Biologics and Bronchial Thermoplasty for severe refractory asthma treatment: From eligibility criteria to real practice. A cross-sectional study.

The increasing knowledge on immuno-inflammatory pathways allowed the development of new therapeutic options in the field of severe refractory asthma (SRA). It is therefore very important to accurately identify phenotypes and endotypes of patients potentially eligible for innovative treatments. The aim of this study was to describe a cohort of patients affected by SRA referring to the Pneumology Unit of Azienda USL di Reggio Emilia/IRCCS in Reggio Emilia, Italy. It is an observational cross-sectional study, investigating the proportion of subjects with eligibility criteria for biological treatments (omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab) and non-pharmacological treatment (bronchial thermoplasty, BT). We enrolled 137 patients with SRA referring to the centre from June 1st, 2017 to June 30th, 2019. The results of this study showed that 125 (91%) of patients were eligible for at least one biologic and 94 (69%) were eligible for BT. Only 6 (4%) of patients had no criteria for any available SRA treatments. Among biologics, there were only 11 (8%) patients resulting in overlap between omalizumab, mepolizumab and benralizumab, and 22 (16%) overlap of patients when BT was included. Considering eligibility criteria for BT, only 6 (4%) patients had inclusion criteria for BT, instead in real life 28% of patients were treated with BT. The major comorbidities were: bronchiectasis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA). The prevalence of bronchiectasis was much higher in the mepolizumab (45%) and benralizumab (43%) groups than in omalizumab (1%) and BT (7%), p < 0,001; CRSwNP and GERD were equally present and EGPA was only present in the mepolizumab group. Overall, our population was eligible for biologicals in almost all cases, and a significant percentage of patients showed the presence of an overlap of allergic and eosinophilic endotypes. This implies the possibility of different therapeutic options and reiterates the need for a correct characterization of patients. This study confirmed how the identification of inflammatory endotypes and phenotypes represent a key role in the selection of the right therapy for the right patient.

Significant improvement in lung function and asthma control after benralizumab treatment for severe refractory eosinophilic asthma.

Severe eosinophilic asthma is a complex disease and much effort has been made to fully understand its mechanisms. Bronchial remodeling and loss of lung function are important features in asthma, however their key aspects are not completely clear, especially the impact that biological drugs may have on them. One of the key cytokines involved in the pathophysiology of eosinophilic asthma is interleukin-5 (IL-5), which plays a very important role together with other type 2 cytokines and chemokines in the development, transmigration and persistence of eosinophils into airways, such as eotaxin-2 and 3, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), IL-33, as well as IL-4 and IL-13. Several monoclonal antibodies have been developed against this cytokine (mepolizumab, reslizumab) or its receptor (benralizumab). Data on the improvement of respiratory function in patients who undergo benralizumab treatment are scarce and partly conflicting. Real-life studies may play a crucial role in clarifying this important aspect. The aim of this retrospective observational real-world study was to evaluate the effect of benralizumab on lung function improvement, exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroids (OCS) reduction and asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) score before and after six months of treatment with benralizumab in a cohort of 20 consecutive patients with severe refractory asthma (SRA) treated at the Pneumology Unit of Local Health Authority, Reggio Emilia, Italy. Add-on therapy with benralizumab allowed to completely suspend OCS in 19 out of 20 patients. Notably, the number of moderate/severe exacerbations dropped significantly (p < 0,0001); as well as an improvement in ACQ score (p < 0,0001). The most relevant data concern respiratory function: the average pre-bronchodilator FEV1 increased by 21.3% (+680 ml) compared to baseline (p = 0,0006). Moreover, the improvement in morning PEF (+66,6 l/min) confirmed the benefit of benralizumab (p = 0,02). The improvement in respiratory function was significantly higher in patients with blood eosinophilia greater than 500 cells/µL and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This study underlies a noticeable improvement in respiratory function, much higher than what has been observed in literature so far. This aspect, together with the others aforementioned, should be considered when choosing a treatment option in the context of precision medicine.

Efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 ARDS undergoing noninvasive ventilation.

