[Adverse events in biologics for severe asthma]

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a pathology that remains severe and is inadequately controlled in 4% of patients. Identification of multiple pathophysiological mechanisms has led to the development of biomedicines, of which there are currently five available in France, with a safety profile that appears favorable but remains uncertain due to a lack of real-life experience with these new molecules.

STATE OF KNOWLEDGE

Although relatively benign, the adverse effects of biologics are diverse. Headache, joint pain, skin reactions at the injection site, fever and asthenia are commonly observed during the different treatments. Ophthalmological complications seem restricted to dupilumab, with numerous cases of keratitis and conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis. Several respiratory complications have also been observed, essentially consisting in pharyngitis and other upper respiratory infections. Hypereosinophilia may occur, mainly with dupilumab, requiring investigation of systemic repercussions or vasculitis. Allergic reactions are uncommon but require careful monitoring during initial injections.

CONCLUSION

Biologics for severe asthma are recent drugs with a favorable safety profile, but with little real-life experience, justifying increased vigilance by prescribing physicians.

Safety of Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma: An Analysis of Suspected Adverse Reactions Reported in the WHO Pharmacovigilance Database

BACKGROUND

The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database.

METHODS

We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3).

RESULTS

Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.

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.

Omalizumab (Xolair) for food allergy

Omalizumab (Xolair – Genentech), a recombinant anti-IgE monoclonal antibody FDA-approved for treatment of allergic asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and chronic urticaria,1,2 has now also been approved for use in conjunction with food allergen avoidance to reduce IgE-mediated food allergic reactions caused by accidental exposure in patients ≥1 year old. Omalizumab is the first drug to be approved in the US to reduce allergic reactions to more than one food. Palforzia, an oral peanut allergen powder, was approved in 2020 to mitigate allergic reactions caused by accidental peanut exposure in patients with a confirmed peanut allergy.

Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of YH35324, a novel Long-Acting High-Affinity IgETrap-Fc protein in subjects with Atopy: Results from the First-in-Human study

BACKGROUND

YH35324, a long-acting IgETrap-Fc fusion protein, is a novel therapeutic agent for immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated allergic diseases. This randomized, double-blind, placebo/active-controlled, single ascending dose Phase 1 study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of YH35324 in subjects with atopy.

METHODS

Eligible subjects were healthy subjects or atopic adults with mild allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, or urticaria, and a serum total IgE level of 30-700 IU/mL (Part A) or > 700 IU/mL (Part B). In Part A, 35 subjects in 5 cohorts received YH35324 (0.3, 1, 3, 6, and 9 mg/kg), 8 received omalizumab (300 mg), and 9 received placebo. In Part B, 8 subjects received YH35324 and 8 received omalizumab.

RESULTS

Twenty subjects (38.5 %) in Part A (YH35324: 37.1 %, omalizumab: 50.0 %, placebo: 33.3 %) and 10 subjects (62.5 %) in Part B (YH35324: 100 %; omalizumab: 25.0 %) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). TEAEs were mostly grade 1/2; no serious AEs, AE-related treatment discontinuation, or anaphylaxis were reported. YH35324 exhibited dose-proportional increase in Cmax and AUClast over the dose range of 0.3-9 mg/kg. YH35324 rapidly suppressed serum-free IgE levels to a significant extent (< 25 and < 82.8 ng/mL, both P < 0.05) and with longer duration than omalizumab.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that YH35324 has a favorable safety profile and is effective in reducing serum-free IgE levels in subjects with atopic conditions.

Safety of omalizumab in chronic urticaria during pregnancy: a real-life study

BACKGROUND

Managing a pregnant patient with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is often challenging. Recent data have shown that most CSU treatments in pregnant patients are second-generation H1 antihistamines (sgAHs), while data on the safety of omalizumab are scant.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate, in a routine clinical practice setting, the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with severe CSU refractory to sgAHs who either became pregnant during treatment or who started the drug during pregnancy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of women aged ≥ 18 years who were pregnant, who received one or more doses of omalizumab at any time during their pregnancy or who were taking omalizumab at the time of, or in the 8 weeks before, conception.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine pregnant patients were evaluated: 23 (79%) conceived a child while taking omalizumab (group A), while 6 (21%) started omalizumab treatment during pregnancy (group B). Among patients in group A, we observed 23 births (21 liveborn singletons and 1 liveborn twin pair) and 1 miscarriage. Fifteen (65%) patients discontinued omalizumab after confirming their pregnancy, while eight (35%) were exposed to omalizumab during their entire pregnancy. In group B, omalizumab was introduced at a mean (SD) 10.83 (3.60) weeks' gestation and all patients were exposed to it until the end of pregnancy. In this group, there were seven liveborn infants (five singletons and one twin pair). No adverse events, pregnancy complications or congenital anomalies in newborns were recorded in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab for CSU treatment before and during pregnancy does not appear to have negative effects on maternal or fetal outcomes.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies

BACKGROUND

Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

METHODS

In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension.

RESULTS

Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).

Efficacy and safety of ligelizumab in adults and adolescents with chronic spontaneous urticaria: results of two phase 3 randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) do not achieve complete control of their symptoms with current available treatments. In a dose-finding phase 2b study, ligelizumab improved urticaria symptoms in patients with H1-antihistamine (H1-AH) refractory CSU. Here, we report the efficacy and safety outcomes from two ligelizumab phase 3 studies.

METHODS

PEARL-1 and PEARL-2 were identically designed randomised, double-blind, active-controlled and placebo-controlled parallel-group studies. Patients aged 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe H1-AH refractory CSU were recruited from 347 sites in 46 countries and randomly allocated in a 3:3:3:1 ratio via Interactive Response Technology to 72 mg ligelizumab, 120 mg ligelizumab, 300 mg omalizumab, or placebo, dosed every 4 weeks, for 52 weeks. Patients allocated to placebo received 120 mg ligelizumab from week 24. The primary endpoint was change-from-baseline (CFB) in weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) at week 12, and was analysed in all eligible adult patients according to the treatment assigned at random allocation. Safety was assessed throughout the study in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. The studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03580369 (PEARL-1) and NCT03580356 (PEARL-2). Both trials are now complete.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 17, 2018, and Oct 26, 2021, 2057 adult patients were randomly allocated across both studies (72 mg ligelizumab n=614; 120 mg ligelizumab n=616; 300 mg omalizumab n=618, and placebo n=209). A total of 1480 (72%) of 2057 were female, and 577 (28%) of 2057 were male. Mean UAS7 at baseline across study groups ranged from 29·37 to 31·10. At week 12, estimated treatment differences in mean CFB-UAS7 were as follows: for 72 mg ligelizumab versus placebo, -8·0 (95% CI -10·6 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -10·0 (-12·6 to -7·4; PEARL-2); 72 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·2 to 2·5; PEARL-1), 0·4 (-1·4 to 2·2; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus placebo -8·0 (-10·5 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -11·1 (-13·7 to -8·5; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·1 to 2·5; PEARL-1), -0·7 (-2·5 to 1·1; PEARL-2). Both doses of ligelizumab were superior to placebo (p<0·0001), but not to omalizumab, in both studies. No new safety signals were identified for ligelizumab or omalizumab.

