Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of High-Dose Mepolizumab Treatment for Hypereosinophilic Syndrome

Biologic therapy in rare eosinophil-associated disorders: remaining questions and translational research opportunities

Rare eosinophil-associated disorders (EADs), including hypereosinophilic syndrome, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders, are a heterogeneous group of conditions characterized by blood and/or tissue hypereosinophilia and eosinophil-related clinical manifestations. Although the recent availability of biologic therapies that directly and indirectly target eosinophils has the potential to dramatically improve treatment options for all EADs, clinical trials addressing their safety and efficacy in rare EADs have been relatively few. Consequently, patient access to therapy is limited for many biologics, and the establishment of evidence-based treatment guidelines has been extremely difficult. In this regard, multicenter retrospective collaborative studies focusing on disease manifestations and treatment responses in rare EADs have provided invaluable data for physicians managing patients with these conditions and helped identify important questions for future translational research. During the Clinical Pre-Meeting Workshop held in association with the July 2023 biennial meeting of the International Eosinophil Society in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, the successes and limitations of pivotal multicenter retrospective studies in EADs were summarized and unmet needs regarding the establishment of guidelines for use of biologics in rare EADs were discussed. Key topics of interest included (1) clinical outcome measures, (2) minimally invasive biomarkers of disease activity, (3) predictors of response to biologic agents, and (4) long-term safety of eosinophil depletion. Herein, we report a summary of these discussions, presenting a state-of-the-art overview of data currently available for each of these topics, the limitations of the data, and avenues for future data generation through implementation of multidisciplinary and multicenter studies.

Managing Patients with Hypereosinophilic Syndrome: A Statement from the Italian Society of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC)

Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) encompasses a heterogeneous and complex group of different subtypes within the wider group of hypereosinophilic disorders. Despite increasing research interest, several unmet needs in terms of disease identification, pathobiology, phenotyping, and personalized treatment remain to be addressed. Also, the prospective burden of non-malignant HES and, more in general, HE disorders is currently unknown. On a practical note, shortening the diagnostic delay and the time to an appropriate treatment approach probably represents the most urgent issue, even in light of the great impact of HES on the quality of life of affected patients. The present document represents the first action that the Italian Society of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC) has finalized within a wider project aiming to establish a collaborative national network on HES (InHES-Italian Network on HES) for patients and physicians. The first step of the project could not but focus on defining a common language as well as sharing with all of the medical community an update on the most recent advances in the field. In fact, the existing literature has been carefully reviewed in order to critically integrate the different views on the topic and derive practical recommendations on disease identification and treatment approaches.

Targeting CCR4 with mogamulizumab in refractory CD3-CD4+ lymphocytic-variant hypereosinophilic syndrome

Not available.

Severe hypereosinophilia in a patient treated with dupilumab and shift to mepolizumab: the importance of multidisciplinary management. A case report and literature review

Type 2 inflammation is a heterogeneous condition due to the complex activation of different immunological pathways. Rapid progress in research to evaluate the efficacy of biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma has led to the availability of effective therapeutic options. These drugs are safe, but temporary iatrogenic hypereosinophilia may sometimes be associated with clinical symptoms or organ damage. Here, we describe a case of severe hypereosinophilia in a patient with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma treated with dupilumab and a subsequent therapeutic shift to mepolizumab that led to maintenance of symptom control and concomitant normalization of blood eosinophil count.

World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of non-hematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary or clonal) disorders with the potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia (HE) has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 109/L, and may be associated with tissue damage. After the exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on a combination of various tests. They include morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization, molecular testing and flow immunophenotyping to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2022 World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification endorse a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions" (MLN-eo-TK), and the MPN subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia" (CEL). Lymphocyte-variant HE is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (e.g., <1.5 × 109/L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Pemigatinib was recently approved for patients with relapsed or refractory FGFR1-rearranged neoplasms. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant HE and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-α have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. Mepolizumab, an interleukin-5 (IL-5) antagonist monoclonal antibody, is approved by the U.S Food and Drug Administration for patients with idiopathic HES. Cytotoxic chemotherapy agents, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation have been used for aggressive forms of HES and CEL, with outcomes reported for limited numbers of patients. Targeted therapies such as the IL-5 receptor antibody benralizumab, IL-5 monoclonal antibody depemokimab, and various tyrosine kinase inhibitors for MLN-eo-TK, are under active investigation.

Clinical and Therapeutic Intervention of Hypereosinophilia in the Era of Molecular Diagnosis

Hypereosinophilia (HE) presents with an elevated peripheral eosinophilic count of >1.5 × 109/L and is composed of a broad spectrum of secondary non-hematologic disorders and a minority of primary hematologic processes with heterogenous clinical presentations, ranging from mild symptoms to potentially lethal outcome secondary to end-organ damage. Following the introduction of advanced molecular diagnostics (genomic studies, RNA sequencing, and targeted gene mutation profile, etc.) in the last 1-2 decades, there have been deep insights into the etiology and molecular mechanisms involved in the development of HE. The classification of HE has been updated and refined following to the discovery of clinically novel markers and targets in the 2022 WHO classification and ICOG-EO 2021 Working Conference on Eosinophil Disorder and Syndromes. However, the diagnosis and management of HE is challenging given its heterogeneity and variable clinical outcome. It is critical to have a diagnostic algorithm for accurate subclassification of HE and hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) (e.g., reactive, familial, idiopathic, myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm, organ restricted, or with unknown significance) and to follow established treatment guidelines for patients based on its clinical findings and risk stratification.

