Search

Objective: Although sporadic case reports have demonstrated successful management of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) by anti-IL-5 therapy, larger-scale monocentric studies for the efficacy of mepolizumab (MEP), an IL-5 monoclonal antibody, are still lacking in Taiwan. Methods: Hospitalized EGPA patients aged at least 18 years were enrolled from November 1998 to October 2023, and analyzed for demographic, clinical, laboratory, medication and outcome data, focusing on the efficacy and safety of biologics use, particularly induction therapy with MEP. Results: Twenty-seven EGPA patients aged 10–70 years (43 ± 15) at disease diagnosis were recruited with 21 under combined corticosteroids/cyclophosphamide induction therapy. Seventeen patients received biologics with 13 under MEP therapy. Ten patients aged 19–71 years (48 ± 15) completed 12-month induction therapy with a 100 mg quadri-weekly subcutaneous injection regimen indicated for active or relapse disease. There were reduced BVAS with complete remission in 6 and partial remission in 4 patients, lower CRP levels, decreased eosinophil counts with an inhibition of 92∼96 %, and tapered prednisolone dosages from 5 to 25 (13.0 ± 6.3) to 0–10 (3.3 ± 3.1) mg/day. Only one patient had an adverse event of injection site reactions. Nine patients received the same regimen for annual maintenance therapy. All had a persistent clinical remission. In these patients, 13–56 injections (41 ± 15) were prescribed with a follow-up period of 12∼52 months (38 ± 14). Conclusion: In this retrospective study, induction therapy with a 12-month 100 mg MEP quadri-weekly subcutaneous injection regimen demonstrates the efficacy and safety for active and relapsing EGPA patients.

Background: In the phase III SYNAPSE study, mepolizumab plus standard of care reduced total endoscopic nasal polyp score (NPS) versus that with placebo in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Objective: Our aim was to investigate relationships between NPS and (1) peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and (2) patient-reported outcomes. Methods: In this post hoc analysis, patients randomized 1:1 received mepolizumab, 100 mg, or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks (plus standard of care). Changes from baseline in PNIF (week 52), visual analog scale scores (overall symptoms, nasal obstruction, and loss of smell [weeks 49-52]), and total 22-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test score (week 52) were assessed in patients with or without improvements in NPS (improvement of ≥1 point) or without (improvement of

Hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) represent a group of rare dis-immune conditions characterized by blood hyper-eosinophilia and eosinophilic related burden. Especially the idiopathic subtype (I-HES) is particularly difficult to diagnose because of its heterogeneous clinical presentation, the lack of specific findings on physical exam, lab tools, and imaging informative enough to unequivocally confirm the diagnosis and the overlap with other entities, including eosinophilic organ-diseases or systemic dis-immune conditions other than I-HES (from atopy to eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis [EGPA], the last often extremely difficult to distinguish from HES). Taken together, all the features mentioned above account for an extremely difficult early recognition HES and on-time referral to a specialized centre. The referral itself is challenging due to a not univocal specialist identification, because of the variability of physicians managing HES in different settings (including allergist/clinical immunologist, haematologist, internal medicine doctors, pulmonologist, rheumatologist). Furthermore, the approach in terms of personalized treatment identification and follow-up plan (timing, organ assessment), is poorly standardized. Further translational and clinical research is needed to address the mentioned unmet needs, but on practical grounds increasing the overall clinicians’ awareness on HES and implementing healthcare pathways for HES patients represent a roadmap that every clinician might try to realize in his specific setting.The present review aims at providing an overview about the current challenges and unmet needs in the practical approach to HES and rare hypereosinophilic allergo-immunological diseases, including a proposal for an innovative multidisciplinary organizational model.

Background: Mepolizumab treatment improves symptom control and quality of life and reduces exacerbations in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, biomarkers that predict therapeutic effectiveness must be determined for use in precision medicine. Herein, we elucidated the dynamics of various parameters before and after treatment as well as patient characteristics predictive of clinical responsiveness to mepolizumab after 1-year treatment. Methods: Twenty-seven patients with severe asthma were treated with mepolizumab for one year. Asthma control test scores, pulmonary function tests, fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, and blood samples were evaluated. Additionally, we explored the role of CD69-positive mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells as a candidate biomarker for predicting treatment effectiveness by evaluating an OVA-induced asthma murine model using MR1 knockout mice, where MAIT cells were absent. Results: The frequencies of CD69-positive group 1 innate lymphoid cells, group 3 innate lymphoid cells, natural killer cells, and MAIT cells decreased after mepolizumab treatment. The frequency of CD69-positive MAIT cells and neutrophils was lower and serum periostin levels were higher in responders than in non-responders. In the OVA-induced asthma murine model, CD69-positive MAIT cell count in the whole mouse lung was significantly higher than that in the control mice. Moreover, OVA-induced eosinophilic airway inflammation was exacerbated in the MAIT cell-deficient MR1 knockout mice. Conclusions: This study shows that circulating CD69-positive MAIT cells, neutrophils, and serum periostin might predict the real-world response after 1-year mepolizumab treatment. Furthermore, MAIT cells potentially have a protective role against type 2 airway inflammation.

