Canadian Rhinology Working Group consensus statement: biologic therapies for chronic rhinosinusitis

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

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

Cross-border collaboration, communication, and research frontiers on biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis from 2004 to 2023

Objective

Biologics are considered as a promising novel treatment option for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis who failed with the standard of care (medical therapy and surgical interventions). This bibliometric analysis was performed to explore cross-border collaboration, communication, and research frontiers on biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis.

Methods

Original research publications on biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis were retrieved from the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) database in the Web of Science Core Collection between 2004 and 2023. Using CiteSpace and R software, the country/region, author, institution, journal, reference, and keywords were extracted to analyze the research focus and global trends in this field.

Results

Research articles exhibited a consistent rising trend from 2004 to 2023, especially the period between 2020 and 2023. Most articles were published by authors from the USA. The USA was the most cited country, enjoying the most active cooperation with other countries/regions. Bachert C owned the most publications and collaborations. Ghent University and Karolinska Institute had the most collaborations with other institutions. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and Allergy published the most articles and were the most co-cited journals. Research frontiers on biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis would focus on efficacy, quality of life, safety, children, management, etc.

Conclusions

This bibliometric analysis displayed the overall situation and global trend on biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis. The visualization analysis of publications could assist researchers rapidly in understanding the hotspots and trends. Further research is warranted to determine the long-term effects and side effects of biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis.

Prescribing Practices and Barriers of Biologics for Chronic Rhinosinusitis Amongst Otolaryngologists

OBJECTIVE(S)

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) are an evolving therapeutic option, but there are limited data on physician experiences in prescribing them. The goal of this study was to gain a better understanding of these experiences including prescribing practices, patient factors which guide prescriber decision, and physician and patient-reported issues which might limit cost-effectiveness of these therapies.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to attending otolaryngologists using the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology (CSOHNS) email distribution and eSurvey program. Responses were tabulated for the entire cohort and compared between rhinologists and non-rhinologists where appropriate. Frequencies and proportions were expressed as a percentage of total respondents. Fisher's exact test was used for statistical analysis between groups.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine total survey responses were recorded representing a response rate of 43%. Significantly more rhinologists reported prescribing biologic medications on their own (100% vs. 50%; p < 0.001) and a higher proportion (1 to 10% vs. <1%) of their patients were on biologics compared with non-rhinologists (p = 0.023). Rhinologists were more likely to consider poor response to medical therapies, need for rescue steroids, and comorbid type 2 conditions in their decision to pursue biologics than non-rhinologists, but they also experienced poorer assistance from patient support programs and less availability to medications.

CONCLUSION

Rhinologists are more comfortable with prescribing and managing biologics for CRSwNP compared with non-rhinologist colleagues. Clinicians prescribing biologic medications for CRSwNP should be familiar with guidelines, indications, and potential adverse events.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3493-3498, 2024.

Influence of Prior Endoscopic Sinus Surgery Extent on Dupilumab Effectiveness in CRSwNP Patients

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend that the vast majority of patients with severe uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) should have at least one endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) prior to starting biologics. Because ESS can be performed with a variable extension, the aim of this study would be to evaluate the association between surgical extensiveness, as measured by ACCESS score, and outcomes collected in patients treated with Dupilumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a multicentric retrospective study; patients affected by CRSwNP who were subjected to Dupilumab therapy and who underwent at least one ESS prior to Dupilumab initiation were included. ACCESS score was assigned to each patient's pre-Dupilumab CT scan. Subjective and objective parameters (SNOT-22, NPS, VAS scores, Sniffin' Sticks) were collected before and during the administration of therapy. Statistical correlations between ACCESS scores and clinical outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients were included; mean time from last previous ESS was 68.6 months, and on average, patients were subjected to 2.2 surgeries. Many correlations with ACCESS scores were demonstrated: better NPS at all timepoints and subjective scores (30-days SNOT-22, VAS nasal obstruction, and rhinorrhea) were achieved in patients with low ACCESS score (more extensive ESS). On the other hand, significantly worse VAS loss of smell values were demonstrated in patients with lower ACCESS scores.

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab patients subjected to a prior extensive ESS may have reduced size of polyps and improved subjective indicators, together with a decreased chance to recover smell, when compared with patients who underwent a minimal excision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:1556-1563, 2024.

