Reduction in oral corticosteroid use in patients receiving omalizumab for allergic asthma in the real-world setting

Pulmonology for the rhinologist

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The upper and lower airways are inter-related despite serving different functions and can no longer be considered separately. Rhinologists are becoming increasingly aware of the role the lower airway plays in optimizing outcomes for their patients. This review highlights recent developments in pulmonology that impact rhinologic conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

The unified airway concept now supports the multidisciplinary management of respiratory and rhinologic pathologies. Biomarkers, biologics and the concept of treatable traits have permitted the development of personalized and precise treatment of the entire respiratory tract. The concept of corticosteroid stewardship, the introduction of steroid sparing agents for the treatment of respiratory diseases and the development of biomarkers, now forces us to be more considerate and precise with oral corticosteroid (OCS) prescribing and to consider reduction regimens. Finally, current research on climate change and vaping will allow us to better educate and prepare our patients to improve adherence and avoid exacerbations to maintain optimal global respiratory health.

SUMMARY

The inter-relatedness of the upper and lower airway has encouraged a multidisciplinary focus in respiratory medicine. More research is required to improve the precision respiratory medicine model, particularly in the realm of biomarkers and endotyping. These developments must also consider the impact of climate change, pollution and toxins for us to provide optimum care for our patients.

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.

Severe Asthma Standard-of-Care Background Medication Reduction With Benralizumab: ANDHI in Practice Substudy

BACKGROUND

The phase IIIb, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled ANDHI double-blind (DB) study extended understanding of the efficacy of benralizumab for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. Patients from ANDHI DB could join the 56-week ANDHI in Practice (IP) single-arm, open-label extension substudy.

OBJECTIVE

Assess potential for standard-of-care background medication reductions while maintaining asthma control with benralizumab.

METHODS

Following ANDHI DB completion, eligible adults were enrolled in ANDHI IP. After an 8-week run-in with benralizumab, there were 5 visits to potentially reduce background asthma medications for patients achieving and maintaining protocol-defined asthma control with benralizumab. Main outcome measures for non-oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent patients were the proportions with at least 1 background medication reduction (ie, lower inhaled corticosteroid dose, background medication discontinuation) and the number of adapted Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step reductions at end of treatment (EOT). Main outcomes for OCS-dependent patients were reductions in daily OCS dosage and proportion achieving OCS dosage of 5 mg or lower at EOT.

RESULTS

For non-OCS-dependent patients, 53.3% (n = 208 of 390) achieved at least 1 background medication reduction, increasing to 72.6% (n = 130 of 179) for patients who maintained protocol-defined asthma control at EOT. A total of 41.9% (n = 163 of 389) achieved at least 1 adapted GINA step reduction, increasing to 61.8% (n = 110 of 178) for patients with protocol-defined EOT asthma control. At ANDHI IP baseline, OCS dosages were 5 mg or lower for 40.4% (n = 40 of 99) of OCS-dependent patients. Of OCS-dependent patients, 50.5% (n = 50 of 99) eliminated OCS and 74.7% (n = 74 of 99) achieved dosages of 5 mg or lower at EOT.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate benralizumab's ability to improve asthma control, thereby allowing background medication reduction.

Systemic corticosteroids in asthma: A call to action from World Allergy Organization and Respiratory Effectiveness Group

Systemic corticosteroids (SCS) are a highly effective treatment for acute exacerbations and long-term symptom control in asthma. Long-term SCS use is highly prevalent across all asthma severities, occurring in over 20% of patients with severe or uncontrolled disease globally. It is now well known that exposure to both long-term and repeated acute courses of SCS is associated with a high risk of serious adverse effects (AEs), such as osteoporosis, and metabolic and cardiovascular complications, especially when prescribed onto a background of other corticosteroids. The aim of this call-to-action article, endorsed by the World Allergy Organization and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group, is to review the accumulating evidence on the burden of SCS on patients with asthma and provide an overview of potential strategies for implementing SCS Stewardship. Primary prevention of exacerbations and improvement of asthma control is a key first step in achieving SCS Stewardship, by optimizing maintenance asthma medications and addressing modifiable risk factors, such as adherence and inhaler technique. Other key elements of SCS Stewardship include increasing appropriate specialist referrals for multidisciplinary review, assessment of biomarkers, and consideration of oral corticosteroid-sparing add-on therapies (eg, biologics). In cases where SCS use is deemed clinically justified, it should be tapered to the lowest possible dose. In addition, patients receiving long-term SCS or frequent acute courses should be closely monitored for emergence of SCS-related AEs. Because of the extensive data available on the costly and burdensome AEs associated with SCS use, as well as the range of treatment options now available, there is a need for healthcare providers (HCPs) to carefully evaluate whether the benefits of SCS outweigh the potential harms, to adopt SCS-sparing and Stewardship strategies, and to consider alternative therapies where possible. Development of a structured and collaborative SCS Stewardship approach is urgently required to protect patients from the potential harm of SCS use.

A pragmatic guide to choosing biologic therapies in severe asthma

There are now several monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies (“biologics”) available to treat severe asthma. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE mAb and is licensed in severe allergic asthma. Current evidence suggests it may decrease exacerbations by augmenting deficient antiviral immune responses in asthma. Like all other biologics, clinical efficacy is greatest in those with elevated T2 biomarkers. Three biologics target the interleukin (IL)-5–eosinophil pathway, including mepolizumab and reslizumab that target IL-5 itself, and benralizumab that targets the IL-5 receptor (IL-5R-α). These drugs all reduce the exacerbation rate in those with raised blood eosinophil counts. Mepolizumab and benralizumab have also demonstrated steroid-sparing efficacy. Reslizumab is the only biologic that is given intravenously rather than by the subcutaneous route. Dupilumab targets the IL-4 receptor and like mepolizumab and benralizumab is effective at reducing exacerbation rate as well as oral corticosteroid requirements. It is also effective for the treatment of nasal polyposis and atopic dermatitis. Tezepelumab is an anti-TSLP (thymic stromal lymphopoietin) mAb that has recently completed phase 3 trials demonstrating significant reductions in exacerbation rate even at lower T2 biomarker thresholds.

Many patients with severe asthma qualify for more than one biologic. To date, there are no head-to-head trials to aid physicians in this choice. However, post-hoc analyses have identified certain clinical characteristics that are associated with superior responses to some therapies. The presence of allergic and/or eosinophilic comorbidities, such as atopic dermatitis, nasal polyposis or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, that may additionally benefit by the choice of biologic should also be taken into consideration, as should patient preferences which may include dosing frequency. To date, all biologics have been shown to have excellent safety profiles.

Oral corticosteroid elimination via a personalised reduction algorithm in adults with severe, eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (PONENTE): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm study

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists on how to reduce oral corticosteroids after the initiation of biologics in severe asthma. The PONENTE trial evaluated the effectiveness and safety of a rapid, individualised steroid-reduction algorithm, including adrenal insufficiency monitoring, after benralizumab initiation.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, single-arm study was done at 138 clinical asthma treatment centres across 17 countries. We enrolled adult patients (age ≥18 years) with severe, eosinophilic asthma (blood eosinophil count ≥150 cells per μL at enrolment or ≥300 cells per μL in the previous year) requiring maintenance oral corticosteroids for at least 3 months preceding enrolment. Patients received benralizumab 30 mg (subcutaneous injection) every 4 weeks for three doses, then every 8 weeks thereafter. The oral corticosteroid reduction phase began at week 4 with daily oral corticosteroid dosages reduced by 1-5 mg every 1-4 weeks depending on the starting dosage, asthma control, and adrenal function status. Adrenal function was assessed with an early morning serum cortisol measurement, followed by adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation when required, once patients achieved a daily oral corticosteroid dosage of 5 mg/day for 4 weeks. Repeat cortisol measurements were taken for patients with evidence of adrenal insufficiency at first testing. Asthma control was assessed with the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6) weekly throughout the induction and oral corticosteroid reduction phases. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients eliminating daily oral corticosteroids, sustained for at least 4 weeks, and the percentage achieving elimination or a daily prednisone or prednisolone dosage of 5 mg or less, for at least 4 weeks, if the reason for no further reduction was adrenal insufficiency. Safety and efficacy analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of benralizumab and were descriptive. We present results after the oral corticosteroid reduction phase; a maintenance phase is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03557307.

