Response to Biologics and Clinical Remission in the Adult German Asthma Net Severe Asthma Registry Cohort

Clinical remission attainment, definitions, and correlates among patients with severe asthma treated with biologics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical remission has emerged as an important treatment goal in severe asthma; however, studies have reported variable attainment due to differences in study populations, definitions, and methods. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical remission attainment, definitions, and correlates among patients with severe asthma who have been treated with biologics.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Web of Science, Embase, and MEDLINE, using the keywords "asthma" and "remission", for studies published between database inception and June 13, 2024, that reported clinical remission among patients with severe asthma treated with biologics. Studies were eligible for inclusion in both the systematic review and meta-analysis if they were published in English language peer-reviewed journals and reported rates of clinical remission for patients treated with biologics for severe asthma. There were no limitations by study design. Two reviewers independently screened identified papers (AS and CR), with disagreements resolved through consensus or referral to a third reviewer (JB). Study-level data on study characteristics, clinical remission definitions, clinical remission attainment, and the potential correlates of clinical remission were extracted independently by two reviewers (AS and CR) using Covidence. We defined a three-component definition of clinical remission, which included use of maintenance oral corticosteroids, exacerbations, and asthma symptom burden, and a four-component definition, which additionally included lung function. We meta-analysed the rate of attainment of clinical remission and assessed the correlates of clinical remission using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024507233.

FINDINGS

Our search identified 3014 potentially eligible studies, of which 1812 were screened. 25 studies were included, which reported 28 analyses of clinical remission attainment. 68 definitions of clinical remission were identified, of which 48 were unique. Little consensus was found between studies in terms of the clinical remission definition, particularly for symptoms and lung function. Eight analyses used the three-component definition of clinical remission and 25 used the four-component definition. The pooled proportion of patients who attained clinical remission was 38% (95% CI 29-47; I2=93%) for the three-component definition and 30% (27-34; I2=83%) for the four-component definition. Several pulmonary factors were associated with lower clinical remission rates, including worse FEV1 (odds ratio 0·09 [95% CI 0·01-0·92]; I2=87%), worse asthma symptoms (0·23 [0·17-0·33]; I2=0%), longer asthma duration (0·49 [0·32-0·76]; I2=22%), and use of maintenance oral corticosteroids (0·57 [0·40-0·79]; I2=49%). The presence of comorbidities, in particular depression (0·38 [0·23-0·61]; I2=6%) and obesity (0·41 [0·31-0·54]; I2=0%), were important non-pulmonary barriers to clinical remission.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical remission is an achievable goal for a minority of patients with severe asthma treated with biologics. Definitions of clinical remission varied substantially between studies, and materially affected attainment, suggesting an urgent need for further consensus-driven definitions. Longer disease duration, higher asthma severity, and the presence of comorbidities were identified as important barriers to clinical remission, suggesting that earlier intervention with effective treatments and a broader treatable traits approach might improve outcomes.

FUNDING

Health Data Research UK, Inflammation and Immunity driver project.

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.

Long-Term Clinical and Sustained REMIssion in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated With Mepolizumab: The REMI-M Study

BACKGROUND

Biological therapies, such as mepolizumab, have transformed the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. Although mepolizumab's short-term effectiveness is established, there is limited evidence on its ability to achieve long-term clinical remission.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term effectiveness and safety of mepolizumab, explore its potential to induce clinical and sustained remission, and identify baseline factors associated with the likelihood of achieving remission over 24 months.

METHODS

The REMIssion in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated with Mepolizumab (REMI-M) is a retrospective, real-world, multicenter study that analyzed 303 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma who received mepolizumab. Clinical, demographic, and safety data were collected at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The most commonly used definitions of clinical remission, which included no exacerbations, no oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, and good asthma control with or without assessment of lung function parameters, were assessed. Sustained remission was defined as reaching clinical remission at 12 months and maintaining it until the end of the 24-month period.