The efficacy of mepolizumab as an alternative to glucocorticoids for treating idiopathic chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (ICEP) has been reported. However, various questions remain unanswered, such as the most appropriate dose and dosage interval of mepolizumab for ICEP, how long efficacy is maintained, how long administration should be continued, and whether and when discontinuation can be considered. We present herein three cases of refractory ICEP treated with mepolizumab at a dose of 100 mg every 4 or 8 weeks. No recurrences were observed after 77 months of treatment in Case 1 and after 45 months in Case 2. Case 3 was treated with mepolizumab for 33 months, but ICEP relapsed 42 months after discontinuation of mepolizumab. In conclusion, mepolizumab for refractory ICEP should be continued for as long as possible, considering disease status, glucocorticoid-related adverse events, and the financial situation of the patient.

Introduction: Benralizumab, mepolizumab, and reslizumab are novel monoclonal antibodies approved for asthma, targeting eosinophilic inflammation. Benralizumab is directed against IL-5 receptor (IL-5R), while mepolizumab and reslizumab are directed against IL-5. The three drugs cause a reduction in eosinophils, but benralizumab also causes a cytotoxic effect on eosinophils and basophils. Recently, it has been reported that suboptimal responders to benralizumab presented exacerbations associated with concomitant infections and sputum neutrophilia and the incidence of infections was greater in patients receiving benralizumab compared to mepolizumab and reslizumab. For this reason, we wanted to explore potential differences in terms of infectious adverse events between the three different anti-IL-5 antibodies. Methods: We performed a rapid systematic review on PubMed up to April 28, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating benralizumab, mepolizumab, or reslizumab in patients with asthma. Included outcomes were the reporting of any respiratory tract infection and any emergency department (ED) or hospital admission for infection or asthma exacerbation. A Mantel-Haenszel meta-analysis was performed with Cochrane RevMan 5.4 to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). A subgroup analysis for the different active treatments was performed. Results: From 163 references we included 21 studies reporting the results of 23 different RCTs for a total population of 9156 patients. All studies compared anti-IL-5 antibodies against placebo. Anti-IL-5 treatment resulted in non-significant differences compared to placebo in the odds for nasopharyngitis (OR = 0.90; 95 % CI from 0.76 to 1.07), pharyngitis (OR = 1.45; 95 % CI from 0.92 to 2.28), upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) (OR = 0.97; 95 % CI from 0.82 to 1.15), rhinitis (OR = 1.01; 95 % CI from 0.71 to 1.44), pneumonia (OR = 0.56; 95 % CI from 0.10 to 2.01), and influenza (OR = 0.84; 95 % CI from 0.65 to 1.09). We observed significant reductions in the reporting of sinusitis (OR = 0.75; 95 % CI from 0.53 to 1.06), bronchitis (OR = 0.71; 95 % CI from 0.59 to 0.86), and ED or hospital admission due to asthma exacerbation for overall anti-IL-5 antibodies compared to placebo (OR = 0.59; 95 % CI from 0.40 to 0.88). We were not able to discriminate whether exacerbations were associated with infections or to increased sputum eosinophilia. From the subgroup analysis, we observed differences in directions and magnitudes of the effect size in the reporting of some events. Benralizumab was associated with increased odds of pharyngitis (OR = 1.56; 95 % CI from 0.97 to 2.52) and a similar trend was observed for mepolizumab in the reporting of rhinitis (OR = 1.85; 95 % CI from 0.72 to 4.78), both non-statistically significant. In terms of effect size, benralizumab also showed higher odds for bronchitis and pneumonia in comparison to mepolizumab and reslizumab (OR = 0.76, OR = 0.69, and OR = 0.60 for bronchitis and OR = 0.80, OR = 0.20, and OR = 0.45, respectively, all non-significant). Conclusion: Anti-IL-5 treatments might have different effects on the reporting of some infection events in patients with asthma. However, the evidence is limited by sample size and far than conclusive and suggest the need of future studies to evaluate the risk of infections in patients with asthma receiving anti-IL-5 treatments.

A 67-year-old woman with a history of poorly controlled asthma was admitted to our hospital with a persistent cough and abnormal chest radiographic findings. Her diagnosis was allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA). Following treatment with mepolizumab, her symptoms and imaging findings improved initially. However, after approximately 2 years, the patient experienced a recurrent cough with elevated non-specific immunoglobulin E levels and worsening chest imaging findings, thereby changing her diagnosis to recurrent ABPA. Mepolizumab was substituted with dupilumab, and her subjective symptoms and imaging findings improved. Our findings suggest that dupilumab may be effective in ABPA cases following the failure of another antibody therapy.

Background: For therapy of severe asthma 5 monoclonal antibodies have been available in Germany up to November 2022, but no clear rules exist on choice of initial therapy, assessment of response, and switch. Objective: To assess current practice on all aspects of biologic therapy by specialists in Germany. Methods: A questionnaire was created by specialists for severe asthma, which was tested and modified by further experts. We invited 119 pulmonologists of the German Asthma Net (GAN) to complete the survey and used SoSci Survey and SPSS for data collection and analysis. Results: Forty-seven pulmonologists took part in the survey with a median annual number of patients treated with biologics of 35, 55% worked in an outpatient practice, and 40% in a hospital. Exacerbations and oral steroid use were the most important factors for the decision to start a biologic therapy. Accordingly, these parameters were also the most relevant for assessment of response. Most participants considered type-2 inflammation biomarkers and comorbidities (foremost CRSwNP and AD) for choosing initial biologic. Asthma Control Test (ACT) was the most common instrument for assessing status of disease control. There was no consensus on thresholds for response of pulmonary function tests including FEV1, FVC, and RV. Eighty-five percent of participants distinguished between “responders”, “partial responders” and “non-responders”. Comorbidities played an important role for the decision to switch to another biologic, eg, when initial therapy had insufficient effectiveness on CRSwNP. Conclusion: This study provides a detailed insight into current opinions and practice of biologic use in severe asthma in Germany.

