Long-Term Efficacy of Mepolizumab at 3 Years in Patients with Severe Asthma: Comparison with Clinical Trials and Super Responders.

The efficacy mepolizumab in severe asthmatic patients is proven in the literature. Primarily to study the effect of mepolizumab on exacerbations, steroid dependence, and the continuation of efficacy in the long term. Secondarily to evaluate the effect of the drug on nasal polyps. Analyzing data from SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy) clinics, we observed severe asthmatic patients treated with mepolizumab 100 mg/4 weeks, for a period of 3 years. 157 patients were observed. Exacerbations were reduced from the first year (-84.6%) and progressively to 90 and 95% in the second and third ones. Steroid-dependent patients decreased from 54% to 21% and subsequently to 11% in the second year and 6% in the third year. Patients with concomitant nasal polyps, assessed by SNOT-22, showed a 49% reduction in value from baseline to the third year. The study demonstrated the long-term efficacy of mepolizumab in a real-life setting.

Omalizumab and cancer risk: Current evidence in allergic asthma, chronic urticaria, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

Omalizumab is a biological drug targeting circulating IgE, approved for use in allergic asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, and recently for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, with good efficacy in all these settings. Some concerns about omalizumab safety have been raised as its use has been recently linked to potential increased cancer risk. Nevertheless, literature evidence does not support this statement, and clinical studies and evidence from real-world registries and surveillance analysis have consistently reported drug safety.

The new indications for biologicals in type 2 diseases: perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide a literature review of what is on the market and under study for some diseases treated with drugs targeting type 2 (T2) inflammation. RECENT FINDINGS: Literature data have shown that drugs targeting type 2 inflammation are effective in asthma and nasal polyposis, conditions for which they are on the market, and have promising expectations in the case of eosinophilic esophagitis, especially using anti-IL-5/IL-5 receptor and IL-4 receptor antibodies, while concerning eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangitis (EGPA), mepolizumab (MEP) was approved by FDA and EMA as a drug for the treatment of this condition because of the promising results obtained in trials and in real life. SUMMARY: The use of these drugs is certainly an important achievement in the treatment of complex diseases such as those mentioned above, which are too often orphaned from innovative treatments and limited to the use of immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroid for their control.

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.

Severe asthma: One disease and multiple definitions.

INTRODUCTION: There is, so far, no universal definition of severe asthma. This definition usually relies on: number of exacerbations, inhaled therapy, need for oral corticosteroids, and respiratory function. The use of such parameters varies in the different definitions used. Thus, according to the parameters chosen, each patient may result in having severe asthma or not. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the choice of a specific definition of severe asthma can change the allocation of patients. METHODS: Data collected from the Severe Asthma Network Italy (SANI) registry were analyzed. All the patients included were then reclassified according to the definitions of U-BIOPRED, NICE, WHO, ATS/ERS, GINA, ENFUMOSA, and TENOR. RESULTS: 540 patients, were extracted from the SANI database. We observed that 462 (86%) met the ATS/ERS criteria as well as the GINA criteria, 259 (48%) the U-Biopred, 222 (41%) the NICE, 125 (23%) the WHO, 313 (58%) the Enfumosa, and 251 (46%) the TENOR criteria. The mean eosinophil value were similar in the ATS/ERS, U-Biopred, and Enfumosa (528, 532 and 516 cells/mcl), higher in WHO and Tenor (567 and 570 cells/mcl) and much higher in the NICE classification (624 cells/mcl). Lung function tests resulted similarly in all groups, with WHO (67%) and ATS/ERS-GINA (73%), respectively, showing the lower and upper mean FEV1 values. CONCLUSIONS: The present observations clearly evidence the heterogeneity in the distribution of patients when different definitions of severe asthma are used. However, the recent definition of severe asthma, provided by the GINA document, is similar to that indicated in 2014 by ATS/ERS, allowing mirror reclassification of the patients examined. This lack of homogeneity could complicate the access to biological therapies. The definition provided by the GINA document, which reflects what suggested by ATS/ERS, could partially overcome the problem.

Economic impact of mepolizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma, in real life.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) which worsen patients' health and increase healthcare spending. Aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic effect of adding mepolizumab (MEP) for the treatment of these patients. METHODS: Patients >18 years old, referred to 8 asthma clinics, starting MEP between May 2017 and December 2018, were enrolled and followed-up for 12 months. Information in the 12 months before mepolizumab were collected retrospectively. The evaluation parameters included: OCS use, number of exacerbations/hospitalizations, concomitant therapies, comorbidity, and annual number of working days lost due to the disease. The primary objective was to compare the annual total cost per patient pre- and post-MEP. Secondary outcomes included rates of exacerbations and number of OCS-dependent patients. RESULTS: 106 patients were enrolled in the study: 46 male, median age 58 years. Mean annual cost pre- and post-MEP (cost of biologic excluded) was €3996 and €1,527, respectively. Total savings due to MEP resulted in €2469 (95%CI 1945-2993), 62% due to exacerbations reduction and 33% due to productivity increase. Such savings could fund about 22% of the total cost of MEP for one year. The introduction of MEP induced a clinical benefit by reducing both OCS-dependent patients (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.06-0.23) and exacerbation rate (RR = 0.19, 95%CI 0.15-0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experienced a clinical benefit in asthma control adding MEP to standard therapy. Biologic therapy can be, partially, funded by the savings produced by patients' improvement.