Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab and Benralizumab in Patients with Inadequately Controlled Asthma: A Systematic Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ando K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7037967 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSevere asthma is a major cause of morbidity. Some patients may benefit from biological therapies. Most evaluations of these treatments are derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but few patients are eligible for these trials. Studies involving more diverse groups of participants exist, but there is a lack of precise pooled estimates.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to evaluate the real-world efficacy of recently and nearly licensed biological therapies for severe asthma to assess the generalizability of the RCT data.MethodsClinical outcomes including exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid usage, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 ) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were examined. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist tool. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE).ResultsA total of 21 studies examining biologicals in real-world settings were identified; they mostly focused on benralizumab and mepolizumab. The introduction of biologicals reduced the annualzsed exacerbation rate significantly by -3.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] -4.53, -3.04), -3.17 (95% CI -3.74, -2.59) and -6.72 (95% CI -8.47, -4.97) with benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab, respectively. Likewise, improvements were observed in FEV1 (0.17 L 95% CI 0.11, 0.24) and FeNO (-14.23 ppb 95% CI -19.71, -8.75) following the treatment with mepolizumab. After treatment with benralizumab, there was an increase in FEV1 (0.21 L 95% CI 0.08, 0.34).ConclusionsThese data demonstrate that anti-IL5 biologicals may improve the clinical outcomes of patients with severe asthma in a clinic environment with similar effect sizes to RCTs. The data were mainly retrospective and unadjusted, so estimated effect sizes may not be reliable. More data are needed to acquire accurate effect estimates in different subpopulations of patients.
| S-EPMC9311192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Quilizumab, a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody, targets the M1-prime segment of membrane-expressed IgE, leading to depletion of IgE-switched and memory B cells. In patients with mild asthma, quilizumab reduced serum IgE and attenuated the early and late asthmatic reaction following whole lung allergen challenge. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of quilizumab in adults with allergic asthma, inadequately controlled despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and a second controller.Five hundred seventy-eight patients were randomized to monthly or quarterly dosing regimens of subcutaneous quilizumab or placebo for 36 weeks, with a 48-week safety follow-up. Quilizumab was evaluated for effects on the rate of asthma exacerbations, lung function, patient symptoms, serum IgE, and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory analyses were conducted on biomarker subgroups (periostin, blood eosinophils, serum IgE, and exhaled nitric oxide).Quilizumab was well tolerated and reduced serum total and allergen-specific IgE by 30-40 %, but had no impact on asthma exacerbations, lung function, or patient-reported symptom measures. At Week 36, the 300 mg monthly quilizumab group showed a 19.6 % reduction (p?=?0.38) in the asthma exacerbation rate relative to placebo, but this was neither statistically nor clinically significant. Biomarker subgroups did not reveal meaningful efficacy benefits following quilizumab treatment.Quilizumab had an acceptable safety profile and reduced serum IgE. However, targeting the IgE pathway via depletion of IgE-switched and memory B cells was not sufficient for a clinically meaningful benefit for adults with allergic asthma uncontrolled by standard therapy.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01582503.
| S-EPMC4797126 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIn the Phase III SIROCCO trial (NCT01928771), benralizumab significantly reduced asthma exacerbations and improved lung function and symptoms for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma. The aim of this subgroup analysis was to evaluate efficacy and safety of benralizumab for Korean patients in SIROCCO.MethodsSIROCCO was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial of 1,204 patients aged 12-75 years with severe asthma uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂-agonists (ICS/LABA). Patients received benralizumab 30 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 8 weeks (Q8W; first 3 doses Q4W) or placebo Q4W for 48 weeks. The primary analysis population comprised patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/μL. This subgroup analysis evaluated Korean patients from this group.ResultsOf 122 Korean patients randomized, 86 had blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/μL. Benralizumab reduced the annual asthma exacerbation rate by 70% (Q4W: rate estimate 0.79, rate ratio 0.30 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.13-0.65], nominal P = 0.003; n = 28) and 85% (Q8W: rate estimate 0.40, rate ratio 0.15 [95% CI, 0.06-0.36], nominal P < 0.001; n = 30) vs. placebo (rate estimate 2.67, n = 28). Prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second was increased with benralizumab treatment by 0.270 L (Q4W: 95% CI, 0.039-0.500, nominal P = 0.023; n = 28) and 0.362 L (Q8W: 95% CI, 0.143-0.582, nominal P = 0.002; n = 30) vs. placebo (n = 27). Total asthma symptom score was similar for patients receiving either benralizumab Q4W (-0.27 [95% CI, -0.83 to 0.30], nominal P = 0.356; n = 27) or benralizumab Q8W (0.10 [95% CI, -0.44 to 0.65], nominal P = 0.708; n = 30) vs. placebo (n = 28). Drug-related adverse events were experienced by 2%, 8%, and 5% of patients in the placebo, benralizumab Q4W, and benralizumab Q8W arms.ConclusionsBenralizumab reduced annual asthma exacerbation rates, increased lung function, and was well-tolerated by Korean patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.
