Real-world safety and efficacy of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma: A long-term post-marketing study in Japan

COVID-19 Immunologic Antiviral Therapy With Omalizumab (CIAO)-a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Background

Omalizumab is an anti-immunoglobulin E monoclonal antibody used to treat moderate to severe chronic idiopathic urticaria, asthma, and nasal polyps. Recent research suggested that omalizumab may enhance the innate antiviral response and have anti-inflammatory properties.

Objective

We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in adults hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia.

Methods

This was a phase II randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing omalizumab with placebo (in addition to standard of care) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The primary endpoint was the composite of mechanical ventilation and/or death at day 14. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality at day 28, time to clinical improvement, and duration of hospitalization.

Results

Of 41 patients recruited, 40 were randomized (20 received the study drug and 20 placebo). The median age of the patients was 74 years and 55.0% were male. Omalizumab was associated with a 92.6% posterior probability of a reduction in mechanical ventilation and death on day 14 with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.11 (95% credible interval 0.002-2.05). Omalizumab was also associated with a 75.9% posterior probability of reduced all-cause mortality on day 28 with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.49 (95% credible interval, 0.06-3.90). No statistically significant differences were found for the time to clinical improvement and duration of hospitalization. Numerically fewer adverse events were reported in the omalizumab group and there were no drug-related serious adverse events.

Conclusions

These results suggest that omalizumab could prove protective against death and mechanical ventilation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This study could also support the development of a phase III trial program investigating the antiviral and anti-inflammatory effect of omalizumab for severe respiratory viral illnesses requiring hospital admission. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04720612.

Safety and efficacy of benralizumab in elderly subjects with severe asthma

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of asthma in adults >65 years old is approximately 12-14%, and 10% have severe asthma. A higher mortality rate is observed in subjects with asthma >65 years old and especially >80 years old.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effectiveness and safety of at least three doses of benralizumab in a subgroup of elderly subjects (>65 years old) with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma in real-life conditions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter study (AUTOBENRA study) conducted in 9 hospitals that included 72 patients aged >18 years old with uncontrolled severe asthma based on the Spanish Asthma Guidelines who were treated with at least three doses of benralizumab, self-administered at home since before April 30, 2021. The recruitment period ended on October 1, 2021. Written consent was obtained before the study commencement. In this subanalysis, we compared the results between patients >65 years old and patients <65 years old.

RESULTS

A total of 72 subjects with severe asthma were screened, and 54 were included (MD: 57.3 ± 10 years old). There were 12 subjects aged >65 years old [MD: 69.8 ± 4.3 years old (minimum: 65 years old; maximum: 83 years old)]. Subjects >65 years old experienced statistically significant improvement in lung function, ACT and mini-AQLQ with benralizumab. Additionally, 9 patients (75%) experienced no asthma exacerbation (p = 0.0047), half (3/6) were able to stop OCS (p = 0.08), and no adverse effects with benralizumab were reported during the 20 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients aged >65 years old, benralizumab was an effective and safe therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma in our study, with no significant differences from the younger subgroup. This is especially important since they are a group with numerous comorbidities, medications and worse quality of life.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of Benralizumab in Japanese Patients with Severe Asthma: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Introduction

This study aimed to demonstrate whether benralizumab maintained the safety and effectiveness profiles established in randomized controlled trials among all patients with severe uncontrolled asthma initially prescribed benralizumab in the real-world setting in Japan.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational, multicenter post-marketing study (ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03588546). The safety and tolerability of benralizumab over 1 year were assessed by the incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and serious ADRs. Patient background characteristics indicating a more frequent onset of ADRs with benralizumab were explored. The main effectiveness assessment was the change in Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 (ACQ-5) score from baseline. Patients with baseline ACQ-5 scores ≥1.5 were defined as having severe uncontrolled asthma.

Results

In total, 632 patients were evaluated for safety and 274 for effectiveness; 139 patients were included in the severe uncontrolled asthma subgroup. ADRs were reported in 12.7% and serious AEs in 13.0% of patients. Serious infections occurred in 3.8%, serious hypersensitivity in 0.3%, and malignancy in 0.3% of patients. No helminthic infections occurred. In the effectiveness population, benralizumab improved the mean (standard deviation [95% confidence interval]) ACQ-5 score by -1.16 (1.40 [-1.36, -0.96]) from baseline; forced expiratory volume in 1 second by 0.151 (0.440 [0.09, 0.21]) L; and Mini-Asthma Quality of Life questionnaire score by 1.16 (1.29 [0.94, 1.38]) at the last observation. The annual asthma exacerbation rate was 0.42. A greater ACQ-5 score improvement was observed among patients with eosinophilic asthma characteristics.

Conclusion

No new safety concerns were raised, and patients experienced benefits consistent with previous studies of benralizumab, thus supporting the use of benralizumab for the add-on maintenance treatment of patients with eosinophilic severe uncontrolled asthma.

Cytokine-targeted therapies for asthma and COPD

Asthma affects over 300 million people worldwide and its prevalence is increasing. COPD is the third leading cause of death globally. Asthma and COPD are complex inflammatory diseases of the airways in which impaired host defences lead to increased susceptibility to pathogens, pollutants and allergens. There is a constant interplay between host and the environment. Environmental exposures can alter the lung microbiome and influence the development of sensitisation by disrupting normal immunoregulation. The underlying airway inflammation in severe asthma is heterogeneous, with upregulation of type 2 cytokines in most cases but increased neutrophilic inflammation and activated T-helper 17 mediated immunity in others. COPD may also comprise several different phentoypes that are driven by different molecular mechanisms or endotypes. This disease heterogeneity is affected by comorbidities, treatments and environmental exposures. Recent intervention trials have shed light on the pathways beyond type 2 inflammation that can lead to beneficial outcomes versus potentially deleterious effects. We have made a great deal of progress over the last 10 years in terms of immunology and the pathophysiology of asthma and this has led to the development of novel treatments and major improvements in severe asthma outcomes. In COPD, however, no targeted treatments have demonstrated great improvements. This article reviews the mechanism of action and efficacy of the available biologics in asthma and COPD.

Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Moderate to Severe Allergic Asthma Patients in China: A Post-Authorization Study

Purpose

Omalizumab was first approved in China in 2017 for the treatment of moderate to severe allergic asthma for adult and adolescent patients aged ≥12 years. In accordance with the Chinese Health Authority requirement, the post-authorization safety study (PASS) was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in a real-world setting in patients with moderate to severe allergic asthma in China over a 24-week observation period.

Patients and Methods

This is a single-arm, non-interventional, multicenter, PASS conducted in adult, adolescent, and pediatric patients (≥6 years old) with moderate to severe allergic asthma receiving omalizumab in a real-world clinical setting from 2020 to 2021 in 59 sites of mainland China.

Results

In total, 1546 patients were screened and 1528 were enrolled. They were stratified according to age (6 to <12 years [n = 191]; ≥12 years [n = 1336]; unknown [n = 1]). Among the overall population, 23.6% and 4.5% of patients reported adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), respectively. Among pediatric patients (6 to <12 years), 14.1% and 1.6% patients reported AEs and SAEs, respectively. AEs that led to treatment discontinuation in both age groups were <2%. No new safety signals were reported. Effectiveness results showed improvement in lung function, asthma control, and quality of life (QoL).

Conclusion

The findings of the current study demonstrated that the safety profile of omalizumab was consistent with its known profile in allergic asthma, and no new safety signals were reported. Omalizumab treatment was effective in improving the lung function and QoL in patients with allergic asthma.

