Benralizumab for patients with mild to moderate, persistent asthma (BISE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Efficacy of different biologics for treating chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is a debate around the use of biological agents in the treatment of chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps. Therefore, this study's purpose was to assess the effectiveness of various biologics in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

METHODS

A systematic and manual search was conducted for all relevant studies from inception to December 20, 2023. Two independent authors carried out the search, screening, assessment, and data extraction. Network meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 14 software.

RESULTS

Our analysis includes a comprehensive set of 19 studies. These studies compared the efficacy of four distinct biologic treatments. The results of reticulated Meta-analysis showed that Dupilumab (MD = - 1.85, 95% CI: - 2.47, - 1.24), Omalizumab (MD = - 1.30, 95% CI: - 1.90, - 0.70), Benralizumab (MD = - 0.84, 95% CI: - 1.66, - 0.03) and Mepolizumab (MD = - 1.48, 95% CI: - 2.22, - 0.74) were superior to placebo from the nasal polyp score(NPS), Dupilumab (MD = - 12.56, 95% CI: - 22.49,- 2.63) was superior to placebo from the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22(SNOT-22)score, and Dupilumab (MD = - 0.84, 95% CI: - 1.08, - 0.59) and Omalizumab (RR = - 0.51, 95% CI: - 0.83, - 0.19) were superior to placebo from the nasal congestion severity(NCS). In terms of cumulative sorting under the surface of the curve (SUCRA) values, Dupilumab was the best performer in the NPS (0.92), SNOT-22 score (0.70), and NCS (0.93); Four different biologics outperformed placebo in the NPS, SNOT-22 score, and NCS.

CONCLUSION

In patients with CRSwNP, based on the efficacy (NPS, (SNOT-22) score, NCS) and, dupilumab is the most efficacious for CRSwNP.

Biologics in T2 Severe Asthma: Unveiling Different Effectiveness by Real-World Indirect Comparison

Background: Indirect comparison among biologics in severe asthma (SA) is a challenging but desirable goal for clinicians in real life. The aim of the study is to define characteristics of a biologic-treated T2-driven-SA population and to evaluate the effectiveness of biologic treatments in a real-world setting by variation in intra/inter-biologic parameters in an up to 4-year follow-up. Methods: Demographic, clinical, functional, and biological characteristics were evaluated retrospectively in 104 patients recruited until July 2022 at baseline (T0) and over a maximum of 4 years (T4) of biologic therapy (omalizumab/OmaG = 41, from T0 to T4, mepolizumab/MepoG = 26, from T0 to T4, benralizumab/BenraG = 18, from T0 to T2, and dupilumab/DupiG = 19, from T0 to T1). Variations of parameters using means of paired Delta were assessed. Results: At baseline, patients had high prevalence of T2-driven comorbidities, low asthma control test (ACT mean 17.65 ± 4.41), impaired pulmonary function (FEV1 65 ± 18 %pred), frequent exacerbations/year (AEs 3.5 ± 3), and OCS dependence (60%). DupiG had lower T2 biomarkers/comorbidities and AEs, and worse FEV1 (57 ± 19 %pred) compared to other biologics (p < 0.05). All biologics improved ACT, FEV1%, FVC%, AEs rate, and OCS use. FEV1% improved in MepoG and BenraG over the minimal clinically important difference and was sustained over 4 years in OmaG and MepoG. A significant RV reduction in OmaG (T4) and DupiG (T1), and BenraG normalization (T2) of airflow limitation were found. We observed through inter-biologic parameters pair delta variation comparison a significant nocturnal awakenings reduction in BenraG vs. OmaG/MepoG, and neutrophils reduction in BenraG/DupiG vs. OmaG. Conclusions: Indirect comparison among biologics unveils clinical and functional improvements that may mark a different effectiveness. These results may highlight the preference of a single biologic compared to another with regard to specific treatable traits.

Anti-IL-5 Pathway Agents in Eosinophilic-Associated Disorders Across the Lifespan

Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-5 pathways have revolutionized the treatment expectations for eosinophilic-associated conditions, particularly in patients with respiratory involvement. Mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody), benralizumab (IL-5 receptor blocker monoclonal antibody), and reslizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody) have collectively contributed to the overall improvement of the disease burden in various conditions. Eosinophilic asthma currently boasts the most robust evidence across all age groups: all three biologics are approved for adults (aged ≥18 years); mepolizumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also in children (aged ≥ 6 years), while bernalizumab was recently approved by the FDA for patients aged ≥6 years in the USA. In chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, subcutaneous mepolizumab is the only anti-IL-5 therapy approved so far and can be used in adult patients (aged ≥18 years). For eosinophilic esophagitis, conflicting evidence surrounds both mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, leading to non-approval of these agents by the FDA/EMA. Recently, mepolizumab was approved for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients aged ≥6 years or older and for hypereosinophilic syndrome adult patients. A phase III trial proving noninferiority of benralizumab versus mepolizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been recently published, while evidence on reslizumab is scant. Overall, current evidence on anti-IL-5 biologics for eosinophilic-associated disorders is mostly focused on adults, whereas data for individuals aged under 18 years and over 65 years are scarce, resulting in a lack of evidence, particularly regarding efficacy, for the use of anti-IL-5 agents in these specific patient populations. This review addresses high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and real-world post-marketing studies regarding the use of anti-IL-5 therapies for eosinophilic-associated disorders across all age groups, spanning childhood, adulthood, and older age.

Safety of Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma: An Analysis of Suspected Adverse Reactions Reported in the WHO Pharmacovigilance Database

BACKGROUND

The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database.

METHODS

We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3).

RESULTS

Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.

Eosinophilic Asthma: Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Horizons

Asthma is a prevalent chronic non-communicable disease, affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. It is characterized by significant airway inflammation, hyperresponsiveness, obstruction, and remodeling. Eosinophilic asthma, a subtype of asthma, involves the accumulation of eosinophils in the airways. These eosinophils release mediators and cytokines, contributing to severe airway inflammation and tissue damage. Emerging evidence suggests that targeting eosinophils could reduce airway remodeling and slow the progression of asthma. To achieve this, it is essential to understand the immunopathology of asthma, identify specific eosinophil-associated biomarkers, and categorize patients more accurately based on the clinical characteristics (phenotypes) and underlying pathobiological mechanisms (endotypes). This review delves into the role of eosinophils in exacerbating severe asthma, exploring various phenotypes and endotypes, as well as biomarkers. It also examines the current and emerging biological agents that target eosinophils in eosinophilic asthma. By focusing on these aspects, both researchers and clinicians can advance the development of targeted therapies to combat eosinophilic pathology in severe asthma.

Adverse events of anti-IL-5 drugs in patients with eosinophilic asthma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and real-world evidence-based assessments

BACKGROUND

We aimed to clarify comprehensively the safety profiles of anti-IL-5 drugs and pinpoint potential safety concerns that may arise in their post-marketing phase.

METHODS

Two researchers conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2022. Additionally, we investigated the FDA AE Reporting System for post-marketing adverse event (AE) reports related to anti-IL-5 drugs. The outcomes fulfilled the proportional reporting rate criteria and the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network.

