Super-Responders to Biologic Treatment in Type 2-High Severe Asthma: Passing Fad or a Meaningful Phenotype?

Connections and Unmet Needs: Severe Asthma Biologics and Osteoporosis

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease with the main anti-inflammatory drugs for better disease control being steroids or corticosteroids. The use of steroids in asthma patients, in particular in uncontrolled asthma patients, is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fragility fractures. A single oral corticosteroid course increases the risk of osteoporosis and the continual use of inhaled corticosteroids is correlated over time to an increased risk for both bone conditions. With the use of new, available biologic therapies for asthma, perhaps even anticipating the times of their use in therapeutic management, in the current guidelines and with targeted strategies of prevention it may be possible to improve asthma management, preventing some comorbidities, such as osteoporosis.

Biologic Medications for Severe Asthma: Implications for Understanding Pathogenic Heterogeneity and Endotypes

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways long known for phenotypic heterogeneity. Phenotyping studies in asthma have led to a better characterization of disease pathogenesis, yet further work is needed to pair available treatments with disease endotypes. In this review, the biology of targeted pathways is discussed along with the efficacy of biologic therapies targeting those pathways. Results of asthma clinical trials are included, as well as results of trials in related diseases. This review then analyzes how biologics help to inform the complex immunobiology of asthma and further guide their use while identifying areas for future research.

Identifying super-responders: A review of the road to asthma remission

Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease marked by heterogeneity and variable clinical outcomes. Recent therapeutic advances have highlighted patients achieving optimal outcomes, termed "remission" or "super-response." This review evaluates the various definitions of these terms and explores how disease burden impedes the attainment of remission. We assessed multiple studies, including a recent systematic review and meta-analysis, on biologic treatments for asthma remission. Our review highlights that type 2 inflammation may be the strongest predictor of biologic response. Key comorbidities (eg, obesity and mood disorders) and behavioral factors (eg, poor adherence, improper inhalation technique, and smoking) were identified as dominant traits limiting remission. In addition, asthma burden and longer disease duration significantly restrict the potential for remission in patients with severe asthma under the current treatment paradigm. We review the potential for a "predict-and-prevent" approach, which focuses on early identification of high-risk patients with type 2 inflammation and aggressive treatment to improve long-term asthma outcomes. In conclusion, this scoping review highlights the following unmet needs in asthma remission: (1) a harmonized global definition, with better defined lung function parameters; (2) integration of nonbiologic therapies into remission strategies; and (3) a clinical trial of early biologic intervention in patients with remission-prone, very type 2-high, moderately severe asthma with clinical remission as a predefined primary end point.

Short-term Tezepelumab effectiveness in patients with severe asthma: a multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

Severe asthma presents significant management challenges, often requiring advanced treatments to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. The use of monoclonal antibodies has revolutionized the clinical course of patients with severe asthma, showing a significant impact on exacerbations reduction, oral corticosteroids (OCS) cessation and on the improvement of lung function and quality of life. Tezepelumab, an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) monoclonal antibody, has emerged as a potential therapeutic option for these patients.

METHODS

We conducted an observational, prospective, multicenter study including 20 patients with confirmed severe asthma according to ERS guidelines and GINA recommendations. Patients received Tezepelumab 210 mg every 4 wk due to uncontrolled asthma despite maximal inhalation treatment with ICS/LABA. Data were collected before treatment initiation (T0) and after three months from the first administration (T3).

RESULTS

After three months of Tezepelumab treatment, we reported significant improvements in asthma symptoms and quality of life, as well as a consistent reduction in exacerbations and OCS use. We found no statistically meaningful differences among main clinical and functional outcomes according to inflammatory biomarkers, while lung function improved significantly in patients with less allergic sensitization. No serious adverse event was reported during the follow up, while the rates of mild adverse effects were comparable to those from registration trials.

CONCLUSION

Tezepelumab demonstrated short-term efficacy in improving asthma control and quality of life, showing a favorable safety profile. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up would confirm these findings and identify predictors of response to Tezepelumab.

