Treatment of childhood asthma with anti-immunoglobulin E antibody (omalizumab)

The new biologic drugs: Which children with asthma should get what?

Novel biologics (targeted antibody therapies) have revolutionized the management of severe childhood asthma. However, it is important that the right biologic is selected for the right patient, and understanding the evidence base for each biologic is crucial. Currently, four biologics (all monoclonal antibodies) are licensed in the UK for the treatment of children with severe asthma - omalizumab (Xolair), mepolizumab (Nucala), and dupilumab (Dupixent) in children aged 6 years and over; and tezepelumab (Tezspire), only in children aged 12 years and over. Tezepelumab is the only licensed biological that may be beneficial in severe asthma without evidence of Type 2 inflammation. All have a good safety profile but varying degrees of clinical efficacy in children, with wide variation in treatment responsiveness between individual patients. When selecting biologics for severe asthma, it is essential to remember the limitations of the current pediatric evidence. At present, there are no results from randomized, head-to-head trials of biologics in severe asthma. TREAT is an ongoing trial comparing omalizumab to mepolizumab and will be one of the first to provide such evidence. We must be especially aware of the dangers of extrapolating data from adults to children, because the pathophysiology and role of biomarkers may differ significantly from adult asthma. Given the current level of knowledge, even after treatment has been initiated, children should be regularly reviewed to determine the efficacy of treatment, side-effect profile and consideration of when treatment with the biologic should be discontinued.

Type 2 Inflammation and Asthma in Children: A Narrative Review

Increased understanding of the underlying pathophysiology has highlighted the heterogeneity of asthma and identified that most children with asthma have type 2 inflammation with elevated biomarkers, such as blood eosinophils and/or fractional exhaled nitric oxide. Although in the past most of these children may have been categorized as having allergic asthma, identifying the type 2 inflammatory phenotype provides a mechanism to explain both allergic and non-allergic triggers in pediatric patients with asthma. Most children achieve control with low to medium doses of inhaled corticosteroids. However, in a small but significant proportion of children, asthma remains uncontrolled despite maximum conventional treatment, with an increased risk of severe exacerbations. In this review, we focus on the role of type 2 inflammation and allergic processes in children with asthma, together with evidence of the efficacy of available treatment options for those who experience severe symptoms.

Endotyping Chronic Respiratory Diseases: T2 Inflammation in the United Airways Model

Over the past 15 years, the paradigm of viewing the upper and lower airways as a unified system has progressively shifted the approach to chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). As the global prevalence of CRDs continues to increase, it becomes evident that acknowledging the presence of airway pathology as an integrated entity could profoundly impact healthcare resource allocation and guide the implementation of pharmacological and rehabilitation strategies. In the era of precision medicine, endotyping has emerged as another novel approach to CRDs, whereby pathologies are categorized into distinct subtypes based on specific molecular mechanisms. This has contributed to the growing acknowledgment of a group of conditions that, in both the upper and lower airways, share a common type 2 (T2) inflammatory signature. These diverse pathologies, ranging from allergic rhinitis to severe asthma, frequently coexist and share diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, as well as therapeutic strategies targeting common molecular pathways. Thus, T2 inflammation may serve as a unifying endotypic trait for the upper and lower airways, reinforcing the practical significance of the united airways model. This review aims to summarize the literature on the role of T2 inflammation in major CRDs, emphasizing the value of common biomarkers and integrated treatment strategies targeting shared molecular mechanisms.

Biological treatments in childhood asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim is to update the information currently available for the use of biologics in severe asthma in children, in order to facilitate their prescription as far as possible.

RECENT FINDINGS

The appearance of biologics for the treatment of severe asthma has meant a revolutionary change in the therapeutic approach to this disease. Currently, five biologics have been approved for severe asthma in children and/or adolescents by the regulatory agencies: omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab and tezepelumab. But despite their positive results in terms of efficacy, there are still relevant points of debate that should induce caution when selecting the most appropriate biologic in a child with severe asthma. Indeed, safety is essential and, for several of the existing treatments, the availability of medium-term to long-term data in this regard is scarce.

SUMMARY

The use of biologics can facilitate the therapeutic paradigm shift from pleiotropic treatments to personalized medicine. However, the choice of the most appropriate biologics remains a pending issue. On the other hand, to the extent that several of the biologics have been available for a relatively short time, the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety in children is that of omalizumab.

Meta-analysis of the adoption of omalizumab in the treatment of pediatric allergic diseases

Introduction

Allergic diseases are common chronic conditions in children, omalizumab has a wide range of adoptions in various diseases. A meta-analysis was implemented to demonstrate the efficacy of omalizumab in the therapy of pediatric allergic diseases.

Materials and methods

English databases were searched. The search terms included "Omalizumab", "Children", "Allergic asthma", and "Atopic dermatitis". The literature was screened regarding inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were extracted and analyzed using RevMan5.3.

Results

a total of six suitable studies, comprising 2761 patients, were selected for inclusion. The meta-analysis results implied that at 24 weeks, OR for worsening of symptoms in children was 0.10 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.41), Z = 3.24, P = 0.001 (P < 0.05); at 52 weeks, OR was 0.27 (95 % CI 0.09-0.83), Z = 2.28, P = 0.02 (P < 0.05); and during treatment, OR for adverse events in children was 0.87 (95 % CI 0.60-1.29), Z = 0.68, P = 0.49 (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

the study comprised six investigations that examined the effectiveness of omalizumab in treating pediatric allergic diseases. The findings demonstrated that, in comparison to standard treatment, omalizumab can greatly alleviate allergy-related clinical symptoms in children, slow down disease progression, and has a higher safety profile with fewer adverse reactions. These results have practical implications and highlight the potential value of omalizumab in pediatric allergy treatment.

Early Assessment of Efficacy and Safety of Biologics in Pediatric Allergic Diseases: Preliminary Results from a Prospective Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing interest in biologics for the management of allergic diseases, sparse real-world data are still available in the pediatric population. This study aimed to evaluate the early real-life efficacy and safety of omalizumab for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and Dupilumab for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD).

METHODS

A prospective study enrolling children aged 6-18 years was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of biologic drugs at 16 weeks of treatment (T1). The effectiveness was measured using validated questionnaires (ACQ-5 for asthma, UAS7 for CSU, and EASI score for AD). Secondary outcome measures included reductions in inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosages, asthma-related hospitalizations/exacerbations, and quality of life (QoL) indicators (iNRS, sNRS, DLQI/cDLQI) for CSU and AD. Safety was expressed according to the descriptions of adverse events provided by EMA and FDA.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of eighteen children (mean age 12.9 ± 3.4 years). The omalizumab treatment significantly reduced ACQ-5 and UAS7 scores (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). In patients with asthma, decreased ICS dosage and hospitalization/exacerbation rates were observed. QoL parameters significantly improved in CSU and AD patients. No severe adverse events were reported for either treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings validate omalizumab and dupilumab as effective and safe therapeutic options for managing moderate-to-severe allergic diseases in children and adolescents.

