbidity score. The primary outcome was direct health care costs. Secondary outcomes were asthma-related hospitalizations or emergency department visits and oral corticosteroid use. The association between omalizumab use and each outcome was assessed using mixed-effects models adjusting for confounders.

RESULTS

Ninety-five omalizumab users and 352 nonusers were matched. Among users, there was a significant increase in health care costs of $1,796 per person owing to the cost of the medication at treatment initiation (P < .0001). Costs did not change significantly among nonusers ($85 increase in average monthly costs per person; P = .59). We found no significant changes in the rates of asthma-related hospitalizations or emergency department visits among omalizumab users (P = .44) or nonusers (P = .99) between pre- and postintervention periods.

CONCLUSION

The use of omalizumab was associated with increased costs but no evidence of lower rates of clinically important outcomes. These results suggest omalizumab had limited effectiveness in our study population. Future studies should further explore subsets of patients most likely to benefit from omalizumab therapy.

Anti-IL5 therapies for asthma

BACKGROUND

This review is the first update of a previously published review in The Cochrane Library (Issue 7, 2015). Interleukin-5 (IL-5) is the main cytokine involved in the activation of eosinophils, which cause airway inflammation and are a classic feature of asthma. Monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 or its receptor (IL-5R) have been developed, with recent studies suggesting that they reduce asthma exacerbations, improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and lung function. These are being incorporated into asthma guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of therapies targeting IL-5 signalling (anti-IL-5 or anti-IL-5Rα) with placebo on exacerbations, health-related qualify of life (HRQoL) measures, and lung function in adults and children with chronic asthma, and specifically in those with eosinophilic asthma refractory to existing treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, clinical trials registries, manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies. The most recent search was March 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab versus placebo in adults and children with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a random-effects model. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies on 6000 participants met the inclusion criteria. Four used mepolizumab, four used reslizumab, and five used benralizumab. One study in benralizumab was terminated early due to sponsor decision and contributed no data. The studies were predominantly on people with severe eosinophilic asthma, which was similarly but variably defined. Eight included children over 12 years but these results were not reported separately. We deemed the risk of bias to be low, with all studies contributing data being of robust methodology. We considered the quality of the evidence for all comparisons to be high overall using the GRADE scheme, with the exception of intravenous mepolizumab because this is not currently a licensed delivery route.All of the anti-IL-5 treatments assessed reduced rates of 'clinically significant' asthma exacerbation (defined by treatment with systemic corticosteroids for three days or more) by approximately half in participants with severe eosinophilic asthma on standard of care (at least medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)) with poorly controlled disease (either two or more exacerbations in the preceding year or Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) 1.5 or more). Non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab also showed a significant reduction in exacerbation rates, but no data were available for non-eosinophilic participants, and mepolizumab or reslizumab.We saw modest improvements in validated HRQoL scores with all anti-IL-5 agents in severe eosinophilic asthma. However these did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference for ACQ and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), with St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) only assessed in two studies. The improvement in HRQoL scores in non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab, the only intervention for which data were available in this subset, was not statistically significant, but the test for subgroup difference was negative.All anti-IL-5 treatments produced a small but statistically significant improvement in mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory flow in one second (FEV1) of between 0.08 L and 0.11 L.There were no excess serious adverse events with any anti-IL-5 treatment, and indeed a reduction in favour of mepolizumab that could be due to a beneficial effect on asthma-related serious adverse events. There was no difference compared to placebo in adverse events leading to discontinuation with mepolizumab or reslizumab, but significantly more discontinued benralizumab than placebo, although the absolute numbers were small (36/1599 benralizumab versus 9/998 placebo).Mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab all markedly reduced blood eosinophils, but benralizumab resulted in almost complete depletion, whereas a small number remained with mepolizumab and reslizumab. The implications for efficacy and/or adverse events are unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall our study supports the use of anti-IL-5 treatments as an adjunct to standard of care in people with severe eosinophilic asthma and poor control. These treatments roughly halve the rate of asthma exacerbations in this population. There is limited evidence for improved HRQoL scores and lung function, which may not meet clinically detectable levels. There were no safety concerns regarding mepolizumab or reslizumab, and no excess serious adverse events with benralizumab, although there remains a question over adverse events significant enough to prompt discontinuation.Further research is needed on biomarkers for assessing treatment response, optimal duration and long-term effects of treatment, risk of relapse on withdrawal, non-eosinophilic patients, children (particularly under 12 years), and comparing anti-IL-5 treatments to each other and, in people eligible for both, to anti-immunoglobulin E. For benralizumab, future studies should closely monitor rates of adverse events prompting discontinuation.