Influence of Genetics on the Response to Omalizumab in Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma with an Allergic Phenotype

Omalizumab is a monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma with an allergic phenotype. Its effectiveness could be influenced by clinical variables and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in one or more of the genes involved in the mechanism of action and process of response to omalizumab, and these could be used as predictive biomarkers of response. We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study that included patients with severe uncontrolled allergic asthma treated with omalizumab in a tertiary hospital. Satisfactory response after 12 months of treatment was defined as (1) Reduction ≥ 50% of exacerbations or no exacerbations, (2) Improvement of lung function ≥ 10% FEV1, and (3) Reduction ≥ 50% of OCS courses or no OCS. Polymorphisms in the FCER1A (rs2251746, rs2427837), FCER1B (rs1441586, rs573790, rs1054485, rs569108), C3 (rs2230199), FCGR2A (rs1801274), FCGR2B (rs3219018, rs1050501), FCGR3A (rs10127939, rs396991), IL1RL1 (rs1420101, rs17026974, rs1921622), and GATA2 (rs4857855) genes were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using TaqMan probes. A total of 110 patients under treatment with omalizumab were recruited. After 12 months of treatment, the variables associated with a reduction in exacerbations were the absence of polyposis (odds ratio [OR] = 4.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95-19.63), IL1RL1 rs17026974-AG (OR = 19.07; 95% CI = 1.27-547), and IL1RL1 rs17026974-GG (OR = 16.76; 95% CI = 1.22-438.76). Reduction in oral corticosteroids (OCS) was associated with age of starting omalizumab treatment (OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.91-0.99) and blood eosinophil levels > 300 cells/µL (OR = 2.93; 95% CI = 1.01-9.29). Improved lung function showed a relationship to the absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR = 12.16; 95% CI = 2.45-79.49), FCGR2B rs3219018-C (OR = 8.6; 95% CI = 1.12-117.15), GATA2 rs4857855-T (OR = 15.98; 95% CI = 1.52-519.57) and FCGR2A rs1801274-G (OR = 13.75; 95% CI = 2.14-142.68; AG vs. AA and OR = 7.46; 95% CI = 0.94-89.12; GG vs. AA). Meeting one response criterion was related to FCER1A rs2251746-TT (OR = 24; 95% CI = 0.77-804.57), meeting two to age of asthma diagnosis (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.88-0.99), and meeting all three to body mass index (BMI) < 25 (OR = 14.23; 95% CI = 3.31-100.77) and C3 rs2230199-C (OR = 3; 95% CI = 1.01-9.92). The results of this study show the possible influence of the polymorphisms studied on the response to omalizumab and the clinical benefit that could be obtained by defining predictive biomarkers of treatment response.

Impact of Omalizumab in Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma and Possible Predictive Biomarkers of Response: A Real-Life Study

Most patients with asthma can control their symptoms with a basic standard of medical care and with maintenance and rescue medication. However, between 5% and 10% of asthmatics worldwide do not achieve control of their symptoms and have recurrent exacerbations and respiratory difficulties. The objective of the study was the real-life evaluation of the clinical improvement of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with omalizumab, together with the search for biomarkers associated with the response. An observational retrospective cohort study was conducted that included patients with severe uncontrolled allergic asthma being treated with omalizumab. Three types of response were evaluated: lower use of oral corticosteroids, improvement in lung function, and reduction in exacerbations. A total of 110 patients under treatment with omalizumab were included, with a mean age of 48 ± 16 years. After 12 months had elapsed, significant reductions were found in the number of exacerbations, use of oral cortico-steroids and doses of inhaled corticosteroids (p < 0.001). Lung function and asthma control improved significantly (p < 0.001; p = 0.004) and eosinophil levels were significantly reduced (p = 0.004). Low scores in the Asthma Control Test were associated with the oral corticosteroid-saving effect; lower previous FEV1 levels and absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were related to improvement in lung function, and prior FEV1 values higher than 80% and absence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with a reduction in exacerbations. The results of this study confirm the clinical benefit obtained after the introduction of omalizumab and the possible predictive biomarkers of response to the treatment.

Specific IgE Response and Omalizumab Responsiveness in Severe Allergic Asthma

Objective

Omalizumab has demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with severe allergic asthma sensitized to perennial allergens and/or severe pollinosis through inhibition of IgE-dependent allergic response. When considering the "one airway, one disease" concept, sensitization to pollen could predict responsiveness to omalizumab. This study aimed to assess whether the pretreatment specific IgE response could be a predictor of responsiveness to omalizumab in severe allergic asthma sensitized to perennial allergens.

Methods

In this retrospective study, 41 adult patients with severe allergic asthma sensitized to perennial allergens (27 females; mean age 59 years) who had completed 52-week omalizumab treatment were enrolled. The Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness was performed, and demographic characteristics and the positive ratios of specific IgE responses classified into five subgroups (pollen, dust mite, house dust, mold, and animal dander) were compared between responders and non-responders. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of responsiveness to omalizumab.

Results

Thirty-one patients (76%) were identified as responders. The number of sensitized aeroallergen subgroups and sensitization to pollens were significantly higher in responders than in non-responders (both p<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that sensitization to pollen (OR = 8.41, p = 0.02) was independently associated with the effectiveness of omalizumab.

Conclusion

Pretreatment serum pollen-specific IgE could be a predictor of responsiveness to omalizumab.

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

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

Promising Therapeutic Functions of Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells Derived-Exosome in Asthma

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disturbance of the airways in which many cells and cellular elements are involved. Wheezing, breathlessness, chest tightness, and coughing, especially at night or in the early morning, are typical symptoms of asthma. At present, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) are standard treatments for regular management. Oral corticosteroids (OCSs) were recommended for controlling asthma exacerbation but only for a short-term treatment because of the side effects on organs. Biologic therapies have achieved exciting and notable effects in clinical treatment but are not applicable for all phenotypes of asthma. At present, some new approaches are under exploration to lessen side effects and improve curative effects. Studies have revealed that bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMMSCs) hold various curative effects in asthma and may benefit in the long term with high safety. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) enriched in body fluid were characterized as subcomponents of extracellular vesicles and delivered carriers combined with genetic messages in vivo. The therapeutic potential of exosomes has become a research hotspot in many diseases. BMMSC-derived exosomes were considered as the dominant part of BMMSCs in cell-to-cell communications and playing curative effects. Points also hold that BMMSC-Exo could interfere with airway inflammation and airway remolding in asthma via modulating the immune response, regulating gene expression, adjusting the phenotype of macrophage, etc. However, BMMSC-Exo still lacked more clinical trials for evaluating the effects on asthma, and the technology of extraction and purification still needs to be improved for wide use. This review aims to draw the relationship among asthma, BMMSC, and exosome, which may provide innovate ideas for treatment of asthma, and arouse attention about the curative potential of BMMSC-Exo.

Monoclonal antibodies in the management of asthma: Dead ends, current status and future perspectives

Patients with moderate-to-severe asthma may now be treated using a variety of monoclonal antibodies that target key inflammatory cytokines involved in disease pathogenesis. Existing clinical data on anti-IgE, anti-IL-5 and other immunological pathways indicate these therapies to offer reduced exacerbation rates, improved lung function, greater asthma control and better quality of life. However, as several patients still do not achieve satisfactory clinical response with the antibodies available, many more biologics, aiming different immunological pathways, are under evaluation. This review summarizes recent data on existing and potential monoclonal antibodies in asthma. Recent advances have resulted in the registration of a new antibody targeting TSLP (tezepelumab), with others being under development. Some of the researched monoclonal antibodies (e.g. anti-IL-13 tralokinumab and lebrikizumab or anti-IL-17A secukinumab) have shown optimistic results in preliminary research; however, these have been discontinued in asthma clinical research. In addition, as available monoclonal antibody treatments have shown little benefit among patients with T₂-low asthma, research continues in this area, with several antibodies in development. This article summarizes the available pre-clinical and clinical data on new and emerging drugs for treating severe asthma, discusses discontinued treatments and outlines future directions in this area.