Eosinophils-from cradle to grave: An EAACI task force paper on new molecular insights and clinical functions of eosinophils and the clinical effects of targeted eosinophil depletion

Over the past years, eosinophils have become a focus of scientific interest, especially in the context of their recently uncovered functions (e.g. antiviral, anti-inflammatory, regulatory). These versatile cells display both beneficial and detrimental activities under various physiological and pathological conditions. Eosinophils are involved in the pathogenesis of many diseases which can be classified into primary (clonal) and secondary (reactive) disorders and idiopathic (hyper)eosinophilic syndromes. Depending on the biological specimen, the eosinophil count in different body compartments may serve as a biomarker reflecting the underlying pathophysiology and/or activity of distinct diseases and as a therapy-driving (predictive) and monitoring tool. Personalized selection of an appropriate therapeutic strategy directly or indirectly targeting the increased number and/or activity of eosinophils should be based on the understanding of eosinophil homeostasis including their interactions with other immune and non-immune cells within different body compartments. Hence, restoring as well as maintaining homeostasis within an individual's eosinophil pool is a goal of both specific and non-specific eosinophil-targeting therapies. Despite the overall favourable safety profile of the currently available anti-eosinophil biologics, the effect of eosinophil depletion should be monitored from the perspective of possible unwanted consequences.

A conversation on allergy: recognizing the past and looking to the future

Allergy is an ever-evolving group of disorders, which includes asthma, atopic dermatitis, rhinitis and food allergies and that currently affects over 1 billion people worldwide. This group of disorders has exploded in incidence since around the start of the 20th century, implying that genetics is not solely responsible for its development but that environmental factors have an important role. Here, Fabio Luciani and Jonathan Coquet, in their role as editors at Immunology & Cell Biology, asked nine prominent researchers in the field of allergy to define the term 'allergy', discuss the role of genetics and the environment, nominate the most important discoveries of the past decade and describe the best strategies to combat allergy at the population level going forward.

Therapeutic efficacy of omalizumab in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis

Background

Omalizumab has been approved for treating moderate-to-severe asthma in children aged over 6 years. Its application to asthmatic children with other allergic diseases has been rarely explored. The present study aims to explore the therapeutic efficacy of omalizumab in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis.

Methods

The clinical data of children diagnosed with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis and treated with omalizumab between September 2020 and April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Lung function indexes such as Childhood Asthma Control Test (C-ACT) scores, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) percent predicted (FEV1%pred), small airway function indexes, and the clinical symptoms of chronic sinusitis were analyzed.

Results

A total of 26 children were observed for 16 weeks. After 16 weeks of omalizumab treatment, the significantly increased C-ACT scores (15.57 ± 3.25 points vs. 24.98 ± 5.21 points, F = 15.7112, P < 0.001) and decreased FeNO (31.55 ± 15.57 ppb vs. 19.86 ± 9.80 ppb, F = 4.4265, P = 0.0022), compared with those at baseline, were suggestive of well-controlled symptoms of asthma and improved lung function. FEV1%pred and FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio (the ratio of the forced expiratory volume in the first 1 s to the forced vital capacity) increased after omalizumab treatment, although no significant differences were detected (P = 0.9954 and 0.9382, respectively). Peak expiratory flow (PEF) percent predicted (PEF%pred) and forced expiratory flow at 75% of FVC (FEF75%), 50% of FVC (FEF50%), and 25%-75% of FVC (FEF25%-75%) significantly increased after omalizumab treatment (P = 0.0477, <0.001, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively). Visual analog scale scores significantly decreased after omalizumab treatment (6.40 ± 2.98 points vs. 0.85 ± 0.40 points, t = 27.2419, P < 0.001), suggesting alleviation in the clinical symptoms of chronic sinusitis.

Conclusion

In this study, it was found that omalizumab can effectively alleviate clinical symptoms and improve lung function and quality of life in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis.

[Biologics in severe childhood asthma]

INTRODUCTION

Severe asthma in children remains relatively rare. It is no longer considered as a single disease but rather as a syndrome corresponding to different phenotypes and distinct pathophysiological pathways. Various biomarkers can contribute to phenotyping, essentially specific IgE test results, blood eosinophil counts, the exhaled fraction of NO (FeNO) assay, as well as deep lung biomarkers from induced sputum, bronchoalveolar lavage or bronchial biopsy.

STATE OF KNOWLEDGE

In children, the biologics currently approved for severe asthma are omalizumab, mepolizumab and dupilumab from the age of 6, and tezepelumab from the age of 12.

PERSPECTIVES

Benralizumab and tezepelumab offer promising perspectives and a pediatric extension could be of interest in future treatment of severe pediatric asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on physiopathological mechanisms, biologics represent a new and promising approach in the treatment of asthma. That said, the long-term efficacy and impact of these treatments on the natural history of the disease require further investigation. It is of paramount importance to take into account the specificities of pediatric asthma and, more particularly, to conduct clinical trials in younger patients.

Controversies in Allergy: Are Biologic Treatment Responses in Severe Asthma the Same in Adults and Children?

The availability of biologic agents for patients with severe asthma has increased dramatically over the last several decades. The absence of direct head-to-head comparative data and relative lack of biomarkers to predict response can make it difficult to choose the right biologic medication for a given patient. Selecting a biologic agent for the pediatric population presents further challenges due to more limited approved biologic agents and fewer clinical trials in children. In addition, the outcome data that are currently available suggest that treatment responses for a given biologic may be different between adult and pediatric patients. To better understand this possible difference in treatment response, this review focuses on the available efficacy data for biologics evaluated in adult and pediatric patients with severe asthma in addition to other considerations when choosing a biologic agent. Finally, this review discusses how asthma phenotypes differ across age groups and their contributions to the responses to biologic treatment across age groups.

An Update on Monoclonal Antibody Therapy to Treat Moderate-to-Severe Asthma: Benefits, Choices, and Limitations

Moderate or severe asthma is a complex disease process clinically manifesting as at least partially reversible airway obstruction due to airway hyperresponsiveness. Asthma therapy was based primarily on symptom control until recent studies of its mechanisms have led to a host of new targeted, safe, and effective therapies. These biologic therapies directly attack culprit inflammatory mediators at the molecular level. In this article we review currently available biologic agents for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma. We provide information deemed necessary to optimally consult with an asthma specialist to choose, assist in financial arrangements for, and coordinate the use of these new, promising, FDA approved biologic agents. We will also briefly review the molecular pathways targeted with each class of biologic to provide a more in-depth understanding of why these targeted therapies are effective. These biologics are the first of many to come that modify newly discovered components of the immune system with which many physicians are unfamiliar.

