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

Drug survival of omalizumab in atopic asthma: Impact of clinical and genetic variables

It is estimated that 40-50% of severe asthma has an atopic basis, representing a clinical challenge and a significant economic burden for healthcare systems. The most effective treatment has emerged with the use of biologic therapies such as omalizumab; however, the rate of therapy switching due to loss of efficacy is high, which has a negative impact on the healthcare system. The aim was to evaluate the influence of genetic polymorphisms as predictors of omalizumab survival. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of 110 patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab in a tertiary hospital. We analyzed FCER1A (rs2251746, rs2427837), FCER1B (rs1441586, rs573790, rs1054485, rs569108), C3 (rs2230199), FCGR2A (rs1801274), FCGR2B (rs3219018, rs1050501), FCGR3A (rs10127939, rs396991), IL1RL1 (rs1420101, rs17026974, rs1921622) and GATA2 (rs4857855) by real-time PCR using Taqman probes. Drug survival was defined as the time from initiation to discontinuation of omalizumab. Cox regression analysis adjusted for the presence of respiratory disease, GERD, SAHS and years with asthma showed that the SNPs FCER1B rs573790 - CT (p < .001; HR = 3.38; CI95% = 1.66-6.87), FCGR3A rs10127939-AC (p = .018; HR = 3.85; CI95% = 1.25-11.81) and FCGR3A rs396991-CC (p = .020; HR = 2.23; CI95% = 1.14-4.38) were the independent variables associated with worse survival in patients diagnosed with asthma. A trend toward statistical significance was also found between and FCGR3A rs10127939-CC (p = .080; HR = 0.13; CI95% = 0.01-1.28) and longer drug survival. The results of this study demonstrate the potential influence of the polymorphisms studied on omalizumab survival and the clinical benefit that could be achieved by defining predictive biomarkers of drug survival.

The Direct and Indirect Role of IgE on Airway Epithelium in Asthma

Asthma is a chronic airway inflammatory disorder, affecting over 350 million people worldwide, with allergic asthma being the most common form of the disease. Allergic asthma is characterized by a type 2 (T2) inflammatory response triggered by numerous allergens beginning in the airway epithelium, which acts as a physical barrier to allergens as well as other external irritants including infectious agents, and atmospheric pollutants. T2 inflammation is propagated by several key cell types including T helper 2 (Th2) cells, eosinophils, mast cells, and B cells. Immunoglobulin E (IgE), produced by B cells, is a key molecule in allergic airway disease and plays an important role in T2 inflammation, as well as being central to remodeling processes within the airway epithelium. Blocking IgE with omalizumab has been shown to be efficacious in treating allergic asthma however, the role of IgE on airway epithelial cells is less communicated. Developing a deeper explanation of the complex network of interactions between IgE and the airway epithelium will facilitate an improved understanding of asthma pathophysiology. This review discusses the indirect and direct roles of IgE on airway epithelial cells, with a focus on allergic asthma disease.

Asthma Biologics Across the T2 Spectrum of Inflammation in Severe Asthma: Biomarkers and Mechanism of Action

Airway inflammation, a hallmark feature of asthma, drives many canonical features of the disease, including airflow limitation, mucus plugging, airway remodeling, and hyperresponsiveness. The T2 inflammatory paradigm is firmly established as the dominant mechanism of asthma pathogenesis, largely due to the success of inhaled corticosteroids and biologic therapies targeting components of the T2 pathway, including IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP). However, up to 30% of patients may lack signatures of meaningful T2 inflammation (ie, T2 low). In T2-low asthma patients, T2 inflammation may be masked due to anti-inflammatory treatments or may be highly variable depending on exposure to common asthma triggers such as allergens, respiratory infections, and smoke or pollution. The epithelium and epithelial cytokines (TSLP, IL-33) are increasingly recognized as upstream drivers of canonical T2 pathways and as modulators of various effector cells, including mast cells, eosinophils, and neutrophils, which impact the pathological manifestations of airway smooth muscle hypertrophy, hypercontractility, and airway hyperresponsiveness. Approved biologics for severe asthma target several distinct mechanisms of action, leading to differential effects on the spectrum of T2 inflammation, inflammatory biomarkers, and treatment efficacy (reducing asthma exacerbations, improving lung function, and diminishing symptoms). The approved anti-asthma biologics primarily target T2 immune pathways, with little evidence suggesting a benefit of targeting non-T2 asthma-associated mediators. Indeed, many negative results challenge current assumptions about the etiology of non-T2 asthma and raise doubts about the viability of targeting popular alternative inflammatory pathways, such as T17. Novel data have emerged from the use of biologics to treat various inflammatory mediators and have furthered our understanding of pathogenic mechanisms that drive asthma. This review discusses inflammatory pathways that contribute to asthma, quantitatively outlines effects of available biologics on biomarkers, and summarizes data and challenges from clinical trials that address non-T2 mechanisms of asthma.

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.

Biologics in severe asthma: a state-of-the-art review

Asthma is considered severe if it remains uncontrolled despite optimal conventional therapy, characterised by poor symptom control, frequent exacerbations and increased exposure to systemic corticosteroids. This has a significant impact on morbidity, mortality and healthcare resource utilisation. Recent advances in the understanding of asthma heterogeneity and immunopathogenesis have helped delineate precise disease pathways. The discovery of these pivotal pathways has led to the development of highly effective biologic therapies. Currently available asthma biologics target immunoglobulin E, interleukin (IL)-5/IL-5Rα, IL-4Rα and thymic stromal lymphopoietin. Identification of specific asthma phenotypes, utilising easily measurable biomarkers, has paved the way towards personalised and precision asthma management. Biologic therapies play a significant role in reducing exacerbations, hospitalisations and the need for maintenance systemic steroids, while also improving the quality of life in patients with severe asthma. The evidence for their clinical efficacy comes from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), extension studies, metanalyses and real-world data. This review synthesises findings from early, pivotal RCTs and subsequent studies following the approval of biologics for severe asthma. The safety and efficacy data from these studies, completed in a variety of settings, provide practical perspectives on their application and enhance their generalisability.

Molecular mechanisms and clinical impact of biologic therapies in severe asthma

Severe asthma is a critical condition for patients with asthma, characterized by frequent exacerbations, decreased pulmonary function, and unstable symptoms related to asthma. Consequently, the administration of systemic corticosteroids, which cause secondary damage because of their adverse effects, is considered. Recently, several types of molecular-targeted biological therapies have become available for patients with severe asthma, and they have a capacity to improve the pathophysiology of severe asthma. However, several clinical reports indicate that the effects differ depending on the biological targets of asthma in individual patients. In this review, the molecular mechanisms and clinical impact of biologic therapies in severe asthma are described. In addition, molecules targeted by possible future biologics are also addressed. Better understanding of the mechanistic basis for the role of biologics in severe asthma could lead to new therapeutic options for these patients.

Japanese Patients with Severe Asthma Identified as Responders to Omalizumab Treatment at 2 Years Based on the GETE Score Continued Treatment for an Extended Period

Purpose

Omalizumab, the anti-IgE monoclonal antibody used to treat severe asthma, reduces asthma exacerbations, hospitalizations, and corticosteroid use. Although allergic asthma is a therapeutic target of omalizumab, omalizumab is not effective in all patients with severe allergic asthma and is not always available for long-term use. We retrospectively investigated factors related to long-term (≥2 years) use of omalizumab for severe asthma.