Response to Omalizumab as an Add-On Therapy in the Treatment of Allergic Asthma in Adult Chinese Patients-A Retrospective Study

(a) Background: Omalizumab is an anti-IgE humanized monoclonal antibody marketed in China for the conventional treatment of poorly controlled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of omalizumab, but the data from studies in actual clinical treatment are still relatively limited. (b) Methods: Thirty-two patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab on the basis of ICS-LABA (inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting beta2-agonist) were selected. Clinical characteristics before and after treatment were collected to analyze the relationship between changes in serum total IgE levels and peripheral blood EOS (eosinophil) levels, FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second), PEF (peak expiratory flow), OCS (oral glucocorticoid) dosage, ATC (asthma control test) score, and the number of acute exacerbations and the treatment response, in order to observe the efficacy of omalizumab in addition to primary therapy, and to investigate whether baseline clinical characteristics such as serum total IgE and EOS levels could predict a treatment response. (c) Results: Using the ACT score as an evaluation, 68.75% of patients benefited from omalizumab treatment at the end of 16 weeks. The response group has a reduction in OCS dosage (p-values of 0.026 and 0.039), a significant reduction in ACT scores (both p < 0.001), and a reduction in the number of acute exacerbations (p = 0.034 and 0.025, respectively) after omalizumab treatment. The binary logistics analysis of factors affecting the effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of allergic asthma were total serum IgE and the presence of comorbidities (p-values of 0.039 and 0.046, respectively). (d) Conclusions: Combining omalizumab with ICS-LABA for 16 weeks significantly improves asthma symptoms in Chinese adults and can be used as an add-on treatment. In addition, high serum IgE levels and the presence of comorbidities were predictors of its therapeutic efficacy.

Biologics and airway remodeling in severe asthma

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airway disease resulting in airflow obstruction, which in part can become irreversible to conventional therapies, defining the concept of airway remodeling. The introduction of biologics in severe asthma has led in some patients to the complete normalization of previously considered irreversible airflow obstruction. This highlights the need to distinguish a "fixed" airflow obstruction due to structural changes unresponsive to current therapies, from a "reversible" one as demonstrated by lung function normalization during biological therapies not previously obtained even with high-dose systemic glucocorticoids. The mechanisms by which exposure to environmental factors initiates the inflammatory responses that trigger airway remodeling are still incompletely understood. Alarmins represent epithelial-derived cytokines that initiate immunologic events leading to inflammatory airway remodeling. Biological therapies can improve airflow obstruction by addressing these airway inflammatory changes. In addition, biologics might prevent and possibly even revert "fixed" remodeling due to structural changes. Hence, it appears clinically important to separate the therapeutic effects (early and late) of biologics as a new paradigm to evaluate the effects of these drugs and future treatments on airway remodeling in severe asthma.

Real-world safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in Japanese patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria: A post-marketing surveillance study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of omalizumab in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) patients has been established, but real-world long-term data remain scarce, especially in Japan.

METHODS

52-week, open-label, single-arm, observational study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of first-time omalizumab in Japanese CSU patients responding inadequately to conventional therapies.

RESULTS

Overall, 235 of 280 patients completed the study. Most patients were aged ≥ 18 and < 65 years; adolescents (≥ 12 and ≤ 18 years) accounted for 9.6% of the total population. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) duration of CSU at baseline was 1.6 ± 3.1 years; 46.1% of patients had had CSU for < 6 months. At baseline, the mean ± SD of Urticaria Control Test (UCT) score, Weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) were 5.1 ± 3.2, 25.2 ± 11.9, and 8.4 ± 5.9, respectively. The mean ± SD duration of the observation period was 330.3 ± 86.2 days. Relapse was reported in 65 patients, 51, 9, and 5 of whom required retreatment with omalizumab 1, 2, and ≥ 3 times, respectively. The incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was reported in 11.8%, 1.4%, and 3.9% of patients, respectively. The most common AEs were urticaria (1.8%) and eczema (1.1%). No adolescents experienced ADRs. A cumulative of 92.8% of patients responded in the Physician's Global Impression of Change, with 81.3%, 75.0%, and 95.1% of patients achieving UCT ≥ 12, UAS7 ≤ 6, and DLQI ≤ 5 up to Week 52, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in CSU patients who responded inadequately to conventional therapies in real-world clinical practice in Japan.

Reduction in asthma exacerbation rate after mepolizumab treatment initiation in patients with severe asthma: A real-world database study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the changes in asthma exacerbation, as well as in oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, exacerbation-related healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and healthcare costs before and after mepolizumab treatment initiation in patients with severe asthma who started treatment with mepolizumab in a real-world clinical setting in Japan.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational, self-controlled study was conducted in Japan using a hospital-based administrative claims database. Patients who were diagnosed with asthma and who were new users of mepolizumab were included in the study. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of any asthma exacerbation/patient-year during the 12-month period before (baseline period) and after (follow-up period) the first mepolizumab prescription. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients with ≥1 any asthma exacerbation, patients with exacerbation requiring hospitalization, the incidence rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalization/patient-year, the median daily OCS dose (OCS sparing effect), exacerbation-related HRU (hospitalization length, the proportion of patients with emergency visits, and the number of emergency/outpatient visits), and associated costs.

RESULTS

Of the 377 patients included, 56.2% were ≥65 years of age. Following the first mepolizumab prescription, incidence rates for any asthma exacerbation were reduced by 40.6% (4.00/patient-year to 2.38/patient-year; the incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.60 [0.53-0.67]; p < 0.0001) from the baseline to follow-up periods. The incidence rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalization was reduced by 55.8% (0.37/patient-year to 0.16/patient-year) from the baseline to follow-up periods. The proportion of patients experiencing any exacerbation decreased from 84.4% to 57.8% and those requiring hospitalization decreased from 23.9% to 10.3% both from the baseline to follow-up periods. The median daily OCS dose decreased by 44.6% (median [interquartile range]: 6.7 [4.7-9.9] mg/day to 3.3 [0.9-5.6] mg/day) from the last baseline quarter to the 4th quarter of the follow-up period. All exacerbation-related HRUs decreased from the baseline to follow-up periods. Inpatient cost reduced by >50% (123,279 Japanese Yen [JPY]/patient-year vs. 57,283 JPY/patient-year), reducing the total cost by 80,716 JPY from the baseline to follow-up periods.

CONCLUSION

Mepolizumab was effective in treating patients with severe asthma by reducing the incidence rates of exacerbations and exacerbation requiring hospitalization, OCS dose, exacerbation-related HRU, and cost in routine clinical practice in Japan.

Rapid Disease Control in First-Line Therapy-Resistant Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid and Bullous Pemphigoid with Omalizumab as Add-On Therapy: A Case Series Of 13 Patients

The role of IgE autoantibodies has been demonstrated in the pathogenesis of bullous pemphigoid for many years. Recently, omalizumab (OMZ), a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody that depletes total serum IgE, has been used off-label in a few case series of bullous pemphigoids demonstrating a rapid efficacy and allowing significant improvements or complete remission as add-on therapy in first-line treatment-resistant patients. Herein, we report the largest retrospective study to evaluate OMZ effectiveness in patients with subepidermal autoimmune blistering diseases. Our series included 13 patients from a single center with bullous pemphigoid or mucous membrane pemphigoid, of whom 7 had mucous membrane involvement. OMZ was added to the unchanged immunosuppressive therapies. Detailed clinical and immunological data during the first year were collected, notably for specific anti-BP180-NC16A IgE and IgG, and the median total follow-up was 30 months (range: 3-81). Our series demonstrated that OMZ induced a significant improvement in pruritus, urticarial score, and daily blister count on day 15, allowing disease control to be achieved in a 1-month median time and complete remission (CR) in a 3-month median time in 85% of these patients previously in therapeutic impasse. At the end of the follow-up, 31% of patients achieved CR on minimal therapy after OMZ weaning without relapses, and 54% achieved CR on OMZ continuation with a minimal dose of concomitant treatment. Two patients experienced therapeutic failure (15%). At baseline, clinical variables reflecting activity were significantly positively correlated with eosinophil blood count, total IgE serum level, specific anti-BP180 IgE and IgG. While baseline anti-BP180 IgG and specific anti-BP180 IgE were significantly positively correlated, only the two patients who experienced a therapeutic failure with OMZ did not fit with this correlation, demonstrating elevated levels of anti-BP180 IgG with no measurable BP180-specific IgE. Follow-up of immunological variables demonstrated a rapid decrease of eosinophilia towards normalization, whereas a slower decline towards negativation was observed over 1 year for anti-BP180 IgG and anti BP180 IgE in patients who responded to OMZ. This case series demonstrated that OMZ is a rapidly effective biologic therapy for refractory bullous pemphigoid and mucous membrane pemphigoid, permitting rapid disease control and reduction of concomitant therapeutics.