Little is known about the efficacy and safety of the anti-interleukin 5 monoclonal antibody mepolizumab (MPZ) in patients with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) in real-life. We thus evaluated disease activity, damage and disease-related complications in 14 patients with EGPA receiving MPZ for refractory disease for a median time of 16 months in comparison with up to five years before MPZ start. Asthma exacerbation rates, the Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score and corticosteroid dosage decreased during MPZ (p

The emergence of biologic therapies for the management of asthma has been a revolutionary change in our capacity to manage this disease.Since the launch of omalizumab, several other biologics have been marketed or are close to being marketed, suggesting that a plethora of monoclonal antibodies can be expected in the coming years. This will facilitate the transition to the paradigm of personalized medicine, but on the other hand will decisively further complicate the choice of the most appropriate treatment, in the absence of reliable enough biological markers.For these reasons, along with the relatively short time of use with these treatments, there are recurrently arising questions for which there are not even moderately documented answers, and for which the only solution must be based, with all reservations, on the combination of indirect evidence and expertise. In this paper, we attempt to address such questions, providing relevant commentaries and considering the whole width of the evidence base.

Background: Recently, mepolizumab and benralizumab have been approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. Objective: Thus, the main objective of the current study was to find out the exact efficacy and safety profile of mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma. Methods: The relevant randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed and clinical trials websites from inception to January 2022. All the analysis were done using RevMan5. Results: There is a significant reduction of asthma exacerbation in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group. However, there is no significant differences were observed in the FEV1 change. Overall adverse drug reactions (ADRs) such as headache and injection site reactions are found non-significant in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group, however, bronchitis, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), sinusitis, and serious adverse event (SAEs) were found to be significantly less. The subgroup analysis has also shown a similar kind of efficacy in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group however, safety analysis results have shown better safer profile of benralizumab as compared to mepolizumab. The sensitivity analysis results have shown non-alteration in the conclusion of the study regarding efficacy parameters however, overall adverse events, sinusitis, and nasopharyngitis results are altered after the exclusion of outliers. Conclusion: Mepolizumab and benralizumab appear to be safe and effective in treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. However, more data is required to draw a valid conclusion, particularly with mepolizumab.

Background: mAbs (biologics) are indicated in patients with poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma. The process of prior authorization and administration of a biologic requires exceptional commitment from clinical teams. Objective: Our aim was to evaluate the process of approval and administration of biologics for asthma and determine the most common reasons associated with denials of biologics and delays in administration. Methods: We examined the records of patients with asthma who were prescribed biologics from January 2018 to January 2020 at 2 centers, Montefiore Medical Center (Bronx, NY) and Scripps Clinics (San Diego, Calif). Demographics, insurance information, and details on the approval process were collected. Results: After querying of electronic health records, the records of 352 and 70 patients with moderate-to-severe asthma were included from Montefiore and Scripps, respectively. Most patients at Montefiore (58.2%) were insured under Managed Care Medicaid (MC Medicaid), whereas most patients at Scripps (61.4%) had commercial insurance. The median times from prescription to administration of a biologic were similar: 34 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 18-63 days) and 34 days (IQR = 22.5-56.0 days) (P = .97) for Montefiore and Scripps, respectively. However, the median approval time for Montefiore was 6 days (IQR = 1-20 days) and that for Scripps was 22 days (IQR = 10-36 days) (P < .001). Approval times for prescriptions requiring appeals were significantly longer than for prescriptions approved after the initial submission: 23 days versus 2.5 days and 40.5 days versus 15.5 days (for Montefiore and Scripps, respectively [P < .001 for both]). Conclusions: Lengthy appeals contribute to delays between prescribing and administering a biologic. Site-specific practices and insurance coverage influence approval timing of the biologics for asthma.

Background: Anti-interleukin-5 (IL-5) therapy has been proposed as a novel treatment option for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, its efficacy for preventing COPD exacerbation remains unclear. Methods: A literature review was conducted to August 26th 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of anti-IL-5 therapy were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the risk of COPD exacerbation. Results: A total of 3 articles containing 5 RCTs were included in the study. Overall, 2837 and 1442 patients received anti-IL-5 therapy (mepolizumab, n = 865; benralizumab, n = 1972) and placebo, respectively. In the pooled analysis, anti-IL-5 therapy was associated with a lower risk of COPD exacerbation compared with the placebo (rate ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86–0.97, I2 = 0%). In addition, no significant differences in the changes in SGRQ scores and FEV1 from baseline were found between the anti-IL-5 therapy and placebo (SGRQ, mean difference, −0.86, 95% CI, −1.92 – 0.19, I2 = 0%; FEV1, mean difference, 0.01, 95% CI, −0.01 – 0.03, I2 = 0%). Anti-IL-5 therapy had a similar risk of any adverse event (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99–1.05), an event leading to treatment discontinuation (risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72–1.48) and any serious adverse events (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85–1.01) when compared with the placebo. Conclusion: Anti-IL-5 therapy was associated with a lower rate of COPD exacerbation compared with placebo. In addition, anti-IL-5 therapy was well tolerated for COPD patients.

