Anti-IL-5 therapy in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma - clinical efficacy and possible criteria for treatment response

Highly Drug-Loaded Nanoaggregate Microparticles for Pulmonary Delivery of Cyclosporin A

Introduction

Nanoparticles have the advantages of improving the solubility of poorly water-soluble drugs, facilitating the drug across biological barriers, and reducing macrophage phagocytosis in pulmonary drug delivery. However, nanoparticles have a small aerodynamic particle size, which makes it difficult to achieve optimal deposition when delivered directly to the lungs. Therefore, delivering nanoparticles to the lungs effectively has become a popular research topic.

Methods

Nanoaggregate microparticles were used as a pulmonary drug delivery strategy for the improvement of the bioavailability of cyclosporine A (CsA). The nanoaggregate microparticles were prepared with polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP) as the excipient by combining the anti-solvent method and spray drying process. The physicochemical properties, aerodynamic properties, in vivo pharmacokinetics and inhalation toxicity of nanoaggregate microparticles were systematically evaluated.

Results

The optimal nanoparticles exhibited mainly spherical shapes with the particle size and zeta potential of 180.52 nm and -19.8 mV. The nanoaggregate microparticles exhibited irregular shapes with the particle sizes of less than 1.6 µm and drug loading (DL) values higher than 70%. Formulation NM-2 as the optimal nanoaggregate microparticles was suitable for pulmonary drug delivery and probably deposited in the bronchiole and alveolar region, with FPF and MMAD values of 89.62% and 1.74 μm. In addition, inhaled NM-2 had C max and AUC0-∞ values approximately 1.7-fold and 1.8-fold higher than oral cyclosporine soft capsules (Neoral®). The inhalation toxicity study suggested that pulmonary delivery of NM-2 did not result in lung function damage, inflammatory responses, or tissue lesions.

Conclusion

The novel nanoaggregate microparticles for pulmonary drug delivery could effectively enhance the relative bioavailability of CsA and had great potential for clinical application.

Lung function trajectories in a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe asthma on mepolizumab, omalizumab, or dupilumab

BACKGROUND

Lung function is an independent predictor of mortality. We evaluated the lung function trajectories of a cohort of patients with asthma receiving biologic therapy.

METHODS

We identified 229 monoclonal antibody-naïve adult patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who initiated omalizumab, mepolizumab, or dupilumab between 2010 and 2022 in a large healthcare system in Boston, MA. Generalized additive mixed models were used to estimate the lung function trajectories during the 156 weeks following biologic initiation. Response was defined as an improvement in FEV1 or a decrease of ≤0.5% per year. The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to assess time to no additional improvement in FEV1 in responders. All models were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, baseline exacerbation rate, and baseline blood eosinophil count.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients initiated mepolizumab, 76 omalizumab, and 65 dupilumab. Baseline eosinophil count was highest in the mepolizumab group (405 cells/mcL) and lowest for omalizumab (250 cells/mcL). Both FEV1 and FVC improved in the mepolizumab group (FEV1 + 20 mL/year; FVC +43 mL/year). For omalizumab, there was an initial improvement in the first year followed by decline with an overall FEV1 loss of -44 mL/year and FVC -32 mL/year. For dupilumab, both FEV1 (+61 mL/year) and FVC (+74 mL/year) improved over time. Fifty percent of the mepolizumab group, 58% omalizumab, and 72% of dupilumab were responders. The median time to no additional FEV1 improvement in responders was 24 weeks for omalizumab, 48 weeks for mepolizumab, and 57 weeks for dupilumab.

CONCLUSION

In this clinical cohort, mepolizumab, omalizumab, and dupilumab had beneficial effects on FEV1 and FVC with distinct post-initiation trajectories.

Long-term multicenter comparison shows equivalent efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in severe asthma therapy

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (biologics) drastically changed severe asthma therapy. Mepolizumab (anti-interleukin (IL) 5), benralizumab (anti-IL5 receptor alpha), and dupilumab (anti-IL4/13) are the most used biologics in this context. While all biologics are efficient individually, the choice of biologic is complicated by insufficient data on their comparative long-term treatment efficacy. Here, we compare the real-life efficacy of these biologics in asthma therapy over 12 months.

METHODS

280 severe asthma patients treated with mepolizumab (129/280, 46%), benralizumab (83/280, 30%) or dupilumab (68/280, 24%) for one year were analyzed retrospectively. Data were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy. Endpoints were changes pulmonary function (PF), exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and dose, asthma control test (ACT) score and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels as well as responder status measured by the recently published "Biologic Asthma Response Score" (BARS).

RESULTS

All biologics led to significant improvements in PF, ACT and OCS dose. Only Mepolizumab and Benralizumab significantly decreased the exacerbation rate, while only Mepolizumab and Dupilumab significantly decreased FeNO. Responder rates measured by BARS were high across all groups: roughly half of all patients achieved full response and most of the remainder achieved at least partial responder status. Overall, outcomes were similar between groups after both 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

All biologics showed great efficacy in individual parameters and high responder rates measured by BARS without a clinically relevant advantage for any antibody. Response was usually achieved after 6 months and retained at 12 months, emphasizing the utility of early response assessment.

The Evolution of Scientific Knowledge in Childhood Asthma over Time: A Surprising History

Asthma is a disease that has been described since the times of Hammurabi. However, it is only since the 1960s that effective therapeutic strategies have been available. Pathogenic mechanisms underlying the disease have been deeply studied, contributing to creating a "patient-specific asthma" definition. Biological drugs have been approved over the last twenty years, improving disease management in patients with severe asthma via a "precision medicine-driven approach". This article aims to describe the evolution of scientific knowledge in childhood asthma, focusing on the most recent biological therapies and their indications for patients with severe asthma.

Tailored Biologics Selection in Severe Asthma

The management of severe asthma presents a significant challenge in asthma treatment. Over the past few decades, remarkable progress has been made in developing new treatments for severe asthma, primarily in the form of biological agents. These advances have been made possible through a deeper understanding of the underlying pathogenesis of asthma. Most biological agents focus on targeting specific inflammatory pathways known as type 2 inflammation. However, recent developments have introduced a new agent targeting upstream alarmin signaling pathways. This opens up new possibilities, and it is anticipated that additional therapeutic agents targeting various pathways will be developed in the future. Despite this recent progress, the mainstay of asthma treatment has long been inhalers. As a result, the guidelines for the appropriate use of biological agents are not yet firmly established. In this review, we aim to emphasize the current state of biological therapy for severe asthma and provide insights into its future prospects.

Tobacco Exposure and Efficacy of Biologic Therapy in Patients With Severe Asthma: A Nationwide Study From the Danish Severe Asthma Register

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials of biologics in severe, uncontrolled asthma have excluded patients with a cumulative tobacco exposure of more than 10 pack-years. Therefore, our knowledge of the impact of smoking exposure on the clinical effects of biologics in severe asthma remains incomplete. However, because many patients with asthma are current or former smokers, investigating the potential impacts of tobacco exposure on the effects of biologic treatment is clinically important.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of smoking history and tobacco exposure on the effectiveness of biologic therapy in real-life patients with severe asthma.

METHODS

We used data from a complete nationwide cohort of patients with severe asthma who were receiving biologics, the Danish Severe Asthma Register. We divided patients according to smoking history and cumulative tobacco exposure and analyzed data at baseline and after 12 months of biologic treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 724 bio-naive patients were identified in the Danish Severe Asthma Register, 398 of whom had never been smokers (55%), 316 were previous smokers (44%), and 10 were current smokers (1%). Within the group of current and former smokers, 37% had 1 to 9 pack-years of tobacco exposure, 26% had 10 to 19 pack-years, and 37% had 20 or more pack-years of tobacco exposure. Patients with tobacco exposure had similar reductions in the number of exacerbations, reductions in maintenance oral corticosteroid use, and improvements in asthma symptoms compared with patients with 0 pack-years.

