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.

A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy.

The recent approval of omalizumab for the treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy is an important step forward for the millions of food allergy patients in the United States. Through the depletion of circulating IgE and the subsequent reduction of FcεR1 on key effector cells, patients increase their tolerance to food allergens. However, omalizumab does not permit patients to eat foods that they are allergic to with impunity. Rather, it protects them from most accidental exposures. In addition, omalizumab does not cure food allergy and has not demonstrated true immunomodulation. Thus, omalizumab might be a lifelong therapy for some patients. Furthermore, there are many important questions and issues surrounding the appropriate administration of omalizumab to treat food allergy, which we discuss. Managing treatment of patients with disease that falls outside the dosing range, assessing treatment response or nonresponse, addressing its appropriateness for patients older than 55, and determining whether immunotherapy plus omalizumab provides any advantage over omalizumab alone all need to be examined. Identifying appropriate patients for this therapy is critical given the cost of biologics. Indeed, not all food allergy patients are good candidates for this therapy. Also, when and how to stop omalizumab therapy in patients who may have outgrown their food allergy needs to be elucidated. Thus, although this therapy provides a good option for patients with food allergies, much information is needed to determine how best to use this therapy. Despite many unanswered questions and issues, we provide clinicians with some practical guidance on implementing this therapy in their patients.

Feast for thought: A comprehensive review of food allergy 2021-2023.

A review of the latest publications in food allergy over the past couple of years confirmed that food allergy is a major public health concern, affecting about 8% of children and 10% of adults in developed countries. The prevalence of food allergy varies around the world, with the increase being driven mainly by environmental factors, possibly together with genetic susceptibility to environmental changes. A precise diagnosis of food allergy is extremely important. Both new tests (eg, the basophil activation test) and improved optimization of information provided by existing tests (eg, the skin prick test and measurement of specific IgE level) can contribute to improving the accuracy and patients' comfort of food allergy diagnosis. Understanding the underlying immune mechanisms is fundamental to designing allergen-specific treatments that can be safe and effective in the long term. New discoveries of the immune response to food allergens, including T-cell and B-cell responses, have emerged. Novel therapeutic approaches are being trialed at various stages of development as attempts to allow for more active intervention to treat food allergy. Prevention is key to reducing the increase in prevalence. Early introduction of allergenic foods seems to be the most effective intervention, but others are being studied, and will, it is hoped, lead to modification of the epidemiologic trajectory of food allergy over time.

Dupilumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (LIBERTY-CSU CUPID): Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals (hives) and/or angioedema. Patients with CSU could remain symptomatic despite standard-of-care H1 antihistamines (H1-AH) or anti-IgE (omalizumab) treatment. Dupilumab blocks IL-4/IL-13 signaling and is approved for multiple type 2/atopic indications. OBJECTIVE: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing dupilumab with placebo in patients with symptomatic CSU despite H1-AH. METHODS: In LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A, patients were omalizumab-naive (n = 138, aged ≥6 years). In Study B, patients were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders (n = 108, aged ≥12 years). The primary end point was either change from baseline over 7 days in the Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) or Itch Severity Score (ISS7) at week 24, with the other as a key secondary end point, depending on regional regulatory requirements. Studies were pooled for safety assessment. RESULTS: In Study A, UAS7 and ISS7 improved with dupilumab versus placebo (difference -8.5 [95% CI, -13.2 to -3.9; P = .0003] and -4.2 [95% CI, -6.6 to -1.8; P = .0005]). In Study B, tested at α = 0.043 after interim analysis, UAS7 improved (difference -5.8 [95% CI, -11.4 to -0.3; P = .0390]), with a numerical trend in ISS7 (difference -2.9 [95% CI, -5.7 to -0.07; nominal P = .0449, not significant]). Pooled safety data were consistent between dupilumab and placebo and with the known dupilumab safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab reduced urticaria activity by reducing itch and hives severity in omalizumab-naive patients with CSU uncontrolled with H1-AH. Although the primary end point for Study B was not met, dupilumab effects were small in patients who were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders.

