A randomized multicenter study evaluating Xolair persistence of response after long-term therapy.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available to assist clinicians with decisions regarding long-term use of asthma therapies, including omalizumab. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the benefit and persistence of response in subjects continuing or withdrawing from long-term omalizumab treatment. METHODS: Evaluating the Xolair Persistency Of Response After Long-Term Therapy (XPORT) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled withdrawal study that included subjects with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma receiving long-term omalizumab. Subjects were randomized by using a hierarchical dynamic randomization scheme to continue their same dose of omalizumab or withdraw to placebo and were then followed every 4 weeks for 1 year. The primary outcome was any protocol-defined severe asthma exacerbation. The secondary outcome was time to first protocol-defined severe asthma exacerbation. Exploratory outcomes included changes in Asthma Control Questionnaire and Asthma Control Test scores. RESULTS: Significantly more subjects in the omalizumab group (67%) had no protocol-defined exacerbation than in the placebo group (47.7%); an absolute difference of 19.3% (95% CI, 5.0%, 33.6%) represents a 40.1% relative difference. Time to first protocol-defined exacerbation analysis revealed a significantly different between-group exacerbation pattern that was consistent with the primary analysis. Subjects continuing omalizumab had significantly better asthma control (mean [SD] change from baseline to week 52: Asthma Control Test score, -1.16 [4.14] vs placebo, -2.88 [5.38], P = .0188; Asthma Control Questionnaire score, 0.22 [0.66] vs placebo, 0.63 [1.13], P = .0039). Discontinuation of omalizumab was associated with an increase in free IgE levels and an increase in basophil expression of the high-affinity IgE receptor. No safety concerns were noted. CONCLUSION: Continuation of omalizumab after long-term treatment results in continued benefit, as evidenced by improved symptom control and reduced exacerbation risk.

Omalizumab in children with uncontrolled allergic asthma: Review of clinical trial and real-world experience.

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases of childhood. Allergen sensitization and high frequencies of comorbid allergic diseases are characteristic of severe asthma in children. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE mAb, is the first targeted biologic therapeutic approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma (AA) that remains uncontrolled despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus other controller medications. Since its initial licensing for use in adults and adolescents 12 years of age and older, the clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of omalizumab have been demonstrated in several published clinical trials in children aged 6 to less than 12 years with moderate-to-severe AA. These studies supported the approval of the pediatric indication (use in children aged ≥6 years) by the European Medicines Agency in 2009 and the US Food and Drug Administration in 2016. After this most recent change in licensing, we review the outcomes from clinical trials in children with persistent AA receiving omalizumab therapy and observational studies from the past 7 years of clinical experience in Europe. Data sources were identified by using PubMed in 2016. Guidelines and management recommendations and materials from the recent US Food and Drug Administration's Pediatric Advisory Committee meeting are also reviewed.