Tiotropium Add-On and Treatable Traits in Asthma-COPD Overlap: A Real-World Pilot Study

Purpose

The ‘treatable traits’ strategy for patients with chronic inflammatory airway diseases, especially asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), is a focus of interest, because it implements precision and personalized medicine. Asthma-COPD overlap (ACO), a phenotype involving both asthma and COPD, is an important disease entity because patients with ACO have significantly worse outcomes, conferring greater economical and social burdens. Some guidelines for ACO recommend add-on therapy of long-acting muscarinic antagonists to inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β₂ agonists. However, this approach is based on extrapolation from patients with asthma or COPD alone. Consequently, a ‘treatable traits’ approach suitable for ACO remains obscure.

Methods

A 12-week open-label cross-over pilot study was conducted in patients with ACO to investigate the effect of tiotropium bromide (TIO) 5 µg/day add-on therapy to fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate (FP/FM) 500/20 µg/day compared with FP/FM 500/20 µg/day alone. A 4-week run-in period and two 4-week treatment periods were included.

Results

A total of 18 male patients with stable ACO participated in this pilot study. All patients were ex-smokers. Mean values ± standard deviation (SD) for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) were 1.21 ± 0.49 L after the run-in period, 1.20 ± 0.51 L after the FP/FM combination therapy period, and 1.30 ± 0.48 L after the TIO add-on therapy to FP/FM period. FEV₁ values after the TIO add-on therapy FP/FM period were significantly higher than those after the run-in period (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

TIO add-on therapy to FP/FM in patients with ACO, considered difficult to treat because of the presence of both asthma and COPD, resulted in improvements in lung function parameters in this real-world pilot study, indicating the potential value of TIO add-on therapy as a “treatable traits” option for standard treatment for ACO.

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.

A pragmatic guide to choosing biologic therapies in severe asthma

There are now several monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies (“biologics”) available to treat severe asthma. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE mAb and is licensed in severe allergic asthma. Current evidence suggests it may decrease exacerbations by augmenting deficient antiviral immune responses in asthma. Like all other biologics, clinical efficacy is greatest in those with elevated T2 biomarkers. Three biologics target the interleukin (IL)-5–eosinophil pathway, including mepolizumab and reslizumab that target IL-5 itself, and benralizumab that targets the IL-5 receptor (IL-5R-α). These drugs all reduce the exacerbation rate in those with raised blood eosinophil counts. Mepolizumab and benralizumab have also demonstrated steroid-sparing efficacy. Reslizumab is the only biologic that is given intravenously rather than by the subcutaneous route. Dupilumab targets the IL-4 receptor and like mepolizumab and benralizumab is effective at reducing exacerbation rate as well as oral corticosteroid requirements. It is also effective for the treatment of nasal polyposis and atopic dermatitis. Tezepelumab is an anti-TSLP (thymic stromal lymphopoietin) mAb that has recently completed phase 3 trials demonstrating significant reductions in exacerbation rate even at lower T2 biomarker thresholds.

Many patients with severe asthma qualify for more than one biologic. To date, there are no head-to-head trials to aid physicians in this choice. However, post-hoc analyses have identified certain clinical characteristics that are associated with superior responses to some therapies. The presence of allergic and/or eosinophilic comorbidities, such as atopic dermatitis, nasal polyposis or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, that may additionally benefit by the choice of biologic should also be taken into consideration, as should patient preferences which may include dosing frequency. To date, all biologics have been shown to have excellent safety profiles.

Use of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma: the age of personalized medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are multiple FDA-approved biologics to treat poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma. Given the heterogeneity of asthma and the lack of head-to-head data between biologics, selecting the best biologic for a patient can be difficult. This review summarizes the key literature to date, in hopes of facilitating an evidence-based approach to selecting the most appropriate biologic for patients with asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to unique mechanisms of action, there is increasing literature on predictors of response to each biologic, such as sensitizations to aeroallergens, peripheral eosinophil count, total serum IgE, and exhaled nitric oxide. Biologics available for asthma are also being increasingly studied in comorbid conditions with asthma, and this may facilitate selecting the most appropriate biologic for a patient. In the absence of head-to-head studies, there is literature of switching between biologics whenever necessary.

SUMMARY

The authors outline an approach to selecting a biologic based on various considerations, and hope this suggested approach facilitates selecting the biologic most suitable for each individual with poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.

Omalizumab: An Optimal Choice for Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma

Omalizumab is the first monoclonal antibody that was globally approved as a personalized treatment option for patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. This review summarizes the knowledge of almost two decades of use of omalizumab to answer some important everyday clinical practice questions, concerning its efficacy and safety and its association with other asthma-related and drug-related parameters. Evidence suggests that omalizumab improves asthma control and reduces the incidence and frequency of exacerbations in patients with severe allergic asthma. Omalizumab is also effective in those patients in reducing corticosteroid use and healthcare utilization, while it also seems to improve lung function. Several biomarkers have been recognized in predicting its efficacy in its target group of patients, while the optimal duration for evaluating its efficacy is between 16 and 32 weeks.

Pediatric usage of Omalizumab: A promising one

Allergic and related diseases have a substantial epidemiological impact on the pediatric population. Small molecule-based medicines have been traditionally used to manage the diseases. Omalizumab is the first monoclonal antibody-based medicine used in children's allergy and shows great promises. It binds to free IgE and prevents it from binding to IgE receptors, thus interrupting the IgE-dependent allergic inflammatory cascade. Vast amounts of data demonstrate its effectiveness and well tolerance by patients, including the children. However, the drug was only approved to use in allergic asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), though other applications were explored in clinical trials. In this review, we summarized current pediatric applications of omalizumab in allergic diseases, focusing on its usages beyond asthma and CSU, including allergic rhinitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, vernal keratoconjunctivitis, food allergy and atopic dermatitis. In addition, we highlighted the unmet needs and controversial issues of anti-IgE therapy.

•

Omalizumab, the first monoclonal antibody-based medicine used in children's allergy, shows great promise.

•

Omalizumab is effective in relieving symptoms associated with almost every children's allergic and related diseases beyond asthma and CSU.

•

There are unmet needs and controversial issues of anti-IgE therapy in allergic and related diseases.

Safety of biological therapy in elderly patients with severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety of biological therapy for severe T2 asthma (omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab) under real-life conditions in elderly patients older than 70 years.

METHODS

Retrospective data collection including clinical characteristics, comorbidities, treatment, disease control and adverse events (AE) of all patients with severe asthma on biological therapy older than 70 years seen in the Severe Asthma Unit of our hospital.

RESULTS

Of 147 patients with severe asthma being treated with biologics, 21 patients older than 70 years were included. The median age of these patients was 76.3 years (range 71-86) and the majority were women (n = 18, 85.7%). There were 9 patients (42.9%) who experienced an AE related to biological treatment. Four (44.4%) were in treatment with omalizumab, two (22.2%) with mepolizumab, two patients (22.2%) with reslizumab and one (11.1%) with benralizumab. The median FEV₁ (%) was 66%. These patients had a considerably higher body mass index (BMI). No significant differences were found for any other variable. Most of the AE reported were considered mild with the exception of one case of systemic AE (anaphylaxis) associated with omalizumab.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the prescription of biological therapy in elderly patients with severe asthma seems to be safe. More evidence is needed in this particular population.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Omalizumab for Severe Allergic Asthma in Japan Using Real-World Evidence

OBJECTIVES

Omalizumab is a recommended add-on therapy for patients with severe allergic asthma who remain uncontrolled despite treatment with standard of care (SoC). This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab compared with SoC applying real-world clinical outcomes in adult patients with severe allergic asthma in Japan.