RESULTS

Clinical remission rates ranged from 28.6% to 43.2% after 12 months and from 26.8% to 52.9% after 24 months based on the different remission definitions. The proportion of patients achieving sustained remission varied between 14.6% and 29%. Factors associated with the likelihood of achieving clinical remission included the presence of aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, better lung function at baseline, male sex, absence of anxiety/depression, gastroesophageal reflux disease, bronchiectasis, and reduced OCS consumption. Adverse events were infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab in achieving clinical remission and sustained remission in severe eosinophilic asthma over 24 months. The identification of distinct factors associated with the likelihood of achieving clinical remission emphasizes the importance of comprehensive management of comorbidities and timely identification of patients who may benefit from biologics.

Clinical response and on-treatment clinical remission with tezepelumab in a broad population of patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma: results over 2 years from the NAVIGATOR and DESTINATION studies

BACKGROUND

In asthma, clinical response is characterised by disease improvement with treatment, whereas clinical remission is characterised by long-term disease stabilisation with or without ongoing treatment. The proportions of patients receiving tezepelumab who responded to treatment and who achieved on-treatment clinical remission were assessed in the NAVIGATOR (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03347279) and DESTINATION (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03706079) studies of severe, uncontrolled asthma.

METHODS

NAVIGATOR and DESTINATION were phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies; DESTINATION was an extension of NAVIGATOR. Complete clinical response was defined as achieving all of the following: ≥50% reduction in exacerbations versus the previous year, improvements in pre-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of ≥100 mL or ≥5%, improvements in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-6 score of ≥0.5 and physician's assessment of asthma improvement. On-treatment clinical remission was defined as an ACQ-6 total score ≤1.5, stable lung function (pre-BD FEV1 >95% of baseline) and no exacerbations or use of oral corticosteroids during the time periods assessed.

RESULTS

Higher proportions of tezepelumab than placebo recipients achieved complete clinical response over weeks 0-52 (46% versus 24%; OR 2.83, 95% CI 2.10-3.82) and on-treatment clinical remission over weeks 0-52 (28.5% versus 21.9%; OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.95-2.19) and weeks >52-104 (33.5% versus 26.7%; OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.97-2.14). Tezepelumab recipients who achieved on-treatment clinical remission versus complete clinical response at week 52 had better preserved lung function and lower inflammatory biomarker levels at baseline, and fewer exacerbations in the 12 months before the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, tezepelumab treatment was associated with an increased likelihood of achieving complete clinical response and on-treatment clinical remission compared with placebo. Both are clinically important outcomes, but may be driven by different patient characteristics.

Clinical remission among severe asthmatics on monoclonal antibody therapy: real-world outcomes at 2 years

Real-world data suggest clinical remission is a feasible treatment goal of monoclonal antibody therapy. Evidence of ongoing response post-12 months may be used to inform treatment decisions. Further work is needed to standardise criteria for remission. https://bit.ly/4cA6TkG.

Clinical remission maintained and improved over time in patients with severe asthma treated with omalizumab

BACKGROUND

Clinical remission has recently been proposed as a possible treatment goal even in severe asthma. In this real-world study, we aimed to assess the achievement rate and predictive factors of clinical remission using omalizumab in patients with severe asthma.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients with severe asthma initiated with omalizumab therapy and recruited from the asthma clinic of the Akdeniz University Hospital, Turkey. Clinical remission was defined as patients who received no oral corticosteroid (OCS) therapy; showed no exacerbations; showed an asthma control questionnaire score of ≤ 1, asthma control test (ACT) of ≥ 20, or both and, FEV1 of ≥ 80% predicted.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included in the study, with an average age of 56.4 ± 13.6 years. The mean duration of asthma was 23.5 ± 11.8 years and the mean duration of omalizumab treatment was 80.05 ± 35.04 months. Clinical remission rates were 25.9% in the first and second year, 34.0% in the third year, 34.1% in the fourth year and 47.4% in the fifth year. Pre-omalizumab ACT, FEV1 (%) and OCS use were significantly higher in patients with clinical remission at 1 year. Logistic regression analyses showed that none of the factors predicted clinical remission.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab has the potential to induce disease remission in a significant proportion of people with severe asthma, and this is maintained and improved over time.

