Search

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., Competing Interests: HS reports fees for lectures or consultations from Astrazeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi all outside the submitted work. DS reports fees for lectures or consultations from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Janssen, MSD, Sanofi, all outside the submitted work. KCB reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi all outside the submitted work. CM no conflicts of interest. RB reports consulting fees or honoraria for lectures from ALK, AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, GSK, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and TEVA, and grants to Mainz University Hospital for research or clinical trials, or both from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, and Roche. RE no conflicts of interest. EH is funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (CHAMP, Project Number: 01GL1742D) for characterisation of children and adolescents with severe asthma. He reports personal fees from ALK, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Leti Pharma, Novartis, Nutricia, Sanofi, and Stallergenes all outside the submitted work. MI reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL-Behring, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, all outside the submitted work. MJ no conflicts of interest. CS received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Sanofi, all outside the submitted work. OS reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Sanofi and Boehringer Ingelheim, all outside the submitted work. CT no conflicts of interest. KM reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, all outside the submitted work. SK reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, all outside the submitted work., (© 2023 The Authors.)