TH2 cell compensatory effect following benralizumab treatment for eosinophilic gastritis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophil accumulation is a main feature of eosinophilic gastritis (EoG) and is associated with its histologic diagnosis and pathology. However, a recent clinical trial has demonstrated that EoG endoscopic, noneosinophil histologic, and clinical features remain persistent despite complete eosinophil depletion. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine gastric T-cell composition and associated cytokine levels of patients with EoG following benralizumab-induced eosinophil depletion versus following administration of placebo. METHODS: A cohort of subjects with EoG from a subset of subjects who participated in a recent phase 2 benralizumab trial was treated for 12 weeks with administration of 3 doses of benralizumab (anti-IL-5 receptor α antibody [n = 5]) or placebo (n = 4). Single-cell suspensions obtained by gastric biopsy were stimulated with phorbol 12,13-dibutyrate and ionomycin in the presence of brefeldin A and monensin. Harvested cells were fixed, stained, and analyzed by flow cytometry to examine T-cell populations and associated cytokines. RESULTS: Following benralizumab treatment but not placebo, blood and gastric eosinophil levels decreased 16-fold and 10-fold, respectively. Whereas histologic score and features were significantly decreased, no change was observed in endoscopic score and features. Following complete eosinophil depletion with benralizumab, gastric TH2 cell levels were 3-fold higher than the levels in the patients with EoG who were given placebo; and the levels of associated type 2 cytokine production of IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 in the benralizumab-treated patients were, respectively, 4-, 5.5-, and 2.5-fold, higher than those in the placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSION: We have identified a putative positive feedback loop whereby eosinophil depletion results in a paradoxic increase in levels of TH2 cells and derived cytokines; this finding suggests an explanation for the limited success of eosinophil depletion as monotherapy in eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal disorders.

Anti-IL-4R versus anti-IL-5/5R after anti-IL-5/5R failure in asthma: An emulated target trial.

BACKGROUND: Switching biologics is now common practice in severe eosinophilic asthma. After insufficient response to anti-IL-5 or 5 receptor (anti-IL-5/5R), the optimal switch between an anti-IL-4R mAb (interclass) or another anti-IL-5/5R drug (intraclass) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the effectiveness of these 2 strategies in asthma control in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and insufficient response to an anti-IL-5/5R mAb. METHODS: We emulated a target randomized trial using observational data from the Recherche sur les AsthMes SEvèreS (RAMSES) cohort. Eligible patients were switched to an anti-IL-4R mAb or another anti-IL-5/5R drug after insufficient response to an anti-IL-5/5R mAb. The primary outcome was the change in Asthma Control Test score at 6 months. RESULTS: Among the 2046 patients in the cohort, 151 were included in the study: 103 switched to an anti-IL-4R mAb and 48 to another anti-IL-5/5R. At 6 months, the difference in Asthma Control Test score improvement was not statistically significant (mean difference groups, 0.82 [-0.47 to 2.10], P = .213). The interclass group exhibited greater cumulative reduction in oral corticosteroid dose (Pinter-intra, -1.05 g [-1.76 to -0.34], P = .041). The interclass group had a better effect, although not significantly, on reducing exacerbations (Δinter-intra, -0.37 [-0.77 to 0.02], P = .124) and increasing lung function (FEV1) (126.8 mL [-12.7 to 266.4], P = .124). CONCLUSIONS: After anti-IL-5/5R mAb insufficient response, switching to dupilumab demonstrated similar improvement in Asthma Control Test scores compared with intraclass switching. However, it appeared more effective in reducing oral corticosteroid use. Larger studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Patients taking benralizumab, dupilumab, or mepolizumab have lower postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 immunity.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies inhibiting the IL-4 or IL-5 pathways are very effective in the treatment of asthma and other related conditions. However, the cytokines IL-4 and IL-5 also play a role in the generation of adaptive immune responses. Although these biologics do not cause overt immunosuppression, their effect in primary severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization has not been studied completely. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the antibody and cellular immunity after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients on biologics (PoBs). METHODS: Patients with severe asthma or atopic dermatitis who were taking benralizumab, dupilumab, or mepolizumab and had received the initial dose of the 2-dose adult SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine were enrolled in a prospective, observational study. As our control group, we used a cohort of immunologically healthy subjects (with no significant immunosuppression) who were not taking biologics (NBs). We used a multiplexed immunoassay to measure antibody levels, neutralization assays to assess antibody function, and flow cytometry to quantitate Spike-specific lymphocytes. RESULTS: We analyzed blood from 57 patients in the PoB group and 46 control subjects from the NB group. The patients in the PoB group had lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, pseudovirus neutralization, live virus neutralization, and frequencies of Spike-specific B and CD8 T cells at 6 months after vaccination. In subgroup analyses, patients with asthma who were taking biologics had significantly lower pseudovirus neutralization than did subjects with asthma who were not taking biologics. CONCLUSION: The patients in the PoB group had reduced SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titers, neutralizing activity, and virus-specific B- and CD8 T-cell counts. These results have implications when considering development of a more individualized immunization strategy in patients who receive biologic medications blocking IL-4 or IL-5 pathways.