BACKGROUND: The severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is extremely variable, ranging from asymptomatic patients to those who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). As for now, there are still no really effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Some evidences suggest that tocilizumab (TCZ) may avoid the progression of severe COVID-19. The aim of this retrospective case-control study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of TCZ in patients with COVID-19 ARDS undergoing noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV). METHODS: Seventy-nine consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and worsening acute respiratory failure (ARF) were admitted to the Pulmonology Unit of Azienda USL of Reggio Emilia-IRCCS. All patients were inflamed (elevated CRP and IL-6 levels) and received NIV at admission according to the presence of a pO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 200 mmHg. The possibility of being treated with TCZ depended on the drug availability. The primary outcome was the in-hospital mortality rate. A secondary composite outcome of worsening was represented by the patients who died in the pulmonology unit or were intubated. RESULTS: Out of 79 patients, 41 were treated with TCZ. Twenty-eight patients received intravenous (IV) TCZ and 13 patients received subcutaneous (SC) TCZ. In-hospital overall mortality rate was 38% (30/79 patients). The probabilities of dying and being intubated during the follow-up using Kaplan-Meier method were significantly lower in total patients treated with TCZ compared to those of patients not treated with TCZ (log-rank p value = 0.006 and 0.036, respectively). However, using Cox multivariate analyses adjusted for age and Charlson comorbidity index only the association with the reduced risk of being intubated or dying maintained the significance (HR 0.44, 95%CI 0.22-0.89, p = 0.022). Two patients treated with TCZ developed cavitating lung lesions during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that TCZ treatment may be effective in COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory impairment receiving NIV. More data on safety are required. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.

Safety and Diagnostic Accuracy of the Transnasal Approach for Endobronchial Ultrasound-Guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration (EBUS-TBNA).

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a safe and accurate diagnostic procedure used for investigating mediastinal pathologies. It is usually performed using an oral approach. The nasal route has been proposed but not extensively investigated. With the aim to report the use of linear EBUS through the nasal route and compare its accuracy and safety with the oral one, we conducted a retrospective analysis of the subjects who underwent an EBUS-TBNA procedure at our center. From January 2020 to December 2021, 464 subjects underwent an EBUS-TBNA, and in 417 patients, EBUS was performed through the nose or mouth. Nasal insertion of the EBUS bronchoscope was performed in 58.5% of the patients. No difference between the two insertion routes was observed in terms of location or number of stations sampled per subject. Procedure complications were mild and similar between the two groups (10.2% for the nasal group vs. 9.8% for the oral group). Minor epistaxis occurred in five subjects in the nasal group. Comparing the two groups, the rates of adequate specimens were similar (95.1% vs. 94.8%), as were the proportions of diagnostic specimens (84% vs. 82%). In conclusion, the nasal route for EBUS-TBNA is a valid alternative to the oral one.

Home-based treatment of biologics for asthma: who, what, where, when and why.

INTRODUCTION: The advent of biologic therapies for severe asthma has profoundly changed the management of this pathology. The introduction of home administration is therefore an important innovation to optimize the patients' management, even if there are many aspects that need to be clarified and pointed out. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the path that led to the possibility of self-administration of biologics, and what the pandemic has changed in the management of these patients. EXPERT OPINION: The growing understanding of asthma phenotypes and endotypes is enabling the careful selection of patients suitable for biologics. In this context, the availability of reliable and simple self-injection devices is important in implementing self-administration. The transition to self-injection is also possible thanks to the high safety profile of biologics. With attention, most patients may potentially be suitable for self-administration. The transition process from hospital to home administration can therefore be carried out correctly by clinicians with adequate expertise in the field of severe asthma and biologic therapies, with the support of other health professionals, pharmacists, and general practitioners. Home administration is probably the best way to guarantee high adherence and high-level satisfaction of patients, even in the long term.