IgE directly affects eosinophil migration in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps through CCR3 and predicts the efficacy of omalizumab.

BACKGROUND: Whether IgE affects eosinophil migration in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) remains largely unclear. Moreover, our understanding of local IgE, eosinophils, and omalizumab efficacy in CRSwNP remains limited. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether IgE acts directly on eosinophils and determined its role in omalizumab therapy. METHODS: Eosinophils and their surface receptors were detected by hematoxylin and eosin staining and flow cytometry. IgE and its receptors, eosinophil peroxidase (EPX), eosinophilic cationic protein, and CCR3 were detected by immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence. Functional analyses were performed on blood eosinophils and polyp tissues. Logistic regression was performed to screen for risk factors. Receiver operating characteristic curve was generated to evaluate the accuracy. RESULTS: Both FcεRI and CD23 were expressed on eosinophils. The expression of FcεRI and CD23 on eosinophil in nasal polyp tissue was higher than in peripheral blood (both P < .001). IgE and EPX colocalized in CRSwNP. IgE directly promoted eosinophil migration by upregulating CCR3 in CRSwNP but not in healthy controls. Omalizumab and lumiliximab were found to be effective in restraining this migration, indicating CD23 was involved in IgE-induced eosinophil migration. Both IgE+ and EPX+ cells were significantly reduced after omalizumab treatment in those who experienced response (IgE+ cells, P = .001; EPX+ cells, P = .016) but not in those with no response (IgE+ cells, P = .060; EPX+ cells, P = .151). Baseline IgE+ cell levels were higher in those with response compared to those without response (P = .024). The baseline local IgE+ cell count predicted omalizumab efficacy with an accuracy of 0.811. CONCLUSIONS: IgE directly promotes eosinophil migration, and baseline local IgE+ cell counts are predictive of omalizumab efficacy in CRSwNP.

Race and ethnicity, not just insurance, is associated with biologics initiation in asthma and related conditions.

BACKGROUND: There are pre-existing inequities in asthma care. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate effect modification by race of the effect of insurance on biologic therapy use in patients with asthma and related diseases. METHODS: We conducted inverse probability weighted analyses using electronic health records data from 2011 to 2020 from a large health care system in Boston, Mass. We evaluated the odds of not initiating omalizumab or mepolizumab therapy within 1 year of prescription for an approved indication. RESULTS: We identified 1132 individuals who met study criteria. Twenty-seven percent of these patients had public insurance and 12% belonged to a historically marginalized group (HMG). One-quarter of patients did not initiate the prescribed biologic. Among patients with asthma, individuals belonging to HMG had higher exacerbation rates in the period before initiation compared to non-HMG individuals, regardless of insurance type. Among HMG patients with asthma, those with private insurance were less likely to not initiate therapy compared to those with public insurance (odds ratio [OR]: 0.67, and 95% CI: 0.56-0.79). Among non-HMG with asthma, privately insured and publicly insured individuals had similar rates of not initiating the prescribed biologic (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.95-1.09). Among those publicly insured with asthma, HMGs had higher odds of not initiating therapy compared to non-HMGs (OR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.03-1.31), but privately insured HMG and non-HMG did not differ significantly (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.91-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Publicly insured individuals belonging to HMG are less likely to initiate biologics when prescribed despite having more severe asthma, while there are no inequities by insurance in individuals belonging to other groups.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dupilumab and Omalizumab on Asthma Exacerbations and Systemic Corticosteroid Prescriptions: Real-World US ADVANTAGE Study.

