Search

This systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important AD‐related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Seven RCTs including 1845 subjects >12 years treated with dupilumab 16 to 52 weeks were evaluated. For adults, there is high certainty that dupilumab decreases SCORAD (MD −30,72; 95% CI −34,65% to −26,79%) and EASI‐75 (RR 3.09; 95% CI 2.45 to 3.89), pruritus (RR 2.96; 95% CI 2.37 to 3.70), rescue medication (RR 3.46; 95% CI 2.79 to 4.30), sleep disturbance (MD −7.29; 95% CI −8.23 to −6.35) and anxiety/depression (MD −3.08; 95% CI −4.41 to −1.75) and improves quality of life (MD −4.80; 95% CI −5.55 to −4.06). The efficacy for adolescents is similar. Dupilumab‐related adverse events (AEs) slightly increase (low certainty). The evidence for dupilumab‐related serious AE is uncertain. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio ranged from 28 500 £ (low certainty) to 124 541 US$ (moderate certainty). More data on long‐term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020153645). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co‐morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home‐based) and its cost‐effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin‐4 receptor α, is approved as add‐on maintenance treatment for inadequately controlled type 2 severe asthma. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled severe asthma. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important asthma‐related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Three RCTs including 2735 subjects >12 years old and 24‐52 weeks of follow‐up were included. Dupilumab reduced with high certainty severe asthma exacerbations (Incidence rate ratio 0.51; 95% CI 0.45‐0.59) and the percentage use of oral corticosteroid use (mean difference (MD) −28.2 mg/d; 95% CI −40.7 to −15.7). Asthma control (ACQ‐5), quality of life (AQLQ) and rescue medication use [puffs/d] improved, without reaching the minimal important clinical difference: ACQ‐5 MD −0.28 (95% CI −0.39 to −0.17); AQLQ MD +0.28 (95% CI 0.20‐0.37); and rescue medication MD −0.35 (95% CI −0.73 to +0.02). FEV1 increased (MD +0.15; 95% CI +0.11 to +0.18) (moderate certainty). There was an increased rate of dupilumab‐related adverse events (AEs) (moderate certainty) and of drug‐related serious AEs (low certainty). The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus standard therapy was 464 000$/QALY (moderate certainty). More data on long‐term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well‐recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma‐related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6‐11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV1, without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug‐related adverse events (AE) and drug‐related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio per quality‐adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV1. More data on long‐term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]