Adverse events of benralizumab in moderate to severe eosinophilic asthma: A meta-analysis

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.

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

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

Anti-IL-5 biologics and rheumatoid arthritis: a single-centre 500 patient year exposure analysis

OBJECTIVE

The increasing use of biological therapies has led to the paradoxical finding that monoclonal antibody therapy for one inflammatory disease can sometimes induce another inflammatory disease. Recently, the use of anti-IL-5 (IL, interleukin) antibody therapies for severe asthma has been associated with the onset of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other inflammatory rheumatological disease. We undertook this audit to identify the prevalence of this finding across a large clinical cohort of patients receiving anti-IL-5 therapy.

METHODS

All patients currently receiving mepolizumab or benralizumab for severe asthma across the Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust's (LTHT) Respiratory Service were included. Electronic records for each patient were searched to identify clinical and biochemical manifestations of inflammatory rheumatological disease following the initiation of anti-IL-5 therapy.

RESULTS

142 patients, with a mean duration of 3.5 years on therapy, were included (89 mepolizumab, 53 benralizumab). 17 patients developed new arthralgias (nine mepolizumab, eight benralizumab), however only one of these patients (on mepolizumab) had raised acute phase reactants and newly positive anti-CCP antibody (ACPA) and rheumatoid factor and was the only patient to receive a formal diagnosis of RA.

CONCLUSION

Although ACPA positive RA has now been reported in a handful of case reports, we noted a very low rate of evolution into RA or inflammatory arthritis, at least in the short-medium term under anti-IL-5 therapy. This challenges the emerging suggestion that anti-IL-5 biologics may be triggering RA.

Severe Asthma and Biological Therapies: Now and the Future

Recognition of phenotypic variability in pediatric asthma allows for a more personalized therapeutic approach. Knowledge of the underlying pathophysiological and molecular mechanisms (endotypes) of corresponding biomarkers and new treatments enables this strategy to progress. Biologic therapies for children with severe asthma are becoming more relevant in this sense. The T2 phenotype is the most prevalent in childhood and adolescence, and non-T2 phenotypes are usually rare. This document aims to review the mechanism of action, efficacy, and potential predictive and monitoring biomarkers of biological drugs, focusing on the pediatric population. The drugs currently available are omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and 1ezepelumab, with some differences in administrative approval prescription criteria between the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Previously, we described the characteristics of severe asthma in children and its diagnostic and therapeutic management.

The evolving landscape of immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic conditions

Allergic conditions, such as asthma, chronic urticaria, atopic dermatitis (AD), and eosinophilic esophagitis, have long been treated with oral and topical steroids which resulted in negative off-target effects. However, newer biologic medications are increasingly being developed and approved for treatment of these conditions. These medications have a variety of mechanisms of action to target pathophysiology specific to these diseases. As biologics become more targeted, fewer off-target effects are seen improving tolerability for patients as well as expanded options for treatment of these conditions. This review discusses monoclonal antibody therapies (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, tezepelumab, and tralokinumab) including their safety and use in asthma, chronic urticaria, AD, and eosinophilic esophagitis.

The Role of Benralizumab in Eosinophilic Immune Dysfunctions: A Case Report-Based Literature Review

In the past years, the knowledge of eosinophils playing a primary pathophysiologic role in several associated conditions has led to the development of biologics targeting therapies aiming at normalizing the immune response, reducing chronic inflammation, and preventing tissue damage. To better illustrate the potential relationship between different eosinophilic immune dysfunctions and the effects of biological therapies in this scenario, here, we present a case of a 63-year-old male first referred to our department in 2018 with a diagnosis of asthma, polyposis, and rhinosinusitis and presenting a suspicion of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs' allergy. He also had a past medical history of eosinophilic gastroenteritis/duodenitis (eosinophilia counts >50 cells/high-power field HPF). The use of multiple courses of corticosteroid therapy failed to completely control these conditions. In October 2019, after starting benralizumab (an antibody directed against the alpha chain of the IL-5 cytokine receptor) as add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma, important clinical improvements were reported both on the respiratory (no asthma exacerbations) and gastrointestinal systems (eosinophilia count 0 cells/HPF). Patients' quality of life also increased. Since June 2020, systemic corticosteroid therapy was reduced without worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms or eosinophilic inflammation. This case warns of the importance of early recognition and appropriate individualized treatment of eosinophilic immune dysfunctions and suggests the conduction of further larger studies on the use of benralizumab in gastrointestinal syndromes aiming at better understanding its relying mechanisms of action in the intestinal mucosa.

