Real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab in patients with severe asthma and associated comorbidities

Comparative Impact of Asthma Biologics: A Nationwide US Claim-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

Biologic modifiers targeting type 2 (T2) airway inflammation are effective in reducing asthma exacerbation. However, real-world and comparative effectiveness studies remain limited.

OBJECTIVE

To examine and compare the real-world impact of anti-T2 asthma biologics.

METHODS

In this retrospective, new user cohort study, we used the MarketScan, a Commercial Claims and Encounters Database, to identify adult patients with asthma who began to receive an anti-T2 biologic agent (anti-IL-5s, dupilumab, or omalizumab). We examined the influence of the biologic class on asthma exacerbation by comparing the average number of asthma exacerbation 1 year before and after biologic initiation. We conducted multivariable regression analyses to compare the effectiveness of these asthma biologics on reducing the incidence of asthma exacerbations within 18 months of the initial administration of biologics while controlling for demographic variables, comorbidities, and asthma severity.

RESULTS

We identified 5,538 asthma patients who were new to taking an anti-T2 biologic [mean age [±SD], 45.6 (12.78) years; 65.8% female). Asthma biologics reduced asthma exacerbation by 11% to 47%, particularly among patients with two or more asthma exacerbations in the year preceding biologic initiation (31% to 65% reduction). Biologics were especially effective in reducing asthma-related hospitalizations (44.6% to 60%). After adjusting for baseline demographics, asthma medication, and comorbidities, dupilumab was associated with a lower estimated mean number of asthma exacerbation per year and lower adjusted odds ratio for developing an asthma exacerbation relative to other biologics (50% to 80% less likely).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-T2 asthma biologics reduced asthma exacerbation in real-word settings. Evidence supports growing literature reporting that dupilumab might have a more favorable impact on asthma exacerbation relative to other asthma biologics.

Advancements in biologic therapy in eosinophilic asthma

INTRODUCTION

Asthma encompasses a spectrum of phenotypes often categorized into two groups- type 2 high (T2 high) and type 2 low (T2 low). T2 high includes atopic and eosinophilic presentations whereas T2 low is non-atopic, non-eosinophilic, and oft associated with neutrophilic inflammation. Eosinophilic asthma is often driven by IgE, IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 and TSLP. This can lead to eosinophilic inflammatory response in the airways which in turn can be used as target for treatment.

AREAS COVERED

The article will focus on biologic therapy that is currently being used in eosinophilic asthma management in mainly the adult population including clinical trials and co-morbidities that can be treated using the same biologics. A review on asthma biologics for pediatric population has been reviewed elsewhere.

EXPERT OPINION

Biological therapy for asthma targeting the IgE, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, and TSLP pathways are shown to have benefit for the treatment of eosinophilic asthma, as exemplified in real-world studies. When choosing the right biological agent factors such as phenotype, comorbidities, and cost-effectiveness of the biologic agent must be taken into consideration.

Difficult-To-Treat and Severe Asthma: Can Real-World Studies On Effectiveness of Biological Treatments Change the Lives of Patients?

Many different phenotypes that characterize severe asthma are supported by intricate pathomechanisms called endotypes. The latter are driven by molecular interactions, mediated by intercellular networks. With regard to the biological treatments of either allergic or non-allergic eosinophilic type 2 asthma, real-world studies have confirmed the positive effects of currently available antibodies directed against immunoglobulins E (IgE), interleukin-5 (IL-5) and its receptor, as well as the receptors of interleukins-4 (IL-4) and 13 (IL-13). The best way to treat severe asthma should be chosen based on the peculiar phenotypic and endotypic traits of each patient. This will lead to relevant improvements in both clinical and functional outcomes. In particular, biological therapies can change the lives of asthma patients with a strong impact on quality of life. Unfortunately, patients with severe non-type-2 asthma, who continue to have pertinent unmet needs, are not receiving satisfactory advances within the context of biological treatments. It is also hopeful that in the next future new therapeutic strategies will be specifically implemented for these people, perhaps offering them the opportunity to improve their current, mostly inadequate asthma management.

