Dupilumab reduces opacification across all sinuses and related symptoms in patients with CRSwNP

Ocular Surface Adverse Events are not Associated with Dupilumab use in Nasal Polyp Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Ocular surface reactions (OSR) have been associated with dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) treatment. However, the association of dupilumab-associated OSR (DA-OSR) for nasal polyps (CRSwNP) treatment has not been studied. We evaluated DA-OSR for CRSwNP treatment using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

METHODS

FAERS was queried for any general ocular reactions (DA-GOR) from 2019Q1 to 2022Q4. DA-OSR were subcategorized from DA-GOR and compared between treatment groups (CRSwNP, asthma, AD). Logistic regression was used to predict DA-OSR. Disproportionality analysis (DPA) of DA-OSR was performed using OpenVigil.

RESULTS

There were 60,198 total observations, of which 5344 were treated for CRSwNP. The prevalence of DA-GOR and DA-OSR was greatest for AD (15.3%, 7.8%), followed by CRSwNP (12.2%, 6.7%) and asthma (9.2%, 3.5%). The most commonly reported OSRs were dry eyes (35.9%), conjunctivitis (15.7%), and increased lacrimation (11.0%). The reported odds ratio (ROR) of CRSwNP-treated DA-OSR was 0.84 (0.73-0.97; p = 0.015), compared to 1.29 (1.20-1.40; p < 0.001) for AD and 0.66 (0.59-0.73; p < 0.001) for asthma. For CRSwNP treatment, the DA-OSR ROR was 0.97 (0.90-1.03; p = 0.3) for men and 0.78 (0.73-0.83, p < 0.001) for older adults (age > 50). ROR in the DPA for DA-OSR was 12.5 (12.2-12.8; p < 0.001) for any indication and 0.58 (0.53-0.64; p < 0.001) for CRSwNP treatment only.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are limitations to FAERS, this study confirms the association between dupilumab and OSR for AD treatment, and does not support an association between dupilumab and OSR for CRSwNP treatment. Younger adults experience more DA-OSR in CRSwNP treatment without a specific predilection for sex.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV Laryngoscope, 134:2602-2608, 2024.

Clinical Efficacy of Topical Nasal Pomegranate Fruit Extract for Chronic Rhinitis and Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of topical nasal Pomegranate Fruit Extract (PFE) for Chronic Rhinitis (CR), Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis (CRSwNP), and Chronic Rhinosinusitis without Nasal Polyposis (CRSsNP). Methods: Prospective, double-blinded, randomized study including 111 consecutive patients, between April 2012 and January 2017, afflicted by CRSwNP, CRSsNP, and CR. Patients from each group were randomly assigned to either PFE treatment or placebo twice daily for 30 days. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed by Ear Nose and Throat, blood and tomographic examinations, and the SNOT-20 questionnaire. Results: CR patients treated with PFE suffered significantly less from thick nasal discharge, difficulty falling asleep, reduced productivity, reduced concentration, and sadness (P = .004, P = .02, P = .03, P = .007 and P = .02, respectively). Conclusions: Topical nasal PFE was found to have some benefits for CR patients, however, not for CRS with or without Nasal Polyposis.

Precision medicine in chronic rhinosinusitis - using endotype and endotype-driven therapeutic options

INTRODUCTION

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a heterogeneous disease, and its complex pathophysiological characteristics pose a challenge to its clinical treatment. CRS is distinguished not only by clinical phenotype but also by endotype characteristics, which are divided into type 2 CRS and non-type 2 CRS.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we summarize and discuss current studies that depict the mechanisms and endotypes of CRS. In particular, inflammatory cells and the microbiome play a role in the pathophysiology of CRS. We also listed some of the biomarkers described in recent studies that may serve as a theoretical foundation for additional investigations. We have summarized the advantages and disadvantages of existing treatments and listed the available biological treatments for CRS in detail.

EXPERT OPINION

Endotype-driven therapeutic options face many challenges because of the complexity of the disease. Glucocorticoids, nasal endoscopic surgery, and biological therapy are the main treatments used in clinical practice, but they have limitations. This review provides advice on the clinical management and treatment options for patients with different endotypes, which will be more conducive to improving the quality of life and reducing the financial burden on patients.

[Treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) with monoclonal antibodies (biologics): S2k guideline of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), and the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians (DEGAM)]

Monoclonal antibodies (so-called biologics) can be prescribed for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) within the scope of their market authorization. However, their prescription is limited to severe CRSwNP without disease control, whereby certain requirements must be met. Dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab have currently gained market authorization, with adequate evidence for their efficacy and safety available in the literature. It can be assumed that other biologics will be approved for this indication in the future. The severity of disease and the efficacy of treatment should be assessed objectively and subjectively before treatment initiation and after an appropriate duration, respectively. The documentation sheet proposed in this guideline chapter can be used for the assessments. In the presence of relative contraindications, a treatment should only be initiated after differentiated consideration by an experienced physician in the sense of a case-by-case decision. In summary, this guideline chapter aims to contribute to high-quality care of adult patients with these therapies in view of the increasing evidence for treatment with these substances and the increasing number of market authorizations of different biologics.

A diagnostic model for predicting type 2 nasal polyps using biomarkers in nasal secretion

Background

Predicting type 2 chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) may help for selection of appropriate surgical procedures or pharmacotherapies in advance. However, an accurate non-invasive method for diagnosis of type 2 CRSwNP is presently unavailable.

Methods

To optimize the technique for collecting nasal secretion (NasSec), 89 CRSwNP patients were tested using nasal packs made with four types of materials. Further, Th2^low and Th2^highCRSwNP defined by clustering analysis in another 142 CRSwNP patients using tissue biomarkers, in the meanwhile, inflammatory biomarkers were detected in NasSec of the same patients collected by the selected nasal pack. A diagnostic model was established by machine learning algorithms to predict Th2^highCRSwNP using NasSecs biomarkers.

Results

Considering the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for IL-5 in NasSec, nasal pack in polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) was superior to other materials for NasSec collection. When Th2^low and Th2^highCRSwNP clusters were defined, logistic regression and decision tree model for prediction of Th2^highCRSwNP demonstrated high AUCs values of 0.92 and 0.90 respectively using biomarkers of NasSecs. Consequently, the pre-pruned decision tree model; based on the levels of IL-5 in NasSec (≤ 15.04 pg/mL), blood eosinophil count (≤ 0.475*10⁹/L) and absence of comorbid asthma; was chosen to define Th2^lowCRSwNP from Th2^highCRSwNP for routine clinical use.

Conclusions

Taken together, a decision tree model based on a combination of NasSec biomarkers and clinical features can accurately define type 2 CRSwNP patients and therefore may be of benefit to patients in receiving appropriate therapies in daily clinical practice.

Efficacy and Safety of Biologics for Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps

Objective: To review published literature for biologic treatment of nasal polyps. Data Sources: PubMed search performed on February 16, 2022, using search terms: biologics, benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, or reslizumab AND nasal polyps, nasal polyposis, or chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). Inclusion criteria were English language, published randomized controlled trials, post hoc analyses, and meta-analyses evaluating biologics for nasal polyposis, with or without comorbid asthma, and no date limits. Additional studies were found through references of primary and tertiary literature. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Nineteen studies, including 8 randomized controlled trials, 2 meta-analyses, and 9 post hoc analyses, examined the efficacy and safety of biologics for nasal polyposis. Agents studied included benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, and reslizumab. Studies had similar inclusion (refractory and recurrent CRSwNP) and exclusion criteria. All studies included the use of an intranasal corticosteroid (mometasone or fluticasone) in addition to the biologic or placebo. The most commonly studied primary endpoint was change in endoscopic nasal polyp score. Data Synthesis: All studies, post hoc analyses, and meta-analyses found improvement in endoscopic, clinical, and/or radiographic endpoints with benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, or reslizumab in patients with CRSwNP with or without comorbid asthma. Dupilumab has the most published data. Dupilumab, mepolizumab, and omalizumab are the only biologics currently Food and Drug Administration-approved for CRSwNP. Conclusion: Biologics are beneficial for treating nasal polyps with or without comorbid asthma. The choice depends on patient and provider preference and insurance coverage.

