Defining a Severe Asthma Super-Responder: Findings from a Delphi Process

Recent evidence for stepping down severe asthma therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Biologics have proven safe and effective for severe asthma. Their introduction has offered hope for patients and prescribers with a growing list of novel medications and indications. While 'step-up' indications for biologic initiation are well described in guidelines, 'step-down' strategy remains poorly understood and thus guidance is limited. In this opinion article we aim to focus on recent practice changing evidence for stepping-down severe asthma management, tools for the assessment of biologic efficacy, propose a framework for the step-down of biologic and nonbiologic therapies and suggest topics of interest for future research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical tools have been developed to aid in assessing biologic response. Some patients experience marked improvement and may enter a period of clinical remission or even complete remission. Following positive response, add-on therapy may safely be approached for taper or withdrawal.

SUMMARY

There is limited consensus but growing evidence for stepping-down therapies in patients who achieve clinical response and/or remission after biologic initiation. Further structured guidance would benefit clinicians who face clinical uncertainty when deciding to step-down therapy in patients with well controlled asthma.

Eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis as a predictor of super-responder and clinical remission in patients with uncontrolled type 2-high severe asthma treated with biologics

Identifying which biomarkers and comorbidities of type 2 (T2) inflammation to focus on when selecting biologics has remained challenging. We retrospectively examined which biomarkers and comorbidities could influence asthma control among T2-high severe asthma patients receiving biologics. Patients without any maintenance oral corticosteroids and exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids indicated super-responder (SR). Clinical remission (CR) was defined as fulfilling the following criteria in addition to achieving SR: asthma symptom improvement (asthma control test score ≥23) and pulmonary function improvement (%forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≥ 80%). We initiated and switched biologics to achieve SR and CR. In total, 111 patients were evaluated, among whom 85.6% and 27.0%-50.5% demonstrated SR and CR, respectively. CR was more frequently observed among patients with severe eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (ECRS) than among those without it. Attention must be paid to the existence of severe ECRS to achieve CR in patients with uncontrolled T2-high severe asthma.

Is it possible to achieve remission in severe asthma? Retrospective analysis of a four-year response in a real-life cohort treated with mepolizumab

Introduction and objective: Response to biologics in severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) can be classified as super-responders, good responders, non-responders, and those achieving clinical remission. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term response to mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and assesses the rate of asthma clinical remission over four years in a real-life setting.

Methods: This is a single-center, observational, retrospective study was conducted at La Paz University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) from 2017 to 2022. Patients with SUA treated with mepolizumab 100mg every four weeks for at least three years were included. Response to mepolizumab was classified into good responders, super-responders, non-responders, and patients achieving clinical remission after three and four years of treatment.

Results: 27 patients (67% women; mean age 37.7 years) were included. 58% of patients achieved remission after three years of treatment, increasing to 63% after four years. Similar trends were observed in super-responders and good responders. We found that a significant number of patients treated with mepolizumab in a real-life setting can achieve asthma remission, particularly when compared to other similar studies.

Conclusions: By distinguishing these different degrees of response, clinicians can better understand the patient's condition and make more informed decisions about whether to continue with the current biologic therapy or consider switching to a different treatment.

Con: clinical remission in asthma - not yet there

The ideal definition of asthma remission should be practical, measurable and meaningful for both patients and physicians, while also representing true disease modification. Unfortunately, current proposals to define asthma remission fall short of this standard, not for lack of careful consideration, but due to the challenges presented by asthma, including but not limited to variability in symptom perception, intrinsic variability in lung function, seasonality and the impact of comorbidities. This article discusses obstacles and challenges to developing a widely adopted, consensus definition of asthma remission. We searched the literature for keywords including "asthma", "remission" and "super-responder" and identified interventional trials in asthma that highlight the challenges inherent in defining asthma remission.

Promoting Prevention and Targeting Remission of Asthma: A EUFOREA Consensus Statement on Raising the Bar in Asthma Care

Asthma is a common, multifaceted respiratory disease with a major impact on quality of life. Despite increased insights into mechanisms underlying various asthma phenotypes and endotypes and the availability of targeted biologic treatment options, the disease remains uncontrolled in a substantial proportion of patients with risk of exacerbations, requiring systemic corticosteroids, and with progressive disease. Current international guidelines advocate for a personalized management approach to patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. The European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) asthma expert panel was convened to discuss strategies to optimize asthma care and to prevent systemic corticosteroid overuse and disease progression. In this meeting report, we summarize current concepts and recommendations and provide a rationale to implement personalized asthma management at earlier stages of the disease. The ultimate goal is to move away from the current one-size-fits-most concept, which focuses on a symptom-driven treatment strategy, and shift toward a phenotype- and endotype-targeted approach aimed at curbing the disease course by improving clinical outcomes and preserving health-related quality of life. Herein, we provide a consensus view on asthma care that advocates a holistic approach and highlight some unmet needs to be addressed in future clinical trials and population studies.

Dupilumab efficacy in relation to changes in club cell secretory protein 16

BACKGROUND

Although the performance of dupilumab in severe asthma has been evaluated, the detailed mechanism underlying its effect remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of dupilumab on serum club cell secretory protein 16 (CC16).

METHODS

A total of 25 patients who were administered dupilumab and underwent computed tomography before and approximately 4 months after the introduction of dupilumab were included. Clinical and computed tomography parameters before and after dupilumab administration, such as mucus plug score and wall area measurement, were compared along with serum CC16 levels. The correlation between the clinical background and treatment effects was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The number of mucus plugs and airway wall area decreased significantly after dupilumab introduction. The number of mucus plugs was positively correlated with both age and serum IgE levels. The number of mucus plugs and airway wall area was inversely correlated with percent of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and maximal mid-expiratory flow. Dupilumab treatment resulted in a significant increase in serum CC16 levels and led to a significant improvement in asthma symptoms, quality-of-life scores, FEV1, and exacerbation frequency. In addition, changes in CC16 were significantly correlated with changes in the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, IgE, quality-of-life score, FEV1, maximal mid-expiratory flow, and mucus plug score.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that dupilumab improves symptoms and respiratory functions by altering the airway epithelial environment.

Patient-centred composite scores as tools for assessment of response to biological therapy for paediatric and adult severe asthma

BACKGROUND

We have previously developed Core Outcome Measures sets for Severe Asthma (COMSA) by multi-stakeholder consensus. There are no patient-centred tools to quantify response to biological therapies for severe asthma. We aimed to develop paediatric and adult CompOsite iNdexes For Response in asthMa (CONFiRM) incorporating clinical parameters and patient-reported quality of life.

METHODS

International expert healthcare professionals and patients with severe asthma were invited to 1) develop consensus levels of clinically relevant changes for each outcome measure within COMSA, 2) use multicriteria decision analysis to develop the CONFiRM scores and 3) assess their internal validity. A separate group of healthcare professionals evaluated CONFiRM's external validity.