A 26-year-old female with steroid dependent eosinophilic asthma and nasal polyps who had successfully been treated with mepolizumab for 17 consecutive months with complete steroid withdrawal and symptoms control, stopped biologic treatment due to pregnancy efforts. Mepolizumab discontinuation resulted in frequent exacerbations and daily symptoms despite high dose ICS/LABA and re-initiation of oral steroids. Mepolizumab was initiated again, followed by improvement of asthma control and gradual withdrawal of steroids within 2 months. The patient became pregnant during the fourth month of mepolizumab re-initiation. The patient presented two asthma exacerbations during pregnancy treated with short course (3 days) oral steroids and delivery was uneventful (female, Apgar 9, weight 2750 g, length 59 cm) in week 40 by caesarean section.

Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is an allergic reaction caused by the fungus Aspergillus, and it is often treated with steroids or antifungal agents. However, long-term use of these medications can lead to infections and drug interactions. We present the case of a 71-year-old woman with ABPA who was diagnosed with hepatitis B and active hepatitis C, and sputum analysis revealed the presence of bacteria. Oral steroids were initially administered, but the patient was switched to mepolizumab because of numerous infectious complications. The early introduction of mepolizumab is effective in patients with ABPA complicated by infectious diseases.

Severe Asthma (SA) is characterized by inadequate disease control despite maximal inhalation therapy. In November 2021, a 68-years old female patient presented at our facility referring a worsening in her asthma-related symptoms and a high exacerbations rate. She reported a liver transplantation in 2015 and was in treatment with tacrolimus. We started treatment with Mepolizumab 100 mg once every 28 days and monitored her lung function as well as her lymphocytes subsets. After one year follow-up, the patient had a substantial improvement in lung function, exacerbation rate, daily OCS intake dose and no variation in the blood concentration of tacrolimus.

The indications for biologic therapy are expanding. Patients may benefit from different biologics for separate conditions or one condition with multiple pathogenic mechanisms targeted by different biologics. We sought to determine the frequency and safety of combining biologics targeting IgE, IL-5, IL-5R, and IL-4/IL-13 in patients referred to a large academic health system through retrospective chart review. Between January 1, 2015 and July 31, 2021, 25 patients receiving multiple biologics simultaneously were identified. Combinations included omalizumab + mepolizumab (n = 11), omalizumab + dupilumab (n = 6), omalizumab + benralizumab (n = 4), mepolizumab + dupilumab (n = 3), and omalizumab + dupilumab + mepolizumab (n = 1). Sixteen patients were receiving multiple biologics for the same condition, most commonly asthma (n = 10). Nine patients were treated for separate conditions, with chronic spontaneous urticaria and atopic dermatitis being the most common combination (n = 3). The median duration of combination biologic use was 17.5 months. There were no reports of anaphylaxis, other allergic reaction, immune dysfunction, pneumonia, or development of malignancy. The use of multiple biologics appears to be well tolerated in this case series. Prospective study is needed to better determine the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of this approach.

Background: Present guidelines recommend a life-long therapy with mepolizumab in patients suffering from severe eosinophilic asthma as several studies proved the disadvantages of treatment cessation. This study evaluated the possibility of extending the dosage intervals of mepolizumab in those patients with severe eosinophilic asthma after being well controlled. Methods: Eighteen patients diagnosed with severe eosinophilic asthma were started on treatment with mepolizumab in regular 4-week intervals. Symptom control was measured using the asthma control test (ACT) and pulmonary function test every 3 months. The amount of oral corticosteroids needed to maintain symptom control was monitored at every visit. After achieving good symptom control, defined as well controlled ACT ≥20, injection intervals were prolonged from 4 up to 6 to 8 weeks. The evaluation of this data was approved by the ethics committee. Results: ACT and pulmonary function values significantly improved after initiating therapy with mepolizumab on a regular 4-weekly injection interval. After extending the dosage intervals, both ACT and pulmonary function remained on a stable level without significant changes during the follow-up visits for 1 year. Median dosage of prednisolone declined significantly in the studied group under mepolizumab therapy and stayed on a low level during the follow-up visits with only a single patient using prednisolone after 1 year. Conclusion: In patients with fully or well controlled eosinophilic asthma treated with mepolizumab extending the dosage intervals between the injections up to 8 weeks bears the potential to save costs for the health care system.

We report a case of severe uncontrolled allergic and eosinophilic asthma in which omalizumab had led to a fast remission. After 18 months, mepolizumab was added to omalizumab because of increased blood eosinophils and a deterioration of asthma control. Asthma was then under control for the next 18 months. Discontinuation of mepolizumab in the ensuing 6 months led to a decrease in asthma control and an increased eosinophilia. The introduction of benralizumab resulted in an immediate increase of lung function, asthma control test (ACT), and symptom relief. Before the introduction of biologics, the patient was on the list for transplantation due to respiratory insufficiency. High-resolution CT scans before and after biologic therapy demonstrated a reduction of bronchial wall thickening and mucous plugging as well as an increase in bronchial caliber. The patient did therefore not need a transplant. We conclude that the dual use of biologics may be efficient in some cases of severe asthma.