Overcoming Barriers to Remission in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: Two-Year Real-World Data With Benralizumab.

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab has been reported to lead to clinical remission of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) at 1 year in some patients. However, whether this is maintained over a longer term remains unclear. Additionally, the impact of pulmonary and extrapulmonary comorbidities on the ability to meet remission is poorly understood. METHODS: Clinical outcomes including remission of SEA with benralizumab at 1 and 2 years were assessed retrospectively in a real-world UK multi-centre severe asthma cohort. The presence of clinically relevant pulmonary and extrapulmonary comorbidities associated with respiratory symptoms was recorded. Analyses to identify factors associated with the ability to meet remission were performed. RESULTS: In total, 276 patients with SEA treated with benralizumab including 113 patients who had switched from a previous biologic to benralizumab were included. Overall, clinical remission was met in 17% (n = 31/186) and 32% (n = 43/133) of patients at 1 and 2 years, respectively. This increased to 28% at 1 year and 49% at 2 years once patients with pulmonary and/or extrapulmonary comorbidities were excluded. Body mass index (BMI) and maintenance OCS (mOCS) use demonstrated a negative association with clinical remission at 1 (BMI: OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.96, p < 0.01; mOCS: OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p < 0.05) and 2 years (BMI: OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, p < 0.05; mOCS: OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this long-term, real-world study, patients with SEA demonstrated the ability to meet and sustain clinical remission when treated with benralizumab. The presence of comorbidities including obesity, which are known to be independently associated with respiratory symptoms, reduced the likelihood of meeting clinical remission.

Mepolizumab depletes inflammatory but preserves homeostatic eosinophils in severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophils are key therapeutic targets in severe asthma that are suppressed by IL5 (mepolizumab) and IL5 receptor (benralizumab) blockade. The effect of IL5 pathway biologics on recently described homeostatic (hEOs) and inflammatory (iEOs) eosinophil subsets is unknown. We aimed to determine the relative impact of mepolizumab and benralizumab treatment on eosinophil subset and phenotype, and explore clinical associations of eosinophil subsets with severe asthma characteristics and treatment response. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional observational study of severe asthma (eosinophilic n = 32, non-eosinophilic n = 23, mepolizumab-treated n = 25), with longitudinal follow-up of 30 eosinophilic participants at two timepoints (4-24 weeks, >24 weeks) post-commencement of mepolizumab (n = 20) or benralizumab (n = 10). Blood hEOs and iEOs were measured by flow cytometry assessment of surface CD62L protein. RESULTS: iEO proportion was significantly lower in mepolizumab-treated participants in both the cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Mepolizumab and benralizumab depleted iEOs to a similar extent, however a significantly greater number of hEOs remained in mepolizumab participants at follow-up. Greater iEO proportion correlated with poorer asthma control in eosinophilic but not non-eosinophilic asthma. Higher residual iEO proportion correlated with poorer asthma control in mepolizumab-treated individuals. Reduced blood eosinophil viability was observed in around half of mepolizumab-treated participants, which was associated with significantly better asthma control and spirometry. CONCLUSIONS: Mepolizumab depletes iEOs and reduces circulating eosinophil viability in severe asthma but preserves a residual population of circulatory hEOs. In contrast benralizumab depleted both iEOs and hEOs. Higher iEO abundance and eosinophil viability are associated with poorer clinical outcomes following mepolizumab-treatment. Monitoring circulating eosinophil phenotype and viability may be useful to predict biologic treatment response in severe asthma.