Patients and Methods

Of the 116 patients treated with omalizumab for severe asthma at our hospital between 2009 and 2017, 82 were included in this retrospective analysis. Thirty-four were excluded because of adverse events, financial difficulties, or hospital transfers. The number of asthma exacerbations, unscheduled visits, corticosteroid doses, asthma control test scores, pulmonary function test results, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels were evaluated.

Results

The median age of the study population was 58 years, with 66% female and 26% taking regular oral corticosteroids. After 2 years of treatment, 52 responders were identified using the global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) score. Improvements in asthma control test scores, airflow limitation, exacerbations, and oral corticosteroid use were observed in the responders. Multivariate analysis revealed that a peripheral blood eosinophil count of ≥200 or a perennial antigen-specific IgE antibody positivity of ≥2 predicted a response at the 2-year mark. However, Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that neither high eosinophil counts nor perennial antigen-specific IgE positivity influenced the prolongation of treatment beyond 2 years, and responders at 2 years underwent omalizumab treatment for a significantly longer period than non-responders (HR = 9.89, p < 0.001), with GETE at 2 years being the only predictor of long-term omalizumab use.

Conclusion

In this retrospective study the GETE after 2 years of omalizumab therapy emerged as the most meaningful predictor of the long-term effectiveness of omalizumab treatment in patients with severe asthma, highlighting the benefits of prolonged therapy in certain populations. These findings may guide future therapeutic strategies for severe asthma.

Systematic literature review of asthma biologic self-administration enhanced by a patient perspective

Background

Several biologics for the treatment of severe asthma are available as self-administration devices.

Objective

We performed a systematic literature review to understand the use, benefits, and challenges of these self-administration devices.

Methods

Electronic databases and conference proceedings were searched using terms for asthma, biologic treatment, and at-home/self-administration (GSK study 213094). Publications were scanned for relevance using prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study Design (PICOS) criteria. Data on efficacy, safety, patient experience, and economic outcomes were extracted; study quality was assessed. A firsthand patient perspective was obtained.

Results

Thirty-five of 504 records met the inclusion criteria. Across four phase 3 studies, ≥95% of biologic self-administrations were successful on the basis of predefined criteria. At-home self-administration was preferred over in-clinic administration by 43-96% of patients across 5 studies. Most patients (≥89%) in two phase 3 studies reported completing self-administration easily without repeated reference to instructions; high proportions of patients (≥98%) were confident in their ability to self-administer their biologic, and ≥96% rated it as extremely, very or moderately easy to self-administer. Across 16 studies reporting efficacy data, there was evidence of reduced blood eosinophil counts and improved asthma control with biologic self-administration, with improved health-related quality of life shown across 6 studies. Economic outcomes data were limited. From a patient perspective, autonomy is the major benefit of self-administration.

Conclusion

Although more evidence is needed, this systematic literature review provides consistent evidence of high injection success rates and, supported by a patient perspective, preference for self-administration of biologics among patients with severe asthma.

Asthma Biologics: Lung Function, Steroid-Dependence, and Exacerbations

The development of multiple targeted biologic therapies over the past two decades has revolutionized the management of asthma. Currently, there are 6 monoclonal antibodies that target specific inflammatory mediators involved in the pathophysiology of asthma, and together, they provide the opportunity for personalized treatment options beyond bronchodilators and inhaled or systemic glucocorticoids in severe and difficult-to-control cases of asthma. These agents are the anti-IgE antibody omalizumab, the anti-IL-5 antibodies mepolizumab and reslizumab, the IL-5 receptor alpha antagonist benralizumab, the IL-4 receptor alpha antagonist dupilumab, and the anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin antibody tezepelumab.

Therapeutic relevance of eosinophilic inflammation and airway viral interactions in severe asthma

The role of eosinophils in airway inflammation and asthma pathogenesis is well established, with raised eosinophil counts in blood and sputum associated with increased disease severity and risk of asthma exacerbation. Conversely, there is also preliminary evidence suggesting antiviral properties of eosinophils in the airways. These dual roles for eosinophils are particularly pertinent as respiratory virus infections contribute to asthma exacerbations. Biologic therapies targeting key molecules implicated in eosinophil-associated pathologies have been approved in patients with severe asthma and, therefore, the effects of depleting eosinophils in a clinical setting are of considerable interest. This review discusses the pathological and antiviral roles of eosinophils in asthma and exacerbations. We also highlight the significant reduction in asthma exacerbations seen with biologic therapies, even at the height of the respiratory virus season. Furthermore, we discuss the implications of these findings in relation to the role of eosinophils in inflammation and antiviral responses to respiratory virus infection in asthma.

Current Practices in Pediatric Asthma Care

This article is a comprehensive review of the latest knowledge and developments on pediatric asthma. It serves as a guide for general practitioners and subspecialists who treat asthma. The pathophysiology and critical features of asthma that should be addressed and the latest therapies available are discussed. The areas where further investigation is needed are also highlighted.

T cell and airway smooth muscle interaction: a key driver of asthmatic airway inflammation and remodeling

Cross talk between T cells and airway smooth muscle (ASM) may play a role in modulating asthmatic airway inflammation and remodeling. Infiltrating T cells have been observed within the ASM bundles of asthmatics, and a wide range of direct and indirect interactions between T cells and ASM has been demonstrated using various in vitro and in vivo model systems. Contact-dependent mechanisms such as ligation and activation of cellular adhesion and costimulatory molecules, as well as the formation of lymphocyte-derived membrane conduits, facilitate the adhesion, bidirectional communication, and transfer of materials between T and ASM cells. T cell-derived cytokines, particularly of the Th1, Th2, and Th17 subsets, modulate the secretome, proliferation, and contractility of ASM cells. This review summarizes the mechanisms governing T cell-ASM cross talk in the context of asthma. Understanding the underlying mechanistic basis is important for directing future research and developing therapeutic interventions targeted toward this complex interaction.

Endotyping Chronic Respiratory Diseases: T2 Inflammation in the United Airways Model

Over the past 15 years, the paradigm of viewing the upper and lower airways as a unified system has progressively shifted the approach to chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). As the global prevalence of CRDs continues to increase, it becomes evident that acknowledging the presence of airway pathology as an integrated entity could profoundly impact healthcare resource allocation and guide the implementation of pharmacological and rehabilitation strategies. In the era of precision medicine, endotyping has emerged as another novel approach to CRDs, whereby pathologies are categorized into distinct subtypes based on specific molecular mechanisms. This has contributed to the growing acknowledgment of a group of conditions that, in both the upper and lower airways, share a common type 2 (T2) inflammatory signature. These diverse pathologies, ranging from allergic rhinitis to severe asthma, frequently coexist and share diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, as well as therapeutic strategies targeting common molecular pathways. Thus, T2 inflammation may serve as a unifying endotypic trait for the upper and lower airways, reinforcing the practical significance of the united airways model. This review aims to summarize the literature on the role of T2 inflammation in major CRDs, emphasizing the value of common biomarkers and integrated treatment strategies targeting shared molecular mechanisms.

