Immunological Aspects Related to Viral Infections in Severe Asthma and the Role of Omalizumab

Efficacy of omalizumab after discontinuation: a retrospective single-center observational study in children with severe asthma

Introduction

Several trials documented safety and efficacy of omalizumab, but there are a few data about its effects after discontinuation. This study aims to evaluate the maintenance of efficacy of omalizumab in pediatric asthmatic patients one year after its suspension.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 17 subjects aged 6-18 years, divided into two groups: Group A (9 patients) who discontinued omalizumab after 18 months, and Group B (8 patients) who continued the therapy. Data on respiratory function (FEV1%), the number of exacerbations, need for hospitalizations, use of oral corticosteroids, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores were collected and analyzed at three time points: baseline (T0), after 18 months of treatment (T1), and 36 months (T2).

Results

In Group A, significant differences were observed between T0 and T1, and T1 and T2, in FEV1% values, the number of exacerbations, the need for oral corticosteroids, and ACT scores. Group B showed significant differences in these parameters over time, with a notable reduction in exacerbations and improvement in ACT scores. The comparative analysis revealed that Group B had a higher number of exacerbations compared to Group A at T0 and greater use of oral cortico-steroids at T1. By T2, Group A had a higher ACT score than Group B at T0, whereas Group B showed higher ACT scores at T2 compared to Group A.

Discussion

The study confirmed the efficacy and safety of omalizumab, with its benefits persisting one year after treatment discontinuation in terms of lung function, reduction in exacerbations, decreased need for oral corticosteroids, and improved quality of life. Further research is necessary.

Choosing the right biologic treatment for individual patients with severe asthma - Lessons learnt from Picasso

Severe asthma represents a true challenge for clinicians from two basic perspectives, i.e.: a rational assessment of the underlying endo/phenotype and the subsequent selection of the best fitted (personalized) and effective treatment. Even though asthma is a heterogeneous disease, in the majority of therapy-compliant patients, it is possible to achieve (almost) complete disease control or even remission through conventional and quite uniform step-based pharmacotherapy, even without phenotyping. However, the absence of deeper assessment of individual patients revealed its handicap to its fullest extent during the first years of the new millennium upon the launch of biological therapeutics for patients with the most severe forms of asthma. The introduction of differentially targeted biologics into clinical practice became a challenge in terms of understanding and recognizing the etiopathogenetic heterogeneity of the asthmatic inflammation, pheno/endotyping, and, consequently, to choose the right biologic for the right patient. The answers to the following three questions should lead to correct identification of the dominant pheno/endotype: Is it really (severe) asthma? Is it eosinophilic asthma? If eosinophilic, is it (predominantly) allergen-driven? The identification of the best achievable and relevant alliance between endotypes and phenotypes ("euphenotypes") should be based not only on the assessment of the actual clinical characteristics and laboratory biomarkers, but more importantly, on the evaluation of their development and changes over time. In the current paper, we present a pragmatic three-step approach to severe asthma diagnosis and management.

Severe pediatric asthma therapy: Omalizumab-A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety profile

Background

Omalizumab is the first biological therapy used to treat moderate-to-severe asthma and certainly the one with the highest number of publications.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to examine two critical outcomes of omalizumab therapy, asthma exacerbation rate, the reduction of the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and the improvement of the lung function as a secondary outcome using the following keywords in the MEDLINE database: "anti-IgE, severe asthma, children, and randomized controlled trial." We specifically selected papers that included moderate-to-severe asthma patients and collected data on children and adolescents.

Results

Four RCT studies (total number of patients = 1,239) were included in the analysis. The reported data on exacerbations showed an overall improvement in the exacerbation rate with a decreased use of inhaled steroids and some other minimal clinically important difference (MCID).

Conclusions

Our systematic review confirms the known findings that omalizumab therapy decreases asthma exacerbation rate and reduces background therapy inhaled steroid dose. Therefore, add-on therapy with omalizumab shows a good efficacy and safety profile, thus proving to be a useful additional therapeutic option.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42023396785.

The effect of COVID-19 on patients recieving omalizumab treatment

Background and aim

Although exposure during drug administration and susceptibility to coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection secondary to immunomodulatory effects constitute potential risks for patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) or asthma on omalizumab (OMZ), there is a risk of loss of response following discontinuation of OMZ. There are few studies describing the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients receiving OMZ.

Materials and methods

A total of 103 patients on OMZ were included in the study between February 2021 and January 2022.