Multidisciplinary Decision-Making-ITAlian Consensus After Two Years of Real Practice on the Management of Severe Uncontrolled CRSwNP by Biologics (ITACA Study)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to reach an Italian multidisciplinary consensus on some crucial aspects of treatment decision making in CRSwNP, following 2 years of clinical experience in order to support specialists in the management of CRSwNP in clinical practice. We addressed issues relating to therapeutic decision-making and shared criteria for the treatment choice, as well as appropriate timing and criteria for evaluating treatment response, and highlighted the need for repeated multidisciplinary assessments.

RECENT FINDINGS

A national survey has been conducted recently to understand how rhinology practice has changed in Italy with the advent of biologics and how this affects patients with uncontrolled, severe CRSwNP. Despite the many published consensus documents, practical recommendations, and protocols on the use of biologics in CRSwNP, heterogenous behaviors in practice are still observed mainly conditioned by the novelty of the topic. The consensus procedure followed a modified Delphi approach. The scientific board included 18 otorhinolaryngologists and 8 allergists, who selected the 4 main topics to be addressed and developed overall 20 statements. Consensus on these statements was sought by a larger group of 48 additional experts, through two rounds of voting, the first web-based, the second in presence with discussion and possible refinement of the statements. The statements reaching an average score ≥ 7 at the second voting round were approved. Five statements were proposed for each of the following topics: baseline evaluation of patients eligible for biologic therapy; choice between different therapeutic options; assessment of the response to biologic treatment; multidisciplinary management. At the first voting round, 19 out of the 20 statements reached a mean score ≥ 7. Following the discussion and a few consequent amendments, at the second round of voting all the 20 statements were approved.

Biologics in the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis in Canada: Current Trends and Practice Patterns

OBJECTIVES

As the understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis has increased over the last few years, it has been discovered that biologic therapy targeting type 2 inflammatory molecules can be beneficial for those with difficult-to-treat chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. Given the recency of biologics, there is somewhat limited evidence on when to prescribe these medications and who should receive them. A recent consensus paper published by a group of Canadian rhinologists gave recommendations regarding prescribing biologics to patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). This study aimed to outline current practices and prescribing patterns of biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis in Canada and contrast this to existing guidelines.

MATERIALS/METHODS

An online survey was distributed to members of the Canadian Rhinology Group of the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. The survey contained 44 questions, with 17 questions covering various topics related to criteria for initializing biologic therapy, investigations ordered prior to initialization of a biologic, and follow-up schedules. The responses were subsequently compared to clinical guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-one physicians responded to the survey. One response was discarded for this analysis as the respondent did not prescribe biologics. The biologic agent of choice for the majority of physicians (85%) was Dupilumab (Dupixent). The most used patient-reported outcome measure used was the SNOT-22 (80%), and most physicians (90%) confirm that their patients have undergone adequate sinus surgery with a computed tomography (CT) scan prior to considering biologic therapy. Investigations ordered prior to therapy and follow-up schedules varied. Only 10% of respondents consistently refer their patients to a multidisciplinary clinic prior to prescribing biologics despite recommendations in guidelines, but 70% involve an allergist and/or a respirologist in the care of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents follow the recommendations made by the Canadian and international guidelines [European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS), European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA)]. The lack of multidisciplinary clinics across the country could be contributing to the low number of physicians using this resource for their patients despite recommendations. As our knowledge about biologics and CRSwNP improves, and with updated guidelines recently published, this survey should be expanded and repeated in the future to revaluate biologic prescribing practices in Canada.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) treated with omalizumab, dupilumab, or mepolizumab: A systematic review of the current knowledge towards an attempt to compare agents' efficacy

BACKGROUND

The heterogeneity of existing studies, along with the fact that there are no published head-to-head trials, are the main reasons for the lack of guidelines regarding the selection of the proper biologic in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps. The aim of this study is to summarize the current knowledge regarding the efficacy of omalizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab in CRS treatment. We also attempt to proceed to an indirect comparison of the agents and try to answer the tricky question: which agent to select and why?

METHODS

An extensive search in English literature was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database/Library. Eligibility criteria included papers with full text published in English, adult population studies, clearly described intervention protocol, and documented primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The studies included numbered 37. All agents provided significant improvement in polyp size, sinuses opacification, severity of symptoms, need for surgery and systemic corticosteroids use. Analysis of available systematic reviews, meta-analyses and indirect treatment comparison studies showed that dupilumab appeared to be the most beneficial agent, in terms of primary and secondary outcomes. However, these results are of relatively low level of evidence due to several methodological limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the present analysis showed a moderate supremacy of dupilumab, there is still no evidence-based answer to the question "which biologic agent is the most effective in CRS treatment?" Improved statistical methodology, head-to-head trials, and real-life studies could lead to more robust conclusions, establishing the real role of the specific biologic agents.