Mepolizumab incompletely suppresses clinical flares in a pilot study of episodic angioedema with eosinophilia

BACKGROUND

Episodic angioedema with eosinophilia (EAE) is a rare multilineage cyclic syndrome of unknown etiology characterized by episodes of angioedema, myalgia, fatigue, and fever that occur every 3 to 8 weeks and resolve between episodes without therapy. Cyclic elevations in serum IL-5 levels and neutrophils precede the increase in absolute eosinophil count (AEC) in most patients.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the role of IL-5-driven eosinophilia in the clinical manifestations of EAE.

METHODS

An open-label pilot study of mepolizumab (700 mg intravenously monthly for 3 months followed by sequential dose reduction to the Food and Drug Administration-approved dose of 300 mg subcutaneously monthly) was conducted. The primary end point was reduction in the number and severity of clinical symptoms as assessed by patient-reported symptom questionnaires. Secondary end points were greater than or equal to 75% reduction in peak AEC after 1 dose of mepolizumab and sustained reduction in AEC after 3 doses of mepolizumab. Exploratory end points included effects of mepolizumab treatment on other cell lineages (numbers and surface marker expression), levels of plasma mediators, and biomarkers of eosinophil activation.

RESULTS

Four female and 1 male (median age, 45 years) participants with EAE were enrolled. None of the 5 participants experienced a reduction in the number of symptomatic flares on mepolizumab therapy, and 1 participant withdrew before study completion because of lack of improvement. Peak AEC was reduced by 75% or more in 3 participants after the first dose of mepolizumab and in 4 participants after 3 doses.

CONCLUSIONS

In a small cohort of participants with EAE, mepolizumab was unsuccessful in substantially reducing clinical symptoms despite reduction in AEC.

Hypereosinophilia causes progressive cardiac pathologies in mice

Hypereosinophilic syndrome is a progressive disease with extensive eosinophilia that results in organ damage. Cardiac pathologies are the main reason for its high mortality rate. A better understanding of the mechanisms of eosinophil-mediated tissue damage would benefit therapeutic development. Here, we describe the cardiac pathologies that developed in a mouse model of hypereosinophilic syndrome. These IL-5 transgenic mice exhibited decreased left ventricular function at a young age which worsened with age. Mechanistically, we demonstrated infiltration of activated eosinophils into the heart tissue that led to an inflammatory environment. Gene expression signatures showed tissue damage as well as repair and remodeling processes. Cardiomyocytes from IL-5Tg mice exhibited significantly reduced contractility relative to wild type (WT) controls. This impairment may result from the inflammatory stress experienced by the cardiomyocytes and suggest that dysregulation of contractility and Ca2+ reuptake in cardiomyocytes contributes to cardiac dysfunction at the whole organ level in hypereosinophilic mice.

Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome presenting as cardiac tamponade and multiorgan dysfunction

Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome is characterised by the overproduction of eosinophils with tissue infiltration, leading to multiorgan dysfunction. Its heterogenous presentation makes the diagnosis challenging and easy to miss. A woman in her 70s was admitted with chest pain and shortness of breath. Diagnostic testing showed elevated cardiac enzymes, an ejection fraction of 45% and pericardial effusion. Pericardiocentesis helped her symptoms significantly. Cardiac catheterisation revealed patent coronary arteries. She was diagnosed with myopericarditis and discharged on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. She returned the following week with worsening chest pain, dyspnoea and diarrhoea. Chest imaging showed bilateral infiltrates. Diagnostic testing showed eosinophilic predominance in peripheral blood (59%), pericardial fluid (37%) and bronchoalveolar lavage (31%). After a negative infectious workup, she was started on glucocorticoids and responded favourably. She was discharged on steroids. Mepolizumab was initiated outpatient, and steroids were discontinued. Mepolizumab was discontinued after 2 years while monitoring her symptoms and eosinophil counts.

Biologic therapies for hypereosinophilic disorders: From tyrosine kinase inhibitors to monoclonal antibodies. Towards an increasingly customized management?

Hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) encompass a wide range of disorders characterized by persistent peripheral blood hypereosinophilia (HE) (i.e., an eosinophil count ≥1.5 × 10⁹/L and ≥ 10% eosinophils preferably with a minimal duration of 6 months if documentation is available) associated with organ damage and/or dysfunction attributable to tissue eosinophilic infiltrate and release of granule contents. In most cases, HE is associated with atopic conditions/allergies, parasitic infections, medications, autoimmune disorders and/or solid tumors in most cases. More rarely, it can be one of the dominant manifestations of an underlying myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm. With regard to hematological forms, in recent decades the advances in understanding the pathogenic aspects of HES have led to a growing interest in these diseases, and in the 2016 WHO classification multiple subgroups were defined according to the molecular profile with the aim of better characterizing these syndromes and establishing which patients will benefit from specific pharmacological targeted therapies. This review article will provide a comprehensive overview of possible therapeutic approaches for HES in the light of each specific molecular alteration, considering both tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies, either implemented in clinical practice or currently still under development.

Case report: Successful use of mepolizumab for immune checkpoint inhibitors-induced hypereosinophilic syndrome in two patients with solid malignancies

Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) represents a group of blood disorders characterized by an absolute eosinophil count (AEC) > 1.5 × 103/μl in the peripheral blood, which eventually extravasate and cause organ damage. It can be primary or secondary to infections or tumors. The infiltration of eosinophils in tissue and organs is associated with different disorders and, in some cases, with life-threatening manifestations. Albeit the pathogenesis of HES in patients with solid tumo\rs is not yet clarified; recently, HES has also been described as an immune-related adverse event in patients with solid tumors receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. Treatment of HES is still debated, especially in patients with concomitant solid tumors, and different drugs including imatinib, hydroxyurea, interferon-ɑ, glucocorticoids, and the monoclonal antibody targeting circulating IL-5 mepolizumab have been proposed according to the underlying cause and the severity of HES. Herein, we describe, for the first time, the successful use of mepolizumab for the treatment of immune checkpoint-induced HES in two patients with metastatic solid tumor.