Results

Fourteen (13.6%) of the patients participating in the study had SARS-CoV-2 infection, of whom 3 (21.4%) required hospitalization and 11 (78.6%) were treated in an outpatient clinic. During the pandemic, 17 (16.5%) of the patients interrupted their OMZ treatment. Patients on OMZ for six months or less had a lower rate of interruption (2.5%) than those on OMZ for more than 6 months (25.4%). Patients interrupted treatment for the following reasons: 3 (17.6%) had COVID-19, 10 (58.9%) did not attend the hospital visit due to concern about contamination with SARS-CoV-2, and 4 (23.5%) thought that OMZ treatment would facilitate contamination with SARS-CoV-2. After interrupting OMZ, 3 (25%) female patients and 5 (100%) male patients presented no worsening of their symptoms. Three (13%) of the patients on OMZ for asthma and 11 (13.8%) of those on the drug for urticaria had COVID-19 infection. Patients presenting CSU and severe asthma are completely different, with different potential consequences of OMZ interruption. Nine (52.9%) patients had aggravated symptoms following interruption of OMZ treatment. Three of them described worsening of asthma symptoms and a need to increment their maintenance therapy due to asthma exacerbation after nearly three weeks of interruption, and 6 of them had hives and pruritus as urticaria exacerbation nearly four weeks after interruption of OMZ. The asthma patients did not stop their other treatments, including inhaled corticosteroids.

Conclusion

Use of OMZ does not increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related pneumonia, or COVID-19-related hospitalization. We advise patients not to interrupt OMZ treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic unless advised to do so by their doctors, and we recommend that they receive instruction concerning self-administration of OMZ to avoid visiting hospitals in the event of a pandemic.

Omalizumab may protect allergic patients against COVID-19: A systematic review

Omalizumab, which downregulates the immunoglobulin E (IgE) receptor site on plasmacytoid dendritic cells and thereby increases interferon-α (INF-α) production, may shorten the duration of viral infections by enhancing the antiviral immunity. A systematic review was conducted to investigate whether previous anti-IgE treatment with omalizumab could protect against SARS-CoV-2 disease ("COVID-19") (infection, disease duration, and severity), and whether IFN-α upregulation could be involved. The research included articles published from March 2020 to January 2022. An accurate search was performed on bibliographic biomedical database (MEDLINE - Pubmed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, BIOMED CENTRAL, Google scholar, COCHRANE LIBRARY, ClinicalTrial.gov) including cohorts, case reports and reviews. Different methods were used, based on the study design, to assess the quality of eligible studies. Several authors link omalizumab to a possible protection against viruses, but they often refer to studies carried out before the pandemic and with viruses other than SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) (eg, rhinoviruses -RV). Few cases of COVID-19 patients treated with omalizumab have been recorded, and, in most of them, no increased susceptibility to severe disease was observed. According to these data, the current indication is to continue omalizumab therapy during the pandemic. Moreover, although omalizumab may enhance the antiviral immune response even for SARS-CoV-2, further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis. It would be helpful to establish a registry of omalizumab-treated (or in treatment) patients who have developed COVID-19. Finally, randomized controlled trials could be able to demonstrate the effect of omalizumab in protecting against severe SARS-CoV-2, through IFN-α upregulation or other immunological pathways.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients receiving allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or biologicals-EAACI recommendations

Immune modulation is a key therapeutic approach for allergic diseases, asthma and autoimmunity. It can be achieved in an antigen-specific manner via allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or in an endotype-driven approach using biologicals that target the major pathways of the type 2 (T2) immune response: immunoglobulin (Ig)E, interleukin (IL)-5 and IL-4/IL-13 or non-type 2 response: anti-cytokine antibodies and B-cell depletion via anti-CD20. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination provides an excellent opportunity to tackle the global pandemics and is currently being applied in an accelerated rhythm worldwide. The vaccine exerts its effects through immune modulation, induces and amplifies the response against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Thus, as there may be a discernible interference between these treatment modalities, recommendations on how they should be applied in sequence are expected. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) assembled an expert panel under its Research and Outreach Committee (ROC). This expert panel evaluated the evidence and have formulated recommendations on the administration of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with allergic diseases and asthma receiving AIT or biologicals. The panel also formulated recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine in association with biologicals targeting the type 1 or type 3 immune response. In formulating recommendations, the panel evaluated the mechanisms of COVID-19 infection, of COVID-19 vaccine, of AIT and of biologicals and considered the data published for other anti-infectious vaccines administered concurrently with AIT or biologicals.

SARS-Cov-2 Infection in Severe Asthma Patients Treated With Biologics

Background

At the beginning of the pandemic, there have been considerable concerns regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and outcomes in patients with severe asthma treated with biologics.

