Dupilumab: Mechanism of action, clinical, and translational science.

Allergic disease prevalence has increased globally with the subset of type 2 inflammatory diseases playing a substantial role. Type 2 inflammatory diseases may differ in clinical presentation, but they exhibit shared pathophysiology that is targeted by the unique pharmacology of dupilumab. Dupilumab binds to the interleukin (IL)-4 receptor alpha subunit (IL-4Rα) that blocks IL-4 and IL-13 signaling, two key drivers of type 2 inflammation. Herein, we review the mechanism of action and pharmacology of dupilumab, and the clinical evidence that led to the regulatory approvals of dupilumab for the treatment of numerous type 2 inflammatory diseases: atopic dermatitis, asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, eosinophilic esophagitis, and prurigo nodularis.

Anti-IL-5 Pathway Agents in Eosinophilic-Associated Disorders Across the Lifespan.

Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-5 pathways have revolutionized the treatment expectations for eosinophilic-associated conditions, particularly in patients with respiratory involvement. Mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody), benralizumab (IL-5 receptor blocker monoclonal antibody), and reslizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody) have collectively contributed to the overall improvement of the disease burden in various conditions. Eosinophilic asthma currently boasts the most robust evidence across all age groups: all three biologics are approved for adults (aged ≥18 years); mepolizumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also in children (aged ≥ 6 years), while bernalizumab was recently approved by the FDA for patients aged ≥6 years in the USA. In chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, subcutaneous mepolizumab is the only anti-IL-5 therapy approved so far and can be used in adult patients (aged ≥18 years). For eosinophilic esophagitis, conflicting evidence surrounds both mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, leading to non-approval of these agents by the FDA/EMA. Recently, mepolizumab was approved for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients aged ≥6 years or older and for hypereosinophilic syndrome adult patients. A phase III trial proving noninferiority of benralizumab versus mepolizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been recently published, while evidence on reslizumab is scant. Overall, current evidence on anti-IL-5 biologics for eosinophilic-associated disorders is mostly focused on adults, whereas data for individuals aged under 18 years and over 65 years are scarce, resulting in a lack of evidence, particularly regarding efficacy, for the use of anti-IL-5 agents in these specific patient populations. This review addresses high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and real-world post-marketing studies regarding the use of anti-IL-5 therapies for eosinophilic-associated disorders across all age groups, spanning childhood, adulthood, and older age.

Dupilumab for Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients 1 to 11 Years of Age.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 pathways and has shown efficacy in five different atopic diseases marked by type 2 inflammation, including eosinophilic esophagitis in adults and adolescents. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 2:2:1:1 ratio, patients 1 to 11 years of age with active eosinophilic esophagitis who had had no response to proton-pump inhibitors to 16 weeks of a higher-exposure or lower-exposure subcutaneous dupilumab regimen or to placebo (two groups) (Part A). At the end of Part A, eligible patients in each dupilumab group continued the same regimen and those in the placebo groups were assigned to higher-exposure or lower-exposure dupilumab for 36 weeks (Part B). At each level of exposure, dupilumab was administered in one of four doses tiered according to baseline body weight. The primary end point was histologic remission (peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count, ≤6 per high-power field) at week 16. Key secondary end points were tested hierarchically. RESULTS: In Part A, histologic remission occurred in 25 of the 37 patients (68%) in the higher-exposure group, in 18 of the 31 patients (58%) in the lower-exposure group, and in 1 of the 34 patients (3%) in the placebo group (difference between the higher-exposure regimen and placebo, 65 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, 48 to 81; P<0.001]; difference between the lower-exposure regimen and placebo, 55 percentage points [95% CI, 37 to 73; P<0.001]). The higher-exposure dupilumab regimen led to significant improvements in histologic, endoscopic, and transcriptomic measures as compared with placebo. The improvements in histologic, endoscopic, and transcriptomic measures between baseline and week 52 in all the patients were generally similar to the improvements between baseline and week 16 in the patients who received dupilumab in Part A. In Part A, the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019, nausea, injection-site pain, and headache was at least 10 percentage points higher among the patients who received dupilumab (at either dose) than among those who received placebo. Serious adverse events were reported in 3 patients who received dupilumab during Part A and in 6 patients overall during Part B. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab resulted in histologic remission in a significantly higher percentage of children with eosinophilic esophagitis than placebo. The higher-exposure dupilumab regimen also led to improvements in measures of key secondary end points as compared with placebo. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; EoE KIDS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04394351.).

