Rapid and Consistent Improvements in Morning PEF in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated with Mepolizumab

Mepolizumab improves work productivity, activity limitation, symptoms, and rescue medication use in severe eosinophilic asthma

Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experience daily activity limitations and reduced productivity at work. Using anonymized individual patient-level data from two previously conducted randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (MENSA [GSK ID:115588/NCT01691521]; MUSCA [GSK ID:200862/NCT02281318]), we investigated the effect of mepolizumab on work productivity, activity limitation, symptoms, and rescue medication use. Patient-reported outcomes including Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health (WPAI-GH) scores (impairment percentages, 0%-100%), global activity limitation (scale 1-4), and perceived change in activity limitation (Likert scale 1-7) since the start of the study were analyzed. WPAI-GH scores from MENSA were analyzed post hoc for employed patients using mixed model repeated measures; global activity limitation and perceived change in activity limitation from MUSCA were analyzed by ordinal logistic regression. Mean changes from baseline in daily asthma symptom scores (scale 0-5) and rescue medication use (occasions/day) were also assessed, via a post hoc meta-analysis of MENSA and MUSCA. At study end, WPAI-GH scores indicative of overall work impairment, impairment while working, and activity impairment consistently improved with mepolizumab versus placebo. Overall, 76% versus 54% of patients rated their activity as "much better," "better," or "slightly better" since the start of the study with mepolizumab versus placebo. Mepolizumab was associated with numerically larger improvements from baseline in asthma symptoms (treatment difference 0.21-0.29 points) and rescue medication use (treatment difference -0.08 to -0.22 occasions/day) versus placebo. Our results indicate that patients with severe eosinophilic asthma may experience improved activity limitation, work productivity, symptoms, and rescue medication use with mepolizumab.

Health outcomes after stopping long-term mepolizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma: COMET

Asthma worsening and symptom control are clinically important health outcomes in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. This analysis of COMET evaluated whether stopping versus continuing long-term mepolizumab therapy impacted these outcomes.

Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma with ≥3 years continuous mepolizumab treatment (via COLUMBA (NCT01691859) or COSMEX (NCT02135692) open-label studies) were eligible to enter COMET (NCT02555371), a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomised 1:1 to continue mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks or to stop mepolizumab, plus standard of care asthma treatment. Patients could switch to open-label mepolizumab following an exacerbation. Health outcome endpoints included time to first asthma worsening (composite endpoint: rescue use, symptoms, awakening at night and morning peak expiratory flow (PEF)), patient and clinician assessed global rating of asthma severity and overall perception of response to therapy, and unscheduled healthcare resource utilisation.

Patients who stopped mepolizumab showed increased risk of and shorter time to first asthma worsening compared with those who continued mepolizumab (hazard ratio (HR) 1.71; 95% CI 1.17–2.52; p=0.006), including reduced asthma control (increased risk of first worsening in rescue use (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.00–1.84; p=0.047) and morning PEF (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.21–2.59; p=0.003). There was a higher probability of any unscheduled healthcare resource use (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.31–2.49; p<0.001), and patients and clinicians reported greater asthma severity and less favourable perceived response to therapy for patients who stopped versus continued mepolizumab.

These data suggest that patients with severe eosinophilic asthma continuing long-term mepolizumab treatment sustain clinically important improvements in health outcomes.

The COMET study investigated whether stopping long-term mepolizumab had an impact on health outcomes in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma; data suggest those who continue long-term mepolizumab treatment sustain clinically important improvementshttps://bit.ly/3A0bvwu

Stopping versus continuing long-term mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma (COMET study)

Background

The long-term efficacy and safety of mepolizumab for treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma are well established. Here, we examine the clinical impact of stopping mepolizumab after long-term use.

Methods

COMET (NCT02555371) was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study. Patients who had completed COLUMBA (NCT01691859) or COSMEX (NCT02135692) and received continuous mepolizumab treatment for ≥3 years were randomised 1:1 to stop (switch to placebo) or continue subcutaneous mepolizumab 100 mg every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Primary end-point: time to first clinically significant exacerbation; secondary end-points: time to first exacerbation requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit, time to decrease in asthma control (≥0.5-point increase in Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score from COMET baseline) and blood eosinophil count ratio to COMET baseline. Safety was assessed.

Results

Patients stopping (n=151) versus continuing (n=144) mepolizumab had significantly shorter times to first clinically significant exacerbation (hazard ratio 1.61, 95% CI 1.17–2.22; p=0.004) and decrease in asthma control (hazard ratio 1.52, 95% CI 1.13–2.02; p=0.005), and higher blood eosinophil counts at week 52 (270 versus 40 cells·µL⁻¹; ratio (stopping versus continuing) 6.19, 95% CI 4.89–7.83; p<0.001). Differences in efficacy outcomes between groups were observed when assessed from week 12 (16 weeks after last mepolizumab dose). Exacerbations requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit were rare. Adverse events in patients continuing mepolizumab were consistent with previous studies. For patients who stopped mepolizumab, the safety profile was consistent with other eosinophilic asthma populations.