Objective

To prospectively observe a cohort of severe asthmatics treated with biologics for the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and disease severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Physicians from centers treating patients with severe asthma all over Greece provided demographic and medical data regarding their patients treated with biologics. Physicians were also asked to follow up patients during the pandemic and to perform a polymerase chain reaction test in case of a suspected SARS-Cov-2 infection.

Results

Among the 591 severe asthmatics (63.5% female) included in the study, 219 (37.1%) were treated with omalizumab, 358 (60.6%) with mepolizumab, and 14 (2.4%) with benralizumab. In total, 26 patients (4.4%) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 9 (34.6%) of whom were admitted to the hospital because of severe COVID-19, and 1 required mechanical ventilation and died 19 days after admission. Of the 26 infected patients, 5 (19.2%) experienced asthma control deterioration, characterized as exacerbation that required treatment with systemic corticosteroids. The scheduled administration of the biological therapy was performed timely in all patients with the exception of 2, in whom it was postponed for 1 week according to their doctors’ suggestion.

Conclusion

Our study confirms that despite the initial concerns, SARS-CoV-2 infection is not more common in asthmatics treated with biologics compared with the general population, whereas the use of biologic treatments for severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to be related to adverse outcomes from severe COVID-19.

Asthma and COVID-19 Associations: Focus on IgE-Related Immune Pathology

Management of patients with asthma during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a concern, especially since asthma predisposes patients to respiratory problems. Interestingly, asthma characterized by type 2 inflammation, also known as T-helper type 2-high endotype, displays a cellular and molecular profile that may confer protective effects against COVID-19. The results of experimental and clinical studies have established the actions of immunoglobulin E (IgE) in inducing airway hyperreactivity and weakening an interferon-mediated antiviral response following respiratory viral infection. Robust evidence supports the beneficial effect of the anti-IgE biologic treatment omalizumab on reducing respiratory virus-induced asthma exacerbations and reducing the frequency, duration, and severity of respiratory viral illness in patients with asthma. Indeed, accumulating reports of patients with severe asthma treated with omalizumab during the pandemic have reassuringly shown that continuing omalizumab treatment during COVID-19 is safe, and in fact may help prevent the severe course of COVID-19. Accordingly, guidance issued by the Global Initiative for Asthma recommends that all patients with asthma continue taking their prescribed asthma medications, including biologic therapy, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of biologic treatments on patients with asthma and COVID-19 will be better understood as more evidence emerges.

Allergic patients during the COVID-19 pandemic-Clinical practical considerations: An European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology survey

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected health care systems unexpectedly. However, data focusing on practical considerations experienced by health care professionals (HCPs) providing care to allergic patients is scarce.

METHODS

Under the framework of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), a panel of experts in the field of immunotherapy developed a 42-question online survey, to evaluate real-life consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in allergy practice.

RESULTS

The respondents in the survey were 618. About 80% of HCPs indicated being significantly affected in their allergy practice. A face-to-face visit reduction was reported by 93% of HCPs and about a quarter completely interrupted diagnostic challenges. Patients with severe uncontrolled asthma (59%) and anaphylaxis (47%) were prioritized for in-person care. About 81% maintained an unaltered prescription of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in asthmatics. About 90% did not modify intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) in patients with allergic rhinitis. Nearly half of respondents kept biological prescriptions unmodified for asthma. About 50% of respondents kept their allergen immunotherapy (AIT) prescription patterns unchanged for respiratory allergies; 60% for insect venom allergies. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergies was initiated by 27%. About 20% kept carrying out up-dosing without modifications and 14% changed to more prolonged intervals. Telemedicine practice was increased.

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs providing care to allergic patients were affected during the pandemic in diagnostic, management, and therapeutic approaches, including AIT for respiratory, insect-venom, and food allergies. Most HCPs maintained controller treatments for both asthma, and allergic rhinitis consistent with international recommendations, as well as biological agents in asthma. Remote tools are valuable in delivering allergy care.

Impact of Anti-Type 2 Inflammation Biologic Therapy on COVID-19 Clinical Course and Outcome

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a general and deep impact on the clinical management of chronic diseases, including respiratory and allergic disorders. At the beginning of the pandemic, one of the main concerns was the potential impact of immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory drugs on COVID-19 clinical course. In this review, we aim to summarize and analyze the available clinical evidence from patients treated with anti-type 2 inflammation biologics (including anti-IgE, anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-4 agents), who developed COVID-19. Overall, the treatment with anti-Th2 biologics can be considered safe during COVID-19. It does not worsen the clinical course and outcome of COVID-19, and it may be actually protective somehow from developing severe forms. Moreover, patients treated with these biological agents do not seem to be more prone to get infected by SARS-CoV-2.