Bronchial thermoplasty in severe asthma: a real-world study on efficacy and gene profiling.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is an effective treatment in severe asthma. How to select patients who more likely benefit from BT is an unmet clinical need. Moreover, mechanisms of BT efficacy are still largely unknown. We sought to determine BT efficacy and to identify potential mechanisms of response. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated clinical outcomes in 27 patients with severe asthma: 13 with T2-high and 14 with T2-low endotype. Expression levels of 20 genes were compared by real-time PCR in bronchial biopsies performed at the third BT session versus baseline. Clinical response was measured based on Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score < 1.5, asthma exacerbations < 2, oral corticosteroids reduction of at least 50% at 12 months post-BT. Patients were classified as responders when they had at least 2 of 3 outcome measures. RESULTS: 81% of patients were defined as responders. BT induced a reduction in alpha smooth muscle actin (ACTA2) and an increase in CD68, fibroblast activation protein-alpha (FAP), alpha-1 and alpha-2 type I collagen (COL1A1, COL1A2) gene expression in the majority of patients. A higher reduction in ubiquitin carboxy-terminal-hydrolase L1 (PGP9.5) mRNA correlated with a better response based on Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). Lower changes in CD68 and FAP mRNAs correlated with a better response based on ACQ. Lower levels of occludin (OCLN), CD68, connective tissue growth factor (CTGF), higher levels of secretory leukocyte protease inhibitor (SLPI) and lower changes in CD68 and CTGF mRNAs were observed in patients who had less than 2 exacerbations post-BT. Lower levels of COL1A2 at baseline were observed in patients who had ACQ < 1.5 at 12 months post-BT. CONCLUSIONS: BT is effective irrespective of the asthma endotypes and seems associated with airway remodelling. Quantification of OCLN, CD68, CTGF, SLPI, COL1A2 mRNAs could be useful to identify patients with better results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was approved by the Local Ethics Committee (Azienda USL-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia-Comitato Etico Area Vasta Nord of Emilia Romagna; protocol number: 2019/0014076) and all the patients provided written informed consent before participating in the study.

Efficacy and safety of EBUS-TBNA under conscious sedation with meperidine and midazolam.

BACKGROUND: According to the guidelines, endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is the technique of choice for the diagnosis of mediastinal involvement in lung cancer; it is also useful for other mediastinal malignancies and benign pathology. Nevertheless, there is still discussion about whether to perform it under general anesthesia or under conscious sedation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of all patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA under conscious sedation with up to 1 mg/kg of meperidine and up to 0.15 mg/kg of midazolam in the Interventional Pulmonology Unit of the Azienda USL-IRCCS Santa Maria Nuova of Reggio Emilia during 2 consecutive years. Demographic data, indication for the procedure, duration, number of lymph node sampled, number of passes per station, diagnostic yield, drugs dosage, questionnaire score, and complications were collected. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent EBUS-TBNA, and 68% of the patients were males and the mean age was 65 ± 13 years old. The average duration of procedures was 24.4 minutes and the mean dosage of drugs was 4.32 ± 1.52 mg for midazolam and 50.86 ± 13.71 mg for meperidine. The mean number of lymph nodes sampled per patient was 1.75 ± 0.82, and each patient received an average of 4.71 ± 1.78 passes. A total of 90.7% of patients completed the procedures, 85% had adequate samples, and 94.4% of patients declared with Likert's questionnaire that they strongly agree to repeat the test if necessary. CONCLUSION: EBUS-TBNA performed under conscious sedation with meperidine and midazolam is feasible and well-tolerated and has a similar diagnostic yield of that reported in literature.

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab Treatment Over a 16-Year Follow-Up: When a Clinical Trial Meets Real-Life.

Purpose: Treatment of severe asthma has made great strides thanks to rapid progress in understanding immune response and inflammatory pathways. This led to the advent of the first biologic for severe allergic asthma (SAA), omalizumab. Although the long-term efficacy and safety of omalizumab has been confirmed, increasingly longer follow-up data can further reinforce this evidence and potentially provide new ones, for example on any loss of efficacy or the appearance of unexpected side effects. This study reports omalizumab treatment-related outcomes after 16 years of follow-up. Patients and Methods: In this real-life retrospective study, an extension of a previous 9-year follow-up study on patients initially recruited in a clinical trial, we enrolled 8 adult patients with SAA followed-up from November 2005 to December 2021. Study subjects were selected based on omalizumab eligibility criteria. Results: Exacerbation rate significantly decreased from 3.6 ± 2.1 events in year before index date to 0.1 ± 0.4 after 32 weeks of treatment (p < 0.0001). Mean annual number of mild-to-moderate exacerbations at 16 years was 0.88 compared with 1.8 in the year before the index date and 1.1 at 32 weeks. No hospitalizations were documented during the 16-year follow-up compared to 0.3 hospitalizations/patient in the year before the index date. Respiratory function also progressively and significantly improved. Regarding patient-reported outcomes (PROs), The AQLQ and ACT significantly improved from baseline throughout the follow-up, particularly up to 9 years of follow-up. During the study, an overall reduction in doses of asthma medications was observed, with a significant OCS-sparing effect. Conclusion: Our study, the longest clinical follow-up on patients treated with anti-IgE, confirms and amplifies the results of the studies carried out so far, as they are maintained over a very long interval of time without drops in efficacy without any type of side effect.