BACKGROUND: In the US, dupilumab is approved for moderate-to-severe eosinophilic or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, while omalizumab is approved for managing moderate-to-severe allergic asthma uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids. However, limited comparative effectiveness data exist for these biologics due to differing patient characteristics and treatment histories. OBJECTIVE: This analysis assessed the real-world effectiveness of dupilumab and omalizumab for asthma among patients in the US. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, TriNetX Dataworks electronic medical record data were used to identify asthma patients (age: ≥12 years) who initiated (index) dupilumab or omalizumab between November 2018 and September 2020, and who had at least 12 months of pre- and post-index clinical information. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to balance potential confounding in treatment groups. Asthma exacerbation rates and systemic corticosteroid (SCS) prescriptions were compared using a doubly robust negative binomial regression model, adjusting for baseline exacerbation/SCS rates and patient characteristics with ≥10% standardized differences after IPTW. RESULTS: Overall, 2,138 patients in dupilumab and 1,313 in omalizumab treatment groups met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. After weighting, the majority of baseline characteristics were balanced (standard difference <10%) between the two groups. Dupilumab was associated with a 44% lower asthma exacerbation rate (p<0.0001) than omalizumab. Additionally, dupilumab treatment significantly (p<0.05) reduced SCS prescriptions by 28% during the follow-up period compared to omalizumab treatment. CONCLUSION: The US ADVANTAGE real-world study demonstrated a significant reduction in severe asthma exacerbations and SCS prescriptions for patients prescribed dupilumab compared to those prescribed omalizumab during 12 months of follow-up.

Management of Atopy with Dupilumab and Omalizumab in CADINS Disease.

The caspase activation and recruitment domain 11 (CARD11) gene encodes a scaffold protein required for lymphocyte antigen receptor signaling. Dominant-negative, loss-of-function (LOF) pathogenic variants in CARD11 result in CARD11-associated atopy with dominant interference of NF-κB signaling (CADINS) disease. Patients with CADINS suffer with severe atopic manifestations including atopic dermatitis, food allergy, and chronic spontaneous urticaria in addition to recurrent infections and autoimmunity. We assessed the response of dupilumab in five patients and omalizumab in one patient with CADINS for the treatment of severe atopic symptoms. CARD11 mutations were validated for pathogenicity using a T cell transfection assay to assess the impact on activation-induced signaling to NF-κB. Three children and three adults with dominant-negative CARD11 LOF mutations were included. All developed atopic disease in infancy or early childhood. In five patients, atopic dermatitis was severe and recalcitrant to standard topical and systemic medications; one adult suffered from chronic spontaneous urticaria. Subcutaneous dupilumab was initiated to treat atopic dermatitis and omalizumab to treat chronic spontaneous urticaria. All six patients had rapid and sustained improvement in atopic symptoms with no complications during the follow-up period. Previous medications used to treat atopy were able to be decreased or discontinued. In conclusion, treatment with dupilumab and omalizumab for severe, refractory atopic disease in patients with CADINS appears to be effective and well tolerated in patients with CADINS with severe atopy.

Biomarkers predicting the controller dose of omalizumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials showed the efficacy of 300 mg/4 weeks of omalizumab (OMA) during 6 months in patients with severe chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Nevertheless, in real life, many patients require higher doses and/or longer treatment. This study assesses the real-life performance of OMA in severe CSU and identifies factors associated with the response. METHODS: CSU patients eligible for OMA were recruited prospectively. Clinical data and a blood test were collected before OMA initiation. Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7) was calculated at baseline and every 3 months during OMA treatment. CSU control was defined as UAS7 <7 points. This work was partially sponsored by OMA manufacturer. RESULTS: Eighty-nine adults (19.1% males) with severe CSU were recruited. Median duration of CSU prior to OMA initiation was 2 years, and median severity by UAS7 at baseline was 24 points (range 10-42 points). OMA controlled 94.4% of patients, but 17.9% of responders required doses >300 mg/4 weeks. A blood basophil count >20 cells/µL (OR 13.33; 95% CI 3.32-52.63; p < .001) and the absence of hypothyroidism (OR 3.65; 95% CI 0.78-16.95; p = .099) were identified as predictive factors to achieve control with 300 mg/4 weeks. Twelve patients were able to stop OMA during the study (responders in remission, RR). RR had received OMA for a median of 29 months (12-53 months). Conversely, 32 patients had been on OMA for >29 months at the end of the study (active responders, AR). AR had received OMA for a median of 45 months (30-100 months). There were no significant differences in clinical or analytical factors between RR and AR patients. CONCLUSIONS: Low blood basophil count and the presence of hypothyroidism might serve as biomarkers for the controller dose of OMA in severe CSU patients.