The impact of long-term systemic glucocorticoid use in severe asthma: A UK retrospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVE

Systemic glucocorticoids (SGCs) are a treatment option for severe asthma but are associated with the development of adverse events (AEs). Evidence on the extent of SGC use and the relationship between SGC dose and AE risk in severe asthma is limited.

METHODS

Patients with severe asthma (Global Initiative for Asthma step 4/5), with no SGC use during the <6-12 months before severe asthma determination (index date) were identified in the UK-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink database (2004-2012). Patients were assessed for SGC exposure and an incident diagnosis of an SGC-related AE (cataracts, diabetes, myocardial infarction [MI], osteoporosis, peptic ulcer or stroke) during the 8-year observation phase. The dose-related risk of an SGC-related AE was determined using AE-specific Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Overall, 75% of 60,418 patients identified with severe asthma received SGC during the 8-year follow-up, with the majority receiving an average of >0-≤2.5 mg/day. The risk of diabetes (hazard ratio [HR]:1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 1.30]), MI (HR: 1.25 [95% CI: 1.09, 1.43]) and osteoporosis (HR: 1.64 [95% CI: 1.51, 1.78]) was increased at low SGC doses (0-2.5 mg/day), with further risk increases at doses >2.5 mg/day versus no SGC use. Compared with no SGC use, SGC increased the risk of peptic ulcer in a non-dose-dependent manner, but the risk of stroke was unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with severe asthma are exposed to SGC, which increases SGC-related AE risk. This suggests that SGC exposure should be minimized as recommended by asthma treatment guidelines.

Biologic therapy in the management of asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Current asthma management relies on inhaled corticosteroids, but some asthma is not well controlled with inhaled steroids alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators or leukotriene pathway inhibitors. The field of biologic therapy has grown dramatically in the past two decades, with current availability of three molecules, with two distinct and highly selective approaches to interfering with the allergic and eosinophilic airway inflammation common to most asthma. This review summarizes current and future options for incorporating biologic therapy into the overall management of asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two new biologic agents have been recently introduced in the United States market, supported by well controlled, randomized clinical trials. These trials have provided insight into the types of patients who are most likely to benefit from these novel agents.

SUMMARY

In asthma patients with frequent exacerbations, the addition of a biologic agent targeting the interleukin-5 pathway, or immunoglobulin E, can significantly reduce exacerbations and improve asthma control. The clinical predictors of utility of specific agents overlap with one another, highlighting the importance of clinical judgment in the overall management of this complex disorder.

IgE and eosinophils as therapeutic targets in asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disorder characterized by reversible airflow obstruction, which is being more widely recognized as a broad-spectrum disease that encompasses multiple patient characteristics and pathophysiologic mechanisms. Suboptimal asthma control leads to increasing burden of healthcare costs and loss of productivity to society. Biologic therapies targeted at IgE and eosinophils can be used in poorly controlled allergic and eosinophilic asthma, respectively. The purpose of this review is to analyze the advancements in currently available biologic therapies targeted at IgE and eosinophils in asthma and to identify how these therapies may impact overall healthcare costs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Omalizumab is an anti-IgE antibody that is approved for use of poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma. Many studies have confirmed that omalizumab not only improves quality of life and symptom scores, but also decreases urgent care and emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Dupilumab is a biologic agent targeted at TH2 cytokines, but indirectly impacts IgE and is an important biologic agent for atopic disease. Mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab target IL-5, a key cytokine for eosinophils. For patients with poorly controlled eosinophilic asthma, these biologic agents improve asthma symptoms, reduce exacerbations, and reduce emergency visits and hospitalizations.

