Predictors of reversible airway obstruction with omalizumab in severe asthma: a real-life study

Association between pre-biologic T2-biomarker combinations and response to biologics in patients with severe asthma

Background

To date, studies investigating the association between pre-biologic biomarker levels and post-biologic outcomes have been limited to single biomarkers and assessment of biologic efficacy from structured clinical trials.

Aim

To elucidate the associations of pre-biologic individual biomarker levels or their combinations with pre-to-post biologic changes in asthma outcomes in real-life.

Methods

This was a registry-based, cohort study using data from 23 countries, which shared data with the International Severe Asthma Registry (May 2017-February 2023). The investigated biomarkers (highest pre-biologic levels) were immunoglobulin E (IgE), blood eosinophil count (BEC) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). Pre- to approximately 12-month post-biologic change for each of three asthma outcome domains (i.e. exacerbation rate, symptom control and lung function), and the association of this change with pre-biologic biomarkers was investigated for individual and combined biomarkers.

Results

Overall, 3751 patients initiated biologics and were included in the analysis. No association was found between pre-biologic BEC and pre-to-post biologic change in exacerbation rate for any biologic class. However, higher pre-biologic BEC and FeNO were both associated with greater post-biologic improvement in FEV1 for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R, with a trend for anti-IL4Rα. Mean FEV1 improved by 27-178 mL post-anti-IgE as pre-biologic BEC increased (250 to 1000 cells/µL), and by 43-216 mL and 129-250 mL post-anti-IL5/5R and -anti-IL4Rα, respectively along the same BEC gradient. Corresponding improvements along a FeNO gradient (25-100 ppb) were 41-274 mL, 69-207 mL and 148-224 mL for anti-IgE, anti-IL5/5R, and anti-IL4Rα, respectively. Higher baseline BEC was also associated with lower probability of uncontrolled asthma (OR 0.392; p=0.001) post-biologic for anti-IL5/5R. Pre-biologic IgE was a poor predictor of subsequent pre-to-post-biologic change for all outcomes assessed for all biologics. The combination of BEC + FeNO marginally improved the prediction of post-biologic FEV1 increase (adjusted R2: 0.751), compared to BEC (adjusted R2: 0.747) or FeNO alone (adjusted R2: 0.743) (p=0.005 and <0.001, respectively); however, this prediction was not improved by the addition of IgE.

Conclusions

The ability of higher baseline BEC, FeNO and their combination to predict biologic-associated lung function improvement may encourage earlier intervention in patients with impaired lung function or at risk of accelerated lung function decline.

Effects of omalizumab on lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With the rise of targeted treatments for asthma, treatment with omalizumab is a new option.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the improvement of pulmonary function with additional omalizumab treatment in patients (⩾6 years old) with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Observational studies of randomized controlled trials of add-on omalizumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma, published from the establishment till August 2022, were retrieved from WAN FANG DATA, PubMed, CNKI, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. Data extraction and quality evaluation were performed on the literature that met the inclusion criteria, using RevMan 5.3 to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled clinical trials were included, involving a total of 3578 patients with asthma, 1856 patients in the omalizumab group, and 1722 patients in the control group. The improvement in Forced expiratory volume in 1 s as a percentage of predicted normal and Forced expiratory volume in 1 s was more pronounced in the omalizumab-treated group [MD = 3.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.89-5.94, p = 0.0002; MD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.05-0.13, p < 0.0001], while the improvement in Morning Peak expiratory flow rate was not statistically different between the two groups (MD = 3.64, 95% CI: -22.17-29.45, p = 0.78).

CONCLUSION

Additional omalizumab treatment showed some improvement in lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ID:CRD42022378498.

