Benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma by previous biologic use and key clinical subgroups: real-world XALOC-1 programme.

BACKGROUND: Pivotal phase 3 trials and real-world studies have demonstrated benralizumab's overall efficacy and safety in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). Additional large-cohort data are needed to confirm its real-world effectiveness in SEA according to previous biologic use and key baseline characteristics important for treatment selection. METHODS: XALOC-1 is a large, multinational, retrospective, observational, real-world study programme of benralizumab in adults with SEA. This 48-week integrated analysis assessed annualised exacerbation rate (AER), maintenance oral corticosteroid (mOCS) use, asthma symptom control and lung function during a 12-month baseline period and up to 48 weeks after benralizumab initiation. Subgroup analyses were based on previous biologic use and key baseline clinical characteristics (mOCS use, blood eosinophil count, exacerbation history, age at asthma diagnosis, fractional exhaled nitric oxide level and presence of atopy and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps). RESULTS: Out of 1002 patients analysed, 380 were biologic-experienced. At week 48, 71.3% were exacerbation-free (versus 17.2% at baseline); relative reduction in AER was 82.7% overall and 72.9% in biologic-experienced patients; rates were maintained across all key clinical characteristic subgroups. Of patients using mOCS at baseline (n=274), 47.4% (130 out of 274) eliminated their use by week 48; the mean reduction from baseline in daily dose was 51.2% and, notably, 34.9% in biologic-experienced patients (n=115). Clinically significant improvements in asthma symptom control and lung function were observed. CONCLUSION: In this large, real-world programme, SEA patients treated with benralizumab had substantial improvements in clinical outcomes irrespective of previous biologic use and key clinical characteristics important to therapeutic decision-making in clinical practice.

Achieving clinical outcomes with benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma patients in a real-world setting: orbe II study.

BACKGROUND: The ORBE II study aimed to describe the characteristics and clinical outcomes of adult patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) treated with benralizumab in a real-world setting in Spain. METHODS: ORBE II (NCT04648839) was an observational, retrospective cohort study in adult SEA patients who had been prescribed benralizumab. Demographic and clinical data of 204 SEA patients were collected 12 months prior to benralizumab initiation (baseline) and at follow-up. Exacerbation rate, asthma symptoms, maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and lung function were evaluated, among other variables. RESULTS: A total of 204 SEA patients were evaluated. Mean (standard deviation, SD) age of the study population was 56.4 (12.4) years, 62.3% were women and mean (SD) duration of asthma was 15.1 (12.7) years. Median (Q1-Q3) follow-up duration was 19.5 (14.2-24.2) months. At baseline, 72.6% of the overall population (OP) presented blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/µL; 36.8% had comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP); 84.8% reported at least one severe exacerbation, and 29.1% were OCS-dependent. At 1 year of follow-up, patients receiving benralizumab treatment had a 85.6% mean reduction in exacerbations from baseline, and 81.4% of patients achieved zero exacerbations. We also found a clinically relevant mean (SD) increase in pre-bronchodilator (BD) FEV1 of 331 (413) mL, with 66.7% of patients achieving a pre-BD FEV1 increase ≥ 100 mL, and 46.3% of patients achieving a pre-BD FEV1 ≥ 80% of predicted. Regarding symptom control, 73.8% of the OP obtained an ACT score ≥ 20 points. After 1 year of follow-up, mean reduction in the daily OCS dose was 70.5%, and complete OCS withdrawal was achieved by 52.8% of the OCS-dependent patients. Almost half (43.7%) of the OP on benralizumab met all four criteria for clinical remission. Patients with concomitant CRSwNP obtained similar or enhanced outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the real-world benefits of benralizumab in SEA patients, and particularly in those with concomitant CRSwNP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04648839.

