Immunology-based recommendations for available and upcoming biologics in aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease

[Does aspirin therapy after desensitization still have a role in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis in the era of biologics?]

The prevalence of analgesic intolerance syndrome (AIS), internationally known as NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD), is reported to be 0.5-5.7% in the general population. The disease often begins with nasal symptoms, which are later joined by chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), asthma, and respiratory hypersensitivity reactions following use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). In the setting of chronic respiratory disease, the type 2 inflammatory endotype is predominant in approximately 80% of patients with CRSwNP, rendering biologics directed against interleukin (IL)-4, IL‑5, IL-13, and IgE of high clinical interest, particularly in patients with severe CRSwNP and NERD. NERD is often associated with CRSwNP and asthma. Patients with CRSwNP and NERD have been treated, among other therapies, with aspirin therapy after desensitization (ATAD). With the approval of monoclonal antibodies for CRSwNP and asthma, the question arises as to what extent ATAD, which is associated with undesirable side effects, is still useful in the treatment of CRSwNP. In this manuscript, the use of ATAD in CRSwNP patients is discussed from different medical and socioeconomic points of view, both alternatively to or in combination with monoclonal antibodies. Accordingly, both ATAD and biologics continue to play a supporting role in modern treatment of CRSwNP in NERD patients, and should be used judiciously to complement each other.

Biologic Therapies across Nasal Polyp Subtypes

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis is a common inflammatory condition, with subtypes like aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, and central compartment atopic disease sharing a common type 2 inflammatory pathway. Respiratory biologic therapies have been developed that target type 2 inflammation. In this article, we discuss the use of respiratory biologic therapies for nasal polyposis in general, as well as within the various subtypes of nasal polyps. Further, we discuss future roles of novel biologic therapies targeting type 2 inflammation in nasal polyposis.

Eosinophils-from cradle to grave: An EAACI task force paper on new molecular insights and clinical functions of eosinophils and the clinical effects of targeted eosinophil depletion

Over the past years, eosinophils have become a focus of scientific interest, especially in the context of their recently uncovered functions (e.g. antiviral, anti-inflammatory, regulatory). These versatile cells display both beneficial and detrimental activities under various physiological and pathological conditions. Eosinophils are involved in the pathogenesis of many diseases which can be classified into primary (clonal) and secondary (reactive) disorders and idiopathic (hyper)eosinophilic syndromes. Depending on the biological specimen, the eosinophil count in different body compartments may serve as a biomarker reflecting the underlying pathophysiology and/or activity of distinct diseases and as a therapy-driving (predictive) and monitoring tool. Personalized selection of an appropriate therapeutic strategy directly or indirectly targeting the increased number and/or activity of eosinophils should be based on the understanding of eosinophil homeostasis including their interactions with other immune and non-immune cells within different body compartments. Hence, restoring as well as maintaining homeostasis within an individual's eosinophil pool is a goal of both specific and non-specific eosinophil-targeting therapies. Despite the overall favourable safety profile of the currently available anti-eosinophil biologics, the effect of eosinophil depletion should be monitored from the perspective of possible unwanted consequences.

Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease: Updates in the era of biologics

OBJECTIVE

Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is a chronic respiratory condition characterized by severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), eosinophilic asthma, and respiratory reactions to cyclooxygenase inhibitors. The management of AERD has evolved recently with the availability of respiratory biologics for treatment of severe asthma and CRSwNP. The objective of this review is to provide an update on the management of AERD in the era of respiratory biologic therapy.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review of pathogenesis and treatment of AERD, with a specific focus on biologic therapies in AERD, was performed through publications gathered from PubMed.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Original research, randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, meta-analyses, and case series of high relevance are selected and reviewed.

RESULTS

Aspirin therapy after desensitization (ATAD) and respiratory biologic therapies targeting interleukin (IL)-4Rα, IL-5, IL-5Rα, and immunoglobulin E, all have some efficacy in the treatment of CRSwNP and asthma in patients with AERD. There are currently no head-to-head studies comparing ATAD vs respiratory biologic therapy, or specific respiratory biologics, for asthma and CRSwNP in patients with AERD.

CONCLUSION

Advances in our understanding of the fundamental drivers of the chronic respiratory inflammation in asthma and CRSwNP have led to the identification of several potential therapeutic targets for these diseases that can be used in patients with AERD. Further study of the use of ATAD and biologic therapy, independently and together, will help to inform future treatment algorithms for patients with AERD.

Automated Identification of Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning: Algorithm Development and Evaluation Study

BACKGROUND

Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is an acquired inflammatory condition characterized by the presence of asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, and respiratory hypersensitivity reactions on ingestion of aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Despite AERD having a classic constellation of symptoms, the diagnosis is often overlooked, with an average of greater than 10 years between the onset of symptoms and diagnosis of AERD. Without a diagnosis, individuals will lack opportunities to receive effective treatments, such as aspirin desensitization or biologic medications.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to develop a combined algorithm that integrates both natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) techniques to identify patients with AERD from an electronic health record (EHR).