Management of Chronic Asthma in Adults

Asthma is characterized by chronic inflammation and respiratory symptoms such as wheezing and coughing. In the United States, it affects 25 million people annually. Chronic smokers, poor adherence to medications, incorrect use of inhalers, and overall poor asthma control are known risk factors that lead to poorly controlled chronic asthmatics. Although asthma is traditionally categorized by severity, treatment by primary care providers is guided by the Global Initiative for Asthma or the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. As more research is available, shared decision-making between health care providers and patients will lead to improved outcomes in managing chronic asthma.

Lung function trajectories in a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe asthma on mepolizumab, omalizumab, or dupilumab

BACKGROUND

Lung function is an independent predictor of mortality. We evaluated the lung function trajectories of a cohort of patients with asthma receiving biologic therapy.

METHODS

We identified 229 monoclonal antibody-naïve adult patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who initiated omalizumab, mepolizumab, or dupilumab between 2010 and 2022 in a large healthcare system in Boston, MA. Generalized additive mixed models were used to estimate the lung function trajectories during the 156 weeks following biologic initiation. Response was defined as an improvement in FEV1 or a decrease of ≤0.5% per year. The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to assess time to no additional improvement in FEV1 in responders. All models were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, baseline exacerbation rate, and baseline blood eosinophil count.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients initiated mepolizumab, 76 omalizumab, and 65 dupilumab. Baseline eosinophil count was highest in the mepolizumab group (405 cells/mcL) and lowest for omalizumab (250 cells/mcL). Both FEV1 and FVC improved in the mepolizumab group (FEV1 + 20 mL/year; FVC +43 mL/year). For omalizumab, there was an initial improvement in the first year followed by decline with an overall FEV1 loss of -44 mL/year and FVC -32 mL/year. For dupilumab, both FEV1 (+61 mL/year) and FVC (+74 mL/year) improved over time. Fifty percent of the mepolizumab group, 58% omalizumab, and 72% of dupilumab were responders. The median time to no additional FEV1 improvement in responders was 24 weeks for omalizumab, 48 weeks for mepolizumab, and 57 weeks for dupilumab.

CONCLUSION

In this clinical cohort, mepolizumab, omalizumab, and dupilumab had beneficial effects on FEV1 and FVC with distinct post-initiation trajectories.

Biologic agents licensed for severe asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Six biologic agents are now approved for patients with severe asthma. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of licensed biologic agents in patients with severe asthma, including the recently approved tezepelumab.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL to identify randomised controlled trials involving licensed biologics until 31 January 2023. We used random-effects meta-analysis models for efficacy, including subgroup analyses by individual agents and markers of T2-high inflammation (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide), and assessed safety.

RESULTS

48 studies with 16 350 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Biologics were associated with a 44% reduction in the annualised rate of asthma exacerbations (rate ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.51-0.62) and 60% reduction of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.27-0.60), a mean increase in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 0.11 L (95% CI 0.09-0.14), a reduction in asthma control questionnaire by 0.34 points (95% CI -0.46--0.23) and an increase in asthma quality of life questionnaire by 0.38 points (95% CI 0.26-0.49). There was heterogeneity between different classes of biologics in certain outcomes, with overall greater efficacy in patients with T2 inflammation. Overall, biologics exhibited a favourable safety profile.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrated that licensed asthma biologics reduce exacerbations and hospitalisations, improve lung function, asthma control and quality of life, and limit the use of systemic corticosteroids, with a favourable safety profile. These effects are more prominent in patients with evidence of T2 inflammation.

A Randomized, Single-Dose, Parallel-Controlled Phase 1 Clinical Comparison of an Omalizumab Biosimilar Candidate with Reference Omalizumab in Healthy Chinese Male Volunteers

This study evaluated the bioequivalence of omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against immunoglobulin-E (IgE), with one of its biosimilar candidates. The study was designed as a randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled trial. A total of subjects who met the inclusion criteria and did not meet the exclusion criteria were dynamically randomly assigned to receive the test drug or the reference drug with a single subcutaneous injection of 150 mg by the minimization method. The test group and the reference group had similar demographic characteristics and baseline characteristics of total IgE. The 90% confidence interval of the geometric average ratio of the area under the serum concentration-time curve from the time 0 to the time of last quantifiable concentration, the area under the serum concentration curve from time 0 to infinity, and the maximum observed serum concentration between the 2 groups were within 80%-125%, showing bioequivalence. The changing trend of total and free IgE in the 2 groups was similar after administration, proving the pharmacodynamic similarity. The 2 groups had no significant difference in the positive rate of antidrug antibodies, and the total positive rate of neutralizing antibodies was 0. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and treatment-related adverse events were similar between the 2 groups, with no serious adverse events. This study shows that the test drug had similar pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and safety to the reference omalizumab in healthy male subjects.

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.

Current and Novel Biologic Therapies for Patients with Asthma and Nasal Polyps

A substantial portion of asthma and nasal polyps (NPs) share a common pathogenesis, which includes type 2-mediated inflammation. Distinct endotypes and phenotypes characterizing asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis have been identified. With emerging evidence describing pathophysiology, novel targets for biologic monoclonal antibody treatments have been developed. There are currently six biologic therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat asthma, including omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, three of these-omalizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab-are also approved for NPs.

Phenotyping of Severe Asthma in the Era of Broad-Acting Anti-Asthma Biologics

Severe asthma is associated with significant morbidity and mortality despite the maximal use of inhaled corticosteroids and additional controller medications, and has a high economic burden. Biologic therapies are recommended for the management of severe, uncontrolled asthma to help to prevent exacerbations and to improve symptoms and health-related quality of life. The effective management of severe asthma requires consideration of clinical heterogeneity that is driven by varying clinical and inflammatory phenotypes, which are reflective of distinct underlying disease mechanisms. Phenotyping patients using a combination of clinical characteristics such as the age of onset or comorbidities and biomarker profiles, including blood eosinophil counts and levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide and serum total immunoglobulin E, is important for the differential diagnosis of asthma. In addition, phenotyping is beneficial for risk assessment, selection of treatment, and monitoring of the treatment response in patients with asthma. This review describes the clinical and inflammatory phenotypes of asthma, provides an overview of biomarkers routinely used in clinical practice and those that have recently been explored for phenotyping, and aims to assess the value of phenotyping in severe asthma management in the current era of biologics.

The Incredible Adventure of Omalizumab

The basis of our current understanding of allergies begins with the discovery of IgE in the mid-1960s. The whole theory of the physiology and pathophysiology of allergic diseases, including rhinitis and asthma, dates from that period. Among the key regions of IgE identified were the FAB (fragment antigen binding) portion that has the ability to capture allergens, and the Cε3 domain, through which IgE binds to its membrane receptor. It was then postulated that blocking IgE at the level of the Cε3 domain would prevent it from binding to its receptor and thus set in motion the allergic cascade. This was the beginning of the development of omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody with an anti-IgE effect. In this article, we review the pathophysiology of allergic disease and trace the clinical development of omalizumab. We also review the benefits of omalizumab treatment that are apparently unrelated to allergies, such as its effect on immunity and bronchial remodeling.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of dupilumab versus omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab added to the standard of care in adults with severe asthma in Colombia

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness studies evaluate health technologies and help choose treatments. The current study compared dupilumab to omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab in Colombian adults with severe uncontrolled type 2 asthma.