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of benralizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled OSTRO trial.

AIMS: Benralizumab, a humanized, afucosylated monoclonal antibody against the interleukin 5 receptor, α subunit, causes rapid depletion of eosinophils by antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. We investigated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of benralizumab in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) from the phase III OSTRO trial. METHODS: Patients received a placebo or 30 mg of benralizumab by subcutaneous injection every 8 weeks (first three doses every 4 weeks) to week 48; a subset of patients continued in an extended follow-up period to assess treatment durability to week 80. Serum benralizumab concentrations and blood eosinophil and basophil counts were assessed to week 80. Biomarker assessments were performed on nasal polyp tissue biopsies at week 56 and nasal lining fluid at weeks 24 and 56 to examine changes in immune cells and inflammatory mediators. RESULTS: Among 185 patients in this analysis, 93 received benralizumab. Serum benralizumab concentrations reached a steady state by week 24 (median concentration 385.52 ng mL-1); blood eosinophils were almost fully depleted and blood basophils were reduced between weeks 16 and 56. Nasal polyp tissue eosinophils decreased with benralizumab from 57.6 cells mm-2 at baseline to 0 cells mm-2 at week 56 (P < .001 vs placebo), and tissue mast cells were numerically reduced. In nasal lining fluid, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin was significantly reduced at weeks 24 and 56 (P < .001) and interleukin-17 at week 56 (P < .05) with benralizumab. CONCLUSION: Benralizumab treatment led to rapid, sustained, nearly complete depletion of eosinophils from blood and nasal polyp tissue in patients with CRSwNP.

Real-world clinical remission of severe asthma with benralizumab in Spanish adults with severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experience high risk of exacerbations and reduced quality of life. Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody binding to IL-5 receptor α subunit, is an approved drug for its treatment. The objective was to describe clinical remission after benralizumab prescription in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Retrospective multicenter study with data from four hospitals in Valencian Community (Spain) with asthma units between 2019 and 2020. Data was gathered at baseline and after 12 months. We considered clinical remission after 1 year if the patient remained without exacerbations and use of systemic corticosteroids and with good clinical control and normal lung function. RESULTS: Data from 139 patients was gathered. At the 12-month follow-up, 44.1% were in clinical remission, since 84.0%, 77.5%, 51.0% and 95.5% of patients did not experience exacerbations, had total asthma control test score of ≥20, prebronchodilator FEV1 of ≥80% and did not use systemic corticosteroids. A significant reduction of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (p = 0.0001), leukotriene receptor antagonists (p = 0.0326), oral corticosteroids (p < 0.0001) and short-acting beta agonists (p = 0.0499) was observed. Baseline factors with greatest individual influence on clinical remission were employment situation, tobacco use, comorbidity number, eosinophil value, number of exacerbations, FEV1, emergency visit number, and ACT, MiniAQLQ and TAI scores. Final analysis of multiple logistic regression indicated that having baseline FEV1 value below 80% increases remission chance 9.7 times a year compared to FEV1 >80%. CONCLUSION: Clinical remission after treatment with benralizumab is achievable in a high percentage of patients with severe asthma eosinophilia not controlled in real life.

