Profile of patients treated with omalizumab in routine clinical practice in Spain

Real-World Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Severe Allergic Asthma: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Assessment of clinical outcomes in the real-world corroborates findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis evaluated real-world data of omalizumab on treatment response, lung function, exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), health care resource utilization (HCRU), and school/work absenteeism at 4, 6, and 12 months after treatment.

METHODS

Observational studies in patients with severe allergic asthma (≥6 years) treated with omalizumab for ≥16 weeks, published from January 2005 to October 2018, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. A random-effects model was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

In total, 86 publications were included. Global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) was good/excellent in 77% patients at 16 weeks (risk difference: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.84; I² = 96%) and in 82% patients at 12 months (0.82, 0.73-0.91; 97%). The mean improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 160, 220, and 250 mL at 16 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively. There was a decrease in Asthma Control Questionnaire score at 16 weeks (-1.14), 6 months (-1.56), and 12 months (-1.13) after omalizumab therapy. Omalizumab significantly reduced annualized rate of severe exacerbations (risk ratio [RR]: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.30-0.56; I² = 96%), proportion of patients receiving OCS (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75; I² = 96%), and number of unscheduled physician visits (mean difference: -2.34, 95% CI: -3.54 to -1.13; I² = 98%) at 12 months versus baseline.

CONCLUSION

The consistent improvements in GETE, lung function, and PROs, and reductions in asthma exacerbations, OCS use, and HCRU with add-on omalizumab in real-life confirm and complement the efficacy data of RCTs.

'Real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in adults with severe allergic asthma: a meta-analysis

Background: Severe asthma affects 5-10% of the 350 million people with asthma worldwide. Findings from the authors' previous meta-analysis supported omalizumab use as an adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma. The publication of fourteen new articles necessitates an update of the meta-analysis.Objective: To evaluate the 'real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of acute allergic asthma in adults by calculating pooled effects estimates from data in published articles.Methods: Articles on omalizumab effectiveness in 'real-world' settings were identified. Effect sizes, including point estimates of the proportion of patients who met a given criteria, mean improvements relative to baseline, and change in the proportion of patients requiring oral corticosteroids compared to baseline were extracted. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to pool effect sizes based on proportions. Standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) were calculated from means and standard deviations. Relative risk was calculated from changes in proportions. Variability within and between studies was evaluated.Results: Omalizumab increases the percentage of individuals rated 'good' or 'excellent' on the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness Scale. Omalizumab also improves respiratory function, quality-of-life, and asthma control while reducing medication usage, exacerbations, hospitalizations, and adverse events.Conclusion: 'Real-world' evidence continues to support the use of omalizumab as adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma.

Short- and long-term real-world effectiveness of omalizumab in severe allergic asthma: systematic review of 42 studies published 2008-2018

INTRODUCTION

Omalizumab is a recombinant monoclonal anti-IgE antibody approved in the US as add-on treatment in moderate-to-severe allergic asthma (in severe allergic asthma [SAA] in Europe). A 2016 review of 24 real-world effectiveness studies in SAA published between 2008-2015 concluded that omalizumab was associated with significant improvements in objective and subjective outcomes with benefits extending beyond 2 years. Several new real-world studies have been published since, bringing the total to 42 studies. Areas covered: This systematic review of 42 studies published since 2008 updates and extends the 2016 review on the real-word evidence on omalizumab in SAA. It offers greater granularity as to time windows within which outcomes are reported and includes studies extending well beyond 4 years post omalizumab initiation. Expert commentary: This review firmly establishes the short-term effectiveness of omalizumab in adolescent and adult patients with SAA at 1 year, and provides strong evidence of long-term effectiveness up to 4 years and emergent evidence of effectiveness beyond 4 years. In the aggregate, these 42 studies underscore the long-term effectiveness of omalizumab in terms of: reducing exacerbations and symptoms, achieving asthma control, improving lung function, enhancing quality of life, decreasing emergency department visits and hospitalizations, and promoting concomitant medication-sparing.

Systematic literature review of the clinical, humanistic, and economic burden associated with asthma uncontrolled by GINA Steps 4 or 5 treatment

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to characterize the epidemiologic, clinical, humanistic, and economic burden of patients with asthma uncontrolled by GINA Steps 4 or 5 treatment (severe, uncontrolled asthma [SUA]).

METHODS

A systematic literature review adhering to PRISMA guidelines was performed. Relevant publications were searched for in MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 2004 to September 2016 and in a conference proceedings database from January 2012 to October 2016. Studies were screened using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Study Design, and Time (PICOS-T) framework. Studies of SUA with observational (prospective and retrospective), randomized, or nonrandomized study designs; adult patient populations; sample sizes ≥20 patients; epidemiologic or clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), or economic outcomes were included. For our analysis, SUA was defined as inadequate control of asthma, despite the use of medium- to high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids and at least one additional treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 195 articles reporting unique study populations were included. Prevalence of SUA was as great as 87.4% for patients with severe asthma, although values varied depending on the criteria used to define asthma control. Compared with patients with severe asthma who were controlled, patients with SUA experienced more symptoms, night-time awakenings, rescue medication use, and worse PROs. SUA-associated costs were 3-times greater than costs for patients with severe, controlled disease.

CONCLUSION

Despite the availability of approved asthma treatments, this literature analysis confirms that SUA poses a substantial epidemiologic, clinical, humanistic, and economic burden. Published data are limited for certain aspects of SUA, highlighting a need for further research.