INTERPRETATION

In the phase 3 PEARL studies, ligelizumab demonstrated superior efficacy versus placebo but not versus omalizumab. The safety profile of ligelizumab was consistent with previous studies.

FUNDING

Novartis Pharma.

Solar Urticaria: An Ambispective Study in a Long-term Follow-up Cohort with Emphasis on Therapeutic Predictors and Outcomes

Solar urticaria is a rare photodermatosis with several unknown pathogenic, clinical and therapeutic aspects. This study analysed the clinical and therapeutic features of a long-term follow-up solar urticaria cohort, with a focus on omalizumab management and outcomes, and characterized omalizumab response with the use of the high-affinity immunoglobulin E (IgE) receptor (FcεRI) and the Urticaria Control Test. An observational, unicentric, ambispective study was conducted from 2007 to 2023. Solar urticaria was diagnosed in 41 patients with a median follow-up of 60 months. Thirteen patients were prescribed omalizumab, with a median treatment time of 48 months. A significant decrease in FcεRI baseline levels and subsequent median increase in Urticaria Control Test was evidenced after omalizumab prescription in all patients. Drug survival at 48 months was at 88.9%. Omalizumab stepping-down protocol led to sustained omalizumab discontinuation in only 1 patient. Median basal Urticaria Control Test was lower (p < 0.01) in patients who were prescribed omalizumab and in patients without remission. This study contributes to our knowledge of omalizumab outcomes in real-life clinical practice and highlights the pathogenic importance of IgE-mediated pathways in solar urticaria, where FcεRI emerges as a possible biomarker of omalizumab response.

Lower myostatin and higher MUC1 levels are associated with better response to mepolizumab and omalizumab in asthma: a protein-protein interaction analyses

INTRODUCTION

Biomarkers are needed to inform the choice of biologic therapy in patients with asthma given the increasing number of biologics. We aimed to identify proteins associated with response to omalizumab and mepolizumab.

METHODS

Aptamer-based proteomic profiling (SomaScan) was used to assess 1437 proteins from 51 patients with moderate to severe asthma who received omalizumab (n = 29) or mepolizumab (n = 22). Response was defined as the change in asthma-related exacerbations in the 12 months following therapy initiation. All models were adjusted for age, sex, and pre-treatment exacerbation rate. Additionally, body mass index was included in the omalizumab model and eosinophil count in the mepolizumab model. We evaluated the association between molecular signatures and response using negative binomial regression correcting for the false discovery rate (FDR) and gene set enrichment analyses (GSEA) to identify associated pathways.

RESULTS

Over two-thirds of patients were female. The average age for omalizumab patients was 42 years and 57 years for mepolizumab. At baseline, the average exacerbation rate was 1.5/year for omalizumab and 2.4/year for mepolizumab. Lower levels of LOXL2 (unadjusted p: 1.93 × 10E-05, FDR-corrected: 0.028) and myostatin (unadjusted: 3.87 × 10E-05, FDR-corrected: 0.028) were associated with better response to mepolizumab. Higher levels of CD9 antigen (unadjusted: 5.30 × 10E-07, FDR-corrected: 0.0006) and MUC1 (unadjusted: 1.15 × 10E-06, FDR-corrected: 0.0006) were associated with better response to omalizumab, and LTB4R (unadjusted: 1.12 × 10E-06, FDR-corrected: 0.0006) with worse response. Protein-protein interaction network modeling showed an enrichment of the TNF- and NF-kB signaling pathways for patients treated with mepolizumab and multiple pathways involving MAPK, including the FcER1 pathway, for patients treated with omalizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides novel fundamental data on proteins associated with response to mepolizumab or omalizumab in severe asthma and warrants further validation as potential biomarkers for therapy selection.

Comparison of the General Characteristics of Patients with Severe Asthma Who Switched from Omalizumab to Mepolizumab versus Patients Who Responded to Omalizumab Treatment: A Real-Life Study

INTRODUCTION

Severe asthma is characterized by frequent recurrent airway symptoms and exacerbations, and these affect the quality of life. Biological agents can be used in the treatment of patients with severe asthma if the disease cannot be controlled with standard controller treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics and laboratory data of patients with severe asthma who were switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab and patients with severe asthma who responded to omalizumab.

METHODS

The clinical characteristics and laboratory data of patients with severe asthma who responded to omalizumab and switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab were compared retrospectively.

RESULTS

Evaluation was made of a total of 79 patients, including 64 omalizumab responders and 15 who switched to mepolizumab from omalizumab. After omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment, the annual number of asthma attacks, the use of oral corticosteroid (OCS), the annual number of hospitalizations, and the eosinophil count significantly decreased (omalizumab: p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively; mepolizumab: p = 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.002, p = 0.001, respectively). After omalizumab treatment, the increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (%) and asthma control test (ACT) score were determined to be statistically significant (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). After mepolizumab treatment, the increase in ACT score was significant (p = 0.003). Drug allergy, chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), regular use of OCS, and high baseline eosinophil count (cells/µL) were associated with poor response to omalizumab treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 7.86, p = 0.003; OR = 52.92, p < 0.001; OR = 10.16, p = 0.004; OR = 0.99, p = 0.004, respectively). House dust mite sensitivity and high baseline FEV1 (%) were associated with good response to omalizumab treatment (OR = 0.29, p = 0.041; OR = 1.06, p = 0.03, respectively). The blood eosinophil count had diagnostic value in predicting the nonresponsiveness to omalizumab treatment (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.967, p < 0.001, cut-off: 510).

CONCLUSION

A high pretreatment eosinophil count, concomitant CRSwNP, a history of drug allergy, and regular OCS use may be associated with poor response to omalizumab treatment in patients with severe asthma. Depending on the treatment response, treatment switching can be applied between biological agents. The results of the current study should be supported by multicenter studies.

Characterizing Adverse Events of Biologic Treatment of T2 Disease: A Disproportionality Analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

INTRODUCTION

Over the last 3 years, the FDA has approved dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab for the treatment of CRSwNP; however, adverse events of these biologics have not been described in post-marketing surveillance trials. By utilizing the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), this study describes and compares biologic-associated adverse events in T2 disease.

METHODS

This case-non-case study assessed disproportionate reporting rates using reporting odds ratios (RORs). RORs and p values for biologic-associated AEs were categorized and compared among dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab. This analysis included AEs associated with all treatment indications. Relative AE rates and outcomes were calculated.

RESULTS

There were a total of 112,560, 24,428, and 18,741 unique AE reports associated with dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab, respectively. Omalizumab had the strongest association with anaphylaxis (ROR = 20.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.58, 23.29). Dupilumab had large relative proportions and positive signals in the ophthalmologic category (7.76%, ROR = 6.20, 95% CI: 6.06, 6.35), such as with blurry vision (ROR = 3.80, CI: 3.52, 4.12) and visual impairment (ROR = 1.98, CI: 1.80, 2.19). Dupilumab was the only biologic associated with injection-site reactions (7.98%, ROR = 8.17, 95% CI: 7.98, 8.37).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This is the first large-scale comparative analysis of the AE profiles of dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab. Our data suggest possible relations between dupilumab and ophthalmologic and injection-site AEs. Omalizumab was the only biologic with a positive anaphylaxis signal. This FAERS investigation suggests important AE differences among these biologics.

