Omalizumab and long-term quality of life outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: a systematic review

Omalizumab for the treatment of patients with severe allergic asthma with immunoglobulin E levels above >1500 IU/mL

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) plays a critical role in the allergen-initiated inflammatory pathway and thus serves as a viable therapeutic target in allergic or IgE-mediated diseases such as asthma. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE biologic, has been approved in the United States (US, 2003) and in the European Union (EU, 2005) as an add-on therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma and severe allergic asthma (SAA) aged 6 years and older. The dose and frequency of omalizumab are adjusted based on the patient's body weight and baseline IgE levels, as recommended by its dosing tables. Currently, these dosing recommendations are limited to patients with baseline IgE levels of up to 1500 IU/mL in the European Union and 700 IU/mL in the United States. However, many patients with SAA have IgE levels >1500 IU/mL, highlighting an unmet need. This review presents the current evidence on the treatment benefits of omalizumab in patients with IgE levels >1500 IU/mL. The findings from the reviewed studies which included >3000 patients support the efficacy and effectiveness of omalizumab in reducing exacerbations, and improving asthma control, lung function, and quality of life in patients with severe asthma having IgE levels beyond the current dosing range. Omalizumab was well-tolerated in these patients, with no new safety signals. In addition, high IgE levels (>1500 IU/mL) are also reported in several comorbidities of asthma (allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis [ABPA], food allergy, and nasal polyposis) and omalizumab has demonstrated efficacy and safety in these indications. These data suggest that omalizumab may be considered for administration in SAA patients, with high IgE levels outside the current dosing tables. A detailed assessment of patients with high IgE levels is needed before deciding on the optimal treatment approach. A management algorithm for SAA patients with IgE >1500 IU/mL is proposed in this review and a suggestion to follow the Delphi consensus is advised.

Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with several clinical variants and often represents a complex disease requiring a specialized and multidisciplinary approach, as well as the use of multiple drugs. The prevalence of severe asthma varies from one country to another, and it is estimated that 50% of these patients present a poor control of their disease. For the best management of the patient, it is necessary a correct diagnosis, an adequate follow-up and undoubtedly to offer the best available treatment, including biologic treatments with monoclonal antibodies. With this objective, this consensus process was born, which began in its first version in 2018, whose goal is to offer the patient the best possible management of their disease in order to minimize their symptomatology. For this 2020 consensus update, a literature review was conducted by the authors. Subsequently, through a two-round interactive Delphi process, a broad panel of asthma experts from SEPAR and the regional pulmonology societies proposed the recommendations and conclusions contained in this document.

Molecular and Immunomodulatory Actions of New Antiasthmatic Agents: Exploring the Diversity of Biologics in Th2 Endotype Asthma

Asthma is a major respiratory disorder characterised by chronic inflammation and airway remodelling. It affects about 1-8% of the global population and is responsible for over 461,000 deaths annually. Until recently, the pharmacotherapy of severe asthma involved high doses of inhaled corticosteroids in combination with β-agonist for prolonged action, including theophylline, leukotriene antagonist or anticholinergic yielding limited benefit. Although the use of newer agents to target Th2 asthma endotypes has improved therapeutic outcomes in severe asthmatic conditions, there seems to be a paucity of understanding the diverse mechanisms through which these classes of drugs act. This article delineates the molecular and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action of new antiasthmatic agents currently being trialled in preclinical and clinical studies to remit asthmatic conditions. The ultimate goal in developing antiasthmatic agents is based on two types of approaches: either anti-inflammatory or bronchodilators. Biologic and most small molecules have been shown to modulate specific asthma endotypes, targeting thymic stromal lymphopoietin, tryptase, spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk), Janus kinase, PD-L1/PD-L2, GATA-3, and CD38 for the treatment and management of Th2 endotype asthma.

Efficacy predictors of omalizumab in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: Findings from a post-hoc analysis of a randomised phase III study

Background

Omalizumab has demonstrated efficacy as an add-on therapy in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. This post-hoc analysis assessed the potential predictors for the efficacy of omalizumab in these patients.

Methods

A post-hoc analysis was performed on a Phase III, randomised, controlled study conducted in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma (NCT01202903). We evaluated if levels of pre-treatment serum total immunoglobulin-E (IgE) and blood eosinophil (EOS), asthma severity, allergen profile, history of perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR), and free IgE level during omalizumab treatment were predictive of omalizumab's efficacy.

Results

This analysis included 608 patients (omalizumab, N = 306; placebo, N = 302). Improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), standardized Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), and Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE) scores with omalizumab treatment compared with placebo were observed in patients with baseline IgE levels ≥76 IU/mL (irrespective of the EOS count). Relatively greater improvements with omalizumab treatment was also noted in patients with both moderate or severe allergic asthma (regardless of asthma severity), and patients sensitised to >3 allergens and with a history of PAR. All patients who were treated with omalizumab achieved free IgE levels below 50 ng/mL by Week 1. Similar clinical outcomes were observed in the subset of patients who achieved free IgE levels of <25 and ≥ 25 ng/mL.

Conclusions

In Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma, baseline IgE and allergen profile (number/PAR history) are potential predictors of treatment response to omalizumab.