SUMMARY

Poorly controlled severe asthma affects a small portion of patients with asthma in the United States and yet it accounts for large portion of healthcare utilization. Biological therapies in poorly controlled severe persistent asthma have been identified to reduce healthcare utilization, including emergency visits and hospitalizations. Biologic agents have a clear beneficial role in the management of severe asthma, and further evaluations should be continued in identifying optimal patient characteristics for the various agents and overall benefit toward healthcare utilization and cost.

The immunology of asthma: Asthma phenotypes and their implications for personalized treatment

OBJECTIVES

To review current thinking regarding the role of personalized phenotype-driven as opposed to broad guideline-based therapies in asthma and to speculate on the relative contributions of innate (lung) and adaptive (T and B lymphocyte) roles in asthma pathogenesis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed literature review.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Articles pertaining to asthma pathogenesis, with emphasis on those that included biotherapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

Current methods allow asthma to be divided into phenotypes characterized by the presence or absence of eosinophilic inflammation. Corticosteroids are likely to be only effective in the context of eosinophilic inflammation. Similarly, interventions with biotherapeutic agents currently available or in development have efficacious only when administered to patients with asthma of relevant phenotypes.

CONCLUSION

The availability of biotherapeutic agents that target IgE, interleukin (IL) 5, and, in the near future, IL-13 is an exciting vindication of molecular medicine. However, these biotherapeutic agents are only effective when targeted to patients with specific asthma phenotypes. In Promising biotherapeutic targets are the airway epithelial-derived cytokines IL-25, IL-33, and thymic stromal lymphopoietin. Targeting these lung epithelial-derived mediators, instead of products of the adaptive immune system, may be more likely to improve day-to-day asthma symptoms in contrast to agents that target the adaptive immune system, approaches that primarily act to ameliorate asthma exacerbations.

Asthma referrals: a key component of asthma management that needs to be addressed

Heterogeneity of asthma and difficulty in achieving optimal control are the major challenges in the management of asthma. To help attain the best possible clinical outcomes in patients with asthma, several guidelines provide recommendations for patients who will require a referral to a specialist. Such referrals can help in clearing the uncertainty from the initial diagnosis, provide tailored treatment options to patients with persistent symptoms and offer the patients access to health care providers with expertise in the management of the asthma; thus, specialist referrals have a substantial impact on disease prognosis and the patient's health status. Hurdles in implementing these recommendations include lack of their dissemination among health care providers and nonadherence to these guidelines; these hurdles considerably limit the implementation of specialist referrals, eventually affecting the rate of referrals. In this review, recommendations for specialist referrals from several key international and national asthma guidelines and other relevant published literature are evaluated. Furthermore, we highlight why referrals are not happening, how this can be improved, and ultimately, what should be done in the specialist setting, based on existing evidence in published literature.

Indirect comparison of bronchial thermoplasty versus omalizumab for uncontrolled severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) as an add-on therapy for uncontrolled severe asthma is an alternative to biologic therapies like omalizumab (OM). We conducted an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) to appraise comparative effectiveness of BT and OM.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified relevant randomized controlled trials. The ITC followed accepted methodology.

RESULTS

The ITC comprised a sham-controlled trial of BT (AIR2) and two placebo-controlled trials of OM (INNOVATE; EXTRA). Comparing the BT post-treatment period to ongoing treatment with OM, showed no significant differences in the rate ratios (RRs) for severe exacerbations (RR of BT versus OM = 0.91 [95% CI: 0.64, 1.30]; p = 0.62) or hospitalizations (RR = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.17, 1.86]; p = 0.53); emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 75% with BT (RR = 0.25 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.91]; p = 0.04); the proportions of patients with clinically meaningful response on the asthma quality-of-life questionnaire were comparable (RR = 1.06 [95% CI: 0.86, 1.34]; p = 0.59). The RR for exacerbations statistically favours OM over the total study period in AIR2 (RR = 1.50 [95% CI: 1.11, 2.02]; p = 0.009) likely reflecting a transient increase in events during the BT peri-treatment period.