Real-world efficacy of dupilumab in four cases of paediatric-onset fibrostenotic eosinophilic esophagitis.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly prevalent immune-mediated disease that leads to chronic changes in the oesophagus. These changes can include strictures, narrowing, and stenosis, mediated by an interleukin (IL)-13 pathway, which leads to remodelling and fibrosis through increasing migration of fibroblasts and subepithelial fibrosis via collagen deposition 1. IL-13 downregulates TSPAN12, a gene whose expression regulates fibrosis and causes changes in barrier function and higher rates of fibrostenosis in EoE. Dupilumab, a biologic therapy aimed at blocking IL-13, has been shown to improve EoE-related inflammation and fibrosis in clinical trials. We report here four unique patients with documented oesophageal stenosis with inability to pass a paediatric endoscope due to structuring disease, requiring dilation, who had resolution of their oesophageal narrowing following dupilumab therapy.

Eosinophil Depletion with Benralizumab for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab is an eosinophil-depleting anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody. The efficacy and safety of benralizumab in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis are unclear. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients 12 to 65 years of age with symptomatic and histologically active eosinophilic esophagitis in a 1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous benralizumab (30 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks. The two primary efficacy end points were histologic response (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) and the change from baseline in the score on the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ; range, 0 to 84, with higher scores indicating more frequent or severe dysphagia) at week 24. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients underwent randomization: 104 were assigned to receive benralizumab, and 107 were assigned to receive placebo. At week 24, more patients had a histologic response with benralizumab than with placebo (87.4% vs. 6.5%; difference, 80.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 72.9 to 88.8; P<0.001). However, the change from baseline in the DSQ score did not differ significantly between the two groups (difference in least-squares means, 3.0 points; 95% CI, -1.4 to 7.4; P = 0.18). There was no substantial between-group difference in the change from baseline in the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score, which reflects endoscopic abnormalities. Adverse events were reported in 64.1% of the patients in the benralizumab group and in 61.7% of those in the placebo group. No patients discontinued the trial because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients 12 to 65 years of age with eosinophilic esophagitis, a histologic response (≤6 eosinophils per high-power field) occurred in significantly more patients in the benralizumab group than in the placebo group. However, treatment with benralizumab did not result in fewer or less severe dysphagia symptoms than placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; MESSINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04543409.).

Eosinophilic esophagitis in the era of biologics.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory, disabling disorder characterized by prominent eosinophilic inflammation of the esophagus, leading to troublesome symptoms including dysphagia and food impaction. The natural history of EoE is poorly known, but it may lead to esophageal strictures. The therapeutic armamentarium is expected to grow in the near future, especially due to the availability of novel biological therapies targeting crucial inflammatory pathways of EoE. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we discuss the main clinical features and natural history of EoE, focusing on the current therapeutic strategies, as well as past and current trials investigating biologics for its treatment. EXPERT OPINION: Dupilumab has been the first approved biologic drug for the treatment of EoE; long-term studies assessing how it could change the natural history of EoE are awaited. Novel biological drugs or other molecules are currently under study and could change the current treatment algorithms in the near future. Proper drug positioning and long term 'exit strategies' are yet to be defined.

Swallowed topical steroid therapy for eosinophilic oesophagitis in children: practical, evidence-based guidance by the BSPGHAN Eosinophilic Oesophagitis Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based guidance for topical steroid use in paediatric eosinophilic oesophagitis (pEoE) in the UK for both induction and maintenance treatment. METHODS: A systematic literature review using Cochrane guidance was carried out by the British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (BSPGHAN) Eosinophilic Oesophagitis (EoE) Working Group (WG) and research leads to determine the evidence base for preparation, dosing and duration of use of swallowed topical steroid (STS) formulations in EoE. Seven themes relating to pEoE were reviewed by the WG, alongside the Cochrane review this formed the evidence base for consensus recommendations for pEoE in the UK. We provide an overview of practical considerations including treatment regimen and dosing. Oral viscous budesonide (OVB) and, if agreed by local regulatory committees, orodispersible budesonide (budesonide 1 mg tablets) were selected for ease of use and with most improvement in histology. A practical 'how to prepare and use' OVB appendix is included. Side effects identified included candidiasis and adrenal gland suppression. The use of oral systemic steroids in strictures is discussed briefly. RESULTS: 2638 citations were identified and 18 randomised controlled trials were included. Evidence exists for the use of STS for induction and maintenance therapy in EoE, especially regarding histological improvement. Using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation criteria, dosing of steroids by age (0.5 mg two times per day <10 years and 1 mg two times per day ≥10 years) for induction of at least 3 months was suggested based on evidence and practical consideration. Once histological remission is achieved, maintenance dosing of steroids appears to reduce the frequency and severity of relapse, as such a maintenance weaning regimen is proposed. CONCLUSION: A practical, evidence-based flow chart and guidance recommendations with consensus from the EoE WG and education and research representatives of BSPGHAN were developed with detailed practical considerations for use in the UK.

