Dual Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for a Severe Asthma Patient

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in allergy: Targeting IgE, cytokine, and alarmin pathways

The etiology of allergy is closely linked to type 2 inflammatory responses ultimately leading to the production of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), a key driver of many allergic conditions. At a high level, initial allergen exposure disrupts epithelial integrity, triggering local inflammation via alarmins including IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP, which activate type 2 innate lymphoid cells as well as other immune cells to secrete type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13, promoting Th2 cell development and eosinophil recruitment. Th2 cell dependent B cell activation promotes the production of allergen-specific IgE, which stably binds to basophils and mast cells. Rapid degranulation of these cells upon allergen re-exposure leads to allergic symptoms. Recent advances in our understanding of the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying allergic pathophysiology have significantly shaped the development of therapeutic intervention strategies. In this review, we highlight key therapeutic targets within the allergic cascade with a particular focus on past, current and future treatment approaches using monoclonal antibodies. Specific targeting of alarmins, type 2 cytokines and IgE has shown varying degrees of clinical benefit in different allergic indications including asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, food allergies and eosinophilic esophagitis. While multiple therapeutic antibodies have been approved for clinical use, scientists are still working on ways to improve on current treatment approaches. Here, we provide context to understand therapeutic targeting strategies and their limitations, discussing both knowledge gaps and promising future directions to enhancing clinical efficacy in allergic disease management.

Combination of monoclonal antibodies targeting type 2 inflammation for severe asthma and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis

Monoclonal antibodies targeting type 2 inflammation are promising treatments for eosinophilic-associated diseases. There is growing interest in the potential benefits of combining two biologics to treat patients with poorly controlled conditions. We present a case of a 54-year-old female patient affected with a relapsing-refractory ANCA myeloperoxidase positive eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), presenting with difficult-to-treat asthma and rhino-sinusitis manifestations. She failed several biologics, including omalizumab 300 mg, mepolizumab 100 mg, and benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks. A switch to dupilumab led to significant eosinophilia (7.69 × 109/L) as well as systemic symptoms, and a deterioration of asthma control. Therefore, a combination of dupilumab-benralizumab was started, leading to better nasal and ear outcomes, asthma control and decrease in blood eosinophils. During the 12-month treatment, no adverse effects were observed. We conducted an extensive literature search in MEDLINE for original articles published until August 1st, 2023 reporting the combination of anti-type 2 biologics. A total of 51 cases were retrieved from the literature. Omalizumab was the most frequently combined drugs (34 cases). Combination therapy led to reduction of asthma exacerbations and glucocorticoid intake, though was ineffective only for one EGPA patient. Only one patient on omalizumab-mepolizumab therapy reported a mild adverse reaction. Combination biologic therapies for conditions which share pathogenic pathways appears to be both safe and effective. This approach may benefit patients with uncontrolled conditions and counter side effects of biologics, like dupilumab-related hypereosinophilia.

Dual biologics therapy in a patient with severe asthma and chronic urticaria: a case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The data on the use of dual biologics are scant, but a topic of current interest.

CASE STUDY

In this report, the treatment regimen of a patient with two T helper 2 pathway-related comorbidities, severe asthma, and chronic spontaneous urticaria, was presented.

RESULTS

Both urticaria and asthma symptoms of the patient could not be controlled entirely with monotherapy while both diseases could be controlled after omalizumab-mepolizumab dual treatment. No adverse events were observed after 6 months of dual biologics use.

CONCLUSION

This report supports other publications in the literature involving the use of dual biologics and provides a summary of the literature.

Efficacy of mepolizumab and omalizumab combination therapy in uncontrolled asthma

OBJECTIVE

Results of biological therapies are often encouraging for severe asthma who are phenotyped as Type 2 inflammation. Unfortunately, some patients do not achieve the desired responses. In this group of patients, there are often switches between anti Ig E and anti-IL-5s and partial improvements are often is deemed sufficient.

METHOD

We planned to start combination therapy with mepolizumab and omalizumab in a 52-year-old patient with uncontrolled allergic asthma whose asthma could not be controlled with omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment, respectively. After complete asthma control was achieved, we aimed to discontinue mepolizumab and continue with omalizumab because it was allergic asthma.

RESULT

The combination of omalizumab 300 mg/month and mepolizumab 100 mg/month was tried and emergency admissions and oral corticosteroids were stopped. At the same time, significant improvement was observed in asthma control test, pulmonary function test and comfort of life.

CONCLUSION

Combined use of Anti-Ig E (omalizumab) and Anti IL 5 (mepolizumab) with a synergistic effect by acting through both pathways, especially in patients with allergic asthma and high levels of both total Ig E and eosinophilia, was found to be effective and no side effects were observed in long-term follow-up. Combination therapy with omalizumab and mepolizumab may become a safe option in patients with severe allergic asthma with a Type 2 inflammatory phenotype who cannot be controlled with each biologic agent.