Diagnosis and Pattern Identification of Intrathoracic Malignant Melanoma Metastasis: A Retrospective Single Center Analysis.

The lung is a frequent site of secondary malignancies. Melanoma is a malignant tumor originating from melanocytes, that accounts for the majority of death related to skin cancers. In advanced stages, it can also present with intrathoracic metastasis, particularly in the lungs, but infrequent intrathoracic manifestations are possible. A retrospective analysis of the cases referred to the pulmonary endoscopy unit of the hospital of Reggio Emilia in the last 10 years (since December 2012) was carried out, discovering 17 cases of melanoma metastasis with thoracic localizations, either with or without a diagnosis of primary melanoma. Four repetitive patterns of clinical-radiological presentation have been identified and described through the same number of paradigmatic clinical cases: nodal involvement (35%), lung mass(es) (41%), diffuse pulmonary involvement (12%), and pleural involvement (12%). These different presentations imply the use of different diagnostic techniques, with an overall high diagnostic yield (87.5%). Finally, a brief analysis of survival based on the pattern of presentation has been performed, finding no statistically significant differences between the four groups at metastasis diagnosis (p-value = 0.06, median survival of respectively 54, 8, 9, and 26 months from metastasis diagnosis), while there is a significant difference considering patients with lung involvement versus nodal/pleural involvement (p = 0.01).

The pharmacoeconomics of the state-of-the-art drug treatments for asthma: a systematic review.

Asthma is a chronic disease characterized by significant morbidities and mortality, with a large impact on socio-economic resources and a considerable burden on health-care systems. In the standard care of asthma, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) associated with long-acting ß-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) are a reliable and often cost-effective choice, especially if based on the single inhaler therapy (SIT) strategy; however, in a subset of patients it is not possible to reach an adequate asthma control. In these cases, it is possible to resort to other pharmacologic options, including corticosteroids (OCS) or biologics. Unfortunately, OCS are associated with important side effects, whilst monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) allow excellent results, even if far more expensive. Up to now, the economic impact of asthma has not been compared with equivalent indicators in several studies. In fact, a significant heterogeneity of the cost analysis is evident in literature, for which the assessment of the real cost-effectiveness of asthma therapies is remarkably complex. To maximize the cost-effectiveness of asthma strategies, especially of biologics, attention must be paid on phenotyping and identification of predictors of response. Several studies were included, involving comparative analysis of drug treatments for asthma, comparative analysis of the costs and consequences of therapies, measurement and evaluation of direct drug costs, and the reduction of health service use. The initial research identified 389 articles, classified by titles and abstracts. A total of 311 articles were excluded as irrelevant and 78 articles were selected. Pharmacoeconomic studies on asthma therapies often report conflicting data also due to heterogeneous indicators and different populations examined. A careful evaluation of the existing literature is extremely important, because the scenario is remarkably complex, with an attempt to homogenize and interpret available data. Based on these studies, the improvement of prescriptive appropriateness and the reduction of the use of healthcare resources thanks to controller medications and to innovative therapies such as biologics partially reduce the economic burden of these treatments. A multidisciplinary stakeholder approach can also be extremely helpful in deciding between the available options and thus optimizing healthcare resources.