RESULTS

We included 24 published studies in our analysis. The anti-IL-5 treatment group showed an incidence of AEs comparable to the placebo group, and it exhibited a significantly lower frequency of serious AEs. Common AEs were asthma, nasopharyngitis, headache, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), and bronchitis. The post-marketing data included 28,478 case reports associated with the suspect drugs and 75 suspect safety observations affecting 16 system organ classes. New suspect observations included incomplete therapeutic product effect, URTIs, and pulmonary mass in reports related to mepolizumab. Reports associated with mepolizumab and benralizumab also indicated issues with incorrect technique in device usage and product issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual anti-IL-5 drugs' safety profiles largely matched their product inserts. We identified issues like improper device usage, product issue, and URTIs as potential concerns for mepolizumab and benralizumab. Additionally, all anti-IL-5 drugs showed signs of incomplete therapeutic effects.

Moderate asthma: burden, mechanisms and therapeutic perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) document provides a classification of asthma severity according with the current level of treatment required to achieve diseases control and underlines the limitations of this approach. In this review, we will provide an overview of recent investigations that have analyzed clinical and molecular features of moderate asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Moderate asthma is heterogeneous in terms of response to inhaled treatment and pathogenetic mechanisms underlying the clinical features. Analysis of inflammatory pathways in patients who do not achieve disease remission allows identification of patient subgroups that may benefit from specific biological treatments.

SUMMARY

Scientific progress makes increasingly clear that there are biological mechanisms capable of identifying and justifying the degree of severity of asthma. The identification of these, combined with the development of new pharmacological treatments, will be the cornerstones of improving the management of asthma in its degrees of severity.

Exploring the risk of infection events in patients with asthma receiving anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies: A rapid systematic review and a meta-analysis

Introduction

Benralizumab, mepolizumab, and reslizumab are novel monoclonal antibodies approved for asthma, targeting eosinophilic inflammation. Benralizumab is directed against IL-5 receptor (IL-5R), while mepolizumab and reslizumab are directed against IL-5. The three drugs cause a reduction in eosinophils, but benralizumab also causes a cytotoxic effect on eosinophils and basophils. Recently, it has been reported that suboptimal responders to benralizumab presented exacerbations associated with concomitant infections and sputum neutrophilia and the incidence of infections was greater in patients receiving benralizumab compared to mepolizumab and reslizumab. For this reason, we wanted to explore potential differences in terms of infectious adverse events between the three different anti-IL-5 antibodies.

Methods

We performed a rapid systematic review on PubMed up to April 28, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating benralizumab, mepolizumab, or reslizumab in patients with asthma. Included outcomes were the reporting of any respiratory tract infection and any emergency department (ED) or hospital admission for infection or asthma exacerbation. A Mantel-Haenszel meta-analysis was performed with Cochrane RevMan 5.4 to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). A subgroup analysis for the different active treatments was performed.

Results

From 163 references we included 21 studies reporting the results of 23 different RCTs for a total population of 9156 patients. All studies compared anti-IL-5 antibodies against placebo. Anti-IL-5 treatment resulted in non-significant differences compared to placebo in the odds for nasopharyngitis (OR = 0.90; 95 % CI from 0.76 to 1.07), pharyngitis (OR = 1.45; 95 % CI from 0.92 to 2.28), upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) (OR = 0.97; 95 % CI from 0.82 to 1.15), rhinitis (OR = 1.01; 95 % CI from 0.71 to 1.44), pneumonia (OR = 0.56; 95 % CI from 0.10 to 2.01), and influenza (OR = 0.84; 95 % CI from 0.65 to 1.09). We observed significant reductions in the reporting of sinusitis (OR = 0.75; 95 % CI from 0.53 to 1.06), bronchitis (OR = 0.71; 95 % CI from 0.59 to 0.86), and ED or hospital admission due to asthma exacerbation for overall anti-IL-5 antibodies compared to placebo (OR = 0.59; 95 % CI from 0.40 to 0.88). We were not able to discriminate whether exacerbations were associated with infections or to increased sputum eosinophilia. From the subgroup analysis, we observed differences in directions and magnitudes of the effect size in the reporting of some events. Benralizumab was associated with increased odds of pharyngitis (OR = 1.56; 95 % CI from 0.97 to 2.52) and a similar trend was observed for mepolizumab in the reporting of rhinitis (OR = 1.85; 95 % CI from 0.72 to 4.78), both non-statistically significant. In terms of effect size, benralizumab also showed higher odds for bronchitis and pneumonia in comparison to mepolizumab and reslizumab (OR = 0.76, OR = 0.69, and OR = 0.60 for bronchitis and OR = 0.80, OR = 0.20, and OR = 0.45, respectively, all non-significant).

Conclusion

Anti-IL-5 treatments might have different effects on the reporting of some infection events in patients with asthma. However, the evidence is limited by sample size and far than conclusive and suggest the need of future studies to evaluate the risk of infections in patients with asthma receiving anti-IL-5 treatments.

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.

The Effects of Benralizumab on Lung Volumes and Airway Resistance in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Add-on biological monoclonal antibodies such as benralizumab (anti-IL-5Ra) are recommended by international guidelines to reduce exacerbations in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). However, few studies have assessed the impact of these therapies on lung function-related outcomes. Our goal was to evaluate the effectiveness of benralizumab on lung function, including lung volumes and airway resistance, in SEA patients in Portugal.

METHODS

This was a real-world, observational, prospective, multicentric study including adult patients diagnosed with SEA (January-June 2023). Spirometry and plethysmography were performed at baseline (T0) and after six months of treatment (T6) with benralizumab to assess: total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), mean forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (mFEF-25/75), intrathoracic gas volume (ITGV), and respiratory airway resistance (Raw). Descriptive statistics (with categorical variables described as frequencies and continuous values as mean and standard deviation (SD)) and paired t-test and Cohen's d effect size were calculated (analyses performed in StataCorp v.15.1; StataCorp LLC, TX, USA).

RESULTS

Overall, 30 SEA patients were evaluated, mostly women (n=18, 60.0%), with atopy (n=22, 73.3%), a mean age of 58.4 years (SD 11.7), and assisted by pulmonology (n=19, 63.3%) or immunology-allergology (n=11, 36.7%) services. Mean eosinophilia at baseline was 1103.57 cells/mcL (SD 604.88; minimum-maximum 460-2400); after the use of benralizumab, the count dropped to zero. After six months of treatment, a significant increase (p<0.0001) in FVC (15.3%), FEV1 (22.6%), and mFEF-25/75 (17.7%) were observed from baseline (Cohen's d between 0.78 and 1.11). ITGV, RV, RV/TLC, and Raw significantly decreased (p<0.0001) during the study period (-17.3%, -29.7%, -8.9%, and -100.6%, respectively) (Cohen's d between -0.79 and -1.06). No differences in TLC were obtained (p=0.173). No differences between sexes were observed for any measure. Patients with more significant eosinophilia (>900 cells/mcL count; n=15) presented better responses in FEV1 (p=0.001) and mFEF-25/75 (p=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

A notable eosinophil depletion with add-on benralizumab led to significant improvements in SEA patients' respiratory function (static lung volumes and airway resistance) in real-world settings after six months. The significant deflating effect of benralizumab on patients' hyperinflated lungs led to enhanced expiratory flow (increased FEV1 and mFEF-25/75) and air trapping (decreased RV/TLC), suggesting this antibody improves bronchial obstruction, lung hyperinflation, and airway resistance. Further studies in a larger population are required to confirm these findings.