The clinical efficacy of type 2 monoclonal antibodies in eosinophil-associated chronic airway diseases: a meta-analysis

Background

Anti-type 2 inflammation therapy has been proposed as a treatment strategy for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders that could reduce exacerbations and improve lung function. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of type 2 monoclonal antibodies (anti-T2s) for eosinophil-associated chronic airway disorders.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 21 August 2022. Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of anti-T2s versus placebo in the treatment of chronic airway diseases were selected. The outcomes were exacerbation rate and change in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from baseline. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 1.0 was used to evaluate the risk of bias, and the random-effects or fixed-effect model were used to pool the data.

Results

Thirty-eight articles concerning forty-one randomized clinical trials with 17,115 patients were included. Compared with placebo, anti-T2s therapy yielded a significant reduction in exacerbation rate in COPD and asthma (Rate Ratio (RR)=0.89, 95%CI, 0.83-0.95, I2 = 29.4%; RR= 0.59, 95%CI, 0.52-0.68, I2 = 83.9%, respectively) and improvement in FEV1 in asthma (Standard Mean Difference (SMD)=0.09, 95%CI, 0.08-0.11, I2 = 42.6%). Anti-T2s therapy had no effect on FEV1 improvement in COPD (SMD=0.05, 95%CI, -0.01-0.10, I2 = 69.8%).

Conclusion

Despite inconsistent findings across trials, anti-T2s had a positive overall impact on patients' exacerbation rate in asthma and COPD and FEV1 in asthma. Anti-T2s may be effective in treating chronic airway illnesses related to eosinophils.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022362280.

Cost-effectiveness of omalizumab for the treatment of severe pediatric allergic asthma-Results of a real-life study in Spain

BACKGROUND

Severe pediatric allergic asthma (SPAA) induces a huge economic burden in terms of direct, indirect, and intangible costs. The use of omalizumab for the treatment of these patients has produced a significant improvement in several clinical outcomes, but at the same time, the cost for the management of the disease has also increased. The aim of this report was to evaluate whether the use of omalizumab is cost-effective.

METHODS

A sample of 426 children with SPAA from the ANCHORS (Asthma iN CHildren: Omalizumab in Real-life in Spain) study was used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the avoidance of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (MSE) and also for the improvement in childhood Asthma Control Test (c-ACT) or the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ5). We retrospectively collected data on health encounters and drug consumption before and up to 6 years after the beginning of the treatment with omalizumab.

RESULTS

The ICER per avoided MSE was €2107 after 1 year, and it consistently decreased to €656 in those followed up to 6 years. Similarly, the ICER for the minimally important difference in control tests showed a decrease from €2059 to €380 per each 0.5 points of improvement in ACQ5 and from €3141 to €2322 per each 3 points improvement in c-ACT, at years 1 and 6, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of OMZ is a cost-effective option for most children with uncontrolled SPAA, especially those who have frequent exacerbations; the costs are progressively reduced in successive years of treatment.

LMAN1 is a receptor for house dust mite allergens

Development of therapies with the potential to change the allergic asthmatic disease course will require the discovery of targets that play a central role during the initiation of an allergic response, such as those involved in the process of allergen recognition. We use a receptor glycocapture technique to screen for house dust mite (HDM) receptors and identify LMAN1 as a candidate. We verify the ability of LMAN1 to directly bind HDM allergens and demonstrate that LMAN1 is expressed on the surface of dendritic cells (DCs) and airway epithelial cells (AECs) in vivo. Overexpression of LMAN1 downregulates NF-κB signaling in response to inflammatory cytokines or HDM. HDM promotes binding of LMAN1 to the FcRγ and recruitment of SHP1. Last, peripheral DCs of asthmatic individuals show a significant reduction in the expression of LMAN1 compared with healthy controls. These findings have potential implications for the development of therapeutic interventions for atopic disease.

Biologics in the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents

Severe asthma in childhood confers substantial patient- and society-level burdens. Although biologics have been available for the management in adults and adolescents for nearly 20 years, research on the efficacy and safety of biologics in children and adolescents has lagged. Fortunately, more recent research specifically in children has provided an evidence base for biologic use in this age group. Most children with severe asthma demonstrate a type 2 inflammatory phenotype, the primary target of currently approved biologics. Three biologics, omalizumab, mepolizumab, and duplilumab, are Food and Drug Administration-approved for children as young as 6 years, whereas benralizumab and tezepelumab are approved for adolescents older than 12 years. All these agents reduce the rates of severe asthma exacerbations, whereas their effects on pulmonary function vary across agents. Safety profiles are reassuring, although additional long-term safety data in children are still needed. The choice of a biologic agent follows a careful assessment of other factors that contribute to uncontrolled asthma and includes biomarkers of blood eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, allergic sensitization, and IgE levels. This review focuses on the underlying pathophysiology of childhood asthma, an approach to phenotyping patients, and the efficacy, safety, and use of biologics in children and adolescents with severe asthma.

Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Omalizumab to Predict the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics in Pediatric Patients

Omalizumab is widely used in clinical practice; however, knowledge gaps in the dosage of omalizumab for children aged 2-6 years with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma have been identified. The aim of this study was to explore dosing regimens for moderately-to-severely allergic pediatric patients aged 2-6 years. The physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of omalizumab was developed and verified in adult patients, extrapolated to pediatric patients, and simulated for omalizumab by adding two observation chambers (free IgE and total IgE). The simulation results showed that the fold errors of the predicted and observed values of the area under the curve (AUC) and peak plasma concentration (C_max ) were between 0.5 and 2.0, and the average folding error and the absolute average folding error values for all concentration-time data points were 1.09 and 1.48, respectively. The PBPK model combined with pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of omalizumab demonstrated that both the model-derived dose and the original dose could control the average free IgE of 2-6-year-old children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma below 25 ng/mL, and some of the model-derived doses were lower. This conclusion provides a basis for the selection of dosage in clinical practice reference.