Safety and efficacy of benralizumab in elderly subjects with severe asthma.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of asthma in adults >65 years old is approximately 12-14%, and 10% have severe asthma. A higher mortality rate is observed in subjects with asthma >65 years old and especially >80 years old. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effectiveness and safety of at least three doses of benralizumab in a subgroup of elderly subjects (>65 years old) with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma in real-life conditions. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter study (AUTOBENRA study) conducted in 9 hospitals that included 72 patients aged >18 years old with uncontrolled severe asthma based on the Spanish Asthma Guidelines who were treated with at least three doses of benralizumab, self-administered at home since before April 30, 2021. The recruitment period ended on October 1, 2021. Written consent was obtained before the study commencement. In this subanalysis, we compared the results between patients >65 years old and patients <65 years old. RESULTS: A total of 72 subjects with severe asthma were screened, and 54 were included (MD: 57.3 ± 10 years old). There were 12 subjects aged >65 years old [MD: 69.8 ± 4.3 years old (minimum: 65 years old; maximum: 83 years old)]. Subjects >65 years old experienced statistically significant improvement in lung function, ACT and mini-AQLQ with benralizumab. Additionally, 9 patients (75%) experienced no asthma exacerbation (p = 0.0047), half (3/6) were able to stop OCS (p = 0.08), and no adverse effects with benralizumab were reported during the 20 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients aged >65 years old, benralizumab was an effective and safe therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma in our study, with no significant differences from the younger subgroup. This is especially important since they are a group with numerous comorbidities, medications and worse quality of life.

Evaluation of multiple-flows exhaled nitric oxide and its clinical significance in severe asthmatic patients treated with biologics: a prospective real-life study.

BACKGROUND: Specific biomarkers, such as eosinophilia in peripheral blood or fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), can guide us in the choice of biologic therapy, allowing a more personalized approach. Although there are multiple evidences in the literature about the role of FeNO as a predictor of response to different biologic treatments, there are no data on the relationship between FeNO changes and clinical response to the four biologic drugs currently in use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and to compare the expression of multiple-flows FeNO parameters in a cohort of patients with severe asthma (SA) before and during the treatment with biologics to evaluate the performance of these biomarkers in predicting the achievement of clinical remission. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 50 patients with severe asthma eligible for biologic therapy. Patients underwent clinical and functional monitoring at baseline (T0) and after 1, 6, and 12 months of treatment (T1, T6, T12), including multiple flows FeNO assessment. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction of FeNO50 values and J'awNO was observed only in benralizumab and dupilumab subgroups. Among biomarkers, the reduction of FeNO 50 values at T1 was associated with a higher probability of achieving clinical remission at T12 (p = 0.003), which was also confirmed by ROC curve analysis (AUC 0.758, p = 0.002; sensitivity 60% and specificity 74% for a reduction of 16 ppb). CONCLUSION: These data confirm the potential of this biomarker in predicting clinical response to biologic treatment in patients with severe asthma in order to guide clinical decisions and evaluate a shift to other biologic therapy.

Anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5R biologics for severe asthma. Are there any differences in their effects?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective multicentre study is to describe the clinical characteristics of patients diagnosed with severe eosinophilic asthma receiving anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα therapies and to compare their effectiveness. METHODS: We collected and analysed results separately for anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5Rα therapies from January 2016 until December 2021 in multidisciplinary severe asthma units. We collected demographic and clinical data, treatment with previous anti-IgE and/or anti-IL-5 agents, and comorbidities. We compared the number of exacerbations and admissions to the hospital, daily oral corticosteroid intake, pulmonary function tests, and Asthma Control Test scores before and after 12 months of therapy. 261 patients were included: 176 patients in the anti-IL-5 group and 85 in the anti-IL-5Rα group. RESULTS: Both groups led to statistically significant reductions in asthma exacerbations, hospital admissions, and visits to the Emergency Room. Although both groups showed a significant reduction in blood eosinophiliccount, we found a difference, although not significant, in the magnitude of reduction as benralizumab was able to decrease eosinophil counts to zero. Patients in the anti-IL-5 group achieved higher ACT scores after treatment, although this improvement was seen in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5Rα biologics have shown similar effectiveness despite having different mechanisms of action. The anti-IL-5 group appeared to be better than benralizumab at improving ACT scores and FEV1/FVC and at reducing the number of inhalers. Although these differences were not statistically significant, it is not clear whether they may have clinical relevance and they might highlight the need for further head-to-head studies comparing these treatments.