CONCLUSION

Former smoking history and lifetime tobacco exposure do not have an impact on the efficacy of biologics in patients with severe asthma.

Pretreatment circulating MAIT cells, neutrophils, and periostin predicted the real-world response after 1-year mepolizumab treatment in asthmatics

BACKGROUND

Mepolizumab treatment improves symptom control and quality of life and reduces exacerbations in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, biomarkers that predict therapeutic effectiveness must be determined for use in precision medicine. Herein, we elucidated the dynamics of various parameters before and after treatment as well as patient characteristics predictive of clinical responsiveness to mepolizumab after 1-year treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with severe asthma were treated with mepolizumab for one year. Asthma control test scores, pulmonary function tests, fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, and blood samples were evaluated. Additionally, we explored the role of CD69-positive mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells as a candidate biomarker for predicting treatment effectiveness by evaluating an OVA-induced asthma murine model using MR1 knockout mice, where MAIT cells were absent.

RESULTS

The frequencies of CD69-positive group 1 innate lymphoid cells, group 3 innate lymphoid cells, natural killer cells, and MAIT cells decreased after mepolizumab treatment. The frequency of CD69-positive MAIT cells and neutrophils was lower and serum periostin levels were higher in responders than in non-responders. In the OVA-induced asthma murine model, CD69-positive MAIT cell count in the whole mouse lung was significantly higher than that in the control mice. Moreover, OVA-induced eosinophilic airway inflammation was exacerbated in the MAIT cell-deficient MR1 knockout mice.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that circulating CD69-positive MAIT cells, neutrophils, and serum periostin might predict the real-world response after 1-year mepolizumab treatment. Furthermore, MAIT cells potentially have a protective role against type 2 airway inflammation.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Among Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated With Mepolizumab and Its Effect on Small Airways

BACKGROUND

The major problem at the Cleveland Allergy and Asthma Center was the need for additional therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma patients who were steroid-dependent or required frequent bursts of prednisone.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine the efficacy of monthly mepolizumab (MP) injections up to 6½ years using Asthma Control Quesitonnaire-7 (ACQ-7), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% (FEF25%-75%) overall and among super-responders, and to understand whether FEF25%-75% is an effective parameter to evaluate MP efficacy.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of 67 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and compared the results between 47 super-responders and the rest of the cohort regarding ACQ-6, ACQ-7, eosinophils, FEV1, and FEF25%-75%. The groups of super-responders and all other patients were described with respect to initial and current values of the study end points using medians and 25th and 75th percentiles. Changes from the initial to the current values in the study end points were measured using percent changes. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used within each group to test the null hypothesis of 0 median percent change.

RESULTS

After 6½ years, there were no significant changes in FEV1. The FEF25%-75%, had a significant median percent increase of 40% among the super-responders (P < .001), which was substantially higher (P = .026) than the median percent increase of 13.8% observed among all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MP up to 6½ years was safe and effective, with significant changes to ACQ-7 and FEF25%-75% associated with MP treatment, but not the FEV1. A higher magnitude of changes was observed among super-responders than the rest of the cohort. Changes in FEF25%-75% were more meaningful than changes in FEV1 in evaluating pulmonary function responsiveness of severe eosinophilic asthma to MP.

Biologics for severe asthma and beyond

Advances in pathophysiological understanding and the elucidation of a type 2 inflammatory signature with interleukins 4, 5 and 13 at its center have led to the development of targeted antibody therapies that are now approved for the treatment of severe asthma. In suitable patients, these medications reduce asthma exacerbations and the necessity for oral corticosteroids, improve asthma control, quality of life and lung function. A proportion of patients with severe asthma may even achieve remission under ongoing biologic therapy. Type-2 inflammatory comorbidities are frequent in patients with severe asthma, sharing overlapping pathophysiology and may similarly respond to biologic treatment. Here, we give an overview of the six biologic therapies currently approved for severe asthma and review randomized clinical trials and real-life studies in asthma and other type-2 inflammatory diseases. We also discuss selection of biologics according to licensing criteria, asthma phenotype and biomarkers, monitoring of treatment response and proceedings in case of insufficient outcome under therapy.

Cyclosporine A-loaded chitosan extra-fine particles for deep pulmonary drug delivery: In vitro and in vivo evaluation

In this study, the extra-fine dry powder inhalers (DPIs) with chitosan (CS) as carrier were successfully prepared by ionic gel method combined with spray drying technique for deep pulmonary drug delivery of Cyclosporine A (CsA), using sodium hyaluronate (SHA) and sodium polyglutamate (SPGA) as polyanions. The CsA-loaded DPIs of CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA were spherical particles with wrinkles on the surface, which were more conducive to improving the aerosol properties. The aerodynamic evaluation of CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA showed that the fine particle fraction (FPF) reached up to 79.22 ± 2.12% and 81.55 ± 0.43%, while the emitted fraction (EF) reached 77.15 ± 1.46% and 78.29 ± 2.10%. In addition, the mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) was calculated as 1.58 ± 0.04 μm and 1.94 ± 0.02 μm for CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA, indicating that they were all extra-fine particles (d < 2 μm). These in vitro aerodynamic results showed that CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA could reach the smaller airways, further improving therapeutic efficiency. The cell viability on A549 cell line results showed that CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA were safe to deliver CsA to lungs. The in vivo pharmacokinetics consequence proved that inhalation administration of CS-SHA-CsA and CS-SPGA-CsA could significantly improve the bioavailability of CsA in vivo compared with oral administration of Neoral®, effectively reducing the risk of a series of adverse effects caused by systemic overexposure. In addition, the safety and compatibility of DPIs using SHA, SPGA, and CS as carriers for pulmonary drug delivery was verified by in vivo repeated dose inhalation toxicity. From these findings, the extra-fine DPIs with CS as carrier could be a viable delivery option for the deep pulmonary drug delivery of CsA relative to orally administered drug.

Response to Biologics and Clinical Remission in the Adult German Asthma Net Severe Asthma Registry Cohort

BACKGROUND

Recently, criteria for evaluation of response to biologics have been proposed and the concept of clinical remission has gained attention as a possible goal even in severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the response and remission in the German Asthma Net severe asthma registry cohort.

METHODS

We included adults not using a biologic at baseline (V0) and compared patients treated between V0 and 1-year visit (V1) without using a biologic (group A) to patients starting with a biologic after V0 and continuing it up to V1 (group B). We applied the Biologics Asthma Response Score to quantify composite response in good, intermediate, or insufficient. We defined clinical remission (R) as absence of significant symptoms (Asthma Control Test score ≥ 20 at V1) in the absence of exacerbations and oral corticosteroid therapy.

RESULTS

Group A included 233 and group B 210 patients, the latter receiving omalizumab (n = 33), mepolizumab (n = 40), benralizumab (n = 81), reslizumab (n = 1), or dupilumab (n = 56). At baseline, group B had less often an allergic phenotype (35.2% vs 41.6%), lower Asthma Control Test score (median, 12 vs 14), more exacerbations in the past year (median, 3 vs 2), and more often high-dose inhaled corticosteroid treatment (71.4% vs 51.5%) than group A. After 1 year of treatment, rates of response (good: 61.4% vs 34.8%; intermediate: 26.7% vs 42.9%; insufficient: 11.9% vs. 22.3%) and/or clinical remission (37.6% vs 17.2%) were higher in group B than in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite more severe asthma at baseline, patients treated with biologics had a markedly higher probability of achieving good clinical response and/or remission than patients treated without biologics.

Criteria for evaluation of response to biologics in severe asthma - the Biologics Asthma Response Score (BARS)

BACKGROUND

 The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (biologics) has revolutionized the therapy of severe asthma. Even though there is a response in the majority of patients, the degree of response varies. To date criteria for assessment of response to biologics are not consistently defined.