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

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

Pathobiology of Type 2 Inflammation in Asthma and Nasal Polyposis

Asthma and nasal polyposis often coexist and are frequently intertwined by tight pathogenic links, mainly consisting of the cellular and molecular pathways underpinning type 2 airway inflammation. The latter is characterized by a structural and functional impairment of the epithelial barrier, associated with the eosinophilic infiltration of both the lower and upper airways, which can be driven by either allergic or non-allergic mechanisms. Type 2 inflammatory changes are predominantly due to the biological actions exerted by interleukins 4 (IL-4), 13 (IL-13), and 5 (IL-5), produced by T helper 2 (Th2) lymphocytes and group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2). In addition to the above cytokines, other proinflammatory mediators involved in the pathobiology of asthma and nasal polyposis include prostaglandin D₂ and cysteinyl leukotrienes. Within this context of 'united airway diseases', nasal polyposis encompasses several nosological entities such as chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). Because of the common pathogenic origins of asthma and nasal polyposis, it is not surprising that the more severe forms of both these disorders can be successfully treated by the same biologic drugs, targeting many molecular components (IgE, IL-5 and its receptor, IL-4/IL-13 receptors) of the type 2 inflammatory trait.

Incidence of Anti-Drug Antibodies to Monoclonal Antibodies in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Antidrug antibodies (ADAs) may worsen the efficacy and safety of biologics. However, little is known about the incidence of ADAs associated with the 6 biologics approved for the treatment of asthma in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the incidence of ADAs and their impact on reported clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, open-label extension studies, and nonrandomized studies of biologics in patients with asthma indexed in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL between January 1, 2000, and July 9, 2022, were carried out. The primary outcomes were treatment-emergent ADAs (incidence) and ADA prevalence.

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies met the eligibility criteria. ADA incidence over follow-up was 2.91% (95% CI, 1.60-4.55) and was highest in the benralizumab studies (8.35%), with a risk ratio of 4.9 (2.69-8.92) when compared with placebo, and lowest in the omalizumab studies (0.00%). Incidence was 7.61% in the dupilumab studies, 4.39% in reslizumab, 3.63% in mepolizumab, and 1.12% in the tezepelumab studies. Incidence of neutralizing antibodies was 0.00% to 10.74% and was highest for benralizumab (7.12%). Incidence of neutralizing antibodies was higher in the benralizumab every 8 weeks (8.17%) versus every 4 weeks arms (5.81%). Results were consistent in subgroup analyses by study type and length of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 2.9% of individuals in the included studies developed ADAs over study follow-up period. The incidence was highest in the benralizumab group and lowest in the omalizumab group. The subcutaneous route and longer dosing intervals were associated with higher ADA development.

Recent developments in the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the type 2 cytokines for severe asthma treatment

Severe or refractory asthma is seen in approximately 5% of asthmatic subjects who have unsatisfactory symptom control despite adherence to high-dose inhaled glucocorticoid therapies resulting in significant morbidity, reduced quality of life with attendant implications for healthcare costs. Marked heterogeneity in symptoms and at the molecular phenotypic level are hallmarks of asthma resulting in the requirement of specifically targeted treatments to block the key pathways of the disease. Monoclonal antibody (mAb)-based biologics targeted at inhibition of the type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13 have become established as effective treatments for severe asthma, with significant clinical benefit seen in carefully selected patient populations that take asthma phenotypes and endotypes into account. The further development of reproducible and straightforward discriminatory biomarkers may aid identification of those patients most likely to benefit from treatment with these interventions.

The clinical efficacy of type 2 monoclonal antibodies in eosinophil-associated chronic airway diseases: a meta-analysis

Background

Anti-type 2 inflammation therapy has been proposed as a treatment strategy for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders that could reduce exacerbations and improve lung function. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of type 2 monoclonal antibodies (anti-T2s) for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 21 August 2022. Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of anti-T2s versus placebo in the treatment of chronic airway diseases were selected. The outcomes were exacerbation rate and change in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from baseline. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 1.0 was used to evaluate the risk of bias, and the random-effects or fixed-effect model were used to pool the data.

Results

Thirty-eight articles concerning forty-one randomized clinical trials with 17,115 patients were included. Compared with placebo, anti-T2s therapy yielded a significant reduction in exacerbation rate in COPD and asthma (Rate Ratio (RR)=0.89, 95%CI, 0.83-0.95, I2 = 29.4%; RR= 0.59, 95%CI, 0.52-0.68, I2 = 83.9%, respectively) and improvement in FEV1 in asthma (Standard Mean Difference (SMD)=0.09, 95%CI, 0.08-0.11, I2 = 42.6%). Anti-T2s therapy had no effect on FEV1 improvement in COPD (SMD=0.05, 95%CI, -0.01-0.10, I2 = 69.8%).

Conclusion

Despite inconsistent findings across trials, anti-T2s had a positive overall impact on patients' exacerbation rate in asthma and COPD and FEV1 in asthma. Anti-T2s may be effective in treating chronic airway illnesses related to eosinophils.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022362280.

Subsets of Eosinophils in Asthma, a Challenge for Precise Treatment

The existence of eosinophils was documented histopathologically in the first half of the 19th century. However, the term “eosinophils” was first used by Paul Ehrlich in 1878. Since their discovery and description, their existence has been associated with asthma, allergies, and antihelminthic immunity. Eosinophils may also be responsible for various possible tissue pathologies in many eosinophil-associated diseases. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the understanding of the nature of this cell population has undergone a fundamental reassessment, and in 2010, J. J. Lee proposed the concept of “LIAR” (Local Immunity And/or Remodeling/Repair), underlining the extensive immunoregulatory functions of eosinophils in the context of health and disease. It soon became apparent that mature eosinophils (in line with previous morphological studies) are not structurally, functionally, or immunologically homogeneous cell populations. On the contrary, these cells form subtypes characterized by their further development, immunophenotype, sensitivity to growth factors, localization, role and fate in tissues, and contribution to the pathogenesis of various diseases, including asthma. The eosinophil subsets were recently characterized as resident (rEos) and inflammatory (iEos) eosinophils. During the last 20 years, the biological therapy of eosinophil diseases, including asthma, has been significantly revolutionized. Treatment management has been improved through the enhancement of treatment effectiveness and a decrease in the adverse events associated with the formerly ultimately used systemic corticosteroids. However, as we observed from real-life data, the global treatment efficacy is still far from optimal. A fundamental condition, “sine qua non”, for correct treatment management is a thorough evaluation of the inflammatory phenotype of the disease. We believe that a better understanding of eosinophils would lead to more precise diagnostics and classification of asthma subtypes, which could further improve treatment outcomes. The currently validated asthma biomarkers (eosinophil count, production of NO in exhaled breath, and IgE synthesis) are insufficient to unveil super-responders among all severe asthma patients and thus give only a blurred picture of the adepts for treatment. We propose an emerging approach consisting of a more precise characterization of pathogenic eosinophils in terms of the definition of their functional status or subset affiliation by flow cytometry. We believe that the effort to find new eosinophil-associated biomarkers and their rational use in treatment algorithms may ameliorate the response rate to biological therapy in patients with severe asthma.