Determinant factors for first-line treatment choice and effectiveness in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: an analysis of the EUREOS EoE CONNECT registry.

This study compared short-term effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), swallowed topical corticosteroids (STC), and dietary therapies in reversing clinical and histological features in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitits (EoE). Determinants for treatment choice and PPI therapy effectiveness were also assessed.  A cross-sectional study analysis of patients under 18 years old recruited onto the multicenter EoE CONNECT registry was performed. Clinico-histological response was defined as symptomatic improvement plus a peak eosinophil count below 15 per high-power field after treatment. Effectiveness of first-line options used in monotherapy was compared. Overall, 393 patients (64% adolescents) receiving PPI, STC, or dietary monotherapy to induce EoE remission were identified. PPI was the preferred option (71.5%), despite STC providing the highest clinico-histological response rates (66%) compared to PPI (44%) and diet (42%). Logistic regression identified fibrotic features and recruitment at Italian sites independently associated to first-line STC treatment; age under 12 associated to dietary therapy over other options. Analysis of 262 patients in whom PPI effectiveness was evaluated after median (IQR) 96 (70-145) days showed that this effectiveness was significantly associated with management at pediatric facilities and use of high PPI doses. Among PPI responders, decrease in rings and structures in endoscopy from baseline was documented, with EREFS fibrotic subscore for rings also decreasing among responders (0.27 ± 0.63 vs. 0.05 ± 0.22, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Initial therapy choice for EoE depends on endoscopic phenotype, patient's age, and patients' origin. High PPI doses and treatment in pediatric facilities significantly determined effectiveness, and reversed fibrotic endoscopic features among responders. What is Known: • Proton pump inhibitors are widely used to induce and maintain remission in EoE in real practice, despite other first-line alternative therapies possibly providing higher effectiveness. What is New: • Proton pump inhibitors represent up to two-thirds of first-line monotherapies used to induce EoE remission in pediatric and adolescent patients with EoE. The choice of STC as first-line treatment for EoE was significantly associated with fibrotic features at baseline endoscopy and recruitment in Italian centers; age less than 12 years was associated with dietary therapy. • PPI effectiveness was found to be determined by use of high doses, attendance at pediatric facilities, presenting inflammatory instead of fibrotic or mixed phenotypes, and younger age. Among responders, PPI therapy reversed both inflammatory and fibrotic features of EoE after short-term treatment.

Comparison of budesonide vehicles in inducing histologic remission in pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis.

OBJECTIVES: Oral viscous budesonide (OVB) is a common medication used to treat eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). It is typically mixed with Splenda to produce a slurry, but other delivery vehicles have been used in clinical practice. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of pediatric EoE patients treated with OVB using different drug delivery vehicles. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of pediatric EoE patients treated with OVB. The primary aim was to evaluate rates of histologic remission (defined by <15 eosinophils per high power field in both mid and distal esophagus) after 6-12 weeks of OVB treatment for each delivery vehicle. Secondary aims were to evaluate histologic response and endoscopic response and remission of different delivery vehicles, and to compare the efficacy of different treatment regimens. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included in the study. Median treatment duration was 3.4 months. Overall rate of histologic remission with OVB was 52.6%. There was no difference in rates of histologic remission (p = 0.313) or response (p = 0.195 and p = 0.681 in mid and distal esophagus, respectively) among the different vehicle types or treatment regimens. Similarly, there was no difference in endoscopic remission and response among the different vehicle types (p = 0.853 and p = 0.727) or treatment regimens (p = 0.244 and p = 0.157). Patients who achieve histologic remission were more likely to be non-Hispanic Caucasian. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest there is no difference in histologic and endoscopic outcomes with various delivery vehicles or combination therapy with OVB in the treatment of EoE. More palatable and cost-effective vehicles can be used to treat EoE.