Background and aims: Biologics that target Type 2 inflammation are effective in reducing exacerbations of severe asthma. We conducted a systematic review and integrated analysis of the efficacy and safety of these biologics in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with increased peripheral blood eosinophils. Methods: Clinical trials of biologics that target Type 2 inflammation in COPD were found using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We analyzed the clinical efficacy of anti-IL-5-targeted therapy at approved (benralizumab 30 mg, mepolizumab 100 mg, for severe asthma) and high (benralizumab 100 mg, mepolizumab 300 mg) doses. Results: Approved benralizumab and mepolizumab doses tended to reduce moderate-to-severe exacerbations by 9% [risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.83, 1.00], p = 0.05], but did not reduce exacerbations requiring emergency department visits or hospitalization. High-dose benralizumab and mepolizumab reduced moderate-to-severe exacerbations by 12% (RR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.80, 0.98], p = 0.02) and exacerbations requiring emergency department visits or hospitalization by 33% (RR = 0.67, 95% CI [0.53, 0.84], p = 0.0005). Neither dose improved St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire or COPD Assessment Test scores. The safety of benralizumab and mepolizumab was comparable to placebo. Conclusions: Benralizumab and mepolizumab have limited efficacy in reducing moderate-to-severe exacerbations in COPD patients with increased peripheral blood eosinophils and requires at least high doses.

Background: The underlying population of patients selected for each respiratory monoclonal antibody might change as other biologics are approved., Objective: To evaluate effect modification by calendar time of the effectiveness of each respiratory biologics in asthma., Methods: The Effectiveness of Respiratory biologics in Asthma (ERA) is a retrospective cohort of severe asthma patients from the Mass General Brigham clinics between January 2013 and September 2023. Periods were pre-specified as the anti-IgE (2013-2015), anti-IL5 (2016-2018), anti-IL4/13 (2019-2021) or anti-alarmin (2022-2023) era. We evaluated each biologic's effect on asthma-related exacerbations comparing the one-year period before and after therapy initiation using Poisson regression and Cox regression for time-to-first exacerbation., Results: Of 647 biologic-naïve patients, 165 initiated omalizumab, 235 anti-IL5, 227 dupilumab, and 20 tezepelumab. Omalizumab's effectiveness improved as more biologics were approved: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.16 [0.94-1.43] anti-IgE era vs. 0.54 [0.37-0.80] anti-IL4/13-alarmin era. Omalizumab patients in the anti-IL4/13-alarmin era had lower blood eosinophil counts and less chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). For anti-IL5s, effectiveness peaked in the anti-IL4/13 era (IRR 0.52 [0.42-0.64]) when patients had higher BMI and less concomitant CRSwNP. Dupilumab was most effective in the anti-IL4/13 era (IRR 0.60 [0.50-0.72]). There were fewer current smokers in dupilumab patients in the anti-IL4/13 era. Results were similar in time-to-event analyses and in sensitivity analyses accounting for the COVID-19 pandemic., Conclusion: There are temporal variations in the effectiveness of biologics partly explained by the shift in the underlying population, particularly for omalizumab. Though having more choices was associated with better patient selection for omalizumab, this was inconsistent for other biologics., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

An 81-year-old woman presented to our hospital due to an abnormal shadow on a chest X-ray and a 4-week-old persistent cough. Laboratory examination revealed increased serum eosinophils and immunoglobulin E. The Asthma Control Test (ACT) score and forced expiratory volume in 1 sec indicated airway obstruction. Chest computed tomography (CT) revealed mucoid impaction in the dilated left-lingular lobar bronchus. She was diagnosed with bronchial asthma and treated with a high-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2 agonist. Two months later, her mucoid impaction in the CT image worsened; moreover, bronchoscopy revealed the white mucus plug with Charcot–Leyden crystals and filamentous fungi. The patient was diagnosed with Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) and treatment with 30 mg/day prednisolone was started. Both the blood eosinophil count and the chest image improved almost substantially, and the steroid was discontinued after a year. Sixteen months after cessation of prednisolone treatment, peripheral eosinophilia and mucoid impaction in the left B3b recurred. For the treatment of bronchial asthma and recurrent ABPA, administration of mepolizumab was initiated. Subsequently, although her peripheral eosinophils count decreased, chest CT showed expansion of the mucoid impaction and IgE increased despite mepolizumab treatment. Alternative subcutaneous injection therapy with dupilumab improved chest image, serum IgE level, and her ACT score.After changing from mepolizumab to dupilumab, her ABPA, asthma, and pulmonary function improved remarkably. This case illustrates the potential utility of dupilumab for ABPA without re-administration of oral prednisolone. Additional research is needed to identify an effective therapy for ABPA with asthma.