Biologics (mepolizumab and omalizumab) induced remission in severe asthma patients.

BACKGROUND: Asthma remission has emerged as a potential treatment goal. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two biologics (mepolizumab/omalizumab) in achieving asthma remission. METHODS: This observational study included 453 severe asthma patients (41% male; mean age ± SD 55.7 ± 14.7 years) from two real-world drug registries: the Australian Mepolizumab Registry and the Australian Xolair Registry. The composite outcome clinical remission was defined as zero exacerbations and zero oral corticosteroids during the previous 6 months assessed at 12 months and 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) ≤1 at 12 months. We also assessed clinical remission plus optimization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥80%) or stabilization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 not greater than 5% decline from baseline) of lung function at 12 months. Sensitivity analyses explored various cut-offs of ACQ-5/FEV1 scores. The predictors of clinical remission were identified. RESULTS: 29.3% (73/249) of AMR and 22.8% (37/162) of AXR cohort met the criteria for clinical remission. When lung function criteria were added, the remission rates were reduced to 25.2% and 19.1%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses identified that the remission rate ranged between 18.1% and 34.9% in the AMR cohort and 10.6% and 27.2% in the AXR cohort. Better lung function, lower body mass index, mild disease and absence of comorbidities such as obesity, depression and osteoporosis predicted the odds of achieving clinical remission. CONCLUSION: Biologic treatment with mepolizumab or omalizumab for severe asthma-induced asthma remission in a subgroup of patients. Remission on treatment may be an achievable treatment target and future studies should consider remission as an outcome measure.

Characterization of omalizumab updosing patterns and predictive factors in chronic spontaneous urticaria: A prospective multicentric observational study.

BACKGROUND: Limited information is available on the use of omalizumab (OMA) updosing since its introduction as a second-line therapy in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) in 2014. Practical guidelines from health authorities are lacking, and the specific characteristics of patients requiring higher doses remain unknown. Our objectives were to characterize the patterns of OMA updosing (defined as changes in dose and/or injection intervals), to identify the predictive factors associated with updosing, and to improve CSU management. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicentric, real-life observational study, including patients diagnosed with CSU and starting OMA. The data were collected at 0, 3, 6, and 9 months. The primary endpoint was the frequency of OMA updosing at 3 months. The secondary endpoints included an analysis of updosed patients' profile, and an assessment of OMA efficacy and safety. RESULTS: We included 153 patients. Twenty percent of patients were updosed at 3 months, and 27% in total during the 9-month follow-up. Practitioners mainly chose to increase the frequency of injections (66%). At baseline, the updosed patients were more likely to have more severe CSU (UCT < 4, p < 0.030), a lower lymphocyte count (<2000/mm3, p = 0.037), and low IgE levels (<70 UI/mL, p = 0.024). The side effects of OMA were not more frequent after updosing. CONCLUSION: One in five patient underwent updosing within just 3 months. OMA updosing is frequent in particular in cases of severe disease and low IgE blood levels.