RESULTS

Five levels of change for each COMSA outcome were agreed. Severe exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid use were rated as the most important in determining both paediatric and adult CONFiRM scores. There was strong agreement between healthcare professionals and patients, although patients assigned greater importance to quality of life. The CONFiRM score quantified response to a biologic from -31 (deterioration) to 69 (best possible response). Paediatric and adult CONFiRMs had good discriminative ability for a sufficient (area under the curve ≥0.92) and a substantial (area under the curve ≥0.95) response to biologics. Both CONFiRMs demonstrated excellent external validity (Spearman correlation coefficients 0.9 and 0.8 for paediatric and adult, respectively; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed novel patient-centred paediatric and adult CONFiRMs that include quality of life measures. CONFiRMs should allow a more holistic understanding of response for the patient and a standardised assessment of the effectiveness of biologics between studies. Further research is needed to prospectively validate CONFiRM scores.

A Delphi Consensus Project to Capture Greek Experts' Opinion on the Position of Triple Therapies in COPD: Why, When and to Whom

Background

In recent years, COPD treatment has become more personalized considering specific patient's characteristics.

Aim and Methods

We have performed a DELPHI consensus project to assess the level of consensus among Greek experts on the use of triple therapy in COPD as an initial and follow-up treatment. A three-round Delphi online survey was developed. The questionnaire was developed by a 6-member steering committee, included 54 statements, and divided into 3 domains: (A) triple therapy as initial treatment (divided into subdomains examining the impact of exacerbations based on lung function, bronchodilation reversibility and/or blood eosinophil count, smoking, symptoms, and comorbidities), (B) escalation to triple therapy from dual bronchodilation and (C) de-escalation from triple therapy to dual bronchodilation. The survey was funded by AstraZeneca and was hosted and analysed by an independent external company.

Results

Consensus was reached in 84.8%, 63% and 80% of statements for domains A, B and C, respectively. Experts agreed that initial treatment with triple therapy is a reasonable option for specific patients, while escalation from dual bronchodilation to triple therapy could be considered, besides frequent exacerbators, also in patients with a history of one moderate exacerbation, mainly in the presence of marked bronchodilator reversibility or high blood eosinophil count. Finally, there was a consensus that de-escalation from triple therapy to dual bronchodilation was inappropriate in patients who had experienced one moderate exacerbation in the previous year.

Conclusion

Although consensus was generated in several statements, panelists failed to reach consensus in many aspects of the use of triple therapy, identifying areas for further research.

Early Treatment Response to Mepolizumab Predicts Clinical Remission in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Mepolizumab can induce an early response and clinical remission in people with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA).

OBJECTIVE

To find whether early response to mepolizumab (100 mg) could predict future asthma remission and to identify the best predictor of treatment response to mepolizumab for achieving remission.

METHODS

The Australian Mepolizumab Registry was used to investigate the early response to mepolizumab at 3 and 6 months and relate this to clinical remission at 12 months. Treatment response was assessed using the 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5), oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose, exacerbation frequency, and postbronchodilator FEV1. Clinical remission, assessed at 12 months, was defined as an ACQ-5 score less than or equal to 1.0 at 12 months, no exacerbations in the previous 6 months, and no OCS use for asthma in the previous 6 months. We estimated the optimism-corrected area under the curve for internal validation.

RESULTS

We analyzed 255 participants with SEA. Seventy-eight (30.6%) participants achieved clinical remission at 12 months. A prediction model including ACQ-5 score, exacerbation frequency, OCS dose, and postbronchodilator FEV1 at 6 months was more predictive of achieving remission than measures at 3 months. The ACQ-5 score at 6 months had the highest optimism-corrected area under the curve of 0.778 (95% CI, 0.719-0.833). An ACQ-5 score less than 1.5 at 6 months had a sensitivity of 85.9% for achieving clinical remission, whereas an ACQ-5 score less than 0.75 had a specificity of 84.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACQ-5 score at 6 months was the best predictor of achieving clinical remission at 12 months in people with SEA treated with mepolizumab. These results can be used to design a treat-to-target paradigm for asthma, in which treatment response is assessed at 6 months to predict clinical remission.

Efficacy Assessment of Biological Treatments in Severe Asthma

Uncontrolled, severe asthma remains a significant clinical challenge, affecting a small proportion of asthma patients worldwide. Despite advancements in treatment options, a subset of patients continues to experience frequent exacerbations, uncontrolled symptoms, and impaired quality of life. The advent of biological therapies has revolutionized the management of severe asthma, offering targeted treatments that address specific inflammatory pathways. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the efficacy and response criteria of biological treatments in severe asthma, focusing on clinical, functional, and inflammatory markers used to help in the evaluation of the biologic treatment. Key response criteria include symptom control, reduction in exacerbations, improvement in lung function, and a reduction in or the discontinuation of oral corticosteroids. Biomarkers such as blood eosinophils and exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) are essential tools in guiding treatment adjustments. Real-world studies underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies, as variability in response to biological therapies can be significant. The emergence of tools such as the FEOS score and EXACTO questionnaire offer quantitative measures for assessing biological response and guiding clinical decisions. Additionally, predictive factors for better or poorer responses, such as pre-treatment lung function and comorbidities, like obesity and rhinosinusitis, are critical in patient selection. This review highlights the need for ongoing reassessments and potential modifications of therapy in cases of suboptimal response. Practical considerations for switching biological therapies are discussed, emphasizing the importance of tailoring treatments to individual patient profiles and disease phenotypes. With the continued development of personalized medicine, the outlook for patients with severe asthma is improving, selecting specific biomarkers to improve the selection of the biologic treatment.

Dupilumab Induces Long-Term On-Treatment Clinical Remission in Patients With Type 2 Asthma

BACKGROUND

Remission is proposed as a multicomponent outcome for patients with severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis of QUEST (NCT02414854) and TRAVERSE (NCT02134028) evaluated whether dupilumab treatment leads to clinical asthma remission (≥12 months with no severe exacerbations, zero oral corticosteroid use, stabilized or improved lung function, patient-reported asthma control <1.5) and assessed its durability in patients with uncontrolled, moderate to severe type 2 asthma (blood eosinophils ≥150 cells/μL or fractional exhaled nitric oxide ≥20 ppb at parent-study baseline) who are not receiving maintenance oral corticosteroids.

METHODS

In QUEST, patients (aged ≥12 years) were randomized to dupilumab 200/300 mg or placebo every 2 weeks for 52 weeks. In TRAVERSE, all patients received dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks for up to 96 weeks. We assessed the proportion of patients meeting criteria for on-treatment clinical remission up to 48 weeks of TRAVERSE.