AIM

 To define criteria for evaluation of response to biologics that are precise, simple and suitable for daily use in order to guide decision-making regarding continuation, switching or stopping of biological therapy.

METHODS

 8 physicians with large experience in this indication, supported by a data-scientist, developed a consensus on criteria to evaluate response to biologics in patients with severe asthma.

RESULT

 We developed a combined score based on current literature, own experience and practicability. It uses the main criteria exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) therapy and asthma control (asthma control test, ACT). We defined thresholds for "good response", "response" and "insufficient response" rated with a score of "2", "1" and "0" respectively: annual exacerbations ("0 or reduction ≥ 75 %", "reduction 50-74 %", "reductio < 50 %"), daily OCS dose ("stopping or reduction ≥ 75 %", "reduction 50-74 %", "reduction < 50 %"), asthma control ("ACT increase ≥ 6 or ≥ 3 with result ≥ 20", "ACT increase 3-5 with result < 20", "ACT increase < 3"). Additional individual criteria like lung function and comorbidities may be important for evaluation of response. We propose 3, 6 and 12 months timepoint for assessment of tolerability and response. Using the combined score, we developed a scheme to guide the decision whether switching the biologic should be considered.

CONCLUSION

 The Biologic Asthma Response Score (BARS) serves as objective and simple tool to evaluate response to biologic therapy using the three main criteria exacerbations, OCS use and asthma control. A validation of the score was initiated.

Emerging Landscape of Nanobodies and Their Neutralizing Applications against SARS-CoV-2 Virus

The new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly altered people's way of life. Despite widespread knowledge of vaccination, mask use, and avoidance of close contact, COVID-19 is still spreading around the world. Numerous research teams are examining the SARS-CoV-2 infection process to discover strategies to identify, prevent, and treat COVID-19 to limit the spread of this chronic coronavirus illness and restore lives to normalcy. Nanobodies have advantages over polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies (Ab) and Ab fragments, including reduced size, high stability, simplicity in manufacture, compatibility with genetic engineering methods, and lack of solubility and aggregation issues. Recent studies have shown that nanobodies that target the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain and disrupt ACE2 interactions are helpful in the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected animal models, despite the lack of evidence in human patients. The creation and evaluation of nanobodies, as well as their diagnostic and therapeutic applications against COVID-19, are discussed in this paper.

Treatment Patterns of Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients With Severe Uncontrolled Asthma Treated by Pulmonologists in Spain

Introduction and objectives

The use of monoclonal antibody (mAb)-based therapies is becoming the new standard of care for severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA). Even though patients may qualify for one or more of these targeted treatments, based on different clinical criteria, a global vision of mAb prescription management in a large sample of hospitals is not well characterised in Spain.The objective was to give a global vision of mAb prescription management in a large sample of hospitals in Spain.

Materials and methods

We used an aggregate data survey method to interview pulmonology specialists in a large sample of Spanish centres (90). The following treatment-related information was obtained on patients treated with mAbs: specific mAbs prescribed, treatment interruption, switch and restart and the reasons for these treatment changes.

Results

mAb prescription was more frequent in females (13.3% females vs 7.4% males; p < 0.001). There were no differences in prevalence by hospital complexity level. In contrast, there were differences by geographical area. Omalizumab was the most prescribed mAb (6.2%), followed by mepolizumab (2.9%). Discontinuation of Omalizumab (due to a lack of effectivity) and switches from this mAb to mepolizumab were more frequent. Very few restarts to the first treatment were observed after a switch from ≥2 mAbs.

Conclusions

Omalizumab appeared as the most prescribed mAb in SUA but was also the most withdrawn; a specific and objective characterisation of patients with SUA, along with asthma phenotyping, and together with further evaluation of safety and effectiveness profiles, will lead to future progress in the management of SUA with mAbs.

Definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma: a systematic review

Background

Biologics have proven efficacy for patients with severe asthma but there is lack of consensus on defining response. We systematically reviewed and appraised methodologically developed, defined and evaluated definitions of non-response and response to biologics for severe asthma.

Methods

We searched four bibliographic databases from inception to 15 March 2021. Two reviewers screened references, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of development, measurement properties of outcome measures and definitions of response based on COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). A modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach and narrative synthesis were undertaken.

Results

13 studies reported three composite outcome measures, three asthma symptoms measures, one asthma control measure and one quality of life measure. Only four measures were developed with patient input; none were composite measures. Studies utilised 17 definitions of response: 10 out of 17 (58.8%) were based on minimal clinically important difference (MCID) or minimal important difference (MID) and 16 out of 17 (94.1%) had high-quality evidence. Results were limited by poor methodology for the development process and incomplete reporting of psychometric properties. Most measures rated "very low" to "low" for quality of measurement properties and none met all quality standards.

Conclusions

This is the first review to synthesise evidence about definitions of response to biologics for severe asthma. While high-quality definitions are available, most are MCIDs or MIDs, which may be insufficient to justify continuation of biologics in terms of cost-effectiveness. There remains an unmet need for universally accepted, patient-centred, composite definitions to aid clinical decision making and comparability of responses to biologics.

[Biologics for the treatment of severe asthma: Current status report 2023]

Severe asthma is associated with increased use of healthcare services, significant deterioration in the quality of life, and high disease and economic burden on patients and societies. Additional treatments are required for severe forms of asthma. Biological agents are recommended for the treatment of severe asthma. In this current status report, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety data of approved biologics; omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, in the treatment of severe asthma and appropriate patient profiles for these biologics. Pubmed and Cochrane databases based on randomized controlled trials, posthoc analyses, meta-analyses, and real-life studies examining the efficacy and effectiveness of biologics in severe asthma were searched, and the results of these studies on important asthma outcomes were reviewed. Existing studies have shown that all the approved biologic agents targeting cells, receptors, and mediators involved in type 2 inflammation in the bronchial wall in severe asthma significantly reduce asthma exacerbations, reduce the need for oral corticosteroids, and improve asthma control, quality of life, and pulmonary functions. Characterizing the asthma endotype and phenotype in patients with severe asthma and determining which treatment would be more appropriate for a particular patient is an essential step in personalized treatment.

New insights into the pathophysiology and therapeutic targets of asthma and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyposis

Asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) or without (CRSsNP) are chronic respiratory diseases. These two disorders often co-exist based on common anatomical, immunological, histopathological, and pathophysiological basis. Usually, asthma with comorbid CRSwNP is driven by type 2 (T2) inflammation which predisposes to more severe, often intractable, disease. In the past two decades, innovative technologies and detection techniques in combination with newly introduced targeted therapies helped shape our understanding of the immunological pathways underlying inflammatory airway diseases and to further identify several distinct clinical and inflammatory subsets to enhance the development of more effective personalized treatments. Presently, a number of targeted biologics has shown clinical efficacy in patients with refractory T2 airway inflammation, including anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL-5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab)/anti-IL5R (benralizumab), anti-IL-4R-α (anti-IL-4/IL-13, dupilumab), and anti-TSLP (tezepelumab). In non-type-2 endotypes, no targeted biologics have consistently shown clinical efficacy so far. Presently, multiple therapeutical targets are being explored including cytokines, membrane molecules and intracellular signalling pathways to further expand current treatment options for severe asthma with and without comorbid CRSwNP. In this review, we discuss existing biologics, those under development and share some views on new horizons.

Relationship Between the Response to Antibody Therapy and Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety Disorders in Patients with Severe Asthma

Purpose

Asthma is associated with a high prevalence of psychopathological disorders, especially depressive disorders or anxiety. In patients with uncontrolled severe asthma, monoclonal antibody (mAb)-therapy positively influenced control of mental disorders. Therefore, we evaluated the impact of antibody therapy on the burden of these mental diseases depending on responder status.

