The eXpeRience registry: the 'real-world' effectiveness of omalizumab in allergic asthma.

Omalizumab has demonstrated therapeutic benefits in controlled clinical trials. Evaluation of outcomes in real-world clinical practice is needed to provide a complete understanding of the benefits of omalizumab treatment. eXpeRience was a 2-year, international, single-arm, open-label, observational registry that evaluated real-world effectiveness, safety and use of omalizumab therapy in 943 patients with uncontrolled persistent allergic asthma. Effectiveness variables (physician's Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness [GETE], and change from baseline in exacerbation rate, symptoms, rescue medication use, and oral corticosteroid [OCS] use) were evaluated at pre-specified time-points. Safety data were also recorded. By physician's GETE, 69.9% of patients were responders to omalizumab after 16 (±1) weeks. The proportion of patients with no clinically significant exacerbations increased from 6.8% during the 12-month pre-treatment period to 54.1% and 67.3% at Months 12 and 24, respectively. Symptoms and rescue medication use at Month 24 were reduced by >50% from baseline. Maintenance OCS use was lower at Month 24 (14.2%) compared with Month 12 (16.1%) and baseline (28.6%). Overall, omalizumab had an acceptable safety profile. The results from eXpeRience indicate that omalizumab was associated with improvements in outcomes in patients with uncontrolled persistent allergic asthma; these improvements were consistent with the results of clinical trials.

Persistency of response to omalizumab therapy in severe allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma.

BACKGROUND: The physician's global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) at 16 weeks has been shown to be the most effective assessment of response to omalizumab (XOLAIR®). This randomized, open-label, parallel-group study evaluated the persistency of treatment responder classification in patients receiving omalizumab added to optimized asthma therapy (OAT). METHODS: Patients (12-75 years, n = 400) with severe allergic asthma, uncontrolled despite Global Initiative for Asthma 2004 Step 4 therapy, received OAT and omalizumab (n = 272) or OAT (n = 128) for 32 weeks. Response or nonresponse was evaluated at Weeks 16 and 32. Response was defined as an investigator's (physician's) GETE rating of excellent or good; nonresponse was defined as a rating of moderate, poor or worsening. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-nine patients had GETE ratings available at Weeks 16 and 32 (omalizumab n = 258, OAT n = 91). Omalizumab responders of about 171/187 (91.4%)and 44/71 (62.0%) omalizumab nonresponders at Week 16 persisted as responders or nonresponders at Week 32. The investigator's GETE at Week 16 predicted persistency of response or nonresponse to omalizumab at Week 32 for 83.3% (215/258) of patients. OAT patients showed a lower persistency of response (18/28 [64.3%]) and a higher persistency of nonresponse (57/63 [90.5%]) than omalizumab patients. Excellent and good GETE ratings in omalizumab-treated patients were reflected by improvements in exacerbation rates (P < 0.001), severe exacerbation rates (P = 0.023), hospitalizations (P = 0.003), total emergency visits (P = 0.026) and Asthma Control Questionnaire overall score (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Response to omalizumab, as assessed by a physician's GETE at 16 weeks, is an effective predictor of continuing persistent response to omalizumab for the majority of patients.

Omalizumab reduces oral corticosteroid use in patients with severe allergic asthma: real-life data.

BACKGROUND: Long-term oral corticosteroid (OCS) therapy is associated with significant burden on patients and healthcare resources; treatments that may help reduce their use are important to improve asthma management. METHODS: French and German clinicians prescribing omalizumab for >16 weeks to patients with severe persistent allergic asthma collected OCS use data. OCS use was recorded at baseline and at a non-specific time point beyond 16 weeks from initiation of omalizumab. The number of asthma exacerbations (FEV(1) < 60% of personal best, requiring OCS burst and unscheduled doctor/emergency visit or hospitalization) and asthma-related hospitalizations during the 12-months prior to omalizumab treatment and during the observation period were also recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 346 patients were treated with omalizumab for >16 weeks. Of these, 166 (48.0%) were receiving maintenance OCS (France, n = 64; Germany, n = 102). Following omalizumab therapy, 84 (50.6%) patients on OCS at baseline reduced/stopped OCS dose at the time of data collection; 34 (20.5%) stopped and 50 (30.1%) reduced OCS. In all patients receiving maintenance OCS at baseline, mean reduction from baseline in daily OCS dose was 29.6% (7.1 mg prednisolone). In patients who reduced/stopped maintenance OCS, mean reduction from baseline in daily OCS dose was 74.3% (15.4 mg prednisolone). Reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations were observed from the 12-months prior to baseline in patients at the time of data collection, irrespective of change in OCS dose. CONCLUSION: European real-life experience demonstrates the OCS-sparing potential of omalizumab in some patients with severe allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma.

Adding omalizumab to the therapy of adolescents with persistent uncontrolled moderate--severe allergic asthma.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of omalizumab among adolescents with moderate-severe allergic asthma inadequately controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients 12 to 17 years of age were pooled from 5 placebo-controlled registration trials of omalizumab. Impact on asthma control was assessed by need for rescue bursts of oral corticosteroids, lung function, symptom scores, and unscheduled office visits. RESULTS: In adolescents (n = 146), addition of omalizumab decreased mean number of rescue bursts (0.3 vs 0.9) versus placebo; relative risk 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.99; P = .047). At study conclusion, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second increased 268 mL (13.8%) in omalizumab-treated subjects versus 98 mL (5.5%) for placebo (least squares mean treatment difference 146 mL [95% CI, 19.4-272.6; P = .024]). Omalizumab significantly improved asthma symptom scores and reduced unscheduled office visits. CONCLUSION: Omalizumab added to baseline therapy improves measures of asthma control in adolescents with persistent moderate-severe allergic asthma.

Pathophysiology and implications for treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a complex group of signs and symptoms caused by direct or indirect lung injury. In spite of decades of research, it is still associated with a high mortality rate. Pathogenesis of this disease is related to alveolar endothelial and epithelial cell injury and associated release and sequestration of inflammatory mediators and cells, including cytokines and neutrophils, respectively. Pharmacologic interventions have been largely unsuccessful, and ventilation strategies to support oxygenation while limiting ventilator associated lung injury have not demonstrated any significant reductions in the mortality rate. However, novel therapies are in development, based on the knowledge of the pathologic processes of acute respiratory distress syndrome. In this article an overview of the disease process and mediator involvement is presented, followed by a review of pharmacologic and ventilation treatments currently in use or under study.

Implementation of guidelines for preoperative laboratory investigations in patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact on preoperative laboratory investigations in elective surgery after the implementation of guidelines for ordering such tests. DESIGN: A retrospective chart audit. SETTING: A university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: The charts of 903 patients who underwent an elective surgical procedure from each surgical specialty except cardiovascular and thoracic. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of guidelines for preoperative laboratory investigations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Impact on the preoperative use of laboratory investigations after implementation of the guidelines as well as patient morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The mean number of preoperative laboratory investigations done per patient decreased from 4.65 before implementation of the guidelines to 4.18 after (p < 0.001). There was no apparent adverse impact on patient morbidity or mortality. CONCLUSION: Implementation of guidelines for preoperative laboratory investigations for elective surgery resulted in a reduction in the number of tests without adverse impact on patient morbidity or mortality.