Real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab in severe asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis in the United States: Impact of comorbidity and sinus surgery

BACKGROUND

Trial data demonstrate that mepolizumab, a humanized anti-interleukin 5 monoclonal antibody, is effective for patients with severe asthma and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps. This real-world, retrospective cohort study investigated mepolizumab for US patients with severe asthma and CRS with/without sinus surgery.

METHODS

IQVIA PharMetrics Plus claims data from baseline and follow-up (12 months before and after mepolizumab initiation) were used to analyze three patient cohorts: cohort 1 (severe asthma only); cohort 2 (severe asthma + comorbid CRS without sinus surgery); and cohort 3 (severe asthma+comorbid CRS+sinus surgery), allowing for cross-cohort comparisons.

RESULTS

The analysis included 495, 370, and 85 patients in cohort 1, cohort 2, and cohort 3, respectively. Systemic and oral corticosteroid use was lower for all cohorts after mepolizumab initiation. In cohort 3, asthma rescue inhaler and antibiotic use were lower during follow-up than baseline. Asthma exacerbations were reduced by 28% to 44% comparing follow-up versus baseline, with the largest reduction in cohort 3 (ratio of incidence rate ratio [RR] vs cohort 1: 0.76; p = 0.036). Reductions in oral corticosteroid claims were greater following mepolizumab initiation for cohort 3 versus cohort 1 (RR, 0.72; p = 0.011) and cohort 2 (RR, 0.70; p < 0.01). In cohorts 1 through 3, outpatient and emergency department visits were reduced by 1 to 2 and 0.4 to 0.6 visits annually, asthma-related and asthma exacerbation-related total costs were reduced by $387 to $2580 USD, and medical costs were reduced by $383 to $2438 USD during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with trial data, mepolizumab use in real-world practice shows benefits across comorbid patient cohorts with more a pronounced impact in those with severe asthma+comorbid CRS + sinus surgery.

Efficacy and Safety of Mepolizumab in the Management of Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Systematic Review

Severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) is characterized by persistent airway inflammation and frequent exacerbations despite standard treatments. Mepolizumab, a monoclonal antibody that reduces eosinophil levels by targeting interleukin-5, has emerged as an add-on therapy for patients with SEA. This systematic review evaluated mepolizumab's efficacy and safety for treating SEA. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across major databases. Thirty-two studies with over 6,000 patients were included, comprising randomized controlled trials, open-label extensions, and real-world observational analyses. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using standard tools. Meta-analysis was deemed inappropriate due to heterogeneity. Instead, a narrative synthesis was performed. Mepolizumab significantly reduced exacerbation rates by around 50% and improved symptoms and lung function compared to placebo in pivotal trials. Long-term open-label studies showed sustained reductions in exacerbations and stable lung function for up to 4.5 years. Real-world data demonstrated consistent 50%-90% exacerbation decreases across diverse patient populations over 6-24 months. Mepolizumab exhibited an acceptable safety profile, with mild injection site reactions and headaches as most common adverse events. While specific subgroups may show enhanced responses, mepolizumab displayed broad efficacy regardless of patient demographics or phenotypes. The extensive evidence provides robust support for mepolizumab as an efficacious and safe add-on treatment option for patients with severe, refractory eosinophilic asthma. Further high-quality comparative effectiveness research is warranted to optimize patient selection and positioning among emerging biologics.

Mepolizumab in Patients With Severe Asthma and Comorbidities: 1-Year REALITI-A Analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma is complex; comorbidities may influence disease outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess mepolizumab effectiveness in patients with severe asthma and comorbidities.

METHODS

REALITI-A was a 2-year international, prospective study enrolling adults with asthma newly prescribed mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously) at physician's discretion. This post hoc analysis assessed 1-year outcomes stratified by comorbidities at enrollment: chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), depression/anxiety, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Outcomes included the rate of clinically significant asthma exacerbations (CSEs; requiring systemic corticosteroids and/or hospital/emergency room admission) between the 12 months pre- and post-mepolizumab treatment and changes from baseline in daily maintenance oral corticosteroid dose (mo 12), Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score (mo 12) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; mo 9-12).