Exploring Definitions and Predictors of Severe Asthma Clinical Remission after Biologic Treatment in Adults

Rationale: There is no consensus on criteria to include in an asthma remission definition in real life. Factors associated with achieving remission after biologic initiation remain poorly understood. Objectives: To quantify the proportion of adults with severe asthma achieving multidomain-defined remission after biologic initiation and identify prebiologic characteristics associated with achieving remission that may be used to predict it. Methods: This was a longitudinal cohort study using data from 23 countries from the International Severe Asthma Registry. Four asthma outcome domains were assessed in the 1 year before and after biologic initiation. A priori-defined remission cutoffs were: 0 exacerbations/yr, no long-term oral corticosteroid (LTOCS), partly/well-controlled asthma, and percent predicted FEV1 ⩾ 80%. Remission was defined using two (exacerbations + LTOCS), three (+control or +lung function), and four of these domains. The association between prebiologic characteristics and postbiologic remission was assessed by multivariable analysis. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 50.2%, 33.5%, 25.8%, and 20.3% of patients met criteria for two-, three- (+control), three- (+lung function), and four-domain remission, respectively. The odds of achieving four-domain remission decreased by 15% for every additional 10 years of asthma duration (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.00). The odds of remission increased in those with fewer exacerbations per year, lower LTOCS daily dose, better control, and better lung function before biologic initiation. Conclusions: One in five patients achieved four-domain remission within 1 year of biologic initiation. Patients with less severe impairment and shorter asthma duration at initiation had a greater chance of achieving remission after biologic treatment, indicating that biologic treatment should not be delayed if remission is the goal.

Overcoming Barriers to Remission in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: Two-Year Real-World Data With Benralizumab

BACKGROUND

Benralizumab has been reported to lead to clinical remission of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) at 1 year in some patients. However, whether this is maintained over a longer term remains unclear. Additionally, the impact of pulmonary and extrapulmonary comorbidities on the ability to meet remission is poorly understood.

METHODS

Clinical outcomes including remission of SEA with benralizumab at 1 and 2 years were assessed retrospectively in a real-world UK multi-centre severe asthma cohort. The presence of clinically relevant pulmonary and extrapulmonary comorbidities associated with respiratory symptoms was recorded. Analyses to identify factors associated with the ability to meet remission were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 276 patients with SEA treated with benralizumab including 113 patients who had switched from a previous biologic to benralizumab were included. Overall, clinical remission was met in 17% (n = 31/186) and 32% (n = 43/133) of patients at 1 and 2 years, respectively. This increased to 28% at 1 year and 49% at 2 years once patients with pulmonary and/or extrapulmonary comorbidities were excluded. Body mass index (BMI) and maintenance OCS (mOCS) use demonstrated a negative association with clinical remission at 1 (BMI: OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.96, p < 0.01; mOCS: OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p < 0.05) and 2 years (BMI: OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, p < 0.05; mOCS: OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this long-term, real-world study, patients with SEA demonstrated the ability to meet and sustain clinical remission when treated with benralizumab. The presence of comorbidities including obesity, which are known to be independently associated with respiratory symptoms, reduced the likelihood of meeting clinical remission.

Real-world biologics response and super-response in the International Severe Asthma Registry cohort

BACKGROUND

Biologic asthma therapies reduce exacerbations and long-term oral corticosteroids (LTOCS) use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there are limited data on outcomes among patients ineligible for RCTs. Hence, we investigated responsiveness to biologics in a real-world population of adults with severe asthma.

METHODS

Adults in the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) with ≥24 weeks of follow-up were grouped into those who did, or did not, initiate biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5/IL5R, anti-IL4/13). Treatment responses were examined across four domains: forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) increase by ≥100 mL, improved asthma control, annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction ≥50%, and any LTOCS dose reduction. Super-response criteria were: FEV1 increase by ≥500 mL, new well-controlled asthma, no exacerbations, and LTOCS cessation or tapering to ≤5 mg/day.

