Adherence to inhaled corticosteroids and clinical outcomes following a year of benralizumab therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma

Allergy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grainne d'Ancona ◽  
Joanne E. Kavanagh ◽  
Jaideep Dhariwal ◽  
Andrew P. Hearn ◽  
Cris Roxas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

scholarly journals Adherence to corticosteroids and clinical outcomes in mepolizumab therapy for severe asthma

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 1902259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gráinne d'Ancona ◽  
Joanne Kavanagh ◽  
Cris Roxas ◽  
Linda Green ◽  
Mariana Fernandes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Biologic Therapy ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Good Adherence ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Exacerbation Rate ◽  
Asthmatic Patients ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Asthma Patients

IntroductionInhaled corticosteroids (ICS) achieve disease control in the majority of asthmatic patients, although adherence to prescribed ICS is often poor. Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma may require treatment with oral corticosteroids (OCS) and/or biologic agents such as mepolizumab. It is unknown if ICS adherence changes on, or alters clinical response to, biologic therapy.MethodsWe examined ICS adherence and clinical outcomes in OCS-dependent severe eosinophilic asthma patients who completed 1 year of mepolizumab therapy. The ICS medicines possession ratio (MPR) was calculated (the number of doses of ICS issued on prescription/expected number) for the year before and the year after biologic initiation. Good adherence was defined as MPR >0.75, intermediate 0.74–0.51 and poor <0.5. We examined outcomes after 12 months of biologic therapy, including OCS reduction and annualised exacerbation rate (AER), stratified by adherence to ICS on mepolizumab.ResultsOut of 109 patients commencing mepolizumab, 91 who had completed 12 months of treatment were included in the final analysis. While receiving mepolizumab, 68% had good ICS adherence, with 16 (18%) having poor ICS adherence. ICS use within the cohort remained similar before (MPR 0.81±0.32) and during mepolizumab treatment (0.82±0.32; p=0.78). Patients with good adherence had greater reductions in OCS dose (median (interquartile range) OCS reduction 100 (74–100)% versus 60 (27–100)%; p=0.031) and exacerbations (AER change −2.1±3.1 versus 0.3±2.5; p=0.011) than those with poor adherence. Good ICS adherence predicted the likelihood of stopping maintenance OCS (adjusted OR 3.19, 95% CI 1.02–9.94; p=0.045).ConclusionICS nonadherence is common in severe eosinophilic asthma patients receiving mepolizumab, and is associated with a lesser reduction in OCS requirements and AER.

Diagnosis and Management of Severe Asthma

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (01) ◽  
pp. 091-099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kian Fan Chung
Keyword(s):  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Immunoglobulin E ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Exhaled Breath ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Asthma Patients ◽  
Long Acting

AbstractSevere therapy-resistant asthma has been defined as “asthma which requires treatment with high dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) plus a second controller (and/or systemic corticosteroids) to prevent it from becoming ‘uncontrolled’ or which remains ‘uncontrolled’ despite this therapy”. Patients who usually present with ‘difficult-to-treat asthma’ should first be assessed to determine whether he/she has asthma with the exclusion of other diagnoses and if so, whether the asthma can be classified as severe therapy-resistant. This necessitates an assessment of adherence to medications, confounding factors, and comorbidities. Increasingly, management of severe therapy-resistant asthma will be helped by the determination of phenotypes to optimize responses to existing and new therapies. Severe asthma patients are usually on a combination of high dose ICS and long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and, in addition, are often on a maintenance dose of oral corticosteroids. Phenotyping can be informed by measuring blood eosinophil counts and the level of nitric oxide in exhaled breath, and the use of sputum granulocytic counts. Severe allergic asthma and severe eosinophilic asthma are two defined phenotypes for which there are efficacious targeted biologic therapies currently available, namely anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) and anti-interleukin (IL)-5 antibodies, respectively. Further progress will be realized with the definition of noneosinophilic or non-T2 phenotypes. It will be important for patients with severe asthma to be ultimately investigated and managed in specialized severe asthma centers.

scholarly journals Eosinophil‐derived neurotoxin and clinical outcomes with mepolizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma

Allergy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (8) ◽  
pp. 2085-2088 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Howarth ◽  
Santiago Quirce ◽  
Alberto Papi ◽  
Elliot Israel ◽  
Stephen Mallett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

Dual biologic therapy in a patient with severe asthma and other allergic disorders