Dysfunctional mucociliary clearance in asthma and airway remodeling - New insights into an old topic

Bronchial asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory condition characterized by chronic airway inflammation, airway hyperresponsiveness and airway structural changes (known as remodeling). The clinical symptoms can be evoked by (non)specific triggers, and their intensity varies over time. In the past, treatment was mainly focusing on symptoms' alleviation; in contrast modern treatment strategies target the underlying inflammation, even during asymptomatic periods. Components of airway remodeling include epithelial cell shedding and dysfunction, goblet cell hyperplasia, subepithelial matrix protein deposition, fibrosis, neoangiogenesis, airway smooth muscle cell hypertrophy and hyperplasia. Among the other important, and frequently forgotten aspects of airway remodeling, also loss of epithelial barrier integrity, immune defects in anti-infectious defence and mucociliary clearance (MCC) dysfunction should be pointed out. Mucociliary clearance represents one of the most important defence airway mechanisms. Several studies in asthmatics demonstrated various dysfunctions in MCC - e.g., ciliated cells displaying intracellular disorientation, abnormal cilia and cytoplasmic blebs. Moreover, excessive mucus production and persistent cough are one of the well-recognized features of severe asthma and are also associated with defects in MCC. Damaged airway epithelium and impaired function of the ciliary cells leads to MCC dysfunction resulting in higher susceptibility to infection and inflammation. Therefore, new strategies aimed on restoring the remodeling changes and MCC dysfunction could present a new therapeutic approach for the management of asthma and other chronic respiratory diseases.

[Unmet Needs in Severe Allergic Asthma]

Severe asthma affects 3%-10% of the world's population, according to estimates by the Global Initiative for ASTHMA (GINA). Allergic asthma is one of the most common phenotypes of severe asthma and it is characterized by allergen-induced type 2 inflammation in which immunoglobulin E (IgE) is a key mediator, making it an important therapeutic target. The introduction of targeted biological therapies or treatments has entered the management for severe asthma in the era of precision medicine, and the goal of treatment is clinical remission of the disease. There is a significant percentage of patients with severe allergic asthma who do not respond to treatments and whose symptoms are not controlled. In this paper, a group of experts in the management of severe allergic asthma reviewed and evaluated the most relevant evidence regarding the pathophysiology and phenotypes of severe allergic asthma, the role of IgE in allergic inflammation, allergen identification, techniques, biomarkers and diagnostic challenges, available treatments and strategies for disease management, with a special focus on biological treatments. From this review, recommendations were developed and validated through a Delphi consensus process with the aim of offering improvements in the management of severe allergic asthma to the professionals involved and identifying the unmet needs in the management of this pathology.

Omalizumab for Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical setting: a prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This single-centre, prospective, observational study included Chinese patients aged 14-75 years with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma according to the Global Initiative for Asthma criteria. Omalizumab was administered subcutaneously, and the investigator collected real-world data on exacerbations, steroid exposure, pulmonary function and laboratory assessments at weeks 16, 24, 52, 104 and 156 after treatment initiation. The primary outcome was reduced exacerbations, measured as the proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year following omalizumab initiation. Bowker's test for paired proportions was performed to compare exacerbation rates before and after treatment initiation. A generalised linear mixed model was used to compare the number of exacerbations.

RESULTS

The mean treatment duration was 46.6 weeks for the full analysis set (n=398). The proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year before and after omalizumab initiation was 80.4% (181/225) and 18.7% (42/225) (difference: -61.8%, 95% CI -68.5 to -54.0, p<0.0001), respectively. At week 52, 67.4% of patients discontinued oral corticosteroids, and 19.5% reduced inhaled corticosteroids. The Asthma Control Test scores increased by 4.6 at week 52 from baseline (p<0.001). Forced expiratory volume in 1 s increased by 11.2% and 9.0% at weeks 24 and 52, respectively, from baseline (p<0.01). Injection site reactions (5.2%) were the most frequently reported adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, omalizumab treatment remarkably reduced exacerbations in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. Omalizumab reduced the use of oral corticosteroids and improved asthma control and pulmonary function.

Omalizumab in Severe Asthma: Effect on Oral Corticosteroid Exposure and Remodeling. A Randomized Open-Label Parallel Study

INTRODUCTION

Data on the clinical efficacy and remodeling of omalizumab therapy in patients on oral corticosteroids (OC) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study is to show that in patients with corticosteroid-dependent asthma, omalizumab is a corticosteroid-sparing therapy able to inhibit airway remodeling and to reduce disease burden (lung function impairment, exacerbations).