Conclusion

Patients who stopped mepolizumab had an increase in exacerbations and reduced asthma control versus those who continued.

This randomised study demonstrates increased exacerbation risk and a decrease in asthma control in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma who stop mepolizumab treatment after long-term use, when compared with those who continue treatment.https://bit.ly/3fsxGV2

Efficacy of one time per day, single-inhaler indacaterol/glycopyrronium/mometasone in patients with inadequately controlled asthma: post hoc analysis of IRIDIUM study in Asian population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The 52-week IRIDIUM study demonstrated the efficacy of indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate (IND/GLY/MF) versus IND/MF and salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate (SAL/FLU) in patients with symptomatic asthma, despite long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) medium-dose or high-dose, predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) <80% and at least one exacerbation in the previous year. Here, we present data from a post hoc analysis of the IRIDIUM study in the Asian subpopulation.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis evaluated improvements in lung function, asthma control and reduction in asthma exacerbations with IND/GLY/MF medium- (150/50/80 µg) and high-dose (150/50/160 µg) versus IND/MF medium- (150/160 µg) and high-dose (150/320 µg), all one time per day and SAL/FLU high-dose (50/500 µg) two times per day, in Asian patients from the IRIDIUM study.

RESULTS

In total, 258 patients (IND/GLY/MF medium-dose, 52; IND/GLY/MF high-dose, 52; IND/MF medium-dose, 51; IND/MF high-dose, 51; SAL/FLU high-dose, 52) were included. IND/GLY/MF medium- and high-dose showed greater improvement in trough FEV1 at week 26 versus respective doses of IND/MF (Δ, 100 mL and 101 mL; both p<0.05, respectively), and SAL/FLU high-dose (Δ, 125 mL; p=0.0189, and 136 mL; p=0.0118, respectively), which were maintained over 52 weeks. Both doses of IND/GLY/MF showed greater improvement in morning and evening peak expiratory flow versus respective doses of IND/MF and SAL/FLU high-dose at week 52. The changes in Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 scores from baseline were comparable in all treatment groups. IND/GLY/MF medium- and high-dose showed greater reductions in severe (34%, 69%), moderate or severe (18%, 54%) and all exacerbations (21%, 34%) compared with SAL/FLU high-dose over 52 weeks.

CONCLUSION

One time per day, single-inhaler IND/GLY/MF improved lung function, reduced asthma exacerbations and provided comparable asthma control versus IND/MF and SAL/FLU in Asian patients with inadequately controlled asthma despite LABA/ICS. The results of this analysis were consistent with the overall population in the IRIDIUM study.

Clinical Development of Mepolizumab for the Treatment of Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: On the Path to Personalized Medicine

The development of mepolizumab, an anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma, is an example of a clinical development program that evolved over time based on sound, basic scientific principles. Initial clinical data on the effects of mepolizumab on lung function in a general asthmatic population were disappointing. However, it became clear that mepolizumab may be more effective against other clinical endpoints, particularly asthma exacerbations, in patients with more severe disease. Furthermore, a developing understanding of asthma disease pathobiology led to the identification of an appropriate target population and predictive biomarker for mepolizumab treatment: patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and blood eosinophil count. Mepolizumab use provides clinically meaningful benefits in this target population, fulfilling an unmet need. This Clinical Commentary Review describes the clinical development of mepolizumab and details of how this program informed the development of other biologic therapies in patients with severe asthma. This account highlights how a personalized approach toward treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, supported by a large body of scientific evidence, ultimately led to new and effective treatments and improved patient outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab) for severe eosinophilic asthma. A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines - recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV₁ , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV₁ . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.

A Phase 2a Study of DP2 Antagonist GB001 for Asthma

BACKGROUND

GB001, a DP₂ antagonist, may inhibit recruitment and activation of inflammatory cells in patients with asthma, consequently reducing airway inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

Explore the efficacy and safety of GB001 in adults with mild to moderate asthma.

