-
The Medical Letter on Drugs and... Apr 2024
Topics: Humans; Omalizumab; Asthma; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Food Hypersensitivity
PubMed: 38576144
DOI: 10.58347/tml.2024.1699b -
Journal of Evidence-based Medicine Jun 2024
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Omalizumab; Humans; Chronic Urticaria; Anti-Allergic Agents
PubMed: 38572834
DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12604 -
Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical... Jun 2024The aim is to update the information currently available for the use of biologics in severe asthma in children, in order to facilitate their prescription as far as... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The aim is to update the information currently available for the use of biologics in severe asthma in children, in order to facilitate their prescription as far as possible.
RECENT FINDINGS
The appearance of biologics for the treatment of severe asthma has meant a revolutionary change in the therapeutic approach to this disease. Currently, five biologics have been approved for severe asthma in children and/or adolescents by the regulatory agencies: omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab and tezepelumab. But despite their positive results in terms of efficacy, there are still relevant points of debate that should induce caution when selecting the most appropriate biologic in a child with severe asthma. Indeed, safety is essential and, for several of the existing treatments, the availability of medium-term to long-term data in this regard is scarce.
SUMMARY
The use of biologics can facilitate the therapeutic paradigm shift from pleiotropic treatments to personalized medicine. However, the choice of the most appropriate biologics remains a pending issue. On the other hand, to the extent that several of the biologics have been available for a relatively short time, the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety in children is that of omalizumab.
Topics: Humans; Asthma; Child; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Biological Products; Adolescent; Omalizumab; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Precision Medicine
PubMed: 38567842
DOI: 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000987 -
Journal of Drugs in Dermatology : JDD Apr 2024Individuals with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) experience significant sleep disturbances and are at risk of anxiety and depression. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Individuals with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) experience significant sleep disturbances and are at risk of anxiety and depression.
Topics: Humans; Omalizumab; Chronic Urticaria; Anti-Allergic Agents; Chronic Disease; Urticaria; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38564395
DOI: 10.36849/JDD.7919 -
European Journal of Dermatology : EJD Feb 2024Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a relatively common dermatological disorder characterized by sudden and unpredictable onset of pruritic wheals and/or angioedema,... (Review)
Review
Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a relatively common dermatological disorder characterized by sudden and unpredictable onset of pruritic wheals and/or angioedema, for more than six weeks. It is a mast cell-mediated histaminergic disorder, considerably worsening patients' quality of life. Current treatment options include anti-histamines, omalizumab and cyclosporine, in a step-wise algorithmic approach, aimed at complete symptom control. Patients do not respond uniformly to these therapeutic options due to phenotypic and endotypic heterogeneity, and often remain uncontrolled/poorly controlled. Recent research is focused on identifying certain biomarkers to predict therapeutic response and facilitate patient-targeted personalized treatment, for maximum benefit. The current article summarizes various biomarkers explored to date, and also elaborates their role in predicting therapeutic response to anti-histamines, omalizumab and cyclosporine, in CSU patients. High disease activity, elevated CRP/ESR and elevated D-dimer are the most important predictors of non/poor-response to antihistamines. Low and very low baseline IgE, elevated CRP/ESR, ASST+, BAT/BHRA+, basopenia, eosinopenia, and elevated D-dimer are predictors of poor and good response to omalizumab and cyclosporine, respectively. Additionally, normal or slightly elevated baseline IgE and FceR1 overexpression are predictors of a faster response with omalizumab. However, none of these predictors have so far been completely validated and are not yet recommended for routine use. Thus, large-scale prospective studies are needed to confirm these predictive biomarkers and identify new ones to achieve the goal of personalized medicine for CSU.
Topics: Humans; Omalizumab; Quality of Life; Chronic Disease; Chronic Urticaria; Urticaria; Histamine Antagonists; Biomarkers; Cyclosporine; Immunoglobulin E; Anti-Allergic Agents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38557452
DOI: 10.1684/ejd.2024.4600 -
Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical... Jun 2024This review aims to explore role of emerging biologics, including ligelizumab, UB-221, dupilumab, and antialarmins, in food allergy management. With a focus on recent... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
This review aims to explore role of emerging biologics, including ligelizumab, UB-221, dupilumab, and antialarmins, in food allergy management. With a focus on recent developments, we evaluate their promise in mitigating adverse events during oral immunotherapy (OIT), reducing allergic reactions, and addressing the limitations of current therapeutic options.