METHODS

This study is a randomised open-label study evaluating the addition of omalizumab to the standard of care in patients with severe asthma receiving oral corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was represented by the change in OC monthly dose by the end of treatment and secondary endpoints included spirometry changes, airway inflammation (FeNO), number of exacerbations and airways remodelling assessed by bronchial biopsies studied by transmission electron microscopy. As a safety variable, adverse effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Efficacy was assessed for 16 patients in the omalizumab group and 13 in the control group. The final cumulative mean monthly OC doses were 34.7 mg and 217 mg for the omalizumab and control group, respectively; the mean difference between groups adjusted for baseline was -148.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) -243.6, -52.5; p = 0.004]. OC withdrawal of 75% versus 7.7% (p = 0.001) was observed in the omalizumab and control group, respectively. Omalizumab provided a slowing of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) loss (70 mL versus 260 mL), a significant decrease in FeNO values and a reduction in the annual relative risk of clinically significant exacerbations of 54%. The treatment was well tolerated. The morphological study showed a significant decrease in basement membrane thickness in the omalizumab group (6.7 µm versus 4.6 µm) compared with controls (6.9 µm versus 7 µm) [mean difference between groups adjusted for baseline was -2.4 (95% CI -3.7, -1.2; p < 0.001], as well as a decrease in intercellular spaces (1.18 µm versus 0.62 µm and 1.21 µm versus 1.20 µm, p = 0.011, respectively). A qualitative improvement was also observed in the treated group.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab showed a marked OC-sparing capacity and was associated with an improvement in clinical management that correlated with bronchial epithelial repair. In OC-dependent asthma, reversibility of remodelling is possible; the concepts that basement membrane enlargement is detrimental and that chronic airway obstruction is systematically irreversible are outdated (EudraCT: 2009-010914-31).

Exploring the Interaction between Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide and Biologic Treatment in Severe Asthma: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is a biomarker of airway inflammation associated with airway hyper-responsiveness and type-2 inflammation. Its role in the management of severe asthmatic patients undergoing biologic treatment, as well as FeNO dynamics during biologic treatment, is largely unexplored.

PURPOSE

The aim was to evaluate published data contributing to the following areas: (1) FeNO as a predictive biomarker of response to biologic treatment; (2) the influence of biologic treatment in FeNO values; (3) FeNO as a biomarker for the prediction of exacerbations in patients treated with biologics.

METHODS

The systematic search was conducted on the Medline database through the Pubmed search engine, including all studies from 2009 to the present.

RESULTS

Higher baseline values of FeNO are associated with better clinical control in patients treated with omalizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab. FeNO dynamics during biologic treatment highlights a clear reduction in FeNO values in patients treated with anti-IL4/13 and anti-IL13, as well as in patients treated with tezepelumab. During the treatment, FeNO may help to predict clinical worsening and to differentiate eosinophilic from non-eosinophilic exacerbations.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher baseline FeNO levels appear to be associated with a greater benefit in terms of clinical control and reduction of exacerbation rate, while FeNO dynamics during biologic treatment remains a largely unexplored issue since few studies have investigated it as a primary outcome. FeNO remains detectable during biologic treatment, but its potential utility as a biomarker of clinical control is still unclear and represents an interesting research area to be developed.

Upper airway disease diagnosis as a predictive biomarker of therapeutic response to biologics in severe asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease sharing airway instability but with different biology, risk factors, and response-to-therapy patterns. Biologics have revolutionized the one-size-fits-to-all approach to personalized medicine in severe asthma (SA), which relies on the identification of biomarkers that define distinct endotypes. Thus, blood eosinophils and, to some extent, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) can predict the response to approved anti-type 2 (T2) biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL-5, and anti-IL-4R alpha), whereas age at onset and comorbidities such as anxiety/depression, obesity, reflux, and upper airway disease (UAD) also influence therapeutic responses in SA. In this article, focusing on the predictive value of biomarkers for the therapeutic response to biologics in SA, we first summarize the level of prediction achieved by T2 biomarkers (blood eosinophils, FeNO) and then review whether data support the predictive value of upper airway diagnosis on such outcomes. Post hoc analysis of most studies with T2 biologics suggests that chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and, to a lower extent, allergic rhinitis may help in predicting clinical response. Considering that T2 biologics are now also approved for the treatment of severe CRSwNP, diagnosis of upper airway disease is a key step in determining eligibility for such therapy.