RESULTS

At QUEST baseline, 1,040 patients receiving dupilumab and 544 taking placebo had type 2 asthma; of those, 842 (dupilumab/dupilumab) and 437 (placebo/dupilumab) enrolled in TRAVERSE. At QUEST week 52 (year 1), 37.2% of patients receiving dupilumab met clinical remission criteria, compared with 22.2% taking placebo (all P < .001). At week 48 of TRAVERSE (year 2 overall), 42.8% (dupilumab/dupilumab) and 33.4% (placebo/dupilumab) of patients met clinical remission criteria. Overall, 29.5% of patients in the dupilumab/dupilumab group met the criteria at both years 1 and 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab treatment enabled approximately one third of patients with type 2 asthma to meet the multicomponent end point for on-treatment clinical asthma remission for up to 2 years.

Biologic Medications for Severe Asthma: Implications for Understanding Pathogenic Heterogeneity and Endotypes

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways long known for phenotypic heterogeneity. Phenotyping studies in asthma have led to a better characterization of disease pathogenesis, yet further work is needed to pair available treatments with disease endotypes. In this review, the biology of targeted pathways is discussed along with the efficacy of biologic therapies targeting those pathways. Results of asthma clinical trials are included, as well as results of trials in related diseases. This review then analyzes how biologics help to inform the complex immunobiology of asthma and further guide their use while identifying areas for future research.

Serum and urine eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN) levels predict biologic response in severe asthma

Background

Eosinophils are crucial in allergic inflammation, and their correlation with asthma severity has made them a focal point in predicting treatment outcomes. Blood eosinophil count is a commonly utilized marker. However, its limitations have prompted alternative biomarker exploration, such as eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN).

Objective

This research was conducted over 24 weeks on 56 patients with severe asthma treated with mepolizumab, reslizumab, and dupilumab. We aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of blood eosinophil count and their potential, including those of blood EDN levels and urine EDN values as biomarkers for predicting treatment response.

Methods

The analysis encompassed examining correlations between biomarkers and clinical features, including exacerbation rates and lung function, through ELISA assays and subsequent statistical analyses. The study protocol is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05164939).

Results

The findings underscore strong correlations between serum EDN levels, blood eosinophil counts, and treatment responses, with EDN demonstrating comparable predictive capabilities to blood eosinophil counts to determine treatment responses. Different biologics exhibited varying efficacy regarding baseline eosinophil counts and EDN levels.

Conclusions

Blood eosinophil counts and EDN levels show potential as predictive markers for treatment responses in patients with severe asthma undergoing biologic therapies. However, further comprehensive studies are warranted to enhance the reliability and applicability of EDN as an effective asthma treatment biomarker.

Clinical remission attainment, definitions, and correlates among patients with severe asthma treated with biologics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical remission has emerged as an important treatment goal in severe asthma; however, studies have reported variable attainment due to differences in study populations, definitions, and methods. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical remission attainment, definitions, and correlates among patients with severe asthma who have been treated with biologics.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Web of Science, Embase, and MEDLINE, using the keywords "asthma" and "remission", for studies published between database inception and June 13, 2024, that reported clinical remission among patients with severe asthma treated with biologics. Studies were eligible for inclusion in both the systematic review and meta-analysis if they were published in English language peer-reviewed journals and reported rates of clinical remission for patients treated with biologics for severe asthma. There were no limitations by study design. Two reviewers independently screened identified papers (AS and CR), with disagreements resolved through consensus or referral to a third reviewer (JB). Study-level data on study characteristics, clinical remission definitions, clinical remission attainment, and the potential correlates of clinical remission were extracted independently by two reviewers (AS and CR) using Covidence. We defined a three-component definition of clinical remission, which included use of maintenance oral corticosteroids, exacerbations, and asthma symptom burden, and a four-component definition, which additionally included lung function. We meta-analysed the rate of attainment of clinical remission and assessed the correlates of clinical remission using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024507233.

FINDINGS

Our search identified 3014 potentially eligible studies, of which 1812 were screened. 25 studies were included, which reported 28 analyses of clinical remission attainment. 68 definitions of clinical remission were identified, of which 48 were unique. Little consensus was found between studies in terms of the clinical remission definition, particularly for symptoms and lung function. Eight analyses used the three-component definition of clinical remission and 25 used the four-component definition. The pooled proportion of patients who attained clinical remission was 38% (95% CI 29-47; I2=93%) for the three-component definition and 30% (27-34; I2=83%) for the four-component definition. Several pulmonary factors were associated with lower clinical remission rates, including worse FEV1 (odds ratio 0·09 [95% CI 0·01-0·92]; I2=87%), worse asthma symptoms (0·23 [0·17-0·33]; I2=0%), longer asthma duration (0·49 [0·32-0·76]; I2=22%), and use of maintenance oral corticosteroids (0·57 [0·40-0·79]; I2=49%). The presence of comorbidities, in particular depression (0·38 [0·23-0·61]; I2=6%) and obesity (0·41 [0·31-0·54]; I2=0%), were important non-pulmonary barriers to clinical remission.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical remission is an achievable goal for a minority of patients with severe asthma treated with biologics. Definitions of clinical remission varied substantially between studies, and materially affected attainment, suggesting an urgent need for further consensus-driven definitions. Longer disease duration, higher asthma severity, and the presence of comorbidities were identified as important barriers to clinical remission, suggesting that earlier intervention with effective treatments and a broader treatable traits approach might improve outcomes.

FUNDING

Health Data Research UK, Inflammation and Immunity driver project.

Identifying super-responders: A review of the road to asthma remission

Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease marked by heterogeneity and variable clinical outcomes. Recent therapeutic advances have highlighted patients achieving optimal outcomes, termed "remission" or "super-response." This review evaluates the various definitions of these terms and explores how disease burden impedes the attainment of remission. We assessed multiple studies, including a recent systematic review and meta-analysis, on biologic treatments for asthma remission. Our review highlights that type 2 inflammation may be the strongest predictor of biologic response. Key comorbidities (eg, obesity and mood disorders) and behavioral factors (eg, poor adherence, improper inhalation technique, and smoking) were identified as dominant traits limiting remission. In addition, asthma burden and longer disease duration significantly restrict the potential for remission in patients with severe asthma under the current treatment paradigm. We review the potential for a "predict-and-prevent" approach, which focuses on early identification of high-risk patients with type 2 inflammation and aggressive treatment to improve long-term asthma outcomes. In conclusion, this scoping review highlights the following unmet needs in asthma remission: (1) a harmonized global definition, with better defined lung function parameters; (2) integration of nonbiologic therapies into remission strategies; and (3) a clinical trial of early biologic intervention in patients with remission-prone, very type 2-high, moderately severe asthma with clinical remission as a predefined primary end point.

Clinical characteristics of complete responders versus non-complete responders to omalizumab, benralizumab and mepolizumab in patients with severe asthma: a long-term retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Some patients with severe asthma may benefit from treatment with biologics, but evidence has been mostly collected from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in which patients' characteristics are different from those encountered in asthma patients in the real-world setting. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical features of complete responders versus non-complete responders to long-term treatment with biologics in patients with severe asthma attended in routine daily practice.