Patients and Methods

Data were collected retrospectively in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma (n = 82) prior to mAb-therapy ("baseline") (omalizumab, dupilumab, benralizumab or mepolizumab). Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) or General Anxiety Disorder (GAD) were detected at baseline using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), as well as general sociodemographic data and lung function parameters. At 6-month (±3 month) follow-up, the burden of psychopathological symptoms under mAb-therapy was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2 (GAD-2). Response status was classified using the Biologics Asthma Response Score (BARS), assessing exacerbations, oral corticosteroid usage and asthma control test (ACT) score. Predictors for non-response to mAb-therapy were identified using linear regression analysis.

Results

Patients with severe asthma suffered from symptoms of MDD/GAD more often compared to the general population, with a higher prevalence among mAb therapy non-responders. mAb-responders exhibited a declining burden of MDD, better quality of life (QoL), less exacerbations, better lung function and better disease control compared to non-responders. A history of symptoms of depression was identified as a predictor for non-response to mAb-therapy.

Conclusion

Asthma symptoms and psychological problems are linked and more prevalent in our cohort of severe asthma patients than in the general population. Patients with signs of MDD/GAD before mAb-therapy show less mAb therapy response suggesting a negative impact of prior psychological problems on treatment response. In some patients, the score on MDD/GAD was caused by severe asthma - here symptoms decreased after effective treatment.

The impact of anti-eosinophilic therapy on exercise capacity and inspiratory muscle strength in patients with severe asthma

Introduction

Exercise limitation is frequently described among asthmatic patients and could be related to different mechanisms of the pulmonary, cardiovascular and muscular systems. Despite this, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) does not have an established role in the management of severe asthma. The aim of our study was to investigate the role of CPET and inspiratory pressure measurement in exercise capacity and muscle strength in severe asthmatic patients treated with anti-IL-5 therapy.

Methods

A monocentric observational study was conducted at Hanover Medical School, Germany, from April 2018 to June 2019. Patients affected by severe asthma treated with either mepolizumab or benralizumab were included. All patients underwent CPET before the initiation of antibody therapy and after 3 months, and follow-up visits were scheduled at 3, 6 and 12 months with plethysmography, inspiratory pressure measurement and blood gas analysis.

Results

14 patients were enrolled: 10 (71.4%) females, median age 52 years (IQR 47-61). Seven patients were treated with benralizumab, seven with mepolizumab. Oxygen uptake (V'_O2 peak) did not change significantly after 3 months of antibody treatment, while the mean value of the breathing reserve exhaustion reduced significantly from 78% to 60% (p=0.004). Whereas at baseline seven patients depleted the breathing reserve and two of them experienced oxygen desaturation during exercise, at 3 months no one presented any desaturation or breathing reserve exhaustion. The inspiratory pressure remained unchanged before and after the antibody therapy.

Conclusion

CPET could show hints of alveolar recruitment and ventilatory efficiency in severe asthma patients treated with antibody therapy.

[Criteria for evaluation of response to biologics in severe asthma - the Biologics Asthma Response Score (BARS)]

BACKGROUND

 The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (biologics) has revolutionized the therapy of severe asthma. Even though there is a response in the majority of patients, the degree of response varies. To date criteria for assessment of response to biologics are not consistently defined.

AIM

 To define criteria for evaluation of response to biologics that are precise, simple and suitable for daily use in order to guide decision-making regarding continuation, switching or stopping of biological therapy.

METHODS

 8 physicians with large experience in this indication, supported by a data-scientist, developed a consensus on criteria to evaluate response to biologics in patients with severe asthma.

RESULT

 We developed a combined score based on current literature, own experience and practicability. It uses the main criteria exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) therapy and asthma control (asthma control test, ACT). We defined thresholds for "good response", "response" and "insufficient response" rated with a score of "2", "1" and "0" respectively: annual exacerbations ("0 or reduction ≥ 75 %", reduction 50-74 %", "reductio  < 50 %"), daily OCS dose ("stopping or reduction ≥ 75 %", "reduction 50-74 %", "reduction < 50 %"), asthma control (ACT increase ≥ 6 or ≥ 3 with result ≥ 20", "ACT increase 3-5 with result < 20", "ACT increase < 3"). Additional individual criteria like lung function and comorbidities may be important for evaluation of response. We propose 3, 6 and 12 months timepoint for assessment of tolerability and response. Using the combined score, we developed a scheme to guide the decision whether switching the biologic should be considered.

CONCLUSION

 The Biologic Asthma Response Score (BARS) serves as objective and simple tool to evaluate response to biologic therapy using the three main criteria exacerbations, OCS use and asthma control. A validation of the score was initiated.

Systemic eosinophilic disease presenting as dacryoadenitis

Eosinophilic disease with orbital involvement is rare. We present two patients with dacryoadenitis associated with local and systemic eosinophilia. A 32-year-old man presented with episodic dacryoadenitis, lower respiratory inflammation and peripheral eosinophilia. Lung and lacrimal gland biopsies demonstrated eosinophilic infiltrate without granuloma, necrosis, or vasculitis. He improved with oral corticosteroids and Mepolizumab, an IL-5 inhibitor. The second case involved a 33-year-old man who similarly presented with episodic dacryoadenitis, pulmonary inflammation and pain/swelling in the hands and feet. Lacrimal gland biopsy demonstrated a predominantly eosinophilic infiltrate without granuloma or vasculitis. Symptoms improved with oral corticosteroids. Although neither patient was provided a definitive diagnosis, both were determined to have an eosinophilic condition on the spectrum of eosinophilic asthma or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis.

Defining response to therapy with biologics in severe asthma: from global evaluation to super response and remission

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, monoclonal antibodies targeting Type-2 inflammatory pathways have been developed for severe asthma treatment. However, even when patients are carefully selected, the response to treatment varies.

AREAS COVERED

Different studies have evaluated response to therapy with biologics such as exacerbation reduction, symptom improvement, pulmonary function increase, improvement in QoL, or decrease of oral corticosteroids, showing that all patients do not respond to all disease aspects and leading to an extensive debate regarding the definition of response.

EXPERT OPINION

Assessing response to therapy is of great importance, but since there is no uniform definition of treatment response, the recognition of patients who really benefit from these therapies remains an unmet need. In the same context, identifying non-responding patients in which biologic therapy should be switched or substituted by alternative treatment options is of paramount importance. In this review, we present the road trip of the definition of therapeutic response to biologics in severe asthmatics by presenting the current relevant medical literature. We also present the suggested predictors of response, with an emphasis on the so-called super-responders. Finally, we discuss the recent insights regarding asthma remission as a feasible treatment goal and provide a simple algorithm for the evaluation of response.

Overall Response to Anti-IL-5/Anti-IL5-Rα Treatment in Severe Asthma Does Not Depend on Initial Bronchodilator Responsiveness

BACKGROUND

Positive bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) (change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second [ΔFEV₁] ≥ +200 mL and ≥ +12%) after inhalation of a short-acting beta-2 agonist has been an inclusion criterion in licensing trials of anti-interleukin 5/anti-interleukin 5 receptor alpha (anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα) biologics in severe asthma. However, in clinical practice, patients with severe uncontrolled asthma frequently show a negative BDR.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the response to anti-IL5/anti-IL5Rα therapies differs between patients with positive and negative BDR at baseline.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter analysis of treatment outcomes in patients with severe asthma receiving anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα stratified for baseline BDR.