Biologic Therapies for Asthma and Allergic Disease: Past, Present, and Future

The discovery of the mechanism underlying allergic disease, mouse models of asthma, and bronchoscopy studies provided initial insights into the role of Th2-type cytokines, including interlukin (IL)-4, IL-5 and IL-13, which became the target of monoclonal antibody therapy. Omalizumab, Benralizumab, Mepolizumab, Reslizumab, and Tezepelumab have been approved. These biologicals have been shown to be good alternative therapies to corticosteroids, particularly in severe asthma management, where they can improve the quality of life of many patients. Given the success in asthma, these drugs have been used in other diseases with type 2 inflammation, including chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), atopic dermatitis, and chronic urticaria. Like the Th2-type cytokines, chemokines have also been the target of novel monoclonal therapies. However, they have not proved successful to date. In this review, targeted therapy is addressed from its inception to future applications in allergic diseases.

Therapeutical Targets in Allergic Inflammation

From the discovery of IgE to the in-depth characterization of Th2 cells and ILC2, allergic inflammation has been extensively addressed to find potential therapeutical targets. To date, omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, and dupilumab, an anti-IL-4 receptor α monoclonal antibody, represent two pillars of biologic therapy of allergic inflammation. Their increasing indications and long-term follow-up studies are shaping the many different faces of allergy. At the same time, their limitations are showing the intricate pathogenesis of allergic diseases.

Is Omalizumab Related to Ear and Labyrinth Disorders? A Disproportionality Analysis Based on a Global Pharmacovigilance Database

Introduction: Asthma is a chronic disease, characterized by reversible airway obstruction, hypersensitivity reactions, and inflammation. Oral corticosteroids are an important treatment option for patients with severe or steroid-resistant asthma. Biologics for asthma are recommended in patients with severe asthma, owing to their steroid-sparing effect as well as their ability to reduce the severity and aggravation of uncontrolled asthma. Most clinical trials of omalizumab in patients with asthma have suggested its tolerability and safety. However, some studies reported eosinophilic comorbidities in the ear, nose, and throat during omalizumab treatment, particularly eosinophilic otitis media. This study examined the relationship between ear disorders and omalizumab compared with that of other biologics for asthma using a large real-world database. Materials and Methods: Individual case safety reports from the Uppsala Monitoring Centre Vigibase of biologics for asthma (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab) up to 29 December 2019, were used. A disproportionality analysis was performed using the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting odds ratio (ROR), and information components (IC). A hierarchy analysis used the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities Terminology. A tree map was generated using R studio version 4.2. Results: In 32,618 omalizumab reports, 714 adverse events (AEs) were detected as signals. Among the 714 signals, seventeen AEs were detected as signals of omalizumab-related ear and labyrinth disorders in 394 reports. Only three AEs (ear pain, ear disorder, and ear discomfort) were detected from mepolizumab. No signal was detected from reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab. Conclusions: Careful monitoring of ear disorders is recommended when omalizumab treatment is started, with decreased oral corticosteroid use in patients with severe asthma. Further studies are necessary to confirm the omalizumab-related signals.

Current Biologics in Asthma Treatment

Uncontrolled asthma and/or severe asthma causes significant impairments in quality of life and is often a huge health care burden. Monoclonal antibodies have been an important addition to the therapeutic management of patients with moderate to severe asthma who do not respond to conventional asthma management. Currently the majority of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved biologics target T2 high inflammation. However, with the expanding knowledge of asthma pathogenesis, novel therapeutics targeting T2 low inflammation are in development. In this article we will focus on the current understanding of T2 inflammation and approved biologics for moderate to severe asthma.

Anti-IL-5 therapies for asthma

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of previously published reviews in the Cochrane Library (2015, first update 2017). Interleukin-5 (IL-5) is the main cytokine involved in the proliferation, maturation, activation and survival of eosinophils, which cause airway inflammation and are a classic feature of asthma. Studies of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 or its receptor (IL-5R) suggest they reduce asthma exacerbations, improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and lung function in appropriately selected patients, justifying their inclusion in the latest guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of therapies targeting IL-5 signalling (anti-IL-5 or anti-IL-5Rα) with placebo on exacerbations, health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measures and lung function in adults and children with chronic asthma, and specifically in those with eosinophilic asthma refractory to existing treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers, manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies. The most recent search was 7 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab versus placebo in adults and children with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a random-effects model. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen studies on about 7600 participants met the inclusion criteria. Six used mepolizumab, five used reslizumab, and six used benralizumab. One study using benralizumab was terminated early due to sponsor decision and contributed no data. The studies were predominantly on people with severe eosinophilic asthma, which was similarly but variably defined. One was in children aged 6 to 17 years; nine others included children over 12 years but did not report results by age group separately. We deemed the overall risk of bias to be low, with all studies contributing data of robust methodology. We considered the certainty of the evidence for all comparisons to be high overall using the GRADE scheme, except for intravenous (IV) mepolizumab and subcutaneous (SC) reslizumab because these are not currently licensed delivery routes. The anti-IL-5 treatments assessed reduced rates of 'clinically significant' asthma exacerbation (defined by treatment with systemic corticosteroids for three days or more) by approximately half in participants with severe eosinophilic asthma on standard care (at least medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)) with poorly controlled disease (either two or more exacerbations in the preceding year or Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score of 1.5 or more), except for reslizumab SC. The rate ratios for these effects were 0.45 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.55; high-certainty evidence) for mepolizumab SC, 0.53 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; moderate-certainty evidence) for mepolizumab IV, 0.43 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.55; high-certainty evidence) for reslizumab IV, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.66; high-certainty evidence) for benralizumab SC. Non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab also showed a significant reduction in exacerbation rates, an effect not seen with reslizumab IV, albeit in only one study. No data were available for non-eosinophilic participants treated with mepolizumab. There were improvements in validated HRQoL scores with all anti-IL-5 agents in severe eosinophilic asthma. This met the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the broader St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; 4-point change) for benralizumab only, but the improvement in the ACQ and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), which focus on asthma symptoms, fell short of the MCID (0.5 point change for both ACQ and AQLQ) for all of the interventions. The evidence for an improvement in HRQoL scores in non-eosinophilic participants treated with benralizumab and reslizumab was weak, but the tests for subgroup difference were negative. All anti-IL-5 treatments produced small improvements in mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory flow in one second (FEV1) of between 0.08 L and 0.15 L in eosinophilic participants, which may not be sufficient to be detected by patients. There were no excess serious adverse events with any anti-IL-5 treatment; in fact, there was a reduction in such events with benralizumab, likely arising from fewer asthma-related hospital admissions. There was no difference compared to placebo in adverse events leading to discontinuation with mepolizumab or reslizumab, but significantly more discontinued benralizumab than placebo, although the absolute numbers were small (42/2026 (2.1%) benralizumab versus 11/1227 (0.9%) placebo). The implications for efficacy or adverse events are unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall this analysis supports the use of anti-IL-5 treatments as an adjunct to standard care in people with severe eosinophilic asthma and poor symptom control. These treatments roughly halve the rate of asthma exacerbations in this population. There is limited evidence for improved HRQoL scores and lung function, which may not meet clinically detectable levels. The studies did not report safety concerns for mepolizumab or reslizumab, or any excess serious adverse events with benralizumab, although there remains a question over adverse events significant enough to prompt discontinuation. Further research is needed on biomarkers for assessing treatment response, optimal duration and long-term effects of treatment, risk of relapse on withdrawal, non-eosinophilic patients, children (particularly under 12 years), comparing anti-IL-5 treatments to each other and, in patients meeting relevant eligibility criteria, to other biological (monoclonal antibody) therapies. For benralizumab, future studies should closely monitor rates of adverse events prompting discontinuation.