Predictive value of the modified Bhalla score for assessment of pulmonary exacerbations in adults with cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to analyze the predictive value of the modified Bhalla score in high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) for assessment of pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients. We also describe the relationship between this score and pulmonary function test results. METHODS: We performed a multicenter and prospective study where adult patients with CF were included consecutively over 18 months. All patients underwent HRCT with acquisition in inspiration and expiration. The results were analyzed by an expert radiologist who assigned a modified Bhalla score value. Lung function was also assessed, and clinical variables were collected. Follow-up lasted approximately 1 year, and PEx were registered. RESULTS: The study population comprised 160 subjects selected from 360 CF patients monitored in the participating CF units. The mean age was 28 years, 47.5% were women, and mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) was 67.5%. The mean global modified Bhalla score was 14.5 ± 0.31 points. Pulmonary function test (PFT) results and the modified Bhalla score correlated well, mainly forced vital capacity (FVC) and FEV1. We constructed a statistical model based on the overall Bhalla score to predict the number of PEx. CONCLUSIONS: The overall modified Bhalla score can predict future PEx in CF patients. This useful tool can help to prevent PEx in higher risk patients. KEY POINTS: • Pulmonary function test results and the modified Bhalla score correlated well with FVC and FEV1. • The total modified Bhalla score can predict the number of exacerbations in adult CF patients. • Our findings highlight the need to establish a unified protocol for chest HRCT during the follow-up of adult patients with CF in order to anticipate possible complications and determine their impact on pulmonary function.

Cost of Hospitalizations due to Exacerbation in Patients with Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: Knowing the cost of hospitalizations for exacerbation in bronchiectasis patients is essential to perform cost-effectiveness studies of treatments that aim to reduce exacerbations in these patients. OBJECTIVES: To find out the mean cost of hospitalizations due to exacerbations in bronchiectasis patients, and to identify factors associated with higher costs. METHODS: Prospective, observational, multicenter study in adult bronchiectasis patients hospitalized due to exacerbation. All expenses from the patients' arrival at hospital to their discharge were calculated: diagnostic tests, treatments, transferals, home hospitalization, admission to convalescence centers, and hospitals' structural costs for each patient (each hospital's tariff for emergencies and 70% of the price of a bed for each day in a hospital ward). RESULTS: A total of 222 patients (52.7% men, mean age 71.8 years) admitted to 29 hospitals were included. Adding together all the expenses, the mean cost of the hospitalization was EUR 5,284.7, most of which correspond to the hospital ward (86.9%), and particularly to the hospitals' structural costs. The adjusted multivariate analysis showed that chronic bronchial infection by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, days spent in the hospital, and completing the treatment with home hospitalization were factors independently associated with a higher overall cost of the hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost of a hospitalization due to bronchiectasis exacerbation obtained from the individual data of each episode is higher than the cost per process calculated by the health authorities. The most determining factor of a higher cost is chronic bronchial infection due to P. aeruginosa, which leads to a longer hospital stay and the use of home hospitalization.

"Causes of death in asthma, COPD and non-respiratory hospitalized patients: a multicentric study".

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the causes of death in asthma patients.To determine the causes of death in hospitalized asthmatic patients and to compare with those observed in COPD patients and non-respiratory individuals, with a particular interest in associations with previous cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Retrospective case-control study which analyzed the deaths of all hospitalized patients admitted for any reason during January, April, July and October of 2008 in 13 Spanish centers. Medical records of deceased patients were reviewed, and demographic and clinical data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 2,826 deaths (mean age 75 years, 56% men) were included in the analysis, of which 82 (2.9%) were of patients with asthma and 283 (10%) with COPD.The most common causes of death in asthma patients were cardiovascular diseases (29.3%), malignancies (20.7%) and infections (14.6%); in COPD patients they were malignancies (26.5%), acute respiratory failure (25.8%) and cardiovascular diseases (21.6%). Asthma, compared to COPD patients, died significantly less frequently from acute respiratory failure and lung cancer. A multivariate logistic regression analysis failed to associate asthma with cardiovascular deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular disease is the most frequent cause of death among hospitalized asthma patients. The specific causes of death differ between asthma and COPD patients.

[FENO measurement devices]. / Dispositivos de medición de FENO.

The use of devices for measuring the exhaled fraction of nitric oxide has proven to be very useful, especially in the diagnosis of asthma, prediction of response to corticosteroids, risk of exacerbations or compliance with treatment, among others, and their use is recommended by important clinical practice guidelines. In recent years we have witnessed a proliferation of options on the market with different characteristics. To help in choosing a device that suits the needs of the professionals involved in the management of asthma, this review presents some of the important characteristics of the most common devices. In addition, the existing comparative and pharmacoeconomic studies are analyzed so that professionals can make the choice of device guided by the most current evidence.