Available and emerging therapies for bona fide advanced systemic mastocytosis and primary eosinophilic neoplasms

The historically poor prognosis of patients with advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM) and primary eosinophilic neoplasms has shifted to increasingly favorable outcomes with the discovery of druggable targets. The multikinase/KIT inhibitor midostaurin and the highly selective KIT D816V inhibitor avapritinib can elicit marked improvements in measures of mast cell (MC) burden as well as reversion of MC-mediated organ damage (C-findings) and disease symptoms. With avapritinib, the achievement of molecular remission of KIT D816V and improved survival compared with historical therapy suggests a potential to affect disease natural history. BLU-263 and bezuclastinib are KIT D816V inhibitors currently being tested in trials of AdvSM. In the new World Health Organization and International Consensus Classifications, the category of "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase (TK) gene fusions" is inclusive of rearrangements involving PDGFRA, PDGFRB, FGFR1, JAK2, FLT3, and ETV6::ABL1. While the successful outcomes with imatinib in FIP1L1::PDGFRA-positive cases and PDGFRB-rearranged neoplasms have become the "poster children" of these disorders, the responses of the other TK-driven neoplasms to small-molecule inhibitors are more variable. The selective FGFR inhibitor pemigatinib, approved in August 2022, is a promising therapy in aggressive FGFR1-driven diseases and highlights the role of such agents in bridging patients to allogeneic transplantation. This review summarizes the data for these approved and investigational agents and discusses open questions and future priorities regarding the management of these rare diseases.

Approach to the patient with suspected hypereosinophilic syndrome

Hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) are a heterogenous group of rare disorders with clinical manifestations ranging from fatigue to life-threatening endomyocardial fibrosis and thromboembolic events. Given the broad differential diagnosis of HES, a comprehensive approach is needed to identify potential secondary (treatable) causes and define end-organ manifestations. Classification by clinical HES subtype is also useful in terms of assessing prognosis and guiding therapy. Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of initial therapy in the setting of acute, life-threatening PDGFR mutation-negative HES. Whereas the recent availability of eosinophil-targeted therapies with extraordinary efficacy and little apparent toxicity is changing the treatment paradigm, especially for idiopathic HES and overlap syndromes, questions remain unanswered regarding the choice of agent, impact of combination therapies, and long-term effects of eosinophil depletion. This review provides a case-based discussion of the differential diagnosis of HES, including the classification by clinical HES subtype. Treatment options are reviewed, including novel eosinophil-targeted agents recently approved for the treatment of HES and/or other eosinophil-associated disorders. Primary (myeloid) disorders associated with hypereosinophilia are not be addressed in depth in this review.

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.

Eosinophils: A Friend or Foe in Human Health and Diseases

Background

Since their discovery, around 150 years, eosinophils research has been a field of changing perspective, and new directions are emerging since then.

Summary

Initially, eosinophils were perceived as terminally differentiated cytotoxic effector cells. Clearly, eosinophils are capable of playing functions other than immune responses, which is not surprising given their intricate interactions with pathogens as well as other circulating leukocytes. Attempts to comprehend the eosinophil biology and functions have yielded remarkable insights into their roles in human health and sickness. The use of FDA-approved eosinophils-targeting biologics has provided exciting opportunities to directly explore the contributions of eosinophils in disease etiology in humans.

Key Messages

In this review, we will focus on the eosinophils' lifecycle and discuss the current state of knowledge from mouse models and retrospective human studies demonstrating eosinophils' roles in the pathogenesis of human diseases such as asthma, cancer, and kidney disorders. Despite three recently approved anti-eosinophil agents, a number of key questions and challenges remain far from settled, thereby generating opportunity to further explore this enigmatic cell. A comprehensive understanding of eosinophils biology and function will surely aid in developing improved therapeutic strategies against eosinophils-associated disorders.

Mepolizumab Reduces Hypereosinophilic Syndrome Flares Irrespective of Blood Eosinophil Count and Interleukin-5

BACKGROUND

Mepolizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 (IL-5) antibody, reduces disease flares in patients with hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). Factors predicting treatment response are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess mepolizumab efficacy by baseline blood eosinophil count (BEC) and serum IL-5 level in patients with HES.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis used data from the phase III study assessing mepolizumab in patients with HES (NCT02836496). Patients 12 years old or older, with HES for 6 or more months, 2 or more flares in the previous year, and BEC ≥1,000 cells/μL at screening were randomized (1:1) to 4-weekly subcutaneous mepolizumab (300 mg) or placebo, plus baseline HES therapy, for 32 weeks. The proportion of patients experiencing 1 or more flares (wk 32), annualized flare rate, and proportion of patients with change from baseline in Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) item 3 (wk 32), were analyzed by baseline BEC (<1500/≥1500 to <2500/≥2500 cells/μL). Flare outcomes were assessed by baseline serum IL-5 (<7.81/≥7.81 pg/mL).