FINDINGS

Between April 1, 2018, and Sept 5, 2020, of 705 patients assessed for eligibility, 598 were recruited and all received at least one dose of benralizumab. Overall, 376 (62·88%, 95% CI 58·86-66·76) of 598 patients eliminated oral corticosteroids and 490 (81·94%, 78·62-84·94) of 598 eliminated use or achieved a dosage of 5 mg or less if the reason for stopping the reduction was adrenal insufficiency. Subgroup analysis showed that dosage reductions were achieved irrespective of baseline eosinophil count, baseline oral corticosteroid dosage, or oral corticosteroid treatment duration. Adrenal insufficiency was detected in 321 (60%) of 533 patients at first assessment and in 205 (38%) of 533 patients 2-3 months later. The safety profile was consistent with previous experience. Most patients (448 [75%] of 598) had no asthma exacerbations during the oral corticosteroid reduction phase with an annualised exacerbation rate of 0·63. Of 598 patients, 38 (6%) experienced a total of 46 exacerbations resulting in emergency department or urgent care visits or hospitalisations.

INTERPRETATION

Despite a high prevalence of adrenal insufficiency, most patients with eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab achieved elimination of oral corticosteroids or maximal possible reduction using a personalised dosage-reduction algorithm.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Effects of omalizumab on allergic conjunctivitis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of subcutaneous omalizumab therapy on the allergic conjunctivitis symptoms of patients being treated for asthma.

METHODS

A total of 84 eyes of 42 patients who were receiving subcutaneous omalizumab therapy for asthma and complained of allergic conjunctivitis symptoms underwent complete ophthalmic examination. All of the patients were graded according to signs and symptoms and duration of symptoms, evaluated using an ocular severity index (SI) and quality of life questionnaires. Immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels and both initial and final %FEV₁ (forced expiratory volume in the first second) values were also evaluated. p values < 0.05 were accepted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

The study included 36 women (85.7%) and 6 men (14.3%) with a mean age of 54.5 ± 10.8 years. The mean duration of omalizumab therapy was 46 ± 30.9 months. There were statistically significant changes between initial and final values for ocular SI, quality of life, subjective symptom frequency and severity and %FEV1. Final values of SI, quality of life, and symptom severity and frequency were statistically significantly lower compared to initial values, while final %FEV₁ was statistically significantly higher compared to initial value (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab therapy for asthma had a favorable effect on the patients' allergic conjunctivitis symptoms and decreased parameters related to ocular disease severity, improved quality of life and increased %FEV₁values.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

2019/5-5, Trial Registration Date: 28/03/2019, Retrospectively registered.

Long-term corticosteroid use, adrenal insufficiency and the need for steroid-sparing treatment in adult severe asthma

Secondary adrenal insufficiency (AI) occurs as the result of any process that disrupts normal hypothalamic and/or anterior pituitary function and causes a decrease in the secretion of steroid hormones from the adrenal cortex. The most common cause of secondary AI is exogenous corticosteroid therapy administered at supraphysiologic dosages for ≥ 1 month. AI caused by oral corticosteroids (OCS) is not well-recognized or commonly diagnosed but is often associated with reduced well-being and can be life-threatening in the event of an adrenal crisis. Corticosteroid use is common in respiratory diseases, and asthma is a representative condition that illustrates the potential challenges and opportunities related to corticosteroid-sparing therapies. For individuals with severe asthma (approximately 5%-10% of all cases), reduction or elimination of maintenance OCS without loss of control can now be accomplished with biologic therapies targeting inflammatory mediators. However, the optimal strategy to ensure early identification and treatment of AI and safe OCS withdrawal in routine clinical practice remains to be defined. Many studies with biologics have involved short evaluation periods and small sample sizes; in addition, cautious approaches to OCS tapering in studies with a placebo arm, coupled with inconsistent monitoring for AI, have contributed to the lack of clarity. If the goal is to greatly reduce and, where possible, eliminate long-term OCS use in severe asthma through the increasing adoption of biologic treatments, there is an urgent need for clinical trials that address both the speed of OCS withdrawal and how to monitor for AI.

Oral Corticosteroids Dependence and Biologic Drugs in Severe Asthma: Myths or Facts? A Systematic Review of Real-World Evidence

Airway inflammation represents an important characteristic in asthma, modulating airflow limitation and symptom control, and triggering the risk of asthma exacerbation. Thus, although corticosteroids represent the cornerstone for the treatment of asthma, severe patients may be dependent on oral corticosteroids (OCSs). Fortunately, the current humanised monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, and reslizumab have been proven to induce an OCS-sparing effect in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), thus overcoming the problem of OCS dependence in severe asthma. Nevertheless, a large discrepancy has been recognized between selected patients enrolled in RCTs and non-selected asthmatic populations in real-world settings. It is not possible to exclude that the OCS-sparing effect of mAbs resulting from the RCTs could be different than the real effect resulting in clinical practice. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and correlation analysis to assess whether mAbs are effective in eliciting an OCS-sparing effect and overcoming the OCS dependence in severe asthmatic patients in real-world settings. Overall, real-world studies support the evidence that OCS dependence is a real condition that, however, can be found only in a small number of really severe asthmatic patients. In most patients, the dependence on OCS can be related to modifying factors that, when adequately modulated, may lead to a significant reduction or suspension of OCS maintenance. Conversely, in severe asthmatics in whom OCS resistance is proved by a high daily dose intake, mAbs allow reversion of the OCS dependence, leading to the suspension of OCS therapy in most patients or >50% reduction in the daily OCS dose.

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.

Diagnosis and Management of T2-High Asthma

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

Long-term efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with allergic asthma: A real-life study

Background: The efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma have been established in both randomized controlled trials and real-life studies. Objective: To evaluate the sustained effectiveness and safety of long-term treatment with omalizumab in a real-world setting. Methods: In this retrospective study, we included patients treated with omalizumab for at least 8 years in four asthma clinics in Greece. Pulmonary function, asthma control, oral corticosteroids (OCS) dose, and exacerbations were recorded before treatment, 6 months later, and annually thereafter. Adverse events were also recorded. Results: Forty-five patients (66.7% women), mean ± standard deviation (SD) age 55.3 ± 12.2 years, were included. The duration of treatment with omalizumab was 10.6 ± 1.2 years. The annual exacerbation rate decreased from 4.1 before omalizumab initiation to 1.1 after 1 year of treatment and remained low up to the 8th year of treatment (p < 0.001). From the 19 patients who were receiving OCS at baseline, 21.1% patients discontinued after 6 months, 47.4% were still on OCS after 4 years of therapy, and 31.6% were on OCS after 8 years. With regard to the OCS dose, 36.8% of the patients reduced the dose ≥ 50% after 6 months and 68.4% achieved 50% reduction after 2 years. The mean daily OCS dose before omalizumab initiation was 7.8 mg of prednisolone or the equivalent, reduced to 4.7 mg/day after 6 months, which reached 1.6 mg/day after 8 years (p < 0.001). Treatment with omalizumab resulted in significant improvements of asthma control and lung function. No severe adverse events were reported. Conclusion: In this real-life study, omalizumab resulted in significant and sustained improvements in asthma exacerbations, asthma control, and lung function, and had a steroid sparing effect and a good safety profile.