CONCLUSIONS

The ITC should be interpreted cautiously considering the differences between patient populations in the included trials. However, based on the analysis, BT compares well with a potentially more costly pharmacotherapy for asthma. Clinicians evaluating the relative merits of using these treatments should consider the totality of evidence and patient preferences to make an informed decision.

Targeted therapy in severe asthma today: focus on immunoglobulin E

Asthma is a complex chronic inflammatory disease of multifactorial etiology. International guidelines increasingly recognize that a standard "one size fits all" approach is no longer an effective approach to achieve optimal treatment outcomes, and a number of disease phenotypes have been proposed for asthma, which has the potential to guide treatment decisions. Among the many asthma phenotypes, allergic asthma represents the widest and most easily recognized asthma phenotype, present in up to two-thirds of adults with asthma. Immunoglobulin E (IgE) production is the primary and key cause of allergic asthma leading to persistent symptoms, exacerbations and a poor quality of life. Therefore, limiting IgE activity upstream could stop the entire allergic inflammation cascade in IgE-mediated allergic asthma. The anti-IgE treatment omalizumab has an accepted place in the management of severe asthma (Global Initiative for Asthma [GINA] step 5) and represents the first (and, currently, only) targeted therapy with a specific target in severe allergic asthma. This review summarizes current knowledge of the mechanisms and pathogenesis of severe asthma, examines the actual role of IgE in asthma and the biological rationale for targeting IgE in allergic asthma and reviews the data for the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of severe asthma. Current knowledge of the role of IgE in asthma, extensive clinical trial data and a decade of use in clinical practice has established omalizumab as a safe and effective targeted therapy for the treatment of patients with severe persistent IgE-mediated allergic asthma.

dIvergEnt: How IgE Axis Contributes to the Continuum of Allergic Asthma and Anti-IgE Therapies

Asthma is an airway disease characterised by chronic inflammation with intermittent or permanent symptoms including wheezing, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and cough, which vary in terms of their occurrence, frequency, and intensity. The most common associated feature in the airways of patients with asthma is airway inflammation. In recent decades, efforts have been made to characterise the heterogeneous clinical nature of asthma. The interest in improving the definitions of asthma phenotypes and endotypes is growing, although these classifications do not always correlate with prognosis nor are always appropriate therapeutic approaches. Attempts have been made to identify the most relevant molecular and cellular biomarkers underlying the immunopathophysiological mechanisms of the disease. For almost 50 years, immunoglobulin E (IgE) has been identified as a central factor in allergic asthma, due to its allergen-specific nature. Many of the mechanisms of the inflammatory cascade underlying allergic asthma have already been elucidated, and IgE has been shown to play a fundamental role in the triggering, development, and chronicity of the inflammatory responses within the disease. Blocking IgE with monoclonal antibodies such as omalizumab have demonstrated their efficacy, effectiveness, and safety in treating allergic asthma. A better understanding of the multiple contributions of IgE to the inflammatory continuum of asthma could contribute to the development of novel therapeutic strategies for the disease.

Biologic treatment eligibility for real-world patients with severe asthma: The IDEAL study

OBJECTIVES

Severe asthma comprises several distinct phenotypes. Consequently, patients with severe asthma can be eligible for more than one biologic treatment targeting Th2 inflammation, such as anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E. The objective of this study was to describe treatment eligibility and overlap in treatment eligibility for mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), omalizumab (anti-IgE) and reslizumab (anti-IL-5) in patients with severe asthma, who were recruited from clinical practice.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, single-visit, observational study in six countries enrolled patients with severe asthma (defined by American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society guidelines). Assessable patients were analysed as a total cohort and a sub-cohort, who were not currently receiving omalizumab. Treatment eligibility was defined according to the local prescribing information or protocol-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients currently receiving omalizumab were automatically categorised as omalizumab-eligible.

