Differential nasal swab cytology represents a valuable tool for therapy monitoring but not prediction of therapy response in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps treated with Dupilumab

Dupilumab's impact on nasal citology: Real life experience after 1 year of treatment

BACKGROUND

Biologic agents are considered a new revolutionized therapy for severe and recurrent forms of CRSwNP which disease burden is not sufficiently controlled by conservative and/or surgical treatments. Recent Research has focused on evaluating their real-life efficacy in CRSwNP, as only limited reports on real-life data are available. However, in most studies, the response to treatment is evaluated in terms of improvement in Nasal Polyp Score (NPS) or in Sino-Nasal Outcome test (SNOT-22) scores. However, both criteria do not consider nasal immunophlogosis, which can be easily assessed by nasal cytology. The aim of our study was to evaluate changings in the nasal inflammatory infiltrate of CRSwNP patients treated with Dupilumab for 12 months.

METHODS

27 patients suffering from severe CRSwNP treated with Dupilumab were recruited. Nasal cytology findings, NPS, SNOT-22, ACT scores and blood eosinophil count at T0 (before treatment) and at T1 (after 1 year of treatment) were compared.

RESULTS

After 1 year of biological therapy with Dupilumab, NPS, SNOT-22 and, among the 17 asthmatic patients, ACT scores improved significantly. At T1, a statistically significant percentage of patients showed negative citology. Moreover, a significant reduction in the mast cell-eosinophilic pattern and an increase of neutrophils and bacteria was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The response to treatment can be considered both in the case of negative nasal cytology and in the case of the appearance of neutrophils and bacteria. In this context, eosinophils, the specific target of biological therapies, play a crucial role in regulating tissue homeostasis and, consequently, the nasal immunophlogosis.

Remission in Type 2 Inflammatory Diseases: Current Evidence, Unmet Needs, and Suggestions for Defining Remission in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of biological therapies for type 2 inflammatory diseases raises the possibility of addressing remission in those dis-immune conditions. No consensus exists for a definition of remission in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This review aims to critically evaluate the published data to provide the basis for defining remission in CRSwNP.

RECENT FINDINGS

The published evidence has yet to provide an unequivocal definition on remission in type 2 inflammatory diseases, in part reflecting differences in approaches to diagnosis and follow-up. A multidimensional evaluation is necessary when considering complete remission, including clinical, inflammatory, and histologic criteria, but how to combine or tailor the three perspectives according to disease severity at baseline or timing of assessment of treatment category is yet to reach consensus. We suggest defining remission starting from the approach taken in asthma and eosinophilic esophagitis, that is, including the resolution of symptoms and improvements in objective parameters of disease severity and/or inflammatory activity. Future studies and consensuses should provide validated criteria with cutoffs for the day-to-day definition of remission. The definition of remission in CRSwNP should include the following criteria, to be verified and maintained for a period of ≥ 12 months: absence of symptoms (nasal obstruction, loss of smell, rhinorrhea as the main ones); no impact of symptoms on quality of life; no need of surgery; no chronic or rescue medications (systemic corticosteroids or antibiotics); and recovery of smell function, possibly evaluated by objective test. Assessment of underlying inflammation should also be considered once accurate and feasible biomarkers are available in clinical practice.

Type 2 Biomarkers for the Indication and Response to Biologics in CRSwNP

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Three biologics targeting type 2 inflammation have been approved for the treatment of severe and uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Nevertheless, around 40-60% of patients do not respond well to these biological treatments. Selecting appropriate patients is crucial to improve treatment outcome of biologics. This review summarizes the literature data on type 2 biomarkers, with a specific focus on the indication to biologics for severe CRSwNP.

RECENT FINDINGS

No consensus has been reached on how to define mucosal type 2 inflammation in CRSwNP. Clinical markers (e.g., 22-item Sino-nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) score, Lund-Mackay CT score (LMS), ethmoid/maxillary sinus CT score, and CT-radiomics), nasal secretion biomarkers (e.g., eosinophil cationic protein and interleukin-5), blood and nasal cytology eosinophil counts, and nasal swab eosinophil peroxidase activity have been reported to be associated with type 2 inflammation in CRSwNP. The time duration since the last surgery, SNOT-22 score at 1 week of treatment, and baseline serum osteoprotegerin levels might indicate the response to dupilumab. LMS and asthma control test scores were found to have moderate predictive value for acceptable improvement after 24-week treatment of omalizumab. High blood eosinophil levels at baseline were associated with treatment response to mepolizumab and benralizumab. Although several clinical and biological markers might be associated with type 2 inflammation and response to biologics in patients with CRSwNP, their validity requires further investigation. Identifying clinically applicable biomarkers for biologic treatment holds significant promise for advancing personalized approaches to biologics and optimizing treatment outcomes for patients with CRSwNP.