Clinical remission and control in severe asthma: agreements and disagreements

Over the last two decades, we have witnessed great advancements in our understanding of the immunological pathways of asthma, leading to the development of targeted therapies, such as biologic drugs, that have radically and definitively changed the clinical outcomes of severe asthma. Despite the numerous therapeutic options available, ~4-10% of all people with asthma have severe or uncontrolled asthma, associated with an increased risk of developing chronic oral corticosteroid use, fixed airflow limitation, exacerbations, hospitalization and, finally, increased healthcare costs. The new concept of disease modification in asthma comes from the evolution of asthma management, which encompasses phenotyping patients with different inflammatory endotypes characterizing the disease, followed by the advent of more effective therapies capable of targeting the proximal factors of airway inflammation. This treat-to-target approach aims to achieve remission of the disease. Because the novel treatment paradigm for severe asthma with the advent of biologic therapies is no longer clinical control but rather clinical remission - a step closer to the concept of cure - a deeper and more accurate understanding of the critical causal mechanisms and endotypes of asthma is necessary to achieve the goal of clinical remission, which has the potential to generate real life-changing benefits for patients. This review aims to frame the evolution of the debated concept of clinical remission and provide clinicians with insights that may be helpful in achieving remission in the greatest number of patients.

Asthma Inception: Epidemiologic Risk Factors and Natural History Across the Life Course

Asthma is a descriptive label for an obstructive inflammatory disease in the lower airways manifesting with symptoms including breathlessness, cough, difficulty in breathing, and wheezing. From a clinician's point of view, asthma symptoms can commence at any age, although most patients with asthma-regardless of their age of onset-seem to have had some form of airway problems during childhood. Asthma inception and related pathophysiologic processes are therefore very likely to occur early in life, further evidenced by recent lung physiologic and mechanistic research. Herein, we present state-of-the-art updates on the role of genetics and epigenetics, early viral and bacterial infections, immune response, and pathophysiology, as well as lifestyle and environmental exposures, in asthma across the life course. We conclude that early environmental insults in genetically vulnerable individuals inducing abnormal, pre-asthmatic airway responses are key events in asthma inception, and we highlight disease heterogeneity across ages and the potential shortsightedness of treating all patients with asthma using the same treatments. Although there are no interventions that, at present, can modify long-term outcomes, a precision-medicine approach should be implemented to optimize treatment and tailor follow-up for all patients with asthma.

The Role of Galectins in Asthma Pathophysiology: A Comprehensive Review

Galectins are a group of β-galactoside-binding proteins with several roles in immune response, cellular adhesion, and inflammation development. Current evidence suggest that these proteins could play a crucial role in many respiratory diseases such as pulmonary fibrosis, lung cancer, and respiratory infections. From this standpoint, an increasing body of evidence have recognized galectins as potential biomarkers involved in several aspects of asthma pathophysiology. Among them, galectin-3 (Gal-3), galectin-9 (Gal-9), and galectin-10 (Gal-10) are the most extensively studied in human and animal asthma models. These galectins can affect T helper 2 (Th2) and non-Th2 inflammation, mucus production, airway responsiveness, and bronchial remodeling. Nevertheless, while higher Gal-3 and Gal-9 concentrations are associated with a stronger degree of Th-2 phlogosis, Gal-10, which forms Charcot-Leyden Crystals (CLCs), correlates with sputum eosinophilic count, interleukin-5 (IL-5) production, and immunoglobulin E (IgE) secretion. Finally, several galectins have shown potential in clinical response monitoring after inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and biologic therapies, confirming their potential role as reliable biomarkers in patients with asthma.

Managing Small Airway Disease in Patients with Severe Asthma: Transitioning from the "Silent Zone" to Achieving "Quiet Asthma"

Background/Objectives: Several studies have demonstrated the positive clinical and functional impact of adding Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist (LAMA) to Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS) and Long-Acting Beta-Agonists (LABA) therapy in the treatment of severe asthma. Aim and objectives: To demonstrate that treating Small Airways Disease (SAD) in severe asthma patients who are candidates for biologics can improve respiratory symptoms, lung function, and airways inflammation, potentially avoiding or delaying the use of biological therapy. Methods: Thirty-two severe asthma patients with SAD were transitioned from separate inhalers for ICS/LABA and LAMA to extrafine single-inhaler beclomethasone, formoterol, and glycopyrronium. None of these patients underwent biological therapy before the study. Follow-up evaluations were conducted at baseline (T0) and three months after initiation (T3). Assessments included clinical evaluations, spirometry, oscillometry, and inflammation markers. Results: Transitioning to single-inhaler triple therapy from T0 to T3 resulted in significant improvements in Asthma Control Test (ACT) and SAD parameters, including increased Forced Expiratory Volume in the mid-range of lung capacity and improved airway resistance and reactance measurements using impulse oscillometry. A significant reduction in airway inflammation was evidenced by lower levels of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide 350 (FeNO 350) (p < 0.001 for all). Conclusions: Adopting a single-inhaler triple therapy notably enhanced clinical control and small airway function in patients with severe asthma and SAD, supporting the positive impact of target-therapy for the achievement of a stable state termed "Quiet Asthma".