[Consensus document for severe asthma in adults. 2022 update]. / Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022.

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with several clinical variants and often represents a complex disease requiring a specialized and multidisciplinary approach, as well as the use of multiple drugs. The prevalence of severe asthma varies from one country to another, and it is estimated that 50% of these patients present a poor control of their disease. For the best management of the patient, it is necessary a correct diagnosis, an adequate follow-up and undoubtedly to offer the best available treatment, including biologic treatments with monoclonal antibodies. With this objective, this consensus process was born, which began in its first version in 2018, whose goal is to offer the patient the best possible management of their disease in order to minimize their symptomatology. For this 2020 consensus update, a literature review was conducted by the authors. Subsequently, through a two-round interactive Delphi process, a broad panel of asthma experts from SEPAR and the regional pulmonology societies proposed the recommendations and conclusions contained in this document.

Biological Biomarkers in Respiratory Diseases. / Biomarcadores biológicos en las enfermedades respiratorias.

In recent years, personalized or precision medicine has made effective inroads into the management of diseases, including respiratory diseases. The route to implementing this approach must invariably start with the identification and validation of biological biomarkers that are closely related to the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of respiratory patients. In this respect, biological biomarkers of greater or lesser reliability have been identified for most respiratory diseases and disease classes, and a large number of studies are being conducted in the search for new indicators. The aim of this review is to update the reader and to analyze the existing scientific literature on the existence and diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic validity of the most important biological biomarkers in the main respiratory diseases, and to identify future challenges in this area.

Asthma Control in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated with Reslizumab: Spanish Real-Life Data.

BACKGROUND: Reslizumab is an anti-interleukin 5 monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated to reduce the risk of severe exacerbations and to improve symptoms, lung function, and quality of life in randomized controlled trials that included patients with severe eosinophilic uncontrolled asthma (SEUA) and a history of severe exacerbations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of add-on reslizumab in a cohort of patients with SEUA under real-life conditions. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, retrospective, real-life study that included subjects with SEUA treated with reslizumab in 44 asthma units throughout Spain. Eligible patients were those who had received at least one dose of reslizumab as part of normal clinical practice. The primary endpoint was complete asthma control at 52 weeks, defined as absence of severe exacerbations, ACT ≥20 and no maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS). Demographic, clinical, and functional data were collected at baseline (T0), after four to six months (T1); after 12 months (T2) and beyond 12 months of therapy (T3). RESULTS: Treatment with reslizumab achieved complete asthma control in 40% of the 208 included SEUA patients and led to a significant reduction in exacerbations (from 3.0; IQR: 2.0-4.0 at V0 to 0.0; IQR: 0.0-0.0 at V2), maintenance OCS use (from 54.8% (95% CI: 48.0-61.6 at T0 to 18.5% (95% CI: 12.5-24.5 at T2) and a meaningful improvement in symptoms in the entire treated population: ACT increased from 12.8 ± 4.5 at V0 to 20.0 ± 5.1 at V2 (p < 0.001). Most of the improvement achieved at 12 months was obtained at 4-6 months. The retention (continuation) rate of reslizumab was 75% through 2 years (95CI%: 1.9-2.1). Overall, reslizumab showed an adequate safety profile. CONCLUSION: Reslizumab is an effective therapy for SEUA with adequate safety profile in real-life conditions.

The Response to Biologics is Better in Patients with Severe Asthma Than in Patients with Asthma-COPD Overlap Syndrome.

Although biologics have demonstrated to be effective in T2-high asthma patients, there is little experience with these drugs in asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of biologics in these two conditions. We included 318 patients (24 ACO and 297 asthma) treated with monoclonal antibodies and followed for at least 12 months. Omalizumab was the most frequently employed biologic agent both in patients with ACO and asthma. Asthma control test (ACT) scores after at least 12 months of biologic therapy were not significantly different between groups. The percentage of patients with ≥1 exacerbation and ≥1 corticosteroid burst was significantly higher in ACO patients (70.8 vs 27.3 and 83.3% vs 37.5%, respectively), whereas the percentage of "controlled" patients (with no exacerbations, no need for corticosteroids and ACT ≥ 20) was significantly lower (16.7% vs 39.7%). In conclusion, this report suggests that patients with ACO treated with biologics reach worse outcomes than asthma patients.