RESULTS

At enrollment (n = 822), 321 of 822 (39%), 309 of 801 (39%), 203 of 785 (26%), and 81 of 808 (10%) patients had comorbid CRSwNP, GERD, depression/anxiety, and COPD, respectively. Post- versus pre-treatment across all comorbidity subgroups: the rate of CSEs decreased by 63% or more; among 298 (39%) patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids at baseline, median dose decreased by 50% or more; Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score decreased by 0.63 or more points; FEV1 increased by 74 mL or more. Patients with versus without CRSwNP had the greatest improvements (eg, rate of CSEs decreased by 75%). Patients without GERD, depression/anxiety, or COPD had greater improvements than those with the respective comorbidities, except for FEV1 in patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab improved disease outcomes in patients with severe asthma irrespective of comorbidities, with additional benefit for patients with CRSwNP.

Real-world outcomes of mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma patients - retrospective cohort study in Slovakia

AIMS

Mepolizumab, a fully-humanized recombinant IgG1 kappa monoclonal antibody directed against IL-5, has shown improved asthma control and lung function in randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate real-world clinical experience in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with mepolizumab in Slovakia.

METHODS

A retrospective, non-interventional study based on medical records of all adult asthma patients initiating mepolizumab between November 1, 2017 and January 31, 2019, completing 12 months of treatment. At baseline, general and clinical profile data were recorded 12 months prior to treatment. Primary and secondary endpoints described the results of mepolizumab use at 2, 6, and 12 months after the initiation and compared to baseline. Statistical testing of individual change (in each patient) in selected parameters was performed.

RESULTS

The cohort included 17 patients with particularly severe asthma at baseline, with frequent severe exacerbations (SE, median 5 [IQR 4-6]/patient/year), high blood eosinophil counts (median 0.6x109/L), frequent oral corticosteroid (OCS) dependence (82.35%), median dose 15 (IQR 7.5-20) mg/day, impaired lung function, and a spectrum of comorbidities. In a one-year follow-up, the data showed reductions in median SE (0 [IQR 0-1] patient/year, eosinophilia (median 0.175x109/L) and OCS maintenance dose (median 6.25 [IQR 2.5-20] mg/day), all statistically significant after 12 months on mepolizumab. Improved and stabilised lung functions throughout the cohort and a reduced incidence of nasal polyposis were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results provide clinical evidence of mepolizumab efficacy in a real sample of patients with severe asthma when administered in routine care settings in Slovakia.

Impact of mepolizumab in patients with high-burden severe asthma within a managed care population

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the real-world impact of mepolizumab on the incidence of asthma exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and asthma exacerbation-related costs in patients with high-burden severe asthma.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Databases in patients with high-burden severe asthma (≥80th percentile of total healthcare expenditure and/or significant comorbidity burden). Patients were ≥12 years of age upon mepolizumab initiation (index date November 1, 2015-December 31, 2018) and had ≥2 mepolizumab administrations during the 6 months post-index. Asthma exacerbation frequency (primary outcome), use of OCS (secondary outcome), and asthma exacerbation-related costs (exploratory outcome) were assessed during the 12 months pre-index (baseline) and post-index (follow-up).

RESULTS

In total, 281 patients were analyzed. Mepolizumab significantly reduced the proportion of patients with any asthma exacerbation (P < 0.001) or exacerbations requiring hospitalization (P = 0.004) in the follow-up versus baseline period. The mean number of exacerbations decreased from 2.5 to 1.5 events/patient/year (relative reduction: 40.0%; P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with ≥1 OCS claim also decreased significantly from 94.0% to 81.9% (relative reduction: 12.9%; P < 0.001), corresponding to a decrease from 6.6 to 4.7 claims/person/year (P < 0.001). Of the 264 patients with ≥1 OCS claim during baseline, 191 (72.3%) showed a decrease in mean daily OCS use by ≥50% in 117 patients (61.3%). Total asthma exacerbation-related costs were significantly lower after mepolizumab was initiated (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab reduced exacerbation frequency, OCS use and asthma exacerbation-related costs in patients with high-cost severe asthma. Mepolizumab provides real-world benefits to patients, healthcare systems and payers.