METHODS

During a 4-week run-in period, adult patients with asthma (N = 158) received medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid and placebo and were then randomized to treatment once daily with GB001 5 mg, 20 mg, or placebo for 16 weeks or until asthma worsening/exacerbation. Patients were tapered to and then discontinued from low-dose inhaled corticosteroid at randomization and at 4 weeks postrandomization, respectively. Primary end point was change in morning peak expiratory flow (AM PEF); secondary end points included measures of asthma control. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar among GB001 5 mg, 20 mg, and placebo groups. Changes in AM PEF in 5 mg and 20 mg groups versus placebo showed mean differences (95% CI) of 15.2 (3.1-27.4) L/min (P = .02) and 13.7 (1.5-25.8) L/min (P = .03), respectively. The changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 55 mL and 32 mL, respectively, were not significant. There was a significant difference between GB001 20 mg and placebo for the secondary end points of time to asthma worsening/exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.29), 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score (-0.60 point), the percentage of days without asthma symptoms (26%), and the percentage of rescue-free days (22%). Patients with baseline eosinophil levels greater than or equal to 300/μL had larger differences between GB001 20 mg and placebo for changes in AM PEF. Similar effects were seen in a post hoc analysis for time to worsening/exacerbations and 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score. The most common nonserious adverse event in the GB001 groups compared with the placebo group was nasopharyngitis.

CONCLUSIONS

GB001 was well tolerated and although not associated with clinically meaningful changes in lung function, improvements in asthma worsening/exacerbations and markers of asthma control were demonstrated. In addition, greater treatment effects were observed in patients with high baseline blood eosinophils. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings in the context of standard of care treatment.

The Pharmacokinetics and Relative Bioavailability of Mepolizumab 100 mg Liquid Formulation Administered Subcutaneously to Healthy Participants: A Randomized Trial

This study compared the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of a new liquid formulation of mepolizumab with the established lyophilized formulation. In this open‐label, parallel‐group, single‐dose study (NCT03014674; GSK ID: 204958), healthy participants were randomized (1:1:1) to receive a single mepolizumab dose (100 mg) administered subcutaneously as liquid in a single‐use prefilled syringe or single‐use prefilled autoinjector, or as a lyophilized formulation. Maximum plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time zero (predose) to time of last quantifiable concentration (AUC_0–t), and AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC_0–∞) as well as additional PK parameters, safety assessments, and blood eosinophil count were evaluated. In total, 244 participants received study drug. All PK parameters were similar across the 3 groups; 90% confidence intervals for maximum plasma concentration, AUC_0–t, and AUC_0–∞ treatment ratios (liquid prefilled syringe or autoinjector vs lyophilized formulation) were within conventional bioequivalence bounds (0.80‐1.25), demonstrating statistical PK comparability. On‐treatment adverse event incidence was 29% to 38%. Mepolizumab liquid formulation administered via prefilled syringe or autoinjector had similar PK properties to the lyophilized formulation, with no safety concerns identified.

An evaluation of mepolizumab for the treatment of severe asthma

Introduction: Asthma is considered one of the most common chronic conditions globally, characterized by variable airflow obstruction and symptoms. Severe asthma is diagnosed when asthma control requires high-intensity therapy or continues to remain uncontrolled despite treatment. Eosinophilic inflammation is known to be perpetuated by the activity of IL-5 in a proportion of severe asthma subjects, and targeting IL-5 may offer a therapeutic option. Areas covered: In this review, we discuss the role and pathogenesis of IL-5 and eosinophils in asthma and rationale of antagonizing IL-5 in severe eosinophilic asthma. Mepolizumab is the first of three anti-IL-5 biologics licensed in 2015 for use in this subgroup of patients. We discuss clinical and real-life studies leading up to its approval and post-marketing outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety to-date, as well as its pros and cons. Expert opinion: IL-5 antagonism has paved the way for an additional personalized therapeutic opportunity for use in severe asthma with eosinophilic inflammation, though there is limited evidence on the long-term implications of suppressing/depleting eosinophils and the duration for which they should be administered.

Rapid onset of effect of benralizumab on morning peak expiratory flow in severe, uncontrolled asthma

BACKGROUND

Benralizumab is a unique eosinophil-depleting monoclonal antibody that significantly reduces asthma exacerbations, improves lung function and asthma symptoms, and permits the reduction of maintenance oral corticosteroid dosage for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To assess benralizumab's onset of action and efficacy by examining change in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) after initiation of treatment in the phase 3 clinical trials SIROCCO, CALIMA, and ZONDA.

METHODS

Mixed-model repeated-measures analysis was used to calculate PEF using daily least squares mean changes from baseline in morning PEF as well as differences between the benralizumab every 8 weeks (first 3 doses every 4 weeks) and placebo groups. A Bayesian nonlinear mixed-effects approach with an exponential relationship was used to model trial data to determine time to clinically meaningful improvement in morning PEF (defined as ≥25 L/min).