Dual biologics for severe asthma and atopic dermatitis: Synopsis of two cases and literature review

The efficacy and safety of the combination of biologic therapies remain unclear with an ineffective and insufficient single biologic for managing asthma. Herein, we report two cases using dual biologics for severe asthma and atopic dermatitis. A 52-year-old male patient who received dupilumab and mepolizumab, benralizumab, or tezepelumab, followed by bronchial thermoplasty, and a 41-year-old male patient who received dupilumab and omalizumab, both experienced improved asthma and atopic dermatitis. To date, 38 cases are using dual biologics for severe asthma. The success rate was 84%, with no major adverse effects. We report the first case of severe asthma receiving dual biologics with tezepelumab and furthermore bronchial thermoplasty, and comprehensive literature review on dual biologics. Dual biologics may be an effective treatment method for severe asthma, requiring further investigation.

Evaluation of antibody drug delivery efficiency via nebulizer in various airway models and breathing patterns

BACKGROUND

Nebulizers are commonly used to treat respiratory diseases, which are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. While inhalation therapy with antibodies has been evaluated in preclinical studies and clinical trials for respiratory diseases, it has not yet been approved for treatment. Moreover, there is limited information regarding the delivery efficiency of therapeutic antibodies via nebulizer.

METHODS

In this study, the nebulization characteristics and drug delivery efficiencies were compared when immunoglobulin G (IgG) was delivered by five nebulizers using two airway models and five breathing patterns. The study confirmed that the delivered dose and drug delivery efficiency were reduced in the child model compared to those in the adult model and in the asthma pattern compared to those in the normal breathing pattern.

RESULTS

The NE-SM1 NEPLUS vibrating mesh nebulizer demonstrated the highest delivery efficiency when calculated as a percentage of the loading dose, whereas the PARI BOY SX + LC SPRINT (breath-enhanced) jet nebulizer had the highest delivery efficiency when calculated as a percentage of the emitted dose.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the total inspiration volume, output rate, and particle size should be considered when IgG nebulization is used. We, therefore, propose a method for evaluating the efficiency of nebulizer for predicting antibody drug delivery.

Combination of Biological Therapy in Severe Asthma: Where We Are?

Biological drugs have revolutionized the management of severe asthma. However, a variable number of patients remain uncontrolled or only partially controlled even after the appropriate administration of a biologic agent. The combination of two biologics may target different inflammatory pathways, and it has been used in patients suffering from uncontrolled severe asthma with evidence of both allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes or severe asthma and type2 comorbidities. Combination therapy has also been used to handle anti-IL4/13R induced hypereosinophilia. There is insufficient data on combining biologics for the treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma and type 2 comorbidities, also because of the high cost, and currently no guideline recommends dual biologic therapy. A systematic search was performed using the Medline and Scopus databases. Published data on concurrent administration of two biological drugs in severe, uncontrolled asthma patients has been reported in 28 real-world studies and 1 clinical trial. Data extraction was followed by a descriptive and narrative synthesis of the findings. Future studies should be conducted to further assess the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of this therapeutic strategy.

Review of Dual Biologics in Specialty Pharmacy Practice

OBJECTIVE

To describe and review the published evidence on use of multiple biologics within specialty pharmacy practice.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed and Embase was conducted from October 2021 through September 2022. Keywords included biologics for immune-mediated conditions along with the terms "dual," "add-on," and "combination."

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All human studies in the English language were considered. Published abstracts, case reports, case series, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Although evidence is limited, there are published meta-analyses of combined biologic use within gastroenterology and rheumatology. There are also numerous case reports within dermatology. Clinical trials of dual biologics for severe rheumatologic conditions and inflammatory bowel disease are in progress. Existing evidence for use in pulmonology and allergy suggest dual biologic therapy can be safe and effective, but data are limited. Literature describing use of monoclonal antibodies for other overlapping conditions is lacking.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

This article reviews the evidence describing combination biologic use and outlines remaining knowledge gaps. It also describes the essential role that specialty pharmacists play in managing therapeutic mAbs.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence describing combination biologic use is limited and long-term safety data are lacking. Pharmacists should utilize their specialized training to assess appropriateness of therapy, provide patient counseling and monitor for safety and efficacy.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Combining Biologics Targeting Eosinophils (IL-5/IL-5R), IgE, and IL-4/IL-13 in Allergic and Inflammatory Diseases

The indications for biologic therapy are expanding. Patients may benefit from different biologics for separate conditions or one condition with multiple pathogenic mechanisms targeted by different biologics. We sought to determine the frequency and safety of combining biologics targeting IgE, IL-5, IL-5R, and IL-4/IL-13 in patients referred to a large academic health system through retrospective chart review. Between January 1, 2015 and July 31, 2021, 25 patients receiving multiple biologics simultaneously were identified. Combinations included omalizumab + mepolizumab (n = 11), omalizumab + dupilumab (n = 6), omalizumab + benralizumab (n = 4), mepolizumab + dupilumab (n = 3), and omalizumab + dupilumab + mepolizumab (n = 1). Sixteen patients were receiving multiple biologics for the same condition, most commonly asthma (n = 10). Nine patients were treated for separate conditions, with chronic spontaneous urticaria and atopic dermatitis being the most common combination (n = 3). The median duration of combination biologic use was 17.5 months. There were no reports of anaphylaxis, other allergic reaction, immune dysfunction, pneumonia, or development of malignancy. The use of multiple biologics appears to be well tolerated in this case series. Prospective study is needed to better determine the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of this approach.