Living without eosinophils: evidence from mouse and man

The enduring view of eosinophils, as immune effector cells whose primary function is host defence against infection by helminths and other microbial pathogens, sets the stage for a fundamental question regarding the safety of therapeutic eosinophil depletion. If eosinophils are significantly reduced or altogether depleted in an effort to alleviate the negative effects of tissue eosinophilia and eosinophilic inflammation in conditions such as asthma, COPD, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and hypereosinophilic syndrome, would these patients become susceptible to infection or another illness? Development of mouse models in which the eosinophil lineage has been ablated, observations in patients naturally lacking eosinophils and data from studies of eosinophil-depleting medical therapies indicate that the absence of eosinophils is not detrimental to health. The evidence available to date, as presented in this review, supports the conclusion that even if certain homeostatic roles for the eosinophil may be demonstrable in controlled animal models and human in vitro settings, the evolution of the human species appears to have provided sufficient immune redundancy such that one may be hale and hearty without eosinophils.

The Role of Staphylococcus aureus and Its Toxins in the Pathogenesis of Allergic Asthma

Bronchial asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases worldwide and affects more than 300 million patients. Allergic asthma affects the majority of asthmatic children as well as approximately 50% of adult asthmatics. It is characterized by a Th2-mediated immune response against aeroallergens. Many aspects of the overall pathophysiology are known, while the underlying mechanisms and predisposing factors remain largely elusive today. Over the last decade, respiratory colonization with Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), a Gram-positive facultative bacterial pathogen, came into focus as a risk factor for the development of atopic respiratory diseases. More than 30% of the world’s population is constantly colonized with S. aureus in their nasopharynx. This colonization is mostly asymptomatic, but in immunocompromised patients, it can lead to serious complications including pneumonia, sepsis, or even death. S. aureus is known for its ability to produce a wide range of proteins including toxins, serine-protease-like proteins, and protein A. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge about the pathophysiology of allergic asthma and to what extent it can be affected by different toxins produced by S. aureus. Intensifying this knowledge might lead to new preventive strategies for atopic respiratory diseases.

A comparison of the effectiveness of biologic therapies for asthma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Trials have not directly compared biologics for the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the relative efficacy of biologics in asthma.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to May 31, 2022 for randomized trials addressing biologic therapies for asthma. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. We present dichotomous outcomes as absolute risk differences per 1000 patients and relative risk with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

We identified 64 trials, including 26,630 patients. For patients with eosinophilic asthma, tezepelumab (329 fewer exacerbations per 1000 [95% CI, 272.6-366.6 fewer]) and dupilumab (319.6 fewer exacerbations per 1000 [95% CI, 272.6-357.2 fewer]) reduce exacerbations compared with placebo (high certainty). Tezepelumab (MD, 0.24 L [95% CI, 0.16-0.32]) and dupilumab (0.25 L [95% CI, 0.21-0.29]) improve lung function compared with placebo (high certainty). Both tezepelumab (110.97 fewer hospital admissions per 1000 [95% CI, 94.53-120.56 fewer]) and dupilumab (97.27 fewer hospitalizations [4.11-124.67 fewer]) probably reduce hospital admissions compared with placebo (moderate certainty). For patients with low eosinophils, biologics probably do not improve asthma outcomes. For these patients, tezepelumab (MD, 0.1 L [95% CI, 0-0.19]) and dupilumab (MD, 0.1 L [95% CI, 0-0.20]) may improve lung function (low certainty).

CONCLUSION

Tezepelumab and dupilumab are effective at reducing exacerbations. For patients with low eosinophils, however, clinicians should probably be more judicious in using biologics, including tezepelumab, because they probably do not confer substantial benefit.

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.

Human Lung Mast Cells: Therapeutic Implications in Asthma

Mast cells are strategically located in different compartments of the lung in asthmatic patients. These cells are widely recognized as central effectors and immunomodulators in different asthma phenotypes. Mast cell mediators activate a wide spectrum of cells of the innate and adaptive immune system during airway inflammation. Moreover, these cells modulate the activities of several structural cells (i.e., fibroblasts, airway smooth muscle cells, bronchial epithelial and goblet cells, and endothelial cells) in the human lung. These findings indicate that lung mast cells and their mediators significantly contribute to the immune induction of airway remodeling in severe asthma. Therapies targeting mast cell mediators and/or their receptors, including monoclonal antibodies targeting IgE, IL-4/IL-13, IL-5/IL-5Rα, IL-4Rα, TSLP, and IL-33, have been found safe and effective in the treatment of different phenotypes of asthma. Moreover, agonists of inhibitory receptors expressed by human mast cells (Siglec-8, Siglec-6) are under investigation for asthma treatment. Increasing evidence suggests that different approaches to depleting mast cells show promising results in severe asthma treatment. Novel treatments targeting mast cells can presumably change the course of the disease and induce drug-free remission in bronchial asthma. Here, we provide an overview of current and promising treatments for asthma that directly or indirectly target lung mast cells.

Uncontrolled severe T2 asthma: Which biological to choose? A biomarker-based approach

In recent years, advances in knowledge of molecular mechanisms involved in asthma have changed uncontrolled severe asthma (USA) treatment, with the appearance of biological treatment. USA is a heterogeneous entity with different endotypes and phenotypes. Nowadays, the biological drugs approved with asthma indication are omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. Tezepelumab is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States and, recently, by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). All these biological drugs have shown their efficacy in clinical trials, especially in reducing exacerbations, improving asthma control, quality of life, pulmonary function, and withdrawing systemic corticosteroids or at least reducing their daily dose, with some differences between them. Except for mepolizumab and reslizumab, biological drugs have different targets and thus different therapeutic indications should be expected; however, in some patients, more than one drug could be indicated, making the election more difficult. Because there are no direct comparisons between biological drugs, some biomarkers are used to choose between them, but they are not unbeatable. In this article, an algorithm to choose the first biological drug in a specific patient is proposed based on different study results and patient' characteristics.

Eosinophilic inflammation: An Appealing Target for Pharmacologic Treatments in Severe Asthma

Severe asthma is characterized by different endotypes driven by complex pathologic mechanisms. In most patients with both allergic and non-allergic asthma, predominant eosinophilic airway inflammation is present. Given the central role of eosinophilic inflammation in the pathophysiology of most cases of severe asthma and considering that severe eosinophilic asthmatic patients respond partially or poorly to corticosteroids, in recent years, research has focused on the development of targeted anti-eosinophil biological therapies; this review will focus on the unique and particular biology of the eosinophil, as well as on the current knowledge about the pathobiology of eosinophilic inflammation in asthmatic airways. Finally, current and prospective anti-eosinophil therapeutic strategies will be discussed, examining the reason why eosinophilic inflammation represents an appealing target for the pharmacological treatment of patients with severe asthma.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with benralizumab for eosinophilic asthma

Eosinophilic asthma accounts for 40% to 50% of asthmatic patients. However, 5% to 10% of patients with asthma need high-dose drug control, which is clinically referred to as severe asthma patients. Interleukin (IL)-5 plays an important role in the proliferation, maturation, and migration of eosinophils. Benralizumab, as an antagonist of the IL-5 receptor, can treat eosinophilic asthma by promoting the apoptosis of eosinophils. The implications for efficacy and/or adverse events are unclear. This article reviews the findings about benralizumab in the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma in recent years. Results indicated the effectiveness of benralizumab for the treatment of severe asthma.

