The clinical effectiveness of mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma; outcomes from four years cohort evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials and real world studies demonstrated benefit of mepolizumab treatment in severe asthma but data on its effectiveness beyond 2 years remain limited. Herein, we provide mepolizumab treatment evaluation up to 4 years. METHODS: we studied all patients initiated on mepolizumab in our center from June 2017 to August 2018. Clinical outcomes data were retrieved from the local dendrite systems registry. Comparison analyses and logistic regression were conducted to explore longevity and predictors of response to mepolizumab treatment. RESULTS: a total of 66 patients initiated on mepolizumab with a median follow-up of 45.8 (42.4,48.1) months were included in the study [mean age 50.3 years (range 18-79), females 50 (73%) ]. At 20.7 months of treatment, 42 patients (63.6%) had positive response, 13 (19.7%) negative response, and 11 (16.7%) discontinued due to other factors. At 45.8 months, 35 (53%) patients were still on mepolizumab, 21 (31.8%) switched to a different biologic, and 10 (15.2%) discontinued biologics. Two deaths were recorded during the study period.The median blood eosinophil was reduced from 0.43x109/L (0.27, 0.75) to 0.04 (0.0, 0.1) (p < 0.00001)]. The median annual exacerbations were reduced from 6.0 (4,8) to 1.0 (0.0,3.0) (p < 0.00001), and mOCS use was reduced from59% to 29%, p = 0.001. The mean asthma control questionnaire-6 (ACQ6) improved from 3.1 ± 1.7 to 2.1 ± 1.3 (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: mepolizumab clinical benefit was sustained over 4 years. However, approximately half of the cohort discontinued the treatment prompting the need for further research into the treatment response longevity.

Difficult-to-treat asthma patients from ethnic minority groups in central England are at an enhanced risk of house dust mite sensitisation.

BACKGROUND: House dust mite (HDM) is the most common sensitising allergen in asthma. Ethnic minority groups (EMGs) in the UK are more likely to live in deprived conditionings with a greater exposure to HDM and other aero-allergens. AIM: To compare the ethnicity-based patterns of sensitisation to aero-allergens and the impact of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in patients with difficult-to-treat asthma (DTA). METHODS: Data of patients with DTA were extracted from the registry of the Birmingham Regional Severe Asthma Service (BRSAS), which have a catchment population of 7.3million from Central England. Patients from White and EMG backgrounds were compared in terms of the prevalence of atopy, total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE), specific serum IgE (ssIgE) and asthma related clinical outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore ethnicity-based risk factors for HDM sensitisation. RESULTS: A total of 1272 patients [White 1016 (79.9%), EMG 256 (20.1%) EMG] with a median age of 51 years (range 16-97) were included in the analysis. Patients from EMG were more likely (64%) to reside in the worst scale of index of multiple deprivation (IMD) than the White patients (25.5%), p < 0.0001. Positive HDM sensitisation was more prevalent in the EMG than in the White group [142/216 (66%) versus 375/842 (45%), p < 0.0001]. The median HDM ssIgE level was higher in the EMG than in the White group [3.0 KUA/L (IQR 0.06, 11.5) versus 0.1 (0.01, 3.0), p < 0.000001]. The odds ratio for positive sensitisation to HDM conveyed by the EMG status was 2.61 (95%CI, 1.8-3.8), p < 0.0001. Compared to the White group, the EMG had higher median total serum IgE [326 KU/L (115, 971) versus 114 (29.8, 434.8), p < 0.000001], higher blood eosinophil count (0.36 × 109 (0.18, 0.62) versus 0.23 (0.1,0.47), p < 0.000001), were marginally more atopic (79.2% vs. 75.6%, p = 0.098) and were less likely to being on maintenance oral corticosteroids (22% vs. 39.7%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In this DTA cohort, positive HDM sensitisation was greater amongst the EMG than the White patients. The EMG status was a significant risk factor for HDM sensitisation.

Consultation on the Libyan health systems: towards patient-centred services.

The extra demand imposed upon the Libyan health services during and after the Libyan revolution in 2011 led the ailing health systems to collapse. To start the planning process to re-engineer the health sector, the Libyan Ministry of Health in collaboration with the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other international experts in the field sponsored the National Health Systems Conference in Tripoli, Libya, between the 26th and the 30th of August 2012. The aim of this conference was to study how health systems function at the international arena and to facilitate a consultative process between 500 Libyan health experts in order to identify the problems within the Libyan health system and propose potential solutions. The scientific programme adopted the WHO health care system framework and used its six system building blocks: i) Health Governance; ii) Health Care Finance; iii) Health Service Delivery; iv) Human Resources for Health; v) Pharmaceuticals and Health Technology; and vi) Health Information System. The experts used a structured approach starting with clarifying the concepts, evaluating the current status of that health system block in Libya, thereby identifying the strengths, weaknesses, and major deficiencies. This article summarises the 500 health expert recommendations that seized the opportunity to map a modern health systems to take the Libyan health sector into the 21st century.