Expert Consensus on the Tapering of Oral Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Asthma. A Delphi Study

Rationale: There is a need to minimize oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in patients with asthma to prevent their costly and burdensome adverse effects. Current guidelines do not provide recommendations for OCS tapering in patients with asthma.Objectives: To develop expert consensus on OCS tapering among international experts.Methods: A modified Delphi method was used to develop expert consensus statements relating to OCS use, tapering, adverse effects, adrenal insufficiency, and patient-physician shared decision-making. Initial statements proposed by experts were categorized, filtered for repetition, and presented back to experts over three ranking rounds to obtain consensus (≥70% agreement).Measurements and Main Results: One hundred thirty-one international experts participated in the study, and 296 statements were ranked. Numerous recommendations and guidance regarding appropriate OCS use were established. Experts agreed that OCS tapering should be attempted in all patients with asthma receiving maintenance OCS therapy, with personalization of tapering rhythm and speed. The importance of recognizing individual adverse effects was also established; however, a unified approach to the assessment of adrenal insufficiency was not reached. Shared decision-making was considered an important goal during the tapering process.Conclusions: In this Delphi study, expert consensus statements were generated on OCS use, tapering, adverse-effect screening, and shared decision-making, which may be used to inform clinical practice. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, highlighting uncertainty among the experts around some aspects of OCS use in asthma, such as adrenal insufficiency, which underscores the need for further research in these domains.

CD3E as a new predictive biomarker of response to omalizumab treatment in asthma patients: Evidence from bioinformatic analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Omalizumab is a bio-targeted agent approved as add-on therapy for the treatment of severe asthma. Most patients with severe asthma show no response to omalizumab. American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Respiratory Society (ERS) recommend blood eosinophil count and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) as biomarkers with high value for increased response to omalizumab and periostin as a biomarker with a low value. In this study, we aimed to identify the biomarkers for predicting treatment response to omalizumab by performing whole blood transcriptional expression profiling using array and clinical data from GSE134544.

METHODS

We analyzed GSE134544 whole blood transcriptional and clinical data of omalizumab treatment using xCell, weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA), gene ontology enrichment analysis, KEGG pathway analysis, protein-protein interaction (PPI) network, and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

We calculated the immune enrichment score using xCell and found that CD4⁺ T cells, CD4⁺ Tem, CD4⁺ memory T cells, CD8⁺ Tcm, and dendritic cells (DC) were relatively higher in responders than in non-responders. Analysis of omalizumab response using WGCNA revealed that the above-mentioned significant immune cells in the red module was relevant to the sample traits; there were 547 genes in the red module. We identified 20 hub genes for the PPI network using cytoHubba, a Cytoscape plugin. Using logistic regression analysis, CD3E was found to be the only significant biomarker, and the area under the curve of ROC curves was 0.763.

CONCLUSION

CD3E maybe a new predictive biomarker of response to omalizumab treatment in asthma patients and be used to select more suitable asthma patients for omalizumab treatment.

Real-World Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Severe Allergic Asthma: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Assessment of clinical outcomes in the real-world corroborates findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis evaluated real-world data of omalizumab on treatment response, lung function, exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), health care resource utilization (HCRU), and school/work absenteeism at 4, 6, and 12 months after treatment.

METHODS

Observational studies in patients with severe allergic asthma (≥6 years) treated with omalizumab for ≥16 weeks, published from January 2005 to October 2018, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. A random-effects model was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

In total, 86 publications were included. Global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) was good/excellent in 77% patients at 16 weeks (risk difference: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.84; I² = 96%) and in 82% patients at 12 months (0.82, 0.73-0.91; 97%). The mean improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 160, 220, and 250 mL at 16 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively. There was a decrease in Asthma Control Questionnaire score at 16 weeks (-1.14), 6 months (-1.56), and 12 months (-1.13) after omalizumab therapy. Omalizumab significantly reduced annualized rate of severe exacerbations (risk ratio [RR]: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.30-0.56; I² = 96%), proportion of patients receiving OCS (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75; I² = 96%), and number of unscheduled physician visits (mean difference: -2.34, 95% CI: -3.54 to -1.13; I² = 98%) at 12 months versus baseline.

CONCLUSION

The consistent improvements in GETE, lung function, and PROs, and reductions in asthma exacerbations, OCS use, and HCRU with add-on omalizumab in real-life confirm and complement the efficacy data of RCTs.

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.

'Real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in adults with severe allergic asthma: a meta-analysis

Background: Severe asthma affects 5-10% of the 350 million people with asthma worldwide. Findings from the authors' previous meta-analysis supported omalizumab use as an adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma. The publication of fourteen new articles necessitates an update of the meta-analysis.Objective: To evaluate the 'real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of acute allergic asthma in adults by calculating pooled effects estimates from data in published articles.Methods: Articles on omalizumab effectiveness in 'real-world' settings were identified. Effect sizes, including point estimates of the proportion of patients who met a given criteria, mean improvements relative to baseline, and change in the proportion of patients requiring oral corticosteroids compared to baseline were extracted. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to pool effect sizes based on proportions. Standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) were calculated from means and standard deviations. Relative risk was calculated from changes in proportions. Variability within and between studies was evaluated.Results: Omalizumab increases the percentage of individuals rated 'good' or 'excellent' on the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness Scale. Omalizumab also improves respiratory function, quality-of-life, and asthma control while reducing medication usage, exacerbations, hospitalizations, and adverse events.Conclusion: 'Real-world' evidence continues to support the use of omalizumab as adjuvant treatment for severe allergic asthma.

Clinical Determinants of Successful Omalizumab Therapy in Severe Allergic Asthma Patients: 4-Year-Long, Real-Life Observation

Introduction

Omalizumab is a high-cost therapy recommended for the treatment of severe allergic asthma.

Objective

To find clinical parameters that are related to the sustained response to omalizumab.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective, real-life, 4-year follow-up was provided in Poland between March 2013 and May 2019. The success of omalizumab was assessed based on composed subjective and objective criteria. Simple/multiple regression analyses were performed to search for predictors of the response to omalizumab.

Results

A total of 989 severe allergic asthma patients were referred for omalizumab therapy, of whom 854 patients were considered eligible for treatment. At weeks 16 and 52, omalizumab was successful in 84% and 91% of patients, respectively. Treatment effectiveness was maintained up to the 4-year follow-up. Four predictors of the response to omalizumab were found at week 16 and two at week 52. The results at week 16 may be used as predictors of success at week 52 based on the model including baseline FEV1% and change in ACQ-7 and miniAQLQ score at week 16: the area under the ROC curve equals 0.746 [95% CI: 0.672–0.820].

Conclusion

Omalizumab therapy is very effective, with this efficacy sustained after 4 years of treatment. Success of the therapy can be predicted from the baseline FEV1% and clinical improvement (based on ACQ-7 and miniAQLQ scores) at week 16.