METHODS

A validated Markov model was adapted for Japan and compared the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab as an add-on therapy to SoC versus SoC alone using the most recently updated price of omalizumab. A Japanese real-world postmarketing surveillance and a pivotal randomized clinical trial were used as inputs for clinical effectiveness. Japanese life tables and literature were accessed for mortality data and unit costs were extracted from a Japanese insurance claims database. Quality of life data were retrieved from the clinical trial.

RESULTS

In the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for omalizumab add-on therapy was ¥2.85 million per quality-adjusted life-year gained (approximately €21 000; 1€ = ¥133.26) compared with SoC alone. The model appeared to be most sensitive to changes in clinically significant severe exacerbation fatality, day-to-day asthma symptom utilities for SoC, discount rates for benefits, day-to-day asthma symptom utilities for omalizumab responders, time horizon, and the annual cost of omalizumab. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of omalizumab being cost-effective was 93% to 98% at a threshold of ¥5 to ¥6 million (willingness-to-pay for 1 quality-adjusted life-year).

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab add-on therapy is cost-effective compared with SoC alone in Japan in severe allergic asthma population who are uncontrolled with high-dose inhaled corticosteroid and other controllers.

Biologics for Asthma and Allergic Skin Diseases in Children

An estimated 7 million children in the United States have asthma, which causes a significant health care burden and affects quality of life. The minority of these children have asthma that does not respond to Global Initiative for Asthma steps 4 and 5 care, and biological medications are recommended at this level in the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations. In addition, biologics have been introduced into the care of children with allergic skin diseases. Omalizumab and mepolizumab are approved for children as young as 6 years, and benralizumab and dupilumab are approved for people aged ≥12 years. Reslizumab is approved only for people aged ≥18 years. These monoclonal antibodies may be added for appropriate patients when asthma or allergic skin diseases are not well controlled. Pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists should work together and be aware of the benefits and risks of these medications for their patients, as well as the practical implications of providing these options for their patients. This clinical report serves as an evaluation of the current literature on these types of medications in the treatment of children with asthma and allergic skin disease.

A systematic literature review of burden of illness in adults with uncontrolled moderate/severe asthma

BACKGROUND

There are limited published data on the burden of moderate/severe uncontrolled asthma.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review to better understand the impact of moderate-to-severe asthma in the US, the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Canada, Japan, and Australia in terms of prevalence, clinical measures, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and economic burden, for patients whose asthma is uncontrolled despite inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LABA) therapy.

RESULTS

The prevalence of uncontrolled asthma among patients with moderate/severe disease varied but was as high as 100% in some subgroups. Patients with uncontrolled asthma generally had poor lung function (mean/median pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁]: 1.69-2.45 L; mean/median pre-bronchodilator percent predicted FEV₁: 57.2-79.7). There was also a substantial but variable exacerbation burden associated with uncontrolled asthma, with the annualised rate of exacerbations ranging from 1.30 to 7.30 when considering various patient subgroups. Furthermore, the annualised rate of severe exacerbations ranged from 1.66 to 3.60. The HRQoL burden measured using disease-specific and generic instruments consistently demonstrated substantial impairment of HRQoL for those with uncontrolled asthma; Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores ranged from 3.00 to 5.20, whilst EurQol-5 Dimensions index scores ranged from 0.53 to 0.59. Direct, indirect and total costs together with consumption of other healthcare resources associated with managing uncontrolled asthma were also substantial in the population studied; no caregiver burden was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that significant unmet needs exist for patients with uncontrolled asthma despite the availability of ICS/LABA therapy. Novel treatments are needed to help reduce the burden to patients, healthcare systems and society.

Long term treatment with omalizumab in adolescent with refractory solar urticaria

BACKGROUND

Solar urticaria represents an uncomfortable form of chronic inducible urticaria. First and second-line treatments are ineffective in some patients, leading to an impairment in their quality of life. Omalizumab represents a safe therapeutic option in case of refractory solar urticaria.

CASE PRESENTATION

We update a case of a 21-year-old Caucasian girl affected by solar urticaria from the age of 14. Poor disease control was achieved with standard or high-dose of H₁-antihistamines. Several omalizumab courses, including a 1-year-long course, were practiced resulting in clinical remission and significant improvement in patient's quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Our experience confirms the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab for the management of refractory solar urticaria. Future studies are awaited in order to monitor long term effects and chronic doses of this treatment, particularly in patients who need concomitant therapy with antihistamines.

Biological therapy for severe asthma

Around 5–10% of the total asthmatic population suffer from severe or uncontrolled asthma, which is associated with increased mortality and hospitalization, increased health care burden and worse quality of life. In the last few years, new drugs have been launched and several asthma phenotypes according to definite biomarkers have been identified. In particular, therapy with biologics has revolutionized the management and the treatment of severe asthma, showing high therapeutic efficacy associated with significant clinical benefits. To date, four types of biologics are licensed for severe asthma, i.e. omalizumab (anti-immunoglobulin E) antibody, mepolizumab and reslizumab (anti-interleukin [IL]-5antibody), benralizumab (anti-IL-5 receptor a antibody) and dupilumab (anti-IL-4 receptor alpha antibody). The aim of this article was to review the biologic therapies currently available for the treatment of severe asthma, in order to help physicians to choose the most suitable biologic agent for their asthmatic patients.

Oral Corticosteroids Dependence and Biologic Drugs in Severe Asthma: Myths or Facts? A Systematic Review of Real-World Evidence

Airway inflammation represents an important characteristic in asthma, modulating airflow limitation and symptom control, and triggering the risk of asthma exacerbation. Thus, although corticosteroids represent the cornerstone for the treatment of asthma, severe patients may be dependent on oral corticosteroids (OCSs). Fortunately, the current humanised monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, and reslizumab have been proven to induce an OCS-sparing effect in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), thus overcoming the problem of OCS dependence in severe asthma. Nevertheless, a large discrepancy has been recognized between selected patients enrolled in RCTs and non-selected asthmatic populations in real-world settings. It is not possible to exclude that the OCS-sparing effect of mAbs resulting from the RCTs could be different than the real effect resulting in clinical practice. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and correlation analysis to assess whether mAbs are effective in eliciting an OCS-sparing effect and overcoming the OCS dependence in severe asthmatic patients in real-world settings. Overall, real-world studies support the evidence that OCS dependence is a real condition that, however, can be found only in a small number of really severe asthmatic patients. In most patients, the dependence on OCS can be related to modifying factors that, when adequately modulated, may lead to a significant reduction or suspension of OCS maintenance. Conversely, in severe asthmatics in whom OCS resistance is proved by a high daily dose intake, mAbs allow reversion of the OCS dependence, leading to the suspension of OCS therapy in most patients or >50% reduction in the daily OCS dose.

Real-life long-term safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in Japanese pediatric patients with severe allergic asthma: A post-marketing surveillance

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is approved as add-on therapy for pediatric asthma since 2013 in Japan, however, its data in clinical practice is limited. This post-marketing surveillance aimed to evaluate long-term safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in Japanese pediatric patients with severe allergic asthma in real-life setting.

METHODS

This 104-week, multicenter surveillance was conducted from September 2013 to May 2019 by central registration method. Patients with severe allergic asthma aged ≥6 and < 15 years at initiation of treatment who were first-time omalizumab users were included. The primary endpoints included incidence of adverse drug reactions and physician's Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE). The secondary endpoints included incidence of serious adverse events, adverse events and adverse drug reactions of special interest and asthma exacerbation-related events.