Assessing the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Routine Clinical Care of Chronic Rhinosinusitis Patients: A Canadian Perspective

IMPORTANCE

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses with significant quality of life impairments. There is a need to implement outcome-based metrics to evaluate the outcomes of CRS treatment with endoscopic sinus surgery or biologics.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to understand Canadian otolaryngologists' opinions on patient-related outcome measures (PROM) for CRS and identify potential barriers to implementation.

DESIGN

Qualitative research.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional survey was distributed via the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and direct emailing.

MEASURES

Participants' demographics, practice information, and opinions on PROM were collected.

RESULTS

Of 346 (23%) Canadian otolaryngologists, 78 responded to the survey (26 rhinology fellowship-trained, 51 non-fellowship-trained, and 1 missing data). Thirty-eight responded that they collect PROM (69% with fellowship-trained, 39% non-fellowship-trained, P = .029). Regarding opinions on PROM, 74% of respondents agreed that it helps patients report their symptoms, 42% agreed that it improves the efficiency of the patient encounter, 54% agreed that it is easy for patients to understand, 62% agreed that it improves management and monitoring of clinical outcomes, and 71% disagreed that PROM is not helpful. Fellowship-trained otolaryngologists were 4 times more likely to agree that PROM improves management and monitoring of clinical outcomes (P = .014), and no other differences in opinions were significant. The most-frequently-identified barriers to PROM usage were lack of time for 67% of respondents, difficulty integrating into clinical workflow for 64%, and lack of integration into the electronic medical record for 47%. If these barriers were addressed, 86% of respondents said they would use PROM in their practice.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Despite the low uptake of PROM among otolaryngologists without rhinology fellowship, opinions were generally favorable. We identified barriers that, if addressed, may increase their use in clinical practice. As resource-limited therapies such as biologics become more prevalent in CRS management, PROM may find more applications in shared clinical decision making.

Biologics for Chronic Rhinosinusitis-A Modern Option for Therapy

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an important ENT pathology which affects about 5-12% of the general population. The treatment of CRS can be pharmacological (nasal sprays, douches, systemic antibiotics and steroids), surgical (endoscopic sinus surgery) or immunological according to established algorithms. CRS was divided for many years into CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP). New ways of classifying CRS by endotypes (presence of neutrophilia, eosinophilia, fibrosis, glandular hypertrophy and epithelial dysmorphisms) appeared after the most recent understandings of the pathophysiology of the disease. Other classifications divide CRS into primary and secondary forms, localized/diffuse types and anatomical presentation. A new type of treatment has been administered in the last years, biologics. For the moment, biologics are indicated just in the cases of the patients who have undergone ESS or have contraindications for surgery and have bilateral polyps and meet a minimum of three of the following criteria: the necessity for systemic therapies with oral or parenteral corticosteroids or contraindications to systemic steroids, significant loss of smell or impaired QoL score, comorbid asthma and type 2 inflammation. This article aims to present the most relevant studies which used the three types of biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5 and anti-IL4/IL3) and wishes to increase the awareness of this new type of treatment that can be used in some CRS cases.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Canada

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab are the three biologics currently approved for use in CRSwNP in Canada. Despite evidence of efficacy, their cost-effectiveness, which is a key factor influencing prescribing patterns, has not yet been compared to each other.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed using a Decision Tree Markov analysis. A third-party healthcare payer perspective and a 10-year time horizon was used. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 Canadian dollars (CAD) per QALY was used to determine cost-effectiveness. Dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab were each compared to each other.

RESULTS

Omalizumab was the most cost-effective biologic using current estimates of cost and efficacy in CRSwNP. Using omalizumab as a baseline, dupilumab had an ICER of $235,305/QALY. Mepolizumab was dominated by omalizumab and dupilumab at the current drug prices and estimates of efficacy. Sensitivity analyses determined that when increasing the WTP threshold to $150,000/QALY, dupilumab became cost-effective compared to omalizumab in 22.5% of simulation scenarios. Additionally, altering dosing frequency had a significant effect on cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

When comparing the relative cost-effectiveness of biologics in recalcitrant CRSwNP, omalizumab currently appears to be the most cost-effective option. Future reductions in drug prices, adjustments to currently approved dosing regimens, better patient selection, and improvements in sinus surgery outcomes will challenge the current cost-effectiveness models and necessitate reassessment as treatments for CRSwNP continue to evolve.

Practical recommendations for managing severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in the era of biologics

Objective

We conducted a national survey to understand how rhinology practice has changed with the advent of biologics and how this affected patients with uncontrolled, severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). We aimed to analyse the results of the survey and infer practical recommendations for clinical practice.