METHODS

Data of a cohort of 90 patients with severe asthma who were treated with biologics (omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab) for at least 12 months and were followed up to March 2022. Data recorded included clinical characteristics and effectiveness of treatment (exacerbation, Asthma Control Test [ACT] score, lung function, use of maintenance oral corticosteroids [mOCS]), FeNO, and blood eosinophils at baseline, at 12 months, and at the end of follow-up. Complete response is considered if, in addition to not presenting exacerbations or the use of mOCS, the ACT score was >20 and, the FEV1 >80% predicted.

RESULTS

An improvement in all asthma control parameters was observed after 12 months of treatment and a mean follow-up of 55 months. After 12 months of treatment 27.2% of patients met the criteria of complete response and this percentage even increased to 35.3% at the end of follow-up. Long-term complete response was associated to better lung function with mepolizumab and omalizumab treatment and to less previous exacerbations in the benralizumab group. The main cause of not achieving a complete response was the persistence of an airflow obstructive pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab improved the clinical outcomes of patients with severe asthma in a clinic environment with similar effect sizes to RCTs in the long term follow-up. Airflow obstruction, however, was a predictor of a non-complete response to biologics.

Is remission the new target in asthma management?

See related article

Real-world biologics response and super-response in the International Severe Asthma Registry cohort

BACKGROUND

Biologic asthma therapies reduce exacerbations and long-term oral corticosteroids (LTOCS) use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there are limited data on outcomes among patients ineligible for RCTs. Hence, we investigated responsiveness to biologics in a real-world population of adults with severe asthma.

METHODS

Adults in the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) with ≥24 weeks of follow-up were grouped into those who did, or did not, initiate biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5/IL5R, anti-IL4/13). Treatment responses were examined across four domains: forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) increase by ≥100 mL, improved asthma control, annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction ≥50%, and any LTOCS dose reduction. Super-response criteria were: FEV1 increase by ≥500 mL, new well-controlled asthma, no exacerbations, and LTOCS cessation or tapering to ≤5 mg/day.

RESULTS

5.3% of ISAR patients met basic RCT inclusion criteria; 2116/8451 started biologics. Biologic initiators had worse baseline impairment than non-initiators, despite having similar biomarker levels. Half or more of initiators had treatment responses: 59% AER reduction, 54% FEV1 increase, 49% improved control, 49% reduced LTOCS, of which 32%, 19%, 30%, and 39%, respectively, were super-responses. Responses/super-responses were more frequent in biologic initiators than in non-initiators; nevertheless, ~40-50% of initiators did not meet response criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with severe asthma are ineligible for RCTs of biologic therapies. Biologics are initiated in patients who have worse baseline impairments than non-initiators despite similar biomarker levels. Although biologic initiators exhibited clinical responses and super-responses in all outcome domains, 40-50% did not meet the response criteria.

Clinical remission and control in severe asthma: agreements and disagreements

Over the last two decades, we have witnessed great advancements in our understanding of the immunological pathways of asthma, leading to the development of targeted therapies, such as biologic drugs, that have radically and definitively changed the clinical outcomes of severe asthma. Despite the numerous therapeutic options available, ~4-10% of all people with asthma have severe or uncontrolled asthma, associated with an increased risk of developing chronic oral corticosteroid use, fixed airflow limitation, exacerbations, hospitalization and, finally, increased healthcare costs. The new concept of disease modification in asthma comes from the evolution of asthma management, which encompasses phenotyping patients with different inflammatory endotypes characterizing the disease, followed by the advent of more effective therapies capable of targeting the proximal factors of airway inflammation. This treat-to-target approach aims to achieve remission of the disease. Because the novel treatment paradigm for severe asthma with the advent of biologic therapies is no longer clinical control but rather clinical remission - a step closer to the concept of cure - a deeper and more accurate understanding of the critical causal mechanisms and endotypes of asthma is necessary to achieve the goal of clinical remission, which has the potential to generate real life-changing benefits for patients. This review aims to frame the evolution of the debated concept of clinical remission and provide clinicians with insights that may be helpful in achieving remission in the greatest number of patients.

Exploring Definitions and Predictors of Response to Biologics for Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

Biologic effectiveness is often assessed as response, a term that eludes consistent definition. Identifying those most likely to respond in real-life has proven challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To explore definitions of biologic responders in adults with severe asthma and investigate patient characteristics associated with biologic response.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal cohort study using data from 21 countries, which shared data with the International Severe Asthma Registry. Changes in four asthma outcome domains were assessed in the 1-year period before and after biologic initiation in patients with a predefined level of prebiologic impairment. Responder cutoffs were 50% or greater reduction in exacerbation rate, 50% or greater reduction in long-term oral corticosteroid daily dose, improvement in one or more category in asthma control, and 100 mL or greater improvement in FEV1. Responders were defined using single and multiple domains. The association between prebiologic characteristics and postbiologic initiation response was examined by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2,210 patients were included. Responder rate ranged from 80.7% (n = 566 of 701) for exacerbation response to 10.6% (n = 9 of 85) for a four-domain response. Many responders still exhibited significant impairment after biologic initiation: 46.7% (n = 206 of 441) of asthma control responders with uncontrolled asthma before the biologic still had incompletely controlled disease postbiologic initiation. Predictors of response were outcome-dependent. Lung function responders were more likely to have higher prebiologic FeNO (odds ratio = 1.20 for every 25-parts per billion increase), and shorter asthma duration (odds ratio = 0.81 for every 10-year increase in duration). Higher blood eosinophil count and the presence of type 2-related comorbidities were positively associated with higher odds of meeting long-term oral corticosteroid, control, and lung function responder criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the multimodal nature of response, showing that many responders experience residual symptoms after biologic initiation and that predictors of response vary according to the outcome assessed.

Dupilumab responder types and predicting factors in patients with type 2 severe asthma: A real-world cohort study

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma (SA) presents a considerable healthcare challenge despite optimal standard treatment. Dupilumab, which is effective in type 2 (T2) SA patients, demonstrates variable responses, categorizing patients as non-responders, partial responders, or those achieving clinical remission. However, real-world response rates remain underexplored. Additionally, understanding the characteristics of patients achieving clinical remission is crucial for predicting favourable responses to dupilumab.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate responder types and identify predictors of clinical remission and non-response induced by dupilumab in a real-world cohort of SA patients.

METHODS

We analyzed retrospective data from SA patients undergoing dupilumab treatment in a study conducted at Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland hospital. Data were collected at baseline and at a 12 to 24-months follow-up (T = 12). Response rates were evaluated at T = 12. Predictors of non-response and clinical remission were investigated using multivariate logistic regression analysis with a stepwise forward variable selection approach.

RESULTS

Among the 175 patients screened, 136 met the inclusion criteria. At T = 12, 31.6 % achieved clinical remission, 47.1 % were partial responders and 21.3 % were non-responders. Predictors associated with clinical remission included high baseline blood eosinophil counts (BEC) and male sex. Conversely, younger age at baseline, low baseline total immunoglobin E (IgE) and low baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels were identified as predictors of non-response.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab results in clinical disease remission in one-third of the treated patients. Clinical remission is predicted by high BEC and male sex, whereas low total IgE, low FeNO and younger age indicate a lower likelihood of response.