RESULTS

Of 133 patients included, 37 had a positive and 96 had a negative BDR at baseline. Following anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα treatment, FEV₁ improved significantly in both groups compared with baseline (P < .0001), with no significant difference between patients with positive and negative BDR (ΔFEV₁ +493 mL vs +306 mL; P = .06). Forced vital capacity (FVC) increased (ΔFVC: +85 mL vs +650 mL; P < .01) and residual volume (RV) decreased (ΔRV +113 mL vs -307 mL; P < .01) significantly in patients with negative BDR. Median annualized exacerbations (0 vs 0; P = .7), reduction of exacerbation rate (Δexacerbations 0 vs -2; P = .07), continuous oral corticosteroids (OCS) use (Δpatients on OCS -35% vs -39%; P = .99) and improvement of Asthma Control Test (ACT) score (ΔACT 6 vs 5; P = .7) were similar in both groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant correlations of positive versus negative BDR with response parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Both groups improved following treatment with similar responses concerning reduction of OCS therapy, exacerbations, and improvement of symptom control. Pulmonary function also improved in both groups during anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα treatment, with differences in response patterns noted.

Airway autoimmunity, asthma exacerbations, and response to biologics

Biologic therapies in asthma are indicated in severe disease, and they are directed against specific inflammatory modulators that contribute to pathogenesis and severity. Currently approved biologics target T2 cytokines (IgE, IL-5, IL-4/IL-13, and TLSP) and have demonstrated efficacy in clinical outcomes such as exacerbation rate and oral corticosteroid dose reductions, blood and airway eosinophil depletion, and lung function improvement. However, a proportion of these patients may show inadequate responses to biologics, with either initial lack of improvement or clinical and functional worsening after an optimal initial response. Exacerbations while on a biologic may be due to several reasons, including imprecise identification of the dominant effector pathway contributing to severity, additional inflammatory pathways that are not targeted by the biologic, inaccuracies of the biomarker used to guide therapy, inadequate dosing schedules, intercurrent airway infections, anti-drug neutralizing antibodies, and a novel phenomenon of autoimmune responses in the airways interfering with the effectiveness of the monoclonal antibodies. This review, illustrated using case scenarios, describes the underpinnings of airway autoimmune responses in driving exacerbations while patients are being treated with biologics, device a strategy to evaluate such exacerbations, an algorithm to switch between biologics, and perhaps to consider two biologics concurrently.

Eosinophilic cationic protein as marker for response to antibody therapy in severe asthma

As eosinophil granulocytes are the main effector cells in patients suffering from bronchial asthma [1], the introduction of anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and IL-5 receptor antibodies therapy led to a substantial change in severe asthma treatment [2, 3]. Despite a correlation between eosinophils and response to antibody therapy, little data regarding biomarkers and predicting factors for treatment outcome are available [4]. As eosinophil blood levels are influenced by oral and inhaled steroid therapy, we assumed that the dosage of eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) might be a better biomarker to predict therapy response.

This study of the eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) as predictor of clinical response to biological therapy in severe asthma found that ECP is not useful in unselected patients but may have a role in those not exposed to oral corticosteroids.https://bit.ly/398RwEk

Asthmatic Eosinophils Alter the Gene Expression of Extracellular Matrix Proteins in Airway Smooth Muscle Cells and Pulmonary Fibroblasts

The impaired production of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins by airway smooth muscle cells (ASMC) and pulmonary fibroblasts (PF) is a part of airway remodeling in asthma. This process might be influenced by eosinophils that migrate to the airway and abundantly secrete various cytokines, including TGF-β. We aimed to investigate the effect of asthmatic eosinophils on the gene expression of ECM proteins in ASMC and PF. A total of 34 study subjects were recruited: 14 with allergic asthma (AA), 9 with severe non-allergic eosinophilic asthma (SNEA), and 11 healthy subjects (HS). All AA patients underwent bronchial allergen challenge with D. pteronyssinus. The peripheral blood eosinophils were isolated using high-density centrifugation and magnetic separation. The individual cell cultures were made using hTERT ASMC and MRC-5 cell lines and the subjects' eosinophils. The gene expression of ECM and the TGF-β signaling pathway was analyzed using qRT-PCR. We found that asthmatic eosinophils significantly promoted collagen I, fibronectin, versican, tenascin C, decorin, vitronectin, periostin, vimentin, MMP-9, ADAM33, TIMP-1, and TIMP-2 gene expression in ASMC and collagen I, collagen III, fibronectin, elastin, decorin, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 gene expression in PF compared with the HS eosinophil effect. The asthmatic eosinophils significantly increased the gene expression of several canonical and non-canonical TGF-β signaling pathway components in ASMC and PF compared with the HS eosinophil effect. The allergen-activated AA and SNEA eosinophils had a greater effect on these changes. In conclusion, asthmatic eosinophils, especially SNEA and allergen-activated eosinophils, imbalanced the gene expression of ECM proteins and their degradation-regulating proteins. These changes were associated with increased gene expression of TGF-β signaling pathway molecules in ASMC and PF.

Biologics in Asthma: A Molecular Perspective to Precision Medicine

Recent developments in therapeutic strategies have provided alternatives to corticosteroids as the cornerstone treatment for managing airway inflammation in asthma. The past two decades have witnessed a tremendous boost in the development of anti-cytokine monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies for the management of severe asthma. Novel biologics that target eosinophilic inflammation (or type 2, T2 inflammation) have been the most successful at treating asthma symptoms, though there are a few in the drug development pipeline for treating non-eosinophilic or T2-low asthma. There has been significant improvement in clinical outcomes for asthmatics treated with currently available monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E, anti-interleukin (IL)-4 receptor α subunit, anti-IL-5, anti-IL-5Rα, anti-IL-6, anti-IL-33, and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP). Despite these initiatives in precision medicine for asthma therapy, a significant disease burden remains, as evident from modest reduction of exacerbation rates, i.e., approximately 40-60%. There are numerous studies that highlight predictors of good responses to these biologics, but few have focused on those who fail to respond adequately despite targeted treatment. Phenotyping asthmatics based on blood eosinophils is proving to be inadequate for choosing the right drug for the right patient. It is therefore pertinent to understand the underlying immunology, and perhaps, carry out immune endotyping of patients before prescribing appropriate drugs. This review summarizes the immunology of asthma, the cytokines or receptors currently targeted, the possible mechanisms of sub-optimal responses, and the importance of determining the immune make-up of individual patients prior to prescribing mAb therapy, in the age of precision medicine for asthma.

Severe Pediatric Asthma Therapy: Mepolizumab

There is a growing need for advanced treatment in children with persistent and severe asthma symptoms. As a matter of fact, between 2 and 5% of asthmatic children experience repeated hospitalizations and poor quality of life despite optimized treatment with inhaled glucocorticoid plus a second controller. In this scenario, mepolizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, has proven to be effective in controlling eosinophil proliferation by targeting interleukin-5 (IL-5), a key mediator of eosinophil activation pathways. Mepolizumab is approved since 2015 for adults at a monthly dose of 100 mg subcutaneously and it has been approved for patients ≥ 6 years of age in 2019. Especially in children aged 6 to 11 years, mepolizumab showed a greater bioavailability, with comparable pharmacodynamics parameters as in the adult population. The recommended dose of 40 mg every 4 weeks for children aged 6 through 11 years, and 100 mg for patients ≥ 12 years provides appropriate concentration and proved similar therapeutic effects as in the adult study group. A marked reduction in eosinophil counts clinically reflects a significant improvement in asthma control as demonstrated by validated questionnaires, reduction of exacerbation rates, and the number of hospitalizations. Finally, mepolizumab provides a safety and tolerability profile similar to that observed in adults with adverse events mostly of mild or moderate severity. The most common adverse events were headache and injection-site reaction. In conclusion, mepolizumab can be considered a safe and targeted step-up therapy for severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype in children and adolescents.