Comorbidities Modify the Phenotype but Not the Treatment Effectiveness to Mepolizumab in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Comorbidities in severe asthma are common and contribute to disease burden. The severe asthma phenotype and treatment response can be impacted by comorbid conditions. Real-world data on the use of mepolizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) in the presence of comorbidities are needed to inform clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of comorbid conditions on baseline phenotype in patients with SEA and assess the mepolizumab treatment effect by comorbidity status in SEA.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Australian Mepolizumab Registry (n = 309) were classified into subgroups defined by the presence or absence of comorbidities, including nasal polyps, aspirin-exacerbated airway disease, asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO), fungal sensitization, and obesity. Patient baseline characteristics were compared, and the impacts of comorbidity on phenotype, identified by differences in patient age and/or baseline biomarker levels and/or asthma severity, were assessed. The mepolizumab treatment effects on clinical and biological outcomes at 12 months were assessed.

RESULTS

Across comorbidity subgroups, mepolizumab reduced the rate of clinically significant exacerbations (range: 47%-77%), maintenance oral corticosteroid use (dose reduction: 4.2-13.3 mg/d), and improved symptom control (Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score: 1.9-2.4 point reduction) and lung function (mean: 3.4-9.3 post-bronchodilator percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second). Peripheral blood eosinophils were reduced (mean: 480-780 cells/μL). Comorbidities (nasal polyps, obesity, ACO, and fungal sensitization) modified the baseline phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab treatment is associated with comparable clinical improvements in patients with SEA and comorbidities. Mepolizumab effectively minimizes the disease impact and corticosteroid burden in patients with SEA.

Biologics for severe asthma: The real-world evidence, effectiveness of switching, and prediction factors for the efficacy

Biologics have been a key component of severe asthma treatment, and there are currently biologics available that target IgE, IL-5, IL-4/IL-13, and TSLP. Randomized controlled trials have established clinical evidence, but a significant portion of patients with severe asthma in real-life settings would have been excluded from those trials. Therefore, real-world research is necessary, and there is a growing body of information about the long-term efficacy and safety of biologics. Multiple clinical phenotypes of severe asthma exist, and it is crucial to choose patients based on their phenotypes. Blood eosinophil count is an important biomarker for anti-IL-5 therapies, and FeNO and eosinophil counts serve as prediction markers for dupilumab. Reliable markers for predicting response, however, have not yet been fully established for omalizumab. Identification of clinical or biological prediction factors is crucial for the path toward clinical remission because the current treatment goal includes clinical remission, which is defined as a realistic goal for remission off treatment. Additionally, since there are now multiple biologic options and overlaps in eligibility for biologics in clinical practice, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of switching the biologics is crucial. Investigations into the clinical trajectory following the cessation of biologics are another important issue. Recent research on omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab's real-world effectiveness, the prediction factor for the efficacy, and the impact of switching or discontinuation will be reviewed and discussed in this review.

REALITI-A Study: Real-World Oral Corticosteroid-Sparing Effect of Mepolizumab in Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe asthma may require maintenance oral corticosteroids (mOCS) for disease control as well as systemic corticosteroid (SCS) bursts for clinically significant exacerbations. However, mOCS and SCS use are associated with adverse effects, which increases patient disease burden.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the real-world corticosteroid-sparing effect of mepolizumab in patients with severe asthma.

METHODS

REALITI-A was a 24-month international, prospective, observational cohort study involving 84 centers across Europe, Canada, and the United States, with a 1-year pre-post mepolizumab treatment preplanned interim analysis. A total of 822 adults with a clinical diagnosis of asthma and a physician decision to initiate mepolizumab treatment (100 mg subcutaneously) were included. End points included daily mOCS dose at baseline (penultimate 28 days of pretreatment) and 1 year after treatment; percent reduction from baseline in mOCS dose; patients discontinuing mOCS 1 year after treatment; and the rate of clinically significant exacerbations (those requiring OCS for 3 days or more [or parenteral administration], emergency room visit, and/or hospital admission) before and after treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 319 patients received mOCS at baseline (median [interquartile range]: 10.0 [5.0-15.0] mg/d). At 1 year after treatment, median mOCS dose was reduced by 75% (2.5 [0.0-5.0] mg/d); 64% of patients had a reduction in mOCS dose of 50% or greater compared with baseline and 43% discontinued mOCS. Clinically significant exacerbations decreased between pretreatment and posttreatment (rate ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.29 [0.26-0.32]; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This 1-year analysis demonstrates that real-world mepolizumab treatment is clinically effective in patients with severe asthma, providing disease control while reducing the need for mOCS and SCS bursts.

