Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in those on mepolizumab therapy

Long-Term Efficacy of Mepolizumab at 3 Years in Patients with Severe Asthma: Comparison with Clinical Trials and Super Responders

The efficacy mepolizumab in severe asthmatic patients is proven in the literature. Primarily to study the effect of mepolizumab on exacerbations, steroid dependence, and the continuation of efficacy in the long term. Secondarily to evaluate the effect of the drug on nasal polyps. Analyzing data from SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy) clinics, we observed severe asthmatic patients treated with mepolizumab 100 mg/4 weeks, for a period of 3 years. 157 patients were observed. Exacerbations were reduced from the first year (-84.6%) and progressively to 90 and 95% in the second and third ones. Steroid-dependent patients decreased from 54% to 21% and subsequently to 11% in the second year and 6% in the third year. Patients with concomitant nasal polyps, assessed by SNOT-22, showed a 49% reduction in value from baseline to the third year. The study demonstrated the long-term efficacy of mepolizumab in a real-life setting.

Safety of biologics in severe asthmatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Asthma guidelines have recommended continuing treatment with biologics during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, a continuation of treatment with biologics in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been little investigated.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety of biologics in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

A pilot, monocentric, prospective study. Patients aged 6 years old and older with severe asthma on treatment with biologics and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled. Patients were followed-up with periodic calls at different time points up to 3 months to detect any adverse effect and its relationship with biologic treatment according to the Naranjo Adverse Probability Scale (NAPS). The severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and clinical outcome were also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, we included 21 patients (10 on therapy with omalizumab, 9 with dupilumab, and 2 with mepolizumab). Only a patient-reported two local adverse events. No other adverse event was reported. Twenty out of 21 patients had a mild COVID-19 course, and no adverse outcome was observed.

CONCLUSION

We showed that the scheduled dose of the biologic therapy can be administered safely on time in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as the treatment did not result in adverse events or outcomes.

Assessment of respiratory function and exercise tolerance at 4-6 months after COVID-19 infection in patients with pneumonia of different severity

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of COVID-19 systemic consequences is a wide research field in which respiratory function assessment has a pivotal role. However, the available data in the literature are still sparse and need further strengthening.

AIM

To assess respiratory function 4-6 months after hospital discharge based on lung disease severity in patients who overcome COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

Patients hospitalised either in the Internal Medicine Department (IMD) for moderate to severe disease or in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for critical disease underwent spirometry with maximal flow-volume curve, lung volumes, lung diffusion capacity (DL_CO ) and six-minute walking test (6-MWT).

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were analysed: 40 from the IMD and 48 from the ICU. In both cohorts, there was a greater prevalence of male patients. In the IMD cohort, 38% of patients showed at least one altered respiratory parameter, while 62% in the ICU cohort did so (P < 0.05). Total lung capacity (TLC) and DL_CO were the most frequently altered parameters: 15% and 33% from IMD versus 33% and 56% from ICU, respectively (P < 0.05). In IMD patients, 5% had only restrictive deficit, 22% had only lung diffusion impairment and 10% had both. In ICU patients, 6% had only restrictive deficit, 29% had only lung diffusion impairment and 27% had both (P < 0.05). ICU patients showed a higher frequency of abnormal 6-MWT (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Lung function tests and 6-MWT are highly informative tools for monitoring the negative consequences of COVID-19 pneumonia, which were more frequent and more complex in patients discharged from ICU.

Repurposing of Chemotherapeutics to Combat COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel strain of SARS coronavirus. The COVID-19 disease caused by this virus was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). SARS-CoV-2 mainly spreads through droplets sprayed by coughs or sneezes of the infected to a healthy person within the vicinity of 6 feet. It also spreads through asymptomatic carriers and has negative impact on the global economy, security and lives of people since 2019. Numerous lives have been lost to this viral infection; hence there is an emergency to build up a potent measure to combat SARS-CoV-2. In view of the non-availability of any drugs or vaccines at the time of its eruption, the existing antivirals, antibacterials, antimalarials, mucolytic agents and antipyretic paracetamol were used to treat the COVID-19 patients. Still there are no specific small molecule chemotherapeutics available to combat COVID-19 except for a few vaccines approved for emergency use only. Thus, the repurposing of chemotherapeutics with the potential to treat COVID-19 infected people is being used. The antiviral activity for COVID-19 and biochemical mechanisms of the repurposed drugs are being explored by the biological assay screening and structure-based in silico docking simulations. The present study describes the various US-FDA approved chemotherapeutics repositioned to combat COVID-19 along with their screening for biological activity, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients receiving allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or biologicals-EAACI recommendations

