Clinical efficacy of dupilumab in the treatment of severe chronic rhinosinusitis: The first case outside of a clinical trial

Dupilumab: a delayed response in asthmatic and atopic patients treated for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

PURPOSE

Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) is a common disease, which was previously approached with sinus surgery or systemic corticosteroids. The advent of biological therapies radically changed the approach to this disease. On the other hand, there is scarce scientific evidence of how specific subsets of patients respond to this treatment.

METHODS

this is a monocentric, prospective study investigating the long-term efficacy on biweekly 300 mg dupilumab therapy in CRSwNP, prescribed to 61 patients. Patients were evaluated at baseline and every 2 months for the first 6 months, then at 9, 12, 16, 20 and 24 months.

RESULTS

dupilumab proved to be an effective treatment, neatly improving both subjective and objective measurements in CRSwNP. The main finding of the study is the difference between specific subgroups of patients: while the overall response is similar, patients with Th2 comorbidities such as asthma and atopy tend to reach a stable response later, with the improvement ongoing even after 6 months of therapy, while non-asthmatic, non-atopic patients attain an earlier stability in response.

CONCLUSIONS

dupilumab provides an excellent long-term control of CRSwNP, but the response in asthmatic and atopic patients appears to be different and delayed when compared to non asthmatic and non atopic ones.

Severe hypereosinophilia in a patient treated with dupilumab and shift to mepolizumab: the importance of multidisciplinary management. A case report and literature review

Type 2 inflammation is a heterogeneous condition due to the complex activation of different immunological pathways. Rapid progress in research to evaluate the efficacy of biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma has led to the availability of effective therapeutic options. These drugs are safe, but temporary iatrogenic hypereosinophilia may sometimes be associated with clinical symptoms or organ damage. Here, we describe a case of severe hypereosinophilia in a patient with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma treated with dupilumab and a subsequent therapeutic shift to mepolizumab that led to maintenance of symptom control and concomitant normalization of blood eosinophil count.

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.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Dupilumab Adverse Events in Nasal Polyp Treatment: Analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

OBJECTIVES

Dupilumab was the first biologic approved to treat chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). While the risk of adverse events in phase-III clinical trials was low, dupilumab-associated adverse reactions (DAR) with real-world use is unknown and potentially under-reported. We aimed to evaluate DAR for CRSwNP treatment (CRSwNP-tx) using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database study.

METHODS

FAERS was queried for DAR from 2019Q1 to 2021Q2. Individual DAR (iDAR) were categorized and quantitatively compared between treatment groups (CRSwNP, asthma, atopic dermatitis). Zero-truncated Poisson regression was modeled to predict the number of iDAR, and logistic regression was modeled to predict serious DARs.

RESULTS

There were 15,411 DAR observations; 911 for CRSwNP-tx, of which 121 (13.3%) had serious reactions and 3 died. Common CRSwNP-tx iDAR were dermatologic (13.9%), generalized (13.3%), and injection-site (10.8%) symptoms. The number of CRSwNP-tx iDAR was 2.99 [2.81, 3.17], compared to 3.44 [3.32, 3.56] for asthma and 3.18 [3.13, 3.24] for atopic dermatitis (Kruskal-Wallis test, P < .001). For CRSwNP-tx, iDAR reported-risk-ratio was 0.84 [0.77, 0.92] among men and 1.12 [1.04, 1.22] among older adults (>50). Serious DAR reported-odds-ratio was 1.37 [0.91, 2.04] among men and 1.39 [0.93, 2.08] among older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are limitations with FAERS, this analysis suggests CRSwNP-tx is associated with fewer iDAR compared with other treatment indications. More iDAR are experienced among women and older adults, but men tend to have more serious DAR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 132:2307-2313, 2022.

A prospective study on the efficacy of dupilumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with type 2 inflammation

Objective

Treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) includes endoscopic sinus surgery and topic and/or systemic corticosteroids, which have only temporary effects. The development of biologic therapies has provided a new treatment paradigm for CRSwNP. Dupilumab is the only biological approved in Italy for CRSwNP, but its efficacy in a real-life context is still scarce.

Methods

We carried out a monocentric prospective study at our institution with a 6-month follow-up on patients administered biweekly 300 mg dupilumab therapy for CRSwNP, prescribed according to EPOS 2020 criteria. Patients were evaluated at baseline and every 2 months.

Results

Median values at baseline and 6 months were, respectively, 3/12 and 8/12 for the Brief Smell Identification Test (p = 0.005), 5/8 and 2/8 for the Nasal Polyp Score (p < 0.001), 10/20 and 6/20 for the Lund-Kennedy score (p < 0.001), 65/110 and 14/110 for the Sinonasal Outcome Test (p < 0.001), and 15/25 and 23/25 for the Asthma Control Test score (p = 0.009). Adverse events were mild, consisting mainly in discomfort at the site of injection. Four patients developed asymptomatic hypereosinophilia. The treatment was not discontinued in any patient.

Conclusions

Dupilumab was confirmed to be an effective and safe treatment for CRSwNP, as previously seen in registrational studies.

Hypereosinophilia management in patients with type 2 chronic rhinosinusitis treated with dupilumab: preliminary results

PURPOSE

Biological therapies are gaining relevance in the management of CRSwNP with few adverse events reported. Among these, dupilumab, an anti-IL4-Ra monoclonal antibody, is frequently associated with hypereosinophilia (HE) which usually remains silent and progressively resolves, although some cases of systemic involvement occurs. The aim of this paper is to describe our experience and propose a management flowchart for HE during therapy with dupilumab.

METHODS

Patients with CRSwNP who satisfied EPOS2020 criteria for biological therapies were included in this prospective study. Each case was discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting with subsequent prescription of dupilumab; all patients were candidates to follow-up bi-monthly for 6 months, while additional blood tests were scheduled in the event of HE.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients with a mean age of 48.4 years were enrolled. Of these, 15 of 21 presented an asthma comorbidity and 9 of 21 ASA sensitivity. Four patients (19%) developed HE with AEC > 1.5 × 10⁹/L, whereas it occurred in 9.5% (two patients) if considered AEC > 3 × 10⁹/L. No cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome were recorded. Following our decision-making flowchart, two patients received short-term corticosteroid therapy, whereas the other two were only eligible for closer follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

During dupilumab therapy, HE may occur and should be considered benign when < 3 × 10⁹/L in the absence of organ involvement. Conversely, in case of HE ≥ 3 × 10⁹/L, an empirical approach with short-term corticosteroid therapy should be considered to debulk the blood from eosinophils and prevent potential organ involvement.