A risk of serious anaphylatic reactions to asthma biologics: a pharmacovigilance study based on a global real-world database

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory condition that affects the lung airways. Chronic use of oral glucocorticoids in patients with severe asthma is associated with several adverse events (AEs). Biologics (omalizumab, benralizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, and dupilumab) have been developed as alternative therapies for the treatment of asthma. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the risk of anaphylactic reactions associated with these five biologics based on a large global database. We utilized individual case reports from the Uppsala Monitoring Center from January 1968 to December 29, 2019. A disproportionality analysis was performed over all drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Anaphylactic reactions were defined according to the "anaphylactic reaction" of the standardized MedDRA queries. Contrary to dupilumab, omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab demonstrated positive signals related to anaphylactic reactions over all drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Reslizumab, which represented only 315 cases of all AEs, requires more reports to determine its association with anaphylactic reactions. More anaphylactic reactions have been identified than are known, and most cases (96.2%) are reported to be serious. Our findings indicate that omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab for asthma treatment are associated with a high risk of anaphylactic reactions; thus, more careful monitoring in the post-administration period is recommended.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab Updosing in Chronic Urticaria: A Retrospective Study

Omalizumab is an effective and safe treatment option with licensed doses in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU); however, some patients are not responsive to licensed doses and require updosing. As studies concerning updosing were insufficient, the present study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab updosing (300 mg every 2 weeks) in CSU patients. Data of CSU patients treated with omalizumab were analyzed retrospectively. As an outcome measure, physician assessment of treatment response (complete response [CR], partial response, and unresponsiveness) was used. In all, 49 patients depicting CR to omalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks and 54 patients treated with omalizumab 300 mg every 2 weeks were included in the study. Mean duration of the disease in updosing group was significantly lengthier than the CR group. The mean percentage level of eosinophils and basophils was significantly higher in the CR group. The history of systemic corticosteroid and oral cyclosporine treatment was significantly more frequent in the updosing group. Treatment with omalizumab 300 mg every 2 weeks for 12 weeks led to CR in 41 patients (75.9%). Our results confirmed the efficacy and safety of omalizumab updosing. Low baso-phil and eosinophil levels could also be important factors in defining the need for updosing.

Omalizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria (CSU): Real-Life Experience in Dose/Interval Adjustments and Treatment Discontinuation

BACKGROUND

Data on real-life experience with omalizumab dose/interval adjustments are still limited, as well as on omalizumab discontinuation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate efficacy and safety of omalizumab dose/interval adjustment in a Portuguese cohort of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and to characterize those who discontinued omalizumab.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who started omalizumab for CSU at a Portuguese Urticaria Center of Reference and Excellence (UCARE) was conducted between 2009 and 2021. Response criteria were based on a weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) <7 points (partial: UAS7 7-15 points; nonresponders: UAS7 >15 points) and minimal important difference >10 points.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were enrolled in the study; 83% of them were women, and the median age was 49 years (interquartile range: 40-58 years). On 300 mg q4 weeks, 96 (70%) patients were responders, 29 (21%) partial responders, and 13 (9%) nonresponders. After dose/interval adjustments (up to 600 mg q2 weeks), 108 (78%) were responders, 27 (20%) partial responders, and 3 (2%) nonresponders. No adverse events were reported. Updosing was more frequent in patients with angioedema, body mass index >30 kg/m2, positive basophil activation test, and autologous serum test. A total of 71 (51%) patients lengthened interval, presenting higher median pre-omalizumab D-dimer (0.2 vs 0 mcg/mL, P = .038) and C-reactive protein (0.3 vs 0.1 mg/dL, P = .030) values than those with a standard dose. In total, 37 patients (27%) stopped omalizumab, but 14 (38%) of them needed retreatment on average 11 months after discontinuation. Patients with angioedema and a longer omalizumab duration had higher chance of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab dose and/or interval adjustment is effective and safe and should be implemented in partial/nonresponders for response improvement and in responders for further discontinuation. A protocol for regimen adjustments is proposed.

Exacerbation of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria Following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Omalizumab-Treated Patients

BACKGROUND

The rapid development and rollout of vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to more than half of the world's population being vaccinated to date. Real-world data have reported various adverse cutaneous reactions, including delayed-onset urticaria, which was highly ranked as a common manifestation across studies. However, the impact of these novel mRNA or viral vector COVID-19 vaccines on preexisting chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) remains largely unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the clinical status of patients with relatively stable CSU who are undergoing omalizumab treatment and to identify risk factors for exacerbation.

METHODS

We conducted a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital. Adult patients with relatively stable CSU under regular omalizumab treatments who had received at least one COVID-19 vaccination were included.

RESULTS

There were 105 study subjects who received 230 COVID-19 vaccinations between March and December 2021. Fifteen patients (14.3%) experienced aggravation of urticaria at least once after COVID-19 vaccination. The demographics and clinical characteristics of the patients were comparable regardless of the exacerbation of CSU. However, case-level analysis revealed that the presence of urticaria (vs none) before vaccination (odds ratio [OR] = 4.99; 95% CI, 1.57-15.82) and the development of systemic reactogenicity (OR = 4.57; 95% CI, 1.62-12.90) were associated with a higher risk for exacerbation.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel COVID-19 vaccination induced exacerbation in more than one-tenth of patients with well-controlled CSU. The establishment of a proper management strategy during COVID-19 vaccination is necessary for patients with CSU.

[Omalizumab Treats Aspirin-Induced Asthma Complicated With Nasosinusitis and Otitis Media:Report of One Case]

Omalizumab,as a biological agent targeting IgE,is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody and the first targeted drug approved for treating moderate-to-severe bronchial asthma.By reviewing one case of aspirin-induced asthma complicated with nasosinusitis and otitis media,we discussed the value of omalizumab in the treatment of asthma and its complications,aiming to provide a reference for clinical practice.

Inhibition of KIT for chronic urticaria: a status update on drugs in early clinical development

INTRODUCTION

Chronic urticaria (CU), including chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU), is a prevalent, enduring, mast-cell driven condition that presents challenges in its management. There is a clear need for additional approved treatment options beyond H1 receptor antagonists and the anti-IgE monoclonal antibody (mAb), omalizumab. One of the latest therapeutic strategies targets KIT, which is considered the primary master regulator for mast cell-related disorders.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a status update on KIT inhibiting drugs in early clinical development for CU.

EXPERT OPINION

Whereas multi-targeted tyrosine kinase KIT inhibitors carry the risk of off-target toxicities, initial data from anti-KIT mAbs indicate significant potential in CSU and CIndU. The prolonged depletion of mast cells over several weeks by barzolvolimab could effectively control urticarial symptoms. Regarding safety, based on theoretical considerations and the available preliminary results, it is already evident that there may be more side effects compared to omalizumab. However, long-term safety data beyond 12 weeks are still lacking. The outcome of ongoing or planned clinical trials with several anti-KIT mAbs will need to demonstrate benefits compared to anti-IgE in CU or whether one approach is better suited for specific urticaria endotypes.

