-
Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory... 2024With the rise of targeted treatments for asthma, treatment with omalizumab is a new option. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
With the rise of targeted treatments for asthma, treatment with omalizumab is a new option.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the improvement of pulmonary function with additional omalizumab treatment in patients (⩾6 years old) with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
Observational studies of randomized controlled trials of add-on omalizumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma, published from the establishment till August 2022, were retrieved from WAN FANG DATA, PubMed, CNKI, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. Data extraction and quality evaluation were performed on the literature that met the inclusion criteria, using RevMan 5.3 to analyze the data.
RESULTS
A total of 11 randomized controlled clinical trials were included, involving a total of 3578 patients with asthma, 1856 patients in the omalizumab group, and 1722 patients in the control group. The improvement in Forced expiratory volume in 1 s as a percentage of predicted normal and Forced expiratory volume in 1 s was more pronounced in the omalizumab-treated group [MD = 3.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.89-5.94, = 0.0002; MD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.05-0.13, < 0.0001], while the improvement in Morning Peak expiratory flow rate was not statistically different between the two groups (MD = 3.64, 95% CI: -22.17-29.45, = 0.78).
CONCLUSION
Additional omalizumab treatment showed some improvement in lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO ID:CRD42022378498.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Forced Expiratory Volume; Lung; Omalizumab; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38235607
DOI: 10.1177/17534666231221771 -
Allergy May 2024Food allergy (FA) is a potentially life-threatening chronic condition that is becoming an increasing public health problem worldwide. This systematic review (SR) was... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Food allergy (FA) is a potentially life-threatening chronic condition that is becoming an increasing public health problem worldwide. This systematic review (SR) was carried out to inform the development of clinical recommendations on the treatment of IgE-mediated FA with biologics and/or IT for the update of the EAACI guidelines. A SR of randomized-controlled trials or quasi-controlled trials was carried out. Studies were identified via comprehensive search strategies in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, up to April 2022.
POPULATION
Human adults, children, and adolescents with IgE-mediated FA.
INTERVENTION
IT and/or biologics.
COMPARATOR
Placebo or standard-of-care (allergen avoidance).
OUTCOME
Efficacy (desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness (SU), remission), quality of life, and safety (systemic and local adverse reactions (AR)). The Cochrane RoB tool was used to assess the risk of bias. It was reported according to PRISMA and registered in PROSPERO CRD4202229828. After screening, 121 studies were included (111 for IT and 10 for biologics). Most studies had a high risk of bias and showed high heterogeneity in design and results. Metanalysis showed a positive effect of biologics and IT in terms of relative risk (RR) for achieving tolerance to the culprit food compared to avoidance or placebo. Omalizumab for any FA showed a RR of 2.17 [95% confidence interval: 1.22, 3.85]. For peanut allergy, oral IT (OIT) had a RR of 11.94 [1.76, 80.84] versus avoidance or placebo, sublingual IT (SLIT) had a RR of 3.00 [1.04, 8.66], and epicutaneous IT (EPIT) of 2.16 [1.56, 3.00]. OIT had a RR of 5.88 [2.27, 15.18] for cow's milk allergy, and of 3.43 [2.24, 5.27] for egg allergy. There was insufficient data on SLIT or EPIT for the treatment of egg and milk allergies. Most ARs reported were mild. For OIT the most common AR involved the gastrointestinal system and for EPIT, AR's most commonly affected the skin. There was limited data on severe or life-threatening ARs. There was limited evidence for long term efficacy and quality of life. In conclusion, biologics and IT, alone or in combination, are effective in achieving desensitization while on active treatment but more evidence is needed on long-term tolerance as current evidence is not of high quality. Adverse events while on therapy are generally mild to moderate but a long-term comprehensive safety profile is missing. There is a critical need to optimize and standardize desensitization protocols and outcome measures to facilitate our understanding of the efficacy and safety as well as to allow for comparison between interventions.
PubMed: 38747333
DOI: 10.1111/all.16129 -
Allergy Jan 2021This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for...