Biologic Therapies in Pediatric Asthma

Undeniably, childhood asthma is a multifactorial and heterogeneous chronic condition widespread in children. Its management, especially of the severe form refractory to standard therapy remains challenging. Over the past decades, the development of biologic agents and their subsequent approval has provided an advanced and very promising treatment alternative, eventually directing toward a successful precision medicine approach. The application of currently approved add-on treatments for severe asthma in children, namely omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab have been shown to be effective in terms of asthma control and exacerbation rate. However, to date, information is still lacking regarding its long-term use. As a result, data are frequently extrapolated from adult studies. Thus, the selection of the appropriate biologic agent, the potential predictors of good asthma response, and the long-term outcome in the pediatric population are still to be further investigated. The aim of the present study was to provide an overview of the current status of the latest evidence about all licensed monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that have emerged and been applied to the field of asthma management. The innovative future targets are also briefly discussed.

Immunoglobulin E-Dependent Activation of Immune Cells in Rhinovirus-Induced Asthma Exacerbation

Acute exacerbation is the major cause of asthma morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs. Respiratory viral infections, particularly rhinovirus (RV) infections, are associated with the majority of asthma exacerbations. The risk for bronchoconstriction with RV is associated with allergic sensitization and type 2 airway inflammation. The efficacy of the humanized anti-IgE monoclonal antibody omalizumab in treating asthma and reducing the frequency and severity of RV-induced asthma exacerbation is well-known. Despite these clinical data, mechanistic details of omalizumab's effects on RV-induced asthma exacerbation have not been well-defined for years due to the lack of appropriate animal models. In this Perspective, we discuss potential IgE-dependent roles of mast cells and dendritic cells in asthma exacerbations.

Difficult-to-Treat Asthma Management in School-Age Children

The World Health Organization divides severe asthma into three categories: untreated severe asthma; difficult-to-treat severe asthma; and severe, therapy-resistant asthma. The apparent frequency of severe asthma in the general population of asthmatic children is probably around 5%. Upon referral of these children, it is important to evaluate the diagnosis of asthma carefully before modifying management and applying a long-term monitoring plan. Identification of pathophysiologic phenotypes using objective biomarkers is essential in our routine assessments of severe asthma. Although conventional pharmacologic approaches should be attempted first, there is growing recognition that children with difficult-to-treat asthma may have unique clinical phenotypes that may necessitate alternative treatment approaches including asthma biologics. These new medications, especially those with effects on multiple pathologic features of asthma, raise the hope that new treatment strategies could induce remission. Besides introducing new medications, the opportunity for closer monitoring is feasible with advances in digital health. Therefore, we have the opportunity to improve response to medications, individualize treatment, and monitor response along with potential steps to prevent severe asthma.

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.

Predictors of a Minimal Clinically Important Difference Following Omalizumab Treatment in Adult Patients With Severe Allergic Asthma

Several factors have been found to be predictors of a good response following omalizumab treatment in patients with severe allergic asthma (SAA). However, it remains unclear whether clinical characteristics can predict a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) following omalizumab treatment in this population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the features associated with an MCID following omalizumab treatment in adult patients with SAA. Of the 124 participants enrolled in this retrospective, cross-sectional study, 94, 103, 20 and 53 achieved the MCID following treatment with omalizumab and were considered to be responders of exacerbation reduction (no exacerbation during the 1-year follow-up period or ≧50% reduction in exacerbations from baseline), oral corticosteroid (OCS) sparing (no use of OCS to control asthma during the study period or a reduction of the monthly OCS maintenance dose to <50% of baseline), lung function (an increase of ≧230 ml in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s from baseline) and asthma control (an increase of ≧3 points in the asthma control test score from baseline), respectively. Normal weight [<25 vs. ≧30 kg/m², odds ratio (OR) = 3.86, p = 0.024] was predictive of a responder of reduction in exacerbations following omalizumab treatment while subjects with a blood eosinophil level of <300 cells/μL (<300 vs. ≧300 cells/μL, OR = 5.81, p = 0.001) were more likely to exhibit an MCID in OCS sparing. No factor was found to be a predictor of lung function or asthma control. When choosing treatment for adult patients with SAA, our findings may help to select those who may benefit the most from omalizumab treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab for the Treatment of Severe or Poorly Controlled Allergic Diseases in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of severe or uncontrolled allergic diseases in children.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov databases up to 23rd July 2021, with no language limitations. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with other treatments or placebo in children with severe or inadequately controlled allergic diseases were considered. The primary outcomes of interest were asthma exacerbation rate, allergic symptom score, desensitisation achievement for food allergy (FA), and incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs). The study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two researchers. Quality assessments were conducted using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and data were pooled using a random-effects model if I ² was 50% or greater in the Cochrane Review Manager.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 RCTs [six on severe asthma, one on atopic dermatitis (AD), one on seasonal allergic rhinitis [SAR], and one on FA] consisting of 2,376 participants met the inclusion criteria. For severe asthma, omalizumab may reduce exacerbations at 12 weeks [risk ratio (RR), 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.89], 24 weeks (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence), and 52 weeks (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.94; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence) and reduce the dose of inhalation corticosteroid compared with placebo. For severe AD, the association between omalizumab and allergic symptom improvement [i.e., SCORing Atopic Dermatitis or Paediatric Allergic Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (PADQLQ)] was not confirmed. For severe SAR, omalizumab showed greater improvement in symptom load scores and saved rescue medication days. For FA, omalizumab demonstrated superiority in desensitisation compared with placebo. To date, no clinically significant drug-related SAEs have been reported.

CONCLUSION

For severe or uncontrolled asthma, AD, SAR, and FA, omalizumab may be associated with improved allergic symptoms and safety in children. Future studies should focus on the benefits and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of omalizumab in multiple allergic diseases compared with other treatments.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42021271863].