A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study on the efficacy of Omalizumab on food allergy threshold in children with severe food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Food allergy is common in childhood with some children having a low threshold and being difficult to protect from accidental ingestion of the offending food. Therapies for this potentially life-threatening condition are highly needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Omalizumab in food-allergic children. METHODS: This is a single-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Food allergic children with a cumulative threshold ≤443 mg food protein at DBPCFC were randomized to Omalizumab (asthma dose) or placebo (3:1). After 3 months, a second DBPCFC was performed (steps 3, 10, 30, 100, 300, 1000, and 3000 mg food protein), followed by a separate open challenge up to 10,000 and 30,000 mg food protein if negative. Responders were defined as ≥2-step increases in threshold. Non-responders received high-dose Omalizumab. A third DBPCFC was performed after 6 months. Skin testing, blood samples, and the severity of atopic co-morbidity were registered during the study and 3 months after treatment. RESULTS: In total, 20 children were evaluated at 3 months (14 Omalizumab, 6 placebo). All treated with Omalizumab increased their threshold at least two steps and with a significant difference between the Omalizumab and the placebo group (p = .003), although the intended number of included children was not reached. The threshold before Omalizumab treatment was 13-443 mg food protein while the threshold after 3 months of treatment increased up to 44,000 mg (1143-44,000). In the placebo group, two children improved threshold during the study. CONCLUSION: An increase in the threshold level during Omalizumab treatment significantly improve patient safety and protected all children against small amount of allergen.

Immunotherapy and biologics in the management of IgE-mediated food allergy: Systematic review and meta-analyses of efficacy and safety.

Food allergy (FA) is a potentially life-threatening chronic condition that is becoming an increasing public health problem worldwide. This systematic review (SR) was carried out to inform the development of clinical recommendations on the treatment of IgE-mediated FA with biologics and/or IT for the update of the EAACI guidelines. A SR of randomized-controlled trials or quasi-controlled trials was carried out. Studies were identified via comprehensive search strategies in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, up to April 2022. POPULATION: Human adults, children, and adolescents with IgE-mediated FA. INTERVENTION: IT and/or biologics. COMPARATOR: Placebo or standard-of-care (allergen avoidance). OUTCOME: Efficacy (desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness (SU), remission), quality of life, and safety (systemic and local adverse reactions (AR)). The Cochrane RoB tool was used to assess the risk of bias. It was reported according to PRISMA and registered in PROSPERO CRD4202229828. After screening, 121 studies were included (111 for IT and 10 for biologics). Most studies had a high risk of bias and showed high heterogeneity in design and results. Metanalysis showed a positive effect of biologics and IT in terms of relative risk (RR) for achieving tolerance to the culprit food compared to avoidance or placebo. Omalizumab for any FA showed a RR of 2.17 [95% confidence interval: 1.22, 3.85]. For peanut allergy, oral IT (OIT) had a RR of 11.94 [1.76, 80.84] versus avoidance or placebo, sublingual IT (SLIT) had a RR of 3.00 [1.04, 8.66], and epicutaneous IT (EPIT) of 2.16 [1.56, 3.00]. OIT had a RR of 5.88 [2.27, 15.18] for cow's milk allergy, and of 3.43 [2.24, 5.27] for egg allergy. There was insufficient data on SLIT or EPIT for the treatment of egg and milk allergies. Most ARs reported were mild. For OIT the most common AR involved the gastrointestinal system and for EPIT, AR's most commonly affected the skin. There was limited data on severe or life-threatening ARs. There was limited evidence for long term efficacy and quality of life. In conclusion, biologics and IT, alone or in combination, are effective in achieving desensitization while on active treatment but more evidence is needed on long-term tolerance as current evidence is not of high quality. Adverse events while on therapy are generally mild to moderate but a long-term comprehensive safety profile is missing. There is a critical need to optimize and standardize desensitization protocols and outcome measures to facilitate our understanding of the efficacy and safety as well as to allow for comparison between interventions.

Comparison of the General Characteristics of Patients with Severe Asthma Who Switched from Omalizumab to Mepolizumab versus Patients Who Responded to Omalizumab Treatment: A Real-Life Study.