A comparison of the impact of anti-IL5/5r therapies in allergic versus non-allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-life setting.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of allergic patients (AP) and non-allergic patients (NAP) with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) treated with anti-IL5/IL5R biologic agents (mepolizumab, benralizumab, or reslizumab) over one year. Sub-analyses assessed treatment response variations between AP and NAP based on the biological used and compared outcomes among AP with and without fungal allergy. METHODS: Observational retrospective analysis. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, pulmonary function tests, Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores, oral corticosteroid (OCS) usage, and exacerbation frequency were assessed at the initiation of biological treatment and after one year. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients with SEA were included, 41 AP and 24 NAP. 55.4% were treated with mepolizumab, 33.8% with benralizumab, and 10.8% with reslizumab. Before anti-IL5/5R treatment, AP had worse baseline outcomes but there were no differences in pulmonary function. Mean annual exacerbation rate and percentage of patients requiring OCS and dose of prednisone were higher in AP than NAP. AP had significantly higher total IgE values. After one year of treatment, more AP discontinued OCS than NAP (p = 0.025). Both experienced a significant reduction in exacerbation frequency (p = 0.001) and improved respiratory function. 70.7% of AP and 60% of NAP improved ACT ≥3 points. There was no significant difference between AP and NAP using mepolizumab (p = 0.145) or benralizumab (p = 0.174) in reducing OCS. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-IL5/IL5R reduced the need for OCS and improved asthma control, regardless of allergic status. Fungal allergy led to lower ACT scores and higher exacerbations than other allergens; both groups improved with anti-IL5/ILR.

Sustained remission induced by 2 years of treatment with benralizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and nasal polyposis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that benralizumab is characterized by a good profile of efficacy and safety, thereby being potentially able to elicit clinical remission on-treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). The main goal of this multicentre observational study was to verify the effectiveness of benralizumab in inducing a sustained remission on-treatment of SEA in patients with or without comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). METHODS: Throughout 2 years of treatment with benralizumab, a four-component evaluation of sustained remission of SEA was performed, including the assessment of SEA exacerbations, use of oral corticosteroids (OCSs), symptom control and lung function. RESULTS: The present study recruited 164 patients suffering from SEA. After 24 months of add-on biological therapy with benralizumab, 69 (42.1%) achieved the important target of sustained remission on-treatment (exacerbation rate = 0, OCS dose = 0, pre-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥80% pred., ACT score ≥ 20). During the same period, a persistent improvement of CRSwNP (SNOT-22 < 30, NP recurrence = 0) was observed in 33 (40.2%) out of 82 subjects with concomitant NP. The latter comorbidity and post-bronchodilator reversibility of airflow limitation were two independent predictors of sustained remission on-treatment (OR = 2.32, p < 0.05 and OR = 5.59, p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Taken together, the results of this real-life clinical investigation indicate that benralizumab can induce a sustained remission on-treatment of SEA, especially in those patients with comorbid CRSwNP and reversible airflow limitation.

Benralizumab treatment in an elderly patient with eosinophilic esophagitis resulted in remission: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-5 (IL-5) has recently been shown to play a crucial role in eosinophil-mediated diseases, implying that an IL-5 receptor alpha chain (IL-5Rα) antibody (benralizumab) can be effective against eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Here, we present a case in which benralizumab significantly improved the symptoms and signs of an elderly Asian woman with EoE who had inadequate response to existing treatments. Case presentation A 73-year-old woman with an 8-year history of bronchial asthma (BA) and a 7-year history of dysphagia presented to our hospital with worsening dysphagia, vomiting, chest pain, and difficulty in eating. Blood biochemical findings revealed an increase in the eosinophil fraction of white blood cells (42.2%), and a conventional chest computed tomography scan revealed esophageal wall thickening. An upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed mucosal edema as well as multiple esophageal rings, and esophageal biopsy specimens showed an eosinophilic infiltrate of more than 15 cells/ high power field. Based on these findings, she was diagnosed as EoE complicated by BA. We firstly administrated 20 mg/day of prednisolone, rabeprazole sodium and liquid budesonide oral suspension for 5 months; however, they were ineffective and her dysphagia worsened over time. Then, benralizumab treatment in combination with these drugs was started. Her dysphagia completely disappeared 2 weeks after starting benralizumab, and an upper endoscopy showed that the clinical findings had completely disappeared after another 6 weeks. Benralizumab was then given to her for 41 months, and her symptoms remained in remission. In addition, she had no EoE recurrence for more than 12 months after discontinuing benralizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Benralizumab in combination with other multiple drugs significantly improved the symptoms and examination findings of an elderly patients with EoE. Furthermore, she experienced no recurrence even after discontinuing benralizumab withdrawal, suggesting that benralizumab could be an appropriate therapeutic option for EoE.