The pharmacological management of asthma in adults: 2023 update

INTRODUCTION

The pharmacotherapy of asthma is a dynamic process that changes as our knowledge of the underlying pathophysiology and treatment of this disease continues to evolve. This implies the need for continuous revision of the recommendations of asthma guidelines and strategies.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the latest key practical information on the pharmacological management of asthma in adults. We provide the background to the 2023 update of the GINA strategy report, focusing on changes and discussing areas of uncertainty. We review current and emerging pharmacotherapy for uncontrolled asthma, including synthetic agents and new biologics, and provide expert perspectives and opinions on the treatment of uncontrolled asthma.

EXPERT OPINION

The current pharmacological treatment of asthma, based on a step-by-step, control-based approach, with ICSs, LABAs and LAMAs being the mainstay generally provides good symptom control. Biologic therapies are often effective in treating T2high severe asthma. However, there is still room for improvement, such as the discovery of new molecules that specifically target chronic inflammation and, most importantly, the ability to provide solutions to the various areas of uncertainty that still exist. Also finding solutions to improve the accessibility and affordability of rescue ICS in resource-constrained settings is critical.

Features of severe asthma response to anti-IL5/IL5r therapies: identikit of clinical remission

Introduction

Clinical remission (CliR) achievement has been recognized as a new potential outcome in severe asthma. Nevertheless, we still lack a detailed profile of what features could better identify patients undergoing clinical remission. In this study, we aim to address this issue, tracing a possible identikit of patients fulfilling remission criteria.

Methods

We enrolled 266 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) treated with a 12-month course of anti-IL5/IL5 receptor (IL5r) monoclonal antibodies. Patients with no exacerbation, OCS withdrawal, ACT ≥ 20 and FEV1 ≥ 80% after 1 year of biologic treatment were classified as in clinical remission.

Results

30.5% of the enrolled patients achieved remission after biologic administration. CliR group showed a lower number of baseline asthma exacerbations and better lung function parameters, with a trend for higher ACT scores and a less frequent history of a positive skin prick test. CliR achievement was unlikely in presence of a higher BMI, a positive skin prick test, an increased number of asthma exacerbations before biologic treatment, anti-muscarinic administration, and a previous diagnosis of EGPA, bronchiectasis or osteoporosis. In contrast, a better lung function, an increased blood eosinophilic count, the presence of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and a more frequent use of reliever therapy predicts remission development. Changes in exacerbations number, OCS use, ACT scores and FEV1% between remittent and non-remittent patients arise at specific follow up timepoints and are positively associated with CliR achievement.

Discussion

anti-IL5/IL5r biologics can induce CliR in a proportion of patients with SEA. Patients achieving remission demonstrate specific clinical, functional and inflammatory features, as well as a specific moment of improvement in all the CliR items.

Effects of biological therapies on patients with Type-2 high asthma and comorbid obesity

Over 20 million adults and 6 million children in the United States (US) have asthma, a chronic respiratory disease characterized by airway inflammation, bronchoconstriction, and mucus hypersecretion. Obesity, another highly prevalent disease in the US, is a major risk factor for asthma and a significant cause of diminished asthma control, increased submucosal eosinophilia, and reduced quality of life. A large subgroup of these patients experiences severe symptoms and recurrent exacerbations despite maximal dosage of standard asthma therapies. In the past two decades, the development of biological therapies has revolutionized the field and advanced our understanding of type 2 inflammatory biomarkers. However, patients with obesity and comorbid asthma are not principally considered in clinical trials of biologics. Large landmark cluster analyses of patients with asthma have consistently identified specific asthma phenotypes that associate with obesity but may be differentiated by age of asthma onset and inflammatory cell profiles in sputum. These patterns suggest that biologic processes driving asthma pathology are heterogenous among patients with obesity. The biological mechanisms driving pathology in patients with asthma and comorbid obesity are not well understood and likely multifactorial. Future research needs to be done to elicit the cellular and metabolic functions in the relationship of obesity and asthma to yield the best treatment options for this multiplex condition. In this review, we explore the key features of type 2 inflammation in asthma and discuss the effectiveness, safety profile, and research gaps regarding the currently approved biological therapies in asthma patients with obesity.