Oral CorticoSteroid sparing with biologics in severe asthma: A remark of the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI)

According to the data derived from several national and international registries, including SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy), and considering the strong impact that frequent or regular use of oral corticosteroid has on quality of life (QoL) of severe asthmatics, as well as on the costs for managing corticosteroid-related diseases, oral corticosteroid sparing up to withdrawal should be considered a primary outcome in the management of severe asthma. New biologics have clearly demonstrated that this effect is possible, with concomitant reduction in the rate of exacerbations and in symptom control. Then, there is no reason for using so frequently oral corticosteroid before having explored all alternatives currently available for a large part of severe asthmatics.

Real-life safety and efficacy of omalizumab in Japanese patients with severe allergic asthma who were subjected to dosing table revision or expansion: A post-marketing surveillance

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is an anti-immunoglobulin E monoclonal antibody approved for patients with severe allergic asthma in Japan. With regard to omalizumab dosage in Japanese adults with severe allergic asthma in clinical practice settings, this post-marketing surveillance evaluated safety and efficacy of the dosing table revision (DTR) based on a dosing regimen of omalizumab administration every 4 weeks dosing regimen and dosing table expansion (DTE) for patients with baseline IgE levels >700 IU/mL.

METHODS

This 52-week, multicenter study, conducted from September 2013 to November 2018, evaluated omalizumab safety outcomes including adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), efficacy outcomes including Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE), change in oral corticosteroid dose, and asthma exacerbation-related events such as hospitalization, emergency room visits, and worsening of symptoms.

RESULTS

Of the 405 patients registered in the study, safety was evaluated in 392 and efficacy in 390. The mean age of patients was 58.5 years and 58.7% were women. In total, 41.3% of the patients were subjected to DTE and 58.7% to DTR. In the safety dataset, 6.6% experienced an ADR, 32.9% experienced an AE, and 16.1% experienced an SAE. In the efficacy dataset, 63.3% of patients at Week 16 and 63.5% at Week 52 had an 'effective' or 'good' GETE score. Omalizumab was associated with a reduction in worsening of asthma symptoms requiring systemic corticosteroids and frequency of hospitalization. All outcomes were comparable among the DTE and DTR subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study support the safety and efficacy of omalizumab administered based on the revised and expanded dosing table in Japanese patients with severe allergic asthma.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps impact in severe asthma patients: Evidences from the Severe Asthma Network Italy (SANI) registry

BACKGROUND

The clinical and laboratory features of patients enrolled in the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry, a web-based observatory collecting demographic, clinical, functional and inflammatory data of patients with severe asthma were evaluated, with a special emphasis to chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP).

METHODS

For each eligible patients the following information has been collected: demographic data, clinical features, asthma control in the previous month according to the GINA (Global INitiative for Asthma) Guidelines and standardized questionnaires, concomitant regular and on demand treatments and inflammatory markers.

RESULTS

695 patients with severe asthma enrolled in 66 SANI centers were analyzed. The prevalence of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis was 40.6%. Atopic dermatitis and bronchiectasis was significantly more frequent in patients with CRSwNP than in subjects without nasal polyposis; similarly, FeNO values are significantly higher in subject with CRSwNP than in patients without nasal polyposis. Finally, patients with CRSwNP had a significantly higher number of asthma exacerbations per year, more days on oral corticosteroids and were more likely to be OCS long term users.

CONCLUSION

OCS sparing is needed in patients with severe asthma, mainly in subjects with CRSwNP, adopting adequate strategies such as a better adherence to the treatment with inhaled therapy according to the GINA recommendations, the use of biologic agents and a multidisciplinary approach of the patient.

Severe asthma: oral corticosteroid alternatives and the need for optimal referral pathways

OBJECTIVE

Patients with severe asthma require high-dose inhaled corticosteroids, with or without add-on treatments, to maintain asthma control. Because symptom control remains unsatisfactory in some patients despite these therapies, maintenance therapy with oral corticosteroids (OCS) remains considered a treatment option by physicians. Besides physician-diagnosed exacerbations, many patients intermittently self-medicate with OCS during episodes of worsening symptoms or as a prevention of such episodes. However, long-term OCS use is associated with several comorbidities that may decrease health-related quality of life, worsen prognosis, and should ideally require monitoring and management. In this review, we discuss the adverse effects of OCS use, the OCS-sparing effect of biologics in severe asthma, and the need for optimal referral pathways to ensure the best outcomes for those at-risk asthma patients.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies with results on the OCS-sparing effect of biologics in adult severe asthma were selected.

RESULTS

Chronic and intermittent OCS use in asthma is associated with considerable adverse effects in asthma. Omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab reduce the need for OCS in severe asthma, while also reducing the exacerbation rate and improving several patient-related outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Targeted biologic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of uncontrolled severe asthma by reducing or even eliminating the need for OCS and improving other major outcomes. Novel agents are now rapidly increasing the therapeutic armamentarium, but additional efforts are needed to optimize referral pathways in order to ensure sustainable access to these therapies.

Omalizumab and long-term quality of life outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: a systematic review

Background:

Asthma is a highly prevalent chronic inflammatory airways disease, with a considerable impact on quality of life (QoL). To express the effects of asthma on patients’ subjective experience, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) represent an important instrument. The asthma QoL questionnaire (AQLQ) is one of the main PROs among these.

Materials and methods:

To identify long-term asthma-related QoL outcomes associated with omalizumab therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, we developed a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. Published real-world effectiveness studies of adults or adolescents (12 years or older) with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab for at least 48 weeks were reviewed. Sources used were Medline (PubMed), the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar up to February 2018. In addition, a cross-referencing search was conducted to complete the revision.

Results:

A total of 255 potential papers were identified in the first search through the database. After full-text viewing, eight articles were finally included in the review. We summarized the results according to the study design, patient baseline characteristics and effectiveness outcomes assessed by AQLQ score results: variation from baseline to the end of study. Results confirmed the long-term benefits of omalizumab as an add-on therapy in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. Since there is a lot of evidence on omalizumab effectiveness, we aimed to focus on how a therapy can change patient’s QoL in a long time period. Data showed long-term effects of omalizumab treatment on subjective (PROs) and objective (lung function, corticosteroid use, hospitalizations, asthma exacerbation) effectiveness measures.

Conclusion:

Studies included in our review were observational trials that, due to their design, present a potential risk of selection bias in the patients included. Beyond this limit, the evaluation of QoL using the AQLQ showed a clear increase over time, following both 48 weeks and 9 years of observation, where QoL improvements still were significant over baseline values.

Severe asthma phenotypes in patients controlled with omalizumab: A real-world study

BACKGROUND

The appropriate identification of asthma phenotypes of responders to omalizumab would optimize the selection of treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the most frequent clinical phenotypes in patients with severe asthma responding to omalizumab and their clinical and pulmonary function improvement.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, multicenter study. Adult patients with severe asthma, who achieved good control after the first year of treatment with omalizumab were included. Omalizumab was prescribed according to clinical routine practice. Responders were assigned to one pre-established phenotype based on the most predominant one before they had started treatment with omalizumab, all according to the physician's criteria. Data about asthma symptoms, number of non-severe asthma exacerbations, medication intake (inhaled and oral corticosteroids and rescue medication), lung function, high fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and peripheral eosinophils counts were recorded.