RESULTS

5.3% of ISAR patients met basic RCT inclusion criteria; 2116/8451 started biologics. Biologic initiators had worse baseline impairment than non-initiators, despite having similar biomarker levels. Half or more of initiators had treatment responses: 59% AER reduction, 54% FEV1 increase, 49% improved control, 49% reduced LTOCS, of which 32%, 19%, 30%, and 39%, respectively, were super-responses. Responses/super-responses were more frequent in biologic initiators than in non-initiators; nevertheless, ~40-50% of initiators did not meet response criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with severe asthma are ineligible for RCTs of biologic therapies. Biologics are initiated in patients who have worse baseline impairments than non-initiators despite similar biomarker levels. Although biologic initiators exhibited clinical responses and super-responses in all outcome domains, 40-50% did not meet the response criteria.

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.

Real-World Data on Tezepelumab in Patients With Severe Asthma in Germany

BACKGROUND

Tezepelumab is a novel biologic blocking thymic stromal lymphopoetin, approved for severe asthma irrespective of biomarker levels or phenotype.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize a real-world tezepelumab patient cohort and the efficacy among various asthma phenotypes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, multicenter study on patients with severe asthma initiating tezepelumab. Clinical response was evaluated at 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

We included 129 patients with an average age of 52.5 ± 13.1 years, 59.7% were female. The majority (86.0%) had increased type 2 (T2) biomarkers, 68.2% an allergic and 31.8% an eosinophilic phenotype. 23.3% of patients were biologic-naive. 22 (18.2%) patients discontinued tezepelumab therapy owing to suspected side effects or insufficient efficacy. At 6 months' follow-up, median reduction in annualized exacerbation rate was-1 [25th percentile; 75% percentile {-2.9; 0.0}], the reduction of oral corticosteroid dose among patients with long-term oral corticosteroid therapy was -5 mg [-10; 0] and the Asthma Control Test (ACT) improved by 2 [0; 5] points. A treatment response according to Biologic Asthma Response Score of 80.8% was demonstrated. There were no significant differences in treatment response between T2-high versus T2-low, early- versus adult-onset and eosinophilic versus non-eosinophilic asthma. Prior treatment with other biologics was associated with inferior treatment response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-life cohort, including a large proportion of patients with history of previous biologic use and encompassing various subgroups, the majority responded to tezepelumab. Our data further suggest a steroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab.

Clinical remission in severe asthma: lights and shadows on an ambitious goal

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was Describe the latest evidence related to the concept of clinical remission in patients with severe asthma, focusing on the lights and shadows of this concept.

RECENT FINDINGS

The idea of clinical remission in severe asthma patients brings about a significant shift in the way asthma is treated and managed. Although there has yet to be unanimous agreement among various scientific societies on the precise definition, this concept can be extremely useful in advancing the treatment of the disease.

SUMMARY

Asthma is a common respiratory condition that affects more than 300 million people globally. It has variable symptoms and severity levels, with about 10% of patients experiencing severe asthma. While there have been advancements in treatment, severe asthma poses significant challenges. Recent approaches have focused on achieving clinical remission, which goes beyond symptom control to address underlying inflammation and biological processes. Clinical remission criteria include the absence of symptoms, reduced medication usage, and normalized inflammatory markers. Various biologic therapies show promise, with some patients achieving remission. However, remission's definition varies globally, hindering standardization and a valid comparison. Standardizing remission criteria and refining predictive factors are crucial for effective asthma management. Overall, achieving clinical remission offers hope for improved long-term outcomes in severe asthma patients.