Anti-IL-5 therapies for asthma

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of previously published reviews in the Cochrane Library (2015, first update 2017). Interleukin-5 (IL-5) is the main cytokine involved in the proliferation, maturation, activation and survival of eosinophils, which cause airway inflammation and are a classic feature of asthma. Studies of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 or its receptor (IL-5R) suggest they reduce asthma exacerbations, improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and lung function in appropriately selected patients, justifying their inclusion in the latest guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of therapies targeting IL-5 signalling (anti-IL-5 or anti-IL-5Rα) with placebo on exacerbations, health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measures and lung function in adults and children with chronic asthma, and specifically in those with eosinophilic asthma refractory to existing treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers, manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies. The most recent search was 7 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab versus placebo in adults and children with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a random-effects model. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen studies on about 7600 participants met the inclusion criteria. Six used mepolizumab, five used reslizumab, and six used benralizumab. One study using benralizumab was terminated early due to sponsor decision and contributed no data. The studies were predominantly on people with severe eosinophilic asthma, which was similarly but variably defined. One was in children aged 6 to 17 years; nine others included children over 12 years but did not report results by age group separately. We deemed the overall risk of bias to be low, with all studies contributing data of robust methodology. We considered the certainty of the evidence for all comparisons to be high overall using the GRADE scheme, except for intravenous (IV) mepolizumab and subcutaneous (SC) reslizumab because these are not currently licensed delivery routes. The anti-IL-5 treatments assessed reduced rates of 'clinically significant' asthma exacerbation (defined by treatment with systemic corticosteroids for three days or more) by approximately half in participants with severe eosinophilic asthma on standard care (at least medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)) with poorly controlled disease (either two or more exacerbations in the preceding year or Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score of 1.5 or more), except for reslizumab SC. The rate ratios for these effects were 0.45 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.55; high-certainty evidence) for mepolizumab SC, 0.53 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; moderate-certainty evidence) for mepolizumab IV, 0.43 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.55; high-certainty evidence) for reslizumab IV, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.66; high-certainty evidence) for benralizumab SC. Non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab also showed a significant reduction in exacerbation rates, an effect not seen with reslizumab IV, albeit in only one study. No data were available for non-eosinophilic participants treated with mepolizumab. There were improvements in validated HRQoL scores with all anti-IL-5 agents in severe eosinophilic asthma. This met the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the broader St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; 4-point change) for benralizumab only, but the improvement in the ACQ and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), which focus on asthma symptoms, fell short of the MCID (0.5 point change for both ACQ and AQLQ) for all of the interventions. The evidence for an improvement in HRQoL scores in non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab and reslizumab was weak, but the tests for subgroup difference were negative. All anti-IL-5 treatments produced small improvements in mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory flow in one second (FEV1) of between 0.08 L and 0.15 L in eosinophilic participants, which may not be sufficient to be detected by patients. There were no excess serious adverse events with any anti-IL-5 treatment; in fact, there was a reduction in such events with benralizumab, likely arising from fewer asthma-related hospital admissions. There was no difference compared to placebo in adverse events leading to discontinuation with mepolizumab or reslizumab, but significantly more discontinued benralizumab than placebo, although the absolute numbers were small (42/2026 (2.1%) benralizumab versus 11/1227 (0.9%) placebo). The implications for efficacy or adverse events are unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall this analysis supports the use of anti-IL-5 treatments as an adjunct to standard care in people with severe eosinophilic asthma and poor symptom control. These treatments roughly halve the rate of asthma exacerbations in this population. There is limited evidence for improved HRQoL scores and lung function, which may not meet clinically detectable levels. The studies did not report safety concerns for mepolizumab or reslizumab, or any excess serious adverse events with benralizumab, although there remains a question over adverse events significant enough to prompt discontinuation. Further research is needed on biomarkers for assessing treatment response, optimal duration and long-term effects of treatment, risk of relapse on withdrawal, non-eosinophilic patients, children (particularly under 12 years), comparing anti-IL-5 treatments to each other and, in patients meeting relevant eligibility criteria, to other biological (monoclonal antibody) therapies. For benralizumab, future studies should closely monitor rates of adverse events prompting discontinuation.

Novel Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma Endotypes

Severe asthma comprises several heterogeneous phenotypes, underpinned by complex pathomechanisms known as endotypes. The latter are driven by intercellular networks mediated by molecular components which can be targeted by specific monoclonal antibodies. With regard to the biological treatments of either allergic or non-allergic eosinophilic type 2 asthma, currently available antibodies are directed against immunoglobulins E (IgE), interleukin-5 (IL-5) and its receptor, the receptors of interleukins-4 (IL-4) and 13 (IL-13), as well as thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) and other alarmins. Among these therapeutic strategies, the best choice should be made according to the phenotypic/endotypic features of each patient with severe asthma, who can thus respond with significant clinical and functional improvements. Conversely, very poor options so far characterize the experimental pipelines referring to the perspective biological management of non-type 2 severe asthma, which thereby needs to be the focus of future thorough research.

Pharmacological approaches to target type 2 cytokines in asthma

Asthma is the most common chronic lung disease, affecting more than 250 million people worldwide. The heterogeneity of asthma phenotypes represents a challenge for adequate assessment and treatment of the disease. However, approximately 50% of asthma patients present with chronic type 2 inflammation initiated by alarmins, such as IL-33 and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), and driven by the T_H2 interleukins IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13. These cytokines have therefore become important therapeutic targets in asthma. Here, we discuss current knowledge on the structure and functions of these cytokines in asthma. We review preclinical and clinical data obtained with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting these cytokines or their receptors, as well as novel strategies under development, including bispecific mAbs, designed ankyrin repeat proteins (DARPins), small molecule inhibitors and vaccines targeting type 2 cytokines.

Sex Disparities in Asthma Development and Clinical Outcomes: Implications for Treatment Strategies

A gender-related disparity exists in asthma morbidity and mortality, which shifts at around puberty from a male predominance to a female predominance. This is clinically reflected in the fact that asthma that occurs in childhood (childhood-onset asthma) mainly affects boys, and that asthma that occurs in adulthood (adult-onset asthma) mainly affects women. Adult-onset asthma is often non-atopic, more severe, and associated with a poorer prognosis, thus posing a marked burden to women’s health and healthcare system. Many factors have been indicated to explain this gender-related disparity, including sociocultural and environmental factors as well as biological sex differences (genetic, pulmonary and immunological factors). It has long been suggested that sex hormones may be implicated in at least these biological sex differences. Overall, the evidence remains equivocal for the role of most sex hormones in asthma pathogenesis and clinical outcomes. Well-designed randomized clinical trials are required assessing the potential preventive or therapeutic effects of hormonal contraceptives on asthma in women, thereby helping to advance the evidence to inform future practice guidelines. The mechanisms underlying the role of sex hormones in asthma are complex, and our understanding is not yet complete. Additional mechanistic studies elucidating sex hormone signaling pathways and their interactions involved in the pathogenesis and clinical manifestations of asthma will help to identify potential sex hormone-driven asthma endotypes and novel therapeutic targets, providing the basis for a more personalized asthma management strategy.