Biologic Therapies for Asthma and Allergic Disease: Past, Present, and Future

The discovery of the mechanism underlying allergic disease, mouse models of asthma, and bronchoscopy studies provided initial insights into the role of Th2-type cytokines, including interlukin (IL)-4, IL-5 and IL-13, which became the target of monoclonal antibody therapy. Omalizumab, Benralizumab, Mepolizumab, Reslizumab, and Tezepelumab have been approved. These biologicals have been shown to be good alternative therapies to corticosteroids, particularly in severe asthma management, where they can improve the quality of life of many patients. Given the success in asthma, these drugs have been used in other diseases with type 2 inflammation, including chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), atopic dermatitis, and chronic urticaria. Like the Th2-type cytokines, chemokines have also been the target of novel monoclonal therapies. However, they have not proved successful to date. In this review, targeted therapy is addressed from its inception to future applications in allergic diseases.

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.

The regulatory role of eosinophils in viral, bacterial, and fungal infections

Eosinophils are innate immune cells typically associated with allergic and parasitic diseases. However, in recent years, eosinophils have also been ascribed a role in keeping homeostasis and in fighting several infectious diseases. Indeed, these cells circulate as mature cells in the blood and can be quickly recruited to the infected tissue. Moreover, eosinophils have all the necessary cellular equipment such as pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), pro-inflammatory cytokines, anti-bacterial proteins, and DNA traps to fight pathogens and promote an efficient immune response. This review summarizes some of the updated information on the role of eosinophils' direct and indirect mediated interactions with pathogens.

Group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) are important in typical type 2 immune-mediated diseases and an essential therapeutic target

The prevalence rate of allergic diseases, such as asthma, atopic rhinitis (AR), and atopic dermatitis (AD), has been significantly increasing over the years because of environmental changes. Type 2 immunity is mediated by allergic inflammation initiated by an innate immune response. This response is orchestrated by type 2 cytokines (interleukin [IL]-4, IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13) together with other cells. The dendritic cell [DC]-T helper 2 (Th2) cell axis is the conventional type 2 immune pathway, and is currently known as the group 2 innate lymphoid cell (ILC2)-DC-Th2 axis that mediates type 2 inflammation. ILC2s strongly mediate type 2 inflammation in allergic diseases. ILC2s are activated by epithelial cell-derived cytokines, such as IL-25 and IL-33, and thymic stromal lymphopoietin. Additionally, ILC2s are activated by mast cell lipid inflammatory mediators, such as cysteinyl leukotrienes and prostaglandin D2. ILC2s produce a large amount of type 2 cytokines. The important role of ILC2s in the pathogenesis of type 2-mediated disease has resulted in ILC2-derived cytokines being a target for therapeutic development. In this review, we discuss type 2 immunity, mainly the ILC2-DC-Th2 axis, and other immune cells, the dominant role of ILC2s in asthma, AR, and AD, and therapeutic targets against type 2 cytokines.

Non-infective cystitis secondary to benralizumab immunotherapy

This case study discusses a patient who presented with severe lower urinary tract symptoms and pain after commencing immunotherapy for eosinophilic asthma. Initial aetiology was presumed to be infective but cultures were negative. Cross-sectional imaging showed extensive perivesical and periprostatic stranding and inflammation. He was initially treated with antibiotics and anti-inflammatories but a lack of clinical improvement led to a rigid cystoscopy which identified an inflamed, oedematous urothelium which was biopsied. Histology demonstrated extensive, full thickness superficial detrusor inflammation, with marked congestion, oedema and a mixed inflammatory infiltrate in keeping with a severe active chronic non-infectious cystitis, possibly secondary to benralizumab therapy. His benralizumab was stopped and his symptoms completely settled. We believe this is the first described case of severe non-infective cystitis which may be secondary to benralizumab. This case adds to the isolated reports of this rare side effect of some of the newer biological agents in use.