RESULTS

Least squares mean morning PEF improvement from baseline was numerically greater by Day 2 after initiation of benralizumab therapy in all 3 trials. The Bayesian nonlinear mixed-effects model indicated that PEF improvement reached the clinically meaningful threshold within 3 weeks in SIROCCO and CALIMA and 2 weeks in ZONDA.

CONCLUSION

In 3 phase 3 randomized clinical trials, benralizumab provided notable improvement in morning PEF 2 days after initiation and clinically meaningful improvements within 3 weeks for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma. The rapid improvement in PEF demonstrated in these trials suggests that benralizumab's unique mechanism of action rapidly improves lung function for patients with severe, eosinophilic asthma.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01928771 (SIROCCO), NCT01914757 (CALIMA), and NCT02075255 (ZONDA).

Assessment of the long-term safety of mepolizumab and durability of clinical response in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma

BACKGROUND

Mepolizumab has demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy profiles in placebo-controlled trials of 12 months' duration or less; however, long-term data are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA).

METHODS

COLUMBA (Open-label Long Term Extension Safety Study of Mepolizumab in Asthmatic Subjects, NCT01691859) was an open-label extension study in patients with SEA previously enrolled in DREAM (Dose Ranging Efficacy And Safety With Mepolizumab in Severe Asthma, NCT01000506). Patients received 100 mg of subcutaneous mepolizumab every 4 weeks plus standard of care until a protocol-defined stopping criterion was met. Safety end points included frequency of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs of special interest. Efficacy end points included annualized exacerbation rates, changes from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 scores, and blood eosinophil counts. Immunogenicity was also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 347 patients were enrolled for an average of 3.5 years (maximum, 4.5 years; total exposure, 1201 patient-years). On-treatment AEs were reported in 94% of patients (exposure-adjusted rate, 3688 events/1000 patient-years). The most frequently reported on-treatment AEs were respiratory tract infection, headache, bronchitis, and asthma worsening. Seventy-nine (23%) patients experienced 1 or more on-treatment serious AEs; there were 6 deaths, none of which were assessed as related to mepolizumab. For patients with 156 weeks or greater enrollment, the exacerbation rate was 0.74 events/y (weeks 0-156), a 56% reduction from the off-treatment period between DREAM and COLUMBA. For all patients, at the first postbaseline assessment, the mean Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 score was reduced by 0.47 points, and blood eosinophil counts were reduced by 78%, with similar improvements maintained throughout the study. The immunogenicity profile (8% anti-drug antibodies) was consistent with previous studies.

CONCLUSION

These data support the long-term safety and efficacy of mepolizumab in patients with SEA.

Real-life evaluation of the clinical, functional, and hematological effects of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma: Results of a single-centre observational study

Mepolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody which targets interleukin-5 (IL-5) and is nowadays available in many countries for add-on biological therapy of severe eosinophilic asthma. Although the approval of mepolizumab use in clinical practice has been made possible by several successful pre-marketing controlled trials, so far only a very few studies have been performed in a real-life setting. Within such a context, our present observational investigation refers to 14 patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma, currently treated with mepolizumab at the Respiratory Unit of "Magna Græcia" University Hospital located in Catanzaro, Italy, whose anti-IL-5 treatment began between June 2017 and January 2018. These patients experienced a significant increase in asthma control test (ACT) score, that was evaluated at baseline (13.64 ± 3.00), as well as after 4 weeks (18.86 ± 3.15; p < 0.0001) and 24 weeks (20.07 ± 1.94; p < 0.0001) of add-on therapy with mepolizumab. This relevant improvement in symptom control was paralleled by a dramatic fall of blood eosinophil numbers, counted at baseline (647.1 ± 274.7 cells/μl), and at the 4th (147.8 ± 66.5 cells/μl; p < 0.0001) and 24th week (98.6 ± 40.3 cells/μl; p < 0.0001) after starting add-on treatment with mepolizumab. These changes were associated with significant and stable increases in FEV₁, which was recorded at baseline (1389 ± 454.3 mL), as well as after 4 weeks (1711 ± 482.3 mL; p < 0.001) and 24 weeks (1701 ± 456.0 mL; p < 0.01). Moreover, in comparison to the 6 months preceding the beginning of treatment with mepolizumab, after 24 weeks of anti-IL-5 therapy significant decreases were detected with regard to exacerbation numbers (from 3.64 ± 1.86 to 1.0 ± 0.78; p < 0.001) and oral intake of prednisone (from 24.11 ± 10.36 mg/day to 1.78 ± 3.82 mg/day). Therefore, these preliminary data referring to our single-centre observational study corroborate, in a real-life environment, the efficacy of mepolizumab for treatment of patients with exacerbation-prone, corticosteroid-refractory, severe eosinophilic asthma.