Role of clinical biomarkers in predicting the effectiveness of omalizumab

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether baseline clinical biomarkers and characteristics can be used to predict the responsiveness of omalizumab.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients with severe asthma who received omalizumab treatment and collected their baseline data and relevant laboratory examination results along with case records of omalizumab treatment responsiveness after 16 weeks. We compared the differences in variables between the group of patients that responded to omalizumab therapy and the non-responder group, and then performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Finally, we analyzed the difference in response rate for subgroups by selecting cut-off values for the variables using Fisher's exact probability method.

RESULTS

This retrospective, single-center observational study enrolled 32 patients with severe asthma who were prescribed daily high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2 receptor agonists on long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists with or without OCS. Data on age, sex, BMI, bronchial thermoplasty, FeNO, serum total IgE, FEV1, blood eosinophils, induced sputum eosinophils, blood basophils, and complications were not significantly different between the responder and non-responder groups. In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression, all the variants were not significant, and we were unable to build a regression model. We used normal high values and the mean or median of variables as cut-off values to create patient subgroups for the variables and found no significant difference in the omalizumab response rate between the subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The responsiveness of omalizumab is not associated with pretreatment clinical biomarkers, and these biomarkers should not be used to predict the responsiveness of omalizumab.

The new indications for biologicals in type 2 diseases: perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a literature review of what is on the market and under study for some diseases treated with drugs targeting type 2 (T2) inflammation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Literature data have shown that drugs targeting type 2 inflammation are effective in asthma and nasal polyposis, conditions for which they are on the market, and have promising expectations in the case of eosinophilic esophagitis, especially using anti-IL-5/IL-5 receptor and IL-4 receptor antibodies, while concerning eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangitis (EGPA), mepolizumab (MEP) was approved by FDA and EMA as a drug for the treatment of this condition because of the promising results obtained in trials and in real life.

SUMMARY

The use of these drugs is certainly an important achievement in the treatment of complex diseases such as those mentioned above, which are too often orphaned from innovative treatments and limited to the use of immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroid for their control.

Comparison between clinical trials and real-world evidence studies on biologics for severe asthma

In recent years, the more widespread availability of biological drugs with specific mechanisms of action has led to significant breakthroughs in the management of severe asthma. Over time, numerous randomised clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of these biologics and define the eligibility criteria of patients suitable for various therapeutic options. These studies were conducted under controlled conditions not always applicable to real life. For this and other reasons, real-world evidence and pragmatic studies are required to provide useful information on the effectiveness of biological drugs and their safety, even in the long term. Because differences in outcomes have sometimes emerged between clinical trials and real-life studies, it is important to clarify the causes of these discrepancies and define the significance of the results of studies conducted in the course of daily clinical practice. Thus, a scientific debate is ongoing, and no consensus has been reached. The purpose of this narrative review is to analyse the differences between randomised trials and real-world evidence studies, focusing on their roles in guiding clinicians among different therapeutic options and understanding the reasons for the large discrepancies often found in the results obtained.

Research advances in airway remodeling in asthma: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Asthma is a common chronic disorder of the airway, and its disability and mortality rates continue to increase each year. Due to the lack of an ideal treatment, asthma control in China remains unsatisfactory. Airway remodeling is the pathological basis for the eventual development of the fixed airflow limitation in asthmatic patients. Early diagnosis and the prevention of airway remodeling has the potential to decrease disease severity, to improve control, and to prevent disease expression.

Methods

This article presents an overview. The literature was combed through via CNKi and PubMed according to the listed keywords. We considered Chinese and English original publications (basic science and clinical), reviews and abstracts of 21th Century.

Key Content and Findings

We review the pathological features and pathogenesis of, and the interventional treatment options for airway remodeling in asthmatic patients, emphasizing the importance of airway remodeling in asthma and providing novel insights into the prevention and control of asthma.