Association of the CFTR gene with asthma and airway mucus hypersecretion.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma with airway mucus hypersecretion is an inadequately characterized variant of asthma. While several studies have reported that hypersecreting patients may carry genetic variants in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene, many of those studies have been questioned for their numerous limitations and contradictory results. OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine the presence of genetic variants of the CFTR gene in patients with asthma with and without airway mucus hypersecretion. (2) To identify the clinical, inflammatory and functional characteristics of the asthma phenotype with airway mucus hypersecretion. METHOD: Comparative multicentre cross-sectional descriptive study that included 100 patients with asthma (39 hypersecretors and 61 non-hypersecretors). Asthmatic hypersecretion was defined as the presence of cough productive of sputum on most days for at least 3 months in 2 successive years. The patients were tested for fractional exhaled nitric oxide, spirometry, induced sputum cell count, total immunoglobulin E (IgE), peripheral blood eosinophil count, C-reactive protein, blood fibrinogen and blood albumin and underwent a skin prick test. Asthma control and quality of life were assessed by the Asthma Control Test and Mini Asthma Quality of Life questionnaires, respectively. Blood DNA samples were collected from the patients and next-generation sequencing using a MiSeq sequencer and the Illumina platform was used for the CFTR gene analysis. RESULTS: Genetic differences were observed in the c.1680-870T>A polymorphism of the CFTR gene, significantly more evident in hypersecretors than in non-hypersecretors: 78.94% vs. 59.32% in the majority allele and 21.05% vs. 40.67% in the minority allele (p = 0.036). Clinically, asthma hypersecretors compared to non-hypersecretors were older (57.4 years vs. 49.4 years; p = 0.004); had greater asthma severity (58.9% vs. 23.7%; p = 0.005); experienced greater airway obstruction (FEV1/FVC% 64.3 vs. 69.5; p = 0.041); had poorer asthma control (60% vs. 29%; p = 0.021); had lower IgE levels (126.4 IU/mL vs. 407.6 IU/mL; p = 0.003); and were less likely to have a positive prick test (37.5% vs. 68.85%; p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that patients with asthma and with mucus hypersecretion (1) may have a different phenotype and disease mechanism produced by an intronic polymorphism in the CFTR gene (NM_000492.3:c.1680-870T>A), and (2) may have a poorer clinical outcome characterized by severe disease and poorer asthma control with a non-allergic inflammatory phenotype.

Effect of Sex Differences on Computed Tomography Findings in Adults With Cystic Fibrosis: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The survival of women with cystic fibrosis (CF) is lower than that of men by approximately 5 years. While various factors have been put forward to account for this discrepancy, no specific reasons have been established. Our hypothesis was that anatomical-structural involvement is more pronounced in women with CF than in men and that this is reflected in thoracic HRCT findings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a prospective multicentre study, in which adult patients were consecutively included over 18 months. Chest HRCT was performed, and findings were scored by 2 thoracic radiologists using the modified Bhalla system. We also studied respiratory function, applied the CFQR 14+ questionnaire, and collected clinical variables. RESULTS: Of the 360 patients followed up in the participating units, 160 were eventually included. Mean age was 28 years, and 47.5% were women. The mean±SD global score on the modified Bhalla score was 13.7±3.8 in women and 15.2±3.8 in men (p=0.024). The highest scores were observed for sacculations, bronchial generations, and air trapping in women. Women had lower BMI, %FEV1, %FVC, and %DLCO. Similarly, the results for the respiratory domain in CFQR 14+ were worse in women, who also had more annual exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to provide evidence of the implication of sex differences in HRCT findings in patients with CF. Women with CF present a more severe form of the disease that results in more frequent exacerbations, poorer functional and nutritional outcomes, deterioration of quality of life, and greater structural damage.