METHODS

Over a 5-year period, a Markov model was utilized to assess the costs of biological treatments and management of exacerbations, comparing various doses of exacerbations, comparing various doses of dupilumab, omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab as add-on treatments. It included a 5% annual discount rate per local HTA, and set willingness-to-pay at three times GDP per capita per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in Colombia.

RESULTS

Dupilumab (200 mg) exhibited greater QALYs and reduced overall costs compared to mepolizumab (100 mg), benralizumab (30 mg), and omalizumab (450 mg and 600 mg), with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALYgained being -$5.429, -$6.269, -$196.567 and -$991.007, respectively. Dupilumab had greater QALYs and costs versus omalizumab 300 mg (ICERof $200.653 per QALY, above the willingness-to-pay threshold of 3 × GDP per capita). Sensitivity analyses were consistent with base case results.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab 200 mg was strongly dominant versus omalizumab 450 mg and 600 mg, mepolizumab 100 mg, and benralizumab 30 mg; however, cost-effectiveness was not demonstrated versus omalizumab 300 mg. These results could assist healthcare professionals in choosing an appropriate biologic for treating severe type 2 asthma.

Effects of biological therapies on patients with Type-2 high asthma and comorbid obesity

Over 20 million adults and 6 million children in the United States (US) have asthma, a chronic respiratory disease characterized by airway inflammation, bronchoconstriction, and mucus hypersecretion. Obesity, another highly prevalent disease in the US, is a major risk factor for asthma and a significant cause of diminished asthma control, increased submucosal eosinophilia, and reduced quality of life. A large subgroup of these patients experiences severe symptoms and recurrent exacerbations despite maximal dosage of standard asthma therapies. In the past two decades, the development of biological therapies has revolutionized the field and advanced our understanding of type 2 inflammatory biomarkers. However, patients with obesity and comorbid asthma are not principally considered in clinical trials of biologics. Large landmark cluster analyses of patients with asthma have consistently identified specific asthma phenotypes that associate with obesity but may be differentiated by age of asthma onset and inflammatory cell profiles in sputum. These patterns suggest that biologic processes driving asthma pathology are heterogenous among patients with obesity. The biological mechanisms driving pathology in patients with asthma and comorbid obesity are not well understood and likely multifactorial. Future research needs to be done to elicit the cellular and metabolic functions in the relationship of obesity and asthma to yield the best treatment options for this multiplex condition. In this review, we explore the key features of type 2 inflammation in asthma and discuss the effectiveness, safety profile, and research gaps regarding the currently approved biological therapies in asthma patients with obesity.

Immunogenicity of biologics used in the treatment of asthma

OBJECTIVE

Asthma is a major global disease affecting adults and children, which can lead to hospitalization and death due to breathing difficulties. Although targeted monoclonal antibody therapies have revolutionized treatment of severe asthma, some patients still fail to respond. Here we critically evaluate the literature on biologic therapy failure in asthma patients with particular reference to anti-drug antibody production, and subsequent loss of response, as the potential primary cause of drug failure in asthma patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Encouragingly, asthma in most cases responds to treatment, including the use of an increasing number of biologic drugs in moderate to severe disease. This includes monoclonal antibody inhibitors of immunoglobulin E and cytokines, including interleukin 4, 5, or 13 and thymic stromal lymphopoietin. These limit mast cell and eosinophil activity that cause the symptomatic small airways obstruction and exacerbations.

SUMMARY

Despite humanization of the antibodies, it is evident that benralizumab; dupilumab; mepolizumab; omalizumab; reslizumab and tezepelumab all induce anti-drug antibodies to some extent. These can contribute to adverse events including infusion reactions, serum sickness, anaphylaxis and potentially disease activity due to loss of therapeutic function. Monitoring anti-drug antibodies (ADA) may allow prediction of future treatment-failure in some individuals allowing treatment cessation and switching therefore potentially limiting disease breakthrough.

Eosinophils-from cradle to grave: An EAACI task force paper on new molecular insights and clinical functions of eosinophils and the clinical effects of targeted eosinophil depletion

Over the past years, eosinophils have become a focus of scientific interest, especially in the context of their recently uncovered functions (e.g. antiviral, anti-inflammatory, regulatory). These versatile cells display both beneficial and detrimental activities under various physiological and pathological conditions. Eosinophils are involved in the pathogenesis of many diseases which can be classified into primary (clonal) and secondary (reactive) disorders and idiopathic (hyper)eosinophilic syndromes. Depending on the biological specimen, the eosinophil count in different body compartments may serve as a biomarker reflecting the underlying pathophysiology and/or activity of distinct diseases and as a therapy-driving (predictive) and monitoring tool. Personalized selection of an appropriate therapeutic strategy directly or indirectly targeting the increased number and/or activity of eosinophils should be based on the understanding of eosinophil homeostasis including their interactions with other immune and non-immune cells within different body compartments. Hence, restoring as well as maintaining homeostasis within an individual's eosinophil pool is a goal of both specific and non-specific eosinophil-targeting therapies. Despite the overall favourable safety profile of the currently available anti-eosinophil biologics, the effect of eosinophil depletion should be monitored from the perspective of possible unwanted consequences.

Omalizumab rescue therapy in refractory status asthmaticus

INTRODUCTION

Refractory status asthmaticus (RSA) is a severe, life-threatening form of asthma exacerbation that persists despite aggressive treatment with systemic corticosteroids, bronchodilators, and other supportive measures. Omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets IgE, has been approved for treating severe allergic asthma and is effective in reducing the frequency of exacerbations and improving asthma control. Limited evidence exists regarding the use of Omalizumab in RSA, but some studies have suggested that it may have a role in its management.

CASE

A 39-year-old male with a decade-long history of asthma presented to the emergency department intubated and unresponsive to pharmacological therapy. The patient's IgE levels were elevated, and Omalizumab was administered after a comprehensive evaluation. The patient made a dramatic recovery and was successfully weaned off the ventilator within 24 h of receiving Omalizumab. He made an uneventful recovery and was discharged home on Omalizumab once every two weeks with regular follow-ups.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Per our literature search, only 3 cases have been reported where Omalizumab was administered to patients with RSA to wean them off ventilatory support successfully. This case study adds to the existing data on the potential benefits of Omalizumab in managing RSA. It suggests it may be a valuable treatment option for patients who do not respond to standard therapy. However, further research is needed to determine the efficacy and safety of Omalizumab in this population.