Conclusions

Thus, there have been research advances in airway remodeling, especially in the areas of slowing down or reversing airway remodeling. As growing studies showed, treating airway remodeling is a promising strategy in preventing the occurrence and progression of asthma. Breakthroughs in these difficulties airway remodeling still facing will open up new avenues in the research and treatment of asthma.

Predictive biomarkers for response to omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Predicting omalizumab treatment response has been a challenge and significant aspect for selecting suitable severe allergic asthma patients for omalizumab use.

OBJECTIVE

To determine which domains of pretreatment baseline characteristics predict omalizumab treatment response among asthmatic patients.

METHODS

Electronic bases were searched for eligible studies that reported potential biomarkers that could predict omalizumab responsiveness and efficacy. Patients who accepted omalizumab treatment were stratified into responders and non-responders. WMD, OR, and their 95%CI were used to access the differences between those omalizumab receivers. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted for potential heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 41 studies evaluating efficacy predictors of omalizumab were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that omalizumab responders had significantly younger age in the adult subgroup, higher pretreatment total serum IgE level, percent predicted FEV₁ and FeNO than that non-responder. We further confirmed that higher blood eosinophil counts and total serum IgE levels are useful markers for selecting asthma patients who may benefit more from omalizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-treatment blood eosinophil counts and total serum IgE level can be a useful efficacy predictor in selecting allergic asthma patients for omalizumab treatment.

Normalisation of airflow limitation in asthma: Post-hoc analyses of TRIMARAN and TRIGGER

Background

In asthma, persistent airflow limitation (PAL) is associated with poorer control, lung function decline and exacerbations. Using post‐hoc analyses we evaluated: the relationship between post‐salbutamol PAL at screening, airflow limitation (AL) during 52 weeks treatment with extrafine beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium (BDP/FF/G) versus BDP/FF and the risk of moderate/severe asthma exacerbations.

Methods

TRIMARAN and TRIGGER were double‐blind studies comparing BDP/FF/G with BDP/FF (TRIMARAN medium‐dose ICS; TRIGGER high‐dose) in adults with uncontrolled asthma. Patients were subgrouped according to post‐salbutamol PAL status at screening, and AL over the 52‐week treatment period.

Results

Most patients with post‐salbutamol PAL at screening had AL at all on‐treatment visits (TRIMARAN 62.8%; TRIGGER 66.8%). A significantly higher proportion of patients had normalised airflow on ≥1 follow‐up visit when receiving BDP/FF/G than BDP/FF (TRIMARAN 44.1 vs. 33.1% [p = 0.003]; TRIGGER 40.1 vs. 26.0% [p < 0.001]). In patients with post‐salbutamol PAL at screening and normalised AL at ≥1 follow‐up visit, exacerbation rates were 15% (p = 0.105) and 19% (p = 0.039) lower in TRIMARAN and TRIGGER versus those with AL on all visits. There was a trend to lower exacerbation rates in patients receiving BDP/FF/G than BDP/FF, particularly in patients in whom AL was normalised.

Conclusion

In these analyses, AL in asthma was associated with an increased exacerbation incidence. Inhaled triple therapy with extrafine BDP/FF/G was more likely to normalise airflow, and was associated with a trend to a lower exacerbation rate than BDP/FF, particularly in the subgroup of patients in whom treatment was associated with airflow normalisation.

ClinicalTrials.gov: TRIMARAN, NCT02676076; TRIGGER, NCT02676089.

Variability of Type 2 inflammatory markers guiding biologic therapy of severe asthma: A 5-year retrospective study from a single tertiary hospital

Background

Currently, biotherapy is mainly administered to treat patients with severe asthma with the Type 2 (T2) inflammation phenotype. The variability of T2 inflammatory markers remains poorly understood.

Objective

We aimed to describe the individual distributions of different biomarkers at varying thresholds and their variation patterns in participants with severe asthma.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data of participants who had completed 2 or more fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and peripheral blood eosinophil counts in our centre within 5 years. The individual distribution of biomarkers (blood or sputum eosinophils, FeNO, and serum total IgE) with repeated measurements at different thresholds was analysed. The varied patterns of biomarkers were analysed by cluster analysis.

