-
Dermatology and Therapy Nov 2023Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a debilitating inflammatory disorder of the skin, characterized by a fluctuating natural history, a complex mechanism of action,... (Review)
Review
Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a debilitating inflammatory disorder of the skin, characterized by a fluctuating natural history, a complex mechanism of action, and a significant burden on patients, including effect on quality of life, development of psychosocial disorders, and a range of comorbidities. Recent international guidelines recommend a therapeutic approach of first-line treatment with second generation H1-antihistamines and second-line treatment with the biologic omalizumab. Here, the salient aspects of CSU and current status of data for omalizumab for patients with CSU are reviewed, with a focus on mechanism of action, efficacy and real-world effectiveness (including patient outcomes, response, relapse, and remission), and safety (including consideration of the risk of anaphylaxis). The review also considers recent data on COVID-19, CSU, and omalizumab and presents our perspective on future needs. Overall, the data suggest that omalizumab is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with CSU that provides benefits for a wide range of patients.
PubMed: 37776480
DOI: 10.1007/s13555-023-01040-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021This living systematic review is one of several Cochrane Reviews evaluating the medical management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic rhinosinusitis is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This living systematic review is one of several Cochrane Reviews evaluating the medical management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic rhinosinusitis is common. It is characterised by inflammation of the nasal and sinus linings, nasal blockage, rhinorrhoea, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. It occurs with or without nasal polyps. 'Biologics' are medicinal products produced by a biological process. Monoclonal antibodies are one type, already evaluated in other inflammatory conditions (e.g. asthma and atopic dermatitis).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL (2020, Issue 9); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 28 September 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least three months follow-up comparing biologics (monoclonal antibodies) against placebo/no treatment in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), disease severity and serious adverse events (SAEs). The secondary outcomes were avoidance of surgery, extent of disease (measured by endoscopic or computerised tomography (CT) score), generic HRQL and adverse effects (nasopharyngitis, including sore throat). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies. Of 1262 adult participants, 1260 had severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps; 43% to 100% of participants also had asthma. Three biologics, with different targets, were evaluated: dupilumab, mepolizumab and omalizumab. All of the studies were sponsored or supported by industry. For this update (2021) we have included two new studies, including 265 participants, which reported data relating to omalizumab. Anti-IL-4Rα mAb (dupilumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Three studies (784 participants) evaluated dupilumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22 (a 22-item questionnaire, with a score range of 0 to 110; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) 8.9 points). At 24 weeks, dupilumab results in a large reduction (improvement) in the SNOT-22 score (mean difference (MD) -19.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) -22.54 to -16.69; 3 studies; 784 participants; high certainty). At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab probably results in a large reduction in disease severity, as measured by a 0- to 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) (MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.47 to -2.53; 3 studies; 784 participants; moderate certainty). This is a global symptom score, including all aspects of chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab may result in a reduction in serious adverse events compared to placebo (5.9% versus 12.5%, risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.76; 3 studies, 782 participants; low certainty). Anti-IL-5 mAb (mepolizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Two studies (137 participants) evaluated mepolizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 25 weeks, the SNOT-22 score may be reduced (improved) in participants receiving mepolizumab (MD -13.26 points, 95% CI -22.08 to -4.44; 1 study; 105 participants; low certainty; MCID 8.9). It is very uncertain whether there is a difference in disease severity at 25 weeks: on a 0- to 10-point VAS, disease severity was -2.03 lower in those receiving mepolizumab (95% CI -3.65 to -0.41; 1 study; 72 participants; very low certainty). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events at between 25 and 40 weeks (1.4% versus 0%; RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 35.46; 2 studies; 135 participants, very low certainty). Anti-IgE mAb (omalizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Five studies (329 participants) evaluated omalizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 24 weeks omalizumab probably results in a large reduction in SNOT-22 score (MD -15.62, 95% CI -19.79 to -11.45; 2 studies; 265 participants; moderate certainty; MCID 8.9). We did not identify any evidence for overall disease severity. It is very uncertain whether omalizumab affects the number of serious adverse events, with follow-up between 20 and 26 weeks (0.8% versus 2.5%, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.00; 5 studies; 329 participants; very low certainty).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Almost all of the participants in the included studies had nasal polyps (99.8%) and all were using topical nasal steroids for their chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. In these patients, dupilumab improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It probably also results in a reduction in disease severity, and may result in a reduction in the number of serious adverse events. Mepolizumab may improve disease-specific HRQL. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in disease severity or the number of serious adverse events. Omalizumab probably improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events. There was no evidence regarding the effect of omalizumab on disease severity (using global scores that address all symptoms of chronic rhinosinusitis).