Real-Life Response to Biologics in Severe Asthma with Nasal Polyposis: Insights from the Belgian Severe Asthma Registry

BACKGROUND

Nasal polyposis (NP) is a comorbidity of type 2 severe asthma (SA) which could influence response to SA biologics.

METHODS

We evaluated (super-) response in SA patients with (NP +) and without NP (NP-) enrolled in the Belgian Severe Asthma Registry (BSAR).

RESULTS

914 patients, of whom 31% NP + , were included. At enrollment, NP + patients had higher annual exacerbation rates, higher number of emergency room visits and more elevated type 2 biomarkers. In the longitudinal subanalysis of 104 patients, both groups had significant and similar asthma responses to asthma biologics, except for a greater increase in FEV1 in the NP + group. Super-response was achieved in 33 patients (32%), irrespective of NP status or type of biologic.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, both NP + and NP - patients had positive treatment responses, with some able to achieve super-response. In SA patients with NP, a greater FEV1 improvement as compared to SA patients without NP was observed.

Spanish Consensus on Remission in Asthma (REMAS)

The concept of "remission" in asthma has been around for a long time and it has been a controversial topic. Despite the attempts of some studies to characterize this entity, the discussion continues. In the case of asthma there is still no clear definition, either in terms of its meaning or the parameters that should be included or whether it should be divided into clinical or complete remission. To help defining these controversial concepts, SEPAR has advocated the multidisciplinary working group REMAS (REMission in ASthma). Following the Delphi methodology and with the involvement of more than 120 specialists in asthma management, this group has arrived at a consensus on the definitions of remission in asthma and establishing the criteria and characteristics that will be of use in future studies evaluating the efficacy or effectiveness of treatments.

The clinical effectiveness of mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma; outcomes from four years cohort evaluation

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials and real world studies demonstrated benefit of mepolizumab treatment in severe asthma but data on its effectiveness beyond 2 years remain limited. Herein, we provide mepolizumab treatment evaluation up to 4 years.

METHODS

we studied all patients initiated on mepolizumab in our center from June 2017 to August 2018. Clinical outcomes data were retrieved from the local dendrite systems registry. Comparison analyses and logistic regression were conducted to explore longevity and predictors of response to mepolizumab treatment.

RESULTS

a total of 66 patients initiated on mepolizumab with a median follow-up of 45.8 (42.4,48.1) months were included in the study [mean age 50.3 years (range 18-79), females 50 (73%) ]. At 20.7 months of treatment, 42 patients (63.6%) had positive response, 13 (19.7%) negative response, and 11 (16.7%) discontinued due to other factors. At 45.8 months, 35 (53%) patients were still on mepolizumab, 21 (31.8%) switched to a different biologic, and 10 (15.2%) discontinued biologics. Two deaths were recorded during the study period.The median blood eosinophil was reduced from 0.43x109/L (0.27, 0.75) to 0.04 (0.0, 0.1) (p < 0.00001)]. The median annual exacerbations were reduced from 6.0 (4,8) to 1.0 (0.0,3.0) (p < 0.00001), and mOCS use was reduced from59% to 29%, p = 0.001. The mean asthma control questionnaire-6 (ACQ6) improved from 3.1 ± 1.7 to 2.1 ± 1.3 (p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

mepolizumab clinical benefit was sustained over 4 years. However, approximately half of the cohort discontinued the treatment prompting the need for further research into the treatment response longevity.

Patient-reported outcome measures in severe asthma: an expert consensus

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to reach a consensus on the most relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs), the corresponding measures (PROMs), and measurement frequency during severe asthma patient follow-up.

METHODS

Two Delphi rounds were conducted. The questionnaire was developed based on a systematic literature review, a focus group with patients, and a nominal group with experts. It assessed PROs' relevance and the appropriateness (A) and feasibility (F) of PROMs using a Likert scale (1=totally agree; 9=totally disagree). The consensus was established when ≥75% of participants agreed (1-3) or disagreed (7-9).

RESULTS

Sixty-three professionals (25 hospital pharmacists, 14 allergists, 13 pulmonologists, and 11 nurses) and 5 patients answered the Delphi questionnaire. A consensus was reached on all PROs regarding their relevance. Experts agreed on the use of ACT (A:95.24%; F:95.24%), mini AQLQ (A:93.65; F:79.37%), mMRC dyspnea scale (A:85.71%; F:85.71%), TAI (A:92.06%; F:85.71%), MMAS (A:75.40%; F:82%), and the dispensing register (A:96.83%; F:92.06%). Also considered suitable were: SNOT-22 (A:90.48%; F:73.80%), PSQI (A:82.54; F:63.90%), HADS (A:82.54; F:64%), WPAI (A:77.78%; F:49.20%), TSQM-9 (A:79.37; F:70.50%) and knowledge of asthma questionnaire (A:77%; F:68.80%); however, their use in clinical practice was considered unfeasible. Panelists also agreed on the appropriateness of EQ-5D, which was finally included despite being considered unfeasible (A: 84.13%; F:67.20%) in clinical practice. Agreement was reached on using ACT, TAI, mMRC, and a dispensing register every three months; mini-AQLQ and MMAS every six months; and EQ-5D every twelve months.

CONCLUSION

This consensus paves the way toward patient-centered care, promoting the development of strategies supporting routine assessment of PROs in severe asthma management.

Impact of pre-biologic impairment on meeting domain-specific biologic responder definitions in patients with severe asthma

BACKGROUND

There is little agreement on clinically useful criteria for identifying real-world responders to biologic treatments for asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of pre-biologic impairment on meeting domain-specific biologic responder definitions in adults with severe asthma.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal, cohort study across 22 countries participating in the International Severe Asthma Registry (https://isaregistries.org/) between May 2017 and January 2023. Change in 4 asthma domains (exacerbation rate, asthma control, long-term oral corticosteroid [LTOCS] dose, and lung function) was assessed from biologic initiation to 1 year post-treatment (minimum 24 weeks). Pre- to post-biologic changes for responders and nonresponders were described along a categorical gradient for each domain derived from pre-biologic distributions (exacerbation rate: 0 to 6+/y; asthma control: well controlled to uncontrolled; LTOCS: 0 to >30 mg/d; percent-predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second [ppFEV1]: <50% to ≥80%).

