Rheumatic adverse events associated with biologic therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies approved for treating chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) have well-established safety profiles but reports of rheumatic adverse events (AEs) are increasing and not well defined. This review aims to assess the risk and incidence of rheumatic AEs associated with biologic therapy in CRSwNP and summarize current reported management strategies. METHODS: A protocol was registered in PROSPERO [CRD42024525663]. A search was conducted in four electronic databases: Medline (Ovid), Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until January 4, 2024. Two reviewers independently screened citations and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool. Data were pooled using a random effects model to calculate overall incidence and relative risk. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies met the final inclusion criteria, totaling 3434 patients of which 2763 (80%) received either dupilumab (n = 2257; 82%), mepolizumab (n = 372; 13%), or omalizumab (n = 134; 5%) for treatment of CRSwNP. The overall incidence rate for any on-treatment rheumatic AE was 0.05 per person-year (95% CI, 0.03-0.09, I2 = 75%). Biologic therapy increased the risk of developing a rheumatic AE (RR = 2.53; 95% CI, 1.29-4.94) compared with placebo. The most frequently reported rheumatic AE was arthralgia or joint pain (n = 94; 95%), followed by lupus-like syndrome or lupus erythematosus-like reaction (n = 2; 2.5%). Discontinuation of treatment was the most common intervention (n = 21, 39%). CONCLUSION: Biologic therapy increases the risk of rheumatic AEs in CRSwNP patients by over twofold. Healthcare providers should remain vigilant in monitoring rheumatic AEs and apply appropriate management strategies on a case-by-case basis.

Efficacy and safety of a proposed omalizumab biosimilar compared to the reference product in the management of uncontrolled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: a multicenter, phase III, randomized, double-blind, equivalency clinical trial.

Background and aims: Allergic asthma has a considerable burden on the quality of life. A significant portion of moderate-to-severe allergic asthma patients need omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin-E monoclonal antibody, as an add-on therapy. In this phase III clinical trial P043 (Zerafil®, CinnaGen, Iran) efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were compared with Xolair® (the originator omalizumab). The primary outcome was the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations. Methods: Exacerbation rates, Asthma Control Test (ACT) results, spirometry measurements, immunogenicity, and safety were evaluated. Each subject received either medication with a dose ranging from 150 to 375 mg based on pre-treatment serum total IgE level (IU/mL) and body weight (kg) every two or four weeks for a duration of 28 weeks. Results: Exacerbation rates were 0.150 (CI: 0.079-0.220) in the P043 group, and 0.190 (CI: 0.110-0.270) in the omalizumab group (per-protocol). The least squares mean differences of predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in the First second (FEV1) were -2.51% (CI: -7.17-2.15, P=0.29) and -3.87% (CI: -8.79-1.04, P=0.12), pre- and post-bronchodilator use. The mean ± SD of ACT scores at the screening and the last visit were 10.62 ± 2.93 and 20.93 ± 4.26 in P043 and 11.09 ± 2.75 and 20.46 ± 5.11 in the omalizumab group. A total of 288 adverse events were reported for the 256 enrolled participants. Among all, "dyspnea" and "headache" were the most reported ones. The overall incidence of adverse events (P=0.62) and serious adverse events (P=0.07) had no significant differences between the two groups. None of the samples were positive for anti-drug antibodies. Conclusion: P043 was equivalent to omalizumab in the management of asthma in reduction of exacerbations. There was no significant difference in other efficacy and safety parameters. Clinical trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05813470) and www.IRCT.ir (IRCT20150303021315N20).

Omalizumab for management of hypersensitivity reactions to anticancer drugs.

Hypersensitivity reactions to anticancer drugs include treatment-limiting toxicity. Standard drug desensitisation offers temporary tolerance and hence requires repetition. We used omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, to overcome immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions to various anticancer drugs. Seven of the eight patients in the current study successfully resumed the desired anticancer drug regimen without standard desensitisation. No safety issues from omalizumab were observed.

Multinational Drug Survival Study of Omalizumab in Patients With Chronic Urticaria and Potential Predictors for Discontinuation.