Clinical Experience with Anti-IgE Monoclonal Antibody (Omalizumab) in Pediatric Severe Allergic Asthma-A Romanian Perspective

Background: Asthma is the most common chronic disease affecting children, with a negative impact on their quality of life. Asthma is often associated with comorbid allergic diseases, and its severity may be modulated by immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated allergen sensitization. Omalizumab is a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, the first biological therapy approved to treat patients aged ≥6 years with severe allergic asthma. The primary objective of our study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of Omalizumab in Romanian children with severe allergic asthma. Methods: In this observational real-life study, 12 children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years (mean 12.4 years) with severe allergic asthma received Omalizumab as an add-on treatment. Asthma control, exacerbations, lung function, and adverse events were evaluated at baseline and after the first year of treatment. Results: We observed general improvement in total asthma symptom scores and reduction in the rate of exacerbation of severe asthma. Omalizumab treatment was associated with improvement in the measures of lung function, and no serious adverse reactions were reported. FEV1 improved significantly after one year of treatment with Omalizumab [ΔFEV1 (% pred.) = 18.3], and [similarly, ΔMEF50 (%) = 25.8]. The mean severe exacerbation rate of asthma decreased from 4.1 ± 2.8 to 1.15 ± 0.78 (p < 0.0001) during the year of treatment with Omalizumab. Conclusions: This study showed that Omalizumab can be an effective and safe therapeutic option for Romanian children and adolescents with severe allergic asthma, providing clinically relevant information on asthma control and exacerbation rate in children and adolescents. The results demonstrated the positive effect of Omalizumab in young patients with asthma, starting from the first year of treatment.

Biologics for Asthma and Allergic Skin Diseases in Children

An estimated 7 million children in the United States have asthma, which causes a significant health care burden and affects quality of life. The minority of these children have asthma that does not respond to Global Initiative for Asthma steps 4 and 5 care, and biological medications are recommended at this level in the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations. In addition, biologics have been introduced into the care of children with allergic skin diseases. Omalizumab and mepolizumab are approved for children as young as 6 years, and benralizumab and dupilumab are approved for people aged ≥12 years. Reslizumab is approved only for people aged ≥18 years. These monoclonal antibodies may be added for appropriate patients when asthma or allergic skin diseases are not well controlled. Pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists should work together and be aware of the benefits and risks of these medications for their patients, as well as the practical implications of providing these options for their patients. This clinical report serves as an evaluation of the current literature on these types of medications in the treatment of children with asthma and allergic skin disease.

Pediatric problematic severe asthma: Recent advances in management

Problematic severe asthma remains a significant challenge to manage, accounting for the majority of healthcare utilization among children with asthma. The heterogeneity is recognized and the clinical phenotypes of "difficult-to-treat" asthma (DA) and "severe therapy-resistant asthma" (STRA) help to guide management. Recent evidence supports molecular distinctions between these phenotypes and shows poor correlations between peripheral and airway markers of inflammation, especially in STRA. Airway neutrophils in the context of childhood severe asthma have been explored, but their role in disease causation, protection, or as bystanders remain unknown, and thus, treatment implications are unclear. Several novel management strategies, including once-daily maintenance therapy, single-device maintenance and reliever therapy, and novel biological treatments are being increasingly used for DA and STRA. However, pediatric data for efficacy of novel treatments is scarce, and when available, is restricted to adolescents. The aim of this review is to highlight recent advances in objective biomarkers that aid stratification and management of childhood severe asthma and to highlight gaps in pediatric evidence. Specifically, the urgent need for efficacy studies to improve the management of problematic severe asthma in children younger than 12 years.

Gender bias in clinical trials of biological agents for severe asthma: A systematic review

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases characterized by sex disparities. Gender bias is a well-documented issue detected in the design of published clinical trials (CTs). International guidelines encourage researchers to analyze clinical data by sex, gender, or both where appropriate. The objective of this work was to evaluate gender bias in the published CTs of biological agents for the treatment of severe asthma. A systematic review of randomized controlled CTs of the biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab, reslizumab, mepolizumab or dupilumab) for the treatment of severe asthma was conducted. The literature search was performed using PubMed and EMBASE without language restrictions. This study followed the corresponding international recommendations. We identified a total of 426 articles, of which 37 were finally included. Women represented 60.4% of patients included. The mean percentage of women in these trials was 59.9%, ranged from 40.8% to 76.7%. The separate analysis by sex of the main variable was only performed in 5 of the 37 publications included, and none of the trials analyzed secondary variables by sex. Only 1 of the articles discussed the results separately by sex. No study included the concept of gender in the text or analyzed the results separately by gender. The proportion of women included in CTs was higher compared to publications of other disciplines, where women were under-represented. The analysis of the main and secondary variables by sex or gender, even the discussion separately by sex, was insufficient. This gives rise to potential gender bias in these CTs.

Clinical efficacy and safety of MP-AzeFlu for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

MP-AzeFlu is a novel option for therapy of allergic rhinitis (AR). The purpose of our study was to assess the safety and efficacy of MP-AzeFlu for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, compared to placebo and azelastine monotherapy.

METHODS

The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were comprehensively searched for all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of using MP-AzeFlu nasal spray on July 26, 2019. In these studies, we selected patients with clinical symptom scores. The heterogeneity of the included studies was assessed by I².

RESULTS

Among the 336 citations retrieved, 6 articles with over 6000 patients were finally included in the meta-analysis. The results of meta-analysis revealed that MP-AzeFlu was superior to placebo ( - 2.43 [95%CI,  - 2.73 to  - 2.14], P < 0.00001) and azelastine ( - 1.27 [95% CI,  - 1.57 to  - 0.97], P < 0.00001) in reflective total nasal symptom score. In the MP-AzeFlu group, the instantaneous total nasal symptom score ( - 2.56 [95% CI,  - 3.02 to  - 2.10], P < 0.00001) and the reflective total ocular symptom score ( - 1.22 [95% CI,  - 1.57 to  - 0.87], P < 0.00001) were significantly reduced compared to the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

MP-AzeFlu is as safe and mild as placebo and azelastine, which also is associated with symptom relief and the improvement of quality of life in AR patients. MP-AzeFlu can provide better clinical benefits than two currently available first-line intranasal therapies. It is an ideal therapy for AR patients.

Effectiveness and Safety Studies of Omalizumab in Children and Adolescents With Moderate-To-Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is currently approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in patients 6 years and older.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous omalizumab as an add-on therapy option for moderate-severe allergic asthma in patients aged 6-20 years old.