Effect of Azithromycin on Asthma Remission in Adults With Persistent Uncontrolled Asthma: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized, Double-Anonymized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Asthma remission is a potential treatment goal.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does adding azithromycin to standard therapy in patients with persistent uncontrolled asthma induce remission compared with placebo?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This secondary analysis used data from the Asthma and Macrolides: the Azithromycin Efficacy and Safety (AMAZES) clinical trial-a double-anonymized placebo-controlled trial that evaluated the safety and efficacy of azithromycin on asthma exacerbations. The primary remission definition (referred to as clinical remission) was zero exacerbations and zero oral corticosteroids during the previous 6 months evaluated at 12 months and a 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 1 at 12 months. Secondary remission definitions included clinical remission plus lung function criteria (postbronchodilator FEV1 ≥ 80% or postbronchodilator FEV1 ≤ 5% decline from baseline) and complete remission (sputum eosinophil count < 3% plus the aforementioned criteria). Sensitivity analyses explored the robustness of primary and secondary remission definitions. The predictors of clinical remission were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 335 participants (41.5% male; median age, 61.01 years; quartile 1-3, 51.03-68.73) who completed the 12-month treatment period were included in the analysis. Twelve months of treatment with azithromycin induced asthma remission in a subgroup of patients, and a significantly higher proportion in the azithromycin arm achieved both clinical remission (50.6% vs 38.9%; P = .032) and clinical remission plus lung function criteria (50.8% vs 37.1%; P = .029) compared with placebo, respectively. In addition, a higher proportion of the azithromycin group achieved complete remission (23% vs 13.7%; P = .058). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. Baseline factors (eg, better asthma-related quality of life, absence of oral corticosteroid burst in the previous year) predicted the odds of achieving clinical remission. Azithromycin induced remission in both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma.

INTERPRETATION

In this study, adults with persistent symptomatic asthma achieved a higher remission rate when treated with azithromycin. Remission on treatment may be an achievable treatment target in moderate/severe asthma, and future studies should consider remission as an outcome measure.

[Modern asthma management]

Symptom prevention and remission are the goals of asthma treatment. Precise phenotyping of the patients, including history, lung function, allergology and measurement of type 2 biomarkers, is the essential prerequisite for treatment success. Basic measures, treatment with DMAADs ("disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs": predominantly inhaled corticosteroids, biologics, and allergen immunotherapy) and treatment of comorbidities are the cornerstones of modern asthma management. The treatment of upper airway diseases such as allergic rhinitis (often associated with early-onset asthma) or chronic rhinosinusitis (often associated with adult-onset asthma, with 2 forms: either with nasal polyps, CRSwNP, or without nasal polyps, CRSsNP) is of major importance in this regard.

Suboptimal Response to Biologics in Severe Asthma-A Marker of Humoral Immunodeficiencies

BACKGROUND

Asthmatic patients with antibody deficiencies (AD) have more severe disease and higher risk of exacerbations. No data exist about the efficacy of biologics in severe asthma (SA) patients with AD.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of biologics in SA patients with and without AD.

METHODS

A case-control real-life study was conducted including 68 patients divided into 2 groups: group 1 with SA-AD and group 2 with SA.

RESULTS

Treatment with biologics for 6 months was effective for decreasing the number of exacerbations, hospitalizations, and emergency department (ED) visits and improving the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score; biologics also proved a systemic corticosteroid-sparing effect. Despite benefits, the number of exacerbations, hospitalizations, and ED visits, the mean ACQ score, and the cumulative dose of systemic corticosteroids remain higher in group 1 than in group 2, with lower lung function parameters. The rates of responses in group 1 were inferior to those in group 2, with a decrease by ≥50% of exacerbation rate in 76% versus 97% of patients (P = .006), no hospitalization in 44% versus 91% of patients (P < .001), no ED visit in 56% versus 82% of patients (P = .018), a significant improvement of the ACQ score by ≥0.5 in 68% versus 100% of patients (P < .001), and an increase of forced expiratory volume in the first second by >10% in 32% versus 65% of patients (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evident benefits, SA patients with AD have suboptimal responses to biologics compared with those immunocompetent. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to optimize the management of these patients in practice.