RESULTS

Among the 345 patients included, the main phenotypes were severe asthma with frequent exacerbations (29.9%), early-onset allergic asthma (23.8%), severe steroid-dependent asthma (18.8%), and severe eosinophilic asthma (13.6%). Clinical and respiratory changes observed after first year of treatment with omalizumab included: reduction in asthma symptoms, reduction in the use and dose of corticosteroids and need for rescue therapy, improvement of pulmonary function, reduction in the number of episodes of non-severe asthma exacerbations regardless of the duration of severe disease since the diagnosis. Increased blood levels of peripheral eosinophils and high FeNO levels were found at baseline.

CONCLUSION

Several heterogeneous severe asthma phenotypes were observed as good responders to omalizumab.

Economic impact of severe asthma exacerbations in Spain: multicentre observational study

Objective: To describe resource use and costs of severe exacerbations in patients with severe asthma.Method: Secondary analysis of an observational, longitudinal, retrospective study that estimated the economic impact of severe asthma. The study was carried out in severe asthma units of the pulmonology and allergy services of 20 public hospitals (inclusion period: June to November 2016). The study included adult patients diagnosed with severe asthma according to the European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society consensus in the stable phase (no exacerbation during the last 2 months), and with at least one severe exacerbation during the study period (12 months). Healthcare resource use due to severe exacerbations (emergency visits, hospitalizations and pharmacological treatment) was recorded. The direct health costs associated with severe exacerbations were calculated by multiplying the resources used by the corresponding unit cost (in 2018 euros).Results: 134 patients with ≥1 severe exacerbation were included: 63% were female and the mean age was 54 years. 249 severe exacerbations were registered. There were 1.5 physician visits at primary care, hospital care and/or emergency room per episode, 13% of episodes required hospitalization, with a mean hospital stay of 7.2 days. Systemic corticosteroids were prescribed in 92% of exacerbations. The mean direct cost was €758.7/exacerbation (95% confidence interval: 556.8-1,011.1), of which 82% was due to hospitalizations (€623.3/episode). Considering only episodes requiring hospital admission, the mean cost increased by €4,997/exacerbation.Conclusions: It was estimated that the economic impact of a severe exacerbation in Spanish patients with severe asthma was €758.7/exacerbation.

'Real-life' experience in asthmatic children treated with omalizumab up to six-years follow-up

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Omalizumab is present in international guidelines for the control of severe asthma, but data on the long-term effects in children are limited. Our objective was to perform a 'real-life' long-term trial of omalizumab in children with allergic asthma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational single center 'real-life' study was performed. Data for treatment, lung function, side effect, asthma exacerbations and hospitalizations were recorded at six months and annually.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients <18 years of age were enrolled. Median treatment period was 2.9 (0.5-6). Fluticasone dose for the maintenance treatment decreases significantly at six months (452mcg/day to 329.89mcg/day, respectively). This difference was maintained throughout the follow-up. Nobody used oral corticosteroid after six months. The rate of hospital admissions and visits to the emergency department for asthma exacerbations decreased significantly in the third years and fourth years follow-up, respectively. There was an improvement in lung function. Mean values of FEV₁ and FEF_25-75% before treatment were 79.88 and 62.94, respectively; after six months of treatment a statistically significant change was seen with a mean FEV₁ of 92.29 and FEF_25-75% of 76.31 (p=0.0001). Lung function values were above normal throughout the six years of treatment. No side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall in 'real life' omalizumab in children reduces asthma exacerbations and hospitalizations, improves lung function, and decreases the maintenance therapy. It is shown to be safe for up to six years of treatment in children.

Short- and long-term real-world effectiveness of omalizumab in severe allergic asthma: systematic review of 42 studies published 2008-2018

INTRODUCTION

Omalizumab is a recombinant monoclonal anti-IgE antibody approved in the US as add-on treatment in moderate-to-severe allergic asthma (in severe allergic asthma [SAA] in Europe). A 2016 review of 24 real-world effectiveness studies in SAA published between 2008-2015 concluded that omalizumab was associated with significant improvements in objective and subjective outcomes with benefits extending beyond 2 years. Several new real-world studies have been published since, bringing the total to 42 studies. Areas covered: This systematic review of 42 studies published since 2008 updates and extends the 2016 review on the real-word evidence on omalizumab in SAA. It offers greater granularity as to time windows within which outcomes are reported and includes studies extending well beyond 4 years post omalizumab initiation. Expert commentary: This review firmly establishes the short-term effectiveness of omalizumab in adolescent and adult patients with SAA at 1 year, and provides strong evidence of long-term effectiveness up to 4 years and emergent evidence of effectiveness beyond 4 years. In the aggregate, these 42 studies underscore the long-term effectiveness of omalizumab in terms of: reducing exacerbations and symptoms, achieving asthma control, improving lung function, enhancing quality of life, decreasing emergency department visits and hospitalizations, and promoting concomitant medication-sparing.

Omalizumab as alternative to chronic use of oral corticosteroids in severe asthma

Systemic/oral corticosteroids (OCS) have been used for decades in the management of acute asthma exacerbations and chronically in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. However, while OCS are effective at treating acute exacerbations, there is only empirical evidence regarding the efficacy of OCS at reducing the rate of exacerbations. Evidence, although scarce, is suggestive of high exacerbation rates in severe asthma patients even when receiving maintenance treatment with OCS. In addition, use of OCS is associated with undesirable effects. Despite all this, physicians have continued to use OCS for managing severe asthma and acute exacerbation due to the lack of availability of effective alternatives. Fortunately, in the last decade several biologics have been proven safe and effective for patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. This has led to the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) recommending the use of biologics, instead of maintenance OCS, in patients with severe asthma (GINA Step 5). These include one biologic targeting immunoglobulin E (IgE) (omalizumab), and different biologics targeting interleukin-5 (IL-5), the IL-5 receptor (IL-5R) or IL-4 receptor α-unit (IL-4R α), including mepolizumab (subcutaneous), reslizumab (intravenous), benralizumab (subcutaneous) and dupilumab (subcutaneous). Omalizumab for the treatment of severe allergic asthma reduces exacerbations, irrespective of blood eosinophil levels. Anti-IL-5/IL-5R biologics are indicated in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and repetitive exacerbations, irrespective of the presence or absence of allergy. Recently, an anti-IL4Rα biologic has been approved by the FDA for eosinophilic phenotype or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. Finally, physicians should consider using biologics as an alternative to chronic OCS therapy.

The Asthma Controller Step-down Yardstick

Asthma guidelines recommend a control-based approach to disease management in which the assessment of impairment and risk is linked to step-based therapy. Using this model, controller treatment is adjusted-upward or downward-according to a patient's level of asthma control over time. Strategies for stepping up controller therapy are well described, and the adult and pediatric Asthma Yardsticks provide operational recommendations based on patient profiles. Strategies for stepping down controller treatment are less clear, although stepping down to the minimum effective therapy is important and should be considered when a patient's asthma has been well controlled for an adequate period as defined by risk and impairment. This Yardstick presents recommendations for when and how to step down asthma controller therapy according to guideline-defined control levels. The objective is to provide clinicians who treat patients with asthma with a practical and clinically relevant framework for implementing a step-down in controller therapy.

Tolerability of Omalizumab in Asthma as a Major Compliance Factor: 10-Year Follow Up

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data related to real life, long-term safety, tolerability and compliance of omalizumab treatment in asthma patients beyond 6 years.