RESULTS

Percentage of biologic responders (ie, those with a category improvement pre- to post-biologic) varied by domain and increased with greater pre-biologic impairment, increasing from 70.2% to 90.0% for exacerbation rate, 46.3% to 52.3% for asthma control, 31.1% to 58.5% for LTOCS daily dose, and 35.8% to 50.6% for ppFEV1. The proportion of patients having improvement post-biologic tended to be greater for anti-IL-5/5R compared with for anti-IgE for exacerbation, asthma control, and ppFEV1 domains, irrespective of pre-biologic impairment.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide realistic outcome-specific post-biologic expectations for both physicians and patients, will be foundational to inform future work on a multidimensional approach to define and assess biologic responders and response, and may enhance appropriate patient selection for biologic therapies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The ISAR database has ethical approval from the Anonymous Data Ethics Protocols and Transparency (ADEPT) committee (ADEPT0218) and is registered with the European Union Electronic Register of Post-Authorization studies (ENCEPP/DSPP/23720). The study was designed, implemented, and reported in compliance with the European Network Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCEPP) Code of Conduct (EUPAS38288) and with all applicable local and international laws and regulation, and registered with ENCEPP (https://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=38289). Governance was provided by ADEPT (registration number: ADEPT1220).

Long-term safety, durability of response, cessation and switching of biologics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe asthma patients suffer from decreased quality of life, and increased asthma symptoms, exacerbations, hospitalizations, and risk of death. Biologics have revolutionized treatment for severe asthma. However, with multiple biologic agents now available, clinicians must consider initial selection the long-term effectiveness of biologics. Additionally, patients have overlapping eligibilities and clinicians may consider switching between biologics for improved response. Finally, careful assessment of biologics cessation is needed for severe asthma patients who depend on these add-on therapies for asthma control.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence for long-term durability and safety varies by biologic agent. In general, initial benefits noted from these agents (ex. exacerbation reduction) is, at minimum, sustained with long term use. Rates of adverse events and serious adverse events, including those requiring cessation of a biologics are low with long term use. Further studies are needed to understand the development of antidrug antibodies but currently their prevalence rates are low. Adverse events and insufficient efficacy are common reasons for biologic cessation or switching. Discontinuation maybe associated with waning of benefits but can be considered in certain situations. Biologic switching can be associated with improved asthma control.

SUMMARY

Biologics are safe and effective long-term therapies for the management of asthma. Discontinuation must be carefully considered and if possible avoided. Reasons for insufficient efficacy must be evaluated and if needed, biologic switching should be considered.

Barriers to clinical remission in severe asthma

Severe asthma is associated with an increased risk for exacerbations, reduced lung function, fixed airflow obstruction, and substantial morbidity and mortality. The concept of remission in severe asthma as a new treatment goal has recently gained attention due to the growing use of monoclonal antibody therapies, which target specific pathologic pathways of inflammation. This review evaluates the current definitions of asthma remission and unveils some of the barriers for achieving this state in the severe asthma population. Although there is no unified definition, the concept of clinical remission in asthma should be based on a sustained period of symptom control, elimination of oral corticosteroid exposure and exacerbations, and stabilization of pulmonary function. The conjugation of these criteria seems a realistic treatment target in a minority of asthmatic patients. Some unmet needs in severe asthma may affect the achievement of clinical remission. Late intervention with targeted therapies in the severe asthma population may increase the risk of corticosteroid exposure and the development of irreversible structural airway changes. Moreover, airway infection is an important component in persistent exacerbations in patients on biologic therapies. Phenotyping exacerbations may be useful to guide therapy decisions and to avoid the liberal use of oral corticosteroids. Another challenge associated with the aim of clinical remission in severe asthma is the multifaceted interaction between the disease and its associated comorbidities. Behavioural factors should be evaluated in case of persistent symptoms despite optimised treatment, and assessing biomarkers and targeting treatable traits may allow for a more objective way of reaching remission. The concept of clinical remission will benefit from an international consensus to establish unifying criteria for its assessment, and it should be addressed in the future management guidelines.

Managing Small Airway Disease in Patients with Severe Asthma: Transitioning from the "Silent Zone" to Achieving "Quiet Asthma"

Background/Objectives: Several studies have demonstrated the positive clinical and functional impact of adding Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist (LAMA) to Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS) and Long-Acting Beta-Agonists (LABA) therapy in the treatment of severe asthma. Aim and objectives: To demonstrate that treating Small Airways Disease (SAD) in severe asthma patients who are candidates for biologics can improve respiratory symptoms, lung function, and airways inflammation, potentially avoiding or delaying the use of biological therapy. Methods: Thirty-two severe asthma patients with SAD were transitioned from separate inhalers for ICS/LABA and LAMA to extrafine single-inhaler beclomethasone, formoterol, and glycopyrronium. None of these patients underwent biological therapy before the study. Follow-up evaluations were conducted at baseline (T0) and three months after initiation (T3). Assessments included clinical evaluations, spirometry, oscillometry, and inflammation markers. Results: Transitioning to single-inhaler triple therapy from T0 to T3 resulted in significant improvements in Asthma Control Test (ACT) and SAD parameters, including increased Forced Expiratory Volume in the mid-range of lung capacity and improved airway resistance and reactance measurements using impulse oscillometry. A significant reduction in airway inflammation was evidenced by lower levels of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide 350 (FeNO 350) (p < 0.001 for all). Conclusions: Adopting a single-inhaler triple therapy notably enhanced clinical control and small airway function in patients with severe asthma and SAD, supporting the positive impact of target-therapy for the achievement of a stable state termed "Quiet Asthma".

Advancements in biologic therapy in eosinophilic asthma

INTRODUCTION

Asthma encompasses a spectrum of phenotypes often categorized into two groups- type 2 high (T2 high) and type 2 low (T2 low). T2 high includes atopic and eosinophilic presentations whereas T2 low is non-atopic, non-eosinophilic, and oft associated with neutrophilic inflammation. Eosinophilic asthma is often driven by IgE, IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 and TSLP. This can lead to eosinophilic inflammatory response in the airways which in turn can be used as target for treatment.

AREAS COVERED

The article will focus on biologic therapy that is currently being used in eosinophilic asthma management in mainly the adult population including clinical trials and co-morbidities that can be treated using the same biologics. A review on asthma biologics for pediatric population has been reviewed elsewhere.

EXPERT OPINION

Biological therapy for asthma targeting the IgE, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, and TSLP pathways are shown to have benefit for the treatment of eosinophilic asthma, as exemplified in real-world studies. When choosing the right biological agent factors such as phenotype, comorbidities, and cost-effectiveness of the biologic agent must be taken into consideration.

Targeting Asthma Remission as the Next Therapeutic Step Toward Improving Disease Control

The long-term goal of asthma management is to achieve disease control, comprising the assessment of 2 main domains: (1) symptom control and (2) future risk of adverse outcomes. Decades of progress in asthma management have correlated with increasingly ambitious disease control targets. Moreover, the introduction of precision medicines, such as biologics, has further expanded the limits of what can be achieved in terms of disease control. It is now believed that clinical remission, a term rarely associated with asthma, may be an achievable treatment goal. An expert framework published in 2020 took the first step toward developing a commonly accepted definition of clinical remission in asthma. However, there remains a widespread discussion about the clinical parameters and thresholds that should be included in a standardized definition of clinical remission. This review aims to discuss on-treatment clinical remission as an aspirational outcome in asthma management, drawing on experiences from other chronic diseases where remission has long been a goal. We also highlight the integral role of shared decision-making between patients and health care professionals and the need for a common understanding of the individual patient journey to remission as foundational elements in reducing disease burden and improving outcomes for patients with asthma.