Benralizumab Reduces Respiratory Exacerbations and Oral Glucocorticosteroid Dose in Patients with Severe Asthma and Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis

Background

Benralizumab reduces exacerbations and long-term oral glucocorticosteroid (OCS) exposure in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. In patients with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), uncontrolled symptoms and exacerbations of asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are important reasons for continued OCS therapies. We aimed to describe outcomes of patients with severe asthma and EGPA treated with benralizumab in real-life.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed adult patients from the Severe Asthma Unit at LMU Munich diagnosed with severe asthma and EGPA treated with benralizumab, differentiating two groups: Group A, patients with a stable daily OCS dose and diagnosis of EGPA >6 months ago; and Group B, patients treated with high-dose daily OCS due to recent diagnosis of EGPA <6 months ago. We compared outcome parameters at baseline and 12 months after initiation of benralizumab, including respiratory exacerbations, daily OCS dose, and lung function.

Results

Group A included 17 patients, all receiving OCS therapy and additional immunosuppressants; 15 patients (88%) continued benralizumab for more than 12 months, demonstrating a significant reduction in daily OCS dose and exacerbations while FEV1 increased. Group B included 9 patients, all with high-dose daily OCS and some receiving cyclophosphamide pulse therapy for life-threatening disease. Benralizumab addition during induction was well tolerated. A total of 7/9 (78%) continued benralizumab for more than 12 months and preserved EGPA remission at the 12-month timepoint.

Conclusion

In this real-life cohort of patients with severe asthma and EGPA, benralizumab initiation during remission maintenance reduced respiratory exacerbations and daily OCS dose. Benralizumab initiation during remission induction was associated with a high rate of clinical EGPA remission.

Remission in asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current concepts of remission in asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Until 2023, asthma guidelines have been promoting the concept of disease control, recommending the step-wise addition of drugs until the best possible disease control is achieved. With the advent of highly effective, anti-inflammatory disease-modifying antiasthmatic drugs (DMAADs), treatment goals of asthma have changed. Several national guidelines have now announced remission as a general treatment goal in asthma. Currently, all guidelines agree that asthma remission is defined by the presence of at least three characteristics over a period of at least one 1 year: absence of exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use for the treatment of asthma and minimal asthma-related symptoms. In the future, a generally accepted, evidence-based and easy-to-use definition of remission will be needed for daily clinical practice. It is clear, however, that precise phenotyping (including measurement of biomarkers) is an essential prerequisite to achieve clinical remission in each individual patient.

SUMMARY

Remission has been included as the treatment goal in asthma in several national guidelines, reflecting the paradigm shift in asthma, from short-term symptom control to long-term symptom prevention. An international consensus on the criteria for asthma remission is expected in the near future.

Real-World Effectiveness of Biologics in Patients With Severe Asthma: Analysis of the KoSAR

PURPOSE

Severe asthma is associated with high morbidity and healthcare utilization; however, treatment options for these patients are limited. This study aimed to determine the therapeutic effects of biologics in clinical practice.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included 136 patients who received biologics for at least 4 months between September 2017 and July 2022 at 25 medical centers affiliated with the Korean Severe Asthma Registry (KoSAR). The study evaluated the treatment effects, including acute exacerbation rates, maintenance of oral corticosteroid dosages, lung function, quality of life, blood eosinophil count, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels, by comparing measurements before and after 4 months of biologic treatment. Responses for each medication was evaluated based on the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness score, and any adverse reactions were summarized.

RESULTS

With the administration of biologics over the course of 4 months, there was a reduction in asthma acute exacerbations, a significant improvement in lung function, and a significant decrease in daily maintenance dose of oral steroid. Blood eosinophil counts decreased in the mepolizumab and reslizumab groups, while FeNO levels decreased only in the dupilumab group. The Asthma Control Test, Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adult Korean Asthmatics, and the EuroQol-visual analogue scale scores showed a significant improvement. Most patients (80.15%) responded to the biologic treatment. Meanwhile, non-responders often had chronic rhinosinusitis as a comorbidity, exhibited lower lung function, and required higher doses of oral steroids. No severe adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologics are highly effective in Korean patients with Type 2 severe asthma, significantly reducing acute exacerbation rates and doses of oral corticosteroids, while also improving lung function. Therefore, it seems beneficial to administer biologics without any restrictions to patients exhibiting Type 2 severe asthma.