AIM

Study aimed to assess safety, tolerability, compliance and all reasons for treatment discontinuation during 10 years on omalizumab.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

This is a retrospective, observational study of uncontrolled asthma patients receiving omalizumab for the last 10 years. All data were collected from patients' files (demographics, adverse events, comorbidities, compliance index, reasons for discontinuation of omalizumab). Reactions to omalizumab were classified as local and systemic, and their severity as mild, moderate or severe. Reactions were either immediate (minutes to hours after drug administration) or delayed (after days). Compliance to omalizumab, defined as Compliance index (CI), was calculated by comparing milligrams of given to milligrams of prescribed dose/ per year.

RESULTS

Out of 35 patients receiving omalizumab, 15 drop out at different time points mostly due to treatment efficacy or appearance of new comorbidities. Patients who continue for the next ten years had mild to moderate adverse events related to omalizumab. There was no increased risk of severe adverse events during 10 years on omalizumab. Patient's treatment tolerability, despite mild to moderate adverse events, is in favour of compliance.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with omalizumab mildly decreased over 10 years but was not affected by severe adverse events of treatment or new comorbidities. Although, omalizumab is safe medicine appearance of new comorbidities has to be closely followed up.

Omalizumab effectiveness in patients with severe allergic asthma according to blood eosinophil count: the STELLAIR study

Omalizumab is a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody used to treat severe allergic asthma (SAA). The aim of the STELLAIR study was to determine the importance of pre-treatment blood eosinophil count as a predictive measure for response to omalizumab.

This retrospective real-life study was conducted in France between December 2015 and September 2016 using medical records of SAA omalizumab-treated patients. Response to omalizumab was assessed by three criteria: physician evaluation, reduction of ≥40% in annual exacerbation rate and a combination of both. Response rate was calculated according to blood eosinophil count measured in the year prior to omalizumab initiation.

872 SAA omalizumab-treated patients were included by 78 physicians (723 adults (age ≥18 years) and 149 minors (age 6–17 years)). Blood eosinophil count was ≥300 cells·µL⁻¹ in 52.1% of adults and 73.8% of minors. By physician evaluation, 67.2% of adults and 77.2% of minors were responders and 71.1% adults and 78.5% minors had a ≥40% reduction in the exacerbation rate. In adults, the response rate for combined criteria was 58.4% (95% CI 53.2–63.4%) for blood eosinophils ≥300 cells·µL⁻¹ (n=377) and 58.1% (95% CI 52.7–63.4%) for blood eosinophils <300 cells·µL⁻¹ (n=346).

This study shows that a large proportion of patients with SAA have a blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells·µL⁻¹, and suggests that omalizumab effectiveness is similar in “high” and “low” eosinophil subgroups.

Omalizumab is a treatment option for severe allergic asthma irrespective of blood eosinophil counthttp://ow.ly/7tQh30iXNTW

"Real-life" Efficacy and Safety Aspects of 4-Year Omalizumab Treatment for Asthma

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of omalizumab in asthma in a real-life setting.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This 4-year observational study included 65 patients treated with omalizumab during clinic visits; treatment response was rated as excellent, good, and partial based on a modified physician's Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (mGETE) scale of emergency room visits (ERV), hospitalization, use of oral corticosteroids, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β-agonist (LABA) dose, and short-acting β-agonist rescue. The following tests were done: forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and the asthma control test (ACT). Measurements were performed 1 month before therapy and at 16 weeks, 1 year, and 4 years of treatment. Statistical analyses were done using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman rank correlation, and McNemar χ2 test.

RESULTS

The dropout rate was 15 (18.5%): 8 nonresponders (10.0%); 2 patients died (2.5%), and 5 were lost to follow-up (6.25%). Treatment response was excellent in 35 (53.8%); good in 23 (35.4%), and partial in 7 patients (10.8%). The number of excellent responders increased from 35 (53.8%) at 16 weeks to 48 (73.8%) at the 4-year follow-up. The number of patients who did not require ERV improved from 0 to 59 (90.8%), and the lowest rate of hospitalization was 1 in year 4 (p < 0.001); patients who did not require courses of oral corticosteroids improved from 0 to 54 (83%). ICS/LABA dose significantly reduced from 65 (100%) to 25 (38.5%) after 4 years of treatment (p < 0.001); ACT scores significantly increased from 15 ± 3 at baseline to 23 ± 3 (p < 0.001) and FEV1 level from 55.6 ± 10.6 to 76.63 ± 10.34 at year 4.

CONCLUSION

In this study, omalizumab therapy resulted in better asthma control, and was effective and well tolerated as an add-on therapy for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.

4-month omalizumab efficacy outcomes for severe allergic asthma: the Dutch National Omalizumab in Asthma Registry

Background

Omalizumab is licensed as add-on therapy for patients with severe allergic asthma. Response is in most studies scored by the physician’s global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE). A good clinical and validated parameter for treatment response is currently missing. Also, there are no established criteria for identifying patients who will respond to omalizumab based on pre-treatment characteristics. The Dutch National Omalizumab in Asthma Registry was developed in 2011 to better evaluate inclusion criteria and measure treatment response after 4 months.

Methods

This is a “real world” prospectively designed, observational data registry in which the outcomes of patients who received omalizumab between 2012 and 2015 were evaluated. Data were collected from all centers in the Netherlands comprising demographic features, criteria for starting treatment, GETE, FEV1, oral corticosteroid use and ACQ.

Results

65.5% of the 403 patients had a good or excellent response to omalizumab after 16 weeks according to the treating physician GETE. 64.5% fulfilled all the criteria for prescribing omalizumab at baseline. The mean ACQ improved from 2.96 at baseline to 1.83 at 16 weeks (p < 0.001). 75.3% of the responders showed more than 0.5 points improvement in the ACQ. The mean FEV1 increased from 71.58 to 79.06 (p < 0.001). There was no relationship between patients with a FEV1 <80 and ≥80% at baseline and response (p = 0.981). Most of the responders had a considerable improvement of FEV1 either/or ACQ or OCS use (88.3%). While 86.7% of the responders had an improvement of either ACQ or FEV1. 75.4% of the responders had an improvement of ACQ, while 50.4% had an improvement of FEV1. Finally 11.7% of the patients with no improvement of FEV1, ACQ or OCS use were considered to have a good response.

Conclusions

This registry of 403 inadequately controlled severe allergic asthma patients in the Netherlands showed a good or excellent response of 65.5% to omalizumab after 16 weeks, in accordance with previous studies. The assumption that careful registration would lead to higher response rates could not be supported by the data from this registry. Improvement of ACQ appears to be a useful additional assessment tool to measure response in omalizumab treated patients.

Long-term "real-life" safety of omalizumab in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma: A nine-year study

BACKGROUND

Randomized Controlled Trials showed that omalizumab exhibited a good safety and tolerability profile in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. However, safety data of long-term treatment with omalizumab are scarce. Our aim was to assess the safety of omalizumab in patients under long-term treatment in a real-life setting.

METHODS

Difficult-to-control asthmatic patients treated with omalizumab up to 9 years were retrospectively evaluated. Mild to severe adverse events any and reasons for discontinuation were recorded.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients (26.4% males, mean age 49.9 ± 14.9 years) were included: mean treatment length, 3.8 ± 2.6 years; mean individual monthly dose, 514.5 ± 345.7 mg (range, 150-1200 mg). A total of 10,472 single injections were given cumulatively to the 91 patients (115 single injections per patients, on average, over a treatment period up to 9 years). Fifty-nine patients (64.8%) were treated for a period of time from 3 to 9 years, 14 of whom from 6 to 9 years. A high proportion of patients who discontinued treatment dropped out within the first year (18, 39.1%), mainly for reasons unrelated to treatment. Six patients (6.6%) discontinued omalizumab for treatment-related adverse events: arthralgia/myalgia (3 patients); urticaria, angioedema (1 patients); metrorrhagia (1 patient); relapsing herpes labialis (1 patient). Four other patients complained of mild adverse events (rhinitis/conjunctivitis, injection site reaction, fatigue, thrombosis) but continued the treatment. Anaphylaxis was not reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with omalizumab appears remarkably safe and well tolerated in real-life setting. Prolonged omalizumab treatment for many consecutive years did not increase the risk of side effects, particularly anaphylaxis.