Long-term multicenter comparison shows equivalent efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in severe asthma therapy.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (biologics) drastically changed severe asthma therapy. Mepolizumab (anti-interleukin (IL) 5), benralizumab (anti-IL5 receptor alpha), and dupilumab (anti-IL4/13) are the most used biologics in this context. While all biologics are efficient individually, the choice of biologic is complicated by insufficient data on their comparative long-term treatment efficacy. Here, we compare the real-life efficacy of these biologics in asthma therapy over 12 months. METHODS: 280 severe asthma patients treated with mepolizumab (129/280, 46%), benralizumab (83/280, 30%) or dupilumab (68/280, 24%) for one year were analyzed retrospectively. Data were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy. Endpoints were changes pulmonary function (PF), exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and dose, asthma control test (ACT) score and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels as well as responder status measured by the recently published "Biologic Asthma Response Score" (BARS). RESULTS: All biologics led to significant improvements in PF, ACT and OCS dose. Only Mepolizumab and Benralizumab significantly decreased the exacerbation rate, while only Mepolizumab and Dupilumab significantly decreased FeNO. Responder rates measured by BARS were high across all groups: roughly half of all patients achieved full response and most of the remainder achieved at least partial responder status. Overall, outcomes were similar between groups after both 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: All biologics showed great efficacy in individual parameters and high responder rates measured by BARS without a clinically relevant advantage for any antibody. Response was usually achieved after 6 months and retained at 12 months, emphasizing the utility of early response assessment.

Adverse events of anti-IL-5 drugs in patients with eosinophilic asthma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and real-world evidence-based assessments.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to clarify comprehensively the safety profiles of anti-IL-5 drugs and pinpoint potential safety concerns that may arise in their post-marketing phase. METHODS: Two researchers conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2022. Additionally, we investigated the FDA AE Reporting System for post-marketing adverse event (AE) reports related to anti-IL-5 drugs. The outcomes fulfilled the proportional reporting rate criteria and the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network. RESULTS: We included 24 published studies in our analysis. The anti-IL-5 treatment group showed an incidence of AEs comparable to the placebo group, and it exhibited a significantly lower frequency of serious AEs. Common AEs were asthma, nasopharyngitis, headache, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), and bronchitis. The post-marketing data included 28,478 case reports associated with the suspect drugs and 75 suspect safety observations affecting 16 system organ classes. New suspect observations included incomplete therapeutic product effect, URTIs, and pulmonary mass in reports related to mepolizumab. Reports associated with mepolizumab and benralizumab also indicated issues with incorrect technique in device usage and product issues. CONCLUSIONS: Individual anti-IL-5 drugs' safety profiles largely matched their product inserts. We identified issues like improper device usage, product issue, and URTIs as potential concerns for mepolizumab and benralizumab. Additionally, all anti-IL-5 drugs showed signs of incomplete therapeutic effects.

Switching of biological therapy to dupilumab in comorbid patients with severe asthma and CRSwNP.

PURPOSE: Nowadays, several efficacious biologic drugs are used for severe asthma with or without chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). However, it has been observed that not all comorbid patients (asthma/CRSwNP) receiving biologic treatment for asthma experience satisfactory control of both conditions equally. METHODS: We selected 20 patients who had both severe asthma and comorbid CRSwNP under biological treatment with benralizumab, omalizumab or mepolizumab with adequate control of asthma but inadequate control of nasal symptoms. Patients were switched to dupilumab and outcomes were evaluated at baseline (T0), at 3 months (T1), at 6 months (T2), at 12 months (T3) and finally at 18 months (T4). Data were collected at each time point including blood tests measuring eosinophil levels and total IgE, SNOT22, ACT, NPS score, rhinomanometry, olfactory testing, and nasal cytology. RESULTS: The results showed an overall improvement in all the outcomes. Peripheral eosinophilia was observed consistently with existing literature. All patients registered an improvement in sinonasal outcomes, while only one patient had a worsening of asthma. Three patients interrupted the therapy due to various causes: poor asthma control, onset of psoriasis and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: The response to a biologic treatment for CRSwNP control may be heterogenous and it seems that patients may benefit from switching improving control in equal measure in the upper and lower airway. Further studies to explore the endotype/phenotype which best fits with each biologic are mandatory to personalize the therapy.