[Precision medicine in the diagnosis and treatment of asthma]

Due to the availability of disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs (DMAADs), especially inhaled steroids (alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators), biologics and modern allergen immunotherapy, the treatment of asthma has fundamentally changed. The aims of modern asthma precision medicine are prevention of symptoms and the induction and maintenance of asthma remission (long-term asthma control, freedom from exacerbations and stable lung function without the use of systemic steroids). A treat to target approach is used as for other chronic inflammatory diseases in internal medicine: the aim is to achieve remission by an individually tailored treatment with DMAADs; however, the prerequisite for modern asthma precision medicine is asthma phenotyping, including a detailed medical history, lung function testing, allergological diagnostics and measurement of type 2 markers (blood eosinophils and, if available, exhaled nitric oxide, FeNO).

Clinical Response and Remission in Patients With Severe Asthma Treated With Biologic Therapies

BACKGROUND

The development of novel targeted biologic therapies for severe asthma has provided an opportunity to consider remission as a new treatment goal.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How many patients with severe asthma treated with biologic therapy achieve clinical remission, and what predicts response to treatment?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The Danish Severe Asthma Register is a nationwide cohort including all adult patients receiving biologic therapy for severe asthma in Denmark. This observational cohort study defined "clinical response" to treatment following 12 months as a ≥ 50% reduction in exacerbations and/or a ≥ 50% reduction in maintenance oral corticosteroid dose, if required. "Clinical remission" was defined by cessation of exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroids, as well as a normalization of lung function (FEV1 > 80%) and a six-question Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 1.5 following 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Following 12 months of treatment, 104 (21%) of 501 biologic-naive patients had no response to treatment, and 397 (79%) had a clinical response. Among the latter, 97 (24%) fulfilled the study criteria of clinical remission, corresponding to 19% of the entire population. Remission was predicted by shorter duration of disease and lower BMI in the entire population of patients treated with biologic therapy.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical response was achieved in most adult patients initiating biologic therapy, and clinical remission was observed in 19% of the patients following 12 months of treatment. Further studies are required to assess the long-term outcome of achieving clinical remission with biologic therapy.

Biologics (mepolizumab and omalizumab) induced remission in severe asthma patients

BACKGROUND

Asthma remission has emerged as a potential treatment goal. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two biologics (mepolizumab/omalizumab) in achieving asthma remission.

METHODS

This observational study included 453 severe asthma patients (41% male; mean age ± SD 55.7 ± 14.7 years) from two real-world drug registries: the Australian Mepolizumab Registry and the Australian Xolair Registry. The composite outcome clinical remission was defined as zero exacerbations and zero oral corticosteroids during the previous 6 months assessed at 12 months and 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) ≤1 at 12 months. We also assessed clinical remission plus optimization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥80%) or stabilization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 not greater than 5% decline from baseline) of lung function at 12 months. Sensitivity analyses explored various cut-offs of ACQ-5/FEV1 scores. The predictors of clinical remission were identified.

RESULTS

29.3% (73/249) of AMR and 22.8% (37/162) of AXR cohort met the criteria for clinical remission. When lung function criteria were added, the remission rates were reduced to 25.2% and 19.1%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses identified that the remission rate ranged between 18.1% and 34.9% in the AMR cohort and 10.6% and 27.2% in the AXR cohort. Better lung function, lower body mass index, mild disease and absence of comorbidities such as obesity, depression and osteoporosis predicted the odds of achieving clinical remission.

CONCLUSION

Biologic treatment with mepolizumab or omalizumab for severe asthma-induced asthma remission in a subgroup of patients. Remission on treatment may be an achievable treatment target and future studies should consider remission as an outcome measure.