Topics: Adult; Anti-Allergic Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Bias; Biological Products; Chronic Disease; Humans; Nasal Obstruction; Nasal Polyps; Omalizumab; Placebos; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33710614
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013513.pub3 -
Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) Aug 2023Type 2 (T2) innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) contribute to airway inflammation and disease in asthma. We hypothesize that ILC2s isolated from people with severe allergic...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Type 2 (T2) innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) contribute to airway inflammation and disease in asthma. We hypothesize that ILC2s isolated from people with severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma would exhibit an enhanced T2 inflammatory activity that would be altered following treatment with mepolizumab and omalizumab. We compare peripheral blood (PB) isolated ILC2's proliferative capacity, IL-5 and IL-13 secretion and phenotype between healthy without asthma (HC), non-asthma allergic (NAA), mild asthma (MA) and severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma (SA) subjects. We then determined the impact of 6 months treatment with either mepolizumab or omalizumab on ILC2s physiology of SA subjects.
METHODS
ILC2s were sorted and cultured in the presence of IL-2, IL-25, IL-33 and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) for 14 days. ILC2s proliferation, phenotypes and functions were assessed using flowcytometry. The ILC2s response was then reassessed following clinically successful treatment of SA subjects with mepolizumab and omalizumab.
RESULTS
SA ILC2s demonstrated increased proliferative capacity, TSLP receptor (TSLPR), GATA3 and NFATc1 protein expressions and increased IL-5 and IL-13 release. ILC2s were also capable of releasing IL-6 in response to stimulation. Mepolizumab treatment reduced ILC2s proliferative capacity and expression of TSLPR, GATA3 and NFATc1. Both mepolizumab and omalizumab were associated with reduced ILC2s release of IL-5 and IL-13, only mepolizumab reduced IL-6.
CONCLUSION
ILC2s from severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma demonstrated an active phenotype typified by increased proliferation, TSLPR, GATA3 and NFATc1 expression and increased IL-5, IL-13 and IL-6 release. Mepolizumab reduced markers of ILC2s activation.
Topics: Humans; Immunity, Innate; Interleukin-13; Biological Products; Omalizumab; Interleukin-5; Interleukin-6; Lymphocytes; Asthma; Cytokines; Pulmonary Eosinophilia; Cell Proliferation
PubMed: 37114915
DOI: 10.1111/resp.14506 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Mar 2023An unmet clinical need exists in the management of treatment-refractory allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA). Omalizumab has shown promising effects in case... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
An unmet clinical need exists in the management of treatment-refractory allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA). Omalizumab has shown promising effects in case series and cohort studies; however, evidence to support its routine clinical use is lacking.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of omalizumab in patients with ABPA.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search across standard databases using specific key words until May 13, 2021. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness (exacerbations, oral corticosteroid [OCS] use, lung function, and patient-reported asthma control) and safety of pre- and post-omalizumab treatment. Subgroup analyses were performed for treatment duration and underlying disease.