Biologics for severe asthma and beyond

Advances in pathophysiological understanding and the elucidation of a type 2 inflammatory signature with interleukins 4, 5 and 13 at its center have led to the development of targeted antibody therapies that are now approved for the treatment of severe asthma. In suitable patients, these medications reduce asthma exacerbations and the necessity for oral corticosteroids, improve asthma control, quality of life and lung function. A proportion of patients with severe asthma may even achieve remission under ongoing biologic therapy. Type-2 inflammatory comorbidities are frequent in patients with severe asthma, sharing overlapping pathophysiology and may similarly respond to biologic treatment. Here, we give an overview of the six biologic therapies currently approved for severe asthma and review randomized clinical trials and real-life studies in asthma and other type-2 inflammatory diseases. We also discuss selection of biologics according to licensing criteria, asthma phenotype and biomarkers, monitoring of treatment response and proceedings in case of insufficient outcome under therapy.

Managing Severe Adverse Reactions to Biologicals in Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

The use of biological agents in the treatment of various inflammatory and malignancy conditions has expanded rapidly. However, these agents can induce hypersensitivity reactions, posing significant clinical challenges.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that included nine patients with severe asthma who experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab).

RESULTS

Hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals in severe asthma were observed in 9 of 68 patients treated. In five cases, treatment was stopped or changed to another available biological, and for four patients administered under close surveillance, titrated provocation or desensitization was applied. Successful desensitization was achieved in three of the patients, allowing them to continue therapy without adverse reactions. Improvements in asthma control were observed post-desensitization, leading to the reduced need for systemic steroid treatments and an increase in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of recognizing hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals to have an appropriate approach for patients with severe asthma. As an effective approach for patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents, desensitization allows treatment continuation.

Mepolizumab Reduces Systemic Corticosteroid Use in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) are associated with short- and long-term adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

To assess mepolizumab efficacy according to prior SCS use and characterize mepolizumab's SCS-sparing capabilities, in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

METHODS

In the randomized, double-blind, phase III SYNAPSE trial (NCT03085797), adults with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps eligible for repeat sinus surgery despite standard of care treatment received mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously) or placebo every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The impact of prior SCS courses (0/1/>1) on mepolizumab versus placebo treatment responses (changes from baseline in total endoscopic nasal polyp [week 52], nasal obstruction visual analog scale [weeks 49-52], and 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test total [week 52] scores) was analyzed post hoc. To characterize mepolizumab's SCS-sparing capabilities, time-to-first SCS course for nasal polyps (prespecified) and total prednisolone-equivalent oral corticosteroid dose by patient baseline characteristics (post hoc, in patients with ≥1 SCS course during SYNAPSE) were assessed up to week 52.

RESULTS

Mepolizumab versus placebo improved treatment responses, irrespective of prior SCS use. By week 52, the probability of requiring SCSs for nasal polyps (Kaplan-Meier estimate [95% CI]) was lower with mepolizumab (25.4% [20.0-32.1]) versus placebo (37.5% [31.1-44.6]). In patients requiring 1 or more dose of SCSs, total (mean ± SD mg/y) prednisolone-equivalent oral corticosteroid dose was lower with mepolizumab (438.9 ± 350.40) versus placebo (505.2 ± 455.091), overall and irrespective of prior sinus surgeries, blood eosinophil count, or comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab is associated with clinical benefits in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps regardless of prior SCS use and has an SCS-sparing effect.

A conversation on allergy: recognizing the past and looking to the future

Allergy is an ever-evolving group of disorders, which includes asthma, atopic dermatitis, rhinitis and food allergies and that currently affects over 1 billion people worldwide. This group of disorders has exploded in incidence since around the start of the 20th century, implying that genetics is not solely responsible for its development but that environmental factors have an important role. Here, Fabio Luciani and Jonathan Coquet, in their role as editors at Immunology & Cell Biology, asked nine prominent researchers in the field of allergy to define the term 'allergy', discuss the role of genetics and the environment, nominate the most important discoveries of the past decade and describe the best strategies to combat allergy at the population level going forward.

GEMA 5.3. Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma

The Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma, better known by its acronym in Spanish GEMA, has been available for more than 20 years. Twenty-one scientific societies or related groups both from Spain and internationally have participated in the preparation and development of the updated edition of GEMA, which in fact has been currently positioned as the reference guide on asthma in the Spanish language worldwide. Its objective is to prevent and improve the clinical situation of people with asthma by increasing the knowledge of healthcare professionals involved in their care. Its purpose is to convert scientific evidence into simple and easy-to-follow practical recommendations. Therefore, it is not a monograph that brings together all the scientific knowledge about the disease, but rather a brief document with the essentials, designed to be applied quickly in routine clinical practice. The guidelines are necessarily multidisciplinary, developed to be useful and an indispensable tool for physicians of different specialties, as well as nurses and pharmacists. Probably the most outstanding aspects of the guide are the recommendations to: establish the diagnosis of asthma using a sequential algorithm based on objective diagnostic tests; the follow-up of patients, preferably based on the strategy of achieving and maintaining control of the disease; treatment according to the level of severity of asthma, using six steps from least to greatest need of pharmaceutical drugs, and the treatment algorithm for the indication of biologics in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma based on phenotypes. And now, in addition to that, there is a novelty for easy use and follow-up through a computer application based on the chatbot-type conversational artificial intelligence (ia-GEMA).

Personalized and Precision Medicine in Asthma and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: The Role of T2 Target Therapy

The role of type 2 inflammation has been progressively associated with many diseases, including severe asthma, atopic dermatitis, nasal polyposis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and, recently, eosinophilic esophagitis. Despite this, the association between asthma and esophagitis is still poorly known, and this is probably because of the low prevalence of each disease and the even lower association between them. Nonetheless, observations in clinical trials and, subsequently, in real life, have allowed researchers to observe how drugs acting on type 2 inflammation, initially developed and marketed for severe asthma, could be effective also in treating eosinophilic esophagitis. For this reason, clinical trials specifically designed for the use of drugs targeted to type 2 inflammation were also developed for eosinophilic esophagitis. The results of clinical trials are presently promising and envisage the use of biologicals that are also likely to be employed in the field of gastroenterology in the near future. This review focuses on the use of biologicals for type 2 inflammation in cases of combined severe asthma and eosinophilic esophagitis.

Omalizumab for Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical setting: a prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This single-centre, prospective, observational study included Chinese patients aged 14-75 years with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma according to the Global Initiative for Asthma criteria. Omalizumab was administered subcutaneously, and the investigator collected real-world data on exacerbations, steroid exposure, pulmonary function and laboratory assessments at weeks 16, 24, 52, 104 and 156 after treatment initiation. The primary outcome was reduced exacerbations, measured as the proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year following omalizumab initiation. Bowker's test for paired proportions was performed to compare exacerbation rates before and after treatment initiation. A generalised linear mixed model was used to compare the number of exacerbations.

RESULTS

The mean treatment duration was 46.6 weeks for the full analysis set (n=398). The proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year before and after omalizumab initiation was 80.4% (181/225) and 18.7% (42/225) (difference: -61.8%, 95% CI -68.5 to -54.0, p<0.0001), respectively. At week 52, 67.4% of patients discontinued oral corticosteroids, and 19.5% reduced inhaled corticosteroids. The Asthma Control Test scores increased by 4.6 at week 52 from baseline (p<0.001). Forced expiratory volume in 1 s increased by 11.2% and 9.0% at weeks 24 and 52, respectively, from baseline (p<0.01). Injection site reactions (5.2%) were the most frequently reported adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, omalizumab treatment remarkably reduced exacerbations in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. Omalizumab reduced the use of oral corticosteroids and improved asthma control and pulmonary function.