INTRODUCTION: Severe asthma is characterized by frequent recurrent airway symptoms and exacerbations, and these affect the quality of life. Biological agents can be used in the treatment of patients with severe asthma if the disease cannot be controlled with standard controller treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics and laboratory data of patients with severe asthma who were switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab and patients with severe asthma who responded to omalizumab. METHODS: The clinical characteristics and laboratory data of patients with severe asthma who responded to omalizumab and switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab were compared retrospectively. RESULTS: Evaluation was made of a total of 79 patients, including 64 omalizumab responders and 15 who switched to mepolizumab from omalizumab. After omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment, the annual number of asthma attacks, the use of oral corticosteroid (OCS), the annual number of hospitalizations, and the eosinophil count significantly decreased (omalizumab: p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively; mepolizumab: p = 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.002, p = 0.001, respectively). After omalizumab treatment, the increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (%) and asthma control test (ACT) score were determined to be statistically significant (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). After mepolizumab treatment, the increase in ACT score was significant (p = 0.003). Drug allergy, chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), regular use of OCS, and high baseline eosinophil count (cells/µL) were associated with poor response to omalizumab treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 7.86, p = 0.003; OR = 52.92, p < 0.001; OR = 10.16, p = 0.004; OR = 0.99, p = 0.004, respectively). House dust mite sensitivity and high baseline FEV1 (%) were associated with good response to omalizumab treatment (OR = 0.29, p = 0.041; OR = 1.06, p = 0.03, respectively). The blood eosinophil count had diagnostic value in predicting the nonresponsiveness to omalizumab treatment (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.967, p < 0.001, cut-off: 510). CONCLUSION: A high pretreatment eosinophil count, concomitant CRSwNP, a history of drug allergy, and regular OCS use may be associated with poor response to omalizumab treatment in patients with severe asthma. Depending on the treatment response, treatment switching can be applied between biological agents. The results of the current study should be supported by multicenter studies.

Prevention of Anaphylaxis Episodes in Idiopathic Anaphylaxis by Omalizumab.

INTRODUCTION: In 15-35 percent of patients with anaphylaxis, the triggering allergen cannot be found; therefore, a diagnosis of idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA) is made. We report on the outcomes in patients with IA treated with omalizumab. METHODS: We included consequent omalizumab-treated IA adult patients treated with omalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Out of 7 patients, 6 were female, median age 40 years with the frequency of anaphylaxis episodes from 3 in 2 years to 5 in 4 months. Baseline tryptase ranged from 1.71 to 12.0 µg/L. An increase in tryptase during anaphylaxis was documented in 6 patients. Activating KIT p.D816V variant was detected in 2 patients. One patient also had hereditary alpha-tryptasemia (HαT). The duration of omalizumab treatment was 0.5-7.5 years. None of the patients have experienced an anaphylactic reaction since the start of treatment. Mild systemic reactions were reported in 6 patients (86%). The presence of underlying cMCD had no impact on the treatment outcome. CONCLUSION: All patients in our study had complete responses to omalizumab. The presence of KIT p.D816V and HαT did not influence the response to omalizumab treatment.

Real-World Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Chronic Urticaria: A Clinical Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety profile of omalizumab as a therapeutic intervention for chronic urticaria (CU). METHODS: From March 1, 2023, to September 30, 2023, data on a cohort comprising 96 patients with CU, who underwent treatment with omalizumab at our medical institution's allergy clinic, were systematically compiled. Subsequent to the administration of omalizumab, the therapeutic efficacy was assessed utilizing the 7-day urticaria activity score and the urticaria control test. RESULTS: Based on the statistical analysis, the mean duration of therapeutic intervention was 2.4 ± 1.3 months, with a corresponding mean cumulative dosage of 765 ± 450 mg. Of the subset of 42 patients with CU who were subjected to a follow-up period exceeding 3 months, it was observed that the treatment led to complete symptom remission, and no instances of recurrence were documented. Notably, there were statistically significant differences in the treatment duration and the cumulative dosage between patients who experienced co-morbid conditions and those who did not (p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.280-1.326; p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.597-2.997). Furthermore, there were significant differences in the treatment duration and cumulative dosage between patients in the combined allergic rhinitis group and those in the non-combined allergic rhinitis group (p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.204-1.305; p = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.326-2.860). CONCLUSION: Omalizumab demonstrates efficacy in the management of CU among Chinese patients by exerting effective symptom control and facilitating the regression of skin lesions. The assessment of its therapeutic efficacy typically requires a 12-week treatment period. Moreover, the co-occurrence of CU with other allergic disorders serves as a pertinent consideration for the adjustment of omalizumab dosing regimens.