Challenges in severe asthma: Do we need new drugs or new biomarkers?

Severe asthma is a complex, heterogenous airway condition. There have been significant advances in severe asthma management in the past decade using monoclonal antibody therapies that target the inflammatory component of the disease. Patient selection has been paramount for the success of these biologicals, leading to significant interest in biomarkers to guide treatment. Some severe asthmatics remain suboptimally controlled despite trials of biologicals and many of these patients still require chronic systemic corticosteroids. New therapeutics are currently in development to address this unmet need. However, whether these patients could be better treated by using novel biomarkers that inform selection among currently available biologics, and that objectively measure disease control is unclear. In this review, we examine the currently used biomarkers that guide severe asthma management and emerging biomarkers that may improve asthma therapy in the future.

Biologic Use and Outcomes Among Adults with Severe Asthma Treated by United States Subspecialists

BACKGROUND

Multiple biologics are now available for severe asthma (SA) treatment and can improve outcomes for patients. However, few available data describe the real-world use and effectiveness of multiple approved biologics, including biologic switching, among subspecialists in the United States (US).

OBJECTIVE

We examined biologic use and associated exacerbation outcomes in a large cohort of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids (mSCS), or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For enrolled patients, sites report asthma exacerbations and medication use starting 12 months before enrollment. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021, biologic use and exacerbation outcomes before and after biologic initiation are described.

RESULTS

Among 2793 enrolled patients, 66% (n = 1832) were receiving biologics. The most utilized biologic (more than one biologic use per patient allowed) was omalizumab (47%), followed by benralizumab (27%), mepolizumab (26%), dupilumab (18%), and reslizumab (3%). Overall, 16% of patients had biologic switches, 13% had stops, and 89% had ongoing biologic use. Patients starting and switching biologics experienced a 58% (1.80 vs 0.76 per patient-year) and 49% (1.47 vs 0.75 per patient-year) reduction in exacerbations, respectively (both P < 0.001), with a numerically greater reduction observed among those starting non-anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) biologics compared to anti-IgE.

CONCLUSION

Real-world starting and switching of biologic therapies for SA was associated with meaningful reductions in exacerbations. With increasing biologic options available, individualized approaches to therapy may improve patient outcomes.

A rational approach to compare and select biologic therapeutics in asthma

OBJECTIVE

To review key literature on asthma biologic therapeutics-currently available and under investigation-to inform a rational approach to select biologics for the management of people with severe asthma by precision medicine.

DATA SOURCES

We used the PubMed database to review literature on biologic therapeutics in asthma.

STUDY SELECTIONS

We included published randomized control trials and real-world studies on biologic therapeutics, available in English, through September 2021.

RESULTS

Increased understanding of asthma endotypes and the roles of various inflammatory mechanisms has led to therapeutic agents that inhibit specific cytokines or immune pathways. Currently available biologic therapeutics target type 2-high asthma. Grouped by mechanisms of action, there are the following 3 types: (1) anti-immunoglobulin E, (2) anti-interleukin (IL)-5 or IL-5 receptor, and (3) anti-IL-4 receptor α. There are also various potential future biologic therapeutics currently under investigation. Although there remains a paucity of data regarding prospective direct head-to-head comparisons of biologic therapeutics in asthma, there are some retrospective and indirect comparison data available.

CONCLUSION

Precision medicine guides selection of biologic therapeutics along with shared decision-making. Biomarkers, although not comprehensive, allow approximations of likely mechanisms. Use of biomarkers, to include historical levels and trends, in addition to consideration of key clinical characteristics and comorbidities can greatly help guide biologic selection. Efficacy, safety, potential adverse effects, indications for other key comorbidities, and logistics should also be considered.

Insights into the Implications of Coexisting Type 2 Inflammatory Diseases

The role of type 2 inflammation in the pathogenesis of certain human diseases is an area of active investigation. Certain asthma, atopic dermatitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis phenotypes are characterized by a Th2 predominant inflammatory pathway and are frequently associated with comorbid conditions in patients. The purpose of this article is to review the evidence behind concurrent Th2-mediated diseases and explore how the presence of these comorbid conditions affect patient and disease outcomes.