Importance: Treating patients with chronic urticaria using omalizumab has been shown to be safe and effective in randomized clinical trials. Multinational studies on long-term omalizumab performance in chronic urticaria in clinical practice settings are lacking, especially on drug survival. Drug survival, which refers to the length of time that patients are treated with a specific drug, is a comprehensive outcome covering effectiveness, safety, and patient and physician preferences. Furthermore, little is known about the reasons and potential predictors for omalizumab discontinuation. Objective: To investigate omalizumab drug survival as well as reasons and potential predictors for discontinuation in a large, diverse population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter cohort study was conducted at 14 Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence in 10 countries, including all patients with chronic urticaria from these centers who were ever treated with omalizumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: Drug survival analysis was performed to assess time to discontinuation. Patient characteristics and treatment protocols were investigated by Cox regression analysis to identify potential predictors for omalizumab discontinuation. Results: In 2325 patients with chronic urticaria who started omalizumab between June 2009 and July 2022, the mean (SD) age of the cohort was 42 (6) years, and 1650 participants (71%) were female. Overall omalizumab survival rates decreased from 76% to 39% after 1 to 7 years, respectively (median survival time, 3.3 [95 % CI, 2.9-4.0] years), primarily due to discontinuation from well-controlled disease in 576 patients (65%). Ineffectiveness and adverse effects were reasons for discontinuation in a far smaller proportion of patients, totaling 164 patients (18%) and 31 patients (4%), respectively. Fast treatment response was associated with higher rates of omalizumab discontinuation due to well-controlled disease (hazard ratio, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.20-1.75]), and disease duration of more than 2 years was associated with lower rates of discontinuation due to well-controlled disease (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98]). Immunosuppressive cotreatment at the start of omalizumab and autoimmune disease was associated with a higher risk for discontinuation due to ineffectiveness (HR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.12-2.42]). The presence of spontaneous wheals (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.93]) and access to higher dosages (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.27-0.58) were both associated with a lower risk for discontinuation of omalizumab due to ineffectiveness. Conclusion and Relevance: This multinational omalizumab drug survival cohort study demonstrated that treatment of chronic urticaria with omalizumab in a clinical setting is effective and safe, and well-controlled disease is the main reason for treatment discontinuation. These findings on omalizumab drug survival rates and reasons and potential predictors for discontinuation may guide patients and physicians in clinical decision-making and expectation management. These results may call for the identification of biomarkers for chronic urticaria remission in complete responders to omalizumab treatment.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Omalizumab and Mepolizumab in Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is heterogeneous in both phenotypes and endotypes. Due to insufficient head-to-head comparison studies, it is hard to decide which biological to initiate. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of omalizumab and mepolizumab which can be used in the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma diagnosed with N-ERD. METHODS: The population of this observational, cross-sectional study comprised of N-ERD patients who received omalizumab or mepolizumab for at least 6 months for severe asthma. Outcomes included the asthma control test (ACT), and sino-nasal outcome test scores (SNOT-22), blood eosinophil counts at initiation of biological treatment (T0, baseline) and at the end of 6th months (T6). Adverse effects related to biological treatment and changes of oral corticosteroids dose was recorded. RESULTS: The study included a total of 22 patients, of whom 11 received mepolizumab and 11 received omalizumab. The change in ACT, SNOT-22, eosinophil counts, and adverse effects related to biologicals were similar at T6 (p = 0.606, p = 0.168, p = 0.05, p = 0.053, respectively). However, when examining the SNOT-22 and ACT based on the cumulative distribution curve (SUCRA), mepolizumab (SUCRA value: 0.61, 0.72, respectively) demonstrated greater efficacy compared to omalizumab (SUCRA value: 0.19, 0.35, respectively). The oral corticosteroids discontinuation rate was similar between the two groups (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: We found both omalizumab and mepolizumab to be effective in treatment; however, we determined that mepolizumab may have a potential superiority in efficacy.

Comparative efficacy and safety of the treatment by Omalizumab for chronic idiopathic urticaria in the general population: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Omalizumab is the only licensed drug that serves as a third-line treatment for chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). The optimum doses of omalizumab remain controversial. Therefore, this study aims to estimate the efficacy and safety of different doses of omalizumab in the treatment of CIU patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four databases were searched from the database's creation to April 8, 2023. Several keywords such as omalizumab and urticarias were used to retrieve related studies. The meta-analytical outcomes were analyzed in R 4.2.1 software and Stata 15.1 software. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool Ver. 2 was used to evaluate the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: In total, 2331 patients were included. Five indexes were employed to assess, including weekly Itch Severity Score (ISS7), weekly Hive Severity Score (HSS7), weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and adverse events (AE). A 300 mg dose of omalizumab was the optimum dose to treat CIU, followed by the 150 mg dose. Furthermore, 600 mg of omalizumab only showed a significant difference from the placebo in HSS7. No significant statistical difference was observed in AE. Meta-regression analysis revealed that time, as a covariate, was statistically significant in the comparison of omalizumab 150 mg with placebo. CONCLUSION: 300 mg of omalizumab was the optimum dosage to treat CIU patients, with a 150 mg dose also exhibiting good efficacy. Further studies are required to explore the efficacy and safety of different doses of omalizumab in the treatment of CIU patients.

