Meta-Analysis of Asthma Control in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated with Mepolizumab

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-P. Llanos Ackert ◽  
M.S. Forshag ◽  
D. Carstens ◽  
B. Mayer ◽  
F. Albers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Asthma Control ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

scholarly journals Impact of baseline clinical asthma characteristics on the response to mepolizumab: a post hoc meta-analysis of two Phase III trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Lemiere ◽  
Camille Taillé ◽  
Jason Kihyuk Lee ◽  
Steven G. Smith ◽  
Stephen Mallett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Function ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Airway Reversibility

Abstract Background Severe asthma is associated with a broad range of phenotypes and clinical characteristics. This analysis assessed whether select baseline patient characteristics could prognosticate mepolizumab efficacy in severe eosinophilic asthma. Methods This was a post hoc meta-analysis of data from the Phase III MENSA (NCT01691521/MEA115588) and MUSCA (NCT02281318/200862) studies. Patients aged ≥ 12 years with severe eosinophilic asthma and a history of exacerbations were randomised to receive placebo (MENSA/MUSCA), mepolizumab 75 mg intravenously (MENSA) or 100 mg subcutaneously (SC) (MENSA/MUSCA) every 4 weeks for 32 (MENSA) or 24 (MUSCA) weeks. The primary endpoint was the annual rate of clinically significant exacerbations; other outcomes included the proportion of patients with no exacerbations and changes from baseline in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score. Analyses were performed by baseline age of asthma onset (< 18 years; 18–40 years; ≥ 40 years); lung function (% predicted FEV1 ≤ 60; 60–80; > 80); airway reversibility (reversible [≥ 12% change in FEV1]; non-reversible [< 12% change in FEV1]); perennial and/or seasonal allergen sensitivity (yes/no); asthma control (uncontrolled [ACQ-5 score ≥ 1.5]; partial/complete control [ACQ-5 score < 1.5]). Results Overall, 936 patients received mepolizumab 100 mg SC or placebo. Across age at asthma onset, lung function and airway reversibility subgroups, mepolizumab reduced the rate of clinically significant exacerbations by 49–63% versus placebo. Improvements in lung function, SGRQ total score and ACQ-5 score were also seen with mepolizumab versus placebo across most age and lung function subgroups. Clinically significant exacerbations were reduced with mepolizumab versus placebo irrespective of season or allergen sensitivity; SGRQ total and ACQ-5 scores were generally improved across seasons. Conclusions Mepolizumab efficacy was consistent for patients with varying age at asthma onset, lung function, airway reversibility and allergen sensitivities at baseline. Our results indicate that mepolizumab is likely to be beneficial for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma with a broad range of baseline clinical characteristics; large-scale real-world studies are needed to confirm the external validity of these findings. Trial registration Post hoc meta-analysis of data from MENSA (NCT01691521/MEA115588) and MUSCA (NCT02281318/200862)

scholarly journals Clinical and Economic Consequences of Switching From Omalizumab to Mepolizumab in Uncontrolled Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: an Observational Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanna Elisiana Carpagnano ◽  
Emanuela Resta ◽  
Massimiliano Povero ◽  
Corrado Pelaia ◽  
Mariella D'Amato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nitric Oxide ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Exhaled Nitric Oxide ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Exacerbation Rate ◽  
Serum Ige ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Oral Corticosteroids

Abstract Background: Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids, which worsen patients’ health and increase healthcare spending. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of switching from omalizumab to mepolizumab in patients eligible for both biologics, but not optimally controlled by omalizumab.Methods: We retrospectively enrolled uncontrolled severe asthmatic patients, referred to seven asthma clinics in Italy, who switched from omalizumab to mepolizumab during the last two years. Clinical, functional, and laboratory information included blood eosinophil count, asthma control test, spirometry, serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, oral corticosteroids intake, use of controller and rescue drugs, exacerbations/hospitalizations, visits and diagnostic exams. Within the perspective of Italian National Health System, a pre- and post-mepolizumab 12-month standardized total cost per patient was calculated.Results: 33 patients were enrolled: 5 males and 28 females, mean age 57 years, mean disease onset 24 years. At omalizumab discontinuation, 88% were oral corticosteroids-dependent with annual mean rate of 4.0 clinically significant exacerbations, 0.30 exacerbations needing emergency room visits or hospitalization; absenteeism due to disease was 10.4 days per patient. Switch to mepolizumab improved all clinical outcomes, reducing total exacerbation rate (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.14), oral corticosteroids -dependent patients (OR = 0.02, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.08), and the number of lost working days because of uncontrolled disease (Δ = -7.9, 95% CI -11.2 to -4.6). Pulmonary function improved, as well as serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide and eosinophils decreased. Mean annual costs were € 12,239 for omalizumab and € 12,639 for mepolizumab (Δ = € 400, 95% CI -1,588 to 2,389); the increment due to drug therapy (+ € 1,581) was almost offset by savings regarding all other cost items (- € 1,181). Conclusions: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not controlled by omalizumab, experienced comprehensive benefits in asthma control by switching to mepolizumab. These relevant improvements were burdened by only very slight increases in economic costs.

scholarly journals Stopping versus continuing long-term mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma (COMET study)

2021 ◽  
pp. 2100396
Author(s):  
Wendy C. Moore ◽  
Oliver Kornmann ◽  
Marc Humbert ◽  
Claude Poirier ◽  
Elisabeth H. Bel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Emergency Department Visit ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Clinically Significant

