Safety of biological therapy in elderly patients with severe asthma

Navigating biologic therapies in elderly asthma

The prevalence of asthma among the elderly population has witnessed a notable rise, presenting unique challenges in diagnosis and management. Biologic therapies, such as omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, have demonstrated efficacy in targeting specific pathways associated with severe asthma in elderly individuals. However, a significant research gap exists in the application of these therapies in elderly asthma patients. Despite the considerable size of the elderly asthma population and the social and economic burden that this specific demographic imposes on society, the available body of research catering to this group is limited. Notably, no RCTs have been expressly designed for the elderly across all asthma biologic therapies. Moreover, most RCTs have set upper age cutoffs, commonly 75 years old, and exclusion criteria for common comorbidities in the elderly, thus marginalizing this group from pivotal research. This underscores the crucial need for intentional inclusion of elderly participants in separately designed clinical trials and more researches, aiming to augment the generalizability of findings and enhance therapeutic outcomes. Given the distinct physiological changes associated with aging, there may be a concern regarding the efficacy and safety of biologic therapies in the elderly compared to non-elderly adults, posing a barrier to their use in this population. However, observational studies have shown similar benefits of these therapies in elderly individuals as seen in non-elderly adults. Other anticipated challenges related to initiating biologic therapy in elderly people with asthma including dosing consideration and monitoring strategies, which are important areas of investigation for optimizing asthma management will be discussed in this review. In summary, this review navigates the current landscape of biologic therapies for elderly asthma, offering valuable insights for various stakeholders, including researchers, healthcare providers, and policymakers, to advance asthma care in this vulnerable population. We propose that future research should concentrate on tailored, evidence-based approaches to address the undertreatment of elderly asthma patients.

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 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.

Identification of biologic-responsive phenotypes in elderly people with eosinophilic asthma

Background

Asthma in the elderly is not as well studied as in younger age groups. Age-related immunosenescence may result in diminished TH2 inflammation, which raises a question about whether asthma in elderly patients responds well to anti-TH2 asthma biologics.

Objective

We sought to determine whether asthma in elderly people has different TH2 biomarkers and clinical features compared to nonelderly people, and if disease in the 2 age groups responds differently to anti-TH2 biologics. We also aimed to identify treatment-responsive phenotypes with clinical and biomarker features that could be used to predict best response to biologics.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted for 56 patients (30 elderly [age ≥62 years] and 26 nonelderly [ages 18-59 years] subjects) with severe asthma treated with dupilumab or benralizumab. Differences in baseline characteristics and response to treatment were analyzed. A hierarchical cluster analysis was also performed to identify treatment-responsive phenotypes. Significance threshold was P = .05 for all analyses.

Results

Baseline characteristics and TH2 biomarkers (blood eosinophil level, total IgE, aeroallergen sensitivity) were similar between elderly and nonelderly subjects. The disease in both groups responded well to biologics (improvement in ACT scores, decreased exacerbations, decreased need for prednisone), but no significant response difference was found based on age groups. Cluster analysis identified 3 phenotypes, as follows: cluster 1, youngest age, moderate eosinophil levels, lowest total IgE, few environmental allergies, and least response to biologics; cluster 2, intermediate age, lowest eosinophil level, highest IgE level, many environmental allergies, and an intermediate response to biologics; and cluster 3, oldest ages, highest eosinophil levels, high total IgE, few environmental allergies, and best response to biologics. These results confirm trends seen in another study utilizing cluster analyses showing that subjects with highest levels of IgE and eosinophils responded better to biologic treatment for asthma.

Conclusion

Elderly people with asthma should be considered for biologic therapy no differently than younger people. There may be subgroups of patients with different biologic responses based on age, allergenicity, IgE, and eosinophil levels that could be used to predict treatment response.