RESULTS

Across baseline BEC subgroups, mepolizumab reduced the proportion of patients experiencing 1 or more flares by 63% to 90% and flare rate by 58% to 84% (treatment-by-eosinophil interaction P = .76 and P = .90, respectively); patients had improved BFI item 3 score with mepolizumab versus placebo (cells/μL: <1,500: 54% vs 37%; ≥1,500 to <2,500: 47% vs 31%; ≥2,500: 61% vs 0%; treatment-by-eosinophil interaction P = .42). Most patients had undetectable baseline serum IL-5 levels; among these, mepolizumab versus placebo reduced the proportion of patients with 1 or more flares (77%) and flare rate (67%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab was efficacious in the patients with HES studied, irrespective of baseline BEC. Undetectable IL-5 levels should not preclude mepolizumab treatment.

An International, Retrospective Study of Off-Label Biologic Use in the Treatment of Hypereosinophilic Syndromes

BACKGROUND

Treatment of hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) often requires the use of immunomodulators with substantial side effect profiles. The emergence of biologics offers an alternative treatment modality.

OBJECTIVE

To examine real-world practice data to describe the safety and consequences of various biologics suspected to directly or indirectly affect eosinophilic inflammation for the treatment of HES.

METHODS

Retrospective data from 13 centers were collected via an online Research Electronic Data Capture repository. Inclusion criteria included (1) peripheral eosinophil count of 1,500/mm³ or greater without a secondary cause; (2) clinical manifestations attributable to the eosinophilia; and (3) having received mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), benralizumab (afucosylated anti-IL-5 receptor α), omalizumab (anti-IgE), alemtuzumab (anti-CD52), dupilumab (anti-IL-4 receptor α), or reslizumab (anti-IL-5) outside a placebo-controlled clinical trial.

RESULTS

Of the 151 courses of biologics prescribed for 121 patients with HES, 59% resulted in improved HES symptoms and 77% enabled tapering of other HES medications. Overall, 105 patients were receiving daily systemic glucocorticoids at the time of a biologic initiation and were able to reduce the glucocorticoid dose by a median reduction of 10 mg of daily prednisone equivalents. Biologics were generally safe and well-tolerated other than infusion reactions with alemtuzumab. Thirteen of 24 patients had clinical improvement after switching biologics and nine patients responded to increasing the dose of mepolizumab after a lack of response to a lower dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologics may offer a safer treatment alternative to existing therapies for HES, although the optimal dosing and choice for each subtype of HES remain to be determined. Limitations of this study include its retrospective nature and intersite differences in data collection and availability of each biologic.

Controversies in Allergy: The Potential Role of Biologics as First-Line Therapy in Eosinophilic Disorders

With advances in understanding the role of eosinophils in disease pathogenesis, particularly in the airways, gastrointestinal tract, and skin, targeting eosinophils or the cytokines that lead to their production, activation, and survival has become an increasingly pursued therapeutic approach. Newly developed biologic agents target eosinophils directly, other cells interacting with or activating eosinophils, or cytokines in the type 2 inflammatory pathway with specific antibodies. Current treatment paradigms reserve therapy with biologics for patients refractory to or intolerant of corticosteroids or immunosuppressants. Given accumulating data for safety and efficacy of these biologics, however, there is the question of whether targeted treatments should be used earlier in the treatment algorithm. In this article, we discuss the pros and cons of using biologics as first-line therapy for eosinophilic diseases of the airways, gastrointestinal tract, and skin. We highlight emerging biologic agents and future directions for research, as well as a rationale for the early use of some biologics to prevent tissue damage, disease progression, and organ dysfunction in selected conditions.

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.

Perspectives on the Efficacy of Benralizumab for Treatment of Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis

Two types of interleukin (IL)-5 antibody biologics, anti-IL-5 antibodies (mepolizumab) and anti-IL-5α receptor antibodies (benralizumab), are indicated for severe asthma. While high-dose mepolizumab is also indicated for EGPA, benralizumab is indicated only for severe asthma. Benralizumab is characterized by antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity activity, giving them specific and rapid anti-IL-5α receptor binding abilities and the ability to target a high number of eosinophils in tissues as well as peripheral blood. Recently, reports on the efficacy of benralizumab as a treatment for EGPA have been published, along with reports on some cases that are difficult to treat with existing oral corticosteroids and mepolizumab. Therefore, we focus on the perspective of the efficacy and safety of benralizumab as a treatment for EGPA patients with steroid dependence in this review. A total of 41 patients with EGPA were treated with benralizumab. After the introduction of benralizumab, oral corticosteroids could be reduced to 10 mg/day or less in all cases and to less than 5 mg/day in 80% or more of the cases. Discontinuation of oral corticosteroids was achieved in more than 40% of patients with EGPA. Benralizumab was effective in patients with mepolizumab-refractory EGPA and intractable cardiac and neuropathy complications. Efficient elimination of eosinophils is expected to improve the remission rate of EGPA with benralizumab treatment. Although the total number of patients was small, benralizumab was safe and tolerable in a wide range of age groups, suggesting efficacy in severe cases with EGPA.

From DREAM to REALITI-A and beyond: Mepolizumab for the treatment of eosinophil-driven diseases

Effective treatment of inflammatory diseases is often challenging owing to their heterogeneous pathophysiology. Understanding of the underlying disease mechanisms is improving and it is now clear that eosinophils play a complex pathophysiological role in a broad range of type 2 inflammatory diseases. Standard of care for these conditions often still includes oral corticosteroids (OCS) and/or cytotoxic immune therapies, which are associated with debilitating side effects. Selective, biological eosinophil‐reducing agents provide treatment options that improve clinical symptoms associated with eosinophilic inflammation and reduce OCS use. Mepolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to and neutralizes interleukin‐5, the major cytokine involved in eosinophil proliferation, activation, and survival. Mepolizumab is approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and hypereosinophilic syndrome. Additionally, the efficacy of add‐on mepolizumab has been observed in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with an eosinophilic phenotype. Here, we review the development, approval, and real‐world effectiveness of mepolizumab for the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, from the DREAM to REALITI‐A studies, and describe how knowledge from this journey extended to the use of mepolizumab and other biologics across a broad spectrum of eosinophilic diseases.