Timing and duration of omalizumab response in patients with chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available that describe response patterns in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU)/chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) treated with omalizumab. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe response patterns by using data from the 3 pivotal omalizumab CIU/CSU trials. METHODS: Every 4 weeks, randomized patients received dosing with placebo or 75, 150, or 300 mg of omalizumab (ASTERIA I: n = 318, 24 weeks; ASTERIA II: n = 322, 12 weeks) or placebo or 300 mg of omalizumab (GLACIAL: n = 335, 24 weeks). Response was defined as well-controlled urticaria (weekly Urticaria Activity Score [UAS7] ≤ 6) or complete response (UAS7 = 0). RESULTS: Response rates were dose dependent and highest with 300 mg of omalizumab. Some patients responded early (before week 4). At week 12, a higher proportion of patients treated with 300 mg of omalizumab reported a UAS7 ≤ 6 (26.0% [75 mg of omalizumab], 40.0% [150 mg of omalizumab], 51.9% [300 mg of omalizumab], and 11.3% [placebo] for ASTERIA I; 26.8% [75 mg of omalizumab], 42.7% [150 mg of omalizumab], 65.8% [300 mg of omalizumab], and 19.0% [placebo] for ASTERIA II; and 52.4% [300 mg of omalizumab] and 12.0% [placebo] for GLACIAL) or a UAS7 = 0 (11.7% [75 mg of omalizumab], 15.0% [150 mg of omalizumab], 35.8% [300 mg of omalizumab], and 8.8% [placebo] for ASTERIA I; 15.9% [75 mg of omalizumab], 22.0% [150 mg of omalizumab], 44.3% [300 mg of omalizumab], and 5.1% [placebo] for ASTERIA II; and 33.7% [300 mg of omalizumab] and 4.8% [placebo] for GLACIAL). In patients receiving 300 mg of omalizumab with 24 weeks of treatment, median time to achieve a UAS7 ≤ 6 was 6 weeks (ASTERIA I and GLACIAL) and median time to achieve a UAS7 = 0 was 12 or 13 weeks (ASTERIA I and GLACIAL, respectively). Some patients who achieved well-controlled urticaria or complete response sustained response throughout the treatment period. CONCLUSION: Benefits of omalizumab treatment were evident early (before week 4) in some patients and persisted to week 24. Use of 300 mg of omalizumab demonstrated best results in controlling CIU/CSU symptoms.

Omalizumab for the treatment of chronic idiopathic or spontaneous urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (also called chronic spontaneous urticaria) do not have a response to therapy with H-antihistamines, even at high doses. In phase 2 trials, omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody [corrected] that targets IgE and affects mast-cell and basophil function, has shown efficacy in such patients. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic idiopathic urticaria who remained symptomatic despite H-antihistamine therapy (licensed doses). We randomly assigned 323 patients to receive three subcutaneous injections, spaced 4 weeks apart, of omalizumab at doses of 75 mg, 150 mg, or 300 mg or placebo, followed by a 16-week observation period. The primary efficacy outcome was the change from baseline in a weekly itch-severity score (ranging from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating more severe itching). RESULTS: The baseline weekly itch-severity score was approximately 14 in all four study groups. At week 12, the mean (±SD) change from baseline in the weekly itch-severity score was -5.1±5.6 in the placebo group, -5.9±6.5 in the 75-mg group (P=0.46), -8.1±6.4 in the 150-mg group (P=0.001), and -9.8±6.0 in the 300-mg group (P<0.001). Most prespecified secondary outcomes at week 12 showed similar dose-dependent effects. The frequency of adverse events was similar across groups. The frequency of serious adverse events was low, although the rate was higher in the 300-mg group (6%) than in the placebo group (3%) or in either the 75-mg or 150-mg group (1% for each). CONCLUSIONS: Omalizumab diminished clinical symptoms and signs of chronic idiopathic urticaria in patients who had remained symptomatic despite the use of approved doses of H-antihistamines. (Funded by Genentech and Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01292473.).

Angioedema in the omalizumab chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria pivotal studies.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema, present in some patients with chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria (CIU/CSU), may have a negative effect on patient quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To describe patient-reported angioedema and its management in the pivotal omalizumab studies (ASTERIA I, ASTERIA II, GLACIAL). METHODS: Enrolled patients with CIU/CSU remained symptomatic despite treatment with histamine1 (H1)-antihistamines at licensed doses (ASTERIA I, ASTERIA II) or H1-antihistamines at up to 4 times the approved dose plus H2-antihistamines and/or a leukotriene receptor antagonist (GLACIAL). All studies administered omalizumab (75, 150, or 300 mg in ASTERIA I and ASTERIA II; 300 mg in GLACIAL) or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for at least 12 weeks. Urticaria Patient Daily Diary entries were completed by patients and summarized. RESULTS: At baseline, angioedema prevalence was higher in GLACIAL (53.1%) than in ASTERIA I (47.5%) or ASTERIA II (40.7%). The mean proportion of angioedema-free days during weeks 4 to 12 was greater for patients treated with 300 mg of omalizumab than placebo in ASTERIA I (96.1% vs 88.2%, P < .001), ASTERIA II (95.5% vs 89.2%, P < .001), and GLACIAL (91.0% vs 88.7%, P = .006). Most patient-reported angioedema was managed by low-intensity interventions (doing nothing or taking medication). CONCLUSION: Treatment with 300 mg of omalizumab was efficacious in reducing patient-reported angioedema. Low-intensity interventions were generally used to manage angioedema episodes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01287117 (ASTERIA I), NCT01292473 (ASTERIA II), and NCT01264939 (GLACIAL).