Efficacy and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have clinical benefits for treating several atopic diseases. However, consensus on its use for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is lacking. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MAbs versus placebo for treating EoE. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were changes in peak esophageal eosinophils count/high power field (HPF) and mean esophageal eosinophils count/HPF. The secondary outcomes were changes in the EoE-Histology Scoring System (EoE-HSS), Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), dysphagia score, and adverse events (AEs). We compared binary outcomes using risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD), with 95% confidence interval (CI). Considering the diversity of mechanistic properties of MAbs, a pre-specified subgroup analysis by MAb mechanism of action was performed for all outcomes, provided that at least two studies were in each subgroup. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics. RESULTS: 6 RCTs were included (533 patients). Compared to placebo, MAbs led to a significant reduction in peak esophageal eosinophils count/HPF (MD -0.78; CI 95% -0.87, -0.6801) and mean esophageal eosinophils count/HPF (SMD -0.79; CI 95% -1.5, -0.08). Moreover, MAbs significantly reduced EoE-HSS scores (grade score: SMD -9.31; 95% CI -13.95, -4.6701; stage score: SMD -10.18; 95% CI -15.06, -5.31), EREFS (SMD -5.95; CI 95% -9.19, -2.71) and dysphagia score (SMD -1.79; CI 95% -3.36, -0.23) without increasing AEs compared to placebo. Among those MAbs whose mechanism of action includes the blockage of the receptor for IL-13 (Dupilumab, QAX576, and RPC4046), the scores of EoE-HSS grade, EoE-HSS stage, EREFS, and dysphagia were significantly reduced, and they presented a similar risk of overall and serious AEs compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: MAbs seem effective and safe in reducing esophageal eosinophil infiltrate, EoE-HSS score, EREFS score, and dysphagia symptoms in patients with EoE. However, further evidence is needed to establish its place in EoE management.

Circulating immunome fingerprint in eosinophilic esophagitis is associated with clinical response to proton pump inhibitor treatment.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to characterize the circulating immunome of patients with EoE before and after proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment in order to identify potential non-invasive biomarkers of treatment response. Methods: PBMCs from 19 healthy controls and 24 EoE patients were studied using a 39-plex spectral cytometry panel. The plasmacytoid dendritic cell (pDC) population was differentially characterized by spectral cytometry analysis and immunofluorescence assays in esophageal biopsies from 7 healthy controls and 13 EoE patients. Results: Interestingly, EoE patients at baseline had lower levels of circulating pDC compared with controls. Before treatment, patients with EoE who responded to PPI therapy had higher levels of circulating pDC and classical monocytes, compared with non-responders. Moreover, following PPI therapy pDC levels were increased in all EoE patients, while normal levels were only restored in PPI-responding patients. Finally, circulating pDC levels inversely correlated with peak eosinophil count and pDC count in esophageal biopsies. The number of tissue pDCs significantly increased during active EoE, being even higher in non-responder patients when compared to responder patients pre-PPI. pDC levels decreased after PPI intake, being further restored almost to control levels in responder patients post-PPI. Conclusions: We hereby describe a unique immune fingerprint of EoE patients at diagnosis. Moreover, circulating pDC may be also used as a novel non-invasive biomarker to predict subsequent response to PPI treatment.

Dupilumab in adolescent eosinophilic esophagitis: Experience with fibrostenosis and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease with esophageal involvement.

We evaluated patients aged 12-20 on dupilumab 300 mg weekly for treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) who had ≥1 follow-up endoscopy at a tertiary care pediatric hospital (n = 18). Fifty percent had inflammatory EoE (n = 9), 22% had fibrostenotic EoE (n = 4), and 28% had non-EoE eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease (EGID) with esophageal involvement (n = 5). Ninety-four percent discontinued topical corticosteroids (TCS) 2-4 weeks after starting dupilumab. Eighty-nine percent of inflammatory EoE patients had histological response (<15 eosinophils/high-powered field) after an average of 19.1 weeks. One hundred percent of patients with fibrostenotic disease exhibited histological response after 16.8 weeks. Of patients with non-EoE EGID, 60% achieved esophageal histological response after an average of 40.1 weeks. In a small cohort, dupilumab was very effective for adolescent inflammatory and fibrostenotic EoE despite rapid weaning of TCS. Dupilumab was also somewhat effective for non-EoE EGID with esophageal involvement; however, a longer duration of therapy was required.

