Tezepelumab in patients with allergic and eosinophilic asthma.

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease commonly driven by allergic and/or eosinophilic inflammation, both of which may be present in severe disease. Most approved biologics for severe asthma are indicated for specific phenotypes and target individual downstream type 2 components of the inflammatory cascade. Tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody (immunoglobulin G2λ), binds specifically to thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), an epithelial cytokine that initiates and sustains allergic and eosinophilic inflammation in asthma. By blocking TSLP, tezepelumab has demonstrated efficacy across known asthma phenotypes and acts upstream of all current clinically used biomarkers. In a pooled analysis of the phase 2b PATHWAY (NCT02054130) and phase 3 NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) studies, compared with placebo, tezepelumab reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate over 52 weeks by 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53, 70) in patients with perennial aeroallergen sensitization (allergic asthma); by 71% (95% CI: 62, 78) in patients with a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL; and by 71% (95% CI: 59, 79) in patients with allergic asthma and a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL. This review examines the efficacy and mode of action of tezepelumab in patients with allergic asthma, eosinophilic asthma and coexisting allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes.

Remission in asthma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current concepts of remission in asthma. RECENT FINDINGS: Until 2023, asthma guidelines have been promoting the concept of disease control, recommending the step-wise addition of drugs until the best possible disease control is achieved. With the advent of highly effective, anti-inflammatory disease-modifying antiasthmatic drugs (DMAADs), treatment goals of asthma have changed. Several national guidelines have now announced remission as a general treatment goal in asthma. Currently, all guidelines agree that asthma remission is defined by the presence of at least three characteristics over a period of at least one 1 year: absence of exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use for the treatment of asthma and minimal asthma-related symptoms. In the future, a generally accepted, evidence-based and easy-to-use definition of remission will be needed for daily clinical practice. It is clear, however, that precise phenotyping (including measurement of biomarkers) is an essential prerequisite to achieve clinical remission in each individual patient. SUMMARY: Remission has been included as the treatment goal in asthma in several national guidelines, reflecting the paradigm shift in asthma, from short-term symptom control to long-term symptom prevention. An international consensus on the criteria for asthma remission is expected in the near future.

Real-World Characteristics of Patients with Severe Asthma prior to Starting Dupilumab: The ProVENT Study.

INTRODUCTION: Dupilumab is approved for the treatment of severe type 2 (T2) asthma; however, the characteristics of patients receiving dupilumab in routine clinical practice are incompletely understood. This study describes the characteristics of patients with severe asthma before dupilumab treatment in a real-world setting. METHODS: This interim analysis of an ongoing real-life study of dupilumab assessed baseline characteristics of the first patient cohort enrolled in the ProVENT study. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (59% females) were analyzed (17% received another biologic before dupilumab treatment and 15% were on maintenance oral corticosteroid treatment). Adult-onset asthma (>18 years) and an allergic phenotype were documented in 58% and 48% of patients, respectively. Median (interquartile range) age was 54 (40-61) years; the median number of exacerbations in the last 24 months was 1 (0-3); median fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) value was 38 (23-64) ppb; and median blood eosinophils (bEOS) count was 184 (8-505) cells/µL. According to the United Kingdom Severe Asthma Registry classification, 53% of patients had T2 intermediate asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL or FeNO ≥25 ppb), 17% had T2 high asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL and FeNO ≥25 ppb), and 4% had T2 low asthma (bEOS <150 cells/µL and FeNO <25 ppb). At least one GINA criterion for T2 airway inflammation was documented in 70% of patients. T2 comorbidities were observed in 64% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that patients eligible for dupilumab treatment display various clinical and biochemical characteristics rather than one clear-cut phenotype.

Bronchodilator Response in Post-COVID-19 Patients Undergoing Pulmonary Rehabilitation.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infections can result in a broad spectrum of symptoms from mild to life-threatening. Long-term consequences on lung function are not well understood yet. METHODS: In our study, we have examined 134 post-COVID patients (aged 54.83 ± 14.4 years) with dyspnea on exertion as a leading symptom 6 weeks to 24 months after a SARS-CoV-2 infection for bronchodilator responsiveness during their stay in our pulmonary rehabilitation clinic. RESULTS: Prior to bronchial dilation, 6 out of 134 patients (4.47%) presented an FEV1/FVC ratio below lower limit of normal (Z-score = -1.645) indicative of an obstructive airway disease. Following inhalation of a ß2-adrenergic agonist we measured a mean FEV1 increase of 181.5 mL in our cohort, which was significantly elevated compared to a historical control group (ΔFEV1 = 118 mL). 28.7% of the patients showed an increase greater than 200 mL and 12% displayed a significant bronchodilation response (>200 mL ΔFEV1 and >12% FEV1 increase). Interestingly, no significant difference in bronchial dilation effect was observed when comparing patients hospitalized and those non-hospitalized during the course of their SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSION: Our data provide evidence for increased prevalence of obstructive ventilatory defects and increased bronchodilator responsiveness in patients with persisting symptoms after COVID-19. Depending on the extent of this complication, post-COVID patients may benefit from an adapted ß2-inhalation therapy including subsequent reevaluation.