Omalizumab in Severe Asthma: Effect on Oral Corticosteroid Exposure and Remodeling. A Randomized Open-Label Parallel Study

INTRODUCTION

Data on the clinical efficacy and remodeling of omalizumab therapy in patients on oral corticosteroids (OC) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study is to show that in patients with corticosteroid-dependent asthma, omalizumab is a corticosteroid-sparing therapy able to inhibit airway remodeling and to reduce disease burden (lung function impairment, exacerbations).

METHODS

This study is a randomised open-label study evaluating the addition of omalizumab to the standard of care in patients with severe asthma receiving oral corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was represented by the change in OC monthly dose by the end of treatment and secondary endpoints included spirometry changes, airway inflammation (FeNO), number of exacerbations and airways remodelling assessed by bronchial biopsies studied by transmission electron microscopy. As a safety variable, adverse effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Efficacy was assessed for 16 patients in the omalizumab group and 13 in the control group. The final cumulative mean monthly OC doses were 34.7 mg and 217 mg for the omalizumab and control group, respectively; the mean difference between groups adjusted for baseline was -148.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) -243.6, -52.5; p = 0.004]. OC withdrawal of 75% versus 7.7% (p = 0.001) was observed in the omalizumab and control group, respectively. Omalizumab provided a slowing of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) loss (70 mL versus 260 mL), a significant decrease in FeNO values and a reduction in the annual relative risk of clinically significant exacerbations of 54%. The treatment was well tolerated. The morphological study showed a significant decrease in basement membrane thickness in the omalizumab group (6.7 µm versus 4.6 µm) compared with controls (6.9 µm versus 7 µm) [mean difference between groups adjusted for baseline was -2.4 (95% CI -3.7, -1.2; p < 0.001], as well as a decrease in intercellular spaces (1.18 µm versus 0.62 µm and 1.21 µm versus 1.20 µm, p = 0.011, respectively). A qualitative improvement was also observed in the treated group.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab showed a marked OC-sparing capacity and was associated with an improvement in clinical management that correlated with bronchial epithelial repair. In OC-dependent asthma, reversibility of remodelling is possible; the concepts that basement membrane enlargement is detrimental and that chronic airway obstruction is systematically irreversible are outdated (EudraCT: 2009-010914-31).

Population-Based Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Omalizumab in Pediatric Patients with Moderate to Severe Persistent Inadequately Controlled Allergic Asthma

Omalizumab is the first approved anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) agent for the treatment of moderate to severe persistent inadequately controlled allergic asthma in adults and adolescents (≥ 12 years old). In 2016, it was approved in pediatric patients (6-11 years old). The objective of this study was to quantitatively characterize the relationship between serum free IgE and pulmonary function (as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]) in pediatrics using a population-based pharmacodynamic model. Data collected during the steroid-stable period (first 24 weeks) of an omalizumab trial with pediatric asthma patients (Study IA05) were used to build the pediatric IgE-FEV1 model. The previously developed population IgE-FEV1 model in adults/adolescents was adapted to characterize the FEV1 and IgE relationship in pediatrics with different magnitude and onset of response. The pediatric IgE-FEV1 model adequately characterized the IgE-FEV1 relationship in pediatrics, particularly at the extremes of the observed body weights (i.e., ≤ 30 kg) and IgE values at screening (i.e., > 700 IU/mL). The estimated sigmoidal free IgE-FEV1 curves were similar in shape and maximum effect, but the estimated free IgE concentration leading to 50% maximum effect (IC50) in pediatric patients (39.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 24.3-63.9 ng/mL) was higher than estimated in adults (19.8, 95% CI 15.1-24.5 ng/mL). The model further confirmed that the current omalizumab dosing rationale based on the mean target free IgE level of 25 ng/ml was appropriate. The pediatric model can be used to predict population FEV1 response for omalizumab when combined with an omalizumab pharmacokinetic-IgE model.

Questions in Mild Asthma: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Patients with mild asthma are believed to represent the majority of patients with asthma. Disease-associated risks such as exacerbations, lung function decline, and death have been understudied in this patient population. There have been no prior efforts from major societies to describe research needs in mild asthma. Methods: A multidisciplinary, diverse group of 24 international experts reviewed the literature, identified knowledge gaps, and provided research recommendations relating to mild asthma definition, pathophysiology, and management across all age groups. Research needs were also investigated from a patient perspective, generated in conjunction with patients with asthma, caregivers, and stakeholders. Of note, this project is not a systematic review of the evidence and is not a clinical practice guideline. Results: There are multiple unmet needs in research on mild asthma driven by large knowledge gaps in all areas. Specifically, there is an immediate need for a robust mild asthma definition and an improved understanding of its pathophysiology and management strategies across all age groups. Future research must factor in patient perspectives. Conclusions: Despite significant advances in severe asthma, there remain innumerable research areas requiring urgent attention in mild asthma. An important first step is to determine a better definition that will accurately reflect the heterogeneity and risks noted in this group. This research statement highlights the topics of research that are of the highest priority. Furthermore, it firmly advocates the need for engagement with patient groups and for more support for research in this field.

Endobronchial Ultrasound is Useful in the Assessment of Bronchial Wall Changes Related to Bronchial Thermoplasty

Background

Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is an interventional endoscopic treatment for severe asthma leading to the clinical improvement, but morphologic changes of bronchial wall related to the procedure and predictors of a favorable response to BT remain uncertain. The aim of the study was to validate an endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) in assessing the effectiveness of BT treatment.

Methods

Patients with severe asthma who met the clinical criteria for BT were included. In all patients clinical data, ACT and AQLQ questionnaires, laboratory tests, pulmonary function tests and bronchoscopy with radial probe EBUS and bronchial biopsies were collected. BT was performed in patients with the thickest bronchial wall L₂ layer representing ASM. These patients were evaluated before and after 12 months of follow-up. The relationship between baseline parameters and clinical response was explored.

Results

Forty patients with severe asthma were enrolled to the study. All 11 patients qualified to BT successfully completed the 3 sessions of bronchoscopy. BT improved asthma control (P=0.006), quality of life (P=0.028) and decreased exacerbation rate (P=0.005). Eight of the 11 patients (72.7%) showed a clinically meaningful improvement. BT also led to a significant decrease in the thicknesses of bronchial wall layers in EBUS (L₁ decreased from 0.183 to 0.173 mm, P=0.003; L₂ from 0.207 to 0.185 mm, P = 0.003; and L_3-5 from 0.969 to 0.886 mm, P=0.003). Median ASM mass decreased by 61.8% (P=0.002). However, there was no association between baseline patient characteristics and the magnitude of clinical improvement after BT.

Conclusion

BT was associated with a significant decrease in the thickness of the bronchial wall layers measured by EBUS including L₂ layer representing ASM and ASM mass reduction in bronchial biopsy. EBUS can assess bronchial structural changes related to BT; however, it did not predict the favorable clinical response to therapy.