Long-term multicenter comparison shows equivalent efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in severe asthma therapy

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (biologics) drastically changed severe asthma therapy. Mepolizumab (anti-interleukin (IL) 5), benralizumab (anti-IL5 receptor alpha), and dupilumab (anti-IL4/13) are the most used biologics in this context. While all biologics are efficient individually, the choice of biologic is complicated by insufficient data on their comparative long-term treatment efficacy. Here, we compare the real-life efficacy of these biologics in asthma therapy over 12 months.

METHODS

280 severe asthma patients treated with mepolizumab (129/280, 46%), benralizumab (83/280, 30%) or dupilumab (68/280, 24%) for one year were analyzed retrospectively. Data were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy. Endpoints were changes pulmonary function (PF), exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and dose, asthma control test (ACT) score and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels as well as responder status measured by the recently published "Biologic Asthma Response Score" (BARS).

RESULTS

All biologics led to significant improvements in PF, ACT and OCS dose. Only Mepolizumab and Benralizumab significantly decreased the exacerbation rate, while only Mepolizumab and Dupilumab significantly decreased FeNO. Responder rates measured by BARS were high across all groups: roughly half of all patients achieved full response and most of the remainder achieved at least partial responder status. Overall, outcomes were similar between groups after both 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

All biologics showed great efficacy in individual parameters and high responder rates measured by BARS without a clinically relevant advantage for any antibody. Response was usually achieved after 6 months and retained at 12 months, emphasizing the utility of early response assessment.

Clinical Response and Remission in Patients With Severe Asthma Treated With Biologic Therapies

BACKGROUND

The development of novel targeted biologic therapies for severe asthma has provided an opportunity to consider remission as a new treatment goal.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How many patients with severe asthma treated with biologic therapy achieve clinical remission, and what predicts response to treatment?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The Danish Severe Asthma Register is a nationwide cohort including all adult patients receiving biologic therapy for severe asthma in Denmark. This observational cohort study defined "clinical response" to treatment following 12 months as a ≥ 50% reduction in exacerbations and/or a ≥ 50% reduction in maintenance oral corticosteroid dose, if required. "Clinical remission" was defined by cessation of exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroids, as well as a normalization of lung function (FEV1 > 80%) and a six-question Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 1.5 following 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Following 12 months of treatment, 104 (21%) of 501 biologic-naive patients had no response to treatment, and 397 (79%) had a clinical response. Among the latter, 97 (24%) fulfilled the study criteria of clinical remission, corresponding to 19% of the entire population. Remission was predicted by shorter duration of disease and lower BMI in the entire population of patients treated with biologic therapy.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical response was achieved in most adult patients initiating biologic therapy, and clinical remission was observed in 19% of the patients following 12 months of treatment. Further studies are required to assess the long-term outcome of achieving clinical remission with biologic therapy.

Pulmonology for the rhinologist

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The upper and lower airways are inter-related despite serving different functions and can no longer be considered separately. Rhinologists are becoming increasingly aware of the role the lower airway plays in optimizing outcomes for their patients. This review highlights recent developments in pulmonology that impact rhinologic conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

The unified airway concept now supports the multidisciplinary management of respiratory and rhinologic pathologies. Biomarkers, biologics and the concept of treatable traits have permitted the development of personalized and precise treatment of the entire respiratory tract. The concept of corticosteroid stewardship, the introduction of steroid sparing agents for the treatment of respiratory diseases and the development of biomarkers, now forces us to be more considerate and precise with oral corticosteroid (OCS) prescribing and to consider reduction regimens. Finally, current research on climate change and vaping will allow us to better educate and prepare our patients to improve adherence and avoid exacerbations to maintain optimal global respiratory health.

SUMMARY

The inter-relatedness of the upper and lower airway has encouraged a multidisciplinary focus in respiratory medicine. More research is required to improve the precision respiratory medicine model, particularly in the realm of biomarkers and endotyping. These developments must also consider the impact of climate change, pollution and toxins for us to provide optimum care for our patients.

Comparison of Long-term Response and Remission to Omalizumab and Anti-IL-5/IL-5R Using Different Criteria in a Real-life Cohort of Severe Asthma Patients

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of biologic therapy response is vital to monitor its effectiveness. Authors have proposed various response criteria including good responder, super-responder, non-responder, and clinical remission.

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the prevalence of response and clinical remission after long-term treatment (>6 months) of anti-IgE and anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα biologics, compare these results with existing criteria, and identify predictors for non-responders and clinical remission.

METHODS

A multicenter, real-life study involving severe asthma patients in Spain. Various outcomes were assessed to gauge response and clinical remission against established criteria.

RESULTS

The study included 429 patients, 209 (48.7%) omalizumab, 112 (26.1%) mepolizumab, 19 (4.4%) reslizumab and 89 (20.7%) benralizumab, with a mean treatment duration of 55.3±38.8 months. In the final year of treatment, 218 (50.8%) were super-responders, 173 (40.3%) responders, 38 (8.9%) non-responders, and clinical remission in 116 (27%), without differences among biologics. The short-term non-responders (<6 months) were 25/545 (4.6%). Substantial variations in response and clinical remission were observed when applying different published criteria. Predictors of non-response included higher BMI (OR:1.14; 95% CI:1.06-1.23; p<0.001), admissions at ICU (2.69; 1.30-5.56; p=0.01), high count of SAE (1.21; 1.03-1.42; p=0.02) before biologic treatment. High FEV1% (0.96; 0.95-0.98; p<0.001), a high ACT score (0.93; 0.88-0.99; p=0.01) before biologic treatment or NSAID-ERD (0.52; 0.29-0.91; p=0.02) showed strong associations with achieving clinical remission.

CONCLUSION

A substantial proportion of severe asthma patients treated long-term with omalizumab or anti-IL5/IL-5Rα achieved a good response. Differences in response criteria highlight the need for harmonization in defining response and clinical remission in biologic therapy to enable meaningful cross-study comparisons.