Methods

A group of ear, nose, and throat specialists (ENTs) experienced in the management of CRSwNP developed a 74-question survey. ENTs from rhinology centres authorised to prescribe biologics in the context of the national health system were invited to answer it between 01/05/2022 and 31/07/2022. The responses underwent descriptive analyses, and the authors discussed the results and derived practical recommendations for clinical practice.

Results

ENTs working in rhinology centres changed their practices coinciding with the advent of biologics. CRSwNP evaluations have become more complex because they involve diagnostic confirmation, determining the patients' immunologic profile, and other factors. We observed heterogenous behaviours in practice that may be conditioned by the novelty of the topic. The results of the survey were used to develop practical recommendations for ENTs and are summarised herein.

Conclusions

Clinical practice in rhinology outpatient clinics has changed profoundly in the era of biologics. Our practical recommendations for clinicians working in rhinology centres are expected to help standardise practice and improve care.

Pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyp and a prominent T2 endotype

Chronic rhinosinusitis is a heterogenous and multifactorial disease, characterized by persistent inflammation of the nose and paranasal sinuses, which causes nasal obstruction, nasal discharge, facial pain, and smell disturbance. Chronic rhinosinusitis is divided into two phenotypes: chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyp and chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyp. Nasal polyps can be associated with many inflammatory cells including eosinophil cells, neutrophil cells, plasma cells, and lymphocytes. T2 endotype is characterized by the type-2 immune response and nasal polyps are associated with eosinophilic dominant infiltration. In contrast, in the T1 and T3 endotypes, chronic rhinosinusitis can be associated with neutrophilic dominant infiltration. In addition, there are mixed types of inflammation with different proportions of eosinophils-neutrophils in chronic rhinosinusitis. In the T2 endotype, there is an increase in the production of Th2 cytokines, including interleukin-4, interleukin-5, and interleukin-13, high levels of immunoglobulin-E in polyp tissue, and eosinophilia. Stimulation of Th2 cells, type-2 innate lymphoid cells, epithelial cell damage, Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins, and autoimmune antibodies have important roles in the enhancement of Th2 cytokines and pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyp. Monoclonal antibodies target type-2 inflammation, decrease nasal polyp size, and improve the clinical symptoms of CRSwNP patients. The present review will focus on factors involved in the pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis and its treatment.

Global expert views on the diagnosis, classification and pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis in clinical practice using a modified Delphi panel technique

Background

Diagnosis, classification, and treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) varies considerably despite the availability of treatment guidelines.

Objectives

We aimed to carry out a two-part modified Delphi panel study to elucidate global expert management of AR in real life.

Methods

The modified Delphi panel study was composed of two ten-minute online questionnaires sent to global AR experts, aiming to identify areas of consensus (defined as >75% respondent agreement) on aspects of their real-world daily practice related to AR diagnosis, classification, and pharmacotherapy. A workshop discussion with respondents held after the first-round questionnaire informed the development of the second-round questionnaire.

Results

Eighteen experts (from 7 countries across 3 continents) completed both questionnaires in September-October 2021 and January 2022, respectively. The majority of respondents agreed that diagnosis of AR is best confirmed using a mixture of observation and testing (n = 15) and collaborating with colleagues across other specialties (n = 14). Experts agreed that severity (n = 18), upper/lower respiratory tract involvement (n = 15) and symptom frequency (n = 14) are important factors when classifying AR, however consensus was not reached on which classification tool should be used. Although there were mixed opinions on the preferred pharmacotherapy treatment in the presented case studies, respondents largely agreed on which treatments require less monitoring (intranasal corticosteroid therapies [INCS]) and when treatments should be stepped down (≤3 months). Although opinions varied across respondents, some respondents considered as-needed INCS treatment and surgery to be viable treatment options.

Conclusion

We identified clear differences between real-world practice and treatment guidelines related to the management of AR. Furthermore, we recognized differences among physicians concerning their clinical practice in the pharmacological treatment of AR. These findings highlight the need for greater research into the management of AR and further indicate there is still a major gap between treatment guidelines and daily practice, even among specialists, suggesting a need for local guideline adaptation and implementation plans.

Definition of severity and treatment response in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a Delphi study among French experts

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of biotherapies has significantly changed the management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). These drugs are generally reserved for severe or recurrent CRSwNP. Thus, the concepts of severity of the disease and treatment response must be mastered by otorhinolaryngologists. However, a clear definition of these concepts in CRSwNP is missing.