Impact of STAT6 Variants on the Response to Proton Pump Inhibitors and Comorbidities in Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the first-line drug for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), although it is estimated that there is a lack of histological remission in 50% of patients. This research aimed to identify pharmacogenetic biomarkers predictive of PPI effectiveness and to study their association with disease features. Peak eosinophil count (PEC) and the endoscopic reference score (EREFS) were determined before and after an eight-week PPI course in 28 EoE patients. The impact of the signal transducer and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6), CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and ABCB1 genetic variations on baseline PEC and EREFS, their reduction and histological response, and on EoE symptoms and comorbidities was analyzed. PEC reduction was higher in omeprazole-treated patients (92.5%) compared to other PPIs (57.9%, p = 0.003). STAT6 rs12368672 (g.18453G>C) G/G genotype showed higher baseline PEC values compared to G/C and C/C genotypes (83.2 vs. 52.9, p = 0.027). EREFS reduction in STAT6 rs12368672 G/G and G/C genotypes was higher than in the C/C genotype (36.7% vs. -75.0% p = 0.011). However, significance was lost after Bonferroni correction. Heartburn incidence was higher in STAT6 rs167769 (g.27148G>A) G/G patients compared to G/A (54.55% vs. 11.77%, p = 0.030). STAT6 rs12368672G>C and rs167769G>A variants might have a relevant impact on EoE status and PPI response. Further research is warranted to clarify the clinical relevance of these variants.

Pharmacologic Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), swallowed topical corticosteroids (STSs), and dupilumab are highly effective therapies for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Shared decision-making informs the choice of therapy and factors such as ease of use, safety, cost, and efficacy should be addressed. PPIs are the most common medication utilized early in the disease course; however, for nonresponders, STSs are an excellent alternative. Dupilumab is unlikely to replace PPIs or STSs as first-line therapy, except in highly specific circumstances. Identification of novel biologic pathways and the development of small molecules may lead to a wider range of treatment options in the future.

ACCURACY OF THE EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS ENDOSCOPIC REFERENCE SCORE IN CHILDREN.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy of applying the endoscopic reference score for EoE (EREFS) in children with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction naïve to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional study was conducted by reviewing reports and photographs of upper gastrointestinal endoscopies (UGE) and esophageal biopsies of patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction. Patients who were treated with PPI or had other conditions that may cause esophageal eosinophilia were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 2,036 patients evaluated, endoscopic findings of EoE were identified in 248 (12.2%) and more than one abnormality was observed in 167 (8.2%). Among all patients, 154 (7.6%) presented esophageal eosinophilia (≥15 eosinophils per high power field) (P<0.01). In this group, 30 patients (19.5%) had normal endoscopy. In patients with EoE, edema (74% vs 6.5%, P<0.01) and furrows (66.2% vs 2.4%, P<0.01) were more prevalent than in the control group. Association of edema and furrows was more frequent in patients with EoE than in the control group (29.2% vs 1.6%, P<0.01, OR=24.7, CI=15.0-40.5). The presence of more than one endoscopic finding had sensitivity of 80.5%, specificity of 93.4%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 50%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.3%, and accuracy of 92.4%. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study showed that endoscopic features suggestive of EoE had high specificity and NPV for diagnosing EoE in children naïve to PPI therapy. These findings highlight the importance of the EREFS in contributing to early identification of inflammatory and fibrostenosing characteristics of EoE, making it possible to identify and to avoid progression of the disease. BACKGROUND: • The EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS) was developed and validated in adults and has been demonstrated to be an adequate tool for diagnosing and assessing treatment response in children. BACKGROUND: • The presence of more than one endoscopic finding stronglysuggests EoE. BACKGROUND: • The EoE endoscopic reference score presents high specificity and negative predictive value for diagnosing EoE in children naïve to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. BACKGROUND: • Endoscopic findings suggestive of EoE in patients naïve to treatment may be useful to characterize disease phenotype and individualize treatment according to the initial clinical presentation.