The minimal important difference for measures of urticaria disease activity: Updated findings.

BACKGROUND: The Urticaria Patient Daily Diary (UPDD) is a validated patient-reported outcome that captures key measures of urticaria disease activity. OBJECTIVE: To update estimates of the minimal important difference (MID) for urticaria disease activity measures in the UPDD, including the weekly itch severity score, weekly number of hives score, weekly average size of largest hive score, and the composite measure of itch severity and number of hives over 7 days, or urticaria activity score 7 (UAS7). METHODS: A total of 975 subjects with chronic idiopathic urticaria from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies completed the UPDD and other patient-reported outcome assessments (the Dermatology Life Quality Index, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, the Chronic Urticaria Quality-of-Life Questionnaire, the EuroQoL-5 Dimension Questionnaire) multiple times. MIDs were estimated through a combination of distribution- and anchor-based methods. RESULTS: MID estimates ranged from 4.5 to 5.0 for the weekly itch severity score, 5.0 to 5.5 for weekly hives count score, 9.5 to 10.5 for the UAS7, and 4.0 to 4.5 for the weekly size of the largest hive score. CONCLUSION: This analysis provided confirmation of the previous MID estimates for the urticaria disease activity measures in the UPDD.

Changes in asthma control, work productivity, and impairment with omalizumab: 5-year EXCELS study results.

BACKGROUND: Asthma poses a significant disease burden worldwide. Current guidelines emphasize achieving and maintaining asthma control. OBJECTIVE: To describe longitudinal changes of asthma control and asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma treated with omalizumab and those who did not receive omalizumab in a real-world setting. METHODS: This study used 5 years of data from patients ages ≥12 years old with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma who were enrolled in the Evaluating Clinical Effectiveness and Long-term Safety in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma observational study. Asthma control was assessed with the Asthma Control Test for 5 years, and asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment was measured with the Work Productivity/Activity Impairment-Asthma questionnaire for the first 2 years. RESULTS: The percentage of patients treated with omalizumab (n = 4930) and with well-controlled asthma (Asthma Control Test score, >20) increased from 45% at baseline to 61% at month 60, and it was 49% (baseline) and 67% (month 60) for the non-omalizumab-treated cohort (n = 2779). For new starters to omalizumab (n = 576), the percentage with well-controlled asthma increased from 25% at baseline to 51% at month 6, and to 60% at month 60. Patients in the omalizumab-treated cohort and those in the non-omalizumab-treated cohort experienced a reduction in asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment. The amount of improvement in asthma control achieved and the reduction in asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment were similar, regardless of asthma severity. CONCLUSION: On average, patients in the Evaluating Clinical Effectiveness and Long-term Safety in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma observational study who initiated omalizumab experienced clinically significant improvement in asthma control, which was observed within 6 months and persisted for 5 years.

Incidence of malignancy in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma treated with or without omalizumab.