World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2022 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of nonhematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary or clonal) disorders with potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia (HE) has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 10⁹ /L. After exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization, next generation sequencing gene assays, and flow immunophenotyping to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2016 World Health Organization endorses a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2", and the myeloproliferative neoplasm subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified" (CEL, NOS). Lymphocyte-variant HE is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (eg, < 1.5 × 10⁹ /L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant HE and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-α have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. Mepolizumab, an interleukin-5 (IL-5) antagonist monoclonal antibody, was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for patients with idiopathic HES. The use of the IL-5 receptor antibody benralizumab, as well as other targeted therapies such as JAK2 and FGFR1 inhibitors, is under active investigation.

The use of biologics in personalized asthma care

INTRODUCTION

The role of biologic treatments in severe asthma continues to expand, with five agents now approved. Selection of biologic treatment has become increasingly complex in the setting of overlapping indications and in the absence of head-to-head trials. Long-term safety data are still limited for more recently approved agents.

AREAS COVERED

We review the evidence supporting the choice of biologic and predicting treatment response utilizing existing widely available biomarkers. In addition, we provide a digest of the long-term safety data currently available for agents approved since 2015. Data sources were identified by using PubMed in 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

We generally favor omalizumab in the first instance for those severe asthma patients also eligible for other biologics, due to the greater long-term safety data available for this agent. Clinical characteristics predicting response, treatment priorities, and comorbidities must also be considered.

Prominent Role of Type 2 Immunity in Skin Diseases-Beyond Atopic Dermatitis

Type 2 immunity, illustrated by T helper 2 lymphocytes (Th2) and downstream cytokines (IL-4, IL-13, IL-31) as well as group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2), is important in host defense and wound healing.¹ The hallmark of type 2 inflammation is eosinophilia and/or high IgE counts and is best recognized in atopic diathesis. Persistent eosinophilia, such as seen in hypereosinophilic syndromes, leads to fibrosis and hence therapeutic Type 2 inhibition in fibrotic diseases is of high interest. Furthermore, as demonstrated in cutaneous T cell lymphoma, advanced disease is characterized by Th1 to Th2 switch allowing cancer progression and immunosuppression. Development of targeted monoclonal antibodies against IL-4Rα (eg, dupilumab) led to a paradigm shift for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) and stimulated research to better understand the role of Type 2 inflammation in other skin conditions. In this review, we summarize up to date knowledge on the role of Type 2 inflammation in skin diseases other than AD and highlight whether the use of Type 2 targeted therapies has been documented or is being investigated in clinical trials. This manuscript reviews the role of Type 2 inflammation in dermatitis, neurodermatitis, IgE-mediated dermatoses (eg, bullous pemphigoid, chronic spontaneous urticaria), sclerodermoid conditions and skin neoplasms.

Treatment of lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilic syndrome (L-HES): what to consider after confirming the elusive diagnosis

Lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilic syndrome (L-HES) is a rare disease driven by immunophenotypically aberrant T cells producing eosinophilopoetic cytokines such as interleukin-5 (IL-5). Treatment is challenging because L-HES is relatively steroid resistant and not amenable to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We searched the literature for clinical trials and observational studies, including case reports, of patients treated for L-HES. In all, 25 studies were selected; two were randomised controlled trials of IL-5 blockade, which included some patients with L-HES, and the rest were observational studies. Corticosteroids are often used as first-line therapy, but patients with L-HES have lower response rates than other types of HES. Treatments that reduce symptoms and steroid dependence in some patients include interferon-alpha (IFN-α), anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies, cyclosporine and mycophenolate. These drugs target T-cell activation and proliferation, or IL-5 directly. Although effective, IFN-α and cyclosporine were commonly reported to cause side-effects resulting in discontinuation. Alemtuzumab can induce remissions, but these are generally short lived. The anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies mepolizumab and benralizumab are effective and well tolerated, but with a high rate of relapse once withdrawn. Hydroxyurea, methotrexate, imatinib were unsuccessful in most patients studied. More prospective clinical trials are needed for patients with L-HES.

Eosinophil Knockout Humans: Uncovering the Role of Eosinophils Through Eosinophil-Directed Biological Therapies

The enigmatic eosinophil has emerged as an exciting component of the immune system, involved in a plethora of homeostatic and inflammatory responses. Substantial progress has been achieved through experimental systems manipulating eosinophils in vivo, initially in mice and more recently in humans. Researchers using eosinophil knockout mice have identified a contributory role for eosinophils in basal and inflammatory processes and protective immunity. Primarily fueled by the purported proinflammatory role of eosinophils in eosinophil-associated diseases, a series of anti-eosinophil therapeutics have emerged as a new class of drugs. These agents, which dramatically deplete eosinophils, provide a valuable opportunity to characterize the consequences of eosinophil knockout humans. Herein, we comparatively describe mouse and human eosinophil knockouts. We put forth the view that human eosinophils negatively contribute to a variety of diseases and, unlike mouse eosinophils, do not yet have an identified role in physiological health; thus, clarifying all roles of eosinophils remains an ongoing pursuit.