RESULTS

Of the 128 patients enrolled, 127 completed the surveillance and were included for safety and effectiveness analysis. Thirteen patients experienced 20 adverse drug reactions with an incidence rate of 10.2%. The most frequent adverse drug reactions were pyrexia (2.4%) and urticaria (1.6%). In total, adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in 60 (47.2%) and 30 patients (23.6%) respectively. Two patients experienced anaphylactic reaction and 1 patient experienced type 1 hypersensitivity. 77.2% had an effective response to omalizumab according to GETE at final assessment, and frequency of all asthma exacerbation-related events decreased in post-treatment versus pre-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term omalizumab treatment showed no new safety signals in pediatric patients with severe allergic asthma. The observed safety and effectiveness profile was consistent with previous studies.

Attitudes of Croatian pulmonologists concerning obstacles to earlier, more appropriate use of biologics in severe asthma: Survey results

AIMS

Biologics have been proven efficacious for patients with severe asthma (SA). It is essential to diagnose such individuals correctly. This study was designed to survey pulmonologists to identify barriers to early diagnosis and subsequent appropriate use of biologics for SA in Croatia.

METHODS

A pulmonologist group with expertise in SA developed the initial list of questions, with the final questionnaire created according to a 2-round Delphi method. The resulting survey consisted of 23 items consequently divided into 4 domains: 1) Pulmonologists' demographics and professional experiences; 2) Concerns about asthma management; 3) Attitudes toward SA diagnosis; and 4) Beliefs and attitudes regarding the use of biologics in managing SA. The given answers represented the respondents' estimates.

RESULTS

Eighty-four surveys were analyzed, with pulmonologists observing that general practitioners often inaccurately diagnose asthma and treat acute exacerbations. Although specialist centers are capably and correctly equipped, the time to diagnose patients with SA is approximately 3.5 months, with initial use of biologics delayed an additional 2 months. The primary indications for prescribing biologics are conventional therapy with oral glucocorticoids (91.7%) and frequent acute exacerbations (82.1%). In addition to improper diagnosis (64.3%), many patients with SA do not receive the indicated biologics owing to strict administrative directives for reimbursement (70.2%) or limited hospital resources (57.1%).

LIMITATIONS

The limitations of this survey include the subjective nature of the collected data, the relatively small sample size, and the lack of the biologic efficacy evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Croatian pulmonologists observed that a significant number of patients with SA who are eligible for biologics are not prescribed them, largely because of an inaccurate and/or delayed diagnosis, a delayed referral to a specialist center, highly restrictive criteria for reimbursement, and/or institutional budgetary limitations.

Clinical effects and immune modulation of biologics in asthma

Asthma is considered a syndrome composed of heterogeneous disorders involving complex chronic airway inflammation. Patients with severe asthma, prolonged symptoms, and frequent asthma exacerbations, despite high doses of inhaled corticosteroids, may benefit from treatment with biologics. Four types of biologics are available for severe asthma, including an anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody (omalizumab), anti-interleukin (IL)-5 antibody (mepolizumab and reslizumab), anti-IL-5 receptor α antibody (benralizumab), and anti-IL-4 receptor α antibody (dupilumab). Biologics for patients with severe asthma demonstrate high therapeutic efficacy and provide significant clinical benefits, including the prevention of asthma exacerbations, alleviation of symptoms, improvement in the quality of life and respiratory function, and reduction in frequencies of hospitalization and emergency outpatient visits. This review provides an overview of the modulation of immunological features by each of the four established biologics in patients with severe allergic asthma. Given the extensive immunomodulatory effects of biologics, further analyses of their precise effects on the human immune system are warranted.

Real-World Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Severe Allergic Asthma: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Assessment of clinical outcomes in the real-world corroborates findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis evaluated real-world data of omalizumab on treatment response, lung function, exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), health care resource utilization (HCRU), and school/work absenteeism at 4, 6, and 12 months after treatment.

METHODS

Observational studies in patients with severe allergic asthma (≥6 years) treated with omalizumab for ≥16 weeks, published from January 2005 to October 2018, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. A random-effects model was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

In total, 86 publications were included. Global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) was good/excellent in 77% patients at 16 weeks (risk difference: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.84; I² = 96%) and in 82% patients at 12 months (0.82, 0.73-0.91; 97%). The mean improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 160, 220, and 250 mL at 16 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively. There was a decrease in Asthma Control Questionnaire score at 16 weeks (-1.14), 6 months (-1.56), and 12 months (-1.13) after omalizumab therapy. Omalizumab significantly reduced annualized rate of severe exacerbations (risk ratio [RR]: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.30-0.56; I² = 96%), proportion of patients receiving OCS (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75; I² = 96%), and number of unscheduled physician visits (mean difference: -2.34, 95% CI: -3.54 to -1.13; I² = 98%) at 12 months versus baseline.

CONCLUSION

The consistent improvements in GETE, lung function, and PROs, and reductions in asthma exacerbations, OCS use, and HCRU with add-on omalizumab in real-life confirm and complement the efficacy data of RCTs.

'Real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in adults with severe allergic asthma: a meta-analysis

Background: Severe asthma affects 5-10% of the 350 million people with asthma worldwide. Findings from the authors' previous meta-analysis supported omalizumab use as an adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma. The publication of fourteen new articles necessitates an update of the meta-analysis.Objective: To evaluate the 'real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of acute allergic asthma in adults by calculating pooled effects estimates from data in published articles.Methods: Articles on omalizumab effectiveness in 'real-world' settings were identified. Effect sizes, including point estimates of the proportion of patients who met a given criteria, mean improvements relative to baseline, and change in the proportion of patients requiring oral corticosteroids compared to baseline were extracted. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to pool effect sizes based on proportions. Standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) were calculated from means and standard deviations. Relative risk was calculated from changes in proportions. Variability within and between studies was evaluated.Results: Omalizumab increases the percentage of individuals rated 'good' or 'excellent' on the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness Scale. Omalizumab also improves respiratory function, quality-of-life, and asthma control while reducing medication usage, exacerbations, hospitalizations, and adverse events.Conclusion: 'Real-world' evidence continues to support the use of omalizumab as adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma.

Allergen immunotherapy and biologics in respiratory allergy: friends or foes?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen-specific immunotherapy has established as an indispensable disease-modifying treatment in allergy practice but its safety and efficacy might be furtherly improved by combining it with other drugs or therapeutic intervention that co-modulate immune type 2 immune networks.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the past two decades, clinical research focused on AIT and omalizumab co-treatment to improve both safety and long-term efficacy of allergic disease treatment. Recently, combination of AIT with other biologicals targeting different mediators of type 2 inflammation has been set up with interesting preliminary results. Moreover, AIT current contraindication might be overcome by contemporarily controlling underlying type 2 inflammation in severe atopic patients.

SUMMARY

AIT--biological combination treatment can realize a complex multitargeted treatment strategy allowing for consistently improving disease control and sparing steroid administration.

Biologic treatment options for severe asthma

Asthma is a common condition that causes episodic expiratory airflow limitation due to bronchial smooth muscle constriction and airways inflammation resulting in increased respiratory symptoms and acute asthma exacerbations. Patients with severe asthma have relied on either recurrent courses or daily use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) to control their disease. However a high level of OCS exposure is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In recent years the elucidation of the role of T2 inflammation underpinning asthma pathogenesis has led to the development of monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies targeting this pathway. Established therapies now include omalizumab targeting IgE, mepolizumab and reslizumab targeting IL-5, benralizumab targeting the IL-5R and dupilumab targeting IL-4R. For many patients these therapies have been transformative and their use has additionally advanced our understanding of the immunology that underpins the disease. This article reviews the biologic therapies currently available for the treatment of severe asthma.