Development of Rheumatoid Arthritis During Anti-Interleukin-5 Therapy in a Patient with Refractory Chronic Eosinophilic Pneumonia

Purpose

To report the case of a patient with refractory chronic eosinophilic pneumonia who developed rheumatoid arthritis during anti-interleukin (IL)-5 therapy.

Case Report

The case of a 66-year-old male ex-smoker with allergic rhinitis who had dyspnea and chronic cough for 6 months and who was ultimately diagnosed with chronic eosinophilic pneumonia is reported. Long-term corticosteroid therapy was necessary due to recurrence of the chronic eosinophilic pneumonia during tapering of the corticosteroid. As a steroid sparing strategy, mepolizumab was initiated, and the steroid was tapered gradually. When the dose of prednisolone was 2 mg/day, he developed polyarthralgia. Mepolizumab was changed to benralizumab considering the possibility that arthralgia was a side effect of mepolizumab; however, the arthralgia continued and he was ultimately diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. Methotrexate was initiated and his arthritis improved. Thereafter, benralizumab was discontinued after 5 injections, and he subsequently required neither systemic corticosteroids nor biologics.

Conclusion

The present case may suggest that suppression of IL-5 induces rheumatoid arthritis in certain patients; however, it is also possible that initial steroid therapy improved subclinical RA and made it remain undiagnosed, and the parallel OCS tapering during IL-5 therapy could have contributed to unveil the underlying RA. Further studies are required to establish guidelines on the optimum use of anti-IL-5 therapy and to understand the interactions between chronic eosinophilic pneumonia, anti-IL-5 therapy, tapering of corticosteroid and development of rheumatoid arthritis.

Anaphylaxis to Drugs, Biological Agents, and Vaccines

Anaphylaxis is a multi-system syndrome resulting from the release of mediators from mast cells and basophils. Drugs are common causes. Anaphylaxis to certain drugs, vaccines, and biological agents present clinical challenges, and merit referral to a board-certified allergist/immunologist for further evaluation and management.

Severe hypereosinophilic syndrome successfully treated with a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 5 receptor α - benralizumab

Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a group of a rare diseases characterized by marked eosinophilia in blood or tissue and eosinophil-related clinical manifestations. Benralizumab is a humanized, monoclonal antibody against interleukin 5 (IL-5) receptor α, which is expressed on human eosinophils.

Here, we present the case of a patient with severe HES in whom treatment with benralizumab, an anti-IL-5 receptor monoclonal antibody, was initiated 6 months ago. Prior to benralizumab administration, the patient was treated with glucocorticoids (GS) and mepolizumab. However, instead of the applied treatment and normal level of peripheral eosinophils the patient presented with fluctuating lower respiratory tract symptoms and recurrent exacerbations of HES.

Treatment with benralizumab (30 mg s.c. every 4-6 weeks) was started, resulting in significant improvement of respiratory signs and symptoms, normalization of eosinophil count and significant reduction of the methylprednisolone dose (after 5 doses of benralizumab administration). No substantial side effects have been noted during treatment and 6-month follow-up.

We argue that in the severe and relapsing course of HES, rescue treatment with benralizumab should be taken into account, particularly in cases of relative inefficacy of GS and mepolizumab.

Anti-interleukin-5 in the Management of Eosinophilic Asthma: A Review of Effectiveness, Safety, and Budgetary Impact From the Perspective of the Brazilian Health System

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-interleukin-5 class therapy agents in the treatment of eosinophilic asthma and the financial impact of these drugs on the Brazilian and Mato Grosso public health systems.

METHODS

The literature review in important databases was guided by a structured research question including patient or population, intervention, comparator, outcome and type of study. The retrieved studies went through a screening, selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment process. A model with two scenarios, one with mepolizumab and the other with benralizumab, was created for budget impact analysis.

RESULTS

Evidence indicated that anti-interleukins-5 have an acceptable safety profile and can reduce exacerbation rates by up to 50% in the population with eosinophilic asthma; however, they showed no significant difference in quality of life. The adoption of these drugs in the Brazilian health system can impact the budget from R$ 40,379,731.50 to R$ 140,301,211.34 depending on the drug incorporated, considering a time horizon of 5 years. From the perspective of the state of Mato Grosso, the budget impact may reach, in the fifth year, an amount of R$ 1,301,210.58 and R$ 2,050.687.62 for the scenarios with mepolizumab and benralizumab, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Anti-interleukins-5 are promising treatments for eosinophilic asthma because they minimise exacerbations and are well tolerated and safe. The financial impact is large, implying that technology costs may be a barrier to accessing this treatment class.