Biologics in Asthma: A Molecular Perspective to Precision Medicine

Recent developments in therapeutic strategies have provided alternatives to corticosteroids as the cornerstone treatment for managing airway inflammation in asthma. The past two decades have witnessed a tremendous boost in the development of anti-cytokine monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies for the management of severe asthma. Novel biologics that target eosinophilic inflammation (or type 2, T2 inflammation) have been the most successful at treating asthma symptoms, though there are a few in the drug development pipeline for treating non-eosinophilic or T2-low asthma. There has been significant improvement in clinical outcomes for asthmatics treated with currently available monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E, anti-interleukin (IL)-4 receptor α subunit, anti-IL-5, anti-IL-5Rα, anti-IL-6, anti-IL-33, and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP). Despite these initiatives in precision medicine for asthma therapy, a significant disease burden remains, as evident from modest reduction of exacerbation rates, i.e., approximately 40-60%. There are numerous studies that highlight predictors of good responses to these biologics, but few have focused on those who fail to respond adequately despite targeted treatment. Phenotyping asthmatics based on blood eosinophils is proving to be inadequate for choosing the right drug for the right patient. It is therefore pertinent to understand the underlying immunology, and perhaps, carry out immune endotyping of patients before prescribing appropriate drugs. This review summarizes the immunology of asthma, the cytokines or receptors currently targeted, the possible mechanisms of sub-optimal responses, and the importance of determining the immune make-up of individual patients prior to prescribing mAb therapy, in the age of precision medicine for asthma.

Gender bias in clinical trials of biological agents for severe asthma: A systematic review

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases characterized by sex disparities. Gender bias is a well-documented issue detected in the design of published clinical trials (CTs). International guidelines encourage researchers to analyze clinical data by sex, gender, or both where appropriate. The objective of this work was to evaluate gender bias in the published CTs of biological agents for the treatment of severe asthma. A systematic review of randomized controlled CTs of the biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab, reslizumab, mepolizumab or dupilumab) for the treatment of severe asthma was conducted. The literature search was performed using PubMed and EMBASE without language restrictions. This study followed the corresponding international recommendations. We identified a total of 426 articles, of which 37 were finally included. Women represented 60.4% of patients included. The mean percentage of women in these trials was 59.9%, ranged from 40.8% to 76.7%. The separate analysis by sex of the main variable was only performed in 5 of the 37 publications included, and none of the trials analyzed secondary variables by sex. Only 1 of the articles discussed the results separately by sex. No study included the concept of gender in the text or analyzed the results separately by gender. The proportion of women included in CTs was higher compared to publications of other disciplines, where women were under-represented. The analysis of the main and secondary variables by sex or gender, even the discussion separately by sex, was insufficient. This gives rise to potential gender bias in these CTs.

Diagnosis and Management of T2-High Asthma

Type 2 (T2) inflammation plays a key role in the pathogenesis of asthma. IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, along with other inflammatory mediators, lead to increased cellular eosinophilic inflammation. It is likely that around half of all patients with asthma have evidence of T2-high inflammation. Sputum and blood eosinophils, exhaled nitric oxide, blood IgE levels, and airway gene expression markers are frequently used biomarkers of T2-high asthma. Individuals with T2-high asthma tend to have several features of increased asthma severity, including reduced lung function and increased rates of asthma exacerbations, and T2-high patients demonstrate distinct pathologic features including increased airway remodeling and alterations in airway mucus production. Several monoclonal antibodies are now available to treat individuals with T2-high asthma and these medications significantly reduce asthma exacerbation rates.

Lessons learned from targeting eosinophils in human disease

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

Regulation of Eosinophilia in Asthma-New Therapeutic Approaches for Asthma Treatment

Asthma is a complex and chronic inflammatory disease of the airways, characterized by variable and recurring symptoms, reversible airflow obstruction, bronchospasm, and airway eosinophilia. As the pathophysiology of asthma is becoming clearer, the identification of new valuable drug targets is emerging. IL-5 is one of these such targets because it is the major cytokine supporting eosinophilia and is responsible for terminal differentiation of human eosinophils, regulating eosinophil proliferation, differentiation, maturation, migration, and prevention of cellular apoptosis. Blockade of the IL-5 pathway has been shown to be efficacious for the treatment of eosinophilic asthma. However, several other inflammatory pathways have been shown to support eosinophilia, including IL-13, the alarmin cytokines TSLP and IL-33, and the IL-3/5/GM-CSF axis. These and other alternate pathways leading to airway eosinophilia will be described, and the efficacy of therapeutics that have been developed to block these pathways will be evaluated.

Eosinophilic asthma and the role of monoclonal antibodies

ABSTRACT

Eosinophilic asthma presents with continuous airway inflammation resistant to inhaled corticosteroids but responsive to oral glucocorticoids and monoclonal antibodies. Diagnostic criteria include significantly elevated blood or sputum eosinophils and/or fractional exhaled nitric oxide. Five monoclonal antibodies are used for treatment, with accurate diagnosis and early intervention essential to better outcomes.

Therapeutic Effects of Benralizumab Assessed in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: Real-Life Evaluation Correlated with Allergic and Non-Allergic Phenotype Expression

BACKGROUND

Benralizumab can be utilized as add-on biological treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. However, so far only a few real-life studies have been published with regard to the use of this anti-IL-5 receptor humanized monoclonal antibody.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this multicenter observational investigation has been to assess the therapeutic effects of benralizumab in patients with severe uncontrolled, corticosteroid refractory eosinophilic asthma. The secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of benralizumab with regard to positive or negative skin prick test (SPT).

METHODS

Clinical, functional, and laboratory parameters were evaluated in order to verify the therapeutic actions of benralizumab in atopic and non atopic subjects with difficult-to-treat eosinophilic asthma. Moreover, a comparative evaluation was carried out in relation to the presence or absence of SPT positivity.

RESULTS

After 6 months of add-on biological therapy with benralizumab, our 111 patients experienced a marked improvement of their severe eosinophilic asthma, expressed by significant changes in asthma exacerbation rate, prednisone intake, daily use of short-acting β2-adrenergic agonists (SABA), asthma control test (ACT) score, asthma quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) score (56 patients), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), blood eosinophil count, blood basophil count (59 patients), and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels (39 patients). In addition, significantly more effective outcomes were detected in patients with positive SPT, when compared to subjects with negative SPT, only in regard to asthma exacerbation number, ACT score, and daily SABA utilization. No significant correlation was found between serum IgE concentrations and each of all measured parameters.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Taken together, the results of this real-world study indicate that in both allergic and non-allergic subjects benralizumab can be used as a valuable pharmacotherapeutic option for add-on biological therapy of severe eosinophilic asthma, regardless of SPT positivity or negativity.

Biologics in severe asthma

Asthma is a chronic airway disease consisting of usually variable airflow limitation and bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Many different phenotypes characterize the clinical expression of asthma, determined by heterogeneous inflammatory patterns driven by distinct cellular and molecular mechanisms known as endotypes. Inside the complex framework of asthma pathobiology, several molecules such as immunoglobulins E (IgE), pro-inflammatory cytokines and their receptors can be targeted by present and future biological treatments of severe asthma. Within this context, already registered monoclonal antibodies including omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab may interfere at various levels with the pathogenic pathways responsible for type-2 airway inflammation. In particular, these drugs target IgE (omalizumab), IL-5 (mepolizumab and reslizumab), IL-5 receptor (benralizumab) and IL-4/IL-13 receptors (dupilumab), respectively. Moreover, other biological therapies are under evaluation in pre-marketing trials, mainly aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies directed against innate cytokines such as IL-33 and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP). Among current and perspective therapeutic approaches, clinicians can choose phenotype/endotype-driven tailored treatments, able to pursue an effective control of difficult to treat type-2 asthma.

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.