RESULTS

The total cohort comprised 670 patients who met the analysis criteria, of whom 20% were eligible for mepolizumab, 31-41% were eligible for omalizumab (depending on eligibility criteria used), and 5% were eligible for reslizumab. In patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 502), proportions eligible for each biologic were similar (mepolizumab: 20%, reslizumab 6%) or lower (omalizumab 7-21%) than those for the total cohort. Overlap in treatment eligibility varied; in mepolizumab-eligible patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 101), 27-37% were omalizumab-eligible and 18% were reslizumab-eligible.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment eligibility for mepolizumab and omalizumab was higher than that for reslizumab. Although there was some overlap in treatment eligibility, the patient groups eligible for treatment with anti-IL-5 or anti-IgE therapies were often distinct, emphasising the different phenotypes and endotypes in severe asthma.

Fifty years later: Emerging functions of IgE antibodies in host defense, immune regulation, and allergic diseases

Fifty years ago, after a long search, IgE emerged as the circulating factor responsible for triggering allergic reactions. Its extremely low concentration in plasma created significant hurdles for scientists working to reveal its identity. We now know that IgE levels are invariably increased in patients affected by atopic conditions and that IgE provides the critical link between the antigen recognition role of the adaptive immune system and the effector functions of mast cells and basophils at mucosal and cutaneous sites of environmental exposure. This review discusses the established mechanisms of action of IgE in pathologic immediate hypersensitivity, as well as its multifaceted roles in protective immunity, control of mast cell homeostasis, and its more recently revealed immunomodulatory functions.

Omalizumab versus Mepolizumab as add-on therapy in asthma patients not well controlled on at least an inhaled corticosteroid: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to examine the comparative efficacy of Omalizumab (OMA) and Mepolizumab (Mepo) in the treatment of severe asthma by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHOD

Data Sources: A systematic review of the literature was performed through four databases from their inception to February 2016.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Randomized control trials and cohort studies were considered if they addressed the individual efficacy of OMA and Mepo in the treatment of asthma that was not well controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with or without other agents.

RESULTS

OMA was significantly better than Mepo in improving the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire with a mean difference of 0.38 and a confidence interval of (0.21-0.55), p < 0.0001, without reaching the minimal clinically important difference of 0.5. No significant difference was seen in Asthma Control Questionnaire, forced expiratory volume in second 1 (FEV1), and Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR) improvement from baseline. Both medications were successful in reducing the calculated annualized rates of asthma exacerbations (AEs) vs placebo by approximately 50%. The heterogeneity score for the different comparisons were elevated except for the PEFR.

CONCLUSION

When compared indirectly via a network meta-analysis, the efficacy of OMA and Mepo was similar in the treatment of asthma that was not well controlled on at least high-dose ICS. The high heterogeneity observed and the different selection criteria for the use of the two drugs do not permit us to make any definitive recommendations for the preferential use of OMA vs Mepo in the patient populations studied. However, the current data do not suggest any major differences in efficacy.

Predictors of response to therapy with omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma - a real life study

OBJECTIVES

Omalizumab is a recombinant humanized IgG1 monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, used for the treatment of severe refractory allergic asthma. However, not all patients with IgE levels within the limits of administration, respond to treatment. The aim of the present study, was to determine clinical and inflammatory characteristics that could predict response to omalizumab.