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. e242211
Author(s):  
Joshua Ray Caskey ◽  
David Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Chronic Idiopathic Urticaria ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Dramatic Improvement ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Systemic Corticosteroids ◽  
Acute Exacerbations ◽  
H1 Antihistamines

Severe asthma is very difficult to manage in many individuals, and systemic corticosteroids are often used to prevent or manage acute exacerbations. Furthermore, comorbid allergic conditions may render standard therapies inadequate. A 51-year-old man presented with severe eosinophilic asthma requiring nearly constant oral corticosteroid usage despite using high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and secondary asthma controllers. His condition was complicated by aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, including severe nasal polyposis, chronic rhinosinusitis, as well as chronic idiopathic urticaria. Mepolizumab was initiated and led to dramatic improvement of asthma over 6 months. However, he continued to experience exacerbations of chronic idiopathic urticaria not responsive to H1-antihistamines. Omalizumab was added, and the patient’s urticaria attained marked improvement with only an occasional breakthrough rash. Dual biologic therapies can be a unique and useful steroid-sparing treatment option for patients with uncontrolled severe asthma and chronic idiopathic urticaria.

scholarly journals Genetically engineered drugs for treatment of bronchial asthma: recent achievements

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 584-601
Author(s):  
S. K. Zyryanov ◽  
O. I. Butranova
Keyword(s):  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
D2 Receptor ◽  
Genetically Engineered ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Prostaglandin D2 ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Ige Antibodies ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Bronchial Inflammation

Current population of patients with asthma is characterized by increasing resistance to standard pharmacotherapeutic agents such as inhaled corticosteroids, antileukotriene agents and anti-IgE antibodies. These findings were confirmed by international statistic data and indicate insufficient efficacy of the treatment. Asthma phenotyping encompassing a role of certain biomarkers for bronchial inflammation could contribute to achieving better response to treatment. Genetically engineered drugs could directly impact on mediators and modulators involved in the inflammation and bronchoconstriction. This is one of the most promising directions of the modern pharmacotherapy, particularly considering severe and difficult-to-treat asthma. A comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of currently available genetically engineered drug groups (monoclonal anti-IgE antibodies, monoclonal antibodies against interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13 and IL-5, and prostaglandin D2 receptor antagonists) was performed by the authors of this article on the basis of results of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT). According to RCT results, omalizumab is still the leading genetically engineered drug. Moreover, evidence of efficacy and safety of novel agents has been published that allowed implementation these drugs in the routine clinical practice for treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma.

scholarly journals Reslizumab versus placebo for poorly controlled, severe eosinophilic asthma: Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 75 (9) ◽  
pp. 884-896
Author(s):  
Milos Milosavljevic ◽  
Slobodan Jankovic ◽  
Ana Pejcic ◽  
Jasmina Milovanovic ◽  
Valentina Opancina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Recombinant Dna ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

Background/Aim. Reslizumab is humanized monoclonal antibody produced by recombinant DNA technology which binds to circulating interleukin-5 (IL-5) and down-regulates the IL-5 signaling pathway. Reslizumab is indicated for the add-on maintenance treatment of patients 18 years and older with severe eosinophilic asthma phenotype whose symptoms were inadequately controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of reslizumab compared to placebo in patients suffering from inadequately controlled, moderateto- severe asthma with elevated blood eosinophil counts. Methods. Our meta-analysis was based on systematic search of literature and selection of high-quality evidence according to pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. The effects of reslizumab and placebo were summarized using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3.5 and heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochrane Q test and I? values. Several types of bias were assessed and publication bias shown by Funnel plot and Egger?s regression. Results. The meta-analysis included 5 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials. Reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg produced substantial improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1. second (FEV 1) (mean difference 0.15 [0.10, 0.21]) and in forced vital capacity (FVC) (mean difference 0.21 [0.09, 0.32]) over the 15 or 16-week treatment period, substantial decrease versus placebo in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score (mean difference -0.28 [-0.41, -0.16]), and substantial increase vs. placebo from baseline in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) total score (mean difference 0.24 [0.06, 0.43]). Also, reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg caused less adverse events versus placebo (OR 0.67 [0.51, 0.88]), especially asthma worsening (OR 0.53 [0.36, 0.77]) or bronchitis (OR 0.42 [0.24, 0.74]). Conclusion. On the basis of published clinical trials reslizumab could be considered as an effective and safe therapeutic option for severe, poorly controlled eosinophilic asthma for the time being.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document