METHODS

The studies published from July, 1970 to May, 2021 were searched from the electronic databases which followed keywords: ("anti-IgE" OR "anti-immunoglobulin E" OR "anti-IgE antibody" OR "omalizumab" OR "rhuMAb-E25" OR "Xolair") AND "asthma" AND ("child" OR "children" OR "adolescents" OR "youth" OR "teenager" OR "kids" OR "pediatric"). Thirteen studies were pooled to determine the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab. Efficacy endpoints were evaluated using a fixed-effects model or a random-effects model depending on heterogeneity. Safety endpoints were evaluated by odds ratio.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. In this meta-analysis, our results showed that fractional exhaled nitric oxide and asthma control test scores were significantly improved with omalizumab treatment. Serum immunoglobulin E was also decreased in children with moderate-to-severe asthma after treatment with omalizumab. The analysis found that there was no significant difference between pre-and post-treatment in forced expiratory volume in one second/ forced vital capacity ratio, forced expiratory flow between 25 and 75% of vital capacity, or FEV1. Overall, more adverse events occurred with omalizumab compared to placebo. However, the degree was mild to moderate.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that omalizumab is safe and effective to treat children and adolescents with moderate-to-severe asthma.

Tuning IgE: IgE-Associating Molecules and Their Effects on IgE-Dependent Mast Cell Reactions

The recent emergence of anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) drugs and their candidates for humans has endorsed the significance of IgE-dependent pathways in allergic disorders. IgE is distributed locally in the tissues or systemically to confer a sensory mechanism in a domain of adaptive immunity to the otherwise innate type of effector cells, namely, mast cells and basophils. Bound on the high-affinity IgE receptor FcεRI, IgE enables fast memory responses against revisiting threats of venoms, parasites, and bacteria. However, the dysregulation of IgE-dependent reactions leads to potentially life-threatening allergic diseases, such as asthma and anaphylaxis. Therefore, reactivity of the IgE sensor is fine-tuned by various IgE-associating molecules. In this review, we discuss the mechanistic basis for how IgE-dependent mast cell activation is regulated by the IgE-associating molecules, including the newly developed therapeutic candidates.

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.

Overview of severe asthma, with emphasis on pediatric patients: a review for practitioners

Asthma is the most common life-threatening chronic disease in children. Although guidelines exist for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, treatment of severe, pediatric asthma remains difficult. Limited studies in the pediatric population on new asthma therapies, complex issues with adolescence and adherence, health disparities, and unequal access to guideline-based care complicate the care of children with severe, persistent asthma. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of asthma, including asthma subtypes, comorbidities, and risk factors, to discuss diagnostic considerations and pitfalls and existing treatments, and then present existing and emerging therapeutic approaches to asthma management. An improved understanding of asthma heterogeneity, clinical characteristics, inflammatory patterns, and pathobiology can help further guide the management of severe asthma in children. More studies are needed in the pediatric population to understand emerging therapeutics application in children. Effective multimodal strategies tailored to individual characteristics and a commitment to address risk factors, modifiers, and health disparities may help reduce the burden of asthma in the USA.

The Current State of Biologic Therapies for Treatment of Refractory Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, with the immune processes behind the chronic inflammation underlying this disorder differing between the various identified asthma endotypes. In addition to heterogeneity in underlying disease pathophysiology, asthmatics fall across a broad spectrum of disease severity and can vary greatly in their response to convention asthma therapies. A small percentage of patients with severe persistent asthma will remain uncontrolled despite treatment with high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and a long-acting beta-agonist. Less than two decades ago, there were few options for these treatment-refractory asthmatics beyond chronic systemic steroids, with their myriad of treatment-limiting side effects. However, in recent years, there have been a growing number of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved biologic medications with targets that include immunoglobulin E (IgE), interleukin-5 (IL-5), the IL-5 receptor and the IL-4/IL-13 receptor-alpha subunit. The current FDA-approved biologics for severe persistent asthma are omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab. These monoclonal antibodies have been shown to improve asthma control, decrease asthma exacerbations and decrease glucocorticoid dependence in certain subsets of patients with asthma. The optimal biologic for treatment of severe asthma varies from patient to patient, depending on the underlying pathophysiology of the patient's disease. For each of these medications, there are certain biomarkers that can help predict whether a patient is likely to respond favorably to the medication. This review will discuss the currently approved biologics for severe persistent asthma, including their indications, efficacy and side effects.

Precision Medicine for Paediatric Severe Asthma: Current Status and Future Direction

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, characterised by different phenotypes and endotypes. Precision medicine in asthma refers to the implementation of a targeted therapy for each individual child, based on the identification of treatable traits, including environmental, immunological and genetic factors. Severe asthma in children is associated with increased hospitalisation rates, a lower quality of life, increased healthcare costs and an increased mortality. In the era of new molecular biologics treatments, it is essential to improve deep phenotyping of children with severe asthma in order to deliver the most effective treatment to each individual child. In this review, we discuss the personalised approach to the assessment and management of severe asthma. We explore the indications and use of the currently licensed biologics, as well as the potential of other emerging treatments.

Safety and effectiveness of omalizumab for the treatment of chronic urticaria in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Evidence on safety and effectiveness of omalizumab for treatment of chronic urticaria in pediatric patients is scarce and limited to case reports. In particular, drug survival of omalizumab has not yet been investigated, which is a key element in the evaluation of its clinical performance. The aim of this study was to investigate safety, effectiveness, and drug survival rates of omalizumab in a daily practice cohort of pediatric patients with chronic urticaria (CU).

METHODS

This is a multicenter study including all pediatric patients from an academic center (Wilhelmina Children's Hospital) and a general center (Diakonessenhuis Hospital) in the Netherlands, who started omalizumab treatment before the age of 18 years. Data on safety, effectiveness, time to discontinuation, and reasons for discontinuation of treatment were assessed. Drug survival of omalizumab was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients, who started treatment between January 2014 and January 2020, were included. Most patients (68.4%) used omalizumab without reporting any side effects and a complete or good response to treatment was achieved in 76.3% of patients. The 1- and 2-year drug survival rates were 62% and 50%, respectively, with well-controlled disease activity as the most frequent reason for discontinuation in 69.2% of patients, followed by ineffectiveness in 23.1% and side effects in 7.7% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates high safety and effectiveness of omalizumab treatment in pediatric patients with CU, which will aid clinical decision making and management of expectations when choosing omalizumab treatment for pediatric patients with CU.

Novel Strategies to Target Mast Cells in Disease

Mast cells (MCs) are versatile effector cells of the immune system, characterized by a large content of secretory granules containing a variety of inflammatory mediators. They are implicated in the host protection toward various external insults, but are mostly well known for their detrimental impact on a variety of pathological conditions, including allergic disorders such as asthma and a range of additional disease settings. Based on this, there is currently a large demand for therapeutic regimens that can dampen the detrimental impact of MCs in these respective pathological conditions. This can be accomplished by several strategies, including targeting of individual mediators released by MCs, blockade of receptors for MC-released compounds, inhibition of MC activation, limiting mast cell growth or by inducing mast cell apoptosis. Here, we review the currently available and emerging regimens to interfere with harmful mast cell activities in asthma and other pathological settings and discuss the advantages and limitations of such strategies.