PK/PD modeling to characterize placebo and treatment effect of omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria

The pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of omalizumab and its pharmacodynamic (PD) effect in patients has yet to be fully characterized in chronic spontaneous urticaria, which could elucidate its pathogenesis and treatment response. This study has two objectives; (1) characterize the population PK of omalizumab and its PD effect on IgE, and (2) develop a drug effect model of omalizumab in urticaria (via change in weekly itch severity score). The target-mediated population of PK/PD model incorporating omalizumab-IgE binding and turnover adequately described PK and PD of omalizumab. The effect compartment model and linear drug effect and additive placebo response adequately described placebo and treatment effects of omalizumab. Several baseline covariates were identified for PK/PD and drug effect models. The developed model has the potential to aid in understanding variability in PK/PD as well as response to omalizumab treatment.

A genome-wide association study of chronic spontaneous urticaria risk and heterogeneity

BACKGROUND

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a dermatologic condition characterized by spontaneous, pruritic hives and/or angioedema that persists for 6 weeks or longer with no identifiable trigger. Antihistamines and second-line therapies such as omalizumab are effective for some CSU patients, but others remain symptomatic, with significant impact on quality of life. This variable response to treatment and autoantibody levels across patients highlight clinically heterogeneous subgroups.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to highlight pathways involved in CSU by investigating the genetics of CSU risk and subgroups.

METHODS

We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 679 CSU patients and 4446 controls and a GWAS of chronic urticaria (CU)-index, which measures IgG autoantibodies levels, by comparing 447 CU index-low to 183 CU index-high patients. We also tested whether polygenic scores for autoimmune-related disorders were associated with CSU risk and CU index.

RESULTS

We identified 2 loci significantly associated with disease risk. The strongest association mapped to position 56 of HLA-DQA1 (P = 1.69 × 10-9), where the arginine residue was associated with increased risk (odds ratio = 1.64). The second association signal colocalized with expression-quantitative trait loci for ITPKB in whole blood (Pcolocalization = .997). The arginine residue at position 56 of HLA-DQA1 was also associated with increased risk of CU index-high (P = 6.15 × 10-5, odds ratio = 1.86), while the ITKPB association was not (P = .64). Polygenic scores for 3 autoimmune-related disorders (hypothyroidism, type 1 diabetes, and vitiligo) were associated with CSU risk and CU index (P < 2.34 × 10-3, odds ratio > 1.72).

CONCLUSION

A GWAS of CSU identified 2 genome-wide significant loci, highlighting the shared genetics between CU index and autoimmune disorders.

Analysis of the Efficacy and Recurrence of Omalizumab Use in the Treatment of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria and Chronic Inducible Urticaria

INTRODUCTION

Chronic urticaria (CU) is a common skin condition that can be divided into chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU). Omalizumab is one treatment option for CU, but currently there are limited clinical studies of omalizumab's efficacy for treating CU in Chinese patients. This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab treatment for CU patients in a Chinese patient population. Specifically, we aimed to compare the differential efficacy of omalizumab for CSU and CIndU patients and predict risk factors for recurrence.

METHODS

We completed a retrospective clinical data review of 130 CU patients who received omalizumab treatment from August 2020 to May 2022, with a maximum follow-up period of 18 months.

RESULTS

A total of 108 CSU patients and 22 CIndU patients were included in the study. After treatment with omalizumab, the response rate in the CSU group was higher than that in the CIndU group (93.5% vs. 68.2%), and CSU patients accounted for a higher proportion of responders and early responders (responders: 87.1% vs. 12.9%, p < 0.001; early responders: 95.7% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.001). Nonresponders had lower total immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels (75.0 vs. 167.5 IU/mL, p = 0.046) and a relatively shorter duration of treatment (1.0 vs. 3.0 months, p = 0.009) compared to responders. Early responders had shorter disease duration (1.0 vs. 3.0 years, p = 0.028), higher baseline UCT (4.0 vs. 2.0, p = 0.034), lower baseline DLQI (18.0 vs. 18.5, p = 0.026), and shorter total treatment time (2.0 vs. 4.0 months, p < 0.001) compared to late responders. All adverse events reported during treatment were mild. Seventy-four patients with CU discontinued the drug after achieving complete disease control, of which 26 (35.1%) relapsed for 2.0 months (interquartile range: 1.0-3.0 months). Compared with nonrelapsed patients, relapsed patients often had other allergic diseases (42.3% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.029), higher basal levels of total IgE (263.0 vs. 140.0 IU/mL, p = 0.033), and longer disease duration (4.2 vs. 1.0 years, p = 0.002). Relapsed patients could still achieve good disease control after restarting omalizumab therapy.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab was effective and safe for CSU and CIndU patients. Patients with CSU responded more quickly to omalizumab and showed a relatively better treatment effect. However, there was a possibility of relapse after discontinuation of omalizumab after complete control of CU, and in these cases, restarting omalizumab treatment after relapse was effective.

Comparison between chronic spontaneous urticaria and chronic induced urticaria on the efficacy of omalizumab treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of omalizumab in the treatment of refractory-to-antihistamines chronic induced urticaria (CIndU) in comparison with that of refractory-to-antihistamines chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). We retrieved interventional studies and observational studies on omalizumab efficacy to CIndU patients and efficacy comparison between CSU and CIndU both refractory to H1-antihistamines in electronic databases (accessed till May 2022). The odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated with a random-effect model in this meta-analysis. The majority of patients with different CIndU subtypes gained complete or partial response and good safety after omalizumab treatment. A total of five studies with 355 CSU patients and 103 CIndU patients were included for the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in the efficacy of omalizumab in the treatment of CSU and CIndU (OR -0.83, 95% CI [0.84, 2.21], P > 0.05). Based on the validity of omalizumab in the treatment of various CIndU subtypes and non-differential efficacy between CSU and CIndU, it is reasonable to list omalizumab as a third-line treatment of refractory CIndU.

Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine and Omalizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) not controlled by optimized doses of antihistamines is referred to as refractory CSU. Add-on therapies recommended by guidelines include omalizumab, immunosuppressive, and anti-inflammatory agents.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to assess the real-world effectiveness of different add-on treatment options for refractory CSU in 2 large clinical practices.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted in 264 patients with refractory CSU not adequately controlled for ≥6 weeks with optimized doses of second-generation histamine-1 blockers. Omalizumab and hydroxychloroquine were the most frequently prescribed add-on therapies, allowing comparisons of clinical outcomes for these 2 agents. Complete response included absent or infrequent urticaria and patient satisfaction with treatment. Partial response was reduced hives, but requiring a second add-on therapy. Sustained response was complete response to an add-on therapy for ≥1 year.

RESULTS

Omalizumab add-on treatment was significantly more likely to be associated with a complete response versus hydroxychloroquine. Complete sustained response at 1 year was observed in 82% (111 of 134) of patients on omalizumab and 66% (73 of 111) on hydroxychloroquine as the first add-on therapy (P < .01). Patients with thyroid disease had a poorer response to add-on treatments (45% responded vs 63%; P = .03). In patients with incomplete responses to first add-on interventions (n = 45), 65% and 62% subsequently had complete responses to omalizumab and hydroxychloroquine, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although omalizumab was superior, hydroxychloroquine achieved a complete response in two-thirds of treated patients. Given a favorable safety profile, hydroxychloroquine should be considered as an add-on treatment for refractory CSU.