| S-EPMC6557768 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Azithromycin is a potential therapeutic choice for asthma control, which is a heterogeneous airway inflammatory disease. Because of variable findings, we intend to evaluate the therapeutic effect and safety of azithromycin in asthma. Databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and CNKI until 31 December 2017, were searched to identify available randomised controlled trials regarding azithromycin treatment for asthma. We identified seven studies involving 1520 cases that met our criteria. The mean difference for lung function (FEV1 , FVC, PEF), symptom assessment (ACQ, AQLQ), airway inflammation, and risk ratios for adverse events were extracted. Chi-square and I2 tests were applied to evaluate the heterogeneity among the studies towards each index with a random effect model or a fixed effect model. Pooled analysis shows that azithromycin administration results in no significant improvement in FEV1 (MD: 0.09, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.29, P = 0.36), PEF (MD: 11.76; 95% CI, -2.86 to 26.38, P = 0.11), total airway inflammatory cells (MD: -0.29; 95% CI, -1.38 to 0.80, P = 0.60), ACQ (MD: 0.05; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.19, P = 0.44), and AQLQ (MD: 0.12; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.26, P = 0.10). Moreover, no significant difference was detected in adverse events (Risk ratio 0.99; 95% CI, 0.82-1.19, P = 0.90). These findings demonstrate no beneficial clinical outcome of azithromycin in asthma control, and we propose that further prospective cohorts are warranted.
| S-EPMC6378181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vancomycin and teicoplanin are the glycopeptides currently in use for the treatment of infections caused by invasive beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive organisms. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that have compared vancomycin and teicoplanin administered systemically for the treatment of suspected or proven infections. A comprehensive search of trials without year, language, or publication status restrictions was performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by using the fixed-effect model (RRs of >1 favor vancomycin). Twenty-four trials were included. All-cause mortality was similar overall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21), and there was no significant heterogeneity. In trials that used adequate allocation concealment, the results favored teicoplanin (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06), while in trials with unknown methods or inadequate concealment, the results favored vancomycin (RR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.27 to 10.30). The latter trials might have recruited more severely ill patients. No other variable affected the RRs for mortality, including the assessment of glycopeptides administered empirically or for proven infections, neutropenia, the participant's age, and drug dosing. There were no significant differences between teicoplanin and vancomycin with regard to clinical failure (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.05), microbiological failure (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.65), and other efficacy outcomes. Lower RRs (in favor of teicoplanin) for clinical failure were observed with a lower risk of bias and when treatment was initiated for infections caused by gram-positive organisms rather than empirically. Total adverse events (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74), nephrotoxicity (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.61), and red man syndrome were significantly less frequent with teicoplanin. Teicoplanin is not inferior to vancomycin with regard to efficacy and is associated with a lower adverse event rate than vancomycin.
| S-EPMC2764163 | biostudies-other
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Dupilumab, a fully human anti-IL-4Rα monoclonal antibody, inhibits signaling of both interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, which are key drivers of type 2-mediated inflammation. Dupilumab is approved in the EU, USA, and other countries for the treatment of adults with inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Following positive phase 2 results in asthma, the phase 3 Liberty Asthma QUEST trial was initiated to provide further evidence for dupilumab efficacy and safety in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS:Liberty Asthma QUEST is a phase 3, multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial (NCT02414854) in patients with persistent asthma who are receiving continuous treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) plus one or two other asthma controller medicines. A total of 1902 patients (aged ≥ 12 years) were randomized in a 2:2:1:1 ratio to receive 52 weeks of add-on therapy with subcutaneously administered dupilumab 200 or 300 mg every 2 weeks or matched placebo. The study consisted of a 4 ± 1-week screening period, 52-week randomized treatment period, and 12-week post-treatment follow-up period. All patients continued to receive their prescribed ICS plus up to two additional controller medications. The primary efficacy endpoints were annualized rate of severe exacerbation events during the 52-week treatment period and absolute change from baseline in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 at week 12. CONCLUSION:Uncontrolled asthma patients with persistent symptoms represent a population of significant unmet need, for whom new treatments are required. Patients with severe asthma are at high risk of asthma exacerbations, and face an accelerated decline in lung function and impaired quality of life. QUEST examines the efficacy of dupilumab in this at-risk patient population; it is the largest placebo-controlled study in uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with a biologic agent to date, and the only phase 3 study of a biologic therapy of asthma that enrolled patients irrespective of baseline type 2 inflammatory biomarker levels. FUNDING:Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. CLINICAL TRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER:NCT02414854.