[Adverse events in biologics for severe asthma]. / Effets indésirables des biothérapies de l'asthme sévère.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma is a pathology that remains severe and is inadequately controlled in 4% of patients. Identification of multiple pathophysiological mechanisms has led to the development of biomedicines, of which there are currently five available in France, with a safety profile that appears favorable but remains uncertain due to a lack of real-life experience with these new molecules. STATE OF KNOWLEDGE: Although relatively benign, the adverse effects of biologics are diverse. Headache, joint pain, skin reactions at the injection site, fever and asthenia are commonly observed during the different treatments. Ophthalmological complications seem restricted to dupilumab, with numerous cases of keratitis and conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis. Several respiratory complications have also been observed, essentially consisting in pharyngitis and other upper respiratory infections. Hypereosinophilia may occur, mainly with dupilumab, requiring investigation of systemic repercussions or vasculitis. Allergic reactions are uncommon but require careful monitoring during initial injections. CONCLUSION: Biologics for severe asthma are recent drugs with a favorable safety profile, but with little real-life experience, justifying increased vigilance by prescribing physicians.

Predicting the Speed of Response to Omalizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: Two distinct chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) endotypes, IgE-mediated autoallergic and IgG-mediated autoimmune, were defined based on the response patterns to omalizumab. However, the coexistence of IgE and IgG autoantibodies in a subset of patients might complicate the prediction of the treatment outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab in CSU patients, focusing on the factors predicting the response patterns. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional single-center study investigating CSU patients treated with omalizumab for at least 6 months between September 2015 and February 2023. Patients were evaluated regarding demographics, clinical findings, baseline laboratory parameters, treatment outcomes, and side effects. Early and late responders were defined depending on the time for response, within or after 3 months, respectively. RESULTS: Among 82 patients, 75 (91.5%) responded to omalizumab during the first 6 months, classified as early (n = 51) and late responders (n = 24). The IgG anti-thyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO)/total IgE ratio was an independent predictor for determining the speed of response (p < 0.05). Of 29 patients who discontinued omalizumab, 19 (65.5%) experienced relapse with a good response to retreatment (n = 18/19, 94.7%). Early responders relapsed more frequently than late responders (77.3% vs. 28.6%) (p < 0.05). Only mild side effects were observed in a minority of patients (n = 8/82, 9.8%). CONCLUSION: Omalizumab is an effective and safe treatment in CSU. The IgG anti-TPO/total IgE ratio seems a valuable tool to predict the early and late responders, the former having a higher possibility of relapse upon drug withdrawal.

Dupilumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (LIBERTY-CSU CUPID): Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals (hives) and/or angioedema. Patients with CSU could remain symptomatic despite standard-of-care H1 antihistamines (H1-AH) or anti-IgE (omalizumab) treatment. Dupilumab blocks IL-4/IL-13 signaling and is approved for multiple type 2/atopic indications. OBJECTIVE: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing dupilumab with placebo in patients with symptomatic CSU despite H1-AH. METHODS: In LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A, patients were omalizumab-naive (n = 138, aged ≥6 years). In Study B, patients were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders (n = 108, aged ≥12 years). The primary end point was either change from baseline over 7 days in the Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) or Itch Severity Score (ISS7) at week 24, with the other as a key secondary end point, depending on regional regulatory requirements. Studies were pooled for safety assessment. RESULTS: In Study A, UAS7 and ISS7 improved with dupilumab versus placebo (difference -8.5 [95% CI, -13.2 to -3.9; P = .0003] and -4.2 [95% CI, -6.6 to -1.8; P = .0005]). In Study B, tested at α = 0.043 after interim analysis, UAS7 improved (difference -5.8 [95% CI, -11.4 to -0.3; P = .0390]), with a numerical trend in ISS7 (difference -2.9 [95% CI, -5.7 to -0.07; nominal P = .0449, not significant]). Pooled safety data were consistent between dupilumab and placebo and with the known dupilumab safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab reduced urticaria activity by reducing itch and hives severity in omalizumab-naive patients with CSU uncontrolled with H1-AH. Although the primary end point for Study B was not met, dupilumab effects were small in patients who were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders.