Phenotype-Driven Therapeutics in Severe Asthma

Inhaled corticosteroids are the mainstay of asthma treatment using a step-up approach with incremental dosing and additional controller medications in order to achieve symptom control and prevent exacerbations. While most patients respond well to this treatment approach, some patients remain refractory despite high doses of inhaled corticosteroids and a long-acting β-agonist. The problem lies in the heterogeneity of severe asthma, which is further supported by the emergence of severe asthma phenotypes. This heterogeneity contributes to the variability in treatment response. Randomized controlled trials involving add-on therapies in poorly controlled asthma have challenged the idea of a "one size fits all" approach targeting specific phenotypes in their subject selection. This review discusses severe asthma phenotypes from unbiased clustering approaches and the most recent scientific evidence on novel treatments to provide a guide in personalizing severe asthma treatment.

Targeted therapy in severe asthma today: focus on immunoglobulin E

Asthma is a complex chronic inflammatory disease of multifactorial etiology. International guidelines increasingly recognize that a standard "one size fits all" approach is no longer an effective approach to achieve optimal treatment outcomes, and a number of disease phenotypes have been proposed for asthma, which has the potential to guide treatment decisions. Among the many asthma phenotypes, allergic asthma represents the widest and most easily recognized asthma phenotype, present in up to two-thirds of adults with asthma. Immunoglobulin E (IgE) production is the primary and key cause of allergic asthma leading to persistent symptoms, exacerbations and a poor quality of life. Therefore, limiting IgE activity upstream could stop the entire allergic inflammation cascade in IgE-mediated allergic asthma. The anti-IgE treatment omalizumab has an accepted place in the management of severe asthma (Global Initiative for Asthma [GINA] step 5) and represents the first (and, currently, only) targeted therapy with a specific target in severe allergic asthma. This review summarizes current knowledge of the mechanisms and pathogenesis of severe asthma, examines the actual role of IgE in asthma and the biological rationale for targeting IgE in allergic asthma and reviews the data for the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of severe asthma. Current knowledge of the role of IgE in asthma, extensive clinical trial data and a decade of use in clinical practice has established omalizumab as a safe and effective targeted therapy for the treatment of patients with severe persistent IgE-mediated allergic asthma.

Oral corticosteroid exposure and adverse effects in asthmatic patients

BACKGROUND

Significant adverse effects (AEs) have been associated with continuous exposure to oral corticosteroids (OCSs). The potential association with intermittent exposure is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the association between OCSs and AEs based on the number of OCS prescriptions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of asthmatic patients 18 years and older in the 2000-2014 MarketScan data set. Propensity score matching was used at baseline (12 months before the index date: first OCS use). Logistic regression was used to examine the association between OCSs and new incident AEs (either combined or individual) controlling for covariates. Follow-up continued for 24 months minimum and 10 years maximum after the index date.

RESULTS

There were 72,063 and 156,373 subjects in the OCS and no OCS cohorts, respectively. Subjects taking 4 or more OCS (1-3) prescriptions within the year had 1.29 (1.04) times the odds of experiencing a new AE within the year. Each year of exposure to 4 or more OCS prescriptions (current and past) resulted in 1.20 times the odds of having an AE in the current year. Exposure to 4 or more prescriptions was associated with significantly greater odds of AEs for osteoporosis, hypertension, obesity, type 2 diabetes, gastrointestinal ulcers/bleeds, fractures, and cataracts (odds, 1.21-1.44 depending on the AE).

CONCLUSION

Although previous research has documented the deleterious effect of continuous OCS exposure in patients with severe asthma, our results suggest that each OCS prescription might result in a cumulative burden on current and future health regardless of dose and duration. OCS-sparing strategies are extremely important to improve patient outcomes.

"Real-life" Effectiveness Studies of Omalizumab in Adult Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

After the approval of omalizumab for severe allergic asthma, a total of 25 studies have evaluated the effectiveness of omalizumab under "real-life" conditions of heterogeneity in patients, clinicians, sites, and treatment patterns.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of omalizumab focusing on treatment response, lung function, quality of life, symptom control, corticosteroid use, and exacerbations and hospitalizations at 4-6, 12, and 24 months.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase for real-life studies on omalizumab in severe asthma published up to 2015. Three effect size types were extracted: single-point proportions; mean ± SD of change relative to baseline as raw numbers and standardized as Cohen's d; and changes in proportions of patients as relative risk. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to account for within- and between-study heterogeneity. Studies were weighted by the DerSimonian and Laird method.

RESULTS

Per data available at the 3 time points, omalizumab therapy was consistently associated with large proportions of patients classified as "good" to "excellent" treatment responders (Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness scale); improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, quality of life (Asthma-related Quality-of-Life Questionnaire scale), and asthma symptom control (Asthma Control Test scale); reductions in oral and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use; and reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of noncontrolled studies documents the real-life pharmacotherapeutic effectiveness of omalizumab, as add-on treatment to ICS ± long-acting β₂-agonists agents, in improving outcomes in patients with severe allergic asthma under conditions of heterogeneity in patients, clinicians, sites, and treatment patterns. The results mirror, complement, and extend the efficacy data from randomized controlled trials.

[Omalizumab: Beyond anti-IgE properties]

INTRODUCTION

Omalizumab is used as a treatment for severe allergic asthma. Its intended mechanism of action is based on its anti-IgE proprieties. However, recent studies have highlighted other mechanisms of action.

STATE OF THE ART

Omalizumab treatment is associated with a decrease in the number of dendritic cells, T and B lymphocytes and eosinophils. This anti-inflammatory activity is characterized by a decrease in the levels of several cytokines involved in the recruitment, activation and survival of eosinophils and mastocytes, and in a Th2 orientation of the immune response. A modulation of bronchial remodeling by omalizumab has recently been shown. A decrease in the production of extracellular matrix components and in the proliferation of smooth muscle cells could be involved in this modulation. These mechanisms of action could explain in part the clinical efficiency of omalizumab in non-allergic conditions such as non-allergic asthma, non-allergic urticaria or nasal polyposis.

CONCLUSION

A precise knowledge of the mechanisms of action of omalizumab could allow the identification of biomarkers predictive of efficacy of this treatment. These could be useful tools in the phenotyping of severe asthma.

The role and choice criteria of antihistamines in allergy management - expert opinion

Allergic diseases are the most common chronic conditions lasting throughout the patient’s life. They not only cause significant deterioration in the quality of life of patients but also lead to significant absenteeism and reduced productivity, resulting in very high costs for society. Effective and safe treatment of allergic diseases is therefore one of the main challenges for public health and should be carried out by all the specialists in family medicine, internists and paediatricians in collaboration with allergists, otorhinolaryngologists and dermatologists. Antihistamines are most commonly used in the treatment of allergies. Several dozen drugs are available on the pharmaceutical market, and their generic forms are advertised widely as very effective drugs for the treatment of allergic diseases. What is the truth? What are the data from clinical trials and observational studies? Are all drugs equally effective and safe for the patient? According to a panel of experts representing various fields of medicine, inappropriate treatment of allergies can be very risky for patients, and seemingly equally acting medications may differ greatly. Therefore, a panel of experts gathered the latest data from the entire scientific literature and analysed the latest standards and recommendations prepared by scientific societies. This paper provides a summary of these studies and highlights the importance for the patient of the proper choice of drug to treat his allergies.