Immune modulation is a key therapeutic approach for allergic diseases, asthma and autoimmunity. It can be achieved in an antigen-specific manner via allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or in an endotype-driven approach using biologicals that target the major pathways of the type 2 (T2) immune response: immunoglobulin (Ig)E, interleukin (IL)-5 and IL-4/IL-13 or non-type 2 response: anti-cytokine antibodies and B-cell depletion via anti-CD20. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination provides an excellent opportunity to tackle the global pandemics and is currently being applied in an accelerated rhythm worldwide. The vaccine exerts its effects through immune modulation, induces and amplifies the response against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Thus, as there may be a discernible interference between these treatment modalities, recommendations on how they should be applied in sequence are expected. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) assembled an expert panel under its Research and Outreach Committee (ROC). This expert panel evaluated the evidence and have formulated recommendations on the administration of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with allergic diseases and asthma receiving AIT or biologicals. The panel also formulated recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine in association with biologicals targeting the type 1 or type 3 immune response. In formulating recommendations, the panel evaluated the mechanisms of COVID-19 infection, of COVID-19 vaccine, of AIT and of biologicals and considered the data published for other anti-infectious vaccines administered concurrently with AIT or biologicals.

SARS-Cov-2 Infection in Severe Asthma Patients Treated With Biologics

Background

At the beginning of the pandemic, there have been considerable concerns regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and outcomes in patients with severe asthma treated with biologics.

Objective

To prospectively observe a cohort of severe asthmatics treated with biologics for the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and disease severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Physicians from centers treating patients with severe asthma all over Greece provided demographic and medical data regarding their patients treated with biologics. Physicians were also asked to follow up patients during the pandemic and to perform a polymerase chain reaction test in case of a suspected SARS-Cov-2 infection.

Results

Among the 591 severe asthmatics (63.5% female) included in the study, 219 (37.1%) were treated with omalizumab, 358 (60.6%) with mepolizumab, and 14 (2.4%) with benralizumab. In total, 26 patients (4.4%) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 9 (34.6%) of whom were admitted to the hospital because of severe COVID-19, and 1 required mechanical ventilation and died 19 days after admission. Of the 26 infected patients, 5 (19.2%) experienced asthma control deterioration, characterized as exacerbation that required treatment with systemic corticosteroids. The scheduled administration of the biological therapy was performed timely in all patients with the exception of 2, in whom it was postponed for 1 week according to their doctors’ suggestion.

Conclusion

Our study confirms that despite the initial concerns, SARS-CoV-2 infection is not more common in asthmatics treated with biologics compared with the general population, whereas the use of biologic treatments for severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to be related to adverse outcomes from severe COVID-19.

Eosinophils and eosinophilic immune dysfunction in health and disease

The functions ascribed to eosinophils have classically been limited to host defence against certain parasitic infections and potentially deleterious effects in the setting of specific diseases that are associated with elevated eosinophil counts in blood and/or tissue. The ability to induce eosinophil depletion either experimentally in animal models or through targeted therapies in humans has extended our understanding of the roles played by eosinophils in health and homeostasis as well as in disease pathogenesis. When associated with human disease aetiology, the eosinophil takes on a pathogenic rather than a protective role. This maladaptive response, called "eosinophilic immune dysfunction" herein, appears central to exacerbation pathogenesis and disease control in severe asthma and may be involved in the aetiology of other eosinophil-related conditions ranging from organ-system-limited diseases such as phenotypic subsets of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis to more broadly systemic diseases such as eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and hypereosinophilic syndrome. In this review, we describe the evidence supporting eosinophilic functions related to health and homeostasis and explore the contribution of eosinophilic immune dysfunction to human disease.

Severe asthma in the era of COVID-19: A narrative review

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Severe asthma management during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a challenge and will continue to be, at least in the next few months, as herd immunity is still a mirage. A lot has to be learned about how COVID-19 affects underlying diseases, and severe asthma is no exception.

METHODS

Narrative review of papers available until February 2021 in PubMed and Google Scholar, relating severe asthma and COVID-19. Four main research topics were reviewed: SARS-CoV-2 infection: immunology and respiratory pathology; interrelationship of severe asthma endotypes and COVID-19 disease mechanisms; severe asthma epidemiology and COVID-19; and biologics for severe asthma in the context of COVID-19.