Successful treatment with benralizumab in a patient with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis refractory to mepolizumab.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is characterized by necrotizing eosinophilic granulomatous inflammation that frequently involves the respiratory tract (90% of cases). Asthma in EGPA is systematically severe and often refractory to common treatment, it is corticosteroid resistant and can often anticipate the onset of systemic vasculitis by many years. A release of cytokines necessary for the activation, maturation and survival of eosinophils, such as IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13 occurs in the activated Th-2 phenotype. In particular, IL-5 level is high in active EGPA and its inhibition has become a key therapeutic target. Oral glucocorticoids (OCS) are effective treatment options but unfortunately, frequent relapses occur in many patients and they lead to frequent side effects. As for now, there are currently no official recommendations on doses and treatment schedules in the management of EGPA. CASE PRESENTATION: In this article, we describe the case of a man with EGPA, severe asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), with poor asthma and CRSwNP control despite OCS and mepolizumab treatment. Respiratory and vasculitis symptoms improved markedly after therapeutic switch to benralizumab. During the treatment, in addition to clinical effects, we witnessed a depletion of blood eosinophils, as well as an improvement in both pulmonary function tests, CT scan and skin lesions present initially. CONCLUSIONS: While there are many studies confirming the efficacy of benralizumab in EGPA, the most interesting aspect of our report is that efficacy was confirmed in a patient previously unresponsive to mepolizumab, known to be effective in EGPA.

A Real-World Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes of Biologicals and Bronchial Thermoplasty for Severe Refractory Asthma (BIOTERM).

BACKGROUND: The important progress made on asthma phenotyping encouraged the development of new therapeutic strategies, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and bronchial thermoplasty (BT). The aim of this study is to compare patients diagnosed with severe refractory asthma (SRA) who are currently being treated with omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab or BT and to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments over a 12-month observation period. METHODS: Overall, 199 consecutive patients with SRA were included. The cohort was selected referring to the eligibility criteria for all available biologics and BT. RESULTS: Among 32 patients treated with benralizumab, we found a 16.7% reduction in hospitalizations, a 66.6% reduction in exacerbations (p = 0.0001) and the greater improvement in FEV1 (+ 37.4%, p < 0.0001). Among omalizumab group (54 patients), there was a 85.7% (p = 0.012) reduction in hospitalizations and a 88.8% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. In the mepolizumab group (83 patients), we found a 89.5% (p = 0.02) reduction in hospitalizations and a 92.1% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. BT subgroup (30 patients) showed a 93.7% (p = 0.001) reduction in hospitalizations and a 73.5% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. The best results in terms of OCS sparing effect were obtained by BT (- 76%, p < 0.0001) and mepolizumab (- 90.2%, p = 0.002). Omalizumab showed the highest percentage of super responder patients. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare all marketed mAbs with BT, ending in more comprehensive and applicable results to clinical practice. All biologics, to varying degrees, reduced hospitalizations, exacerbations, and OCS use. The starting point for patients in the BT group was worse regarding hospitalizations, exacerbations and OCS, but despite this, even this non-pharmacological option obtained positive results, comparable to biologics.

Real world effectiveness of benralizumab on respiratory function and asthma control.

BACKGROUND: Biological drugs have been recognized as a breakthrough in the treatment of severe refractory asthma. This retrospective real-life observational study aims to evaluate the effect of add-on benralizumab on lung function, exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroids (OCS) reduction and asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) score after 52-weeks. METHODS: In this observational study, a cohort of 18 patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) according to the ERS / ATS and GINA 2020 classifications, with reference to the Pulmonology Unit of the Azienda USL - IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy, were enrolled from 1 September 2019 to 31 August 2020. For each patient, the following data were collected: demographic data (age, sex, age of onset of asthma, history of smoking and atopy); comorbidity; clinical data (lung function, exacerbations, emergency room visits and hospitalizations); asthma control questionnaire (ACQ); biomarkers (blood eosinophil count and total serum IgE); asthma control drugs as high-dose inhaled corticosteroids / long-acting beta-adrenoceptor agonists (ICS / LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), theophylline, OCS. The benralizumab 30 mg treatment schedule was based on the currently recommended dosing regimen. RESULTS: After end-of-treatment (EOT), a complete weaning of all patients from OCS was confirmed. After 26 weeks, the number of exacerbations decreased from 2.90 to 0.05 (p<0.0001), hospitalizations and ACQ score decreased from 3.37 to 0.97 (p<0.0001). At EOT, the number of exacerbations was unchanged, while no hospitalizations had occurred. Overall, lung function markedly improved over the study period. After 52 weeks, the increase in FEV1 from baseline was 26,8% (p=0.0002). The subset of patients with nasal polyposis (NP) had an increase of nearly 50% (1008 ml) and patients with blood eosinophils count (BEC) greater than 500 cells / µl showed an increase of 68% (1081 ml) in FEV1 at EOT. CONCLUSIONS: The notable improvement in respiratory function is a significant result in this study and it is much higher than what has emerged to date. This result, together with the OCS sparing effect and the excellent clinical control of asthma, makes benralizumab a reliable and safe therapeutic option for SEA.

Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19 related-acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: During this long COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID-19 ARDS. MATHERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. RESULTS: NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. CONCLUSION: Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID-19 ARDS-related treatment.

Anti-IL5 Therapies for Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: Literature Review and Practical Insights.

Severe refractory asthma (SRA) still has a high economic and social impact, including a reduction in quality of life (QoL), productivity, a greater risk of exacerbations and emergency department (ED) visits. Another major issue is the need of oral corticosteroids (OCS), often due to a poor response to standard therapies or the lack of indication for currently available biological drugs. A thorough understanding of the immunological pathways and eosinophilopoietic processes allows a correct application of the new pharmacological strategies and leads to better clinical responses. For these unmet needs, several monoclonal antibody (mAb) drugs have been introduced over the past few years. These are mainly available for allergic and especially eosinophilic uncontrolled refractory asthma. As the number of therapeutic options increases, the choice of biological drugs can be made only after careful considerations of the particular asthma endotype, patients' comorbidities and clinical data. The selection of the correct therapeutic option can therefore be guided after a careful evaluation of the particular endotype and phenotype, from the combined evaluation of inflammatory biomarkers, clinical picture and comorbidities. The careful evaluation of all these parameters can therefore help the physician in the optimal management of these complex patients, for whom it is often possible to achieve exceptional results by managing the available options in the best possible way. The aim of this review is to define the positioning of the biological drugs currently available for type 2 asthma, with a special focus on options for eosinophilic asthma in the context of the most recent knowledge of immunological pathways.

Reduction of oral corticosteroids in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with Benralizumab: could it represent a marker of treatment efficacy?

Introduction: Subjects with severe Th2-high endotype usually respond to oral corticosteroids (OCS). However, they often require high dosages with incremental side effects and health-care costs. The advent of biological therapies provides an effective strategy to improve asthma control, as well as reduce OCS use. Various molecules have been developed, each targeting different pathways. We analyzed the two anti-IL-5 strategies, benralizumab and mepolizumab, based on pivotal trials (RCTs), mechanisms of action and their possible role on the steroid-sparing effect. Areas covered: This review analyzes the data from the benralizumab and mepolizumab RCTs, focusing on the advantages of each drug on clinical efficacy and the steroid-sparing effect. Expert opinion: Benralizumab may represent a promising therapeutic option in the treatment of eosinophilic asthma, due to its mechanism of action, which rapidly allows a reduction in the eosinophils' number, and a greater steroid-sparing effect.

Efficacy and steroid-sparing effect of benralizumab: has it an advantage over its competitors?

Severe refractory asthma is characterized by a higher risk of asthma-related symptoms, morbidities, and exacerbations. This disease also determines much greater healthcare costs and deterioration in health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). Another concern, which is currently much discussed, is the high percentage of patients needing regular use of oral corticosteroids (OCS), which can lead to several systemic side effects. Airway eosinophilia is present in the majority of asthmatic patients, and elevated levels of blood and sputum eosinophils are associated with worse control of asthma. Regarding severe refractory eosinophilic asthma, interleukin-5 (IL-5) plays a fundamental role in the inflammatory response, due to the profound effect on eosinophils biology. The advent of the biological therapies provided an effective strategy, even if the increased number of molecules with different targets raised the challenge of choosing the right therapy and avoid overlapping. When considering severe refractory eosinophilic asthma and anti-IL-5 treatments, it is not easy to define which drug to choose between mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab. In this article, we carried out an indirect comparison among literature data, especially between OCS reduction studies (ZONDA-SIRIUS) and pivotal studies (SIROCCO-MENSA), evaluating whether the clinical efficacy and the steroid-sparing effect of benralizumab may represent an advantage over other compounds. This data could help the clinician in the decision process of treatment choice, within the different available therapeutic options for eosinophilic refractory severe asthma.