Lessons learned from targeting eosinophils in human disease

Eosinophils are a minor subset of the granulocyte lineage distinguished by their unique morphology, phenotype, cytoplasmic contents, and function. Evolutionarily, these are ancient cells whose existence has been conserved within vertebrates for millions of years, suggesting that their contribution to innate immunity and other pathologic and homeostatic responses are important to the host. Knowledge regarding the role of eosinophils in health and disease took a leap forward in 2004 with the creation of mouse strains deficient in eosinophils. This advance was paralleled in humans using pharmacology, namely, with the development of drugs capable of selectively reducing and sometimes even eliminating human eosinophils in those receiving these agents. As a result, a more definitive picture of what eosinophils do, and do not do, is emerging. This review will summarize recent advances in our understanding of the role of eosinophils in human disease by focusing mainly on data from clinical studies with anti-eosinophil therapies, even though the first of such agents, mepolizumab, was only approved in the USA in November 2015. Information regarding both efficacy and safety will be highlighted, and where relevant, intriguing data from animal models will also be mentioned, especially if there are conflicting effects seen in humans.

Hypereosinophilic syndrome with central nervous system involvement treated with anti-IL-5 therapy

Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a rare disorder characterized by a persistent eosinophilia with a multi-organ involvement including neurological manifestation. A 59-year-old man was referred from a neurosurgery unit with a spastic triparesis with predominant left side involvement, dissociated sensory loss to Th7, and metastasis-like lesions in a brain CT. MRI examination of the thoracic spine revealed an intraspinal T2-hyperintensive lesion with a subtle central gadolinium enhancement at Th4-Th8 level. MRI of the cervical spine showed a C1-Th1 long T2-hyperintensive lesion with a partial gadolinium enhancement and MRI of the brain revealed a large tumefactive T2-hyperintensive lesion in the right hemisphere. Blood tests showed an increased number of eosinophils (1790 cells/µl; 18.3%). Common causes of the eosinophilia were excluded. After corticosteroid treatment moderate neurological improvement was observed however in the brain MRI new T2-hyperintensive lesions were revealed. The patient was referred to the Department of Allergology and qualified for a treatment with mepolizumab, a monoclonal antibody against IL-5, with subsequent clinical and radiological improvement. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of hypereosinophilic syndrome with brain and spinal cord involvement treated with mepolizumab.

Hypereosinophilic syndromes - An enigmatic group of disorders with an intriguing clinical spectrum and challenging treatment

Hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) comprises a group of rare disorders characterized by blood hypereosinophilia (>1.5 × 10⁹/l) accompanied by eosinophil-associated organ damage. The 2016 World Health Organization classification recognizes a category of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with prominent eosinophilia (M/L_eo) and well-characterized gene rearrangements of PDGFRA/B, FGFR1 or JAK2. PDGFRA/B-rearranged patients usually manifest as imatinib-sensitive myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). FGFR1- and JAK2- rearranged cases may manifest as MPNs or aggressive lymphomas/leukemias and historically have had a dismal prognosis, although clinical trials with targeted treatment are promising. A negative screen for M/L_eo in a patient with myeloid features should prompt consideration of a diagnosis of chronic eosinophilic leukemia-not otherwise specified. If these are excluded and a secondary cause is not identified, a diagnosis of idiopathic HES and/or other rare variants of HES should be considered. This review, through an illustrative case, summarizes current knowledge on HES pointing at new directions in diagnosis and treatment.

Mepolizumab in Hypereosinophilic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab (MEP) in the management of hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). A systematic search was performed, and articles published until March 2021 were analyzed. The primary efficacy results evaluated were hospitalization rate related to HES, morbidity (new or worsening), relapses/failure, treatment-related adverse effects, prednisone dosage ≤10 mg/day for ≥8 weeks, and eosinophil count <600/μL for ≥8 weeks. A meta-analysis was conducted, when appropriate. Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 255 patients, were included. The studies contemplated the use of MEP 300 mg/SC or 750 mg/IV. According to the evaluation of the proposed outcomes, when relapse rates/therapeutic failures were assessed, there was a 26% reduction with MEP 300 mg/SC (RD=-0.26; 95% CI: -0.44 to -0.08; p=0.04) and 48% reduction with MEP 750 mg/IV (RD=-0.48; 95% CI: -0.67, -0.30; p<0.00001). For the outcomes, prednisone dosage ≤10 mg/day for ≥8 weeks was 48% (RD=0.48; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.62; p<0.00001), and the eosinophil count <600/μL for ≥8 weeks was 51% (RD=0.51; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.63; p<0.00001), both showed a reduction with MEP 300 mg/IV and 750 mg/IV. No statistically significant differences in treatment-related adverse effects outcomes were observed for either dosage (RD=0.09; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.24; p=0.20; RD=0.09; 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.29; p=0.39). Despite the positive effects observed for the studied outcomes, the exact significance remains unclear.

A new dawn for eosinophils in the tumour microenvironment

Eosinophils are evolutionarily conserved, pleotropic cells that display key effector functions in allergic diseases, such as asthma. Nonetheless, eosinophils infiltrate multiple tumours and are equipped to regulate tumour progression either directly by interacting with tumour cells or indirectly by shaping the tumour microenvironment (TME). Eosinophils can readily respond to diverse stimuli and are capable of synthesizing and secreting a large range of molecules, including unique granule proteins that can potentially kill tumour cells. Alternatively, they can secrete pro-angiogenic and matrix-remodelling soluble mediators that could promote tumour growth. Herein, we aim to comprehensively outline basic eosinophil biology that is directly related to their activity in the TME. We discuss the mechanisms of eosinophil homing to the TME and examine their diverse pro-tumorigenic and antitumorigenic functions. Finally, we present emerging data regarding eosinophils as predictive biomarkers and effector cells in immunotherapy, especially in response to immune checkpoint blockade therapy, and highlight outstanding questions for future basic and clinical cancer research.