Trial registration

NCT01202903 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Response to Omalizumab in Black and White Patients with Allergic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Higher asthma burden is more likely to be experienced by Black than White patients. In clinical research, underrepresentation of minority populations is observed.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate response to omalizumab in Black and White patients in North America with moderate to severe asthma.

METHODS

Data from placebo-controlled (EXTRA) and single-armed (PROSPERO) omalizumab studies were used for this post hoc analysis. We used a Poisson regression model to examine exacerbation rates. An analysis of covariance model was used to estimate placebo-corrected change in FEV₁ and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) by racial group.

RESULTS

This analysis included 631 White and 176 Black patients from EXTRA and 567 White and 130 Black patients from PROSPERO. In EXTRA, placebo-corrected exacerbation rate reductions (relative rate change [95% confidence interval], 22.6% [2.0-38.9%] vs 22.0% [-18.0% to 48.4%]) and FEV₁ improvements were similar for White and Black patients. There was a trend toward greater AQLQ improvements for Black versus White patients (least squares mean treatment differences: 0.0 vs 0.3, 0.6 vs 0.4, and 0.6 vs 0.2 at weeks 16, 32, and 48, respectively) throughout the study. In PROSPERO, on-study exacerbation rates (0.76 [0.65-0.88] vs 0.77 [0.56-1.10]) and AQLQ improvements (least squares mean change from baseline: 1.2 vs 1.2 and 1.3 vs 1.2 at month 6 and end of study, respectively) were similar for White versus Black patients. A trend toward greater FEV₁ improvement was observed in White versus Black patients throughout the study.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of EXTRA and PROSPERO suggests that Black and White patients with moderate to severe asthma experience similar improvements in exacerbations, FEV₁, and AQLQ with omalizumab.

Effectiveness of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma: A retrospective study in China

BACKGROUND

We conducted the first real-world study of treatment with omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, in Chinese patients with severe allergic asthma.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was the steroid-sparing effect of omalizumab after 12 and 16 weeks of treatment. Characteristics of the patient population, treatment patterns, response rate, and other measures of therapeutic effectiveness were also reported.

METHODS

This nationwide, retrospective, real-world study was conducted in patients with severe allergic asthma who were treated with omalizumab in China. Data, including demographics, Asthma Control Test (ACT) and laboratory and lung function test results, and omalizumab use information, were extracted from patient records collected as part of a previously conducted real-world survey (Asthma Group of the Respiratory Disease Society of the Chinese Medical Association).

RESULTS

In total, 139 patient records were included; 131 and 118 patients remained on treatment at the ≥12- and ≥16-week time points, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation age and median asthma duration (interquartile range) were 47.4 ± 14.3 and 7 (4, 15) years, respectively; 75.6% of patients had a history of allergic disease. Reductions (versus baseline) in inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2 agonists or oral corticosteroids were reported in 61.1% and 63.6% of patients at ≥12 and ≥ 16 weeks, respectively. There were significant improvements in ACT scores (6.08, P < .001) and nitric oxide fraction in exhaled air (-13.0, P = .01) from baseline. Multivariate analysis revealed that age and allergic medical history were predictors of omalizumab treatment response. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Real-world omalizumab treatment was efficacious and well-tolerated in Chinese patients with severe allergic asthma.

Biologicals for severe asthma: what we can learn from real-life experiences?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe asthma is a serious disease affecting about 5-10% of asthmatic patients. Often patients with this kind of asthma requires periodical courses or daily intake of oral corticosteroids, to control symptoms. In the last few years several biological drugs have been developed with the aim to decrease exacerbations and reduce or suspend intake of systemic steroids in severe asthmatic patients. Clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy and the safety of biological antibodies in asthma, but it is already known that randomized controlled trials alone are not sufficient to provide complete information on a drug.

RECENT FINDINGS

After marketing of monoclonal antibodies has been developed several real-life studies with the aim to observe how drugs, tested only on trial patients, are able to provide adequate effectiveness even on 'real' patients; indeed, it is well known that the latter differ in some characteristics from the patients of the trials.

SUMMARY

The results of this analysis confirm the good efficacy of the biologics similarly in real-life patients, also ensuring a promising safety even in periods of observation longer than those of the randomized controlled trials.

Long-term omalizumab efficacy in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab therapy was found to be safe and effective as an add-on therapy for patients with poorly controlled severe asthma. Although several studies over the last decade have demonstrated its efficacy in other Immunoglobulin E related diseases, its use in such conditions is off-label.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of long-term therapy with Omalizumab in patients with persistent severe allergic rhinitis and inadequately controlled severe asthma.

METHODS

Patients with poorly controlled severe asthma and persistent allergic rhinitis were enrolled and treated with Omalizumab for 36 months with every four-week subcutaneous administration. The efficacy assessment included the severity of AR symptoms every six months using Visual Analogue Scale, Asthma Control Test, nasal endoscopy, spirometry, and biomarkers (blood eosinophils and neutrophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, total IgE).

RESULTS

Eleven patients aged between 26 and 70 years were enrolled, and 10 completed the study. A significant improvement of allergic rhinitis symptoms, Asthma Control Test, and lung function was observed. There was also a reduction in the status of the biomarkers at the end of the study.

CONCLUSION

Long-term therapy with Omalizumab was effective and safe in treating severe persistent allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab) for severe eosinophilic asthma. A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines - recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV₁ , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV₁ . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.