This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Critical and important CSU-related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Ten RCTs including 1620 subjects aged 12 to 75 years old treated with omalizumab for 16 to 40 weeks were evaluated. Omalizumab 150 mg does not result in clinically meaningful improvement (high certainty) of the urticaria activity score (UAS)7 (mean difference (MD) -5; 95%CI -7.75 to -2.25), and the itch severity score (ISS)7 (MD -2.15; 95% CI -3.2 to -1.1) does not increase (moderate certainty) quality of life (QoL) (Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI); MD -2.01; 95%CI -3.22 to -0.81) and decreases (moderate certainty) rescue medication use (MD -1.68; 95%CI -2.95 to -0.4). Omalizumab 300 mg results in clinically meaningful improvements (moderate certainty) of the UAS7 (MD -11.05; 95%CI -12.87 to -9.24), the ISS7 (MD -4.45; 95%CI -5.39 to -3.51), and QoL (high certainty) (DLQI; MD -4.03; 95% CI -5.56 to -2.5) and decreases (moderate certainty) rescue medication use (MD -2.04; 95%CI -3.19 to -0.88) and drug-related serious AEs (RR 0.77; 95%CI 0.20 to 2.91).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Allergic Agents; Biological Products; Child; Chronic Urticaria; Humans; Middle Aged; Omalizumab; Quality of Life; Urticaria; Young Adult
PubMed: 32767573
DOI: 10.1111/all.14547 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Oct 2020Symptomatic dermographism (SD), the most common form of chronic inducible urticaria, presents with transient wheals accompanied by itching in response to scratching.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic dermographism (SD), the most common form of chronic inducible urticaria, presents with transient wheals accompanied by itching in response to scratching. Little is known about available treatment options and their efficacy in SD.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the efficacy of treatment options for patients with SD.
METHODS
Using predefined search terms, we searched for relevant literature published until September 2019. The systematic review process was consistent with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis recommendations.
RESULTS
The 23 studies identified included 15 randomized controlled trials; 22 and 17 assessed treatment responses in patients with SD by provocation/threshold testing and patient/physician clinical assessment, respectively. Thirteen different treatments were investigated in a total of 430 adult patients. The most frequently studied therapy, first-generation H-antihistamines, showed variable efficacy and significant side effects. In contrast, second-generation H-antihistamines (2AH), in all studies, were effective and well tolerated. Monotherapy with an H-antihistamine (AH) was not effective, whereas adding an AH increased the efficacy of treatment with an H-antihistamine (AH). SD improved with omalizumab. All other treatments were only investigated in small, unrepeated, and/or uncontrolled studies. There are no studies on updosing of 2AH.
CONCLUSIONS
The available SD studies are heterogeneous, mostly monocentric, old, small, and unrepeated, pointing to a high need for more and better studies. We suggest that 2AH should be the first-line treatment. In uncontrolled cases, the combination of AH and AH may be tried. Even though there is no evidence of its efficacy over standard dosage, updosing of 2AH may be considered based on the extrapolation of evidence from chronic spontaneous urticaria; omalizumab should be added in recalcitrant patients.
Topics: Adult; Chronic Disease; Chronic Urticaria; Histamine Antagonists; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Omalizumab; Urticaria
PubMed: 32473421
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.05.016 -
Clinical and Experimental Allergy :... Jun 2020BACKGROUND: Mastocytosis is associated with mast cell (MC) mediator-related symptoms for which limited therapies are available. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the...