Objective: Mepolizumab is indicated as an additional treatment of severe refractory eosinophilic asthma. The observed differences in population subgroups according to plasma eosinophil count, the existence of patients with high levels of immunoglobulin E who are candidates of omalizumab and mepolizumab, as well as mepolizumab’s economic impact, lead to make efficient economic studies for clinical decision making. The aim was to analyze mepolizumab’s cost-efficacy and budget impact. Method: Cost comparison and the use of mepolizumab’s budgetary impact was performed, from the Spanish National Health System’s perspective. Among the assessed alternatives, inhaled systemic corticosteroids, plus long acting beta agonist (β2) and/or oral systemic corticosteroids in patients with non immunoglobulin E-mediated severe allergic asthma, and said treatment along with omalizumab in patients with immunoglobulin E mediated eosinophilic allergic asthma were included. Its efficacy was evaluated through avoided clinically relevant exacerbations. The direct costs associated with exacerbation were assessed. Results: Mepolizumab’s long run average incremental cost regarding omalizumab’s is 797 euros per patient a year. Considering omalizumab’s alternative discounted price, including mepolizumab for patients with immunoglobulin E mediated eosinophilic allergic asthma would increase public spending from 2.3 to 4.6 million euros. Given omalizumab’s notified price, the gradual introduction of mepolizumab in the Spanish National Health System would save 3.6 million euros in three years. For non immunoglobulin E-mediated severe asthma patients, the avoided cost/exacerbation by introducing mepolizumab is 15,085 euros, assuming a gradual market penetration of mepolizumab. In patients with ≥ 500 eosinophils/μL, this cost decreases to 7,767 euros per avoided exacerbation with a budgetary impact of 183.2 million euros in three years with a progressive penetration of mepolizumab. Conclusions: The cost comparison between mepolizumab and omalizumab in immunoglobulin E mediated eosinophilic asthma patients suggests a use of the lower cost drug, promoting price competition. Additionally, prioritizing its use among non immunoglobulin E-mediated severe refractory eosinophilic asthma patients and ≥ 500 eosinophils/μL plasma level patients, would improve its efficiency as well as reducing its budgetary impact.

Resumen: Introducción: El mepolizumab es un anticuerpo monoclonal que bloquea la interleuquina 5 circulante (IL5). El benralizumab se une a la subunidad alfa del receptor de la IL 5 induciendo la eliminación directa de eosinófilos y basófilos. El propósito fue evaluar su efectividad en nuestra práctica clínica habitual. Métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo de una cohorte de pacientes asmáticos graves eosinofílicos tratados con mepolizumab y benralizumab durante al menos 6 meses. El seguimiento se ha realizado en la unidad de asma. Resultados: Se analizaron 25 pacientes en tratamiento con mepolizumab y 13 con benralizumab alcanzando un tiempo de seguimiento de 12 meses en el 73,7% de los mismos (10 en el caso de benralizumab y 18 para mepolizumab). Tras el tratamiento biológico se observa una disminución del 71% en el número de ingresos (p = 0,0027) y del 66% (p = 0,0013) en las visitas a urgencias. Se contabilizaron 31 ciclos de corticoides vs. 15 tras el tratamiento biológico suponiendo un descenso de un 52% (p = 0,0069). El control del asma medido por cuestionario de control (ACT) fue de 10,8 puntos (SD: 4,73) vs. 20,3 puntos (SD: 4,77), (p = 0,001) y el % FEV1 fue del 70,6% (SD: 21.5) vs. 76,2% (SD: 27,2), (p = 0,0437). Conclusiones: Se confirma la efectividad de los fármacos anti-IL5 en vida real mostrando mejoras en exacerbaciones, control y función pulmonar. Abstract: Introduction: Mepolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits circulating interleukin 5 (IL-5). Benralizumab binds to the alpha subunit of the IL-5 receptor, inducing the direct elimination of eosinophils and basophils. The aim of this study was to evaluate their effectiveness in our routine clinical practice. Methods: A retrospective observational study of a cohort of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with mepolizumab and benralizumab for at least 6 months, and followed up in the asthma unit. Results: We analyzed 25 patients who received mepolizumab and 13 who received benralizumab, 73.7% of whom were followed up for 12 months (10 months for benralizumab and 18 for mepolizumab). After biological treatment, there was a 71% reduction in the number of admissions (p = .0027) and a 66% reduction (p = .0013) in emergency visits. A reduction in corticosteroid use was recorded: 31 cycles of corticosteroids compared to 15 after biological treatment, representing a decrease of 52% (p = .0069). Asthma control measured by the Asthma Control Test was 10.8 (SD: 4.73) vs. 20.3 (SD: 4.77), (p = .001) and FEV1% was 70.6% (SD: 21.5) vs. 76.2% (SD: 27.2), (p = .0437). Conclusions: The effectiveness of anti-IL-5 drugs in real life was confirmed, with improvements in exacerbations, asthma control and lung function.

Background and aims: Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) which worsen patients’ health and increase healthcare spending. Aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic effect of adding mepolizumab (MEP) for the treatment of these patients. Methods: Patients >18 years old, referred to 8 asthma clinics, starting MEP between May 2017 and December 2018, were enrolled and followed-up for 12 months. Information in the 12 months before mepolizumab were collected retrospectively. The evaluation parameters included: OCS use, number of exacerbations/hospitalizations, concomitant therapies, comorbidity, and annual number of working days lost due to the disease. The primary objective was to compare the annual total cost per patient pre- and post-MEP. Secondary outcomes included rates of exacerbations and number of OCS-dependent patients. Results: 106 patients were enrolled in the study: 46 male, median age 58 years. Mean annual cost pre- and post-MEP (cost of biologic excluded) was €3996 and €1,527, respectively. Total savings due to MEP resulted in €2469 (95%CI 1945–2993), 62% due to exacerbations reduction and 33% due to productivity increase. Such savings could fund about 22% of the total cost of MEP for one year. The introduction of MEP induced a clinical benefit by reducing both OCS-dependent patients (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.06–0.23) and exacerbation rate (RR = 0.19, 95%CI 0.15–0.24). Conclusions: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experienced a clinical benefit in asthma control adding MEP to standard therapy. Biologic therapy can be, partially, funded by the savings produced by patients’ improvement.