Reduction/elimination of blood eosinophils in severe asthma: should there be a safety consideration?

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophils play a central role in the inflammation of asthma and are the target of new biologic treatments for patients with severe asthma. Biologics targeting the IL-5 pathway have been shown to reduce asthma exacerbations, improve lung function, reduce oral corticosteroid use, and improve quality of life, accompanied by reduced or even eliminated blood eosinophils. Eosinophils have been associated with host protection and tumor growth, raising potential concerns about the consequences of these long-term therapies that reduce or eliminate them.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we explore the current safety profile of biologics regarding the impact they may have on blood eosinophils, trying to answer the question about any safety consideration.

EXPERT OPINION

Eosinophils have been associated with host protection and tumor growth, raising potential concerns about the consequences of long-term therapies that reduce or eliminate these blood cells.

Emerging Evidence for Pleiotropism of Eosinophils

Eosinophils are complex granulocytes with the capacity to react upon diverse stimuli due to their numerous and variable surface receptors, which allows them to respond in very different manners. Traditionally believed to be only part of parasitic and allergic/asthmatic immune responses, as scientific studies arise, the paradigm about these cells is continuously changing, adding layers of complexity to their roles in homeostasis and disease. Developing principally in the bone marrow by the action of IL-5 and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor GM-CSF, eosinophils migrate from the blood to very different organs, performing multiple functions in tissue homeostasis as in the gastrointestinal tract, thymus, uterus, mammary glands, liver, and skeletal muscle. In organs such as the lungs and gastrointestinal tract, eosinophils are able to act as immune regulatory cells and also to perform direct actions against parasites, and bacteria, where novel mechanisms of immune defense as extracellular DNA traps are key factors. Besides, eosinophils, are of importance in an effective response against viral pathogens by their nuclease enzymatic activity and have been lately described as involved in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 immunity. The pleiotropic role of eosinophils is sustained because eosinophils can be also detrimental to human physiology, for example, in diseases like allergies, asthma, and eosinophilic esophagitis, where exosomes can be significant pathophysiologic units. These eosinophilic pathologies, require specific treatments by eosinophils control, such as new monoclonal antibodies like mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab. In this review, we describe the roles of eosinophils as effectors and regulatory cells and their involvement in pathological disorders and treatment.

Use of IL-5 Inhibitor Benralizumab as a Novel Therapy for Eosinophilic Otitis Media: Clinical Capsule and Review of Literature

OBJECTIVE

We report a case of recurrent eosinophilic otitis media (EOM) successfully treated with the novel monoclonal IL-5 inhibitor benralizumab. We also review literature relevant to EOM diagnosis and potential for biologic treatment.

PATIENT

A 24-year-old woman with bilateral otitis media with effusion unresponsive to standard treatment.

INTERVENTION(S)

Multidisciplinary treatment using subcutaneous benralizumab after diagnosis of EOM.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Behavioral audiometry, peripheral serology, otomicroscopy, and eosinophilic otitis media symptom severity.

RESULTS

Recalcitrant otitis media with effusion (OME) in the setting of nasal polyposis and asthma prompted clinical suspicion for EOM, which was confirmed by pathologic examination of middle ear effusion and soft tissue biopsy. Treatment with benralizumab was initiated by pulmonology and well-tolerated. Within 2 months of treatment onset there was a cessation of EOM symptoms, a reduction of peripheral eosinophil levels, and an improvement in conductive hearing loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Monoclonal antibodies such as benralizumab may be an effective treatment option for EOM. A high level of clinical suspicion in patients with bronchial asthma, nasal polyposis, and recalcitrant OME may allow early diagnosis of EOM. Awareness of emerging biologic treatment options is important in the management of this challenging entity and may prevent long-term sequelae.