RESULTS
In total, 49 studies (n = 267) were included in the qualitative synthesis and 14 case series (n = 186) in the quantitative meta-analysis. Omalizumab treatment significantly reduced the annualized exacerbation rate compared with pretreatment (mean difference, -2.09 [95% CI, -3.07 to -1.11]; P < .01). There was a reduction in OCS use (risk difference, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.84]; P < .01), an increase in termination of OCS use (risk difference, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.24-0.82]; P < .01), and a reduction in OCS dose (milligrams per day) (mean difference, -14.62 [95% CI, -19.86 to -9.39]; P < .01) in ABPA patients receiving omalizumab. Omalizumab improved FEV % predicted by 11.9% (95% CI, 8.2-15.6; P < .01) and asthma control, and was well-tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS
Omalizumab treatment reduced exacerbations and OCS use, improved lung function and asthma control in patients with ABPA, and was well-tolerated. The results highlight the potential role of omalizumab in the treatment of ABPA.
Topics: Humans; Omalizumab; Aspergillosis, Allergic Bronchopulmonary; Cystic Fibrosis; Asthma; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 36581073
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.12.012 -
The clinical benefit of mepolizumab replacing omalizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma.Allergy Sep 2019Mepolizumab and omalizumab are treatments for distinct but overlapping severe asthma phenotypes. (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial
BACKGROUND
Mepolizumab and omalizumab are treatments for distinct but overlapping severe asthma phenotypes.
OBJECTIVE
To assess if patients eligible for both biologics but not optimally controlled with omalizumab experience improved asthma control when switched directly to mepolizumab.
METHODS
OSMO was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, 32-week trial in patients with ≥2 asthma exacerbations in the year prior to enrollment, despite receiving high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and other controller(s), plus omalizumab (≥4 months). At baseline, patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL (or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year) and an Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score ≥1.5 discontinued omalizumab and immediately commenced mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks. Endpoints included change from baseline in ACQ-5 score (primary), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and the proportions of ACQ-5 and SGRQ responders, all at Week 32, and the annualized exacerbation rate over the study period.
RESULTS
At Week 32 (intent-to-treat population [n = 145]), the least squares (LS) mean changes (standard error [SE]) in ACQ-5 and SGRQ total scores were -1.45 (0.107) and -19.0 (1.64) points; with 77% and 79% of patients achieving the minimum clinically important differences (ACQ-5: ≥0.5 points; SGRQ: ≥4 points), respectively. The annualized rate of clinically significant exacerbations was 1.18 events/year, a 64% reduction from 3.26 events/year during the previous year. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were consistent with previous trials.
CONCLUSION
After directly switching from omalizumab to mepolizumab, patients with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma experienced clinically significant improvements in asthma control, health status, and exacerbation rate, with no tolerability issues reported.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Asthma; Child; Drug Substitution; Eosinophils; Female; Humans; Leukocyte Count; Male; Middle Aged; Omalizumab; Quality of Life; Severity of Illness Index; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 31049972
DOI: 10.1111/all.13850 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Apr 2022Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is an inflammatory condition of the upper airways. Optimal management is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies and aspirin desensitization for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is an inflammatory condition of the upper airways. Optimal management is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
We compared the effects of mAbs and aspirin desensitization (ASA-D) for treatment of CRSwNP.
METHODS
We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, US Food and Drug Administration, and the European Medicines Agency databases from inception to August 4, 2021, for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of mAbs and ASA-D for CRSwNP. We conducted network meta-analysis of sinusitis symptoms, heath-related quality of life, rescue oral corticosteroids and surgery, endoscopic and radiologic scores, and adverse events. We used the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess certainty of evidence. PROSPERO CRD42020177334.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials evaluating 8 treatments (n = 3461) were included in the network meta-analysis. Compared to placebo, moderate to high certainty evidence showed that health-related quality of life (SNOT-22) improved with dupilumab (mean difference [MD] -19.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) -22.50, -17.32]), omalizumab (MD -16.09 [95% CI -19.88, -12.30]), mepolizumab (MD -12.89 [95% CI -16.58, -9.19], ASA-D (MD -10.61 [95% CI -14.51, -6.71]), and benralizumab (MD -7.68 [95% CI -12.09, -3.27]). The risk of rescue nasal polyp surgery likely decreased with dupilumab (risk difference [RD] -16.35% [95% CI -18.13, -13.48]), omalizumab (RD -7.40% [95% CI -11.04, -2.43]), mepolizumab (RD -12.33% [95% CI -15.56, -7.22]), and ASA-D (RD -16.00% [95% CI -19.79, 0.21]; all moderate certainty). Comparisons among agents show with moderate to high certainty that dupilumab ranks among the most beneficial for 7 of 7 outcomes, omalizumab for 2 of 7, mepolizumab for 1 of 7, and ASA-D for 1 of 7.