RESULTS

COVID-19 disease mechanisms start with upper respiratory cell infection, and afterwards several immunological facets are activated, contributing to disease severity, namely cell-mediated immunity and antibody production. Although infrequent in the COVID-19 course some patients develop a cytokine storm that causes organ damage and may lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome or multiorgan failure. Regarding severe asthma endotypes, type2-high might have a protective role both in infection risk and disease course. There is conflicting data regarding the epidemiological relationship between COVID-19 among severe asthma patients, with some studies reporting increased risk of infection and disease course, whereas others the other way round. Biologics for severe asthma do not seem to increase the risk of infection and severe COVID-19, although further evidence is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Globally, in the era of COVID-19, major respiratory societies recommend continuing the biologic treatment, preferably in a self-home administration program.

Understanding and Managing Severe Asthma in the Context of COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread across the world. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the question of whether asthma is a risk factor for getting the infection or for poor outcomes motivated a great debate. In the field of severe asthma and its treatment during COVID-19 pandemic, several issues are also pending. A literature review focused on the management of severe asthma patients in the context of COVID-19 is performed. The available evidence suggests that severe asthma patients do not have an increased risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes and that it is safe to treat asthmatic patients with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and biologics during the pandemic, even though some studies indicate that high doses of ICS may predispose to COVID-19. The chronic use of oral corticosteroid (OCS) might be associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes, although there is no complete agreement. There is very limited evidence concerning the use of triple therapy for asthma in the context of this pandemic. Ultimately, severe asthma patients should maintain their medication during the COVID-19 pandemic, including biologic agents. More studies are needed to address the role of asthma medications and asthma’s different phenotypes on the incidence and course of COVID-19.

Recent Updates in Experimental Research and Clinical Evaluation on Drugs for COVID-19 Treatment

Since the outbreak of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan (China) in December 2019, the epidemic has rapidly spread to many countries around the world, posing a huge threat to global public health. In response to the pandemic, a number of clinical studies have been initiated to evaluate the effect of various treatments against COVID-19, combining medical strategies and clinical trial data from around the globe. Herein, we summarize the clinical evaluation about the drugs mentioned in this review for COVID-19 treatment. This review discusses the recent data regarding the efficacy of various treatments in COVID-19 patients, to control and prevent the outbreak.

Biological therapies, asthma and coronavirus disease 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As of June 2021, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exceeded 180 million reported cases and was responsible for almost 4 million deaths globally. Asthma affects approximately 262 million people worldwide and is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Presently, it appears asthma is neither associated with an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 nor with a risk of severe COVID-19 or COVID-19 related death. Regarding the severe asthma patients on biologics, questions remain. The purpose of this review is to discuss the evidence regarding the relationship between asthma, biologics and COVID-19.

RECENT FINDINGS

The available evidence does not suggest that severe asthmatics on treatment with biologics have a higher risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection compared to the general population. It does not appear that they have a higher risk of severe disease or COVID-19 related death either.

SUMMARY

This review suggests that treatment with biologics for severe asthma is safe and should be maintained during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, more studies are needed to address this question and the role of biological therapy on different asthma phenotypes.

The effect of allergy and asthma as a comorbidity on the susceptibility and outcomes of COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic causes an overwhelming number of hospitalization and deaths with a significant socioeconomic impact. The vast majority of studies indicate that asthma and allergic diseases do not represent a risk factor for COVID-19 susceptibility nor cause a more severe course of disease. This raises the opportunity to investigate the underlying mechanisms of the interaction between an allergic background and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The majority of patients with asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, food allergies and drug allergies exhibit an over-expression of type 2 immune and inflammatory pathways with the contribution of epithelial cells, innate lymphoid cells, dendritic cells, T cells, eosinophils, mast cells, basophils, and the type 2 cytokines interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-9, IL-13, and IL-31. The potential impact of type 2 inflammation-related allergic diseases on susceptibility to COVID-19 and severity of its course have been reported. In this review, the prevalence of asthma and other common allergic diseases in COVID-19 patients is addressed. Moreover, the impact of allergic and non-allergic asthma with different severity and control status, currently available asthma treatments such as inhaled and oral corticosteroids, short- and long-acting β2 agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists and biologicals on the outcome of COVID-19 patients is reviewed. In addition, possible protective mechanisms of asthma and type 2 inflammation on COVID-19 infection, such as the expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry receptors, antiviral activity of eosinophils and cross-reactive T-cell epitopes, are discussed. Potential interactions of other allergic diseases with COVID-19 are postulated, including recommendations for their management.