Management of Chronic Asthma in Adults

Asthma is characterized by chronic inflammation and respiratory symptoms such as wheezing and coughing. In the United States, it affects 25 million people annually. Chronic smokers, poor adherence to medications, incorrect use of inhalers, and overall poor asthma control are known risk factors that lead to poorly controlled chronic asthmatics. Although asthma is traditionally categorized by severity, treatment by primary care providers is guided by the Global Initiative for Asthma or the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. As more research is available, shared decision-making between health care providers and patients will lead to improved outcomes in managing chronic asthma.

Switching Biological Therapies in Severe Asthma

Currently, three classes of monoclonal antibodies targeting type 2 inflammation pathways are available in Italy for the treatment of severe asthma: anti-IgE (Omalizumab), anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα (Mepolizumab and Benralizumab), and anti-IL-4Rα (Dupilumab). Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-life studies have been conducted to define their efficacy and identify baseline patients' characteristics potentially predictive of favorable outcomes. Switching to another monoclonal antibody is recommended in case of a lack of benefits. The aim of this work is to review the current knowledge on the impact of switching biological therapies in severe asthma as well as on predictors of treatment response or failure. Almost all of the information about switching from a previous monoclonal antibody to another comes from a real-life setting. In the available studies, the most frequent initial biologic was Omalizumab and patients who were switched because of suboptimal control with a previous biologic therapy were more likely to have a higher baseline blood eosinophil count and exacerbation rate despite OCS dependence. The choice of the most suitable treatment may be guided by the patient's clinical history, biomarkers of endotype (mainly blood eosinophils and FeNO), and comorbidities (especially nasal polyposis). Due to overlapping eligibility, larger investigations characterizing the clinical profile of patients benefiting from switching to different monoclonal antibodies are needed.

Comparing bronchial thermoplasty with biologicals for severe asthma: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) has shown favorable safety and efficacy in several randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but has not been directly compared to biological therapies.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, to retrieve RCTs of BT or FDA-approved biologicals against controls in patients with severe asthma. Six outcomes were analyzed: Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), the number of patients experiencing ≥1 asthma exacerbation, annualized exacerbation rate ratio (AERR), oral corticosteroid dose reduction (OCDR), and morning peak expiratory flow rate (amPEF). Random-effects, Frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed, and therapies were ranked using P-scores.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine RCTs (15,547 patients) were included. Fewer patients treated with BT experienced ≥1 asthma exacerbation (risk ratio [RR] = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.45-0.98) compared to control. AERR of BT versus control was non-significant, but significant improvements in ACQ score (mean difference [MD] -0.41, 95%CI -0.63 to -0.20), AQLQ score (MD = 0.54, 95%CI = 0.30-0.77), amPEF and OCDR were found. No significant differences between BT and biologics were seen across indirect comparisons of all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the lack of head-to-head comparative trials, this NMA suggests that BT is non-inferior to biologicals in terms of quality-of-life scores, and represents a promising alternative for patients with severe asthma.

An Update on Monoclonal Antibody Therapy to Treat Moderate-to-Severe Asthma: Benefits, Choices, and Limitations

Moderate or severe asthma is a complex disease process clinically manifesting as at least partially reversible airway obstruction due to airway hyperresponsiveness. Asthma therapy was based primarily on symptom control until recent studies of its mechanisms have led to a host of new targeted, safe, and effective therapies. These biologic therapies directly attack culprit inflammatory mediators at the molecular level. In this article we review currently available biologic agents for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma. We provide information deemed necessary to optimally consult with an asthma specialist to choose, assist in financial arrangements for, and coordinate the use of these new, promising, FDA approved biologic agents. We will also briefly review the molecular pathways targeted with each class of biologic to provide a more in-depth understanding of why these targeted therapies are effective. These biologics are the first of many to come that modify newly discovered components of the immune system with which many physicians are unfamiliar.

The clinical efficacy of type 2 monoclonal antibodies in eosinophil-associated chronic airway diseases: a meta-analysis

Background

Anti-type 2 inflammation therapy has been proposed as a treatment strategy for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders that could reduce exacerbations and improve lung function. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of type 2 monoclonal antibodies (anti-T2s) for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 21 August 2022. Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of anti-T2s versus placebo in the treatment of chronic airway diseases were selected. The outcomes were exacerbation rate and change in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from baseline. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 1.0 was used to evaluate the risk of bias, and the random-effects or fixed-effect model were used to pool the data.

Results

Thirty-eight articles concerning forty-one randomized clinical trials with 17,115 patients were included. Compared with placebo, anti-T2s therapy yielded a significant reduction in exacerbation rate in COPD and asthma (Rate Ratio (RR)=0.89, 95%CI, 0.83-0.95, I2 = 29.4%; RR= 0.59, 95%CI, 0.52-0.68, I2 = 83.9%, respectively) and improvement in FEV1 in asthma (Standard Mean Difference (SMD)=0.09, 95%CI, 0.08-0.11, I2 = 42.6%). Anti-T2s therapy had no effect on FEV1 improvement in COPD (SMD=0.05, 95%CI, -0.01-0.10, I2 = 69.8%).

Conclusion

Despite inconsistent findings across trials, anti-T2s had a positive overall impact on patients' exacerbation rate in asthma and COPD and FEV1 in asthma. Anti-T2s may be effective in treating chronic airway illnesses related to eosinophils.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022362280.

Influence of Genetics on the Response to Omalizumab in Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma with an Allergic Phenotype

Omalizumab is a monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma with an allergic phenotype. Its effectiveness could be influenced by clinical variables and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in one or more of the genes involved in the mechanism of action and process of response to omalizumab, and these could be used as predictive biomarkers of response. We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study that included patients with severe uncontrolled allergic asthma treated with omalizumab in a tertiary hospital. Satisfactory response after 12 months of treatment was defined as (1) Reduction ≥ 50% of exacerbations or no exacerbations, (2) Improvement of lung function ≥ 10% FEV1, and (3) Reduction ≥ 50% of OCS courses or no OCS. Polymorphisms in the FCER1A (rs2251746, rs2427837), FCER1B (rs1441586, rs573790, rs1054485, rs569108), C3 (rs2230199), FCGR2A (rs1801274), FCGR2B (rs3219018, rs1050501), FCGR3A (rs10127939, rs396991), IL1RL1 (rs1420101, rs17026974, rs1921622), and GATA2 (rs4857855) genes were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using TaqMan probes. A total of 110 patients under treatment with omalizumab were recruited. After 12 months of treatment, the variables associated with a reduction in exacerbations were the absence of polyposis (odds ratio [OR] = 4.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95-19.63), IL1RL1 rs17026974-AG (OR = 19.07; 95% CI = 1.27-547), and IL1RL1 rs17026974-GG (OR = 16.76; 95% CI = 1.22-438.76). Reduction in oral corticosteroids (OCS) was associated with age of starting omalizumab treatment (OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.91-0.99) and blood eosinophil levels > 300 cells/µL (OR = 2.93; 95% CI = 1.01-9.29). Improved lung function showed a relationship to the absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR = 12.16; 95% CI = 2.45-79.49), FCGR2B rs3219018-C (OR = 8.6; 95% CI = 1.12-117.15), GATA2 rs4857855-T (OR = 15.98; 95% CI = 1.52-519.57) and FCGR2A rs1801274-G (OR = 13.75; 95% CI = 2.14-142.68; AG vs. AA and OR = 7.46; 95% CI = 0.94-89.12; GG vs. AA). Meeting one response criterion was related to FCER1A rs2251746-TT (OR = 24; 95% CI = 0.77-804.57), meeting two to age of asthma diagnosis (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.88-0.99), and meeting all three to body mass index (BMI) < 25 (OR = 14.23; 95% CI = 3.31-100.77) and C3 rs2230199-C (OR = 3; 95% CI = 1.01-9.92). The results of this study show the possible influence of the polymorphisms studied on the response to omalizumab and the clinical benefit that could be obtained by defining predictive biomarkers of treatment response.