Severe asthma: adding new evidence - Latin American Thoracic Society

This document constitutes a summary of the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) prepared at the initiative of the Latin American Thoracic Society (ALAT). Due to new evidence in the treatment of severe asthma, it was agreed to select six clinical questions, and the corresponding recommendations are provided herein. After considering the quality of the evidence, the balance between desirable and undesirable impacts and the feasibility and acceptance of procedures, the following recommendations were established. 1) We do not recommend the use of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus formoterol as rescue medication in the treatment of severe asthma. 2) We suggest performing many more high-quality randomised studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tiotropium in patients with severe asthma. 3) Omalizumab is recommended in patients with severe uncontrolled allergic asthma with serum IgE levels above 30 IU. 4) Anti-interleukin (IL)-5 drugs are recommended in patients with severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma (cut-off values above 150 cells·µL⁻¹ for mepolizumab and above 400 cells·µL⁻¹ for reslizumab). 5) Benralizumab is recommended in adult patients with severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma (cut-off values above 300 cells·µL⁻¹). 6) Dupilumab is recommended in adult patients with severe uncontrolled allergic and eosinophilic asthma and in adult patients with severe corticosteroid-dependent asthma.

Severe #asthma: evidence @ALAToraxhttps://bit.ly/34jYhg2

Biologics for atopic diseases: Indication, side effect management, and new developments

With the advent of biologicals, more and more therapeutics are available that specifically address specific switch points in the pathomechanism of immunologically dominated diseases. Thus, the focus of diagnostics and therapy (precision medicine) is more on the individual disease characteristics of the individual patient. Regarding the different phenotypes of atopic diseases, severe asthma was the first entity for which biologicals were approved, followed by urticaria, and finally atopic dermatitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Experience in the treatment of severe bronchial asthma has shown that the intensity of the response to biological therapy depends on the quality of clinical and immunological phenotyping of the patients. This also applies to different diseases of the atopic form, as patients can suffer from several atopic diseases at the same time, each with different characteristics. Biologics are already emerging that may represent a suitable therapy for allergic bronchial asthma, which often occurs together with severe neurodermatitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. In practice, however, the question of possible combinations of biologicals for the therapy of complex clinical pictures of individual patients is increasingly arising. In doing so, the side effect profile must be taken into account, including hypersensitivity reactions, whose diagnostic and logistical management must aim at a safe and efficient therapy of the underlying disease. Increased attention must also be paid to biological therapy in pregnancy and planned (predictable) vaccinations as well as existing infections, such as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Before starting a biological therapy, the immune status should be checked with regard to chronic viral and bacterial infections and, if necessary, the vaccination status should be refreshed or missing vaccinations should be made up for before starting therapy. Currently, reliable data on the effect of biologicals on the immunological situation of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 are not available. Therefore, research and development of suitable diagnostic methods for detection of immunologically caused side effects as well as detection of potential therapy responders and non-responders is of great importance.

Mabs for treating asthma: omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab

The introduction of biologics for the treatment of patients with refractory asthma represented a marked therapeutic advance. For more than 10 y, the only biologic available has been the monoclonal anti-IgE antibody omalizumab, reserved for patients with asthma caused by perennial allergen. In recent years, other biologics have been licensed for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. They include monoclonal antibodies that target the Th2-pathway cytokines, such as IL-5 (mepolizumab and reslizumab) or its receptor (benralizumab) and the IL-4 and IL-13 receptor (dupilumab). The effectiveness of these biologics was demonstrated in several placebo controlled trials, the main outcomes being the significant reduction of the rate of asthma exacerbation and the improvement of respiratory function in actively treated patients. Based on the further understanding of the pathogenesis of asthma, new cytokines network and new targets are emerging, such as thymic stromal lymphopoietin, which can activate Th2 cells, innate lymphoid cells, or both, or prostaglandin D2 (PGD2), to develop additional biologics.

Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics (part I): allergy as an important differential diagnosis in complex immune-derived adverse events

Purpose

Biotechnological substances (BSs) are strongly relied upon to prevent rejection of transplanted organs, and to treat oncological, allergological, and other inflammatory diseases. Allergic reactions to partly foreign biologics can occur due to their potential immunogenicity. The severity of an immune response to a biological drug may range from no clinical significance to a severe, life-threatening anaphylactic reaction.

Methods

Detailed searches were performed on Pubmed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to include all available publications. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and British Columbia Cancer Agency Drug Manual databases were screened for hypersensitivity reaction (HSR), infusion reaction, injection site reaction, urticaria, and anaphylaxis for individual BSs.

