The use of biologics in patients suffering from chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps - a 4-year real life observation

From one biologic to another: the rationale and evidence behind switching therapies in chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although biologics had been used to treat CRSwNP, not all patients respond favourably, necessitating the use of other biologics. As there are currently no guidelines available, the process and rationale for switching biologic therapy in the treatment of CRSwNP are examined in this review.

RECENT FINDINGS

Due to the heterogeneity of diseases, biologic therapies may efficiently control CRSwNP but give inadequate control for asthma, or vice versa . Changing an ineffective first-line biologic to a second-line treatment or others is generally referred to as switching. The most common reasons for switching biologics are poor symptom management or ineffectiveness, and undesirable adverse effects. The ineffectiveness was largely due to the use of omalizumab or mepolizumab, whereas the adverse effects were due to dupilumab.

SUMMARY

Switching biologics is a nuanced process influenced by a variety of patient-specific and clinical factors. Biologics that effectively treat upper and lower airway diseases are recommended for optimal control in CRSwNP patients with concurrent asthma. There was no difference in outcomes between switching biologics with and without a washout period. Switching between biologics in the same class is generally not recommended. Dupilumab serves as an effective treatment option for refractory cases particularly aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease.

Long-Term Real-World Outcomes and Insights of Biologic Therapies in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps is a Type 2 inflammatory disease associated with a significant burden on quality of life. While biological therapies have shown efficacy in randomized controlled trials, data on long-term real-world outcomes remain limited. This retrospective cohort study evaluated the clinical efficacy, safety, and treatment dynamics of biologics, particularly anti-IL-4 (dupilumab), over a five-year period at a tertiary medical center. Fifty-two patients with CRSwNP meeting the EPOS/EUFOREA eligibility criteria were included. Clinical parameters, including nasal polyp score, SNOT-22, and olfactory function, were assessed across follow-up intervals. Anti-IL-4 therapy demonstrated the most consistent and sustained improvements in all clinical parameters, with a significant proportion of patients maintaining response beyond 36 months. A subset of patients underwent interval extension of dupilumab injections without loss of efficacy. Subdomain analysis of the SNOT-22 questionnaire revealed improvements predominantly in nasal and emotional domains. Treatment response, assessed according to the EUFOREA criteria, favored anti-IL-4 over anti-IL-5 and anti-IgE. Side effects were infrequent and mostly mild. These findings support the durable effectiveness of biologics in real-world CRSwNP management and suggest that tapering down the injection intervals may be a feasible strategy for selected patients. Further studies are needed to refine treatment response definitions and optimize patient-specific therapeutic approaches.

Chinese Position Paper on Biologic Therapy for Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps

Emerging biologics that selectively target key cytokines present a promising therapeutic alternative for patients suffering from severe, uncontrollable chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Despite the limited availability of registered biologics for CRSwNP treatment in China, the country is experiencing rapid development in this field. It is imperative to standardize the application of biologic agents in CRSwNP management in preparation for their future integration into the CRSwNP care pathway. The Rhinology Group, Chinese Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery; the Rhinology Group, Chinese Medical Doctor Association of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery; and the Nasal and Ocular Allergy Group, Chinese Society of Allergy have convened an expert panel consisting of principal investigators experienced in clinical trials of biologic treatment for CRSwNP. This expert panel was assembled to discuss the application of biologic agents in patients with CRSwNP in China. Additionally, the latest findings on the pathogenesis of CRSwNP, mechanisms of biologic agents, and efficacy and safety of biologic treatment in patients with CRSwNP were reviewed, with a special emphasis on research evidence from China. The expert panel reached a consensus on several critical issues, including criteria for the prescription, treatment course, and efficacy evaluation from a Chinese perspective. This position paper aims to guide Chinese physicians in the use of biologic agents for patients with CRSwNP. As our experience with biologic treatment continues to grow, this position paper will be further updated.

Biological therapy in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

INTRODUCTION

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a heterogeneous disease. High proportions of patients with CRSwNP characterized by type 2 inflammation fail to gain adequate control with conventional treatment. The application of biologics in clinics and assessments of novel biologics in clinical trials are blooming in expectations to fulfill the unmet medical needs of patients with CRSwNP with type 2 inflammation.

AREAS COVERED

After an extensive search of PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE for the most recent evidence, we thoroughly summarize current advances in biological therapies for treating patients with CRSwNP.

EXPERT OPINION

In recent years, biological therapy has been in the spotlight in clinical studies on CRSwNP. Biologics have proven to be efficacious in reducing nasal polyp size, alleviating CRSwNP-related symptoms, improving quality of life, and reducing the need for systemic corticosteroids or endoscopic sinus surgery for nasal polyps. The considerable efficacy and safety profile of biologics has offered patients with refractory CRSwNP another treatment option. However, some concerns remain to be addressed. Aspects such as the position of biological therapy in the management of CRSwNP, traits of patients suitable for certain biologics, etc. necessitate efforts to elucidate these unknowns in order to provide patients with tailored therapy.

Real-World Evaluation of Dupilumab in the Long-Term Management of Eosinophilic Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: A Focus on IL-4 and IL-13 Receptor Blockade

Background and Objectives: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a complex inflammatory condition of the nasal passages that severely impairs quality of life. Type 2 CRS is characterized by eosinophilic inflammation, driven by cytokines like IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13. These cytokines are key to CRS pathogenesis and contribute to a heavy disease burden, especially with comorbidities. This study assessed dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-4 and IL-13 signaling, to evaluate its efficacy in reducing the disease burden in patients with CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Materials and Methods: The patients received subcutaneous dupilumab for 42 weeks. The outcomes included Nasal Polyp Score (NPS); Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores; total IgE; and olfactory function. Results: Significant improvements were observed across the NPS and SNOT-22, NRS, and VAS scores after 42 weeks. Their total IgE levels were reduced, though a transient increase in peripheral eosinophilia appeared at 16 weeks. The patients also reported substantial improvements in olfactory function and high satisfaction with the treatment, supporting dupilumab's potential in reducing both symptom severity and inflammation in CRSwNP. Conclusions: These results indicate that dupilumab may be an effective treatment for CRSwNP, offering significant symptom relief, improved olfactory function, and enhanced quality of life. High satisfaction levels suggest that dupilumab may provide therapeutic advantages over the conventional CRS treatments, though further studies are warranted to confirm its long-term benefits.