[Update on asthma 2024 - what the ENT specialist needs to know]. / Aktuelles zum Asthma 2024 ­ was der HNO-Arzt wissen muss.

The lifetime prevalence of 8.6% of asthma in Germany reflects the high medical and socioeconomic impact of the disease. Asthma treatment goals have changed during the last decades: from symptom control to symptom prevention, with highly effective, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs (DMAADs) aiming at asthma remission. In order to achieve this goal, phenotyping of patients (including an evaluation of allergies and type 2 biomarkers) is crucial for personalized treatment. The identification and effective treatment of concomitant diseases, such as allergic rhinitis or chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), plays a major role for successful treatment. This underlines the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration of otolaryngologists and respiratory physicians in the management of patients with asthma. This CME article informs the reader about current guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, focusing on clinically relevant recommendations for ENT physicians.

Validation of the German version of the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ).

BACKGROUND: The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ), a 10-item, equally weighted, yes/no tool assessing symptom impairment and risk of exacerbations in patients with asthma aged ≥12 years, was developed and validated in a US patient population to evaluate varying levels of asthma control. This study aimed to validate the German language version of the AIRQ in patients aged ≥12 years with different levels of asthma control. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational, multi-centre study comprising a single visit was conducted in multiple specialised asthma centres and general practices in Germany. A total of 300 patients completed the following measures: 1) Patient Sociodemographic and Clinical Questionnaire, 2) AIRQ, 3) Asthma Control Test (ACT), and 4) Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6). Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the AIRQ score cut points with the greatest predictive validity in discriminating between different control levels relative to a standard of ACT plus prior-year exacerbations or ACQ-6 plus prior-year exacerbations. RESULTS: The German version of the AIRQ demonstrated a robust capability to correctly identify well-controlled versus not well- or very poorly controlled (AUC values of 0.90 or higher) and well- or not well-controlled versus very poorly controlled asthma (AUC values of 0.89 or higher). CONCLUSIONS: The German version of the AIRQ is a suitable tool to identify adults with varying levels of asthma control, which in turn can help to accurately identify patients with uncontrolled asthma in clinical practice.

Response to Various Biologics in Patients with Both Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Patients can have features of both chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. However, there is still no consensus how to precisely define this patient population. In addition, there are little data on the effectiveness of biologics in these patients. METHOD: Presence of COPD was defined by a smoking history of ≥10 pack years (PY), a postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio < lower limit of normal (LLN) and FEV1 < 80% predicted, a carbon monoxide diffusion capacity (DLCO) < LLN, and dyspnoea on exertion as a leading symptom. Presence of asthma was defined by high type 2 biomarkers (blood eosinophils ≥300 cells/µL and/or FeNO ≥50 ppb), typical clinical features of asthma (including nocturnal respiratory symptoms), and a documented history of a clinical benefit from inhaled and/or oral glucocorticoid treatment. We analysed data from 20 patients fulfilling the criteria for both COPD and asthma who were newly treated with a biologic due to recurrent exacerbations despite high-dose inhaled triple therapy. RESULTS: Median values before treatment with a biologic were as follows: 40 PY, FEV1 42% predicted, DLCO 45% predicted, 475 eosinophils/µL blood, FeNO 48 ppb. Median duration of biologic treatment (mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, omalizumab, or tezepelumab) was 12 months. There were significant improvements in exacerbations (most prominent effect), asthma control, and lung function during biologic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Various types of biologics approved for severe asthma treatment can be effective in patients with both COPD and asthma. We propose an easy-to-use definition of these patients for routine clinical practice.

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.] / S2k-Leitlinie zur fachärztlichen Diagnostik und Therapie von Asthma 2023.