Real-life safety and efficacy of omalizumab in Japanese patients with severe allergic asthma who were subjected to dosing table revision or expansion: A post-marketing surveillance

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is an anti-immunoglobulin E monoclonal antibody approved for patients with severe allergic asthma in Japan. With regard to omalizumab dosage in Japanese adults with severe allergic asthma in clinical practice settings, this post-marketing surveillance evaluated safety and efficacy of the dosing table revision (DTR) based on a dosing regimen of omalizumab administration every 4 weeks dosing regimen and dosing table expansion (DTE) for patients with baseline IgE levels >700 IU/mL.

METHODS

This 52-week, multicenter study, conducted from September 2013 to November 2018, evaluated omalizumab safety outcomes including adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), efficacy outcomes including Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE), change in oral corticosteroid dose, and asthma exacerbation-related events such as hospitalization, emergency room visits, and worsening of symptoms.

RESULTS

Of the 405 patients registered in the study, safety was evaluated in 392 and efficacy in 390. The mean age of patients was 58.5 years and 58.7% were women. In total, 41.3% of the patients were subjected to DTE and 58.7% to DTR. In the safety dataset, 6.6% experienced an ADR, 32.9% experienced an AE, and 16.1% experienced an SAE. In the efficacy dataset, 63.3% of patients at Week 16 and 63.5% at Week 52 had an 'effective' or 'good' GETE score. Omalizumab was associated with a reduction in worsening of asthma symptoms requiring systemic corticosteroids and frequency of hospitalization. All outcomes were comparable among the DTE and DTR subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study support the safety and efficacy of omalizumab administered based on the revised and expanded dosing table in Japanese patients with severe allergic asthma.

Beliefs and preferences regarding biological treatments for severe asthma

Background

Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers’ specialty and experience.

Methods

We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared.

Results

Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice.

Biological Therapies of Severe Asthma and Their Possible Effects on Airway Remodeling

Asthma is a chronic and heterogenic respiratory tract disorder with a high global prevalence. The underlying chronic inflammatory process and airway remodeling (AR) contribute to the symptomatology of the disease. The most severely ill asthma patients may now be treated using a variety of monoclonal antibodies aiming key inflammatory cytokines involved in asthma pathogenesis. Although clinical data shows much beneficial effects of biological therapies in terms of reduction of exacerbation rates, improvement of lung functions, asthma control and patients' quality of life, little is known on the effects of these monoclonal antibodies on AR—a key clinical trait of long-term asthma management. In this review, the authors summarize the data on the proven effects of monoclonal antibodies in asthma on AR. To date, in terms of reversing AR, the mostly studied was omalizumab. However, some studies also addressed this clinical issue in context of other severe asthma biological therapies (mepolizumab, benralizumab, tralokinumab). Still, data on effects of particular biological therapies on AR in severe asthma are incomplete and require further studies. According to the American Thoracic Society research recommendations, future research shall focus on AR in asthma and improve drugs targeting AR, including the available and future monoclonal antibodies.

Real-World Observational Study on the Characteristics and Treatment Patterns of Allergic Asthma Patients Receiving Omalizumab in Canada

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is a treatment option for pediatric and adult patients with moderate to severe allergic asthma poorly controlled with standard inhaled therapies. Clinical trials and observational studies have demonstrated the efficacy of omalizumab. There is limited real-world evidence on the characteristics and treatment patterns of Canadian asthma patients receiving omalizumab.

OBJECTIVE

We profiled Canadian omalizumab users to estimate time to omalizumab discontinuation and to assess changes in concurrent medication usage before, during, and after therapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study that analyzed data from Canadian prescription claims databases. An algorithm was used to select naïve users of omalizumab with an inferred diagnosis of GINA 5-asthma who made a claim for omalizumab from February 1, 2007, to June 2, 2015. Demographic and baseline characteristics were assessed at index. Outcomes examined over the analysis period included (i) daily omalizumab dose per patient and per claim; (ii) omalizumab discontinuation (defined as ≥100-day gap in making omalizumab claims) and its potential predictors (ie, age, sex, province of residence, drug insurer; assessed by Cox Proportional Hazards Model); and (iii) for patients who discontinued omalizumab, changes in concurrent medication usage before, during, and 6 months after omalizumab usage.

RESULTS

The final study cohort consisted of 1160 patients (mean age: 45.8 ± 15.2 years; 64.7% female). During the first year of omalizumab therapy, 29.5% of patients discontinued treatment. The singular characteristic that predicted omalizumab discontinuation with statistical significance was age group (20‒34 years vs 12‒19 years; hazard ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.11-2.76; P<0.05). There were significant reductions in the use of some concurrent inhaled and oral asthma medications during and/or after omalizumab use (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one-third of patients who initiated omalizumab in Canada for refractory, moderate to severe allergic asthma discontinued treatment during the first year.

Roles of omalizumab in various allergic diseases

IgE and mast cells play a pivotal role in various allergic diseases, including asthma, allergic rhinitis, and urticaria. Treatment with omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, has significantly improved control of these allergic diseases and introduced a new era for the management of severe allergic conditions. About 10 years of experience with omalizumab treatment for severe allergic asthma confirmed its effectiveness and safety, reducing symptoms, frequency of reliever use, and severe exacerbations in patients with intractable conditions. Omalizumab is particularly useful in childhood asthma, where atopic conditions often determine clinical courses of asthma. Recently, omalizumab is approved for the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) with the fixed dose of 300 mg. Although the mechanisms underlying the actions of omalizumab in CSU are not fully clarified, nearly 90% of patients with CSU showed a complete or a partial response to omalizumab treatment. Furthermore, omalizumab is just approved for the treatment of severe Japanese cedar pollinosis (JC) based on the successful results of an add-on study of omalizumab for inadequately controlled severe pollinosis despite antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids. For proper use of omalizumab to treat severe JC, co-administration of antihistamines is necessary, while patients should meet the criteria including strong sensitization to Japanese cedar pollen (≥class 3) and poor control under standard treatment. In the management of severe allergic diseases using omalizumab, issues including cost and concerns about relapse after its discontinuation should be overcome. At the same time, possibilities for application to other intractable allergic diseases should be considered.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background

Patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis (AR) who are treated according to the current rhinitis management guidelines may be inadequately controlled. These patients are at risk of serious comorbidities, such as asthma and chronic sinusitis. These symptoms, sneezing and an itchy, runny, stuffy nose, may have a negative impact on patients’ daily functioning. Omalizumab is being developed as a new choice for the treatment of AR. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases for randomized controlled studies on the treatment of AR with omalizumab. Our evaluation outcomes were symptom scores, medication efficacy, combined symptom and medication scores, and adverse events. We descriptively summarized and quantitatively synthesized original data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR by using Stata12.0 software for meta-analyses.

Results

The results of our meta-analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences between the omalizumab group and the control group in the following aspects: daily nasal symptom score (standardized mean difference [SMD] = –0.443, 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.538 to –0.347, P < .001); daily ocular symptom score (SMD = –0.385, 95% CI: –0.5 to –0.269, P < .001); daily nasal medication symptom scores (SMD = –0.421, 95% CI: –0.591 to –0.251, P < .001); proportion of days of emergency drug use (risk ratio [RR] = 0.488, 95% CI: 0.307 to 0.788, P < .005); rhinoconjunctivitis-specific quality of life questionnaire (SMD = –0.286, 95% CI: –0.418 to –0.154, P < .001); and overall evaluation (RR = 1.435, 95% CI: 1.303–1.582, P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in safety indicator: adverse events (RR = 1.026, 95% CI: 0.916–1.150, P = .655).

Conclusion

Omalizumab is effective and relatively safe in patients with AR; omalizumab used in conjunction with special immunotherapy has shown promising results, especially in reducing adverse events.

