Guidance for Administering Biologics for Severe Asthma and Allergic Conditions

Asthma and Cardiovascular Diseases: Navigating Mutual Pharmacological Interferences

Asthma and cardiovascular disease (CVD) often co-exist. When a patient has both conditions, management requires an approach that addresses the unique challenges of each condition separately, while also considering their potential interactions. However, specific guidance on the management of asthma in patients with CVD and on the management of CVD in patients with asthma is still lacking. Nevertheless, health care providers need to adopt a comprehensive approach that includes both respiratory and CVD health. The management of CVD in patients with asthma requires a delicate balance between controlling respiratory symptoms and minimising potential cardiovascular (CV) risks. In the absence of specific guidelines for the management of patients with both conditions, the most prudent approach would be to follow established guidelines for each condition independently. Careful selection of asthma medications is essential to avoid exacerbation of CV symptoms. In addition, optimal management of CV risk factors is essential. However, close monitoring of these patients is important as there is evidence that some asthma medications may have adverse effects on CVD and, conversely, that some CVD medications may worsen asthma symptoms. On the other hand, there is also increasing evidence of the potential beneficial effects of asthma medications on CVD and, conversely, that some CVD medications may reduce the severity of asthma symptoms. We aim to elucidate the potential risks and benefits associated with the use of asthma medications in patients with CVD, and the potential pulmonary risks and benefits for patients with asthma who are prescribed CVD medications.

A survey of severe asthma in Canada: results from the CASCADE practice reflective program

BACKGROUND

Since the last guidance was published by the Canadian Thoracic Society, there have been several advances in the clinical management of severe asthma. To gain a better understanding of the current standards of care and treatment patterns of patients, the CASCADE practice reflective program was established to conduct a real-world analysis of severe asthma management among specialists in Canada with a goal of identifying areas of opportunity to enhance patient management and outcomes.

METHODS

The CASCADE program was a two-part practice reflective and assessment program delivered through an on-line portal for selected specialists (Respirologists and Allergists) in Canada. The program consisted of a one-time overview survey of physician practice to establish overall practice parameters, followed by a review of at least 5 severe asthma patients to establish the current landscape of severe asthma management.

RESULTS

The program collected practice overview surveys from 78 specialists (52 Respirologists, 24 Allergists, and 2 General practice physicians with an interest in respiratory disease) in 8 provinces. Practices included a variety of types in both large metropolitan centres and smaller regional settings. There were 503 patients reviewed and included in the program. Most (65%) patients were currently using a biologic treatment, 30% were biologic naive, and 5% had used a biologic treatment in the past. Most patients (53%) were reported to have mixed allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes, despite a perception that allergic, eosinophilic and mixed phenotypes were evenly balanced in the physician practice. Overall, patients currently treated with biologic agents had parameters suggesting higher control and were more satisfied with treatment. However, there was less than optimal treatment satisfaction for more than half of all patients, particularly for those patients not treated with a biologic agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Phenotyping is hampered by poor availability for several assessments, and the full range of treatments are not currently fully utilized, partly due to physician familiarity with the agents and partly due to prescribing restrictions. Even when treated with biologic agents, patient satisfaction can still be improved.

Biologic therapies for severe asthma with persistent type 2 inflammation

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airways disease with reversible airflow obstruction, characterised in the majority by type 2 airway inflammation. Type 2 inflammation results in secretion of interleukin-4, -5 and -13 in the airways, recruitment of inflammatory cells (especially eosinophils and mast cells), and airway changes such as mucus hypersecretion and increased airway reactivity. Approximately 5 to 10% of people with asthma, despite optimal therapy and adherence to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2 agonists, are unable to obtain good symptom control and continue to experience exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids; this is known as 'severe asthma'. In many cases, this is associated with persistent type 2 inflammation, indicated by the persistent elevation of blood eosinophils or fractional exhaled nitric oxide. In people with severe asthma and persistent type 2 inflammation, biologic (monoclonal antibody) therapy is indicated. Biologic therapies currently available in Australia for asthma are benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab and omalizumab. They are administered subcutaneously and are generally well tolerated. Biologic asthma therapies are very effective in improving symptoms, and reducing the rate of exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids, in people with severe asthma and persistent type 2 inflammation. Inhaled corticosteroid treatment should be continued in people using a biologic therapy.

Effect of Tezepelumab on the Humoral Immune Response to Seasonal Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccination in Patients with Moderate to Severe Asthma: The Phase 3b VECTOR Study

INTRODUCTION

Annual influenza vaccinations are recommended for adolescents and adults with moderate to severe asthma. This study investigated the effect of tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of thymic stromal lymphopoietin, on the humoral immune response to the quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in patients with moderate to severe asthma.

METHODS

VECTOR was a phase 3b, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study. Adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and young adults (aged 18-21 years) with moderate to severe asthma were enrolled across 15 centers in the USA. Patients received tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously at weeks 0, 4, 8, and 12, and a single dose of inactivated quadrivalent seasonal influenza vaccine at week 12 before receiving study treatment. Immediately before vaccination and at 4 weeks postvaccination (week 16), strain-specific antibody responses were assessed for four influenza antigens by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays. Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were randomized to tezepelumab (n = 35) or placebo (n = 35). There were no meaningful differences in HAI or MN antibody responses between treatment groups at week 16. HAI assay geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) for influenza strains were 1.76-7.34 for tezepelumab and 1.46-4.75 for placebo. MN assay GMFRs were 4.00-14.56 for tezepelumab and 3.56-10.62 for placebo. In the HAI assay, a fourfold or larger rise in antibody titer from weeks 12 to 16 occurred in 15.2-78.8% and 15.2-51.5% of tezepelumab and placebo recipients, respectively, and 97.0-100% of patients in both treatment groups achieved an antibody titer of at least 40 at week 16. No unexpected safety findings occurred.

CONCLUSION

There was no observed suppression of the humoral immune response after influenza vaccination in adolescents and young adults with moderate to severe asthma treated with tezepelumab. Therefore, the influenza vaccine can be administered to this patient population during tezepelumab treatment.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT05062759.

Montelukast as a potential treatment for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Montelukast is a leukotriene inhibitor that is widely used to treat chronic asthma and allergic rhinitis. The drug interferes with molecular signaling pathways produced by leukotrienes in a variety of cells and tissues throughout the human body that lead to tightening of airway muscles, production of aberrant pulmonary fluid (airway edema), and in some cases, pulmonary inflammation.

AREAS COVERED

Montelukast has also been noted to have anti-inflammatory properties, suggesting it may have a role in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has been noted to induce misfiring of the immune system in some patients. A literature search of PubMed was performed to identify all relevant studies of montelukast and SARS-CoV-2 through 27 January 2023.

EXPERT OPINION

Montelukast has been the subject of small studies of SARS-CoV-2 and will be included in a large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of outpatients with COVID-19 sponsored by the United States National Institutes of Health known as Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-6. This paper reviews what is known about montelukast, an inexpensive, well-tolerated, and widely available medication, and examines the rationale for using this drug to potentially treat patients with COVID-19.