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

IgE is associated with exacerbations and lung function decline in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Both allergen-specific IgE and total IgE in serum play a major role in asthma. However, the role of IgE in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is poorly understood. It was the aim of this study to systematically analyze the relationship between serum IgE levels and disease characteristics in large COPD cohorts. METHODS: COSYCONET is a comprehensively characterized cohort of patients with COPD: total IgE and IgE specific to common aeroallergens were measured in serum of 2280 patients, and related to clinical characteristics of the patients. WISDOM is another large COPD population (2477 patients): this database contains the information whether total IgE in serum was elevated (≥ 100 IU/l) or normal in patients with COPD. RESULTS: Both in COSYCONET and WISDOM, total IgE was elevated (≥ 100 IU/l) in > 30% of the patients, higher in men than in women, and higher in currently than in not currently smoking men. In COSYCONET, total IgE was elevated in patients with a history of asthma and/or allergies. Men with at least one exacerbation in the last 12 months (50.6% of all men in COSYCONET) had higher median total IgE (71.3 IU/l) than men without exacerbations (48.3 IU/l): this difference was also observed in the subgroups of not currently smoking men and of men without a history of asthma. Surprisingly, a history of exacerbations did not impact on total IgE in women with COPD. Patients in the highest tertiles of total IgE (> 91.5 IU/ml, adjusted OR: 1.62, 95% CI 1.12-2.34) or allergen-specific IgE (> 0.19 IU/ml, adjusted OR: 2.15, 95% CI 1.32-3.51) were at risk of lung function decline (adjusted by: age, gender, body mass index, initial lung function, smoking status, history of asthma, history of allergy). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that IgE may play a role in specific COPD subgroups. Clinical trials using antibodies targeting the IgE pathway (such as omalizumab), especially in men with recurrent exacerbations and elevated serum IgE, could elucidate potential therapeutic implications of our observations.

Risk Assessment for Patients with Chronic Respiratory Conditions in the Context of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Statement of the German Respiratory Society with the Support of the German Association of Chest Physicians.

Assessing the risk for specific patient groups to suffer from severe courses of COVID-19 is of major importance in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This review focusses on the risk for specific patient groups with chronic respiratory conditions, such as patients with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis (CF), sarcoidosis, interstitial lung diseases, lung cancer, sleep apnea, tuberculosis, neuromuscular diseases, a history of pulmonary embolism, and patients with lung transplants. Evidence and recommendations are detailed in exemplary cases. While some patient groups with chronic respiratory conditions have an increased risk for severe courses of COVID-19, an increasing number of studies confirm that asthma is not a risk factor for severe COVID-19. However, other risk factors such as higher age, obesity, male gender, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney or liver disease, cerebrovascular and neurological disease, and various immunodeficiencies or treatments with immunosuppressants need to be taken into account when assessing the risk for severe COVID-19 in patients with chronic respiratory diseases.

Immune Modulation in Asthma: Current Concepts and Future Strategies.

Asthma treatment concepts have profoundly changed over the last 20 years, from standard therapeutic regimens for all patients with asthma towards individually tailored interventions targeting treatable traits ("precision medicine"). A precise and highly effective immune modulation with minimal adverse effects plays a central role in this new concept. Recently, there have been major advances in the treatment of asthma with immune-modulatory compounds. One example is the approval of several highly potent biologics for the treatment of severe asthma. New immune-modulatory strategies are expected to enter clinical practice in the future; these innovations will be especially important for patients with treatment-resistant asthma.

Impact of an increase in the inhaled corticosteroid dose on blood eosinophils in asthma.

Here, we report that increasing treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with not well-controlled asthma from a medium to a high dose results in a profound reduction of blood eosinophils (median fall in blood eosinophil concentrations from 560 to 320 cells/µL). Therefore, 'normal values' of blood eosinophils in patients with asthma need to be considered in view of the individual ICS doses of the patients. In addition, increases in the dose of ICS may result in blood eosinophil concentrations which would formally preclude treatment with biologics targeting the interleukin-5 pathway.

Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes with Budesonide plus Formoterol Spiromax for Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Real-World, Observational Trial.