The Long-Term Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Adult Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma: Continuous Treatment Versus Boosting Treatment

The implications of boosting Omalizumab treatment (OT) in patients with severe allergic asthma (SAA) remain unclear. The study aimed to explore and compare the 12-month effectiveness between continuous, at least 10-month OT (continuation group) and four-month boost of Omalizumab (boost group) in adult patients with SAA. In this retrospective cohort study, clinical data were collected for further analysis. Of all participants (n = 124), a significant reduction in annual exacerbations (baseline = 0.8 ± 1.5, follow-up = 0.5 ± 1.0, p = 0.047 *) and improvement in small airway ventilation as evaluated by forced expiratory flow at 25–75% (baseline = 55.1 ± 11.1%, follow-up = 59.4 ± 8.4%, p < 0.001 *) were found in the continuation group (n = 110). By contrast, the boost group (n = 14) had significantly increased annual exacerbations (baseline = 0.7 ± 1.4, follow-up = 2.9 ± 3.6, p = 0.031 *) and impaired small airway function (baseline = 55.3 ± 12.9, follow-up = 52.1 ± 12.5, p = 0.026 *). Furthermore, the continuation group rather than the boost group had significant decreases in the frequency of oral corticosteroid (OCS) use as controllers (baseline = 32.7%, follow-up = 20.0%, p = 0.047 *; baseline = 50.0%, follow-up = 21.4%, p = 0.237, respectively) and OCS maintenance dose (mg/month) (baseline = 85.9 ± 180.8, follow-up = 45.8 ± 106.6, p = 0.020 *; baseline = 171.4 ± 221.5, follow-up = 50.0 ± 104.3, p = 0.064, respectively), and increases in asthma control test scores (baseline = 16.0 ± 3.0, follow-up = 19.8 ± 4.4, p < 0.001 *; baseline = 14.6 ± 3.8, follow-up = 19.7 ± 4.7, p = 0.050, respectively). Continuous OT would be beneficial for adult patients with SAA, while boost of Omalizumab would worsen their long-term outcomes.

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.

Case Report: Self-Administration of Omalizumab in an Adolescent With Severe Asthma During SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Acute asthma remains one of the most frequent causes of children's access to healthcare. Asthma exacerbation is an essential defining characteristic of its severity, and respiratory infections entail increased risks of exacerbations with potential hospitalization. In the literature, contradictory findings have been reported about the risk and severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients affected by asthma, with several implications for its management. Anti-IgE monoclonal antibody therapy is meant for patients affected by severe persistent allergic asthma without adequate control with other treatments. Indeed, biological therapies, such as omalizumab, are used as add-on treatments (step 5 in the Global Initiative for Asthma report) for severe asthma with several benefits, including a reduction in the frequency of exacerbations. To the best of our knowledge, we hereby report the first case in which an adolescent with severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab has switched to self-administration at home during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Based on our peculiar experience, physicians may consider switching to self-administration of omalizumab at home, even during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. However, more extensive research data from future studies are needed to confirm these first findings.

An expert review on breaking barriers in severe asthma in Brazil: Time to act

Currently, Brazil lacks a national asthma management program and is burdened with nearly 200,000 hospitalizations due to the disease per year and approximately 5 deaths per day. The purpose of this article was to analyze the current issues surrounding severe asthma in Brazil, as the status of diagnosis and treatment is largely unknown, and to provide feasible recommendations to elicit imminent action. A panel of Brazilian medical experts in the field of severe asthma was provided with a series of relevant questions to address prior to a multi-day conference. Within this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group. Through numerous rounds of discussion consensus was achieved. In order to overcome barriers to adequate asthma treatment, this panel recommends specific initiatives that can be implemented in the short-term to decrease the burden of severe asthma in Brazil. With increasing healthcare costs and limited resources globally, there is an opportunity to implement these recommendations in other countries in order to achieve adequate asthma care. Severe asthma is a heterogeneous and complex disease with various phenotypes that requires strict attention for diagnosis and management. Although this disease affects only a small proportion of the population with asthma, it poses a great burden to healthcare systems. Thus, barriers to diagnosis, treatment, and management should be overcome as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Preventing asthma in high risk kids (PARK) with omalizumab: Design, rationale, methods, lessons learned and adaptation

Asthma remains one of the most important challenges to pediatric public health in the US. A large majority of children with persistent and chronic asthma demonstrate aeroallergen sensitization, which remains a pivotal risk factor associated with the development of persistent, progressive asthma throughout life. In individuals with a tendency toward Type 2 inflammation, sensitization and exposure to high concentrations of offending allergens is associated with increased risk for development of, and impairment from, asthma. The cascade of biological responses to allergens is primarily mediated through IgE antibodies and their production is further stimulated by IgE responses to antigen exposure. In addition, circulating IgE impairs innate anti-viral immune responses. The latter effect could magnify the effects of another early life exposure associated with increased risk of the development of asthma - viral infections. Omalizumab binds to circulating IgE and thus ablates antigen signaling through IgE-related mechanisms. Further, it has been shown restore IFN-α response to rhinovirus and to reduce asthma exacerbations during the viral season. We therefore hypothesized that early blockade of IgE and IgE mediated responses with omalizumab would prevent the development and reduce the severity of asthma in those at high risk for developing asthma. Herein, we describe a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of omalizumab in 2-3 year old children at high risk for development of asthma to prevent the development and reduce the severity of asthma. We describe the rationale, methods, and lessons learned in implementing this potentially transformative trial aimed at prevention of asthma.

Biologicals in the Treatment of Pediatric Atopic Diseases

The management of atopic diseases such as severe asthma, severe atopic dermatitis, and severe food allergy in childhood is challenging. In particular, there are safety concerns regarding the use of high-dose corticosteroids. The recent development of biologicals and their approval for the treatment of children offer a new, very promising, and more personalized therapy option. Omalizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab are currently approved as add-on treatments of severe asthma in children and have been shown to be effective in improvement of asthma control and reduction of exacerbations. Dupilumab is the only biological approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis in adolescents so far. It has been demonstrated to significantly improve symptoms of atopic dermatitis.However, safety data for biologicals used in atopic diseases in children and adolescents are still very limited. Biologicals are generally considered to be safe in adults. These data are often extrapolated to children. Additionally, data for long-term use are lacking. Thus, the safety profiles of those biologicals cannot yet be conclusively assessed.