BACKGROUND: The Epidemiologic Study of Xolair (omalizumab): Evaluating Clinical Effectiveness and Long-term Safety in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma (EXCELS) assessed the long-term safety of omalizumab in a clinical practice setting as part of a phase IV US Food and Drug Administration postmarketing commitment. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate long-term safety in omalizumab-treated and nonomalizumab-treated patients. Primary outcome measures focused on assessment of malignancies. METHODS: EXCELS was a prospective observational cohort study in patients (≥12 years of age) with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. There were 2 cohorts: omalizumab (taking omalizumab at baseline) and nonomalizumab (no history of omalizumab treatment). Primary outcomes included all confirmed, incident, study-emergent primary malignancies (malignancies), including and excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC); all malignancies were externally adjudicated. RESULTS: The omalizumab cohort had a higher proportion of patients with severe asthma compared with the nonomalizumab cohort (50.0% vs 23.0%). Median follow-up was approximately 5 years for both cohorts. Crude malignancy rates were similar in the omalizumab and nonomalizumab cohorts, with a rate ratio of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.62-1.13) for all malignancies and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.71-1.36) for all malignancies excluding NMSC. Kaplan-Meier plots of time to first confirmed study-emergent primary malignancy were similar for the 2 treatment cohorts. Cox proportional hazards modeling, adjusting for confounders and risk factors, resulted in a hazard ratio (omalizumab vs nonomalizumab) of 1.09 (95% CI, 0.87-1.38) for all malignancies and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.83-1.59) for all malignancies excluding NMSC. CONCLUSION: Results from EXCELS suggest that omalizumab therapy is not associated with an increased risk of malignancy.

Exploring the effects of omalizumab in allergic asthma: an analysis of biomarkers in the EXTRA study.

RATIONALE: For many patients with asthma, allergic airway inflammation is primarily a Th2-weighted process; however, heterogeneity in patterns of inflammation suggests phenotypic distinctions exist that influence disease presentation and treatment effects. OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FE(NO)), peripheral blood eosinophil count, and serum periostin as biomarkers of Th2 inflammation and predictors of treatment effects of omalizumab. METHODS: The EXTRA omalizumab study enrolled patients (aged 12-75 yr) with uncontrolled severe persistent allergic asthma. Analyses were performed evaluating treatment effects in relation to FE(NO), blood eosinophils, and serum periostin at baseline. Patients were divided into low- and high-biomarker subgroups. Treatment effects were evaluated as number of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations during the 48-week treatment period (primary endpoint). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 850 patients were enrolled. Data were available from 394 (46.4%), 797 (93.8%), and 534 (62.8%) patients for FE(NO), blood eosinophils, and serum periostin, respectively. After 48 weeks of omalizumab, reductions in protocol-defined exacerbations were greater in high versus low subgroups for all three biomarkers: FE(NO), 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37-70; P = 0.001) versus 16% (95% CI, -32 to 46; P = 0.45); eosinophils, 32% (95% CI, 11-48; P = 0.005) versus 9% (95% CI, -24 to 34; P = 0.54); and periostin, 30% (95% CI, -2 to 51; P = 0.07) versus 3% (95% CI, -43 to 32; P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in exacerbation frequency between omalizumab and placebo was greatest in the three high-biomarker subgroups, probably associated with the greater risk for exacerbations in high subgroups. Additional studies are required to explore the value of these biomarkers in clinical practice. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00314574).

Omalizumab in patients with symptomatic chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria despite standard combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria/chronic spontaneous urticaria (CIU/CSU) often continue to experience symptoms despite receiving standard-of-care therapy with H1-antihistamines along with 1 or more add-on therapies. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 24 weeks of treatment with omalizumab in patients with persistent CIU/CSU despite treatment with H1-antihistamines at up to 4 times the approved dose plus H2-antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or both. METHODS: In this phase III study patients were randomized to receive 6 subcutaneous injections at 4-week intervals of either 300 mg of omalizumab or placebo, followed by a 16-week observation period. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the overall safety of omalizumab compared with placebo. Efficacy (itch severity, hive, and urticaria activity scores) was evaluated at weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: The overall incidence and severity of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between omalizumab and placebo recipients; the safety profile was consistent with omalizumab in patients with allergic asthma. At week 12, the mean change from baseline in weekly itch severity score was -8.6 (95% CI, -9.3 to -7.8) in the omalizumab group compared with -4.0 (95% CI, -5.3 to -2.7) in the placebo group (P < .001). Significant improvements were seen for additional efficacy end points at week 12; these benefits were sustained to week 24. CONCLUSION: Omalizumab was well tolerated and reduced the signs and symptoms of CIU/CSU in patients who remained symptomatic despite the use of H1-antihistamines (up to 4 times the approved dose) plus H2-antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or both.