BACKGROUND: Mastocytosis is associated with mast cell (MC) mediator-related symptoms for which limited therapies are available. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of MC mediator-related symptoms in adult patients with mastocytosis. RESULTS: We identified one multi-centre retrospective cohort study (39 patients), one retrospective cohort study (13 patients), 4 case series and 10 case reports. No published controlled randomized study was identified. We included 69 patients (13 patients with cutaneous mastocytosis and 56 with systemic mastocytosis). The mean age was 48 years. Omalizumab maintenance dose was 300 mg for the majority of patients. The mean duration of treatment was 17 months. Treatment led to a tolerability of venom immunotherapy and to a complete resolution of severe reactions in all patients with post-honeybee sting anaphylaxis. Complete resolution of idiopathic anaphylaxis episodes was noted in 84% of the patients. Complete resolution of palpitations, gastrointestinal, cutaneous, neuropsychiatric, respiratory and musculoskeletal symptoms was observed at a rate of 43%, 29%, 27%, 11%, 9% and 0%, respectively. Efficacy was maintained for the entire duration of the treatment in all but four responders. Adverse events were reported for 13 patients. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Omalizumab appears to prevent some life-threatening reactions associated with mastocytosis and may be a good option to treat the associated symptoms. However, the evidence relied upon is observational, uncontrolled and from a small number of patients. A randomized controlled trial is needed to better understand the place of omalizumab in mastocytosis treatment.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Mastocytosis; Middle Aged; Omalizumab
PubMed: 32107810
DOI: 10.1111/cea.13592 -
American Journal of Otolaryngology 2022The management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is challenging due to disease recurrence and adverse effects. Both surgical and medical treatment... (Review)
Review
The management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is challenging due to disease recurrence and adverse effects. Both surgical and medical treatment modalities impact the quality of patients' lives. Monoclonal antibody treatment has recently been used successfully in CRS with limited reported adverse events. We aimed to review the literature to shed more light on the safety and adverse events associated with the biological therapy of CRSwNP. A comprehensive systematic review was conducted on the safety of different biological treatments when used for managing CRSwNP. We have included 13 studies in the present systematic review, including 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one cross-sectional study. The total sample size for the included studies was 2282 patients. Six studies investigated the safety and adverse events of dupilumab; three investigated omalizumab, three investigated mepolizumab, and only one investigated reslizumab. Some studies have reported that adverse events were common with these types of drugs. However they were not specific and self-limited. Headaches, injection site reactions, and pharyngitis were the most common adverse events found among the reported adverse events. The Dupilumab trial reported pharyngitis in 225 patients (22.4 %) followed by erythema in 9.4 %, headache in 8.1 %, epistaxis in 5.1 %, and asthma in 1.7 % of patients. Trials which used omalizumab reported headaches, nasal pharyngitis, injection-site reactions to be the most common adverse events with estimated prevalence rates of 8.1 %, 5.9 %, and 5.2 %, respectively. Mepolizumab and reslizumab studies reported that 40 % of patients were complicated by nasal polyps/congestion/pharyngitis/infections, 14 had a headache (15.5 %), two developed asthma (2.2 %), and only one patient (1.1 %) had epistaxis as an adverse event. Although the literature's current investigations indicate the safety of the biologic treatment modalities, further studies are needed as some uncertainty among the trials have been reported.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Polyps; Rhinitis; Omalizumab; Epistaxis; Sinusitis; Chronic Disease; Biological Therapy; Asthma; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Biological Products; Headache; Pharyngitis; Quality of Life
PubMed: 36057193
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2022.103615 -
Current Medical Research and Opinion Nov 2020We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to determine the epidemiology and clinical burden of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to describe...
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to determine the epidemiology and clinical burden of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to describe how the addition of biologics has affected outcomes for patients with CRSwNP.
METHODS
The SLR adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Embase, MEDLINE, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews databases were searched using OVID. Relevant studies published between 1 January 2008 and 8 February 2019, for epidemiology, and 1 January 2008 and 16 February 2019, for clinical burden, and relevant conference abstracts from 1 January 2017 to 7 March 2019, for epidemiology and 1 January 2017-16 February 2019 for clinical burden were included.
RESULTS
For the epidemiology and clinical burden SLR, 147 and 119 records, respectively, met the inclusion criteria. We found the prevalence of CRSwNP was 1-2.6% and was greater in men. Asthma, allergy, and allergic rhinitis were the most common comorbidities identified. Reported risk factors included asthma, gene polymorphisms, age, and eosinophilia. Studies indicated that dupilumab, mepolizumab, and omalizumab each improved different clinical outcomes. Non-biologics (drugs such as corticosteroids or antibiotics, surgery, or aspirin desensitization) improved clinical outcomes as well.