Atopy and Response to Omalizumab Treatment in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: The possible influence of sensitization to aeroallergens on omalizumab response in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) has been insufficiently investigated. This study's aim was to investigate atopy's influence on omalizumab response in CSU patients. METHOD: Retrospective study of CSU patients followed at a Portuguese Urticaria Center of Reference and Excellence (UCARE), treated with omalizumab for at least 6 months, between 2015 and 2022. At T0, all patients underwent quantification of specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) for total extract of most prevalent aeroallergens (ImmunoCAP Thermo Fisher Scientific®) and were divided in 2 groups, according to their response to omalizumab during the first 16 weeks of treatment: responders (R) (UAS7 <7) versus partial (PR) (UAS7 = 7-15) and nonresponders (UAS7 >15). R were further classified as fast (FR) (4-6 weeks) and slow responders (SR) (12-16 weeks). Total serum IgE, circulating eosinophil, and basophil counts were compared between groups at T0. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant (SPSS® v25.0). RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (80% female) were studied, mean age 49 ± 14 years. Median CSU duration pre-omalizumab was 3 (0.6-20) years and mean omalizumab treatment duration was 3.7 ± 2.3 years. 38 (40%) had concomitant chronic inducible urticaria and 72 (75%) angioedema. Based on positive results of the specific IgE assay, 35 patients (36%) were considered atopic. Most patients (n = 30; 86%) were sensitized to house dust mites (HDM) (Dermatophagoides farinae = 28, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus = 27, Blomia tropicalis = 19, Lepidoglyphus destructor = 17), followed by pollens (n = 12; 34%) (mixture of grasses = 10, Olea europaea = 7, Parietaria officinalis = 6), epithelia (n = 9; 26%) (dog = 8, cat = 7), and fungi (Alternaria alternata = 4; 11%). Eight patients (23%) were monosensitized to HDM and 4 (11%) to pollens. No significant association was found between aeroallergen sensitization and CSU duration, concomitant chronic inducible urticaria, or angioedema. Atopic patients featured significantly higher levels of baseline total serum IgE than nonatopic (469 vs. 94 U/mL, respectively; p = 0.0009). Mean baseline counts of eosinophils and basophils were not significantly different between atopic and non-atopic, respectively: eosinophils (128 vs. 121/mm3) and basophils (26 vs. 28/mm3). Regarding response to omalizumab, most patients (58; 60%) were responders: FR - 46 (79%); SR - 12 (21%). There was no significant association between aeroallergen sensitization and omalizumab response or speed of response. CONCLUSIONS: As far as we know, this is the first study exploring the influence of atopy sensitization pattern on omalizumab response in CSU. According to our results, presence of atopy/sensitization pattern does not influence omalizumab response in CSU patients.