Approach to Eosinophilia Presenting With Pulmonary Symptoms

Eosinophilia with pulmonary involvement is characterized by the presence of peripheral blood eosinophilia, typically ≥500 cells/mm³, by pulmonary symptoms and physical examination findings that are nonspecific, and by radiographic evidence of pulmonary disease and is further supported by histopathologic evidence of tissue eosinophilia in a lung or pleura biopsy specimen and/or increased eosinophils in BAL fluid, usually >10%. Considering that there are a variety of underlying causes of eosinophilia with pulmonary manifestations and overlapping clinical, laboratory, and radiologic features, it is essential to approach the evaluation of eosinophilia with pulmonary findings systematically. In this review, we will describe a case presentation and discuss the differential diagnosis, a directed approach to the diagnostic evaluation and supporting literature, the current treatment strategies for pulmonary eosinophilia syndromes, and the levels of evidence underlying the recommendations, where available. Overall, optimal management of eosinophilic lung disease presentations are directed at the underlying cause when identifiable, and the urgency of treatment may be guided by the presence of severe end-organ involvement or life-threatening complications. When an underlying cause is not easily attributable, management of eosinophilia with pulmonary involvement largely relies on eosinophil-directed interventions, for which biologic therapies are increasingly being used.

Eosinophilia Associated With CD3-CD4+ T Cells: Characterization and Outcome of a Single-Center Cohort of 26 Patients

Background: Lymphocytic variant hypereosinophilic syndrome is characterized by marked over-production of eosinophilopoietic factor(s) by dysregulated T cells leading to eosinophil expansion. In most cases, these T cells are clonal and express a CD3^-CD4⁺ phenotype. As this is a rare disorder, presenting manifestations, disease course, treatment responses, and outcome are not well-characterized. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective single-center observational study, we reviewed medical files of all patients with persistent hypereosinophilia seen between 1994 and 2019 in whom CD3^-CD4⁺ T cells were detected. Data collection included clinical and biological findings at presentation, treatment responses, disease course, and serial CD3^-CD4⁺ T cell counts. Results: Our cohort comprises 26 patients, including 2 with hypereosinophilia of undetermined significance. All 24 symptomatic patients had cutaneous lesions and/or angioedema, and fasciitis was present in several cases. The aberrant T cell subset represented 2% or less total lymphocytes in 11 subjects. TCR gene rearrangement patterns on whole blood were polyclonal in these cases, while they all had serum CCL17/TARC levels above 1,500 pg/ml. Disease manifestations were mild and did not require maintenance therapy in roughly one third of the cohort, while two thirds required long-term oral corticosteroids and/or second-line agents. Among these, interferon-alpha was the most effective treatment option with a response observed in 8/8 patients, one of whom was cured of disease. Treatment had to be interrupted in most cases however due to poor tolerance and/or development of secondary resistance. Anti-interleukin-5 antibodies reduced blood eosinophilia in 5/5 patients, but clinical responses were disappointing. A sub-group of 5 patients had severe treatment-refractory disease, and experienced significant disease- and treatment-related morbidity and mortality, including progression to T cell lymphoma in three. Conclusions: This retrospective longitudinal analysis of the largest monocentric cohort of CD3^-CD4⁺ T cell associated lymphocytic variant hypereosinophilic syndrome published so far provides clinicians confronted with this rare disorder with relevant new data on patient presentation and outcome that should help tailor therapy and follow-up to different levels of disease severity. It highlights the need for novel therapeutic options, especially for the subset of patients with severe treatment-refractory disease. Future research efforts should be made toward understanding CD3^-CD4⁺ T cell biology in order to develop new treatments that target primary pathogenic mechanisms.

Autoimmune diseases and immune-checkpoint inhibitors for cancer therapy: review of the literature and personalized risk-based prevention strategy

Patients with cancer and with preexisting active autoimmune diseases (ADs) have been excluded from immunotherapy clinical trials because of concerns for high susceptibility to the development of severe adverse events resulting from exacerbation of their preexisting ADs. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be safe and effective in this patient population. However, baseline corticosteroids and other nonselective immunosuppressants appear to negatively impact drug efficacy, whereas retrospective and case report data suggest that use of specific immunosuppressants may not have the same consequences. Therefore, we propose here a two-step strategy. First, to lower the risk of compromising ICI efficacy before their initiation, nonselective immunosuppressants could be replaced by specific selective immunosuppressant drugs following a short rotation phase. Subsequently, combining ICI with the selective immunosuppressant could prevent exacerbation of the AD. For the most common active ADs encountered in the context of cancer, we propose specific algorithms to optimize ICI therapy. These preventive strategies go beyond current practices and recommendations, and should be practiced in ICI-specialized clinics, as these require multidisciplinary teams with extensive knowledge in the field of clinical immunology and oncology. In addition, we challenge the exclusion from ICI therapy for patients with cancer and active ADs and propose the implementation of an international registry to study such novel strategies in a prospective fashion.

Effectiveness of mepolizumab for eosinophilic pneumonia following bronchial thermoplasty

A 57-year-old woman with poorly controlled diabetes was admitted to our hospital for additional treatment of severe asthma. Although bronchial thermoplasty was performed in the both upper lobes, cough and dyspnoea gradually appeared 2 weeks later. High-resolution computed tomography revealed thickness of intralobular septa and a diffuse ground-glass attenuation in the lung fields. Laboratory examination revealed elevated levels of serum eosinophils and total immunoglobulin E. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid showed a remarkable increase of eosinophils as high as 48.5%, then eosinophilic pneumonia was diagnosed. Although treatment with steroids resulted in an improvement of eosinophilic pneumonia, the treatment was discontinued after 4 days because it worsened her diabetic condition. Since eosinophilic pneumonia recurred after discontinuing steroid, mepolizumab was administered, which subsequently improved her disease condition. Clinicians should be aware that bronchial thermoplasty can lead to eosinophilic pneumonia and mepolizumab might be an effective treatment in this setting.