Impact of Omalizumab on Anaphylaxis in Patients Treated for Chronic Urticaria

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening systemic allergic reaction. Omalizumab (OMA) is an established treatment in chronic urticaria (CU), but experience in anaphylaxis is limited.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OMA on anaphylaxis in patients with CU who are resistant to antihistamine therapy and have a history of anaphylaxis.

METHOD

Patients with antihistamine-resistant CU and a history of anaphylaxis were eligible. OMA was given 300 mg/150 mg every 4 weeks. Urticaria control test (UCT) scores, the episodes of anaphylaxis, and adverse events were recorded during the OMA treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 7 adults were included. After starting OMA, all of them achieved a complete control (UCT = 16) after 3 months of OMA treatment; 6 of them did not suffer any attack of anaphylaxis in the follow-up periods (5 patients for more than 12 months and 1 patient for 4 months). No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

The study indicated the efficacy and safety of OMA for antihistamine-resistant CU patients with a history of anaphylaxis and its potential as a prevention option for anaphylaxis.

[Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with refractory allergic asthma: a meta-analysis]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with refractory allergic asthma using meta-analysis. Methods: We searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the website of ClinicalTrials. gov registry for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using the search terms: ("anti-IgE" OR "anti-immunoglobulin E" OR "anti-IgE antibody" OR "omalizumab" OR "rhuMAb-E25" OR "Xolair") AND ("allergic asthma"). The time was up to September 19th 2020. Review Manager 5.4 software and Stata16 software were used to calculate pooled RR or WMD, perform heterogeneity test, and assess publication bias. Results: Fifteen RCTs with 6 316 patients in total (omalizumab, n=3 469; placebo, n=2 847) met our selection criteria. Comparing with placebo, omalizumab reduced the risk of asthma exacerbations during both stable-inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) phase (RR=0.69, 95%CI: 0.63-0.75, P<0.001; I²=39.0%, P=0.090) and ICS-reduction phase (RR=0.55, 95%CI: 0.46-0.66, P<0.001; I²=41.0%, P=0.180), reduced emergency visits (RR=0.53, 95%CI: 0.38-0.73, P<0.001; I²=0, P=0.420), made a significant reduction in dosage of ICS (RR=1.35, 95%CI: 1.25-1.45, P<0.001; I²=22.0%, P=0.280) and even withdrew from ICS completely (RR=1.80, 95%CI: 1.41-2.31, P<0.001; I²=57.0%, P=0.070). Omalizumab significantly improved asthma-related quality of life (RR=1.81, 95%CI: 1.51-2.17). The use of rescue bronchodilators was significantly reduced in the omalizumab group (RR=0.78, 95%CI: 0.67-0.92) but there was no significant difference in the dosage of rescue bronchodilators (puff per day) (WMD=-0.32, 95%CI: -0.77-0.13). Patients taking omalizumab did not increase the frequency of any adverse events (RR=1.01, 95%CI: 0.98-1.03) and serious adverse events (RR=0.89, 95%CI: 0.74-1.06). Conclusions: Omalizumab is an ideal adjunctive treatment for refractory allergic asthma with good efficacy and safety. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the appropriate duration of treatment.

Rituximab, Omalizumab, and Dupilumab Treatment Outcomes in Bullous Pemphigoid: A Systematic Review

Background

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune subepidermal bullous disease of the skin. First-line treatment of systemic corticosteroids may cause serious adverse events. Rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab should be explored as alternative treatment options to improve outcomes.

Objective

To systematically review the rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab treatment outcomes in bullous pemphigoid.

Methods

A PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library search were conducted on March 10, 2022. A total of 75 studies were included using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

Results

Use of rituximab (n=122), omalizumab (n=53) and dupilumab (n=36) were reported in 211 patients with BP. Rituximab led to complete remission in 70.5% (n=86/122) and partial remission in 23.8% (n=29/122) of patients within 5.7 months, with a recurrence rate of 20.5% (n=25/122). 9.0% (n=11/122) of patients died and infection (6.6%, n=8/122) was the most common adverse event. Omalizumab led to complete remission in 67.9% (n=36/53) and partial remission in 20.8% (n=11/53) of patients within 6.6 months, with a recurrence rate of 5.7% (n=3/53). 1.9% (n=1/53) of patients died and thrombocytopenia (1.9%, n=1/53) was observed as the most common adverse event. Dupilumab led to complete remission in 66.7% (n=24/36) and partial remission in 19.4% (n=7/36) of patients within 4.5 months of treatment without any reported adverse events, with a recurrence rate of 5.6% (n=2/36).

Conclusions

Rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab have similar clinical benefits for BP patients. However, rituximab resulted in higher recurrence rates, adverse events, and mortality rates.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022316454.

An open-label, proof-of-concept study of lirentelimab for antihistamine-resistant chronic spontaneous and inducible urticaria

BACKGROUND

Chronic urticaria (CU) is a debilitating mast cell-driven disease, often refractory to standard therapy (ie, antihistamines). Lirentelimab, an anti-sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectin 8 mAb, selectively inhibits mast cells and depletes eosinophils.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine safety and efficacy of lirentelimab in patients with CU.

METHODS

This phase 2a study enrolled patients with CU refractory to up to 4-fold H1-antihistamine doses. Patients received 6 monthly intravenous doses of lirentelimab (0.3, 1, and up to 3 mg/kg). Primary efficacy end point was change in Urticaria Control Test score at week 22. Urticaria Activity Score weekly average (UAS7) was assessed in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and Cholinergic UAS7 was used for patients with cholinergic urticaria (CholU).

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were enrolled in 4 cohorts (n = 13 omalizumab-naive CSU, n = 11 omalizumab-refractory CSU, n = 11 CholU, n = 10 symptomatic dermographism). Urticaria Control Test scores increased with lirentelimab across cohorts, with mean changes at week 22 of 11.1 ± 4.1, 4.8 ± 7.0, 6.5 ± 6.2, and 3.4 ± 4.1 and complete response rates (Urticaria Control Test score ≥ 12) of 92%, 36%, 82%, and 40%, respectively. In omalizumab-naive and omalizumab-refractory patients with CSU, disease activity decreased at week 22 (mean UAS7 change, -73% and -47%, respectively), with UAS7 response rates (≥50% reduction) of 77% and 45%, respectively. In patients with symptomatic dermographism, 50% (5 of 10) and 40% (4 of 10) had complete itch and hive resolution by FricTest, respectively, and 100% (7 of 7) evaluable patients with CholU had negative responses to Pulse-Controlled Ergometry exercise test. Most common adverse events included infusion-related reactions (43%; all mild/moderate and transient), nasopharyngitis (21%), and headache (19%). No treatment-related serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Lirentelimab demonstrated activity across 3 forms of antihistamine-refractory CU.

Case Report: Safety and Efficacy of Omalizumab in a 13-Year-Old Patient With Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria and Type 1 Diabetes

Chronic urticaria (CU) is defined by the presence of itchy wheals, sometimes accompanied by angioedema, lasting for at least 6 weeks. CU is treated with second-generation antihistamines, increased up to four times the normal doses for second-line treatment. Omalizumab (a monoclonal antibody anti-IgE) may be recommended as third-line therapy in children aged over 12 years. Few reports have suggested that glucose homeostasis is impaired in some type 2 diabetic patients receiving omalizumab, and even in non-diabetic patients, fasting blood glucose and HOMA-IR values appeared to be significantly increased. We report the case of a 13-year-old girl with diabetes mellitus type 1 and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) refractory to standard recommended therapy that we treated with omalizumab at a standard recommended dose of 300 mg every 4 weeks. We observed a rapid and complete remission of CSU after treatment with this humanized monoclonal antibody without detrimental effects on the patient's glucose control especially in terms of HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin), time in glycemic range (TIR), and daily insulin needs.