RECENT FINDINGS
Antiimmunoglobulin E mAbs, exemplified by omalizumab, demonstrate efficacy in desensitization and safety improvement during multiallergen OIT. Next-generation antibodies like ligelizumab and UB-221 exhibit enhanced potency and unique mechanisms, holding promise for food allergy treatment. Dupilumab, targeting IL-4 receptor alpha, presents potential benefits in decreasing allergen-specific IgE and modifying the atopic march. Exploration of antialarmins, specifically anti-IL-33 (etokimab) and anti-TSLP (tezepelumab), reveals encouraging results, with etokimab showing early success in peanut allergy trials.
SUMMARY
Biologics hold promising potential for food allergy treatment. Tailoring therapeutic approaches based on shared decision-making becomes pivotal. While omalizumab remains a significant option, next-generation anti-IgE antibodies and agents targeting alarmins exhibit unique strengths. Dupilumab, despite limited success as monotherapy, shows promise as an adjunct for OIT. Careful consideration of treatment goals, patient preferences, and the evolving landscape of biologics will shape future clinical practice, offering allergists an expanded toolbox for personalized food allergy management.
Topics: Humans; Food Hypersensitivity; Biological Products; Desensitization, Immunologic; Animals; Anti-Allergic Agents; Immunoglobulin E; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Allergens; Omalizumab
PubMed: 38547423
DOI: 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000981 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Mar 2024: Real-life data on the efficacy of biologic agents (BAs) on asthma-comorbid CRSwNP are needed. Our primary goal is to investigate the effects of BAs on CRSwNP symptoms,...
: Real-life data on the efficacy of biologic agents (BAs) on asthma-comorbid CRSwNP are needed. Our primary goal is to investigate the effects of BAs on CRSwNP symptoms, as well as endoscopic and tomography scores. Our secondary goal is to show a reduction in the frequency of acute sinusitis exacerbations and the need for surgery. : We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, real-life study. We screened the patients with asthma-comorbid CRSwNP treated with omalizumab or mepolizumab. A total of 69 patients (40 F/29 M; omalizumab n = 55, mepolizumab n = 14) were enrolled. We compared the visual analog scale (VAS), sinonasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22), nasal congestion score (NCS), Lund-Mackay computed tomography score (LMS), and total endoscopic polyp scores (TPS) before and after BAs. We evaluated the endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and acute exacerbations of chronic rhinosinusitis (AECRS) frequencies separately, according to the BAs. The overall median (min-max) age was 43 (21-69) years. The median (min-max) of biologic therapy duration was 35 (4-113) months for omalizumab and 13.5 (6-32) for mepolizumab. Significant improvements were seen in VAS, SNOT-22, and NCS with omalizumab and mepolizumab. A significant decrease was observed in TPS with omalizumab [95% CI: 0-4] ( < 0.001), but not with mepolizumab [95% CI: -0.5-2] ( = 0.335). The frequency of ESS and AECRS were significantly reduced with omalizumab [95% CI: 2-3] ( < 0.001) and [95% CI: 2-5] ( < 0.001); and mepolizumab [95% CI: 0-2] ( = 0.002) and [95% CI: 2-8.5] ( < 0.001), respectively. There was no significant difference in LMS with either of the BAs. Omalizumab and mepolizumab can provide a significant improvement in the sinonasal symptom scores. BAs are promising agents for CRSwNP patients with frequent exacerbations and multiple surgeries.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Humans; Middle Aged; Asthma; Chronic Disease; Nasal Polyps; Omalizumab; Retrospective Studies; Rhinosinusitis; Sinusitis; Turkey; Male; Female; Young Adult
PubMed: 38541174
DOI: 10.3390/medicina60030448 -
Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical... Jun 2024This review examine the dynamic landscape of food allergy treatment within the context of emerging biologics. Our purpose is to comprehensively evaluate the potential... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
This review examine the dynamic landscape of food allergy treatment within the context of emerging biologics. Our purpose is to comprehensively evaluate the potential benefits, challenges, and transformative impact associated with the utilization of biologics in comparison to conventional therapeutic modalities.
RECENT FINDINGS
This document synthesizes recent scientific investigations to various biologics, such as omalizumab, ligelizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, providing a nuanced understanding of their roles in oral immunotherapy, rapid desensitization, and overall food allergy management. Recent studies and clinical trials highlight the impact of anti-IgE treatment on food allergies, revealing critical findings such as dose-related efficacy, facilitation of rapid desensitization in peanut allergies, and the sustained positive outcomes observed in individuals with multifood allergies.