Real-life effectiveness of mepolizumab in severe asthma: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in randomized controlled trials is well established. Following approval of mepolizumab as add-on therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma in multiple regions worldwide, it is now important to determine its impact in real-world settings in which patients are not subject to stringent eligibility criteria. This systematic literature review assessed published evidence of clinical outcomes, safety, and healthcare resource use among patients with severe asthma receiving mepolizumab in real-world settings.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE In-Process via Ovid.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Eligible studies were observational, and enrolled ≥10 patients with asthma who received mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously. Data extracted included annualized exacerbation rate, mean daily oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose, proportion of patients using OCS, several measures of lung function, patient-reported asthma control and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety, and economic burden.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles (22 unique studies; 2,040 patients with severe asthma on mepolizumab) were identified. Mepolizumab use was associated with a reduction in annualized exacerbation rates (requiring OCS) of 54-97% (p < 0.05 in all studies), reduced mean/median daily OCS doses, and OCS discontinuation during follow-up (27-84% of patients). Improvements in lung function, asthma control, and HRQoL were also observed. The most commonly reported adverse events included headache and arthralgia; discontinuation of mepolizumab due to adverse events occurred in 0-10.6% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Findings show that patients with severe asthma consistently demonstrate clinically relevant benefits with mepolizumab treatment in a real-world setting.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .

Switch from Omalizumab to Benralizumab in Allergic Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Real-Life Experience from Southern Italy

Background. The wide availability of monoclonal antibodies for the add-on therapy of severe asthma currently allows for the personalization of biologic treatment by selecting the most appropriate drug for each patient. However, subjects with overlapping allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes can be often eligible to more than one biologic, so that the first pharmacologic choice can be quite challenging for clinicians. Within such a context, the aim of our real-life investigation was to verify whether allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by an initial biologic treatment with omalizumab, could experience better therapeutic results from a pharmacologic shift to benralizumab. Patients and methods. Twenty allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, unsuccessfully treated with omalizumab and then switched to benralizumab, were assessed for at least 1 year in order to detect eventual changes in disease exacerbations, symptom control, oral corticosteroid intake, lung function, and blood eosinophils. Results. In comparison to the previous omalizumab therapy, after 1 year of treatment with benralizumab our patients experienced significant improvements in asthma exacerbation rate (p < 0.01), rescue medication need (p < 0.001), asthma control test (ACT) score (p < 0.05), forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV₁) (p < 0.05), and blood eosinophil count (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, with respect to the end of omalizumab treatment, the score of sino-nasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) significantly decreased after therapy with benralizumab (p < 0.05). Conclusion. The results of this real-life study suggest that the pharmacologic shift from omalizumab to benralizumab can be a valuable therapeutic approach for allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by anti-IgE treatment.

Efficacy of mepolizumab in usual clinical practice and characteristics of responders

BACKGROUND

Severe eosinophilic asthma is a high-burden disease. Mepolizumab has been effective in several randomized clinical trials. However, such success might not be applicable to patients treated in usual clinical practice. The objectives of this article are to evaluate the efficacy of mepolizumab in severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma under usual clinical practice, and to determine characteristics associated with the response to this treatment.

METHODS

We have conducted a retrospective, multicentre study, including all adult patients with severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma in Galicia, Spain, on whom mepolizumab treatment was started before June 2020, at least 6 months before the time of inclusion, and had received at least one dose of the drug. Patient characteristics, clinical data, respiratory function and comorbidities were collected at baseline and at the 6-month-follow-up. Responders and super-responders were defined according to clinical response and requirement of systemic corticosteroids.

RESULTS

122 patients (mean age 58 years old) were included. In the follow-up treatment 6 months later, 75.4% of the patients were well-controlled, displaying a significant reduction in blood eosinophil counts (p < 0.001), hospital admissions and disease exacerbations (p < 0.001), and had their systemic glucocorticosteroid dose significantly reduced (p < 0.001). The inhaled corticosteroid dose was also lowered (p < 0.01) after 6 months of treatment. Around two-thirds had a clinically significant increase in FEV1, 95% of the patients were considered responders and 43% super-responders.

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical practice, mepolizumab is effective in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and it has a good safety profile.

Asthma biologics: Real-world effectiveness, impact of switching biologics, and predictors of response

BACKGROUND

Confirmation of effectiveness of asthma biologics in the real world is desirable because patient characteristics and experiences may differ from those included in randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate real-world effectiveness of asthma biologics and identify predictors of response.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study in patients with severe asthma receiving biologics. The primary outcome was change in clinically significant exacerbations at 12 months after starting biologic therapy, compared with 12 months before. Secondary outcomes were change in severe exacerbations, maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose, prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and asthma control test scores. Subgroup analyses were performed for subjects who were biologic naive or not. A stepwise logistic regression model was performed to compare responders to nonresponders.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients were included. Biologic therapy was associated with a 59% reduction in clinically significant exacerbations (P < .001), 65% reduction in severe exacerbations (P < .001), and 54% reduction in maintenance OCS dose (P = .001) in the 12 months after starting therapy. Biologics also resulted in improvement in prebronchodilator FEV1 (P = .002) and Asthma Control Test score (P < .001). Subjects who were previously on another biologic also experienced significant improvements in exacerbation frequency, maintenance OCS dose, and asthma control. Responders were more likely to be nonsmokers and have higher baseline FEV1, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and eosinophil counts greater than 500 cells/μL.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, biologic therapy in asthma is effective in improving exacerbations, asthma control, and lung function. Patients who have a suboptimal response to 1 biologic can still benefit from treatment with a different biologic.

Recent Insights into the Management of Inflammation in Asthma

The present prevailing inflammatory paradigm in asthma is of T2-high inflammation orchestrated by key inflammatory cells like Type 2 helper lymphocytes, innate lymphoid cells group 2 and associated cytokines. Eosinophils are key components of this T2 inflammatory pathway and have become key therapeutic targets. Real-world evidence on the predominant T2-high nature of severe asthma is emerging. Various inflammatory biomarkers have been adopted in clinical practice to aid asthma characterization including airway measures such as bronchoscopic biopsy and lavage, induced sputum analysis, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide. Blood measures like eosinophil counts have also gained widespread usage and multicomponent algorithms combining different parameters are now appearing. There is also growing interest in potential future biomarkers including exhaled volatile organic compounds, micro RNAs and urinary biomarkers. Additionally, there is a growing realisation that asthma is a heterogeneous state with numerous phenotypes and associated treatable traits. These may show particular inflammatory patterns and merit-specific management approaches that could improve asthma patient outcomes. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) remain the mainstay of asthma management but their use earlier in the course of disease is being advocated. Recent evidence suggests potential roles for ICS in combination with long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) for as needed use in mild asthma whilst maintenance and reliever therapy regimes have gained widespread acceptance. Other anti-inflammatory strategies including ultra-fine particle ICS, leukotriene receptor antagonists and macrolide antibiotics may show efficacy in particular phenotypes too. Monoclonal antibody biologic therapies have recently entered clinical practice with significant impacts on asthma outcomes. Understanding of the efficacy and use of those agents is becoming clearer with a growing body of real-world evidence as is their potential applicability to other treatable comorbid traits. In conclusion, the evolving understanding of T2 driven inflammation alongside a treatable traits disease model is enhancing therapeutic approaches to address inflammation in asthma.

Adjuvants and Antigen-Delivery Systems for Subunit Vaccines against Tuberculosis

The only licensed vaccine against tuberculosis is BCG. However, BCG has failed to provide consistent protection against tuberculosis, especially pulmonary disease in adults. Furthermore, the use of BCG is contraindicated in immunocompromised subjects. The research towards the development of new vaccines against TB includes the use of Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens as subunit vaccines. Such vaccines may be used either alone or in the prime-boost model in BCG-vaccinated people. However, the antigens for subunit vaccines require adjuvants and/or delivery systems to induce appropriate and protective immune responses against tuberculosis and other diseases. Articles published in this Special Issue have studied the pathogenesis of BCG in children and the use of BCG and recombinant BCG as potential vaccines against asthma. Furthermore, the use of different adjuvants and delivery systems in inducing the protective immune responses after immunization with subunit vaccines has been described.