Targeting eosinophils in respiratory diseases: Biological axis, emerging therapeutics and treatment modalities

Eosinophils are bi-lobed, multi-functional innate immune cells with diverse cell surface receptors that regulate local immune and inflammatory responses. Several inflammatory and infectious diseases are triggered with their build up in the blood and tissues. The mobilization of eosinophils into the lungs is regulated by a cascade of processes guided by Th2 cytokine generating T-cells. Recruitment of eosinophils essentially leads to a characteristic immune response followed by airway hyperresponsiveness and remodeling, which are hallmarks of chronic respiratory diseases. By analysing the dynamic interactions of eosinophils with their extracellular environment, which also involve signaling molecules and tissues, various therapies have been invented and developed to target respiratory diseases. Having entered clinical testing, several eosinophil targeting therapeutic agents have shown much promise and have further bridged the gap between theory and practice. Moreover, researchers now have a clearer understanding of the roles and mechanisms of eosinophils. These factors have successfully assisted molecular biologists to block specific pathways in the growth, migration and activation of eosinophils. The primary purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the eosinophil biology with a special emphasis on potential pharmacotherapeutic targets. The review also summarizes promising eosinophil-targeting agents, along with their mechanisms and rationale for use, including those in developmental pipeline, in clinical trials, or approved for other respiratory disorders.

Efficacy and Safety of Biologic Agents in Chronic Urticaria, Asthma and Atopic Dermatitis - A Real-life Experience

Introduction:

Several biologic agents have been approved for the treatment of asthma, chronic urticaria and atopic dermatitis. These therapeutic agents are especially useful for patients with severe or refractory symptoms. We present the real-life experience of four of the commonly used biologic agents in the United Arab Emirates.

Methods:

In this retrospective observational study, we reviewed the demographic, clinical, laboratory and treatment parameters for all patients treated with biologic agents.

Results:

270 patients received biologics at our centre between May 2015 and December 2019 with a median age of 36.5 years. Omalizumab was the most prescribed agent (n=183, 67.8%) followed by dupilumab (n=54, 20%), benralizumab (n=22, 8.1%) and mepolizumab (n=11, 4.1%). Urticaria was the commonest treatment indication (n=148, 55%) followed by asthma (n=105, 39%) and atopic dermatitis (n=13, 5%). All chronic urticaria patients were treated with omalizumab and showed improvement in the mean urticaria control test score from 6.7±4.47 to 12.02±4.17, with a p-value of 0.001. Dupilumab was found to be the most commonly prescribed drug for asthma (37%), followed by omalizumab (32%), benralizumab (21%) and mepolizumab (10%). The mean Asthma control test score for all asthmatics combined increased from 17.06 ± 5.4 to 19.44 ± 5.6, with p-value 0.0012 with treatment; FeNO reduced from 60.02 ± 45.74 to 29.11 ± 27.92, with p-value 0.001 and mean FEV1 improved from 2.38L ± 0.8 to 2.67L ± 0.78, with p-value 0.045. Only 4 patients in the entire cohort reported adverse events.

Conclusion:

Our study demonstrated that biological agents are a safe and effective treatment for atopic asthma, chronic urticaria and atopic dermatitis.

Biologics to Treat Severe Asthma in Children and Adolescents: A Practical Update

Background: Severe asthma represents a significant challenge for children and adolescents. At the same time, it often places a burden on patients, caregivers, and society, mainly related to morbidity, mortality, and health care resources. In children and adolescents, severe asthma is mostly characterized by type 2 inflammation, which leads to bronchial eosinophilia that may be suppressed by corticosteroids. However, in this age group, a high dosage of inhaled corticosteroids combined with systemic corticosteroids sometimes results in unacceptable side effects, such as reduced growth velocity and reduced bone mineral density. Therefore, there is increasing and enthusiastic interest in today's biologics, including omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab. There is growing evidence that they may be effective and safe add-on options for children and adolescents. In 2009, omalizumab was approved by the European Medicines Agency as the first available therapeutic option for allergic asthma in patients as young as 6 years of age, followed by a similar approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2016. Previously, omalizumab was marketed for this indication in patients ≥ age 12. Subsequent biologics, namely mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, are IL-5 targeted agents that are presently approved in some countries for severe eosinophilic asthma starting at 6 years of age. Dupilumab is targeted against the IL-4 receptor α-chain, and it has been approved in the United States and the European Union as an add-on maintenance therapy in patients ≥12 years of age. Conclusion: This review presents the most recent evidence on approved biologics for the treatment of severe asthma and discusses the unmet needs and future perspective, focusing on the pediatric and adolescent age groups.

Molecular Targets for Biological Therapies of Severe Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory disease characterized by usually reversible bronchial obstruction, which is clinically expressed by different phenotypes driven by complex pathobiological mechanisms (endotypes). Within this context, during the last years several molecular effectors and signalling pathways have emerged as suitable targets for biological therapies of severe asthma, refractory to standard treatments. Indeed, various therapeutic antibodies currently allow to intercept at different levels the chain of pathogenic events leading to type 2 (T2) airway inflammation. In addition to pro-allergic immunoglobulin E (IgE), that chronologically represents the first molecule against which an anti-asthma monoclonal antibody (omalizumab) was developed, today other targets are successfully exploited by biological treatments of severe asthma. In particular, pro-eosinophilic interleukin 5 (IL-5) can be targeted by mepolizumab or reslizumab, whereas benralizumab is a selective blocker of IL-5 receptor. Moreover, dupilumab behaves as a dual receptor antagonist of pleiotropic interleukins 4 (IL-4) and 13 (IL-13). Besides these drugs that are already available in medical practice, other biologics are under clinical development such as those targeting innate cytokines, also including the alarmin thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), which plays a key role in the pathogenesis of type 2 asthma. Therefore, ongoing and future biological therapies are significantly changing the global scenario of severe asthma management. These new therapeutic options make it possible to implement phenotype/endotype-specific treatments, that are delineating personalized approaches precisely addressing the individual traits of asthma pathobiology. Such tailored strategies are thus allowing to successfully target the immune-inflammatory responses underlying uncontrolled T2-high asthma.

Targeted Molecular Therapies in Allergy and Rhinology

Biologic agents, monoclonal antibodies that target highly-specific molecular pathways of inflammation, are becoming integrated into care pathways for multiple disorders that are relevant in otolaryngology and allergy. These conditions share common inflammatory mechanisms of so-called Type 2 inflammation with dysregulation of immunoglobulin E production and eosinophil and mast cell degranulation leading to tissue damage. Biologic agents are now available for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), asthma, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). This paper summarizes the diagnosis and management of these conditions and critically reviews the clinical trial data that has led to regulatory approval of biologic agents for these conditions.