Decoding treatment efficacy: uncovering response and failure dynamics to biologics in asthma

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a global health problem, with alarming prevalence and mortality rates. Biologic therapies, particularly monoclonal antibodies such as omalizumab, have emerged as promising alternatives, targeting specific immune pathways. This article assesses the efficacy of these biologics in asthma management and attempts to reveal factors associated with their response and failure dynamics.

AREA COVERED

This article explores the efficacy of biologics in asthma, biomarkers, and the relationship between asthma phenotypes (including eosinophilic and non-eosinophilic (neutrophilic) types) and biologic treatments; particularly their effectiveness for each subtype.

EXPERT OPINION

Personalized asthma management that incorporates molecular insights as well as individual variations is of outmost necessity. An emphasis is put on immunological profiling, understanding comorbidities and considering individual patient factors when managing asthma. Cutting-edge phenotyping tools including omic technologies play a crucial role in improving asthma management precision. Variability in patient responses to biologic treatments such as non-responders, partial responders and super responders poses a formidable challenge to effective asthma care management strategies.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Among Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated With Mepolizumab and Its Effect on Small Airways

BACKGROUND

The major problem at the Cleveland Allergy and Asthma Center was the need for additional therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma patients who were steroid-dependent or required frequent bursts of prednisone.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine the efficacy of monthly mepolizumab (MP) injections up to 6½ years using Asthma Control Quesitonnaire-7 (ACQ-7), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% (FEF25%-75%) overall and among super-responders, and to understand whether FEF25%-75% is an effective parameter to evaluate MP efficacy.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of 67 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and compared the results between 47 super-responders and the rest of the cohort regarding ACQ-6, ACQ-7, eosinophils, FEV1, and FEF25%-75%. The groups of super-responders and all other patients were described with respect to initial and current values of the study end points using medians and 25th and 75th percentiles. Changes from the initial to the current values in the study end points were measured using percent changes. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used within each group to test the null hypothesis of 0 median percent change.

RESULTS

After 6½ years, there were no significant changes in FEV1. The FEF25%-75%, had a significant median percent increase of 40% among the super-responders (P < .001), which was substantially higher (P = .026) than the median percent increase of 13.8% observed among all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MP up to 6½ years was safe and effective, with significant changes to ACQ-7 and FEF25%-75% associated with MP treatment, but not the FEV1. A higher magnitude of changes was observed among super-responders than the rest of the cohort. Changes in FEF25%-75% were more meaningful than changes in FEV1 in evaluating pulmonary function responsiveness of severe eosinophilic asthma to MP.

Real-world super-response to biologics in severe asthma: A French monocentric retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Biologics have dramatically improved outcomes in severe T2-high asthma. Although the identification of patients with the best response is key to understand the efficacy of these agents and select the best target populations, the definition and predictors of super-response are not fully established yet.

METHODS

This study aimed to describe super-response and to identify predictors of super-response to biologics in a French severe eosinophilic asthma cohort followed in a severe asthma tertiary care center between January 2005 and December 2020. Super-response was defined a priori as no oral corticosteroids intake and no exacerbations over 12 months. Collected data at baseline and after 12 months included asthma history, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, lung function, T2-biomarkers, baseline asthma-related treatments, and asthma control.

RESULTS

Among 157 patients assessed for eligibility, 108 were included, corresponding to 166 treatments with biologics. Overall response rate was 63.2 % (105/166) and super-response rate was 39.7 % (66/166). In omalizumab group (n = 67), lower dose of oral corticosteroids in maintenance was the only factor associated with super-response (p = 0.008). In the anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5R group (n = 99), absence or lower dose of oral corticosteroids in maintenance and absence of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis were statistically associated with super-response (p = 0.009, p = 0.001 and p = 0.02 respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this real-life study in severe T2-high asthma patients, a lower dose or absence of daily oral corticosteroids and absence of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis were the only identifiable predictors of super-response to biologics. Physicians should not wait for maintenance oral corticosteroids to be required before considering the initiation of a biologic in severe asthma.