A risk of serious anaphylatic reactions to asthma biologics: a pharmacovigilance study based on a global real-world database

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory condition that affects the lung airways. Chronic use of oral glucocorticoids in patients with severe asthma is associated with several adverse events (AEs). Biologics (omalizumab, benralizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, and dupilumab) have been developed as alternative therapies for the treatment of asthma. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the risk of anaphylactic reactions associated with these five biologics based on a large global database. We utilized individual case reports from the Uppsala Monitoring Center from January 1968 to December 29, 2019. A disproportionality analysis was performed over all drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Anaphylactic reactions were defined according to the "anaphylactic reaction" of the standardized MedDRA queries. Contrary to dupilumab, omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab demonstrated positive signals related to anaphylactic reactions over all drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Reslizumab, which represented only 315 cases of all AEs, requires more reports to determine its association with anaphylactic reactions. More anaphylactic reactions have been identified than are known, and most cases (96.2%) are reported to be serious. Our findings indicate that omalizumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab for asthma treatment are associated with a high risk of anaphylactic reactions; thus, more careful monitoring in the post-administration period is recommended.

Long-Term Omalizumab in Elderly Patients with Chronic Urticaria: Is It a Safe Therapy?

BACKGROUND

Biologics have revolutionized the treatment of many diseases. In this regard, omalizumab (OMA), an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, is the recommended therapeutic option for patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) refractory to second-generation H1-antihistamines. Several studies confirm the efficacy and safety of the drug. However, the literature focusing on the elderly population is scarce, as this age group is often excluded from clinical trials. Therefore, the pharmacological treatment of CSU in elderly patients is a challenge that is increased by their comorbidities and consequent polypharmacy.

OBJECTIVES

We describe the real-life safety profile of OMA in elderly patients (≥70 years) with CSU and chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU). We aimed to provide data for daily clinical practice in this vulnerable patient group.

METHOD

A retrospective review was performed of the records of patients with CSU/CIndU from May 2003 to December 2019 in the Hospital Universitario La Paz. We describe qualitative and quantitative data according to measures of central tendency. Comparisons between qualitative and quantitative data were performed with the Mann-Whitney U test and the Fisher's test for qualitative variables. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Eighty-nine patients were included, divided into two groups (<70 vs. ≥70 years). The overall rate of adverse events (AEs) was 48%, mainly mild. No association between age and AE was found (p = 0.789). No serious AE such as anaphylaxis was detected. CSU predominated in both groups. CIndU was less prevalent in the elderly (p = 0.017). There was no association between age and the other variables. Although the frequency of neoplasms was slightly higher in the elderly with OMA, we found no difference compared to the incidence of neoplasms in the general population. Therefore, our data suggest that OMA may be a safe treatment in elderly people with CSU/CIndU for prolonged periods of treatment, although further studies with larger samples are needed to corroborate our observations.

Management of Elderly Asthma: Key Questions and Tentative Answers

The aging lung undergoes structural changes, immunosenescence, and inflammation, rendering the elderly more susceptible to developing obstructive airway disease. Thus, asthma in those of chronological age ≥ 65 years is not rare. Elderly asthma (EA) imposes considerable burdens in terms of mortality and morbidity, and expenditure. However, clinicians lack knowledge of EA and thus often prescribe inappropriate management. In this review, we ask 3 key questions frequently encountered during EA diagnosis and treatment: 1) Is EA different?; 2) How can we appropriately diagnose EA?; 3) Are there management strategies specific to EA? Based on recent studies, we provide tentative answers as follows: 1) late-onset EA differs in clinical features and pathogenetic mechanisms from non-EA, and thus further phenotypic and endotypic characterization of EA is needed; 2) both over- and under-diagnosis of asthma in the elderly can be reduced if the objective diagnostic tests are appropriately performed; 3) cautious prescription of ICS to selected EA patients should be encouraged, and a multifaceted approach which involves increasing medical awareness and inhaler use proficiency and adherence, seeking the assistance of caregivers, and correcting micronutrient deficiencies is required to reduce acute exacerbations in EA patients.