Significant improvement in lung function and asthma control after benralizumab treatment for severe refractory eosinophilic asthma

Severe eosinophilic asthma is a complex disease and much effort has been made to fully understand its mechanisms. Bronchial remodeling and loss of lung function are important features in asthma, however their key aspects are not completely clear, especially the impact that biological drugs may have on them. One of the key cytokines involved in the pathophysiology of eosinophilic asthma is interleukin-5 (IL-5), which plays a very important role together with other type 2 cytokines and chemokines in the development, transmigration and persistence of eosinophils into airways, such as eotaxin-2 and 3, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), IL-33, as well as IL-4 and IL-13. Several monoclonal antibodies have been developed against this cytokine (mepolizumab, reslizumab) or its receptor (benralizumab). Data on the improvement of respiratory function in patients who undergo benralizumab treatment are scarce and partly conflicting. Real-life studies may play a crucial role in clarifying this important aspect. The aim of this retrospective observational real-world study was to evaluate the effect of benralizumab on lung function improvement, exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroids (OCS) reduction and asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) score before and after six months of treatment with benralizumab in a cohort of 20 consecutive patients with severe refractory asthma (SRA) treated at the Pneumology Unit of Local Health Authority, Reggio Emilia, Italy. Add-on therapy with benralizumab allowed to completely suspend OCS in 19 out of 20 patients. Notably, the number of moderate/severe exacerbations dropped significantly (p < 0,0001); as well as an improvement in ACQ score (p < 0,0001). The most relevant data concern respiratory function: the average pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ increased by 21.3% (+680 ml) compared to baseline (p = 0,0006). Moreover, the improvement in morning PEF (+66,6 l/min) confirmed the benefit of benralizumab (p = 0,02). The improvement in respiratory function was significantly higher in patients with blood eosinophilia greater than 500 cells/μL and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This study underlies a noticeable improvement in respiratory function, much higher than what has been observed in literature so far. This aspect, together with the others aforementioned, should be considered when choosing a treatment option in the context of precision medicine.

Biologics for the Treatments of Allergic Conditions: Severe Asthma

By selectively targeting specific steps of the immune inflammation cascade, biologic drugs for severe asthma have substantially contributed to increase the standard of care, to reduce drug-related morbidity. and most importantly to ameliorate patients' quality of life. Upcoming molecules are going to provide a chance for severe phenotypes besides Th2 high through the interaction with epithelial and innate immunity. Some practical aspects including optimal treatment duration, the possibility of a dose treatment modulation, the place and relevance of ICS in best responders are still under debate. Long-term safety, especially when interacting with innate immunity needs to be further investigated.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Benralizumab in Adult and Adolescent Patients with Asthma

Introduction

Benralizumab, an interleukin-5 receptor alpha–directed cytolytic anti-eosinophil monoclonal antibody, was recently approved as add-on maintenance treatment for patients aged 12 years and older with uncontrolled asthma with eosinophilic inflammation.

Methods

Pharmacokinetic (PK) data from nine clinical trials for patients with asthma were pooled and analyzed to further characterize the PK of benralizumab and evaluate demographic covariate effects.

Results

Population modeling results demonstrated that the PK of benralizumab were dose-proportional across a wide dosage range and were adequately described by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption from the subcutaneous dosing site and a first-order elimination pathway from the central compartment. Following subcutaneous administration, the absorption half-life of benralizumab was 3.54 days, and the absolute bioavailability was 58.9%. Estimated clearance (CL; 0.291 L/day), central volume of distribution (V_c; 3.13 L), and peripheral volume of distribution (V_p; 2.52 L) were typical for therapeutic immunoglobulins. Elimination half-life was approximately 15.5 days for patients with asthma. Age, sex, race, liver function, renal function, baseline blood eosinophil count, anatomic injection site, and commonly used small-molecule drugs had no clinically relevant impact on benralizumab CL. Only body weight and antidrug antibodies (ADAs) were identified as relevant PK covariates. Power parameters (exponent) of body weight on CL, V_c, and V_p were 0.807, 0.803, and 0.528, respectively, and the presence of ADAs increased benralizumab CL by 124%.

Conclusions

Over 5–20 weeks, the PK of benralizumab were dose-proportional across a dosage range of 0.03–3 mg/kg intravenously and 2–200 mg subcutaneously administered every 4 weeks or every 8 weeks (first three doses every 4 weeks). Body weight and ADA status were identified as relevant PK covariates. Baseline eosinophil count, hepatic and renal functions, anatomical subcutaneous injection site, and commonly used small-molecule drugs had no impact on the PK of benralizumab.

Are We Meeting the Promise of Endotypes and Precision Medicine in Asthma?

While the term asthma has long been known to describe heterogeneous groupings of patients, only recently have data evolved which enable a molecular understanding of the clinical differences. The evolution of transcriptomics (and other 'omics platforms) and improved statistical analyses in combination with large clinical cohorts opened the door for molecular characterization of pathobiologic processes associated with a range of asthma patients. When linked with data from animal models and clinical trials of targeted biologic therapies, emerging distinctions arose between patients with and without elevations in type 2 immune and inflammatory pathways, leading to the confirmation of a broad categorization of type 2-Hi asthma. Differences in the ratios, sources, and location of type 2 cytokines and their relation to additional immune pathway activation appear to distinguish several different (sub)molecular phenotypes, and perhaps endotypes of type 2-Hi asthma, which respond differently to broad and targeted anti-inflammatory therapies. Asthma in the absence of type 2 inflammation is much less well defined, without clear biomarkers, but is generally linked with poor responses to corticosteroids. Integration of "big data" from large cohorts, over time, using machine learning approaches, combined with validation and iterative learning in animal (and human) model systems is needed to identify the biomarkers and tightly defined molecular phenotypes/endotypes required to fulfill the promise of precision medicine.

Anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of asthma: an update

INTRODUCTION

Asthma exhibits marked heterogeneity in symptoms with severe or refractory asthma representing a clear area of unmet medical need. These patients require more specifically targeted treatments with monoclonal antibody-based biologics targeted at inhibition of the type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13 having considerable potential as effective treatments for severe asthma. For the most part, anti-cytokine-based biologic therapies are more likely to give significant clinical benefit in carefully selected patient populations that take asthma phenotypes and endotypes into account.

AREAS COVERED

This review is based on recent English-language original articles in Pub Med or MedLine that reported significant clinical findings on the current status, therapeutic potential and safety of the anti-IL-5 biologics mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab in the treatment of severe refractory asthma.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-IL-5 treatment appears effective in patients with eosinophilic asthma through exacerbation prevention with accumulating evidence of glucocorticoid-sparing effects with an acceptable safety profile for these biologics.

Real-Life effects of benralizumab on exacerbation number and lung hyperinflation in atopic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma

BACKGROUND

The humanized monoclonal antibody benralizumab targets the α subunit of the interleukin-5 (IL-5) receptor and the FcγRIIIa receptor expressed by natural killer cells. Through this dual mechanism of action, benralizumab neutralizes the pro-eosinophil functions of IL-5 and promotes eosinophil apoptosis.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

The present real-life study aimed to evaluate, in 22 allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, the effects of benralizumab on asthma exacerbations and lung hyperinflation.

RESULTS

In this regard here we show that, after 24 weeks of add-on treatment, benralizumab completely depleted peripheral blood eosinophils (from 810 to 0 cells/μL; p < 0.0001), and significantly decreased both asthma exacerbation number (from 4 to 0; p < 0.0001) and residual volume (from 2720 to 2300 mL; p < 0.01). Moreover, at the same time point (24 weeks) benralizumab also increased pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ (from 1295 to 1985 mL; p < 0.0001), FVC (from 2390 to 2974 mL; p < 0.0001), FEF_25-75 (from 0.6 to 1.42 L/sec; p < 0.0001), IC (from 1940 to 2460 mL; not significant), and ACT score (from 14.73 to 22.95; p < 0.0001), as well as reduced prednisone intake (from 25 to 0 mg; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our results suggest that via its anti-eosinophil actions benralizumab improved airflow limitation, lung hyperinflation, and respiratory symptoms, as well as lowered asthma exacerbation rate and abrogated OCS consumption in most patients.