BACKGROUND: The fixed-dose combination of budesonide/formoterol (B/F) has been available in the Spiromax® dry powder inhaler since 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess patient satisfaction, inhaler use errors, and disease control in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with B/F Spiromax. METHODS: This non-interventional, prospective, 12-week study enrolled consecutive asthma or COPD patients who had recently begun treatment with B/F Spiromax or were switched from another inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist combination to B/F Spiromax in routine clinical practice. Patients recruited from 243 specialist respiratory clinics or general practices in Germany were assessed for patient satisfaction (Satisfaction with Inhalers and Preference questionnaire), inhaler application errors (modified Easy Low Instruction over Time checklist), disease control, and safety. RESULTS: The population included 3,943 patients: asthma n = 2,707 (68.7%); COPD n = 1,236 (31.3%). At baseline, 60.1% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their previous inhaler, and this increased to 88.8% at week 12 of B/F Spiromax use. Overall, 62.1% of pre-treated patients preferred B/F Spiromax to their old inhaler. The frequency of any handling error observed with B/F Spiromax at week 12 was lower than at baseline (11.9 vs. 25.5% of patients, respectively). After 12 weeks, 77.4% were assessed as having improved (minimally, much, or very much) overall health status versus baseline. Guideline-defined disease severity (as rated by physicians) and patient-reported symptom severity improved during the study in both asthma and COPD patients. B/F Spiromax was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: B/F Spiromax was associated with high patient satisfaction, low device handling error rate, and improvements in clinical outcomes in real-world clinical practice.

Benralizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody, as add-on treatment for patients with severe, uncontrolled, eosinophilic asthma (CALIMA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab is a humanised, afucosylated, anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody that induces direct, rapid, and nearly complete depletion of eosinophils. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of benralizumab as add-on therapy for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma and elevated blood eosinophil counts. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (CALIMA) undertaken at 303 sites in 11 countries, we enrolled patients aged 12-75 years with severe asthma uncontrolled by medium-dosage to high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß2-agonists (ICS plus LABA) and a history of two or more exacerbations in the previous year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 56 weeks of benralizumab 30 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W; first three doses 4 weeks apart), or placebo (all subcutaneous injection). Patients were stratified (2:1) by baseline blood eosinophil counts 300 cells per µL or greater and less than 300 cells per µL, respectively. Patients and study centre staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was annual exacerbation rate ratio versus placebo for patients receiving high-dosage ICS plus LABA with baseline blood eosinophils 300 cells per µL or greater (intention-to-treat analysis). Key secondary endpoints were pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and total asthma symptom score. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01914757. FINDINGS: Between Aug 21, 2013, and March 16, 2015, 2505 patients were enrolled, of whom 1306 patients were randomised; 425 patients were randomly assigned to and received benralizumab 30 mg Q4W, 441 to benralizumab 30 mg Q8W, and 440 to placebo. 728 patients were included in the primary analysis population. Benralizumab resulted in significantly lower annual exacerbation rates with the Q4W regimen (rate 0·60 [95% CI 0·48-0·74], rate ratio 0·64 [95% CI 0·49-0·85], p=0·0018, n=241) and Q8W regimen (rate 0·66 [95% CI 0·54-0·82], rate ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·54-0·95], p=0·0188, n=239) compared with placebo (rate 0·93 [95% CI 0·77-1·12], n=248). Benralizumab also significantly improved pre-bronchodilator FEV1 (Q4W and Q8W) and total asthma symptom score (Q8W only) in these patients. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis (90 [21%] in the Q4W group, 79 [18%] in the Q8W group, and 92 [21%] in the placebo group) and worsening asthma (61 [14%] in the Q4W group, 47 [11%] in the Q8W group, and 68 [15%] in the group). INTERPRETATION: Benralizumab significantly reduced annual exacerbation rates and was generally well tolerated for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with blood eosinophils 300 cells per µL or greater. Our data further refine the patient population likely to receive the greatest benefit from benralizumab treatment. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Kyowa Hakko Kirin.

Addressing unmet needs in understanding asthma mechanisms: From the European Asthma Research and Innovation Partnership (EARIP) Work Package (WP)2 collaborators.

Asthma is a heterogeneous, complex disease with clinical phenotypes that incorporate persistent symptoms and acute exacerbations. It affects many millions of Europeans throughout their education and working lives and puts a heavy cost on European productivity. There is a wide spectrum of disease severity and control. Therapeutic advances have been slow despite greater understanding of basic mechanisms and the lack of satisfactory preventative and disease modifying management for asthma constitutes a significant unmet clinical need. Preventing, treating and ultimately curing asthma requires co-ordinated research and innovation across Europe. The European Asthma Research and Innovation Partnership (EARIP) is an FP7-funded programme which has taken a co-ordinated and integrated approach to analysing the future of asthma research and development. This report aims to identify the mechanistic areas in which investment is required to bring about significant improvements in asthma outcomes.