Omalizumab in severe allergic asthma inadequately controlled with standard therapy: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting ß(2)-agonists (LABAs) are recommended in patients with asthma that is not well-controlled; however, many patients continue to have inadequately controlled asthma despite this therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with inadequately controlled severe asthma who are receiving high-dose ICS and LABAs, with or without additional controller therapy. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00314575). SETTING: 193 investigational sites in the United States and 4 sites in Canada. PATIENTS: 850 patients aged 12 to 75 years who had inadequately controlled asthma despite treatment with high-dose ICS plus LABAs, with or without other controllers. INTERVENTION: Omalizumab (n = 427) or placebo (n = 423) was added to existing medication regimens for 48 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was the rate of protocol-defined exacerbations over the study period. Secondary efficacy end points included the change from baseline to week 48 in mean daily number of puffs of albuterol, mean total asthma symptom score, and mean overall score on the standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ[S]). Safety end points included the frequency and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: During 48 weeks, the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations was significantly reduced for omalizumab compared with placebo (0.66 vs. 0.88 per patient; P = 0.006), representing a 25% relative reduction (incidence rate ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.92]). Omalizumab improved mean AQLQ(S) scores (0.29 point [CI, 0.15 to 0.43]), reduced mean daily albuterol puffs (-0.27 puff/d [CI, -0.49 to -0.04 puff/d]), and decreased mean asthma symptom score (-0.26 [CI, -0.42 to -0.10]) compared with placebo during the 48-week study period. The incidence of adverse events (80.4% vs. 79.5%) and serious adverse events (9.3% vs. 10.5%) were similar in the omalizumab and placebo groups, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The results are limited by early patient discontinuation (20.8%). The study was not powered to detect rare safety events or the treatment effect in the oral corticosteroid subgroup. CONCLUSION: In this study, omalizumab provided additional clinical benefit for patients with severe allergic asthma that is inadequately controlled with high-dose ICS and LABA therapy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Genentech and Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

A randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of single-dose omalizumab in patients with H1-antihistamine-refractory chronic idiopathic urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Proof-of-concept studies with omalizumab in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) have shown significant decreases in mean urticaria activity scores (UASs). OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with CIU who remain symptomatic despite concomitant H(1)-antihistamine therapy. METHODS: This phase II, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study investigated omalizumab in patients aged 12 to 75 years in the United States and 18 to 75 years in Germany with a UAS over 7 days (UAS7) of 12 or greater despite antihistamine therapy. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive a single subcutaneous dose of 75, 300, or 600 mg of omalizumab or placebo added to a stable dose of H(1)-antihistamine. The primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline to week 4 in UAS7. Patients were followed for an additional 12 weeks to monitor safety. RESULTS: Ninety patients from the United States or Germany were enrolled. Both the 300-mg omalizumab group (-19.9 vs -6.9, P < .001) and the 600-mg omalizumab group (-14.6 vs -6.9, P = .047) showed greater improvement versus the placebo group in UAS7. No meaningful difference was observed for the 75-mg omalizumab group. Similar results were seen for key secondary end points of weekly hive and itch scores. Onset of effect occurred after 1 to 2 weeks. Omalizumab was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events was similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that a fixed dose of 300 or 600 mg of omalizumab provides rapid and effective treatment of CIU in patients who are symptomatic despite treatment with H(1)-antihistamines.