Severe asthma clinical remission after biologic treatment with anti-IL4/IL13: A real-life experience

INTRODUCTION

Dupilumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-4/interleukin-13 monoclonal antibody, has shown efficacy in many aspects of Type-2 severe asthma management. Currently, we lack real-life studies addressing the achievment of clinical remission in patients treated with this biologic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective study enrolling 18 patients with severe asthma treated with Dupilumab. We assessed main clinical, functional and biological severe asthma features at baseline (T0) and after a 1-year course of treatment (T12). Clinical remission was defined at T12 in patients without asthma exacerbations, no oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, ACT ≥ 20 and FEV1 improvement ≥ 100 ml from baseline.

RESULTS

Among total population, 38.9% of patients achieved clinical remission at T12. Anti IL-4/IL-13 treatment significantly reduced asthma exacerbations and OCS use in the overall cohort, with a more pronounced ACT improvement in the remission group. Patients achieving clinical remission went through a step down of the inhalation therapy, suspending long-acting anti-muscarinics administration at T12.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with anti-IL4/IL13 can induce clinical remission in patients with T2 severe asthma.

Real-world characteristics of "super-responders" to mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis

Background

The current definition of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) super-responders to biologic treatment does not include patients with other eosinophil-based comorbidities. Although eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is frequently associated with SEA, we lack data on a possible super-response to biologic treatments in patients suffering from these two diseases. We aim to assess super-responder features in real-life patients with SEA and EGPA treated with mepolizumab and benralizumab.

Methods

We enrolled 39 patients with SEA and EGPA eligible for treatment with mepolizumab or benralizumab. Super-responder assessment was performed considering oral corticosteroid (OCS) cessation, lack of exacerbations, forced expiratory volume in 1 s and Asthma Control Test (ACT) improvement.

Results

Super-responders showed worse clinical baseline characteristics than non-super-responder patients, with a greater improvement in severe asthma exacerbations, OCS dose reduction and ACT score increase. Definition of super-responders was consistent only considering a 12-month course of monoclonal antibody, lacking sensitivity in earlier evaluations.

Conclusion

Mepolizumab and benralizumab are safe and effective in patients with EGPA and SEA, since a consistent proportion of patients show a super-response after 12 months of treatment. Further studies will address specific criteria for super-responder assessment in these patients.

Revisiting asthma pharmacotherapy: where do we stand and where do we want to go?

Several current guidelines/strategies outline a treatment approach to asthma, which primarily consider the goals of improving lung function and quality of life and reducing symptoms and exacerbations. They suggest a strategy of stepping up or down treatment, depending on the patient's overall current asthma symptom control and future risk of exacerbation. While this stepwise approach is undeniably practical for daily practice, it does not always address the underlying mechanisms of this heterogeneous disease. In the last decade, there have been attempts to improve the treatment of severe asthma, such as the addition of a long-acting antimuscarinic agent to the traditional inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist treatment and the introduction of therapies targeting key cytokines. However, despite such strategies several unmet needs in this population remain, motivating research to identify novel targets and develop improved therapeutic and/or preventative asthma treatments. Pending the availability of such therapies, it is essential to re-evaluate the current conventional "one-size-fits-all" approach to a more precise asthma management. Although challenging, identifying "treatable traits" that contribute to respiratory symptoms in individual patients with asthma may allow a more pragmatic approach to establish more personalised therapeutic goals.

Defining response to therapy with biologics in severe asthma: from global evaluation to super response and remission

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, monoclonal antibodies targeting Type-2 inflammatory pathways have been developed for severe asthma treatment. However, even when patients are carefully selected, the response to treatment varies.

AREAS COVERED

Different studies have evaluated response to therapy with biologics such as exacerbation reduction, symptom improvement, pulmonary function increase, improvement in QoL, or decrease of oral corticosteroids, showing that all patients do not respond to all disease aspects and leading to an extensive debate regarding the definition of response.

EXPERT OPINION

Assessing response to therapy is of great importance, but since there is no uniform definition of treatment response, the recognition of patients who really benefit from these therapies remains an unmet need. In the same context, identifying non-responding patients in which biologic therapy should be switched or substituted by alternative treatment options is of paramount importance. In this review, we present the road trip of the definition of therapeutic response to biologics in severe asthmatics by presenting the current relevant medical literature. We also present the suggested predictors of response, with an emphasis on the so-called super-responders. Finally, we discuss the recent insights regarding asthma remission as a feasible treatment goal and provide a simple algorithm for the evaluation of response.