Country-based report: the safety of omalizumab treatment in pregnant patients with asthma

BACKGROUND/AIM

We aimed to report outcomes of pregnant patients with asthma under omalizumab treatment and their infants in our country.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with asthma who received omalizumab for at least 6 months and at least one dose during their pregnancy were retrospectively evaluated using a questionnaire regarding their disease and therapy and the health of their infants.

RESULTS

Twenty pregnant patients and their 23 infant’s data were analyzed. The mean delivery age was 31.8 ± 7.4 years. They received omalizumab for 28.9 ± 21.8 months. Eight (36.4%) patients showed exacerbation of the disease during pregnancy. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and asthma control test (ACT) scores at the starting time of omalizumab administration, first month of the pregnancy, and after delivery were 71 ± 18%, 83.4 ± 10.5%, and 80.5 ± 13% (FEV1), and 11.9 ± 4.9, 20.2 ± 2.6, and 20.4 ± 2.2 (ACT), respectively. One patient gave birth to twin infants, two patients to two infants each in different years, and 17 to one infant each. Three (13%) infants had low birth weight and five (21.7%) were born prematurely. No congenital anomalies were detected. Seven (30.4%) infants presented atopic diseases during their life.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab treatment during pregnancy seems to be safe for both patients and their infants.

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to identify evidence gaps that will guide future research on omalizumab for CRSwNP.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library on 13 October 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with placebo, given for at least 16 weeks in adult patients with CRSwNP.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent authors screened search results, extracted data and assessed studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were pooled using the inverse-variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by the χ² test and the I² statistic.

RESULTS

A total of four RCTs involving 303 participants were identified. When comparing omalizumab to placebo, there was a significant difference in Nasal Polyps Score (MD=-1.20; 95% CI -1.48 to -0.92), Nasal Congestion Score (MD=-0.67; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.48), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (MD=-15.62; 95% CI -19.79 to -11.45), Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD=-1.84; 95% CI -2.43 to -1.25) and reduced need for surgery (risk ratio (RR)=5.61; 95% CI 1.99 to 15.81). Furthermore, there was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events ((RR=1.40; 95% CI 0.29 to 6.80), adverse events (RR=0.83; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.15) and rescue systemic corticosteroid (RR=0.52; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.61).

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first meta-analysis that identified omalizumab significantly improved endoscopic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes in adults with moderate to severe CRSwNP and it was safe and well tolerated.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020207639.

Safety of Methotrexate in Chronic Urticaria Unresponsive to Omalizumab

Omalizumab (humanized anti-immunoglobulin IgE) is currently the first choice of treatment for chronic urticaria refractory to high-dose second-generation antihistamines (sgAH). Despite its high safety profile, response to omalizumab is insufficient in one-third of patients. Some studies have suggested that methotrexate is effective in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria, but there are no studies on its efficacy and safety in patients unresponsive to omalizumab. This retrospective study aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness and adverse effects of methotrexate in patients with chronic urticaria unresponsive to omalizumab + high-dose sgAH. The patients were evaluated in terms of age at disease onset, duration of the urticaria episode before methotrexate therapy, treatment before methotrexate therapy, final treatment, treatment responses, 7-day urticaria activity score (UAS7) before and after treatment, and total IgE levels. Methotrexate was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 15 mg once weekly as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs to 10 chronic urticaria patients with a history of nonresponse to omalizumab + high-dose sgAH. The mean age of the patients was 44.6±11.5 (31-65) years, and 9 (90%) of the patients were female. The mean duration of methotrexate therapy was 5.1±2.4 months (1.5-9 months). Complete response or well-controlled response was observed in 70% of the patients and partial response was observed in 1 patient (10%). Methotrexate was well tolerated by 80% of the patients. Methotrexate seems to be a useful treatment option both as monotherapy or combined therapy in patients resistant to omalizumab + sgAH.

Omalizumab-associated eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis: cause or coincidence?

Omalizumab is an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody used in severe allergic asthma. Herein, we describe a case of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, which manifested 3 months after initiation of omalizumab therapy, while maintenance corticosteroid therapy dose was unchanged.

Effect of omalizumab as add-on therapy to Quality of Life Questionnaire for Korean Asthmatics (KAQLQ) in Korean patients with severe persistent allergic asthma

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Omalizumab is the first biologic known to be effective in patients with severe allergic asthma.

METHODS

This study was conducted as a multicenter, single-group, open trial to evaluate the improvement in the quality of life with the additional administration of omalizumab for 24 weeks in Korean patients with severe persistent allergic asthma.

RESULTS

Of the 44 patients, 31.8% were men and the mean age was 49.8 ± 11.8 years. A score improvement of 0.5 points or more in the Quality of Life Questionnaire for Korean Asthmatics (KAQLQ) was noted in 50.0% (22/44) of the patinets. In the improved group, the baseline total immunoglobulin E (IgE) level and the amount of omalizumab used were higher, and the day and night asthma symptoms were more severe, compared to those in the non-improved group. According to the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness, favorable outcomes were found in 78.6% of patients. The Korean asthma control test (p < 0.005) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second % predicted (FEV1%; p < 0.01) improved significantly in patients who received omalizumab treatment, compared to that at week 0, and the total dose of rescue systemic corticosteroids significantly decreased (p < 0.05). The improved group on KAQLQ showed a significant improvement in FEV1% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab can be considered a biological treatment for Korean patients with severe allergic asthma. It is recommended to consider omalizumab as add-on therapy in patients with high baseline total IgE levels and severe asthma symptoms.

Effects of omalizumab in children with asthma: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is still controversial in the current literature whether omalizumab is beneficial for children with asthma. Given that there is no high-quality meta-analysis to incorporate existing evidence, the purpose of this protocol is to design a systematic review and meta-analysis of the level I evidence to ascertain whether omalizumab is beneficial and safe for children with asthma.

METHODS

The systematic literature review is structured to adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The following search terms will be used in PUBMED, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases on June, 2021, as the search algorithm: (omalizumab) AND (asthma) AND (children). The primary outcome is the long-term safety and tolerability of omalizumab. The other outcomes include asthma control, quality of life, use of asthma controller medications, and spirometry measurements and emergency room visits due to asthma, and serum trough concentrations of omalizumab, free and total immunoglobulin E measured. Review Manager software (v 5.3; Cochrane Collaboration) will be used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The review will add to the existing literature by showing compelling evidence and improved guidance in clinic settings.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

10.17605/OSF.IO/G6N3P.

The efficacy of omalizumab treatment in chronic spontaneous urticaria is associated with basophil phenotypes

BACKGROUND

The mechanisms underlying disease pathogenesis in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and improvement with omalizumab are incompletely understood.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine whether the rate of clinical remission is concordant with baseline basophil features or the rate of change of IgE-dependent functions of basophils and/or plasmacytoid dendritic cells during omalizumab therapy.

