Efficacy of omalizumab (Xolair®) in patients with moderate to severe predominately chronic oral steroid dependent asthma in Taiwan: a retrospective, population-based database cohort study

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.

Can omalizumab be an alternative treatment for non-atopic severe asthma? A real-life experience with omalizumab

Introduction

Omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, has largely demonstrated its efficacy in severe allergic asthma. There are limited data about the effectiveness of omalizumab in patients with non-atopic severe persistent asthma. In this study, we aimed to determine the effect of omalizumab in patients with non-atopic severe asthma and compare the data obtained with those in patients with allergic severe asthma.

Materials and Methods

This study was an observational, retrospective, tertiary single-center study that assessed and compared the clinical outcome of adult patients with severe asthma (165 atopic and 41 non-atopic) who have been on omalizumab for one year or longer between January 2008 and January 2020. Effectiveness was assessed by considering symptom scores (GINA symptom control score), daily systemic corticosteroids (SCS) dosage, blood eosinophil counts, pulmonary function, and number of severe exacerbations and hospitalizations within the last one year.

Result

Omalizumab exhibited significant improvement in the clinical status of non-atopic asthma patients as measured by GINA symptom score [decreased from 3.77 ± 0.63 to 1.36 ± 1.27 (p<0.001)], the number of emergency room visits for asthma [decreased from 11.25 ± 14.69 to 0.25 ± 0.55 (p<0.001)], and the number of hospitalizations [decreased from 1.17 ± 2.87 to 0.14 ± 0.36 (p= 0.036)]. These results were not significantly different from those obtained in allergic asthma patients. FEV1 improved significantly from 2.08 ± 0.86 to 2.14 ± 0.84 (p= 0.041) and oral corticosteroid doses decreased significantly from 1.67 ± 7.49 to 0.46 ± 2.74 (p= 0.015) in the only atopic group.

Conclusions

Omalizumab, which is a proven and effective treatment option for allergic asthma, may also be an efficacious alternative option in non-atopic severe asthma.

Biologics for severe asthma: The real-world evidence, effectiveness of switching, and prediction factors for the efficacy

Biologics have been a key component of severe asthma treatment, and there are currently biologics available that target IgE, IL-5, IL-4/IL-13, and TSLP. Randomized controlled trials have established clinical evidence, but a significant portion of patients with severe asthma in real-life settings would have been excluded from those trials. Therefore, real-world research is necessary, and there is a growing body of information about the long-term efficacy and safety of biologics. Multiple clinical phenotypes of severe asthma exist, and it is crucial to choose patients based on their phenotypes. Blood eosinophil count is an important biomarker for anti-IL-5 therapies, and FeNO and eosinophil counts serve as prediction markers for dupilumab. Reliable markers for predicting response, however, have not yet been fully established for omalizumab. Identification of clinical or biological prediction factors is crucial for the path toward clinical remission because the current treatment goal includes clinical remission, which is defined as a realistic goal for remission off treatment. Additionally, since there are now multiple biologic options and overlaps in eligibility for biologics in clinical practice, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of switching the biologics is crucial. Investigations into the clinical trajectory following the cessation of biologics are another important issue. Recent research on omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab's real-world effectiveness, the prediction factor for the efficacy, and the impact of switching or discontinuation will be reviewed and discussed in this review.

Elevated Serum Sialic Acid Levels May be Associated With Diabetes Retinopathy: A Cross-Sectional Study in Ghana

This study determined the association between serum sialic acid (SSA) and metabolic risk factors in Ghanaian Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) with and without micro vascular complications. This cross-sectional study recruited 150 T2DM out-patients visiting the diabetic Clinic at the Tema General Hospital, Ghana. Fasting blood samples were collected and analyzed for Total Cholesterol (TC), Triglyceride (TG), Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C), High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C), Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG), Glycated Haemoglobin (HbA1c), SSA and C-Reactive Protein. SSA levels were significantly higher in diabetics with retinopathy (210.12 ± 85.09mg/dl) compared with those with nephropathy and those without complication (p-value= 0.005). Body adiposity index (BAI) (r= -0.419, p-value = 0.037) and Triglyceride (r= -0.576, p-value = 0.003), had a moderate negative correlation with SSA levels. In a One-Way Analysis of Covariance (Adjusted for TG and BAI), SSA could distinguish between diabetics with retinopathy and those without complications (p-value = 0.004) but not nephropathy (p-value = 0.099). Within group linear regression analysis showed that Elevated serum sialic acid was found in type 2 diabetic patients with retinopathic micro-vascular complications. Therefore, estimation of sialic acid levels may help with the early prediction and prevention of microvascular complications occurring due to diabetes, thereby decreasing the mortality and morbidity.