METHODS

This article focuses on definitions of severity and treatment response in CRSwNP by providing an expert consensus among French rhinologists, using a Delphi study.

RESULTS

The severity assessment should seek the presence of uncontrolled asthma, olfactory disorders, nasal blockage, impaired quality of life (QOL) and cumulative annual dose of systemic corticosteroids.The treatment response should assess the presence of olfactory disorders, nasal blockage, QOL impairment, response to background therapy, resistance and/or dependence to oral corticosteroids, cumulative annual dose of systemic corticosteroids, response to surgery and to biologics.A failure after polypectomy should not be considered as a failure of surgical management of CRSwNP and must discuss the realization of an extended sinus surgery procedure before the prescription of biologics.

CONCLUSION

Definitions of severity, control of CRSwNP, as well as therapeutic strategies to improve patients' QOL achieved high level of consensus.

Canadian multidisciplinary expert consensus on the use of biologics in upper airways: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) often coexists with lower airway disease. With the overlap between upper and lower airway disease, optimal management of the upper airways is undertaken in conjunction with that of the lower airways. Biologic therapy with targeted activity within the Type 2 inflammatory pathway can improve the clinical signs and symptoms of both upper and lower airway diseases. Knowledge gaps nevertheless exist in how best to approach patient care as a whole. There have been sixteen randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trails performed for CRSwNP targeted components of the Type 2 inflammatory pathway, notably interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5 and IL-13, IL- 5R, IL-33, and immunoglobulin (Ig)E. This white paper considers the perspectives of experts in various disciplines such as rhinology, allergy, and respirology across Canada, all of whom have unique and valuable insights to contribute on how to best approach patients with upper airway disease from a multidisciplinary perspective.

METHODS

A Delphi Method process was utilized involving three rounds of questionnaires in which the first two were completed individually online and the third was discussed on a virtual platform with all the panelists. A national multidisciplinary expert panel of 34 certified specialists was created, composed of 16 rhinologists, 7 allergists, and 11 respirologists who evaluated the 20 original statements on a scale of 1-9 and provided comments. All ratings were quantitively reviewed by mean, median, mode, range, standard deviation and inter-rater reliability. Consensus was defined by relative interrater reliability measures-kappa coefficient ([Formula: see text]) value > 0.61.

RESULTS

After three rounds, a total of 22 statements achieved consensus. This white paper only contains the final agreed upon statements and clear rationale and support for the statements regarding the use of biologics in patients with upper airway disease.

CONCLUSION

This white paper provides guidance to Canadian physicians on the use of biologic therapy for the management of upper airway disease from a multidisciplinary perspective, but the medical and surgical regimen should ultimately be individualized to the patient. As more biologics become available and additional trials are published we will provide updated versions of this white paper every few years.

Clinical outcomes of dupilumab therapy in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in a Canadian tertiary care rhinology practice

BACKGROUND

In 2020, dupilumab became the first monoclonal antibody therapy to be approved by Health Canada for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). The primary aim of this study was to characterize the outcomes in an initial cohort of patients with CRSwNP who have undergone dupilumab therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of patients with CRSwNP who were treated with dupilumab. Demographic information, comorbidities, number of previous surgeries, and insurance information were collected. The primary outcome were changes in the sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) scores from baseline to timepoints after receiving dupilumab.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were considered for dupilumab therapy, and 27 (56%) received coverage or were able to fund the medication independently. Patients waited an average of 3.6 months to obtain access to the medication. The mean age of the patients was 43. Forty-one percent (11/27) of patients had aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, and 96% (26/27) had a diagnosis of asthma. The mean length of time on dupilumab was 12.1 months. The baseline SNOT-22 score was 60.6. The mean decrease at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after starting dupilumab was 8.8, 26.5, 42.8, and 33.8, respectively. There were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with dupilumab in a Canadian tertiary care rhinology clinic demonstrated substantial clinical improvement as measured by disease-specific sinonasal outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine the longer-term effectiveness and adverse event profile of this novel therapy.