Biological therapy-associated adverse reactions in asthma: analysis of reporting to the Portuguese pharmacovigilance system

Objectives: Biological drugs have been successfully tested in asthma, especially in the most severe forms of the disease. The goal of this study was to characterize the safety profile of biologicals used in asthma.Methods: Retrospective and descriptive analysis of spontaneous reports (SRs) involving omalizumab and mepolizumab, sent to the Portuguese Pharmacovigilance System, since market launch until October 2018.Results: A total of 127 SRs for omalizumab and 10 SRs mepolizumab were found. Most patients were female (75.6% omalizumab and 90.0% mepolizumab), and aged 18-64 years (61.4% and 50.0%, respectively). 71.7% of the reports for omalizumab were serious, with 2 cases of anaphylaxis, 12 malignant neoplasms and 2 abortions. Only 20.0% of the reports for mepolizumab were considered serious. A total of 391 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for omalizumab and 20 ADRs for mepolizumab were found. Most reported ADRs belonged to System organ class (SOC) groups: 'respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders' and 'investigations', for omalizumab; 'musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders' and 'general disorders and administration site conditions' for mepolizumab.Conclusion: Over the years, there was an increasing trend of SRs with these biological drugs. However, it is necessary to continue to develop educational programs in order to get a better reporting system.

A drug safety review of treating eosinophilic asthma with monoclonal antibodies

Introduction: The last two decades have seen significant progress in the treatment of severe asthma especially the severe eosinophilic phenotype. This review article serves to update the reader on the known safety profiles of these medications. It does not serve as a review of their clinical efficacies.Areas covered: All four of the currently approved monoclonal antibodies (biologics) used in the treatment of severe asthma are discussed with reference to the known safety data garnered from clinical trials and real world evidence. A fifth, approved by The European Commission and FDA, but not yet by NICE or Health Canada, is also discussed.Expert opinion: For each of the five biologics the authors shall summarize the known safety profiles and also the potential adverse effects as their usage is extended long term with suggestions for real world studies to help us develop our knowledge base.

Omalizumab Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Asthma in the US Medicare Population

BACKGROUND

Asthma in older adults is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality; similarly, asthma can be severe enough among younger adults to warrant disability benefits. Reasons for poor outcomes in both groups of patients may include discontinuation and lack of adherence to controller therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To examine characteristics and treatment patterns of US Medicare patients initiating omalizumab for asthma, and factors associated with its discontinuation and adherence.

METHODS

A retrospective claims database analysis of Medicare beneficiaries with asthma initiating omalizumab treatment was carried out. The primary outcomes were omalizumab discontinuation (gap in use ≥90 days) and adherence (proportion of days covered ≥0.8) over a 12-month follow-up. Multivariable regressions were used to examine factors associated with omalizumab discontinuation and adherence.

RESULTS

Of the 3058 Medicare patients initiating omalizumab for asthma (mean age, 62.7 years), 36.9% discontinued omalizumab and 60.6% were adherent. Discontinuation rates were 32.7% and 42.8%, and adherence rates were 65.4% and 53.9%, for disabled and older Medicare patients, respectively. Patients aged 65 to 69 years and 70 to 74 years had significantly lower odds of discontinuation (odds ratios [95% CI], 0.66 [0.46-0.93] and 0.62 [0.43-0.89], respectively) and higher odds of adherence than did patients aged 80 years or older. Compared with patients receiving low-income subsidy, patients not receiving low-income subsidy had lower odds of discontinuation (0.66 [0.52-0.83]) and higher odds of adherence (1.52 [1.20-1.93]). Greater numbers of preindex evaluation and management physician visits and comorbid rhinitis were associated with lower odds of discontinuation and higher odds of adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 60% of Medicare patients with asthma continued and were adherent to omalizumab over a 12-month follow-up. Patient age, low-income subsidy status, and the numbers of evaluation and management physician visits were among factors associated with treatment adherence and discontinuation.

A case of chronic eosinophilic pneumonia in a patient treated with dupilumab

The increasing knowledge on inflammatory pathways has driven the development of targeted biological therapies for severe refractory asthma. Among the recently developed biologics, the fully human monoclonal antibody dupilumab is an interesting therapeutic option, given its ability to inhibit the biological effects of both IL-4 and IL-13. We describe the case of a male, Caucasian, 56-year-old patient with allergic and eosinophilic severe asthma. Given the poor asthma control, he started treatment with add-on dupilumab, and after the tenth injection, he presented with a fever and bilateral pulmonary thickening. A significant increase in blood eosinophilia was also reported. The patient underwent a fiberoptic bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB/TBB). BAL revealed eosinophils alveolitis (60%) while TBB showed findings compatible with chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP). After prolonged treatment with oral corticosteroids, the clinical picture improved with resolution of CEP. Since the beginning of dupilumab treatment, simultaneously to a great improvement in asthma control, the patient showed a progressive increase in blood eosinophils count and subsequent onset of clinical-radiological pattern suggestive of CEP. Based on published data, dupilumab may have induced an alteration of the complex immunological pathway of our patient. This pathway is affected by both allergic and eosinophilic asthmatic endotypes, and consequently, the concomitant action of allergenic stimuli and eosinophils may have caused the appearance of eosinophilic pneumonia. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of CEP as a possible severe side effect of dupilumab administration.

Self-reported satisfaction of patients receiving omalizumab for severe allergic asthma in Malta

Treatment satisfaction is of utmost importance for ensuring adherence. Omalizumab is administered long-term if effective and well-tolerated in a hospital setting. The aim was to evaluate treatment satisfaction with omalizumab in Malta and to identify factors that may influence patients' satisfaction. A questionnaire was distributed to all asthmatic adult patients receiving omalizumab for at least one year. The questionnaire included demographic data, dosing regimen, asthma control test and the 14-item English version of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) Version 1.4. The TSQM 1.4 domain scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores represent higher satisfaction. Our cohort included 33 patients (52% males), mean age 53.7 ± 11 years, mean baseline IgE level 510.6IU/ml, mean duration of treatment 3.8 ± 1.98 years and mean number of injections per month 4.6 ± 2.6. Median TSQM scores were as follows: graded effectiveness 78%, graded side effects 100%, graded convenience 74.2% and overall satisfaction 76%. Regression analysis showed that convenience score, effectiveness score and ACT score were significantly associated with global satisfaction. Global satisfaction scored high among the Maltese cohort of patients despite the inconvenience and side effects associated with receiving omalizumab. This is an add-on beneficial effect to the efficacy and effectiveness already been achieved with this medication.

A retrospective cohort study evaluating healthcare resource utilization in patients with asthma in Japan

Although the global economic burden of asthma is well described, detailed data regarding Asia, particularly for Japan, are relatively scarce. This retrospective study aims to fill this evidence gap by evaluating asthma-associated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and economic burden in Japanese patients aged ≥16 years, identified using anonymized patient data from the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) database from April 2009 to March 2015. Asthma severity was classified according to asthma treatment guidelines from the Japanese Society of Allergology. HCRU was calculated based on hospitalizations, emergency room visits, outpatient visits, and prescriptions. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for HCRU and per-patient-per-year direct costs were reported. In addition, differences across HCRU and cost variables for severe versus non-severe asthma patients were also compared. Of 541,434 asthma cases identified from the JMDC database during the study period, 54,433 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. HCRU and costs were heavily concentrated within severe asthma, a subgroup comprising 12.7% of total study population. Moreover, patients with severe asthma had significantly higher all-cause hospitalizations, outpatient visits, outpatient prescriptions (IRR [95% CI], 1.60 [1.46–1.76]; 1.43 [1.41–1.45]; 1.24 [1.22–1.25], respectively), and total medical costs (mean ± SD costs, US$ 4345 ± 11,104 versus US$ 1528 ± 3989, P < 0.001 (t-test); US$ 1 = 110 JPY) compared with those with non-severe asthma. The burden of asthma is significantly and disproportionately concentrated in Japanese severe asthma patients, suggesting clinical failure to achieve adequate disease control. This study highlights the unmet needs for severe asthma in Japan and provides a catalyst for important dialogues in advancing public health.