Impact of prior smoking exposure and COPD comorbidity on treatment response to monoclonal antibodies in patients with severe asthma

Despite the prognostic role of smoking in asthma [1], clinical studies of asthma usually exclude current smokers or ex-smokers with a smoking history of >10 pack-years [2–5]. Specifically, the role of humanised monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with severe asthma and prior smoking exposure has not been studied; however, these drugs are used in patients with severe asthma and a history of smoking [6–9]. The aim of the present study was to evaluate in a real-world setting how a history of smoking and comorbid COPD affect the clinical outcome of patients suffering from severe asthma that are treated with monoclonal antibodies.

Patients suffering from severe asthma may benefit from an antibody treatment irrespective of their status as an ex-smokerhttps://bit.ly/3fYC8tC

Real-World Multicenter Experience with Mepolizumab and Benralizumab in the Treatment of Uncontrolled Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Over 12 Months

Purpose

Treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) has been revolutionized by the development of monoclonal antibodies targeting underlying immunological pathways of eosinophilic asthma. Two of the most frequently used antibodies in clinical practice are mepolizumab, targeting interleukin (IL) 5 and benralizumab, targeting the IL5 receptor alpha. The comparative treatment efficacy of these antibodies remains unclear, particularly regarding long-term outcomes.

Patients and Methods

In this multicenter, retrospective study, we included 123 patients treated with mepolizumab and 64 patients treated with benralizumab for 12 months at one of three study sites in Germany. Data were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy. Endpoints were changes in pulmonary function (PF), exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and dose, asthma control test (ACT) score and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels.

Results

Both mepolizumab and benralizumab led to significant improvements in PF with an increase in median forced expiratory volume (FEV1) after 12 months from 59% to 74% for mepolizumab and 63% to 72% for benralizumab. Treatment also led to significant improvements in ACT scores after 12 months (mepolizumab: 13 [interquartile range (IQR) 9-17] to 19 [IQR 15-23]; benralizumab: 12 [IQR 9-16] to 22 [IQR 16-25]) as well as a reduction of mean OCS dose (mepolizumab 8 mg [IQR 5-12.5 mg] median prednisolone equivalent at baseline to 5 mg [IQR 3-7.5 mg]; benralizumab 7.5 mg [IQR 5-15 mg] to 5 mg [IQR 2-10 mg]). The exacerbation rates were reduced significantly, irrespective of the treatment. Overall, changes were similar after 6 and 12 months of therapy.

Conclusion

Both mepolizumab and benralizumab are highly effective in the long-term treatment of SEA, with no clinically relevant differences in outcomes after 12 months of therapy. In both groups, improvements were similar after 6 and 12 months of therapy, underlining the feasibility of early treatment evaluation.

ASTHMA: ROLE OF THE ANGIOTENSIN-(1-7)/MAS PATHWAY IN PATHOPHYSIOLOGY AND THERAPY

The incidence of asthma is a global health problem, requiring studies aimed at developing new treatments to improve clinical management, thereby reducing personal and economic burdens on the health system. Therefore, the discovery of mediators that promote anti-inflammatory and pro-resolutive events are highly desirable to improve lung function and quality of life in asthmatic patients. In that regard, experimental studies have shown that the Angiotensin-(1-7)/Mas receptor of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is a potential candidate for the treatment of asthma. Therefore, we reviewed findings related to the function of the Angiotensin-(1-7)/Mas pathway in regulating the processes associated with inflammation and exacerbations in asthma, including leukocyte influx, fibrogenesis, pulmonary dysfunction and resolution of inflammation. Thus, knowledge of the role of the Angiotensin-(1-7)/Mas can help pave the way for the development of new treatments for this disease with high morbidity and mortality through new experimental and clinical trials.

Biologic Therapy and Severe Asthma in Children

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous, complex and chronic disease widespread in the pediatric population. According to the recent findings about the different endotypes of asthma in children, each one characterized by specific intracellular molecular pathways, several innovative biologic therapies have been developed. Due to their precise ability to target specific inflammatory type 2 mediators, biologics have revolutionized the care of chronic allergic diseases in the pediatric and adult population. In this review, we aim to provide the latest evidence about the use, indications, efficacy and safety of biologic therapies to treat severe asthma in children and adolescents.

Mepolizumab effectiveness in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and co-presence of bronchiectasis: A real-world retrospective pilot study

BACKGROUND

The association of bronchiectasis (BE) in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) is quite frequent. Mepolizumab is a well-recognized treatment for SEA; we aim to evaluate its effectiveness in SEA patients with and without BE in real-life.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective pilot study, including patients with SEA treated with mepolizumab for one year. Asthma control test (ACT), lung function, annual exacerbations rate, oral corticosteroid dosage, FeNO, chronic mucous secretions, blood and sputum eosinophils were recorded at baseline and after 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

we included 32 patients (mean age: 52.3 ± 10, 59% female). 50% showed co-presence of bronchiectasis, (SEA + BE). Significant improvements were found in ACT [(13.8 ± 4.6 to 20.7 ± 4.1, p = 0.0009) and (13 ± 4.8 to 20.7 ± 4.6, p = 0.0003)], annual exacerbations rate [from 7 (4-12) to 0 (0.00-0.75) and from 8 (4-12) to 0 (0-1), p < 0.0001], and blood eosinophils count [748 cells/μL (400-1250) vs. 84 cells/μL (52.5-100), and from 691 cells/μL (405-798) vs. 60 cells/μL (41-105), p < 0.0001] in SEA and SEA + BE group respectively, already after 6 months of treatment. A reduction in daily oral corticosteroids intake at 12 months was shown [from 15 mg (0-25) to 0 mg (0-0), p = 0.003 and from 8.8 mg (0-25) to 0 mg (0-0) (p = 0.01)] in both SEA and SEA + BE, respectively. Similar results were found, comparing SEA + BE patients based on the severity of bronchiectasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Mepolizumab effectively improves asthma symptoms control, reducing annual exacerbations and corticosteroid intake in all patients with SEA, even in the subgroup with coexisting bronchiectasis, independently of their severity.

Treating severe asthma: Targeting the IL-5 pathway

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous disease with different phenotypes based on clinical, functional or inflammatory parameters. In particular, the eosinophilic phenotype is associated with type 2 inflammation and increased levels of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5 and IL-13). Monoclonal antibodies that target the eosinophilic inflammatory pathways (IL-5R and IL-5), namely mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, are effective and safe for severe eosinophilic asthma. Eosinophils threshold represents the most indicative biomarker for response to treatment with all three monoclonal antibodies. Improvement in asthma symptoms scores, lung function, the number of exacerbations, history of late-onset asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, low oral corticosteroids use and low body mass index represent predictive clinical markers of response. Novel Omics studies are emerging with proteomics data and exhaled breath analyses. These may prove useful as biomarkers of response and non-response biologics. Moreover, future biomarker studies need to be undertaken in paediatric patients affected by severe asthma. The choice of appropriate biologic therapy for severe asthma remains challenging. The importance of finding biomarkers that can predict response continuous an open issue that needs to be further explored. This review describes the clinical effects of targeting the IL-5 pathway in severe asthma in adult and paediatric patients, focusing on predictors of response and non-response.

Biological Therapies in Children and Adolescents with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma: A Practical Review

Severe uncontrolled asthma is a complex and heterogeneous disease. A multidisciplinary assessment is required to correctly identify and manage children and adolescents with severe asthma because they may require strict monitoring and additional treatment with advanced targeted therapies. Recent research efforts have focused on identifying epidemiologic, clinical, and molecular mechanisms that underlie severe asthma, leading to the recognition of different phenotypes and endotypes and identifying biomarkers able to predict the response to biologic therapies. Additional progress has occurred by introducing biological therapies that have revolutionized the care of chronic allergic diseases in the adult and pediatric population. In this review, we briefly summarized the current literature on biological therapies to treat severe asthma in children and adolescents.