Impact of omalizumab on treatment of severe allergic asthma in UK clinical practice: a UK multicentre observational study (the APEX II study)

OBJECTIVE

To describe the impact of omalizumab on asthma management in patients treated as part of normal clinical practice in the UK National Health Service (NHS).

DESIGN

A non-interventional, mixed methodology study, combining retrospective and prospective data collection for 12 months pre-omalizumab and post-omalizumab initiation, respectively.

SETTING

Data were collected in 22 UK NHS centres, including specialist centres and district general hospitals in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

258 adult patients (aged ≥16 years; 65% women) with severe persistent allergic asthma treated with omalizumab were recruited, of whom 218 (84.5%) completed the study.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was change in mean daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) between the 12-month pre-omalizumab and post-omalizumab initiation periods. A priori secondary outcome measures included response to treatment, changes in OCS dosing, asthma exacerbations, lung function, employment/education, patient-reported outcomes and hospital resource utilisation.

RESULTS

The response rate to omalizumab at 16 weeks was 82.4%. Comparing pre-omalizumab and post-omalizumab periods, the mean (95% CIs) daily dose of OCS decreased by 1.61 (-2.41 to -0.80) mg/patient/day (p<0.001) and hospital exacerbations decreased by 0.97 (-1.19 to -0.75) exacerbations/patient (p<0.001). Compared with baseline, lung function, assessed by percentage of forced expiratory volume in 1 s, improved by 4.5 (2.7 to 6.3)% at 16 weeks (p<0.001; maintained at 12 months) and patient quality of life (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire) improved by 1.38 (1.18 to 1.58) points at 16 weeks (p<0.001, maintained at 12 months). 21/162 patients with complete employment data gained employment and 6 patients lost employment in the 12-month post-omalizumab period. The mean number of A&E visits, inpatient hospitalisations, outpatient visits (excluding for omalizumab) and number of bed days/patient decreased significantly (p<0.001) in the 12-month post-omalizumab period.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the beneficial effects of omalizumab on asthma-related outcomes, quality of life and resource utilisation in unselected patients treated in 'real-world' clinical practice.

'Real-life' effectiveness studies of omalizumab in adult patients with severe allergic asthma: systematic review

We reviewed 24 'real-life' effectiveness studies of omalizumab in the treatment of severe allergic asthma that included 4117 unique patients from 32 countries with significant heterogeneity in patients, clinicians and settings. The evidence underscores the short- and long-term benefit of anti-IgE therapy in terms of the following: improving lung function; achieving asthma control and reducing symptomatology, severe exacerbations and associated work/school days lost; reducing healthcare resource utilizations, in particular hospitalizations, hospital lengths of stay and accident specialist or emergency department visits; reducing or discontinuing other asthma medications; and improving quality of life - thus confirming, complementing and extending evidence from randomized trials. Thus, omalizumab therapy is associated with signal improvements across the full objective and subjective burden of illness chain of severe allergic asthma. Benefits of omalizumab may extend up to 2-4 years, and the majority of omalizumab-treated patients may benefit for many years. Omalizumab has positive short- and long-term safety profiles similar to what is known from randomized clinical trials. Initiated patients should be monitored for treatment response at 16 weeks. Those showing positive response at that time are highly likely to show sustained treatment response and benefit in terms of clinical, quality of life and health resource utilization outcomes.

Omalizumab Improves Quality of Life and Asthma Control in Chinese Patients With Moderate to Severe Asthma: A Randomized Phase III Study

Purpose

Omalizumab is the preferred add-on therapy for patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma and has demonstrated efficacy and safety in various ethnicities. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.

Methods

This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase III study assessed lung function, quality of life, asthma control, and safety of omalizumab after 24-week therapy in Chinese patients (18-75 years of age).

Results

A total of 616 patients were randomized (1:1) to omalizumab or placebo. The primary endpoint, least squares mean treatment difference (LSM-TD) in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (omalizumab vs placebo), at Weeks >20-24 was 8.85 L/min (Full analysis set; P=0.062). Per-protocol analysis set showed significant improvements with LSM-TD of 11.53 L/min in mean mPEF at Weeks >20-24 (P=0.022). The FEV1 % predicted was significantly improved with omalizumab vs placebo from 8 to 24 weeks (after 24-week treatment: LSM-TD=4.12%; P=0.001). At Week 24, a higher proportion of omalizumab-treated patients achieved clinically relevant improvements in standardized AQLQ (58.2% vs 39.3%; LSM=0.51 vs 0.10; P<0.001) and ACQ (49.5% vs 35.5%; LSM=-0.51 vs -0.34; P=0.002) scores vs placebo. Total and nighttime symptom scores reduced significantly with omalizumab vs placebo (LSM-TD=-0.21, P=0.048 and -0.12, P=0.011, respectively). Although the study was not powered to study differences in exacerbation rates (P=0.097), exacerbations in winter months were less frequent in the omalizumab vs placebo group (2 vs 21). Adverse event and severe adverse event rates were comparable between omalizumab and placebo.

Conclusions

Omalizumab improves lung function, quality of life, and asthma control in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma and has a good safety profile.

[Omalizumab: What have we learned after ten years of prescription?]

INTRODUCTION

Omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin E monoclonal antibody, has now been used for ten years as an add-on therapy for severe adult atopic asthma, poorly controlled by high-doses inhaled steroids and long-acting beta-agonists.

BACKGROUND

This innovative therapy has been the first biotherapy used on a large scale in severe asthma. It has shown clinical benefits, especially in the prevention of severe exacerbation, with a satisfactory safety profile. Despite its cost, it is an interesting alternative to continuous oral steroids, which cause more long-term side effects.

PERSPECTIVES

After ten-years of prescription of omalizumab, we review here the mechanism of action, the benefits, the main side effects, the cost-effectiveness and also the alternative indications of this interesting molecule. We also consider the practicalities of using omalizumab, particularly the importance a rigorous assessment of its efficacy after 16 weeks of treatment, and possible future therapeutic indications.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab has proven its efficacy in large randomized studies but also in real life practice in severe allergic asthma.

Bronchial asthma: is personalized therapy on the horizon?

In the last years there is an increasing trend towards personalized medicine for patients with asthma. This is due to the availability of novel specific therapies. These new compounds are supposed to be used in well-defined patient groups, which are likely to respond to these interventions. In addition to already used anti-IgE, novel monoclonal antibodies such as anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-13 are becoming available. Currently clinical trials are ongoing to identify which patient population will respond to these novel therapies.

Omalizumab in an allergology clinic: real life experience and future developments

Omalizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that reduces levels of circulating IgE and expression of IgE high affinity receptor (FCɛRI) on mast cells and basophils. Its role in the therapy of allergic asthma and urticaria is well established. According to GINA guidelines, omalizumab should be considered as an important alternative to systemic corticosteroids in uncontrolled asthma. Several ongoing trials will evaluate omalizumab efficacy in the treatment of other allergic diseases and conditions. Further studies are needed to answer several practical questions on the optimal duration of treatment and possible biomarkers to predefine a cohort of responders to this therapy.