Contributions of Eosinophils to Human Health and Disease

The human eosinophil has long been thought to favorably influence innate mucosal immunity but at times has also been incriminated in disease pathophysiology. Research into eosinophil biology has uncovered a number of interesting contributions by eosinophils to health and disease. However, it appears that not all eosinophils from all species are created equal. It remains unclear, for example, exactly how having eosinophils benefits the human host when helminth infections in the developed world have become scarce. This review focuses on our current state of knowledge as it relates to human eosinophils. When information is lacking, we discuss lessons learned from mouse studies that may or may not directly apply to human biology and disease. It is an exciting time to be an "eosinophilosopher" because the use of biologic agents that selectively target eosinophils provides an unprecedented opportunity to define the contribution of this cell to eosinophil-associated human diseases.

Critical Points on the Use of Biologicals in Allergic Diseases and Asthma

Improved understanding of the contribution of immune-inflammatory mechanisms in allergic diseases and asthma has encouraged development of biologicals and small molecules specifically targeting the innate and adaptive immune response. There are several critical points impacting the efficacy of this stratified approach, from the complexity of disease endotypes to the effectiveness in real-world settings. We discuss here how these barriers can be overcome to facilitate the development of implementation science for allergic diseases and asthma.

Approach to Patients with Eosinophilia

Physicians may encounter blood or tissue eosinophilia through a routine complete blood count with differential or a tissue pathology report. In this article, the basic biology of eosinophils is reviewed and definitions of blood eosinophilia, as well as the challenges of defining tissue eosinophilia, are discussed. Conditions associated with eosinophilia are briefly discussed as well as a general approach to evaluating eosinophilia. Future challenges include determining which eosinophil-associated diseases benefit from eosinophil-targeted therapy and identifying biomarkers for disease activity and diagnosis.

Mechanisms of glucocorticoid resistance in hypereosinophilic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids (GC) are considered first-line therapy for most patients with hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). Although response rates are generally high, many patients require moderate to high doses for control of eosinophilia and symptoms, and up to 15% of patients do not respond at all. Despite this, little is known about the mechanisms of GC resistance in patients with HES.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the aetiology of GC resistance in HES.

METHODS

Clinical data and samples from 26 patients with HES enrolled on a prospective study of GC responsiveness and 23 patients with HES enrolled on a natural history study of eosinophilia for whom response to GC was known were analysed retrospectively. Expression of GC receptor isoforms was assessed by quantitative RT-PCR in purified eosinophils. Serum cytokine levels were quantified by suspension array assay in multiplex.

RESULTS

Despite an impaired eosinophil response to GC after 7 days of treatment, the expected rise in absolute neutrophil count was seen in 7/7 GC-resistant patients, suggesting that GC resistance in HES is not a global phenomenon. Eosinophil mRNA expression of glucocorticoid receptor (GR) isoforms (α, β, and P) was similar between GC-sensitive (n = 20) and GC-resistant (n = 9) patients with HES. Whereas geometric mean serum levels were also comparable between GC-r (n = 11) and GC-s (n = 19) for all cytokines tested, serum IL-5 levels were >100 pg/mL only in GC-r patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These data suggest that the mechanism of GC resistance in HES is not due to a global phenomenon affecting all lineages, but may be due, at least in some patients, to impairment of eosinophil apoptosis by increased levels of IL-5.

Hypereosinophilic syndromes in the precision medicine era: clinical, molecular aspects and therapeutic approaches (targeted therapies)

Introduction: Hypereosinophilic syndromes are a heterogeneous group of disorders that may be associated with life-threatening organ injury as a result of tissues infiltration by eosinophils. The main goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. When possible, therapy should be directed at the underlying etiology. However, even in the absence of any known cause, when organ damage is present, hypereosinophilia must be treated promptly and aggressively to reduce potential morbidity and mortality.Areas covered: Conventional therapies, including corticosteroids, hydroxyurea (hydroxycarbamide) and interferon-alpha, have shown variable efficacy and a non-negligible toxicity emphasizing the need of new therapeutic strategies based on drugs with different mechanisms of action.Expert opinion: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have a central role among targeted therapies of hypereosinophilic syndromes. Imatinib, initially empirically used based on its activity in chronic myeloid leukemia, achieved preliminary excellent results further confirmed in large series of patients. Third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ponatinib, while active in vitro and in vivo in animals, still deserve confirmation in properly designed clinical trials. In addition, clinical investigation on monoclonal antibodies against interleukin-5, interleukin-5Rα, IgE, and CD52 represents a promising area of research.

World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2019 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of non-hematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary, clonal) disorders with potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 10⁹ /L, and may be associated with tissue damage. After exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on a combination of various tests. They include morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ-hybridization, flow immunophenotyping, and T-cell clonality assessment to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2016 World Health Organization endorses a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2", and the MPN subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified" (CEL, NOS). Lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (eg, <1.5 × 10⁹ /L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close-follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-alfa have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. In addition to hydroxyurea, second line cytotoxic chemotherapy agents, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation have been used for aggressive forms of HES and CEL, with outcomes reported for limited numbers of patients. The use of antibodies against interleukin-5 (IL-5) (mepolizumab), the IL-5 receptor (benralizumab), as well as other targets on eosinophils remains an active area of investigation.

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.