Inhaled Dry Powder Antibiotics in Patients with Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis: Efficacy and Safety in a Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Nebulised antibiotics are habitually used in patients with bronchiectasis, but the use of dry powder inhaled antibiotics (DPIA) in these patients is extremely limited. This study seeks to analyse the efficacy and safety of DPIA in bronchiectasis patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multi-centre study of historic cohorts. All the hospital centres in Spain were contacted in order to collect data on patients with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis who had taken at least one dose of DPIA. Its efficacy was analysed in clinical, functional and microbiological terms by comparing the year before and the year after the prescription of DPIA. Adverse effects and variables associated with these effects, or any need to withdraw the drug, were also analysed. RESULTS: 164 patients from 33 Spanish centres were included; 86% and 14% of these were treated with dry powder colistin and tobramycin, respectively. Chronic bronchial infection by Pseudomonas aeruginosa was present in 86% of these patients, and DPIA significantly reduced the number of exacerbations, the quantity and purulence of sputum and the isolation of pathogenic microorganisms. The most common adverse effect was cough (40%), particularly in cases of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and a previous cough and in those patients who had difficulties in handling the device. These factors were associated with a higher level of withdrawal of the treatment. There were no serious adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that DPIA are clinically efficacious and safe for treating bronchiectasis patients. Cough was shown to be the most common side-effect and reason for withdrawal of the treatment.

Beliefs and preferences regarding biological treatments for severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers' specialty and experience. METHODS: We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice.

Economic Impact and Clinical Outcomes of Omalizumab Add-On Therapy for Patients with Severe Persistent Asthma: A Real-World Study.

BACKGROUND: Omalizumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody indicated as add-on therapy to improve asthma control in patients with severe persistent allergic asthma. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate social, healthcare expenditure and clinical outcomes changes after incorporating omalizumab into standard treatment in the control of severe asthma. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, a total of 220 patients were included from 15 respiratory medicine departments in the regions of Andalusia and Extremadura (Spain). Effectiveness was calculated as a 3-point increase in the Asthma Control Test (ACT) and a reduction in the annual number of exacerbations. The economic evaluation included both direct and indirect costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Results from the year before and the year after incorporation of omalizumab were compared. RESULTS: After adding omalizumab, improvement of lung function, asthma and rhinitis according to patient perception, as well as the number of exacerbations and asthma control measured by the ACT score were observed. Globally, both healthcare resources and pharmacological costs decreased after omalizumab treatment, excluding omalizumab cost. When only direct costs were considered, the ICER was €1712 (95% CI 1487-1995) per avoided exacerbation and €3859 (95% CI 3327-4418) for every 3-point increase in the ACT score. When both direct and indirect costs were considered, the ICER was €1607 (95% CI 1385-1885) for every avoided exacerbation and €3555 (95% CI 3012-4125) for every 3-point increase. CONCLUSIONS: Omalizumab was shown to be an effective add-on therapy for patients with persistent severe asthma and allowed reducing key drivers of asthma-related costs.

Impact of reslizumab on outcomes of severe asthmatic patients: current perspectives.

Approximately 5%-10% of asthmatics suffer from severe asthma. New biological treatments represent a great opportunity to reduce asthma burden and to improve asthma patients' lives. Reslizumab will soon be available in several European countries. This anti-IL-5 IgG4/κ monoclonal antibody, administered intravenously at a dose of 3 mg/kg over 20-50 minutes every 4 weeks, has been shown to be safe and effective in patients with 400 eosinophils/µL or more in their peripheral blood. The clinical effects in reducing asthma exacerbations and in improving the quality of life and lung function are clear, but further research is needed to determine the best biological compound for a specific cluster of patients. Research data have shown that in patients who were expressing other clinical features of eosinophilic inflammation over asthma (rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis), the clinical benefit of reslizumab was greater. Furthermore, it has also been observed that in patients with unsatisfactory response to mepolizumab, reslizumab is able to significantly improve the clinical and biological parameters. The aim of personalized medicine is to provide the right drug to the right patient at the right dose at the right moment. The biological treatments that were developed to modify specific pathological pathways not only provide us with the tools for the management of asthma patients but also clarify the biological mechanisms involved in its pathogenesis.