Predicting the Speed of Response to Omalizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: Two distinct chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) endotypes, IgE-mediated autoallergic and IgG-mediated autoimmune, were defined based on the response patterns to omalizumab. However, the coexistence of IgE and IgG autoantibodies in a subset of patients might complicate the prediction of the treatment outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab in CSU patients, focusing on the factors predicting the response patterns. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional single-center study investigating CSU patients treated with omalizumab for at least 6 months between September 2015 and February 2023. Patients were evaluated regarding demographics, clinical findings, baseline laboratory parameters, treatment outcomes, and side effects. Early and late responders were defined depending on the time for response, within or after 3 months, respectively. RESULTS: Among 82 patients, 75 (91.5%) responded to omalizumab during the first 6 months, classified as early (n = 51) and late responders (n = 24). The IgG anti-thyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO)/total IgE ratio was an independent predictor for determining the speed of response (p < 0.05). Of 29 patients who discontinued omalizumab, 19 (65.5%) experienced relapse with a good response to retreatment (n = 18/19, 94.7%). Early responders relapsed more frequently than late responders (77.3% vs. 28.6%) (p < 0.05). Only mild side effects were observed in a minority of patients (n = 8/82, 9.8%). CONCLUSION: Omalizumab is an effective and safe treatment in CSU. The IgG anti-TPO/total IgE ratio seems a valuable tool to predict the early and late responders, the former having a higher possibility of relapse upon drug withdrawal.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Omalizumab and Mepolizumab in Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is heterogeneous in both phenotypes and endotypes. Due to insufficient head-to-head comparison studies, it is hard to decide which biological to initiate. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of omalizumab and mepolizumab which can be used in the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma diagnosed with N-ERD. METHODS: The population of this observational, cross-sectional study comprised of N-ERD patients who received omalizumab or mepolizumab for at least 6 months for severe asthma. Outcomes included the asthma control test (ACT), and sino-nasal outcome test scores (SNOT-22), blood eosinophil counts at initiation of biological treatment (T0, baseline) and at the end of 6th months (T6). Adverse effects related to biological treatment and changes of oral corticosteroids dose was recorded. RESULTS: The study included a total of 22 patients, of whom 11 received mepolizumab and 11 received omalizumab. The change in ACT, SNOT-22, eosinophil counts, and adverse effects related to biologicals were similar at T6 (p = 0.606, p = 0.168, p = 0.05, p = 0.053, respectively). However, when examining the SNOT-22 and ACT based on the cumulative distribution curve (SUCRA), mepolizumab (SUCRA value: 0.61, 0.72, respectively) demonstrated greater efficacy compared to omalizumab (SUCRA value: 0.19, 0.35, respectively). The oral corticosteroids discontinuation rate was similar between the two groups (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: We found both omalizumab and mepolizumab to be effective in treatment; however, we determined that mepolizumab may have a potential superiority in efficacy.

Unveiling Treatment Response Predictors in Predominant Subtypes of Chronic Inducible Urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) is a subtype of chronic urticaria (CU), which requires specific triggers to occur. Despite their common occurrence, treatment response rates and predictors of treatment responses are largely lacking in the literature. This study evaluates antihistamine (AH) and omalizumab response rates in the most common CIndU subtypes and examines whether certain features can predict treatment responses. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed CU patients with at least one CIndU subtype and performed comparisons between subgroups, in a total of 423 patients (70% CIndU, 30% chronic spontaneous urticaria [CSU] plus CIndU). RESULTS: The treatment response rates in CIndU were 51.6%, 51.5%, and 86.5% with standard-dose second-generation H1-antihistamines (sgAHs), updosed/combined sgAH, and omalizumab, respectively. Overall AH response was higher in CIndU than CSU plus CIndU (78.3% vs. 62%, p = 0.002) and in symptomatic dermographism (SD) and cold urticaria (ColdU) than cholinergic urticaria (ChoU) (83.2% vs. 78.3 vs. 60.9%, p = 0.04). AH-refractory patients had a longer disease duration (45.2 ± 56.7 months vs. 37 ± 51.9 months, p = 0.04), more angioedema, accompanying CSU, mixed CIndU subtypes (37.5% vs. 21.1%, p = 0.003; 45.1% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.002; 8.8% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.014), and lower baseline urticaria control test scores (5.86 ± 3.3 vs. 8.6 ± 3.6, p < 0.001) than AH-responsive patients. CONCLUSION: CIndU exhibits a good response to both AHs and omalizumab. Notably, the response to AHs is more pronounced in SD and ColdU compared to ChoU. Disease duration, angioedema, accompanying CSU, mixed CIndU, and lower baseline UCT scores may be used to predict AH treatment outcome in CIndU.