| S-EPMC5960488 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8360078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Eosinophils play a pivotal role in the inflammatory pathology of asthma and have been the target of new biologic treatments for patients with eosinophilic asthma. Given the central role of interleukin (IL)-5 in the eosinophil lifecycle, several therapies directed against the IL-5 pathway have been developed, including the anti-IL-5 antibodies mepolizumab and reslizumab and the IL-5 receptor ? (IL-5R?)-directed cytolytic antibody benralizumab. Eosinophil-depleting therapies represent a relatively new class of asthma treatment, and it is important to understand their long-term efficacy and safety. Eosinophils have been associated with host protection and tumor growth, raising potential concerns about the consequences of long-term therapies that deplete eosinophils. However, evidence for these associations in humans is conflicting and largely indirect or based on mouse models. Substantial prospective clinical trial and postmarketing data have accrued, providing insight into the potential risks associated with eosinophil depletion. In this review, we explore the current safety profile of eosinophil-reducing therapies, with particular attention to the potential risks of malignancies and severe infections and a focus on benralizumab. Benralizumab is an IL-5R?-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody that targets and efficiently depletes blood and tissue eosinophils through antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Benralizumab is intended to treat patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with eosinophilic inflammation. The integrated analyses of benralizumab safety data from the phase III SIROCCO and CALIMA trials and subsequent BORA extension trial for patients with asthma, and the phase III GALATHEA and TERRANOVA trials for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, form the principal basis for this review.
| S-EPMC7165132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic sinonasal disease is common in asthmatic patients and associated with poor asthma control; however, there are no long-term trials addressing whether chronic treatment of sinonasal disease improves asthma control.We sought to determine whether treatment of chronic sinonasal disease with nasal corticosteroids improves asthma control, as measured by the Childhood Asthma Control Test and Asthma Control Test in children and adults, respectively.A 24-week multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of placebo versus nasal mometasone in adults and children with inadequately controlled asthma was performed. Treatments were randomly assigned, with concealment of allocation.Two hundred thirty-seven adults and 151 children were randomized to nasal mometasone versus placebo, and 319 participants completed the study. There was no difference in the Childhood Asthma Control Test score (difference in change with mometasone - change with placebo [?M - ?P], -0.38; 95% CI, -2.19 to 1.44; P = .68; age 6-11 years) or the Asthma Control Test score (?M - ?P, 0.51; 95% CI, -0.46 to 1.48; P = .30; age ?12 years) in those assigned to mometasone versus placebo. In children and adolescents (age 6-17 years) there was no difference in asthma or sinus symptoms but a decrease in episodes of poorly controlled asthma defined by a decrease in peak flow. In adults there was a small difference in asthma symptoms measured by using the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (?M - ?P, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.11; P < .01) and in nasal symptoms (sinus symptom score ?M - ?P, -3.82; 95% CI, -7.19 to -0.45; P = .03) but no difference in asthma quality of life, lung function, or episodes of poorly controlled asthma in adults assigned to mometasone versus placebo.Treatment of chronic sinonasal disease with nasal corticosteroids for 24 weeks does not improve asthma control. Treatment of sinonasal disease in asthmatic patients should be determined by the need to treat sinonasal disease rather than to improve asthma control.
| S-EPMC4344935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Omalizumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, is the first approved anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) agent for the treatment of subjects with moderate to severe persistent allergic asthma that are inadequately controlled by the standard of care. The objective of this study was to quantitatively characterize relationships between serum free IgE and pulmonary function (as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]) as well as serum free IgE and airway inflammation (as measured by fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]) using population-based efficacy models. Data were collected from patients in the EXTRA trial who received omalizumab or placebo 150 to 375 mg subcutaneously every 2 or 4 weeks from week 0 to 48 with constant standard of care as background therapy. None of the covariates evaluated, including demographics, disease status, and baseline pharmacodynamic biomarkers, were significant in explaining the variability in the FEV1 or FeNO response to omalizumab. Results from the efficacy models further confirmed the current omalizumab dosing rationale based on the mean target free IgE level of 25 ng/ml and quantified the variability for the target. In addition, the resulting population models could be used to predict population FEV1 or FeNO response for omalizumab and/or other anti-IgE therapeutics for which PK-IgE models are constructed.
| S-EPMC3675747 | biostudies-literature