A case of chronic eosinophilic pneumonia in a patient treated with dupilumab.

The increasing knowledge on inflammatory pathways has driven the development of targeted biological therapies for severe refractory asthma. Among the recently developed biologics, the fully human monoclonal antibody dupilumab is an interesting therapeutic option, given its ability to inhibit the biological effects of both IL-4 and IL-13. We describe the case of a male, Caucasian, 56-year-old patient with allergic and eosinophilic severe asthma. Given the poor asthma control, he started treatment with add-on dupilumab, and after the tenth injection, he presented with a fever and bilateral pulmonary thickening. A significant increase in blood eosinophilia was also reported. The patient underwent a fiberoptic bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB/TBB). BAL revealed eosinophils alveolitis (60%) while TBB showed findings compatible with chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP). After prolonged treatment with oral corticosteroids, the clinical picture improved with resolution of CEP. Since the beginning of dupilumab treatment, simultaneously to a great improvement in asthma control, the patient showed a progressive increase in blood eosinophils count and subsequent onset of clinical-radiological pattern suggestive of CEP. Based on published data, dupilumab may have induced an alteration of the complex immunological pathway of our patient. This pathway is affected by both allergic and eosinophilic asthmatic endotypes, and consequently, the concomitant action of allergenic stimuli and eosinophils may have caused the appearance of eosinophilic pneumonia. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of CEP as a possible severe side effect of dupilumab administration.

Towards precision medicine: The application of omics technologies in asthma management.

Asthma is a chronic obstructive respiratory disease characterised by bronchial inflammation. Its biological and clinical features have been widely explored and a number of pharmacological treatments are currently available. Currently several aspects of asthma pathophysiological background remain unclear, and this is crucial for the traditional asthma phenotype approach as well as for new endotype definition. In this scenario, the identification of new molecular and clinical biomarkers may be helpful in order to better understand the disease, define specific diagnostic tools and highlight relevant novel targets for pharmacology treatments. Omics technologies offer an innovative research tool for addressing the above mentioned goals. However, there is still a lot to do both in the fields of basic research and in the clinical application of these new technologies. Recently, genome-wide association studies, microRNAs and proteomics are contributing to enrich the available data for the identification of new asthma biomarkers. A precise approach to the patient with asthma, particularly with severe uncontrolled asthma, requires new and specific therapeutic targets, but also proper tools able to drive the clinician in tailoring the treatment. On the other hand, treatment response predictors are needed, particularly in the field of biological drugs, whose sustainability implies a correct and precise patient selection. Translating acquired knowledge about omics in clinical practice may address the unmet needs described above, but large-scale studies are required in order to confirm omics relevance and effectiveness in daily practice. Thus in our opinion the application of omics is still lagging in the real-life setting.

Precision Medicine in Targeted Therapies for Severe Asthma: Is There Any Place for "Omics" Technology?

According to the current guidelines, severe asthma still represents a controversial topic in terms of definition and management. The introduction of novel biological therapies as a treatment option for severe asthmatic patients paved the way to a personalized approach, which aims at matching the appropriate therapy with the different asthma phenotypes. Traditional asthma phenotypes have been decomposing by an increasing number of asthma subclasses based on functional and physiopathological mechanisms. This is possible thanks to the development and application of different omics technologies. The new asthma classification patterns, particularly concerning severe asthma, include an increasing number of endotypes that have been identified using new omics technologies. The identification of endotypes provides new opportunities for the management of asthma symptoms, but this implies that biological therapies which target inflammatory mediators in the frame of specific patterns of inflammation should be developed. However, the pathway leading to a precision approach in asthma treatment is still at its beginning. The aim of this review is providing a synthetic overview of the current asthma management, with a particular focus on severe asthma, in the light of phenotype and endotype approach, and summarizing the current knowledge about "omics" science and their therapeutic relevance in the field of bronchial asthma.