METHODS

We studied retrospectively patients treated with omalizumab as per GINA guidelines in one asthma tertiary referral center. Demographic and functional characteristics, level of asthma control, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, blood and eosinophils and IgE level, induced sputum cell count, eosinophil cationic protein and Interleukin-13 in sputum supernatant were recorded. All measurements were performed before starting treatment with omalizumab. Response to treatment was evaluated according to the physician's global evaluation of treatment effectiveness. Patients were characterized as early responders when improvement was achieved within 16 weeks and as late responders when improvement was achieved between 16 and 32 weeks. Patients who did not show any improvement after 32 weeks of therapy were considered as non-responders.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients treated with omalizumab were included in the study. 28 (68.3%) patients were characterized as responders while 13 patients (31.7%) were considered as non-responders. Among responders, 25 (89%) were early responders and 3 (n = 11%) were late responders. Responders were characterized by lower baseline FEV₁ and FEV₁/FVC and higher IL-13 levels in induced sputum supernatant compared to non-responders. Late responders had higher serum IgE levels, shorter disease duration and higher number of blood eosinophils. Finally, using ROC curve analysis, the best predictors of response to omalizumab were FEV₁ (AUC = 0.718) and IL-13 in sputum supernatant (AUC = 0.709).

CONCLUSION

Lower baseline FEV₁ and higher IL-13 levels in induced sputum supernatant were predictors of response to omalizumab. Patients with higher baseline serum IgE levels, shorter disease duration and higher blood eosinophils may experience a late response and might benefit from a more prolonged treatment before being characterized as non-responders.

"Real-life" Effectiveness Studies of Omalizumab in Adult Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

After the approval of omalizumab for severe allergic asthma, a total of 25 studies have evaluated the effectiveness of omalizumab under "real-life" conditions of heterogeneity in patients, clinicians, sites, and treatment patterns.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of omalizumab focusing on treatment response, lung function, quality of life, symptom control, corticosteroid use, and exacerbations and hospitalizations at 4-6, 12, and 24 months.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase for real-life studies on omalizumab in severe asthma published up to 2015. Three effect size types were extracted: single-point proportions; mean ± SD of change relative to baseline as raw numbers and standardized as Cohen's d; and changes in proportions of patients as relative risk. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to account for within- and between-study heterogeneity. Studies were weighted by the DerSimonian and Laird method.

RESULTS

Per data available at the 3 time points, omalizumab therapy was consistently associated with large proportions of patients classified as "good" to "excellent" treatment responders (Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness scale); improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, quality of life (Asthma-related Quality-of-Life Questionnaire scale), and asthma symptom control (Asthma Control Test scale); reductions in oral and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use; and reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of noncontrolled studies documents the real-life pharmacotherapeutic effectiveness of omalizumab, as add-on treatment to ICS ± long-acting β₂-agonists agents, in improving outcomes in patients with severe allergic asthma under conditions of heterogeneity in patients, clinicians, sites, and treatment patterns. The results mirror, complement, and extend the efficacy data from randomized controlled trials.

Patient Characteristics and Individualization of Biologic Therapy

Progress in the understanding of disease processes has provided additional therapeutic targets, best exemplified by the increasing role of biologics in the clinical armamentarium. This article provides a focused review of current treatment paradigms and pathophysiology for asthma, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, as well as C1 inhibitor deficiency. It elucidates the populations in which biologics were studied for the aforementioned disease states, emphasizing characteristics to consider when selecting therapy. It is important to correctly estimate patient outcome before starting therapy based on cost analysis. Treatment decisions need to be guided by appropriate patient stratification based on each individual's underlying phenotype.

The safety of mepolizumab for the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is an airway disease characterized by airway inflammation. It is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs to the healthcare system and society. Interleukin-5 (IL-5) was identified for its role in eosinophil development, maturation, and survival in tissues, which has been related to disease severity and airway eosinophilia. Areas covered: In this review, we will present the pharmacokinetics and dynamics of mepolizumab in addition to efficacy and safety data. Expert Opinion: Mepolizumab is novel, new, first-in-class therapy targeting IL-5. It has been found to be particularly effective in the management of patients with asthma whose peripheral blood eosinophil count is at a well-defined cut point within the normative range. This easily available biomarker, along with a history of asthma exacerbations, has translated into a clinically significant reduction in asthma exacerbations and the dose of oral corticosteroids in patients who previously have been prednisone-dependent. The pivotal studies indicate that mepolizumab was well tolerated, with the most frequently reported adverse events being headache, nasopharyngitis, worsening of asthma, and local injection reactions. These study investigators did not report any deaths or anaphylaxis related to mepolizumab.