Adverse effects of dupilumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Case report and narrative review

Herein we review the current literature on the adverse effects related to biological therapy with the monoclonal antibody dupilumab in patients with type 2 inflammation prevalent phenotype chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Our review shows that the side effects of dupilumab may be linked to the prevalent type 2 inflammation phenotype (asthma, dermatitis, CRSwNP). We also report the first case of cutaneous rash as a side effect of dupilumab in a patient with CRSwNP.

Biologics for severe uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a change management approach. Consensus of the Joint Committee of Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology on biologics in rhinology

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a heterogeneous inflammatory condition of nasal mucosa and paranasal sinuses, predominantly mediated by type 2 inflammation and often associated with comorbid asthma and/or Exacerbated Respiratory Disease (N-ERD). The standard of care involves local and systemic corticosteroids and/or sinonasal surgery, although these options may be associated with recurrences and patients may require revision surgery. Difficult-to-treat patients, in fact, have a more severe disease requiring high systemic corticosteroid use and/or multiple sinonasal surgeries. Literature data suggests that biologic agents targeting specific key effectors of type 2 inflammation may offer supplemental therapy for patients with severe and uncontrolled CRSwNP, leading to significant improvement in several outcomes. For these reasons, over the years the endotyping of the disease has become increasingly important. Herein, we provide not only an update on the existing studies about the most promising biologics in CRSwNP, but also critical discussion on controversies about the use of biologics in severe uncontrolled CRSwNP. We finally provide consensus on strategic issues gathered among experts of the Joint Committee of Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology on biologics in order to offer the best care for difficult to treat patients.

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

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests that biologic therapy with targeted activity within the Type 2 inflammatory pathway can improve the clinical signs and symptoms of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). There remains a population in CRSwNP that despite medical therapy and endoscopic sinus surgery have persistent signs and symptoms of disease. Therefore, biologics, monoclonal antibody agents, could be beneficial therapeutic treatments for these patients. There have been eight 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. However, there are no formal recommendations for the optimal use of biologics in managing Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS) within the Canadian health care environment.

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. 17 fellowship trained rhinologists across Canada evaluated the 28 original statements on a scale of 1-10 and provided comments. A rating within 1-3 indicated disagreement, 8-10 demonstrated agreement and 4-7 represented being neutral towards a statement. All ratings were quantitively reviewed by mean, median, mode, range and standard deviation. Consensus was defined by removing the highest and lowest of the scores and using the "3 point relaxed system".

RESULTS

After three rounds, a total of 11 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 CRS.

CONCLUSION

This white paper provides guidance to Canadian physicians on the use of biologic therapy for the management of patients with CRS, 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.

A systematic review to examine the relationship between objective and patient-reported outcome measures in sinonasal disorders: recommendations for use in research and clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Common sinonasal disorders include chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), allergic rhinitis (AR), and a deviated nasal septum (DNS), which often coexist with shared common symptoms including nasal obstruction, olfactory dysfunction, and rhinorrhea. Various objective outcome measures and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess disease severity; however, there is limited evidence in the literature on the correlation between them. This systematic review aims to examine the relationship between them and provide recommendations.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified studies quantifying correlations between objective outcome measures and PROMs for the sinonasal conditions using a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

In total, 59 studies met inclusion criteria. For nasal obstruction, rhinomanometry shows a lack of correlation whereas peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) shows the strongest correlation with PROMs (r > 0.5). The Sniffin' Stick test shows a stronger correlation with PROMs (r > 0.5) than the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) (r < 0.5). Computed tomography (CT) sinus scores show little evidence of correlation with PROMs and nasal endoscopic ratings (weak correlation, r < 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Overall, objective outcome measures and PROMs assessing sinonasal symptoms are poorly correlated, and we recommend that objective outcome measures be used with validated PROMs depending on the setting. PNIF should be used in routine clinical practice for nasal obstruction; rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry may be useful in research. The Sniffin' Sticks test is recommended for olfactory dysfunction with UPSIT as an alternative. CT scores should be excluded as a routine CRS outcome measure, and endoscopic scores should be used in combination with PROMs until further research is conducted.