CONCLUSIONS
CRSwNP is fairly prevalent in the general population. Despite the significant efficacy of existing treatments, several unmet needs remain. The high burden of uncontrolled symptoms, frequent recurrence of nasal polyps after surgery, and long-term adverse effects of oral corticosteroids indicate that new therapies addressing these unmet needs should be developed. Although data on biologics from randomized controlled trials look promising, the efficacy of biologics in the real world has yet to be established. The SLR of the epidemiology and clinical burden of CRSwNP revealed key gaps in the literature. There was a paucity of prevalence data across many geographic areas, and no prevalence projections could be determined. Studies showed varying efficacy of non-biologics and no studies directly compared biologics for efficacy. Data regarding clinical efficacy of agents for eosinophilic CRSwNP or severe CRSwNP were lacking, and these patient populations would be served by more trials.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Asthma; Biological Products; Chronic Disease; Humans; Nasal Polyps; Omalizumab; Prevalence; Rhinitis; Risk Factors; Sinusitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32847417
DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2020.1815682 -
Biomedicines Sep 2021Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) represents a central pathophysiological hallmark of asthma, with airway smooth muscle (ASM) being the effector tissue implicated in the... (Review)
Review
Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) represents a central pathophysiological hallmark of asthma, with airway smooth muscle (ASM) being the effector tissue implicated in the onset of AHR. ASM also exerts pro-inflammatory and immunomodulatory actions, by secreting a wide range of cytokines and chemokines. In asthma pathogenesis, the overexpression of several type 2 inflammatory mediators including IgE, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, and TSLP has been associated with ASM hyperreactivity, all of which can be targeted by humanized monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Therefore, the aim of this review was to systematically assess evidence across the literature on mAbs for the treatment of asthma with respect to their impact on the ASM contractile tone. Omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab were found to be effective in modulating the contractility of the ASM and preventing the AHR, but no available studies concerning the impact of reslizumab on the ASM were identified from the literature search. Omalizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab can directly modulate the ASM in asthma, by specifically blocking the interaction between IgE, IL-4, and TSLP, and their receptors are located on the surface of ASM cells. Conversely, mepolizumab and benralizumab have prevalently indirect impacts against AHR by targeting eosinophils and other immunomodulatory effector cells promoting inflammatory processes. AHR has been suggested as the main treatable trait towards precision medicine in patients suffering from eosinophilic asthma, therefore, well-designed head-to-head trials are needed to compare the efficacy of those mAbs that directly target ASM contractility specifically against the AHR in severe asthma, namely omalizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab.
PubMed: 34572466
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9091281 -
Allergologia Et Immunopathologia 2019Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) affects approximately 1% of the population, affecting both children and adults. Omalizumab (Oma) is a therapeutic option for patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) affects approximately 1% of the population, affecting both children and adults. Omalizumab (Oma) is a therapeutic option for patients with refractory forms of CSU.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of Oma in the treatment of CSU.
METHODS
Systematic review (Cochrane Collaboration methodology) of randomized clinical trials comparing Oma to placebo in refractory CSU treatment. The search is based on MEDLINE; EMBASE, Central Cochrane Library, and LILACS. The outcomes evaluated were: control of the illness, adverse events, and quality of life.
RESULTS
Of the 848 identified studies 13 were selected for further review and six were included in the meta-analysis. For all outcomes, high-quality evidence has confirmed that Oma is effective in the treatment of CSU. The dosage of 300mg/month achieved better results; namely a significant reduction in pruritus, papules, and urticaria activity, as well as an increase in the number of patients with a controlled condition, improvement in the quality of life and no differences in adverse events compared to the placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
High-quality evidence demonstrates that Oma is effective and safe in the treatment of CSU refractory to therapy with H1 antihistamines.
Topics: Anti-Allergic Agents; Chronic Urticaria; Drug Therapy, Combination; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Immunoglobulin E; Immunotherapy; Omalizumab; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31607407
DOI: 10.1016/j.aller.2019.05.003 -
European Annals of Allergy and Clinical... May 2020A systematic review of the current literature on retreatment with omalizumab of patients with relapsing chronic spontaneous urticaria was performed. Published evidence... (Review)
Review
A systematic review of the current literature on retreatment with omalizumab of patients with relapsing chronic spontaneous urticaria was performed. Published evidence shows that retreatment is safe and clinically effective, and that time to complete clinical response reduces as the number of retreatments increases.
Topics: Anti-Allergic Agents; Chronic Urticaria; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Omalizumab; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32108461
DOI: 10.23822/EurAnnACI.1764-1489.136