CONCLUSIONS
Multiple biologics and ASA-D credibly improve patient-important outcomes, with clinically important differences in effects among agents; dupilumab uniquely ranks among the most beneficial for all outcomes studied.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Aspirin; Chronic Disease; Humans; Nasal Polyps; Network Meta-Analysis; Omalizumab; Quality of Life; Sinusitis
PubMed: 34543652
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2021.09.009 -
JAMA Pediatrics Jan 2020Systemic treatments for severe childhood atopic dermatitis have limited evidence and/or are unlicensed. Despite the efficacy of anti-IgE medication (omalizumab) in the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Systemic treatments for severe childhood atopic dermatitis have limited evidence and/or are unlicensed. Despite the efficacy of anti-IgE medication (omalizumab) in the treatment of atopy, no large randomized studies in childhood atopic dermatitis have been published.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effectiveness of omalizumab in treating severe atopic dermatitis in children.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The Atopic Dermatitis Anti-IgE Pediatric Trial (ADAPT) was a 24-week single-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with a 24-week follow-up. Conducted from November 20, 2014, to August 31, 2017, at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London in the United Kingdom, this trial recruited participants after a screening visit. Eligible participants (n = 62) were aged 4 to 19 years and had severe eczema (with objective Scoring Atopic Dermatitis [SCORAD] index >40) that was unresponsive to optimum therapy. Statistical analysis was conducted using the intention-to-treat principle.
INTERVENTIONS
Subcutaneous omalizumab or placebo for 24 weeks. The drug manufacturer's dosing tables were used to determine the dosage based on total IgE (30-1500 IU/mL) and body weight (in kilograms) at randomization.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Objective SCORAD index after 24 weeks of treatment.
RESULTS
In total, 62 children (mean [SD] age, 10.3 [4.2] years; 32 (52%) were male) were randomized to either omalizumab (n = 30) or placebo (n = 32). Five participants withdrew from treatment (4 [13%] from the placebo group, and 1 [3%] from the omalizumab group). Follow-up attendance was 97% at week 24 and 98% at week 48. After adjustment for baseline objective SCORAD index, age, and IgE level, the mean difference in objective SCORAD index improvement between groups at week 24 was -6.9 (95% CI, -12.2 to -1.5; P = .01), significantly favoring omalizumab therapy and reflecting the results in other assessments of atopic dermatitis severity. Improved quality-of-life scores were seen in the omalizumab group, as measured by the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index/Dermatology Life Quality Index (-3.5; 95% CI, -6.4 to -0.5) and Pediatric Allergic Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire score (-0.5; 95% CI, -0.9 to -0.0). Improvements in disease severity occurred despite lower potent topical corticosteroid use in the omalizumab group compared with the placebo group (median [interquartile range (IQR)] percentage of body surface area covered, 16% [10%-46%] vs 31% [14%-55%]; median [IQR] number of days of use, 109 [34-164] days vs 161 [82-171] days).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This randomized clinical trial found that omalizumab significantly reduced atopic dermatitis severity and improved quality of life in a pediatric population with atopy and severe eczema despite highly elevated total IgE levels at baseline. The result was associated with a potent topical corticosteroid sparing effect and may suggest that omalizumab is a treatment option for difficult-to-manage severe eczema in children with atopy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02300701.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adolescent; Anti-Allergic Agents; Child; Child, Preschool; Dermatitis, Atopic; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Omalizumab; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 31764962
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.4476 -
International Forum of Allergy &... Feb 2023Comparative effectiveness research between endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and biologic therapy for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is a...