METHODS

Adults (n = 18) with refractory CSU were treated with omalizumab 300 mg monthly for 90 days. Subjects recorded daily urticaria activity scores, and clinical assessments with blood sampling occurred at baseline and on days 1, 3, 6, 10, 20, 30, 60, and 90 following omalizumab. At baseline, subjects were categorized by basophil functional phenotypes, determined by in vitro histamine release (HR) responses to anti-IgE antibody, as CSU-responder (CSU-R) or CSU-non-responder (CSU-NR), as well as basopenic (B) or nonbasopenic (NB).

RESULTS

CSU-R/NB subjects demonstrated the most rapid and complete symptom improvement. By day 6, CSU-R/NB and CSU-NR/NB had increased anti-IgE-mediated basophil HR relative to baseline, and these shifts did not correlate with symptom improvement. In contrast, CSU-NR/B basophil HR did not change during therapy. The kinetics of the decrease in surface IgE/FcεRI was similar in all 3 phenotypic groups and independent of the timing of the clinical response. Likewise, plasmacytoid dendritic cells' surface IgE/FcεRI decline and TLR9-induced IFN-α responses did not reflect clinical change.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in basophil IgE-based HR, surface IgE, or FcεRI bear no relationship to the kinetics in the change in clinical symptoms. Baseline basophil count and basophil functional phenotype, as determined by HR, may be predictive of responsiveness to omalizumab.

IgE blockade with omalizumab reduces pruritus related to immune checkpoint inhibitors and anti-HER2 therapies

Background:

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) blockade with omalizumab has demonstrated clinical benefit in pruritus-associated dermatoses (e.g. atopic dermatitis, bullous pemphigoid, urticaria). In oncology, pruritus-associated cutaneous adverse events (paCAEs) are frequent with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) and targeted anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies. Thus, we sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IgE blockade with omalizumab in cancer patients with refractory paCAEs related to CPIs and anti-HER2 agents.

Patients and methods:

Patients included in this multicenter retrospective analysis received monthly subcutaneous injections of omalizumab for CPI or anti-HER2 therapy-related grade 2/3 pruritus that was refractory to topical corticosteroids plus at least one additional systemic intervention. To assess clinical response to omalizumab, we used the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. The primary endpoint was defined as reduction in the severity of paCAEs to grade 1/0.

Results:

A total of 34 patients (50% female, median age 67.5 years) received omalizumab for cancer therapy-related paCAEs (71% CPIs; 29% anti-HER2). All had solid tumors (29% breast, 29% genitourinary, 15% lung, 26% other), and most (n = 18, 64%) presented with an urticarial phenotype. In total, 28 of 34 (82%) patients responded to omalizumab. The proportion of patients receiving oral corticosteroids as supportive treatment for management of paCAEs decreased with IgE blockade, from 50% to 9% (P < 0.001). Ten of 32 (31%) patients had interruption of oncologic therapy due to skin toxicity; four of six (67%) were successfully rechallenged following omalizumab. There were no reports of anaphylaxis or hypersensitivity reactions related to omalizumab.

Conclusions:

IgE blockade with omalizumab demonstrated clinical efficacy and was well tolerated in cancer patients with pruritus related to CPIs and anti-HER2 therapies.

Randomized Comparative Clinical Study of First Global Omalizumab Biosimilar with Innovator Product in Moderate to Severe Persistent Asthma

PURPOSE OF STUDY

Omalizumab the first anti-IgE antibody is proven with several real-world studies and meta-analyses as important adjuvant in severe allergic asthma. This study was undertaken for the first omalizumab biosimilar to establish clinical biosimilarity and interchangeability with originator product.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind comparative study 105 subjects (70 subjects in the study group and 35 subjects in the reference group) were dosed up to week 16 as double blind phase and responders entered open label phase till week 24. All responders at week 16 received study product in open-label phase of the study as per their dosing schedule till week 24. The additional efficacy assessment visit was performed till week 24. Safety follow up visit was performed in responders at week 26. The pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) assessment was planned in 48 subjects after first dose of omalizumab.

RESULTS

In double blind phase, 4 (5.80%) asthma exacerbations were reported in study arm compared to 1 (2.86%) asthma exacerbation in reference arm with no statistically significant difference (p>0.05). The time to first asthma exacerbation was 53 days in study arm compared to 62 days in reference arm. In study and reference arm, the mean change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1%) was 7.51 and 5.98 at week 4; and 12.30 and 8.94 at week 16 respectively while mean change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC%) was 4.20 and 4.06 at week 4 and 6.77 and 7.10 at week 16 respectively (no statistically significant difference, p>0.05). At week 16, 4 (5.80%) subjects in study arm had 50-75% inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose reduction compared to 2 (5.71%) subjects in reference arm. The proportion of subjects with meaningful improvement in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (improvement in overall AQLQ score ≥0.5), mean change in overall Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score and proportion of responders based on Global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) assessment also was similar at 16 weeks. A total of 101 adverse events were reported out of which 63 were reported in the study or biosimilar arm and 38 were reported in the reference or innovator arm. Two serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported, one in each arm. No deaths occurred during this study and the safety observations are consistent with the known safety profile of omalizumab. All the samples analysed in this study were negative for anti-omalizumab antibodies. There was no significant difference in the PK and PD evaluation.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, safety and immunogenicity was concluded to show no meaningful clinical difference of the biosimilar omalizumab with the reference product.

Whole blood transcriptional variations between responders and non-responders in asthma patients receiving omalizumab

BACKGROUND

Anti-IgE (omalizumab) has been used for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma that is not controlled by inhaled steroids. Despite its success, it does not always provide patients with significant clinical benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the transcriptional variations between omalizumab responders and non-responders and to study the mechanisms of action of omalizumab.

METHODS

The whole blood transcriptomes of moderate-to-severe adult asthma patients (N = 45:34 responders and 11 non-responders) were analysed over the course of omalizumab treatment. Non-asthmatic healthy controls (N = 17) were used as controls.

RESULTS

Transcriptome variations between responders and non-responders were identified using the genes significant (FDR < 0.05) in at least one comparison of each patient response status and time point compared with control subjects. Using gene ontology and network analysis, eight clusters of genes were identified. Longitudinal analyses of individual clusters revealed that responders could maintain changes induced with omalizumab treatment and become more similar to the control subjects, while non-responders tend to remain more similar to their pre-treatment baseline. Further analysis of an inflammatory gene cluster revealed that genes associated with neutrophil/eosinophil activities were up-regulated in non-responders and, more importantly, omalizumab did not significantly alter their expression levels. The application of modular analysis supported our findings and further revealed variations between responders and non-responders.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study provides not only transcriptional variations between omalizumab responders and non-responders, but also molecular insights for controlling asthma by omalizumab.