Considerations for shared decision-making in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Shared decision-making is an approach where physicians and patients work together to determine a personalized treatment course. Such an approach is integral to patient-centered care in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). CRSwNP is a chronic inflammatory condition of the sinonasal cavity that can severely impact physical health, smell, and quality of life (QOL). Traditional standard-of-care treatment options include topical (i.e. sprays) and oral corticosteroids and endoscopic sinus surgery, but more recently, novel corticosteroid delivery methods (i.e. high volume irrigations, recently-approved exhalation breath-powered delivering devices, and drug-eluting steroid implants) and 3 new FDA approved biologics directed against type II immunomodulators have become available. The availability of these therapeutics offers exciting new opportunities in CRSwNP management but requires personalized and shared-decision making as each modality has variable impacts on CRSwNP and related comorbid conditions. Studies have published treatment algorithms, but the practical use of these lean guidelines is heavily influenced by the lens of the treating physician, the most common being otolaryngologists and allergy immunologists. Clinical equipoise occurs when there is no basis for one intervention to be regarded as “better” than another. While most guidelines, in general, support the use of topical corticosteroids with or without oral corticosteroids followed by ESS for the majority of unoperated CRSwNP patients, there are situations of clinical equipoise that arise particularly in CRSwNP who have failed surgery or those with severe comorbid conditions. In the shared decision-making process, clinicians and patients must consider symptomatology, goals, comfort, compliance, treatment efficacy, and treatment cost when determining the initial choice of therapy and escalation of therapy with the potential use of multiple modalities for recalcitrant CRSwNP. A summary of salient considerations that might constitute shared decision-making is presented in this summary.

A comparative analysis of endoscopic sinus surgery versus biologics for treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Comparative effectiveness research between endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and biologic therapy for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is a nascent field as new therapeutic modalities become clinically available.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter cohort of CRSwNP patients, undergoing ESS between 2011 and 2019, were compared to phase-3 biologic trial data. Patients undergoing ESS received baseline nasal endoscopy quantified via Lund-Kennedy (LK) grading. Patients meeting inclusion criteria, modified from Dupilumab-LIBERTY-NP-24&52, omalizumab-POLYP-1&2, and Mepolizumab-SYNAPSE clinical trials, were included in this study. Baseline characteristics and outcome measures were compared between these cohorts at 24 weeks and 52 weeks, when possible.

RESULTS

A total of 111 CRSwNP patients met modified inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline age, sex, asthma status, aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease status, smell identification, LK-polyp score, and Lund-Mackay computed tomography (CT) scores between ESS and biologic groups. At 24 weeks, ESS demonstrated significantly greater improvements in 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) compared to one (of two) dupilumab trials (p < 0.05) and both omalizumab trials (p < 0.001). ESS associated with significantly lower nasal polyp scores (NPS) compared to dupilumab (p < 0.001) and omalizumab (p < 0.001), despite comparable improvements in smell identification (p > 0.05). At 52 weeks, ESS resulted in statistically similar improvement in SNOT-22 scores compared to dupilumab (p = 0.21), but NPS remained significantly lower in the ESS group compared to dupilumab (p < 0.001) and mepolizumab (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

At 24 weeks and 52 weeks, ESS offers comparable SNOT-22 improvements compared to dupilumab. ESS and dupilumab offer comparable improvement in smell identification at 24 weeks. Compared to omalizumab, ESS offers superior SNOT-22 improvements. ESS offers significantly greater reductions in polyp size compared to omalizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab therapies.

Mepolizumab for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in adults

INTRODUCTION

The treatment paradigm for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is complex, consisting of a combination of conservative, medical and surgical management. High rates of recurrence despite current standard of care has led to the search for treatments that can improve outcomes and limit the treatment burden for patients living with this chronic condition.

AREAS COVERED

Eosinophils are granulocytic white blood cells that proliferate as part of the innate immune response. IL5 is an inflammatory cytokine implicated in the development of eosinophil-associated diseases that has emerged as a target for biologic therapy. Mepolizumab (NUCALA) is a humanized antiIL5 monoclonal antibody that represents a novel therapeutic approach to CRSwNP. The results of multiple clinical trials are encouraging but its real-world implementation requires a thorough cost-benefit analysis across a range of clinical situations.

EXPERT OPINION

: Mepolizumab is an emerging biologic therapy that shows promising potential for the treatment of CRSwNP. It appears to provide both objective and subjective improvement as an addon therapy to standard of care treatment. Its specific role in treatment algorithms remains a topic of discussion. Future research surrounding its efficacy and cost effectiveness as compared to alternative options is needed.

Comparison of guidelines for prescription and follow-up of biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

PURPOSE

To compare international and regional guidelines for prescription and monitoring of response to biologics in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).

METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify publications reporting indications for biologic therapy in CRSwNP. A full-text reading identified specific issues for comparison: prior surgery, evidence of type 2 inflammation (T2I), smell function, comorbidities, use of systemic corticosteroids, impact on quality of life, and endoscopic and CT findings were compared for the prescription, while the monitoring of the treatment was described in relation to timing, classification of response and criteria for withdrawal.