SUMMARY
The use of biologics presents a groundbreaking approach in the treatment of food allergies. The multifaceted action of these agents, along with their potential to overcome the challenges associated with traditional therapies, marks a significant advancement. Despite the persisting challenges of economic constraints and the need for further safety studies, biologics offer a promising avenue for improving the quality of life for individuals with food allergies. Ongoing research and collaborative efforts are imperative to fully realize the transformative potential inherent in these emerging therapeutic frontiers.
Topics: Humans; Allergens; Anti-Allergic Agents; Biological Products; Desensitization, Immunologic; Food Hypersensitivity; Immunoglobulin E; Omalizumab; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38538153
DOI: 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000978 -
International Archives of Allergy and... 2024The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety profile of omalizumab as a therapeutic intervention for chronic urticaria (CU). (Observational Study)
Observational Study
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety profile of omalizumab as a therapeutic intervention for chronic urticaria (CU).
METHODS
From March 1, 2023, to September 30, 2023, data on a cohort comprising 96 patients with CU, who underwent treatment with omalizumab at our medical institution's allergy clinic, were systematically compiled. Subsequent to the administration of omalizumab, the therapeutic efficacy was assessed utilizing the 7-day urticaria activity score and the urticaria control test.
RESULTS
Based on the statistical analysis, the mean duration of therapeutic intervention was 2.4 ± 1.3 months, with a corresponding mean cumulative dosage of 765 ± 450 mg. Of the subset of 42 patients with CU who were subjected to a follow-up period exceeding 3 months, it was observed that the treatment led to complete symptom remission, and no instances of recurrence were documented. Notably, there were statistically significant differences in the treatment duration and the cumulative dosage between patients who experienced co-morbid conditions and those who did not (p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.280-1.326; p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.597-2.997). Furthermore, there were significant differences in the treatment duration and cumulative dosage between patients in the combined allergic rhinitis group and those in the non-combined allergic rhinitis group (p < 0.01, 95% CI: 0.204-1.305; p = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.326-2.860).
CONCLUSION
Omalizumab demonstrates efficacy in the management of CU among Chinese patients by exerting effective symptom control and facilitating the regression of skin lesions. The assessment of its therapeutic efficacy typically requires a 12-week treatment period. Moreover, the co-occurrence of CU with other allergic disorders serves as a pertinent consideration for the adjustment of omalizumab dosing regimens.
Topics: Humans; Omalizumab; Chronic Urticaria; Female; Male; Adult; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome; Anti-Allergic Agents; Young Adult
PubMed: 38513629
DOI: 10.1159/000538011 -
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment Dec 2024There is a lack of real-life safety data on treatment options for chronic urticaria in the presence of comedication and comorbidities.
BACKGROUND
There is a lack of real-life safety data on treatment options for chronic urticaria in the presence of comedication and comorbidities.
METHODS
We present a single-center UCARE pilot study of 212 outpatients with chronic urticaria. Patients were divided into three groups according to different CU therapies according to international guidelines.
RESULTS
Of 212 patients, 108 (mean age 48.9 years, 71.3% female) had 59 comorbidities, including cardiovascular, autoimmune and malignant diseases. Patients were followed for a mean of 24.6 months (SD ± 21.3). Urticaria therapies were divided into three groups: A: 105 (97.2%) with omalizumab and 2nd generation antihistamines), B: 16 patients (14.8%): dual therapy with antihistamines and cyclosporine in 10 (9.3%), montelukast in five (4. 6%), dapsone in four (3.7%), hydroxychloroquine in one patient (0.9%), C: 12 (11.1%) patients received a third drug for 4.9 months (SD ± 3.2) and one quadruple therapy (2.1 months). 10 out of 12 (83.3%) patients received montelukast, two (16.7%) cyclosporine, two (16.7%) dapsone and one (8.3%) hydroxychloroquine as a third drug for chronic urticaria.
CONCLUSIONS
Combining treatment modalities for chronic urticaria and comorbidities are available and feasible with a good safety profile.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Hydroxychloroquine; Pilot Projects; Chronic Disease; Chronic Urticaria; Urticaria; Omalizumab; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Cyclosporine; Dapsone; Anti-Allergic Agents; Acetates; Cyclopropanes; Quinolines; Sulfides
PubMed: 38508226
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2024.2329784