Omalizumab: An Optimal Choice for Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma

Omalizumab is the first monoclonal antibody that was globally approved as a personalized treatment option for patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. This review summarizes the knowledge of almost two decades of use of omalizumab to answer some important everyday clinical practice questions, concerning its efficacy and safety and its association with other asthma-related and drug-related parameters. Evidence suggests that omalizumab improves asthma control and reduces the incidence and frequency of exacerbations in patients with severe allergic asthma. Omalizumab is also effective in those patients in reducing corticosteroid use and healthcare utilization, while it also seems to improve lung function. Several biomarkers have been recognized in predicting its efficacy in its target group of patients, while the optimal duration for evaluating its efficacy is between 16 and 32 weeks.

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.

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.

Effectiveness of Low-Dose Itraconazole in Fungal-Associated Severe Asthma: A Retrospective Study

Background

The efficacy of antifungal therapy in fungal-associated severe asthma remains controversial.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the differences in the clinical presentation and response to antifungal therapy between severe asthmatics with fungal sensitization and positive fungal isolates.

Methods

This retrospective study included 73 patients with severe asthma from January 2004 to December 2017. We examined the presentation, medication, exacerbations, pulmonary function, serum IgE, blood eosinophils, and sputum culture results. Follow-up care was provided to each patient for minimum 3 years.

Results

We classified the patients into four groups: group 1, neither fungal sensitization nor fungal isolates in the sputum (n=16); group 2, positive fungal sensitization (n=16); group 3, positive fungal isolates (n=31); and group 4, concomitant positive fungal sensitization and positive fungal isolates (n=10). There were four participants in group 2, 15 in group 3, and 6 in group 4 had received itraconazole therapy for 3 months. Patients in group 3 presented with lower serum IgE level than those in groups 2 and 4. Antifungal therapy significantly improved ACT score during the first year in groups 3 (from 18 [15–22] to 24 [23–24], p=0.0004) and resulted in a long-lasting ACT improvement till the third year in group 3 (from 18 [15–22] to 24 [22–24], p=0.0013).

Conclusion

Antifungal therapy could effectively control the symptoms in patients with severe asthma with positive fungal isolates, contrary to those with merely fungal sensitization; therefore, highlighting the need for a more precise treatment strategy in future for fungal-associated severe asthma.

Systematic Literature Review of Systemic Corticosteroid Use for Asthma Management

Systemic corticosteroid use to manage uncontrolled asthma and its associated healthcare burden may account for important health-related adverse effects. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the real-world extent and burden of systemic corticosteroid use in asthma. We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify English-language articles published in 2010–2017, using search terms for asthma with keywords for oral corticosteroids and systemic corticosteroids. Observational studies, prescription database analyses, economic analyses, and surveys on oral/systemic corticosteroid use in children (>5 yr old), adolescents (12–17 yr old), and adults with asthma were included. We identified and reviewed 387 full-text articles, and our review included data from 139 studies. The included studies were conducted in Europe, North America, and Asia. Overall, oral/systemic corticosteroids were commonly used for asthma management and were more frequently used in patients with severe asthma than in those with milder disease. Long-term oral/systemic corticosteroid use was, in general, less frequent than short-term use. Compared with no use, long-term and repeated short-term oral/systemic corticosteroid use were associated with an increased risk of acute and chronic adverse events, even when doses were comparatively low. Greater oral/systemic corticosteroid exposure was also associated with increased costs and healthcare resource use. This review provides a comprehensive overview of oral/systemic corticosteroid use and associated adverse events for patients with all degrees of asthma severity and exposure duration. We report that oral/systemic corticosteroid use is prevalent in asthma management, and the risks of acute and chronic complications increase with the cumulative oral corticosteroid dosage.

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.

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.

Real-world Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Exacerbations in US Patients With Asthma Newly Treated With Omalizumab

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to examine patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and exacerbations among patients with asthma newly treated with omalizumab.

METHODS

Data for this study were obtained from administrative claims and medical records. The index date was the date of the first claim for omalizumab. All patients had ≥12 months of continuous health plan eligibility before and after the index date. Demographic and clinical characteristics were obtained 12 months before the index date. Treatment patterns of asthma medications, including omalizumab, and asthma exacerbations were evaluated in the preindex and postindex periods.