RESULTS

Ten publications were found. Prior surgery was strictly necessary in five guidelines, while in all the remaining it was variably recommended. A confirmation of T2I was considered necessary in one publication, unnecessary in two, and recommended or constituted only one of the factors to consider in seven. All the other issues analyzed were variably considered. Reevaluation was suggested at 4-6 months and 1 year, mostly assessing improvement in the same criteria used for prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of subjective and objective findings is used for the identification of patients with CRSwNP who are indicated for biologic therapy. Major debate has developed on the need for previous surgery, which is generally recommended, or strictly necessary for some authors. Confirmation of T2I is generally suggested, but compulsory only in a minority of guidelines. Smell function, use of systemic corticosteroids, and the impact on quality of life are the other factors most frequently considered.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps management in the biologic therapy era: an international YO-IFOS survey

PURPOSE

To investigate the consistency between the international guidelines recommendations and worldwide standard practices regarding diagnostic work-up and follow-up strategies for managing patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) in the era of monoclonal antibodies.

METHODS

A questionnaire developed by the Rhinology section of the Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological Societies (Yo-IFOS) included items regarding the management of CRSwNP patients, monoclonal prescription, surgical and follow-up procedures, awareness of biologicals availability, and other relevant clinical practices. The online survey was directed to otolaryngologists and distributed in Europe, North America, South America, and the Middle East through otolaryngological and/or rhinological societies.

RESULTS

A total of 202 responses were analyzed; the mean participants' age was 45 ± 11 (73% men and 27% women), and 31% were from the United States, Canada 19%, Europe 45%, Middle East and South America 5%. Only 60% of the respondents declared using validated symptoms and endoscopic score systems in their clinical practice. Several practice discrepancies emerged in our cohort, including preferred surgical approach, prescription of preoperative oral steroids, and perioperative antibiotics (59% and 58%, respectively), as well as divergent awareness levels of available biologics for CRSwNP worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

CRSwNP needs a complex and time-consuming assessment, according to the latest guidelines. There seems to be a gap between these recommendations and the real-world data, which should draw more attention to bringing them into uniform clinical practice in the near future.

Current evaluation and management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps

INTRODUCTION

A clear understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and its close association with other airway pathologies, especially asthma, helps to comprehend the concept of the united airway and the importance of a multidisciplinary approach and the actual roll of biologic therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This expert review is the synthesis of a working group on the current state of the art of the evaluation and management of CRSwNP. A thorough analysis of the literature has been conducted for the latest studies and results, specially the European (EPOS 2020) and American (ICAR-RS 2021) guidelines.

EXPERT OPINION

The roles of optimal medical treatment and indications for surgery are becoming clearer, but much research is still needed regarding the extent and radicality when surgery is indicated. The main objectives of this review were to provide a clear and updated description of treatments, their indication, follow-up, and response criteria. These steps are considering the broad spectrum of inflammation endophenotypes and the biologic therapy available. Understanding the role and limitations of each specialty is key for providing greatest benefit to the patient.

Improving predictability of IgE-high type 2 chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps in the biologic era

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disease that may require biological therapy. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE biologic that was recently approved by the FDA and Health Canada for use in severe CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) recalcitrant to intranasal corticosteroids. Dosing is based on weight and pre-treatment serum IgE, with elevated levels of the latter being an indication for biologic treatment according to EPOS and EUFOREA guidelines. The goal of this study was to identify variables that predict IgE-high type 2 inflammation and serve as indicators for biologic treatment in CRS.

METHODS

Patients ≥ 19 yo diagnosed with CRS undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery were included retrospectively. Demographics, past medical history, preoperative blood work, Lund-Mackay (LM), Lund Kennedy (LK), and SNOT-22 scores were extracted. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression analyses were conducted. Model superiority was based on Nagelkerke R2 scores and receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients, average age 49.96 ± 13.59 years, were included. Sixty-one binary logistic regression models for elevated serum IgE were created. Among the top 3 models, the best model had sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values of 82.1, 69.2, 80.0, and 72.0. All performance measures except sensitivity exceeded the Canadian Biologics Guideline model. Serum eosinophils ≥ 300 cell/uL, CRSwNP and LM ≥ 17 increased the odds of elevated IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

IgE-high type-2 inflammation can be predicted by a model that includes eosinophil ≥ 300 cell/uL, CRSwNP, LM ≥ 17, asthma diagnosis and SNOT-22 ≥ 40. Patients meeting these parameters have a high pretest probability for elevated IgE and would benefit from IgE serology to determine qualification for omalizumab. This could reduce unwarranted IgE serology in patients with CRSwNP but also target a patient population for further workup that will lead to optimization of resource allocation and improve healthcare equity in rural and remote areas within Canada.