Eosinophil depletion with benralizumab is associated with attenuated mannitol airway hyperresponsiveness in severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.

BACKGROUND: Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and eosinophilia are hallmarks of persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether eosinophil depletion with benralizumab might attenuate indirect mannitol AHR in severe uncontrolled asthma using a pragmatic open-label design. METHODS: After a 4-week run-in period with provision of usual inhaled corticosteroids and/or long-acting ß-agonist (baseline), adults with mannitol-responsive uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma received 3 doses of open-label benralizumab 30 mg every 4 weeks, followed by 16 weeks' washout after the last dose. The primary outcome was doubling difference (DD) in provocative dose of mannitol required to decrease FEV1 by 10% (PD10) at the end point after 12 weeks, powered at 90% with 18 patients required to detect 1 DD. Secondary outcomes included measures assessed by the asthma control questionnaire and mini-asthma quality of life questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients completed 12 weeks' benralizumab therapy at the end point at week 12. Mean (SEM) age was 53 (4) years, and FEV1 80.2% (4.1%) inhaled corticosteroid dose was 1895 (59) µg, with 12 receiving long-acting muscarinic antagonist and 13 leukotriene receptor antagonists. Improvement in AHR was significant by 8 weeks, with a mean 2.1 DD (95% confidence interval 1.0, 3.3; P < .01) change in PD10 at week 12, while mean changes in asthma control questionnaire and mini-asthma quality of life questionnaire were significant by week 2 and sustained over 12 weeks, both exceeding the minimal important difference. Peripheral blood eosinophils were depleted by 2 weeks (439 to 6 cells/µL). No significant improvement occurred in lung function after 12 weeks. Domiciliary peak flow and symptoms also improved with benralizumab. CONCLUSION: Eosinophil depletion results in clinically meaningful attenuated AHR in severe uncontrolled asthma patients.

Comparative efficacy of tezepelumab to mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the efficacy of tezepelumab, approved for the treatment of type 2 high and low asthma, compares to the efficacy of other biologics for type 2-high asthma. OBJECTIVES: We sought to conduct an indirect comparison of tezepelumab to dupilumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab in the treatment of eosinophilic asthma. METHODS: The investigators conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses. They identified randomized controlled trials indexed in PubMed, Embase, or Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) between January 1, 2000, and August 12, 2022. Outcomes included exacerbation rates, prebronchodilator FEV1, and the Asthma Control Questionnaire. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 9201) met eligibility. Tezepelumab (relative risk: 0.63; 95% credible interval [CI]: 0.46-0.86) was associated with significantly lower exacerbation rates than benralizumab and larger improvements in FEV1 compared to mepolizumab (mean difference [MD]: 66; 95% CI: -33 to 170) and benralizumab (MD: 62; 95% CI: -22 to 150), though the 95% CI crossed the null value of 0. Mepolizumab improved the Asthma Control Questionnaire score the most, but this improvement was not significantly different from that of tezepelumab (tezepelumab vs mepolizumab; MD: 0.14; 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.38). For efficacy by clinically important thresholds, tezepelumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab achieved a >99% probability of reducing exacerbation rates by ≥50% compared to placebo, but benralizumab had only a 66% probability of doing so. Tezepelumab and dupilumab had a probability of 1.00 of improving prebronchodilator FEV1 by ≥100 mL above placebo. Compared to mepolizumab, dupilumab had >90% chance for improving FEV1 by ≥50 mL, but none of the differences between biologics exceeded 100 mL. CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with eosinophilic asthma, tezepelumab and dupilumab were associated with greater improvements (although below clinical thresholds) in exacerbation rates and lung function than benralizumab or mepolizumab.