Successful simultaneous targeting of IgE and IL-5 in a severe asthmatic patient selected for lung transplantation

We report a case of severe uncontrolled allergic and eosinophilic asthma in which omalizumab had led to a fast remission. After 18 months, mepolizumab was added to omalizumab because of increased blood eosinophils and a deterioration of asthma control. Asthma was then under control for the next 18 months. Discontinuation of mepolizumab in the ensuing 6 months led to a decrease in asthma control and an increased eosinophilia. The introduction of benralizumab resulted in an immediate increase of lung function, asthma control test (ACT), and symptom relief. Before the introduction of biologics, the patient was on the list for transplantation due to respiratory insufficiency. High-resolution CT scans before and after biologic therapy demonstrated a reduction of bronchial wall thickening and mucous plugging as well as an increase in bronchial caliber. The patient did therefore not need a transplant. We conclude that the dual use of biologics may be efficient in some cases of severe asthma.

Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with several clinical variants and often represents a complex disease requiring a specialized and multidisciplinary approach, as well as the use of multiple drugs. The prevalence of severe asthma varies from one country to another, and it is estimated that 50% of these patients present a poor control of their disease. For the best management of the patient, it is necessary a correct diagnosis, an adequate follow-up and undoubtedly to offer the best available treatment, including biologic treatments with monoclonal antibodies. With this objective, this consensus process was born, which began in its first version in 2018, whose goal is to offer the patient the best possible management of their disease in order to minimize their symptomatology. For this 2020 consensus update, a literature review was conducted by the authors. Subsequently, through a two-round interactive Delphi process, a broad panel of asthma experts from SEPAR and the regional pulmonology societies proposed the recommendations and conclusions contained in this document.

Cost Utility of Bronchial Thermoplasty for Severe Asthma: Implications for Future Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Based on Phenotypic Heterogeneity

Background

Asthma is a disease with tremendous phenotypic heterogeneity, and the patients who are most severely impacted by the disease are high utilizers of the United States healthcare system. In the past decade, there has been many advances in asthma therapy for those with severe disease, including the use of a procedure called bronchial thermoplasty (BT) and the use of biologic therapy for certain phenotypes, but questions remain regarding the long-term durability and cost effectiveness of these therapies. The purpose of this analysis was (1) to assess the cost utility of BT relative to usual care (base case) and (2) to assess the cost utility of BT relative to usual care plus biologic therapy (omalizumab) (scenario analysis) based on updated 10-year clinical trial outcomes.

Methods

A Markov cohort model was developed and used to estimate the cost utility of BT to estimate the costs and quality-of-life impact of BT versus the comparisons over a 10-year time frame using a limited societal perspective, which included both direct health utilization costs and indirect costs associated with missed days of work, among those with severe persistent asthma.

Results

In the base case and the scenario analysis, BT was the dominant treatment strategy compared to usual care alone and usual care plus biologic therapy. The net monetary benefit for BT was $483,555.49 over a 10-year time horizon.

Conclusion

Cost-utility models are central to policy decisions dictating coverage, and can be extended to inform the patient and provider, during clinical decision-making, of the relative trade-offs of therapy, assessing long-term clinical and cost outcomes. Phenotypic classification of severe asthma is central to patient management and should also be integrated into economic analysis frameworks, particularly as new biologic agents are developed that are specific to a phenotype. Despite a larger upfront cost of BT therapy, there is a durable clinical and economic benefit over time for those with severe asthma.

Specific Therapy for T2 Asthma

Asthma is a disease with high incidence and prevalence, and its severe form accounts for approximately 10% of asthmatics. Over the last decade, the increasing knowledge of the mechanisms underlying the disease allowed the development of biological drugs capable of sufficiently controlling symptoms and reducing the use of systemic steroids. The best-known mechanisms are those pertaining to type 2 inflammation, for which drugs were developed and studied. Those biological treatments affect crucial points of bronchial inflammation. Among the mechanisms explored, there were IgE (Omalizumab), interleukin 5 (Mepolizumab and Reslizumab), interleukin 5 receptor alpha (Benralizumab) and interleukin 4/13 receptor (Dupilumab). Under investigation and expected to be soon commercialized is the monoclonal antibody blocking the thymic stromal lymphopoietin (Tezepelumab). Seemingly under study and promising, are anti-interleukin-33 (itepekimab) and anti-suppressor of tumorigenicity-2 (astegolimab). With this study, we want to provide an overview of these drugs, paying particular attention to their mechanism of action, the main endpoints reached in clinical trials, the main results obtained in real life and some unclear points regarding their usage.