Comparison of omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment efficacy in patients with atopic and eosinophilic "Overlap" severe asthma: Biological agent preference in atopic-eosinophilic severe asthma.

Approximately 1-third of patients with severe asthma are candidates for both omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment. We aimed to compare the clinical, spirometric and inflammatory efficacy of these 2 biologics in atopic and eosinophilic "overlap" severe asthma patients. In our 3-center retrospective cross-sectional observational study, the data of patients who received omalizumab or mepolizumab for at least 16 weeks to treat severe asthma were examined. Atopic (perennial allergen sensitivity and total IgE level 30-1500 IU/mL) and eosinophilic (blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL in admission; or ≥300 cells/µL in the previous year) patients with asthma suitable for both biologics were included in the study. Post-treatment changes in the asthma control test (ACT) score, number of attacks, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and eosinophil count were compared. The rates of any biological responder patient were compared according to whether they had high eosinophil counts (≥500 cells/µL vs <500 cells/µL). Total of 181 patients data were evaluated, of the 74 atopic and eosinophilic overlap patients included in the study, 56 were receiving omalizumab and 18 were receiving mepolizumab. When omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment efficacies were compared, there was no difference in terms of the reduction in attacks and improvement in ACT. The decrease in eosinophil levels in patients in the mepolizumab arm was significantly higher than that in patients in the omalizumab arm (46.3% vs 87.8%; P < .001). The improvement in FEV1 was greater with mepolizumab treatment, although the difference was not significant (215 mL vs 380 mL; P = .053). It has been shown that having high eosinophil counts does not affect the clinical and spirometric responder patient rates for either biological condition. The success of omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment is similar in patients with atopic and eosinophilic overlap with severe asthma. However, because the baseline patient inclusion criteria are not compatible, head-to-head studies comparing both biological agents are required.

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin on diabetic patients receiving high-doses of insulin.

OBJECTIVE: In this study we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin addition to diabetic patients using high dose insulin. METHODS: The current study was carried out in the outpatient diabetic clinics of Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital. Thirty diabetic patients who were receiving high dose (>0,5U/kg) insulin and oral antidiabetic treatment (other than SGLT 2 inhibitors) were included in this study. Primary end point was the change in HbA1c, insulin doses and serum electrolyte from the addition of dapagliflozin 10 mg to the week 12. RESULTS: At the end of three month BMI were obviously decreased from 33.31 ±4.51 to 32.14 ±4.66 (p: 0.001). There was also an evident decrease of insulin requirement from 76 ±23.15 U/kg to 57.60 ±17.61 U/day (p<0.001). As well as the decrease in insulin doses, there was also a significant decline in HbA1c (Δ 1.6 %) and fasting blood glucose levels (Δ68.6 mg/dl) (p<0.001). Among serum electrolyte levels slight but meaningful increase of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and sodium (Na) levels were seen (p: 0.044 and p: 0.026). There were no significant changes in serum cholesterol levels with electrolytes such as potassium, calcium, phosphorus magnesium and vitamin D (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: In diabetic patients with inadequately controlled glucose regulation despite high-dose insulin therapy, dapagliflozin may be an alternative combination choice to decrease the need of insulin dose and obtain an optimal HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose levels and weight without major side effects.