Safety of Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma: An Analysis of Suspected Adverse Reactions Reported in the WHO Pharmacovigilance Database.

BACKGROUND: The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database. METHODS: We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3). RESULTS: Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab. CONCLUSIONS: The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.

Efficacy of omalizumab for the treatment of bullous pemphigoid: Spanish multicentre real-world experience.

BACKGROUND: Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Most patients are older and have associated multiple comorbidities. Topical and systemic corticosteroids are considered the first-line treatment for BP, and immunosuppressants are used as steroid-sparing treatments. However, both have side-effects and contraindications, which are even more common in this older population. New treatments targeting interleukins and receptors related to BP pathogenesis have been proposed to decrease these side-effects while achieving equal or better effectiveness and response rates. Omalizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets IgE and has been proposed for the treatment of BP due to the evidence that IgE autoantibodies play an essential role in BP pathogenesis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for the treatment of BP. METHODS: We carried out a multicentre, retrospective, observational study including patients diagnosed with BP who received omalizumab for ≥ 3 months from 15 tertiary hospitals in Spain. IgE levels prior to treatment were measured, and we evaluated the possible correlation with clinical response. We excluded patients treated with omalizumab for < 3 months, as we consider this duration to be insufficient for a comprehensive assessment of its efficacy. To evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment, we used the percentage of body surface area improvement. RESULTS: We included 36 patients. The vast majority had associated multiple comorbidities, and all patients had used other systemic therapies apart from corticosteroids before omalizumab. In total, 83% experienced some kind of treatment response and 42% of all patients treated achieved complete response. We did not find any correlation between higher IgE levels and a better response (P = 0.2). All patients tolerated omalizumab without reported side-effects. CONCLUSIONS: Omalizumab is a good therapeutic alternative for BP as it provided clinical response in most patients, and nearly one-half of the cases achieved complete response. It showed no side-effects, which is crucial in older patients with BP.

Prevention of Anaphylaxis Episodes in Idiopathic Anaphylaxis by Omalizumab.

INTRODUCTION: In 15-35 percent of patients with anaphylaxis, the triggering allergen cannot be found; therefore, a diagnosis of idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA) is made. We report on the outcomes in patients with IA treated with omalizumab. METHODS: We included consequent omalizumab-treated IA adult patients treated with omalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Out of 7 patients, 6 were female, median age 40 years with the frequency of anaphylaxis episodes from 3 in 2 years to 5 in 4 months. Baseline tryptase ranged from 1.71 to 12.0 µg/L. An increase in tryptase during anaphylaxis was documented in 6 patients. Activating KIT p.D816V variant was detected in 2 patients. One patient also had hereditary alpha-tryptasemia (HαT). The duration of omalizumab treatment was 0.5-7.5 years. None of the patients have experienced an anaphylactic reaction since the start of treatment. Mild systemic reactions were reported in 6 patients (86%). The presence of underlying cMCD had no impact on the treatment outcome. CONCLUSION: All patients in our study had complete responses to omalizumab. The presence of KIT p.D816V and HαT did not influence the response to omalizumab treatment.

[Biologic therapy in patients with severe NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease and previous aspirin desensitization : Results of a multicentric study]. / Biologikatherapie bei schwer erkrankten Patienten mit "NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease" und stattgehabter ASS­Desaktivierung : Ergebnisse einer multizentrischen Studie.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a type­2 inflammatory disease of the upper airways, with severe impairment of quality of life. Persons affected by NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD) usually present with highly dynamic recurrence of polyps and disease despite prior treatment with sinus surgeries, oral corticosteroids, and aspirin desensitization (ATAD). Biologic therapy has fundamentally changed the choice of therapeutic concept; however, limited data exist on subgroups such as NERD patients. The aim of the current article is to report on a multicenter retrospective study on add-on therapy with dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab in patients with NERD. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients (NERD+, status after ATAD) in three reference centers in Germany (Munich, Mainz, Berlin). Subjective and objective parameters were collected at 4, 8, and 12 months after biologic therapy initiation in accordance with current EPOS/EUFOREA (European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps/European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases) guidelines. Biologic agents were chosen depending on availability and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Treatment was commenced in 122 patients meeting the criteria for CRSwNP and NERD. The endoscopic polyp score, SNOT-22 questionnaire score, visual analogue scoring of total symptoms/severity of disease, and sense of smell (psychophysical testing with Sniffin'Sticks/Brief Smell Identification Test, B­SIT; Sensonics, Inc., Haddon Heights, NJ, USA) improved significantly after 4 and 12 months of add-on therapy (p < 0.0001). All three biologic agents significantly improved one or more disease parameter. Adverse events were not life threatening but led to change of biologic agent in 4 cases. Patients rated biologic therapy significantly better than ATAD, with improved long-term disease control. CONCLUSION: Add-on biologic therapy is effective, safe, and widely accepted among CRSwNP + NERD patients. Future studies might allow for personalized algorithms with sequential surgery, ATAD, and/or biologic therapy.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies.