Results

Treatment with BSs can cause various types of HSR. These are mentioned in the literature with definitions such as allergic reactions, anaphylactoid reactions, anaphylaxis, HSR, infusion reactions, injection site reactions, cytokine release syndrome, and urticaria. Due to the overlap in signs and symptoms in the reported descriptions, it is not always possible to differentiate these reactions properly according to their pathomechanism. Similarly, many data reported as anaphylaxis actually describe severe anaphylactic reactions (grades III or IV).

Conclusion

There is an urgent need for a simpler symptom- or system-based classification and scoring system to create an awareness for HSRs to BSs. A better understanding of the pathophysiology of HSRs and increased clinical experience in the treatment of side effects will provide timely control of unexpected reactions. As a result, immunotherapy with BSs will become safer in the future.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab) for severe allergic asthma: A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines - recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma

Allergic asthma is a frequent asthma phenotype. Both IgE and type 2 cytokines are increased, with some degree of overlap with other phenotypes. Systematic reviews assessed the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab (alphabetical order) vs standard of care for patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. All three biologicals reduced with high certainty the annualized asthma exacerbation rate: benralizumab incidence rate ratios (IRR) 0.63 (95% CI 0.50 - 0.81); dupilumab IRR 0.58 (95%CI 0.47 - 0.73); and omalizumab IRR 0.56 (95%CI 0.42 - 0.73). Benralizumab and dupilumab improved asthma control with high certainty and omalizumab with moderate certainty; however, none reached the minimal important difference (MID). Both benralizumab and omalizumab improved QoL with high certainty, but only omalizumab reached the MID. Omalizumab enabled ICS dose reduction with high certainty. Benralizumab and omalizumab showed an increase in drug-related adverse events (AEs) with low to moderate certainty. All three biologicals had moderate certainty for an ICER/QALY value above the willingness to pay threshold. There was high certainty that in children 6-12 years old omalizumab decreased the annualized exacerbation rate [IRR 0.57 (95%CI 0.45-0.72)], improved QoL [relative risk 1.43 (95%CI 1.12 -1.83)], reduced ICS [mean difference (MD) -0.45 (95% CI -0.58 to -0.32)] and rescue medication use [ MD -0.41 (95%CI -0.66 to -0.15)].

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab) for severe eosinophilic asthma. A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines - recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV₁ , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV₁ . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.

Infectious Implications of Interleukin-1, Interleukin-6, and T Helper Type 2 Inhibition

Targeting interleukins that drive innate inflammation has expanded treatments of autoinflammatory and autoimmune disorders. Interleukin (IL)-1 inhibition has proven useful for monogenic autoinflammatory syndromes, and IL-6 inhibition for autoimmune arthritides. Biological therapies impeding these pathways impair detection and containment of pathogens, particularly invasive bacteria, reflecting the importance of IL-1 and IL-6 in communicating danger throughout the immune system. Biologics targeting T helper type 2 inflammation are used to treat specific allergic, atopic, and eosinophilic diseases. They may impair protections against local herpesvirus reactivations while augmenting antiviral responses to respiratory viruses. Their risks with helminth exposures have yet to be defined.

Benralizumab: an updated treatment of eosinophilic asthma

Introduction: An estimated 5-10% of people with asthma have disease which remains uncontrolled despite maximal treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Benralizumab is currently licensed for use in patients with severe asthma who have an eosinophilic phenotype. Benralizumab depletes eosinophils by binding to the anti-IL5 receptor on the surface of eosinophils, mitigating the effect of IL-5 on eosinophil proliferation and survival, and induces natural killer cell-mediated eosinophil apoptosis.Areas covered: The authors review the mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic profile of Benralizumab and summarize the scientific data supporting its clinical efficacy and safety in severe asthma. Further, the authors highlight future studies of Benralizumab in asthma and other diseases.Expert opinion: Benralizumab lowers exacerbation rates, symptom burden, and oral glucocorticoid use, and improves lung function, in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. Benralizumab is well tolerated and is an attractive choice for patients and physicians due to its eosinophil-depleting mechanism of action and less frequent dosing schedule. More data is needed to guide the selection of biologic therapy in severe asthma patients.