Immunogenicity of biologics used in the treatment of asthma

OBJECTIVE

Asthma is a major global disease affecting adults and children, which can lead to hospitalization and death due to breathing difficulties. Although targeted monoclonal antibody therapies have revolutionized treatment of severe asthma, some patients still fail to respond. Here we critically evaluate the literature on biologic therapy failure in asthma patients with particular reference to anti-drug antibody production, and subsequent loss of response, as the potential primary cause of drug failure in asthma patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Encouragingly, asthma in most cases responds to treatment, including the use of an increasing number of biologic drugs in moderate to severe disease. This includes monoclonal antibody inhibitors of immunoglobulin E and cytokines, including interleukin 4, 5, or 13 and thymic stromal lymphopoietin. These limit mast cell and eosinophil activity that cause the symptomatic small airways obstruction and exacerbations.

SUMMARY

Despite humanization of the antibodies, it is evident that benralizumab; dupilumab; mepolizumab; omalizumab; reslizumab and tezepelumab all induce anti-drug antibodies to some extent. These can contribute to adverse events including infusion reactions, serum sickness, anaphylaxis and potentially disease activity due to loss of therapeutic function. Monitoring anti-drug antibodies (ADA) may allow prediction of future treatment-failure in some individuals allowing treatment cessation and switching therefore potentially limiting disease breakthrough.

Comparison of Long-term Response and Remission to Omalizumab and Anti-IL-5/IL-5R Using Different Criteria in a Real-life Cohort of Severe Asthma Patients

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of biologic therapy response is vital to monitor its effectiveness. Authors have proposed various response criteria including good responder, super-responder, non-responder, and clinical remission.

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the prevalence of response and clinical remission after long-term treatment (>6 months) of anti-IgE and anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα biologics, compare these results with existing criteria, and identify predictors for non-responders and clinical remission.

METHODS

A multicenter, real-life study involving severe asthma patients in Spain. Various outcomes were assessed to gauge response and clinical remission against established criteria.

RESULTS

The study included 429 patients, 209 (48.7%) omalizumab, 112 (26.1%) mepolizumab, 19 (4.4%) reslizumab and 89 (20.7%) benralizumab, with a mean treatment duration of 55.3±38.8 months. In the final year of treatment, 218 (50.8%) were super-responders, 173 (40.3%) responders, 38 (8.9%) non-responders, and clinical remission in 116 (27%), without differences among biologics. The short-term non-responders (<6 months) were 25/545 (4.6%). Substantial variations in response and clinical remission were observed when applying different published criteria. Predictors of non-response included higher BMI (OR:1.14; 95% CI:1.06-1.23; p<0.001), admissions at ICU (2.69; 1.30-5.56; p=0.01), high count of SAE (1.21; 1.03-1.42; p=0.02) before biologic treatment. High FEV1% (0.96; 0.95-0.98; p<0.001), a high ACT score (0.93; 0.88-0.99; p=0.01) before biologic treatment or NSAID-ERD (0.52; 0.29-0.91; p=0.02) showed strong associations with achieving clinical remission.

CONCLUSION

A substantial proportion of severe asthma patients treated long-term with omalizumab or anti-IL5/IL-5Rα achieved a good response. Differences in response criteria highlight the need for harmonization in defining response and clinical remission in biologic therapy to enable meaningful cross-study comparisons.

Biologics for severe asthma and beyond

Advances in pathophysiological understanding and the elucidation of a type 2 inflammatory signature with interleukins 4, 5 and 13 at its center have led to the development of targeted antibody therapies that are now approved for the treatment of severe asthma. In suitable patients, these medications reduce asthma exacerbations and the necessity for oral corticosteroids, improve asthma control, quality of life and lung function. A proportion of patients with severe asthma may even achieve remission under ongoing biologic therapy. Type-2 inflammatory comorbidities are frequent in patients with severe asthma, sharing overlapping pathophysiology and may similarly respond to biologic treatment. Here, we give an overview of the six biologic therapies currently approved for severe asthma and review randomized clinical trials and real-life studies in asthma and other type-2 inflammatory diseases. We also discuss selection of biologics according to licensing criteria, asthma phenotype and biomarkers, monitoring of treatment response and proceedings in case of insufficient outcome under therapy.