Canadian real-world study of access and clinical results using dupilumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with polyps

Background

Dupilumab is the first monoclonal antibody therapy to be approved in Canada for the treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP). The goal of the study was to assess its effectiveness and efficacy in a real-world setting. This study aims to assess how clinical outcomes of biologic therapy in real-world application (effectiveness) correspond to outcomes in clinical trials (efficacy) and to look into factors that might explain an efficacy-effectiveness gap.

Methods

A retrospective study evaluating disease specific sinonasal outcomes routinely collected for clinical care. This study included patients who were evaluated for coverage of dupilumab at a tertiary care rhinology clinic for the treatment of CRSwNP in the first year since dupilumab was approved in Canada for this indication. Sinonasal outcomes were be evaluated by collecting data on the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT)-22 questionnaire.

Results

Eighty-five patients were considered for dupilumab therapy during the study period, 49% patients were able to attain coverage for the requested therapy. The mean SNOT-22 score at baseline was 60.56 (SD 21.63). After 16 weeks of treatment the mean SNOT-22 score decreased by 37 points to 23.36; at 28 weeks the mean SNOT-22 was 23.47. After 1 year, the mean SNOT-22 score was 14.37.

Conclusion

Patients treated with dupilumab for CRSwNP at out tertiary rhinology clinic showed substantial clinical symptom improvement that is similar to that observed in prior randomised clinical trials. No serious adverse effects related to dupilumab were reported in this cohort. Long-term follow-up is needed to inform effectiveness analyses beyond the 1 year clinical trial duration.

Graphical Abstract

Developments and Emerging Trends in the Global Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis From 2001 to 2020: A Systematic Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Research on the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has increased in recent decades. We undertook a bibliometric and visualization analysis of studies on CRS treatment to track research trends and highlight current research “hotspots”.

Methods

Original publications related to CRS treatment were obtained from the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) of Clarivate Analytics between 2001 and 2020. The country/region, institution, author, journal, references, and keywords involved in this topic were extracted using CiteSpace and VOSviewer to identify and analyze the research focus and trends in this field.

Results

In the previous two decades (especially after 2015), the number of publications on CRS treatment has grown markedly. With regard to publications and access to collaborative networks, the leading country was the USA. High-frequency keywords were “CRS,” “endoscopic sinus surgery,” “sinusitis,” “nasal polyps,” “asthma,” “rhinosinusitis,” “management,” “diagnosis,” “outcomes,” and “quality of life.” Inspection of keyword bursts suggested that “clinical practice guideline,” “adult CRS,” “innate lymphoid cell,” “recurrence,” and “mepolizumab” are the emerging research hotspots. The timeline view of the cluster map revealed that biologic agents have become an up-and-coming “hot topic” in CRS treatment in recent years.

Conclusion

Academic understanding of CRS treatment has improved markedly over the past 20 years. We study analyzed the papers objectively, methodically, and comprehensively, and identified hotspots and prospective trends in the field of CRS treatment. These results will aid rhinologists in gaining greater insight into CRS treatment strategies and identifying the changing dynamics of CRS research.

A Practical Clinical Protocol for Monitoring Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis Treated with Biologics

Objectives:

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is a pathological condition which leads to high healthcare-related costs and low quality of life for patients. The introduction of new biological therapies (monoclonal antibodies, MAbs) in CRSwNP patients has allowed new therapeutic options for non-responders to conventional therapies and Dupilumab represents the first approved biological agent. The aim of this paper is to provide a practical clinical multidisciplinary protocol which might help clinicians involved in this field to monitor the clinical outcomes.

Methods:

Our centre of Rhinology and Rhino-Allergology has developed a dedicated collection form to observe the outcomes of patients treated with Dupilumab. Our research started from the indications given in EPOS 2020 as main reference. We then implemented these references in an electronic database trying to apply Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) in current clinical practice.

Results:

The result consists of three parts: an anamnestic collection data, a clinician reported outcome and two patient reported outcomes (PROMs) questionnaire, the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22). The tables we propose should provide an adequate correlation with the patients’ adherence to therapy and their treatment outcomes. Such periodical evaluation (after a month, after 3 months, after 6 months and at one year) should quickly allow to monitor if the patient is correctly assuming the therapy and the eventual objective improvements.

Conclusions:

We propose a practical monitoring protocol formulated to analyse both objective and subjective aspects of patients with severe uncontrolled CRSwNP treated with MAbs, thus helping to define in future a better comparison between the clinical results of different institutes.