Adrenal insufficiency is a contraindication for omalizumab therapy in mast cell activation disease: risk for serum sickness

Omalizumab is an effective therapeutic humanized murine IgE antibody in many cases of primary systemic mast cell activation disease (MCAD). The present study should enable the clinician to recognize when treatment of MCAD with omalizumab is contraindicated because of the potential risk of severe serum sickness and to report our successful therapeutic strategy for such adverse event (AE). Our clinical observations, a review of the literature including the event reports in the FDA AE Reporting System, the European Medicines Agency Eudra-Vigilance databases (preferred search terms: omalizumab, Xolair®, and serum sickness) and information from the manufacturer’s Novartis database were used. Omalizumab therapy may be more likely to cause serum sickness than previously thought. In patients with regular adrenal function, serum sickness can occur after 3 to 10 days which resolves after the antigen and circulating immune complexes are cleared. If the symptoms do not resolve within a week, injection of 20 to 40 mg of prednisolone on two consecutive days could be given. However, in MCAD patients whose adrenal cortical function is completely suppressed by exogenous glucocorticoid therapy, there is a high risk that serum sickness will be masked by the MCAD and evolve in a severe form with pronounced damage of organs and tissues, potentially leading to death. Therefore, before the application of the first omalizumab dose, it is important to ensure that the function of the adrenal cortex is not significantly limited so that any occurring type III allergy can be self-limiting.

Omalizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis: friend or foe? A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate, through a Medline search, the role of omalizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed with the following inclusion criteria: original articles and case reports written in English and reporting an association between omalizumab and EGPA.

RESULTS

We found 18 papers on EGPA (14 case reports, 3 retrospective cohort studies, 1 prospective cohort study). Omalizumab showed to be effective as corticosteroid-sparing agent in EGPA patients with severe asthmatic manifestations. On the contrary, conflicting results concerned its use in refractory forms of EGPA. Plausible is the increased risk of EGPA onset among asthmatic patients treated with omalizumab, probably related to steroid reduction, even if it cannot be excluded that omalizumab might be occasionally directly involved in the pathogenesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the use of omalizumab in selected forms of EGPA, but caution in the tapering of corticosteroids is also recommended. Quality of evidence is limited, as the source of information was mainly case reports. Clinical trials are required in order to evaluate the role of omalizumab in EGPA and to ascertain the risk of asthmatic patients given omalizumab to develop EGPA.

Ligelizumab for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria

BACKGROUND

In the majority of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, most currently available therapies do not result in complete symptom control. Ligelizumab is a next-generation high-affinity humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody. Data are limited regarding the dose-response relationship of ligelizumab and the efficacy and safety of ligelizumab as compared with omalizumab and placebo in patients who have moderate-to-severe chronic spontaneous urticaria that is inadequately controlled with H₁-antihistamines at approved or increased doses, alone or in combination with H₂-antihistamines or leukotriene-receptor antagonists.

METHODS

In a phase 2b dose-finding trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive ligelizumab at a dose of 24 mg, 72 mg, or 240 mg, omalizumab at a dose of 300 mg, or placebo, administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks for a period of 20 weeks, or a single 120-mg dose of ligelizumab. Disease symptoms of hives, itch, and angioedema were monitored by means of weekly activity scores. The main objective was to determine a dose-response relationship for the complete control of hives (indicated by a weekly hives-severity score of 0, on a scale from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater severity); the primary end point of this response was assessed at week 12. Complete symptom control was indicated by a weekly urticaria activity score of 0 (on a scale from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating greater severity). Safety was analyzed throughout the trial.

RESULTS

A total of 382 patients underwent randomization. At week 12, a total of 30%, 51%, and 42% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of hives, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. A dose-response relationship was established. At week 12, a total of 30%, 44%, and 40% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of symptoms, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. In this small and short trial, no safety concerns regarding ligelizumab or omalizumab emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher percentage of patients had complete control of symptoms of chronic spontaneous urticaria with ligelizumab therapy of 72 mg or 240 mg than with omalizumab or placebo. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477332.).

Successful Omalizumab Therapy for Bullous Pemphigoid Despite Transient Reaction

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a rare blistering skin disease that is commonly treated with corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents. Here, we present a 74-year-old woman with severe BP following a leg fracture who was successfully treated with omalizumab. We started her on a regimen of omalizumab 300 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, and within a week she reported significantly decreased pain and faster healing time of lesions. Incidentally, bilateral erythematous, non-blistering dermatitis developed 5 centimeters distal to the injection sites within a week of her first injection and resolved spontaneously in 2 days. She continues to tolerate the omalizumab injections well after 28 months of treatment and has not developed the injection site dermatitis since the first administration. Omalizumab appears to be a promising treatment modality for BP even when associated with transient injection site reactions, but further studies investigating the mechanisms by which omalizumab reduces bullae in BP are needed. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18(9):947-949.

Omalizumab for asthma and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis in adults with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

In cystic fibrosis (CF), omalizumab has been used for difficult-to-treat asthma and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) but safety and efficacy data are limited for this population.

METHODS

We assessed patients receiving omalizumab for asthma or ABPA in the Toronto adult CF center between 2005 and 2017. We evaluated treatment safety and efficacy by analyzing changes in FEV₁% predicted (FEV₁pp) max value, slope and variability captured by the area under the curve (AUC), the cumulative dose of systemic corticosteroids (SCS), use of intravenous (IV) antibiotics and hospitalization days before omalizumab and up to 1 year after treatment initiation. Linear mixed effects model was used for FEV₁pp slope and the trapezoidal rule for FEV₁pp AUC.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven CF patients received omalizumab, 16 (59.3%) for asthma and 11 (40.7%) for ABPA. No significant omalizumab-related adverse effects were observed. In the asthmatic group, the max value of FEV₁pp improved on omalizumab and the cumulative dose of SCS decreased. In the ABPA group, the rate of FEV₁pp decline (slope) and the variability of FEV₁pp (AUC) improved on omalizumab. In ABPA patients, the cumulative SCS dose was not significantly different but 4 (36%) patients decreased their SCS dose by >50% compared to baseline. Days on IV antibiotics and hospital days did not differ significantly before and while on omalizumab therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult CF patients with difficult-to-treat asthma or ABPA, omalizumab should be considered. Larger studies are needed to identify patient characteristics that may predict response to omalizumab.

Pediatric asthma: An unmet need for more effective, focused treatments

BACKGROUND

Despite remarkable advances in our understanding of asthma, there are still several unmet needs associated with the management of pediatric asthma.

METHODS

A two-day, face-to-face meeting was held in London, United Kingdom, on October 28 and 29, 2017, involving a group of international expert clinicians and scientists in asthma management to discuss the challenges and unmet needs that remain to be addressed in pediatric asthma.

RESULTS

These unmet needs include a lack of clinical efficacy and safety evidence, and limited availability of non-steroid-based alternative therapies in patients <6 years of age. An increased focus on children is needed in the context of clinical practice guidelines for asthma; current pediatric practice relies mostly on extrapolations from adult recommendations. Furthermore, no uniform definition of pediatric asthma exists, which hampers timely and robust diagnosis of the condition in affected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for a uniform definition of pediatric asthma, clearly distinguishable from adult asthma. Furthermore, guidelines which provide specific treatment recommendations for the management of pediatric asthma are also needed. Clinical trials and real-world evidence studies assessing anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) therapies and other monoclonal antibodies in children <6 years of age with asthma may provide further information regarding the most appropriate treatment options in these vulnerable patients. Early intervention with anti-IgE and non-steroid-based alternative therapies may delay disease progression, leading to improved clinical outcomes.