Background: Data on mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (EA) and comorbidities are needed to assess whether randomized controlled trial results are applicable in the real world. Objective: To evaluate real-life effectiveness and the presence/absence of predictors of treatment response in patients with one or more comorbidities (nasal polyps, allergic rhinitis, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome, obesity, bronchiectasis) who received mepolizumab (MEPO) for the treatment of severe EA. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study in patients with severe asthma and presence of comorbidities treated with mepolizumab at the respiratory outpatient clinic, Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy. Health records of 31 severe asthmatic patients were retrieved and analyzed. Asthma control test (ACT) score, blood eosinophil count, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), FEV1% of predicted and FEV1/FVC (Forced Vital Capacity) ratio, oral corticosteroid (OCS) dosage, and exacerbations were recorded at baseline (T0), after 3 (T1), 6 (T3), 9 (T6), and 12 months (T12). Clinical response was defined when 3 of these 4 criteria were fulfilled: i) 30% exacerbation decrease; ii) 80% blood eosinophilia reduction; iii) 3 point ACT increase; iv) FEV1 increase ≥200 mL. Results: 83.87% of patients were classified as responsive to MEPO treatment. Substantial depletion of the blood eosinophils (>80%) was found in 87.1% of patients, FEV1 > 200 mL was seen in 54.84% of patients, a 3-point ACT improvement from baseline was recorded in 80.65% 25 of patients and a 30% reduction of exacerbations rates was seen in 96.77% of patients. Moreover, the majority 38.71% of patients met 3/4 parameters after 12 months. Neither the comorbidities nor other characteristics (sex, BMI, age, smoking) influenced treatment response. Conclusions: MEPO in patients with severe EA is effective regardless of the presence of comorbidities.

Abstract Background The severe forms of asthma represent a major burden, because of severity of symptoms, costs and impact on everyday life. Recently, Mepolizumab (MEP) was approved and marketed for the treatment of hypereosinophilic severe asthma. This anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody reduced exacerbation rates and oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in well selected patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of patients receiving MEP in a real-life setting. Thus, we describe a retrospective analysis of patients treated with MEP in six centres in North Western Italy, including those who participated in the main regulatory trials. Methods The baseline data, before prescription, from six North Western Italy severe asthma clinics, between June 1st 2017 and December 31st 2017, were evaluated. The collected real-life data were then compared with those of SIRUS, MENSA, DREAM and MUSCA trials. Results Sixty-five patients were included (45% female; mean age 56 years; age range 19–84). Main observed differences with regulatory trials could be observed in eosinophils blood count at baseline, where the mean of our real-life patients (653 cells/μL) was overall higher than the one of all trials (240 cells/μL, 296 cells/μL, 253 cells/μL; p

Background: The MENSA trial assessed the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. This report describes the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in Japanese patients from MENSA. Methods: A post hoc analysis of the Japanese subgroup from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, Phase III MENSA trial (NCT01691521). Patients ≥12 years with severe eosinophilic asthma received mepolizumab 75 mg intravenously (IV), 100 mg subcutaneously (SC), or placebo, every 4 weeks for 32 weeks. The primary endpoint was the annualized rate of exacerbations. Secondary and other endpoints included annualized rate of exacerbations requiring emergency department (ED) visit/hospitalization, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and eosinophil counts. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored. Results: In the Japanese subgroup (N = 50), the rate of clinically significant exacerbations was reduced by 90% (rate ratio [RR]: 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02–0.57; P = 0.010) with mepolizumab IV and 62% (RR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.12–1.18; P = 0.094) with mepolizumab SC, versus placebo. No exacerbations requiring ED visit/hospitalization were reported with mepolizumab IV; exacerbations were reduced by 73% (RR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.06–1.29; P = 0.102) with mepolizumab SC versus placebo. Compared with placebo, mepolizumab IV and SC numerically increased morning PEF from baseline by 40 L/min and 13 L/min, improved quality of life by greater than the minimal clinically important difference (SGRQ: 9.5 [P = 0.083] and 7.9 [P = 0.171] points) and reduced eosinophil counts. AE incidence was similar between treatments. Results were broadly consistent with the overall population. Conclusions: Mepolizumab was efficacious and well tolerated in Japanese patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, producing similar responses to the overall MENSA population.

We report the case of a 50-year-old man with allergic bronchopulmonary mycosis (ABPM) complicated with bilateral septic arthritis of the knees caused by Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). He had a background of bronchial asthma and end-stage renal failure on maintenance dialysis. He was treated with 30 mg/day of prednisolone for 14 days for ABPM. He developed bilateral septic arthritis of the knees, caused by MRSA during prednisolone treatment. He underwent bilateral arthroscopic washout with a 2-week course of intra-articular arbekacin, concomitantly treated with a 6-week course of intravenous teicoplanin and oral rifampicin, subsequently followed by oral linezolid treatment. However, he suffered exacerbation of ABPM during treatment of septic arthritis. Because of these serious infectious complications, he was treated with mepolizumab instead of corticosteroids for the ABPM, which resolved all symptoms and clinical features. This case highlights mepolizumab treatment as an alternative to corticosteroid therapy for treatment of ABPM in patients with comorbidities such as infection.