Effectiveness and response predictors of omalizumab in a severe allergic asthma population with a high prevalence of comorbidities: the Australian Xolair Registry

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma is a high impact disease. Omalizumab targets the allergic inflammatory pathway; however, effectiveness data in a population with significant comorbidities are limited.

AIMS

To describe severe allergic asthma, omalizumab treatment outcomes and predictors of response among the Australian Xolair Registry participants.

METHODS

A web-based post-marketing surveillance registry was established to characterise the use, effectiveness and adverse effects of omalizumab (Xolair) for severe allergic asthma.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 192) (mean age 51 years, 118 female) with severe allergic asthma from 21 clinics in Australia were assessed, and 180 received omalizumab therapy. They had poor asthma control (Asthma Control Questionnaire, ACQ-5, mean score 3.56) and significant quality of life impairment (Asthma-related Quality of Life Questionnaire score 3.57), and 52% were using daily oral corticosteroid (OCS). Overall, 95% had one or more comorbidities (rhinitis 48%, obesity 45%, cardiovascular disease 23%). The omalizumab responder rate, assessed by an improvement of at least 0.5 in ACQ-5, was high at 83%. OCS use was significantly reduced. The response in participants with comorbid obesity and cardiovascular disease was similar to those without these conditions. Baseline ACQ-5 ≥ 2.0 (P = 0.002) and older age (P = 0.05) predicted the magnitude of change in ACQ-5 in response to omalizumab. Drug-related adverse events included anaphylactoid reactions (n = 4), headache (n = 2) and chest pains (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Australian patients with severe allergic asthma report a high disease burden and have extensive comorbidity. Symptomatic response to omalizumab was high despite significant comorbid disease. Omalizumab is an effective targeted therapy for severe allergic asthma with comorbidity in a real-life setting.

Drop-out rate among patients treated with omalizumab for severe asthma: Literature review and real-life experience

Background

In patients with asthma, particularly severe asthma, poor adherence to inhaled drugs negatively affects the achievement of disease control. A better adherence rate is expected in the case of injected drugs, such as omalizumab, as they are administered only in a hospital setting. However, adherence to omalizumab has never been systematically investigated. The aim of this study was to review the omalizumab drop-out rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-life studies. A comparative analysis was performed between published data and the Italian North East Omalizumab Network (NEONet) database.

Results

In RCTs the drop-out rate ranged from 7.1 to 19.4 %. Although the reasons for withdrawal were only occasionally reported, patient decision and adverse events were the most frequently reported causes. In real-life studies the drop-out rate ranged from 0 to 45.5 %. In most cases lack of efficacy was responsible for treatment discontinuation. According to NEONet data, 32 % of treated patients dropped out, with an increasing number of drop outs observed over time. Patient decision and lack of efficacy accounted for most treatment withdrawals.

Conclusions

Treatment adherence is particularly crucial in patients with severe asthma considering the clinical impact of the disease and the cost of non-adherence. The risk of treatment discontinuation has to be carefully considered both in the experimental and real-life settings. Increased knowledge regarding the main reasons for patient withdrawal is important to improve adherence in clinical practice.

Omalizumab for severe allergic asthma in clinical trials and real-life studies: what we know and what we should address

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for the assessment of any therapeutic intervention. Real-life (R-L) studies are needed to verify the provided results beyond the experimental setting. This review aims at comparing RCTs and R-L studies on omalizumab in adult severe allergic asthma, in order to highlight the concurring results and the discordant/missing data. The results of a selective literature research, including "omalizumab, controlled studies, randomized trial, real-life studies" as key words are discussed. Though some similarities between RCTs and R-L studies strengthen omalizumab efficacy and safety outcomes, significant differences concerning study population features, follow-up duration, local adverse events and drop-out rate for treatment inefficacy emerge between the two study categories. Furthermore the comparative analysis between RCTs and R-L studies highlights the need for further research, concerning in particular long-term effects of omalizumab and its impact on asthma comorbidities.

National trends in hospital admissions for asthma exacerbations among pediatric and young adult population in Spain (2002-2010)

OBJECTIVE

To assess the changes in incidence, use of mechanical ventilation, length of stay (LOS), costs and mortality of children (0-15 years) and young adults (16-45 years) hospitalized for asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

We included patients hospitalized for asthma exacerbations in Spain from 2002 to 2010 (ICD9-CM codes 493.0x-493.9x). The data were collected from the National Hospital Discharge Database (entire population). We calculated the yearly age- and sex-specific incidence rates for each of the two groups.

RESULTS

We included a total of 12,038 pediatric patients and 2792 young adults hospitalized for asthma exacerbations. Overall crude incidence decreased from 20.5 to 18.7 admissions per 100.000 inhabitants in the pediatric group (p < 0.05), and from 4.12 to 3.68 admissions per 100.000 inhabitants among young adults, from 2002 to 2010 (p < 0.05). By contrast, we detected a significant increase in the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in both groups. The average LOS decreased during the study period, from 3.71 (SD 2.28) to 3.16 (SD 2.11) days (p < 0.05) among pediatric patients and there were not changes among young adults. During the study period, the mean cost per patient decreased from 1558.53 (SD 443.63) to 1378.41 (SD 472.71) euros in the pediatric group (p < 0.05), while increased from 2183.44 (SD 783.15) to 2564.32 (SD 1933.98) euros among young adults (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest a decrease in the incidence of hospital admissions for asthma exacerbations with concomitant increase in use of NIV in asthmatic patients, both pediatric and young adults patients. Although LOS and mean cost have decreased among pediatric patients, they have not changed and increased, respectively, among young adults. A better management of the disease at primary care services may explain the improvement in the incidence and outcomes.