Effectiveness of Mepolizumab in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma with/without Nasal Polyposis: A Real-Life Study.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases and affects around 334 million people worldwide. The estimated prevalence of severe asthma is 3-10% of the asthmatic population. Mepolizumab has demonstrated efficacy in reducing exacerbations, oral corticosteroid use, and improving quality of life, asthma control, and lung function in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). Our study aimed to check the response to mepolizumab in a series of severe asthma patients regarding exacerbations, oral corticosteroid use, asthma control, quality of life, and lung function and to compare the response between patients with and without nasal polyps. METHOD: This is a retrospective, multicenter study of RE-ASGRAMUR (Register of Severe Asthma of the Region of Murcia) performed in eight hospitals of the Region of Murcia (Spain) under routine clinical practice conditions. We included patients diagnosed with SEA who completed at least 1 year of treatment with mepolizumab. We analyzed clinical characteristics, drug tolerance, and effectiveness: exacerbations, ACT, miniAQLQ, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and use of oral corticosteroids. We also compared the results between patients with and without nasal polyps. RESULTS: The median of exacerbations before treatment was 3 and decreased to 0 after treatment (mean decrease of 77.4%). The median diary oral prednisone intake was 15 mg before treatment and 5 mg after treatment (mean 56% reduction). We have obtained a significant improvement in other variables: ED visits and hospitalizations, asthma control (ACT), quality of life (miniAQLQ), and lung function (FEV1). Thirty-four out of 70 patients (48.57%) fulfilled the criteria of super-responder, and 17 out of 70 (24.29%) had a complete response. More patients in the group with nasal polyps fulfilled the criteria of super-responder and complete response to mepolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Mepolizumab is a safe and effective treatment for SEA patients, improving exacerbations, oral corticosteroid intake, asthma control, quality of life, and lung function. In patients with associated nasal polyposis, there is a statistically significant higher proportion of super-responders and complete responders.

Analysis of response of severe eosinophilic asthmatic patients to benralizumab.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials and real-life studies have been published showing effectiveness of benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthmatic patients. The aim of the present study is to describe super-responders to benralizumab in a series of 79 patients who completed at least 1 year of treatment, and to compare super-responders with non super-responders. METHODS: This is a multicenter study of the Register of Severe Asthma of the Region of Murcia (RE-ASGRAMUR) Group performed in eight hospitals under the conditions of routine clinical practice. Patients with zero exacerbations and no oral corticosteroid therapy for asthma were considered super-responders. We analyzed clinical, functional, and inflammatory parameters of selected patients. RESULTS: In all, 50 of the 79 patients (63%) met the super-responder criteria. In addition, 36% of the patients (26/71) were considered as complete responders to treatment (super--responder + Asthma Control Test [ACT] ≥ 20 + forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] ≥ 80%). The super--responders were significantly older in age (P = 0.0029), had higher eosinophils count (P = 0.0423), higher proportion of nasal polyps (P = 0.036), and they had less severe disease at baseline. After 1 year of treatment, the super-responders had higher levels of ACT questionnaire (23 vs 19, P = 0.0007) and better percentage of FEV1 (83 vs 75, P = 0.0359). CONCLUSION: Almost two of the three patients treated with benralizumab were super--responders after 1 year of treatment and 36% had a complete response. Super-responders were associated with older age, higher eosinophils count, had nasal polyposis as comorbidity, and had less severe disease at baseline. This data illustrated the good real-life response of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma to the treatment with benralizumab.

[Consensus document for severe asthma in adults. 2022 update]. / Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022.

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with several clinical variants and often represents a complex disease requiring a specialized and multidisciplinary approach, as well as the use of multiple drugs. The prevalence of severe asthma varies from one country to another, and it is estimated that 50% of these patients present a poor control of their disease. For the best management of the patient, it is necessary a correct diagnosis, an adequate follow-up and undoubtedly to offer the best available treatment, including biologic treatments with monoclonal antibodies. With this objective, this consensus process was born, which began in its first version in 2018, whose goal is to offer the patient the best possible management of their disease in order to minimize their symptomatology. For this 2020 consensus update, a literature review was conducted by the authors. Subsequently, through a two-round interactive Delphi process, a broad panel of asthma experts from SEPAR and the regional pulmonology societies proposed the recommendations and conclusions contained in this document.

Effect of vitamin D supplementation on asthma control in patients with vitamin D deficiency: the ACVID randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between asthma and vitamin D deficiency has been known for some time. However, interventional studies conducted in this regard have shown conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in asthmatic patients in improving the degree of control of asthma. METHODS: Randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in adult asthmatic patients with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin-D3 <30 ng/mL. The intervention group received oral supplementation with 16 000 IU of calcifediol per week, and the control group had placebo added to their usual asthma treatment. The study period was 6 months. The primary endpoint was the degree of asthma control as determined by the asthma control test (ACT). Secondary endpoints included quality of life measured using the mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, the number of asthma attacks, oral corticosteroid cycles, the dose of inhaled corticosteroids, number of emergency visits, unscheduled consultations with the primary care physician and hospitalisations for asthma. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve patients were randomised (mean age 55 years, with 87 (78%) being women). Of the 112 patients, 106 (95%) completed the trial. Half the patients (56) were assigned to the intervention group and the other half to the control group. A statistically significant clinical improvement was observed in the intervention group (+3.09) compared with the control group (-0.57) (difference 3.66 (95% CI 0.89 to 5.43); p<0.001) as measured using ACT scores. Among the secondary endpoints, a significant improvement in the quality of life was found in the intervention group (5.34), compared with the control group (4.64) (difference 0.7 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.25); p=0.01). CONCLUSION: Among adults with asthma and vitamin D deficiency, supplementation with weekly oral calcifediol compared with placebo improved asthma control over 6 months. Further research is needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02805907.