BACKGROUND
Comparative effectiveness research between endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and biologic therapy for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is a nascent field as new therapeutic modalities become clinically available.
METHODS
A prospective, multicenter cohort of CRSwNP patients, undergoing ESS between 2011 and 2019, were compared to phase-3 biologic trial data. Patients undergoing ESS received baseline nasal endoscopy quantified via Lund-Kennedy (LK) grading. Patients meeting inclusion criteria, modified from Dupilumab-LIBERTY-NP-24&52, omalizumab-POLYP-1&2, and Mepolizumab-SYNAPSE clinical trials, were included in this study. Baseline characteristics and outcome measures were compared between these cohorts at 24 weeks and 52 weeks, when possible.
RESULTS
A total of 111 CRSwNP patients met modified inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline age, sex, asthma status, aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease status, smell identification, LK-polyp score, and Lund-Mackay computed tomography (CT) scores between ESS and biologic groups. At 24 weeks, ESS demonstrated significantly greater improvements in 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) compared to one (of two) dupilumab trials (p < 0.05) and both omalizumab trials (p < 0.001). ESS associated with significantly lower nasal polyp scores (NPS) compared to dupilumab (p < 0.001) and omalizumab (p < 0.001), despite comparable improvements in smell identification (p > 0.05). At 52 weeks, ESS resulted in statistically similar improvement in SNOT-22 scores compared to dupilumab (p = 0.21), but NPS remained significantly lower in the ESS group compared to dupilumab (p < 0.001) and mepolizumab (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
At 24 weeks and 52 weeks, ESS offers comparable SNOT-22 improvements compared to dupilumab. ESS and dupilumab offer comparable improvement in smell identification at 24 weeks. Compared to omalizumab, ESS offers superior SNOT-22 improvements. ESS offers significantly greater reductions in polyp size compared to omalizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab therapies.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Polyps; Prospective Studies; Omalizumab; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Biological Products; Endoscopy; Chronic Disease; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35980852
DOI: 10.1002/alr.23059 -
Advances in Therapy Nov 2023Patients with uncontrolled, allergic severe asthma may be prescribed biologic therapies to reduce exacerbations and improve disease control. Randomized controlled trials... (Review)
Review
Patients with uncontrolled, allergic severe asthma may be prescribed biologic therapies to reduce exacerbations and improve disease control. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these therapies have differed in design, with varying results overall and by baseline blood eosinophil count (BEC). This study describes published annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) reductions from RCTs in patients with allergic severe asthma, overall and by baseline BEC category. A literature search was performed to identify published phase 3 RCT data of US Food and Drug Administration-approved biologics for severe asthma in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma and confirmed sensitization to perennial aeroallergens. Analyses focused on AAER reduction versus placebo in the overall population and/or in those with an elevated or low BEC at baseline or screening. Baseline serum total immunoglobulin E levels varied between RCT populations. In patients with allergic severe asthma across all BEC categories, data were available for tezepelumab, dupilumab, benralizumab and omalizumab only; the greatest AAER reduction was observed with tezepelumab. In patients with allergic severe asthma and BECs of ≥ 260 cells/µL or ≥ 300 cells/μL, AAER reductions were observed with all biologics (tezepelumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and omalizumab); the greatest AAER reduction was observed with tezepelumab and the smallest AAER reduction was observed with omalizumab. In patients with allergic severe asthma and BECs of < 260 cells/µL or < 300 cells/μL (regardless of historical BEC), an AAER reduction was observed with tezepelumab but not with benralizumab or omalizumab. Differential mechanisms of action may explain the differences in results observed between biologics. Among patients with allergic severe asthma, the efficacy of biologics in RCTs varied considerably overall and by BEC. Tezepelumab was the only biologic to demonstrate AAER reductions consistently across all subgroups. These differences can inform provider treatment decisions when selecting biologic treatments for patients with allergic severe asthma.
Topics: Humans; Eosinophils; Omalizumab; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Biological Products
PubMed: 37698716
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02647-2