Background: The concept of remission on biological treatment has been suggested as a therapeutic target for patients with severe asthma, composed of 1. no chronic use of systemic steroids, 2. no exacerbations, 3. minimal symptoms, and 4. optimized lung function, for a significant time. However, the criteria for remission are not clearly defined., Objective: Our objective was to compare different criteria for remission in subjects receiving biologicals for severe asthma., Methods: A cross-sectional study of adult subjects who receive a stable regimen of a biological for severe asthma for at least 6-months. We compared the proportion of subjects who fulfilled different specific criteria in the four domains, as well as those who achieved different composite outcome measures of clinical remission., Results: Of 39 subjects, 28 were females (71.8%), mean age 60.4. Twelve were current or past smokers (30.8%). Twelve had prior different biological treatment (30.8%), and 3/39 had more than one previous treatment (7.7%). Current biological included mepolizumab 12/39 (30.8%), dupilumab 11/39 (28.2%), benralizumab 10/39 (25.6%), omalizumab 5/39 (12.8%), reslizumab 1/39 (2.6%). Different specific criteria were achieved in 39-80% of subjects, being highest for no chronic steroid use and lowest for symptoms control and lung function. Overall remission was obtained by 20-41%, depending on definition, with significant variability in agreement between different sets of remission criteria (Cohen's kappa 0.33-0.89)., Conclusion: Clinical remission is achievable in real-world severe asthmatics on biological therapies. The core criteria for remission should be better defined., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Ori Wand reports a relationship with GlaxoSmithKline that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees. Ori Wand reports a relationship with AstraZeneca that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees. Ori Wand reports a relationship with Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Ori Wand reports a relationship with Sanofi that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Ori Wand reports a relationship with Kamada Ltd that includes: speaking and lecture fees. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is an eosinophilic vasculitis that affects a variety of organ systems. Historically, glucocorticoids and a variety of other immunosuppressants were used to abrogate the inflammation and tissue injury associated with EGPA. The management of EGPA has evolved greatly during the last decade with the development of novel targeted therapeutics that have resulted in significantly improved outcomes for these patients, with many more novel targeted therapies emerging., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None. The authors certify that none of them have any conflicts of interest.

Objective: Asthma is one of the 4 leading causes of death worldwide. Severe asthma is associated with poor quality of life, decreased life expectancy, and higher health resources consumption such as the use of oral corticosteroids (OCSs). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab as an add-on compared with the standard care of the Chilean public health system (combined inhaled corticosteroid therapy and a long-acting beta-agonist, short-acting beta-agonist, and OCS)., Materials and Methods: A Markov model was adapted to represent the day-to-day of patients with severe asthma over a lifetime horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to account for the second-order uncertainty of the model. In addition, a risk subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab across different risk populations., Results: Mepolizumab produces more benefits than standard of care alone (1 additional quality-adjusted life-year, a decrease of OCS usage, an approximated 11 avoided exacerbations) but it cannot be considered cost-effective in the light of the Chilean threshold (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: US dollars [USD] 105 967/quality-adjusted life-year vs USD 14 896). Despite this, cost-effectiveness increases in specific subgroups, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 44 819 in patients with eosinophil count ≥ 300 cell/mcL and exacerbation history of at least 4 exacerbations in the past year., Conclusion: Mepolizumab cannot be considered a cost-effective strategy for the Chilean health system. Nevertheless, price discount in specific subgroups improves its cost-effectiveness profile significantly and may offer opportunities for access to specific subgroups., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Interleukin-5 (IL-5) inhibitors have revolutionized the management of eosinophilic asthma. However, IL-5 is thought to play a protective role in atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular safety data for IL-5i are scarce. We used population-level data to examine the association between genetically proxied IL-5i and the risk of cardiovascular diseases. Genetic instruments for IL-5i were selected from a genome-wide association study of eosinophil count in 563,946 individuals. Genetic association data for coronary artery disease were obtained from 60,801 cases, 40,585 stroke cases, 7988 venous thromboembolism cases, and up to 406,111 controls. We used the inverse-variance weighted method and a series of sensitivity analyses. Nine genetic variants were selected to instrument IL-5i. Genetically proxied IL-5i was not associated with the risk of coronary heart disease (OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.65-1.03), stroke (OR 1.10; 0.95-1.27), or venous thromboembolism (OR 0.87; 0.64-1.17). We found no genetic evidence to suggest that IL-5i affects the risk of adverse cardiovascular and thromboembolic events., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 [The Author/The Authors]. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), formerly known as Churg-Strauss Syndrome, is a multisystem antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) positive vasculitis, characterized by the presence of chronic rhinosinusitis, asthma and prominent peripheral blood eosinophilia. Although the most commonly involved organ is the lung, followed by the skin, EGPA can affect any organ system. Herein, we present the complicated case of an 18-year-old male patient with severe life-threatening EGPA, with central nervous system, cardiac and gasterointestinal involvement, which was resistant to initial treatment with glucocorticoids and cyclophosphamide. The patient responded well, achieving complete remission after the addition of rituximab and mepolizumab to glucocorticoids and cyclophosphamide., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest There are no conflict sof interest regarding this manuscript., (Copyright © 2022 Southern Society for Clinical Investigation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)