Real-world effectiveness and predictors of super-responders to dupilumab in a Chinese uncontrolled asthma cohort

Background: Dupilumab has been shown to be effective in clinical trials for moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma. However, the efficacy of dupilumab in the real world and the prediction of treatment response have not been well studied in patients with asthma. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of dupilumab and explore predictors of super-responders in a Chinese retrospective cohort. Methods: From January 2021 through December 2022, the patients with uncontrolled asthma who were treated with dupilumab for 4 months were included. Symptom control, type 2 inflammatory biomarkers, and lung function were collected at baseline and follow-up for efficacy assessment. Super-responders were defined as exacerbation-free, off maintenance of oral corticosteroids (mOCS), and with a score of the five-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) of <0.5. The uni- and multivariable logistic regressions were used to construct predictive models for super-responders based on baseline features. Results: A total of 53 patients were included. After 4 months treatment, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) ACQ-5 score decreased from 1.8 (1.6-2.4) to 0.4 (0.2-0.8) (p < 0.001), the median (IQR) number of exacerbations, from 0.0 (0.0-1.0) to 0.0 (0.0-0.0) (p = 0.005). The median (IQR) dose of mOCS (prednisone equivalent) decreased from 15.0 mg/day (8.8-22.5 mg/day) to 2.5 mg/day (0.0-10.0 mg/day) (p = 0.008) in nine patients who were receiving mOCS. All efficacy assessment parameters, including sputum eosinophil were significantly improved, while blood eosinophil count did not decline (530 cells/mm³ [300-815 cells/mm³] versus 560 cells/mm³ [220-938 cells/mm³], p = 0.710). After taking dupilumab, 25 of 53 patients (47.2%) achieved a super-response. The age of onset < 42 years (odds ratio [OR] 7.471 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.286-43.394) and the baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) of 25-50 ppb (OR 35.038 [95% CI, 3.104-395.553]) predicted super-responders, which showed a C-index of 0.822 (95% CI, 0.697-0.947). Conclusion: Dupilumab significantly improved symptom control, type 2 inflammatory markers, and lung function in Chinese patients with uncontrolled asthma. Airway eosinophils, rather than blood eosinophils, can be a reliable indicator of therapeutic efficacy. The early-onset asthma as well as the medium-high level of baseline FeNO contributed to the prediction of super-responders.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Among Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated With Mepolizumab and Its Effect on Small Airways

BACKGROUND

The major problem at the Cleveland Allergy and Asthma Center was the need for additional therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma patients who were steroid-dependent or required frequent bursts of prednisone.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine the efficacy of monthly mepolizumab (MP) injections up to 6½ years using Asthma Control Quesitonnaire-7 (ACQ-7), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% (FEF25%-75%) overall and among super-responders, and to understand whether FEF25%-75% is an effective parameter to evaluate MP efficacy.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of 67 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and compared the results between 47 super-responders and the rest of the cohort regarding ACQ-6, ACQ-7, eosinophils, FEV1, and FEF25%-75%. The groups of super-responders and all other patients were described with respect to initial and current values of the study end points using medians and 25th and 75th percentiles. Changes from the initial to the current values in the study end points were measured using percent changes. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used within each group to test the null hypothesis of 0 median percent change.

RESULTS

After 6½ years, there were no significant changes in FEV1. The FEF25%-75%, had a significant median percent increase of 40% among the super-responders (P < .001), which was substantially higher (P = .026) than the median percent increase of 13.8% observed among all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MP up to 6½ years was safe and effective, with significant changes to ACQ-7 and FEF25%-75% associated with MP treatment, but not the FEV1. A higher magnitude of changes was observed among super-responders than the rest of the cohort. Changes in FEF25%-75% were more meaningful than changes in FEV1 in evaluating pulmonary function responsiveness of severe eosinophilic asthma to MP.

The perceived waning of biologics in severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Biologics are highly effective in severe asthma and used at fixed dosing intervals. However, in clinical practice, dosing intervals are sometimes shortened if patients perceive a decreased biologic effect before the next administration. The occurrence and clinical relevance of this perceived waning of biological effect is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To explore (1) the frequency, severity and conditions, (2) associated symptoms and (3) relationship with clinical characteristics of the patient-perceived waning effect of biologics before the next administration.

METHODS

Severe asthma patients receiving biological treatment ≥4 months were included. Based on 17 semi-structured patient interviews, we developed a questionnaire focusing on the waning effect of biologics before the next administration, which was distributed among 129 patients. Clinical characteristics, including asthma control (ACQ) and quality of life (AQLQ) scores, were collected from patient files.

RESULTS

65/101 patients who completed the questionnaire reported a waning of biological effect, graded as severe (median (IQR) 6.5 (5-7.5) on a 0-10 BORG-scale). Waning manifested in a broad spectrum of symptoms. Patients reporting waning had higher ACQ and lower AQLQ scores versus those without (p < 0.05) and higher BORG-scores were associated with higher exacerbation rate (ρ = 0.309, p = 0.013). A third of all patients were in favor of extending or shortening their dosing interval.

CONCLUSION

Two-thirds of severe asthma patients report waning of biologic effect at the end of the dosing interval, which is associated with poorer asthma control and quality of life. The diversity in observed waning of effect opens the way for research into more individualized dosing of biologics.

Biologics in severe asthma: A pragmatic approach for choosing the right treatment for the right patient

The development of monoclonal antibody therapies targeting specific components of the pathways relevant to asthma pathophysiology has revolutionized treatment of severe asthma both in adults and children and helped to further unravel the heterogeneity of this disease. However, the availability of multiple agents, often with overlapping eligibility criteria, creates a need for pragmatic guidance for specialists undertaking care of patients with severe asthma. In this review, we provide an overview of the data supporting the clinical efficacy of biologics in distinct asthma phenotypes/endotypes. We also focus on the role of biomarkers and treatable traits, including comorbidities, in the choice of asthma biologics, highlight which treatments have been demonstrated to be steroid sparing in corticosteroid dependent asthma, and provide practical guidance that can drive shared decision making on treatment choice with patients. In addition, we summarize what is known to date regarding long-term safety of these drugs, and lastly, discuss future directions in biologics research.

Real-world super-response to biologics in severe asthma: A French monocentric retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Biologics have dramatically improved outcomes in severe T2-high asthma. Although the identification of patients with the best response is key to understand the efficacy of these agents and select the best target populations, the definition and predictors of super-response are not fully established yet.

METHODS

This study aimed to describe super-response and to identify predictors of super-response to biologics in a French severe eosinophilic asthma cohort followed in a severe asthma tertiary care center between January 2005 and December 2020. Super-response was defined a priori as no oral corticosteroids intake and no exacerbations over 12 months. Collected data at baseline and after 12 months included asthma history, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, lung function, T2-biomarkers, baseline asthma-related treatments, and asthma control.

RESULTS

Among 157 patients assessed for eligibility, 108 were included, corresponding to 166 treatments with biologics. Overall response rate was 63.2 % (105/166) and super-response rate was 39.7 % (66/166). In omalizumab group (n = 67), lower dose of oral corticosteroids in maintenance was the only factor associated with super-response (p = 0.008). In the anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5R group (n = 99), absence or lower dose of oral corticosteroids in maintenance and absence of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis were statistically associated with super-response (p = 0.009, p = 0.001 and p = 0.02 respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this real-life study in severe T2-high asthma patients, a lower dose or absence of daily oral corticosteroids and absence of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis were the only identifiable predictors of super-response to biologics. Physicians should not wait for maintenance oral corticosteroids to be required before considering the initiation of a biologic in severe asthma.