Factors to Consider in Prescribing Asthma Biologic Therapies to Children

The increasing availability of biologics, both by expanding age indications and by development of new therapies, provides additional options to treat children and adolescents with severe asthma. However, the evidence for these biologics in these populations is limited compared with that for adult studies. As such, before initiation of therapy, possible alternative therapies that can also provide asthma control, confirmation of the diagnosis of asthma, management of comorbidities, and assessment of adherence should be explored. The choice of a biologic should be a shared decision-making process between providers and families, balancing biologic efficacy, goals of care, administration, and ability to treat multiple conditions. Response to treatment should be periodically evaluated not only to ensure an ineffective treatment is not continued but also to consider when to potentially discontinue therapy should it be beneficial. The utilization of biologics in children and adolescents with severe asthma also leads to unanswered questions on their role in disease remission and long-term outcomes.

Baseline Characteristics of Patients Enrolled in Clinical Trials of Biologics for Severe Asthma as Potential Predictors of Outcomes

(1) Background: Over the past 20 years, monoclonal antibodies have been developed for the treatment of severe asthma, with numerous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted to define their safety and efficacy. The growing availability of biologics, which until now have only been available for T2-high asthma, has been further enriched by the arrival of tezepelumab. (2) Methods: This review aims to evaluate the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in RCTs of biologics for severe asthma to understand how they could potentially predict outcomes and how they can help differentiate between available options. (3) Results: The studies reviewed demonstrated that all biologic agents are effective in improving asthma control, especially with regard to reducing exacerbation rates and OCS use. As we have seen, in this regard, there are few data on omalizumab and none yet on tezepelumab. In analysing exacerbations and average doses of OCSs, pivotal studies on benralizumab have enrolled more seriously ill patients. Secondary outcomes, such as improvement in lung function and quality of life, showed better results-especially for dupilumab and tezepelumab. (4) Conclusion: Biologics are all effective, albeit with important differences. What fundamentally guides the choice is the patient's clinical history, the endotype represented by biomarkers (especially blood eosinophils), and comorbidities (especially nasal polyposis).

IL-4 and IL-13, not eosinophils, drive type 2 airway inflammation, remodeling and lung function decline

RATIONALE

Type 2 (T2) asthma is characterized by airflow limitations and elevated levels of blood and sputum eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, IgE, and periostin. While eosinophils are associated with exacerbations, the contribution of eosinophils to lung inflammation, remodeling and function remains largely hypothetical.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of T2 cytokines IL-4, IL-13 and IL-5 on eosinophil biology and compare the impact of depleting just eosinophils versus inhibiting all aspects of T2 inflammation on airway inflammation.

METHODS

Human eosinophils or endothelial cells stimulated with IL-4, IL-13 or IL-5 were assessed for gene changes or chemokine release.Mice exposed to house dust mite extract received anti-IL-4Rα (dupilumab), anti-IL-5 or control antibodies and were assessed for changes in lung histological and inflammatory endpoints.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

IL-4 or IL-13 stimulation of human eosinophils and endothelial cells induced gene expression changes related to granulocyte migration; whereas, IL-5 induced changes reflecting granulocyte differentiation.In a mouse model, blocking IL-4Rα improved lung function by impacting multiple effectors of inflammation and remodeling, except peripheral eosinophil counts, thereby disconnecting blood eosinophils from airway inflammation, remodeling and function. Blocking IL-5 globally reduced eosinophil counts but did not impact inflammatory or functional measures of lung pathology. Whole lung transcriptome analysis revealed that IL-5 or IL-4Rα blockade impacted eosinophil associated genes, whereas IL-4Rα blockade also impacted genes associated with multiple cells, cytokines and chemokines, mucus production, cell:cell adhesion and vascular permeability.

CONCLUSIONS

Eosinophils are not the sole contributor to asthma pathophysiology or lung function decline and emphasizes the need to block additional mediators to modify lung inflammation and impact lung function.

Age of asthma onset does not impact the response to omalizumab

TRIAL REGISTRATION

These studies were conducted before clinical trial registration was required; therefore, clinical trial registration numbers are not available.

Upper airway disease diagnosis as a predictive biomarker of therapeutic response to biologics in severe asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease sharing airway instability but with different biology, risk factors, and response-to-therapy patterns. Biologics have revolutionized the one-size-fits-to-all approach to personalized medicine in severe asthma (SA), which relies on the identification of biomarkers that define distinct endotypes. Thus, blood eosinophils and, to some extent, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) can predict the response to approved anti-type 2 (T2) biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL-5, and anti-IL-4R alpha), whereas age at onset and comorbidities such as anxiety/depression, obesity, reflux, and upper airway disease (UAD) also influence therapeutic responses in SA. In this article, focusing on the predictive value of biomarkers for the therapeutic response to biologics in SA, we first summarize the level of prediction achieved by T2 biomarkers (blood eosinophils, FeNO) and then review whether data support the predictive value of upper airway diagnosis on such outcomes. Post hoc analysis of most studies with T2 biologics suggests that chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and, to a lower extent, allergic rhinitis may help in predicting clinical response. Considering that T2 biologics are now also approved for the treatment of severe CRSwNP, diagnosis of upper airway disease is a key step in determining eligibility for such therapy.

Biologics for severe asthma: The real-world evidence, effectiveness of switching, and prediction factors for the efficacy

Biologics have been a key component of severe asthma treatment, and there are currently biologics available that target IgE, IL-5, IL-4/IL-13, and TSLP. Randomized controlled trials have established clinical evidence, but a significant portion of patients with severe asthma in real-life settings would have been excluded from those trials. Therefore, real-world research is necessary, and there is a growing body of information about the long-term efficacy and safety of biologics. Multiple clinical phenotypes of severe asthma exist, and it is crucial to choose patients based on their phenotypes. Blood eosinophil count is an important biomarker for anti-IL-5 therapies, and FeNO and eosinophil counts serve as prediction markers for dupilumab. Reliable markers for predicting response, however, have not yet been fully established for omalizumab. Identification of clinical or biological prediction factors is crucial for the path toward clinical remission because the current treatment goal includes clinical remission, which is defined as a realistic goal for remission off treatment. Additionally, since there are now multiple biologic options and overlaps in eligibility for biologics in clinical practice, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of switching the biologics is crucial. Investigations into the clinical trajectory following the cessation of biologics are another important issue. Recent research on omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab's real-world effectiveness, the prediction factor for the efficacy, and the impact of switching or discontinuation will be reviewed and discussed in this review.