SingleNucleotide Polymorphisms as Biomarkers of Mepolizumab and Benralizumab Treatment Response in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma.

The most promising treatment options for severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) have emerged in recent years with the development of monoclonal antibodies for blocking selective targets responsible for the underlying inflammation, such as mepolizumab and benralizumab. However, there is variability in treatment response that is not fully controlled. The variability of the response to mepolizumab and benralizumab could be influenced by single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and it would be useful to detect these and use them as predictive biomarkers of response. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of 72 Caucasian patients recruited from a tertiary hospital with severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma treated with mepolizumab and benralizumab. Polymorphisms in the IL5 (rs4143832, rs17690122), RAD50 (rs11739623, rs4705959), IL1RL1 (rs1420101, rs17026974, rs1921622), GATA2 (rs4857855), IKZF2 (rs12619285), FCGR2A (rs1801274), FCGR2B (rs3219018, rs1050501), FCGR3A (rs10127939, rs396991), FCER1A (rs2251746, rs2427837), FCER1B (rs1441586, rs573790, rs569108), and ZNF415 (rs1054485) genes were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using Taqman probes. The response was analyzed after 12 months of treatment. In patients under mepolizumab treatment, a treatment response defined as a reduction in exacerbations was associated with ZNF415 rs1054485-T (p = 0.042; OR = 5.33; 95% CI = 1.06-30.02), treatment response defined as a reduction in oral corticosteroids use was associated with the number of exacerbations in the previous year (p = 0.029; OR = 3.89; 95% CI = 1.24-14.92), and treatment response defined as improvement in lung function was associated with the age at the beginning of biological therapy (p = 0.002; OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.04-1.18), FCER1B rs569108-AA (p < 0.001; OR = 171.06; 95% CI = 12.94-6264.11), and FCER1A rs2427837-A (p = 0.021; OR = 8.61; 95% CI = 1.71-76.62). On the other hand, in patients under benralizumab treatment, treatment response, defined as a reduction in exacerbations, was associated with ZNF415 rs1054485-T (p = 0.073; OR = 1.3 × 108; 95% CI = 1.8 × 10-19-NA), FCER1B rs569108-AA (p = 0.050; OR = 11.51; 95% CI = 1.19-269.78), allergies (p = 0.045; OR = 4.02; 95% CI = 1.05-16.74), and sex (p = 0.028; OR = 4.78; 95% CI = 1.22-20.63); and treatment response defined as improvement in lung function was associated with polyposis (p = 0.027; OR = 9.16; 95% CI = 1.58-91.4), IKZF2 rs12619285-AA (p = 0.019; OR = 9.1; 95% CI = 1.7-75.78), IL5 rs4143832-T (p = 0.017; OR = 11.1; 95% CI = 1.9-112.17), and FCER1B rs1441586-C (p = 0.045; OR = 7.81; 95% CI = 1.16-73.45). The results of this study show the potential influence of the studied polymorphisms on the response to mepolizumab and benralizumab and the clinical benefit that could be obtained by defining predictive biomarkers of treatment response.

The New Therapeutic Frontiers in the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Biological Drugs.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a multifaceted disease characterized by a wide heterogeneity of clinical manifestations, endoscopic and histopathologic patterns, and responsiveness to therapy. From the perspective of an effective approach to the patient, the different inflammatory mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of EoE and biologics, in particular monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), targeting these pathways are needed. Currently, the most relevant is dupilumab, which interferes with both interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 pathways by binding IL-4 receptor α, and is the only mAb approved by the European Medicine Agency and US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of EoE. Other mAbs investigated include mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab (interfering with IL-5 axis), cendakimab and dectrekumab (anti-IL-13s), tezepelumab (anti-TSLP), lirentelimab (anti-SIGLEG-8), and many others. Despite the undeniable economic impact of biologic therapies, in the near future, there will be room for further reflection about the opportunity to prescribe biologic agents, not only as a last-line therapy in selected cases such as patients with comorbidities involving common pathways. Although recent findings are very encouraging, the road to permanent success in the treatment of EoE is still long, and further studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of mAbs and to discover new potential targets.