Results

A total of 241 eligible participants were screened. Through long-term longitudinal multiple measurements, we found that approximately 50% of severe asthmatics had blood eosinophil levels fluctuating around the threshold defined by biological agents. FeNO persisted at levels >19.5 ppb or 25 ppb in more than half of patients; about 30% of participants crossed this threshold. In our centre, 47.4% of participants consistently exceeded sputum eosinophils >3%, and 47.4% of patients crossed this threshold. Approximately 66.7% of participants had more than 50% alterations of serum total IgE, and 98.1% of participants continued to have IgE levels greater than 30 IU/mL. We used cluster analysis to classify variability and levels of FeNO and blood eosinophils and identified 4 patient clusters. Cluster 1 can be summarised as T2 severe asthma with low blood eosinophil levels and stability. Cluster 2 can be summarised as asthma with continuous increase and small fluctuations in various T2 inflammatory markers. Cluster 3 can be summarised as a non/low-T2 inflammatory phenotype. Cluster 4 can be summarised as a stable, moderate T2 inflammatory phenotype.

Conclusion

We identified the distributions and variable patterns of the T2 inflammatory markers currently used to guide asthma biotherapy in clinical practice. The longitudinal comprehensive multiple assessments of T2 inflammatory markers provide support for initiating biologic therapy patients with severe asthma whose biomarker levels vary.

Effectiveness of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma: A retrospective study in China

BACKGROUND

We conducted the first real-world study of treatment with omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, in Chinese patients with severe allergic asthma.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was the steroid-sparing effect of omalizumab after 12 and 16 weeks of treatment. Characteristics of the patient population, treatment patterns, response rate, and other measures of therapeutic effectiveness were also reported.

METHODS

This nationwide, retrospective, real-world study was conducted in patients with severe allergic asthma who were treated with omalizumab in China. Data, including demographics, Asthma Control Test (ACT) and laboratory and lung function test results, and omalizumab use information, were extracted from patient records collected as part of a previously conducted real-world survey (Asthma Group of the Respiratory Disease Society of the Chinese Medical Association).

RESULTS

In total, 139 patient records were included; 131 and 118 patients remained on treatment at the ≥12- and ≥16-week time points, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation age and median asthma duration (interquartile range) were 47.4 ± 14.3 and 7 (4, 15) years, respectively; 75.6% of patients had a history of allergic disease. Reductions (versus baseline) in inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2 agonists or oral corticosteroids were reported in 61.1% and 63.6% of patients at ≥12 and ≥ 16 weeks, respectively. There were significant improvements in ACT scores (6.08, P < .001) and nitric oxide fraction in exhaled air (-13.0, P = .01) from baseline. Multivariate analysis revealed that age and allergic medical history were predictors of omalizumab treatment response. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Real-world omalizumab treatment was efficacious and well-tolerated in Chinese patients with severe allergic asthma.

Biologicals for severe asthma: what we can learn from real-life experiences?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe asthma is a serious disease affecting about 5-10% of asthmatic patients. Often patients with this kind of asthma requires periodical courses or daily intake of oral corticosteroids, to control symptoms. In the last few years several biological drugs have been developed with the aim to decrease exacerbations and reduce or suspend intake of systemic steroids in severe asthmatic patients. Clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy and the safety of biological antibodies in asthma, but it is already known that randomized controlled trials alone are not sufficient to provide complete information on a drug.

RECENT FINDINGS

After marketing of monoclonal antibodies has been developed several real-life studies with the aim to observe how drugs, tested only on trial patients, are able to provide adequate effectiveness even on 'real' patients; indeed, it is well known that the latter differ in some characteristics from the patients of the trials.

SUMMARY

The results of this analysis confirm the good efficacy of the biologics similarly in real-life patients, also ensuring a promising safety even in periods of observation longer than those of the randomized controlled trials.