BACKGROUND: Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy. METHODS: In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension. RESULTS: Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).

Bioequivalence Between a New Omalizumab Prefilled Syringe With an Autoinjector or with a Needle Safety Device Compared with the Current Prefilled Syringe: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Healthy Volunteers.

Omalizumab is an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody currently approved for the treatment of asthma, nasal polyps/chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and chronic spontaneous urticaria. Omalizumab is available as an injection in a prefilled syringe (PFS) with a needle safety device (NSD). New product configurations were developed to reduce the number of injections per dose administration, improve patient convenience and treatment compliance. The objective of this randomized open-label 12-week study was to demonstrate pharmacokinetic bioequivalence between (1) new PFS with autoinjector (PFS-AI), (2) new PFS-NSD configuration, and (3) current PFS-NSD configuration. Each new configuration was considered bioequivalent to the current configuration if the confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean ratios (GMR) were contained in the 0.80-1.25 range for maximum concentration (Cmax), area under the concentration-time curve until the last quantifiable measurement (AUClast), and AUC extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf). Safety was assessed throughout the study. In total, 193 healthy volunteers were randomized at 1:1:1 ratio to omalizumab 1×300 mg/2 mL via new PFS-AI (n = 66), omalizumab 1×300 mg/2 mL via new PFS-NSD (n = 64), or omalizumab 2×150 mg/1 mL via current PFS-NSD (n = 63). Comparing new PFS-AI versus current PFS-NSD, the GMRs were: Cmax, 1.085; AUClast, 1.093; AUCinf, 1.100. Comparing new PFS-NSD versus current PFS-NSD, the GMRs were: Cmax, 1.006; AUClast, 1.016; AUCinf, 1.027. The 95% CIs for all GMR parameters were contained within the 0.80-1.25 range. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of omalizumab. Single-dose omalizumab administered as the new PFS-AI or new PFS-NSD was bioequivalent to the current PFS-NSD.

Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of YH35324, a novel Long-Acting High-Affinity IgETrap-Fc protein in subjects with Atopy: Results from the First-in-Human study.

BACKGROUND: YH35324, a long-acting IgETrap-Fc fusion protein, is a novel therapeutic agent for immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated allergic diseases. This randomized, double-blind, placebo/active-controlled, single ascending dose Phase 1 study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of YH35324 in subjects with atopy. METHODS: Eligible subjects were healthy subjects or atopic adults with mild allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, or urticaria, and a serum total IgE level of 30-700 IU/mL (Part A) or > 700 IU/mL (Part B). In Part A, 35 subjects in 5 cohorts received YH35324 (0.3, 1, 3, 6, and 9 mg/kg), 8 received omalizumab (300 mg), and 9 received placebo. In Part B, 8 subjects received YH35324 and 8 received omalizumab. RESULTS: Twenty subjects (38.5 %) in Part A (YH35324: 37.1 %, omalizumab: 50.0 %, placebo: 33.3 %) and 10 subjects (62.5 %) in Part B (YH35324: 100 %; omalizumab: 25.0 %) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). TEAEs were mostly grade 1/2; no serious AEs, AE-related treatment discontinuation, or anaphylaxis were reported. YH35324 exhibited dose-proportional increase in Cmax and AUClast over the dose range of 0.3-9 mg/kg. YH35324 rapidly suppressed serum-free IgE levels to a significant extent (< 25 and < 82.8 ng/mL, both P < 0.05) and with longer duration than omalizumab. CONCLUSION: This study showed that YH35324 has a favorable safety profile and is effective in reducing serum-free IgE levels in subjects with atopic conditions.