METHODS

A rule-based decision tree algorithm incorporating NLP-based features was developed using clinical documents from the EHR at Mayo Clinic. From clinical notes, using NLP techniques, 7 features were extracted that included the following: AERD, asthma, NSAID allergy, nasal polyps, chronic sinusitis, elevated urine leukotriene E4 level, and documented no-NSAID allergy. MedTagger was used to extract these 7 features from the unstructured clinical text given a set of keywords and patterns based on the chart review of 2 allergy and immunology experts for AERD. The status of each extracted feature was quantified by assigning the frequency of its occurrence in clinical documents per subject. We optimized the decision tree classifier's hyperparameters cutoff threshold on the training set to determine the representative feature combination to discriminate AERD. We then evaluated the resulting model on the test set.

RESULTS

The AERD algorithm, which combines NLP and ML techniques, achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve score, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.78-0.94), 80.00 (95% CI 70.82-87.33), and 88.00 (95% CI 79.98-93.64) for the test set, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a promising AERD algorithm that needs further refinement to improve AERD diagnosis. Continued development of NLP and ML technologies has the potential to reduce diagnostic delays for AERD and improve the health of our patients.

Monoclonal antibody or aspirin desensitization in NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD)?

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is a clinical syndrome characterized by nasal polyposis, asthma, and intolerance to aspirin/NSAID. It affects approximately 15% cases of severe asthma, 10% of nasal polyps and 9% of rhinosinusitis. N-ERD results in associated asthma exacerbations, oral corticosteroids bursts, corticosteroid-dependent disease, and multiple endoscopic sinus surgeries. Unknown influences cause polyp epithelium to release alarmins, such as IL-33 and TSLP. These cytokines activate lymphoid cells, both Th2 and ILC2, to release cytokines such as IL5, IL4 and IL13, resulting in complex type 2 inflammation involving mast cells, eosinophils and platelets. Arachidonic acid released from such cells is metabolized into mediators. N-ERD is characterized by an imbalance in eicosanoid levels, especially CysLTs, PDG and PGE2. Patients with N-ERD present nasal symptoms (congestion, hyposmia/anosmia, nasal discharge) and lower airways symptoms (cough, sneezing, shortness of breath, chest tightness), anosmia, severe hyposmia as well as severe asthma which impacts the quality of life in this disease and leads to safety concerns in patients daily lives. Despite the variety of treatment strategies, the likelihood of recurrence of symptoms is high in patients with N-ERD. The most important strategies for treating N-ERD are listed as following: drug therapies, aspirin desensitization, monoclonal antibodies and other therapies associated. N-ERD treatment remains a major challenge in the current situation. Selecting the appropriate patient for aspirin desensitization, monoclonal antibodies or both is essential. This review provides an overview on aspirin desensitization and biologics in N-ERD and might help in decision making from both the perspective of the physician and patient. Patient characteristics, safety, efficacy, health care costs, but also patient preferences are all factors to take into account when it comes to a choice between biologics or aspirin desensitization.

Review of biologics in allergy and immunology

Biologics or molecularly targeted drugs are often highly effective for the treatment of allergic diseases and other immunologic disorders, and they are relatively safe for short-term use as compared with conventional approaches such as the systemic use of corticosteroids. A number of studies published in 2021 consistently demonstrated their effectiveness and also revealed unanticipated findings. Among them, clinical trials for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using biologics targeting thymic stromal lymphopoietin, IL-33, and IL-33 receptor demonstrated that these type 2 alarmin cytokines are also involved in non-type 2, noneosinophilic inflammation. Randomized controlled trials reporting the efficacies of 2 small-molecule oral drugs targeting Janus kinase-1 had a substantial impact on the management of atopic dermatitis. These drugs demonstrated superiority over dupilumab, which has previously demonstrated efficacy and is in wide use in clinical practice. As a concern, biologics are generally costly, and it should be noted that racial/ethnic minority populations may be less likely to receive biologics in the real world. Here, we have reviewed recent clinical trials and related topics dealing with the effects of biologics on allergic and immunologic diseases; in addition, we discuss how our understanding of the pathophysiology of these disorders has progressed.

Aspirin desensitization and biologics in aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease: Efficacy, tolerability, and patient experience

BACKGROUND

Patterns of medication use and efficacy in aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) have not been well characterized, especially since the advent of respiratory biologics. Aspirin therapy after desensitization (ATAD) is efficacious for upper and lower respiratory symptoms for patients with AERD, though aspirin-related adverse effects can limit therapy. The optimal coordination of ATAD and respiratory biologics for the treatment of AERD remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to characterize patterns of medication use and treatment experience with biologics and ATAD in AERD.

METHODS

We surveyed 98 patients with AERD recruited from the Brigham and Women's Hospital AERD registry. Patients completed an online questionnaire describing their medication history and treatment experience.

RESULTS

A total of 52 (53.0%) patients reported a history of use of one or more respiratory biologics (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, or dupilumab), and 84 (85.7%) reported undergoing aspirin desensitization. There were 24 patients (24.4%) who reported concurrent use of a biologic and ATAD. Compared with those taking ATAD alone, patients taking a biologic and ATAD concurrently were less likely to report that aspirin was effective for their AERD symptoms (odds ratio, 0.161 [95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.76]; P =.02). Whereas patients reported varying efficacy with biologics, dupilumab had the highest odds of patients reporting it worked "very well" (odds ratio, 17.58 [95% confidence interval, 5.68-54.35]; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Biologics are emerging as a treatment option for AERD and are generally well tolerated. Biologic efficacy in AERD is variable by agent, though most patients taking dupilumab found it to be effective. Patients on a biologic in conjunction with ATAD may represent a more severe subset of AERD for which ATAD alone is insufficient.