Real-World Effectiveness of Mepolizumab in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Mepolizumab is a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin 5 (IL-5) used to treat severe eosinophilic asthma. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of mepolizumab in the real world. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in the context of heterogeneity among patients, clinicians, and treatment regimens to study the effectiveness of mepolizumab in the real world.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and Embase databases for real-world studies on severe asthma treatment with mepolizumab as of June 30, 2020. Exacerbations, asthma-related hospitalizations, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) or Asthma Control Test (ACT), corticosteroid use, peripheral blood eosinophil counts, and the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide were selected as indicators to evaluate the effectiveness. Standardized mean differences by the Cohen method and mean differences were chosen as indicators of effect size. Cohen d values of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 are considered as small, medium, and large effects, respectively. We used the Dersimonian-Laird random-effect model to quantify pooled effectiveness estimates.

FINDINGS

A total of 1457 patients from 13 studies were included in this review. At all time points, mepolizumab was associated with reductions in exacerbations (2.92 and 2.73 events per patient per year fewer at 6 and 12 months, respectively) and hospitalizations (0.36 events per patient per year fewer at 12 months); improvements in asthma control (ACQ scores reductions of 1.32 and 1.03 at 6 and 12 months, respectively; ACT scores increase of 6.52 at 6-12 months); slight improvements in pulmonary function (FEV₁ increase of 0.23 L at 1-3 months and 6-12 months, respectively); reductions in oral corticosteroid use (9.02- and 7.68-mg decrease at 6 and 12 months, respectively); and reductions in peripheral blood eosinophil counts (decreases of 559.11 cells/μL and 599.17 cells/μL at 1-3 months and 6-12 months, respectively) and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (13-ppb reduction at 6-12 months).

IMPLICATIONS

Our study suggests that mepolizumab is associated with improvements in several clinically meaningful real-world outcomes. This study is a supplement to and extension of the efficacy of randomized controlled trials of mepolizumab. (Clin Ther. 2021;XX:XXX-XXX) © 2021 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Clinical evaluation of type 2 disease status in a real-world population of difficult to manage asthma using historic electronic healthcare records of blood eosinophil counts

BACKGROUND

Blood eosinophil measurement is essential for the phenotypic characterization of patients with difficult asthma and in determining eligibility for anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα biological therapies. However, assessing such measures over limited time spans may not reveal the true underlying eosinophilic phenotype, as treatment, including daily oral corticosteroid therapy, suppresses eosinophilic inflammation and asthma is intrinsically variable.

METHODS

We interrogated the electronic healthcare records of patients in the Wessex AsThma CoHort of difficult asthma (WATCH) study (UK). In 501 patients being evaluated in this tertiary care centre for difficult to control asthma, all requested full blood count test results in a 10-year retrospective period from the index WATCH assessment were investigated (n = 11,176).

RESULTS

In 235 biological therapy-naïve participants who had 10 or more measures in this time period, 40.3% were eosinophilic (blood eosinophils ≥300 cells/µl) at WATCH enrolment whilst an additional 43.1%, though not eosinophilic at enrolment, demonstrated eosinophilia at least once in the preceding decade. Persistent eosinophilia was associated with worse post-bronchodilator airway obstruction and higher Fractional exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO). In contrast, the 16.6% of patients who never demonstrated eosinophilia at this blood eosinophil threshold showed preserved lung function and lower markers of Type 2 inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

This highlights the central role that type 2 inflammation, as indicated by blood eosinophilia, has in difficult asthma and suggests that longitudinal electronic healthcare record analysis can be an important tool in clinical asthma phenotyping, providing insight that may help understand disease progression and better guide more specific treatment approaches.

Single-cell transcriptomic analysis of allergen-specific T cells in allergy and asthma

CD4⁺ T helper (T_H) cells and regulatory T (T_reg) cells that respond to common allergens play an important role in driving and dampening airway inflammation in patients with asthma. Until recently, direct, unbiased molecular analysis of allergen-reactive T_H and T_reg cells has not been possible. To better understand the diversity of these T cell subsets in allergy and asthma, we analyzed the single-cell transcriptome of ~50,000 house dust mite (HDM) allergen-reactive T_H cells and T_reg cells from asthmatics with HDM allergy and from three control groups: asthmatics without HDM allergy and nonasthmatics with and without HDM allergy. Our analyses show that HDM allergen-reactive T_H and T_reg cells are highly heterogeneous and certain subsets are quantitatively and qualitatively different in individuals with HDM-reactive asthma. The number of interleukin-9 (IL-9)-expressing HDM-reactive T_H cells is greater in asthmatics with HDM allergy compared with nonasthmatics with HDM allergy, and this IL-9-expressing T_H subset displays enhanced pathogenic properties. More HDM-reactive T_H and T_reg cells expressing the interferon response signature (T_HIFNR and T_regIFNR) are present in asthmatics without HDM allergy compared with those with HDM allergy. In cells from these subsets (T_HIFNR and T_regIFNR), expression of TNFSF10 was enriched; its product, tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand, dampens activation of T_H cells. These findings suggest that the T_HIFNR and T_regIFNR subsets may dampen allergic responses, which may help explain why only some people develop T_H2 responses to nearly ubiquitous allergens.

Changes in Type 2 Biomarkers After Anti-IL5 Treatment in Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) suffer from frequent asthma exacerbations, where eosinophils are major effector cells in airway inflammation, and anti-interleukin (IL)-5 becomes an effective treatment modality to control eosinophilic inflammation of SEA. Fifteen patients with SEA who had been treated with anti-IL5 (reslizumab, 100 mg monthly intravenously) for 6 months at Ajou University Hospital (Suwon, Korea) were enrolled in this study. Clinical parameters, including total blood eosinophil count (TEC), FEV1%, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels, and serum biomarkers such as eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN), periostin (PON), and transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1), were analyzed. EDN levels and TEC decreased significantly after 1 month of treatment (P < 0.05 for both), while no changes were noted in FeNO/PON/TGF-β1 levels. FEV1% increased after 2 months of treatment (P < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between TEC and EDN levels (r = 0.60, P = 0.02). Significant negative correlations were noted between age and TEC/EDN levels (r = -0.57, P = 0.02 and r = -0.56, P = 0.03, respectively). Baseline TEC was higher in the EDN-responder group (≥75% decrease) than in the non-responder group (P = 0.06) with a positive correlation between %reduction in EDN and TEC (r = 0.67, P = 0.01). The onset age was younger and asthma duration was longer in the FEV1%-non-responder group (<12% increase) than in the FEV1%-responder group (P = 0.07 and P = 0.007, respectively). In conclusion, changes in the serum EDN level may be a potential biomarker for monitoring eosinophilic inflammation after anti-IL5 treatment in SEA, which is affected by onset age and asthma duration.

Biotherapy and treatment of adult primary chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: Cellular and molecular bases

The present article reviews the molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in the pathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwCRSwNP) and underlying the action mechanisms of biotherapies. Biotherapy uses substances naturally produced by the organism or their specific antagonists targeting a proinflammatory mechanism. CRSwCRSwNP is a form of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), which is classically subdivided in to 2 types according to the presence of polyps. In recent years, the concept of endotypes emerged, with a more exhaustive definition of the types of CRS according to inflammatory mechanism, with a view to developing personalized treatments. CRSwNP pathophysiology is poorly understood. Polyps arise from a primary epithelial lesion in a context of chronic local inflammation, mainly type 2 in Europe, implicating eosinophils, IgE, Th2 cytokines (IL-4/IL-13, IL-5) and T and B cells. Biotherapy seems promising in CRSwNP. The present review details the various pathophysiological pathways underlying the action mechanisms of biotherapies, and the various published studies, assessing efficacy and mode of action in the treatment of CRSwNP.