FINDINGS

The study included 1564 patients. Asthma-related medication use decreased from the preindex to the postindex periods (oral corticosteroids, 83.3%-66.4%, P < 0.001; inhaled corticosteroids [ICSs], 33.1%-26.8%, P < 0.001; long-acting β₂-adrenergic agonists [LABAs], 6.6%-5.2%, P = 0.009; ICS-LABA combination, 69.3%-64.3%, P < 0.001; leukotriene modifiers, 67.8%-59.7%, P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with any asthma exacerbations decreased by 33.6% (66.6%-44.2%, P < 0.001). Notably, the relative decreases in hospitalization and emergency department exacerbations were 79.3% and 72.2%, respectively. A total of 930 patients (59.5%) discontinued omalizumab treatment during the entire postindex period (maximum, 3400 days [approximately 9 years]), with 353 (38.0%) restarting omalizumab treatment.

IMPLICATIONS

In this real-world analysis, patients newly initiating omalizumab therapy for allergic asthma used fewer concomitant asthma medications, while experiencing significant reductions in asthma exacerbations, especially hospitalization- and emergency department-specific exacerbations, from pre- to post-omalizumab treatment initiation periods.

Biologic agents for severe asthma patients: clinical perspectives and implications

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory multifactorial disorder of the airways characterized by the involvement of immune cells and mediators in its onset and maintenance. Traditional therapeutic strategies have been unsatisfactory in controlling the underlying pathology, especially in the more severe states. Hence in the last couple of decades, new biological approaches targeting molecular mediators have been developed. In this narrative review we examine biological agents currently available for the management of severe asthma, focusing our attention on their clinical application, pros and cons, and in particular on gaps regarding the use of these agents. The most well-known and used biologic agent in clinical practice is omalizumab, though there is emerging evidence for mepolizumab too. The future of these biological therapies is to broaden our knowledge of their practical use and ascertain predictive biomarkers, or define an algorithm, useful in the optimal application of these 'biological weapons'.

"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.

Using medication utilization information to develop an asthma severity classification model

Background

Claims data are currently widely used as source data in asthma studies. However, the insufficient information in claims data related to level of asthma severity may negatively impact study findings. The present study develops and validates an asthma severity classification model that uses medication utilization in Taiwan National Health Insurance claims data.

Methods

The National Health Insurance Research Database was used for the years 2006–2012 and included a total of 7221 patients newly diagnosed with asthma in 2007 for model development and in 2008 for model validation. The medication utilization of patients during the first year after the index date was used to classify level of severity, and the acute exacerbation of asthma during the second through fourth years after the index date was used as the outcome variable. Three models were developed, with subjects classified into four, three, and two groups, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Kaplan-Meier survival curve were used to compare the performances of the classification models.

Results

In development data, the distribution of subjects and acute exacerbation rate among the stage 1 to stage 4 were: 62.71%, 5.54%, 22.79%, and 8.96%, and 8.17%, 9.55%, 11.97%, and 14.91%, respectively. The results also showed the higher severity groups to be more prone to being prescribed oral corticosteroids for asthma control, while lower severity groups were more likely to be prescribed short-acting medication and inhaled corticosteroid treatment. Furthermore, the results of survival analysis showed two-group classification was recommended and yield moderate performance (AUC = 0.671). In validation data, the distribution of subjects, acute exacerbation rates, and medication uses among stages were similar to those in development data, and the results of survival analysis were also the same.

Conclusions

Understanding asthma severity is critical to conducting effective, scholarly research on asthma, which currently uses claims data as a primary data source. The model developed in the present study not only overcomes a gap in the current literature but also provides an opportunity to improve the validity and quality of claims-data-based asthma studies.

A review of omalizumab for the management of severe asthma

Despite the expansion of the understanding in asthma pathophysiology and the continual advances in disease management, a small subgroup of patients remain partially controlled or refractory to standard treatments. Upon the identification of immunoglobulin E and other inflammatory mediators, investigations and developments of targeted agents have thrived. Omalizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that specifically targets the circulating immunoglobulin E, which in turn impedes and reduces subsequent releases of the proinflammatory mediators. In the past decade, omalizumab has been proven to be efficacious and well-tolerated in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma in both trials and real-life studies, most notably in reducing exacerbation rates and corticosteroid use. While growing evidence has demonstrated that omalizumab may be potentially beneficial in treating other allergic diseases, its indication remains confined to treating severe allergic asthma and chronic idiopathic urticaria. Future efforts may be focused on determining the optimal length of omalizumab treatment, seeking biomarkers that could better predict treatment response, as well as extending its indications.