An Emerging Role for Exhaled Nitric Oxide in Guiding Biological Treatment in Severe Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with regard to the inflammatory pathways activated. In recent years, biologic drugs (monoclonal antibodies) directed towards specific components of type 2 inflammation have been approved for the treatment of severe asthma. Phenotyping of patients with severe asthma and evaluation of biomarkers have been recommended to help identify patients who are candidates for treatment with biologics and to monitor treatment responses. Fractional exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) is a biomarker of type 2 inflammation in asthma, signaling activation of Interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13 pathway. FeNO could be useful to assess treatment response or identify candidates for a specific drug that acts on type 2 inflammation mechanisms linked to Nitric Oxide (NO) production, such as the IL-4/IL-13 pathway or upstream processes. The value of FeNO as a biomarker predictive of responses to the biologics available for treating severe asthma is discussed based on the published studies at the moment of the review.

Effectiveness of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma with and without chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a PROXIMA study post hoc analysis

Background

A significant proportion of patients with severe asthma may also suffer from nasal polyposis, which is commonly defined as chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), the presence of which may adversely affect asthma treatment outcomes. The biologic agent omalizumab is effective as add-on therapy in patients with severe allergic asthma. The aim of this post hoc analysis of the PROXIMA study was to compare the efficacy of omalizumab between patients with severe allergic asthma, with and without comorbid CRSwNP.

Methods

PROXIMA was a prospective observational 2-part study conducted in Italy in adult patients with severe allergic asthma, where, in the second part, patients eligible for add-on omalizumab initiated treatment for 12 months. Patient baseline data such as comorbidities and history of exacerbations were collected. Outcomes were asthma control (Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ]), lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁]) and exacerbation rate. The post hoc analysis compared these outcomes between the cohort with comorbid CRSwNP and the cohort without CRSwNP.

Results

Of 123 patients included in this analysis, 17 (13.8%) were in the CRSwNP cohort. There was no significant difference between cohorts in baseline clinical characteristics or in change from baseline at 12 months in ACQ values,  % of predicted FEV₁ or annual asthma exacerbation rate, although results were numerically in favor of the CRSwNP cohort versus the non-CRSwNP cohort. The proportion of patients who achieved an improvement in all three outcomes was numerically greater in the CRSwNP cohort (35.7% vs 23.0%).

Conclusions

In an observational real-world setting, add-on omalizumab for severe allergic asthma was effective in improving asthma control, lung function and in reducing exacerbations, including in those patients with CRSwNP.

Prediction of response to biological treatment with monoclonal antibodies in severe asthma

In recent years, major developments have occurred in severe asthma management. Different asthma phenotypes and subgroups have been identified and new treatment options have become available. A total of five monoclonal antibodies are currently approved in severe asthma treatment: omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. These drugs have been shown to reduce exacerbations and to have an oral corticosteroid-sparing effect in many severe asthma patients. However, biological treatment is not successful in all patients and should be discontinued in non-responsive patients. Treating the right patient with the right biologic, and therefore biologic response prediction, has become a major point of interest in severe asthma management. A variety of response outcomes is utilized in the different clinical trials, as well as a huge range of potential predicting factors. Also, regarding the timing of the response evaluation, there are considerable differences between studies. This review summarizes the results from studies on predicting responses and responders to biological treatment in severe asthma, taking into account clinical, functional and inflammatory parameters assessed prior to the start of treatment as well as following a few months of therapy. In addition, future perspectives are discussed, highlighting the need for more research to improve patient identification and treatment responses in the field of biological treatment in severe asthma.

Real-life studies of biologics used in asthma patients: key differences and similarities to trials

Introduction: The precision medicine approach that is now mandatory for severe asthma management includes the use of novel biologic agents blocking specific immunological mechanisms that are responsible for disease phenotypes and endotypes: monoclonal antibodies blocking IgE, IL-5 and IL-4/IL-13 immunological pathways are so far available. Areas covered: Clinical trials involving a large number of patients proved their efficacy in reducing asthma exacerbations, improving lung function and quality of life, and reducing the need for systemic corticosteroid treatment. Since biologics have been available for routine use, a series of real-life experiences on severe asthmatics treated with them have been published: these studies confirmed the beneficial effects in a real-world setting (effectiveness) of these drugs and showed novel aspects that were not covered by clinical trials, such as their effect on particular subgroup of patients, unexpected adverse events, and potential novel indications. Expert opinion: Both clinical trials and real-life experiences are needed to establish robust data on biologic agents for severe asthma, with real-life studies giving more broader insights on different aspects related to the biologics themselves and to the disease.