The long-term efficacy and safety of mepolizumab for treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma are well established. Here, we examine the clinical impact of stopping mepolizumab after long-term use.COMET (NCT02555371) was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study. Patients who had completed COLUMBA (NCT01691859) or COSMEX (NCT02135692) and received continuous mepolizumab treatment for ≥3 years were randomised 1:1 to stop (switch to placebo) or continue subcutaneous mepolizumab 100 mg every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Primary endpoint: time to first clinically significant exacerbation; secondary endpoints: time to first exacerbation requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit, time to decrease in asthma control (≥0.5-point increase in Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score from COMET baseline), and blood eosinophil count ratio to COMET baseline. Safety was assessed.Patients stopping (n=151) versus continuing (n=144) mepolizumab had significantly shorter times to first clinically significant exacerbation (hazard ratio: 1.61 [95% confidence interval: 1.17,2.22]; p=0.004) and decrease in asthma control (hazard ratio: 1.52 [1.13,2.02]; p=0.005), and higher blood eosinophil counts at Week 52 (270 versus 40 cells·µL−1; ratio [stopping versus continuing]: 6.19 [4.89, 7.83]; p<0.001). Differences in efficacy outcomes between groups were observed when assessed from Week 12 (16 weeks after last mepolizumab dose). Exacerbations requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit were rare. Adverse events in patients continuing mepolizumab were consistent with previous studies. For patients who stopped mepolizumab, the safety profile was consistent with other eosinophilic asthma populations.Patients who stopped mepolizumab had an increase in exacerbations and reduced asthma control versus those who continued.

Reslizumab and mepolizumab for moderate-to-severe poorly controlled asthma: an indirect comparison meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 1491-1505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Yan ◽  
Chakrapani Balijepalli ◽  
Rohini Sharma ◽  
Stephane Barakat ◽  
Shawn X Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Global Initiative For Asthma ◽  
Credible Intervals ◽  
Global Initiative ◽  
Eosinophil Counts

Aim: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg and mepolizumab 100 mg. Materials & methods: Eligible studies evaluated reslizumab and mepolizumab in patients with inadequately-controlled severe eosinophilic asthma. Using a Bayesian network meta-analysis, 95% credible intervals and posterior probabilities were reported. Results: Of 19 indirect efficacy comparisons performed in base-case (Global Initiative for Asthma 4/5 patients with ≥2 exacerbations in the previous year) and overall populations, significant differences favoring reslizumab were observed for severe exacerbations, FEV1 at 4 weeks and eosinophil counts at 4, 16 and 24 weeks, with no other significant differences including risk of adverse events. Conclusion: Indirect comparison of reslizumab and mepolizumab largely showed no significant differences in efficacy or safety.

scholarly journals Corticosteroid tapering with benralizumab treatment for eosinophilic asthma: PONENTE Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 00009-2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Menzies-Gow ◽  
Jonathan Corren ◽  
Elisabeth H. Bel ◽  
Jorge Maspero ◽  
Liam G. Heaney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adrenal Insufficiency ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Maintenance Phase ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Interleukin 5 ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Related Quality

Benralizumab is an interleukin-5 receptor α-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody approved in several countries for the add-on maintenance treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma aged 12 years and older. In the 28-week Phase III ZONDA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02075255), benralizumab produced a median 75% reduction from baseline in oral corticosteroid (OCS) dosage (versus 25% for placebo) while maintaining asthma control for patients with OCS-dependent severe asthma. This manuscript presents the detailed protocol for the Phase IIIb PONENTE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03557307), a study that will build on the findings from ZONDA.As the largest steroid-sparing study undertaken in severe asthma, PONENTE has a faster steroid tapering schedule for prednisone dosages ≥7.5 mg·day−1 than previous studies, and it includes an evaluation of adrenal insufficiency and an algorithm to taper OCS dosage when prednisone dosage is ≤5 mg·day−1. It also has a longer maintenance phase to assess asthma control for up to 6 months after completion of OCS tapering.The two primary endpoints are whether patients achieve 100% reduction in daily OCS use and whether patients achieve 100% reduction in daily OCS or achieve OCS dosage ≤5 mg·day−1, if adrenal insufficiency prevented further reduction, both sustained over ≥4 weeks without worsening of asthma. Safety and change from baseline in health-related quality of life will also be assessed.PONENTE should provide valuable guidance for clinicians on tapering OCS dosage, including the management of adrenal insufficiency, following benralizumab initiation for the treatment of patients who are OCS-dependent with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.

MEPOLIZUMAB REDUCES EXACERBATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH SEVERE EOSINOPHILIC ASTHMA IRRESPECTIVE OF BASELINE MAINTENANCE OCS USE: META-ANALYSIS FROM TWO PH3 TRIALS

CHEST Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 156 (4) ◽  
pp. A1745-A1746
Author(s):  
Steven Smith ◽  
Njira Lugogo ◽  
Ian Pavord ◽  
Elisabeth Bel ◽  
Jean-Pierre Llanos-Ackert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

scholarly journals The Benefit of Benralizumab Monoclonal Antibody Treatment for Severe Eosinophilic Asthma in a Case Series (Pulmonology Clinic Târgu Mureș, Romania)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 157-161
Author(s):  
Nimród László ◽  
Hédy Katalin Sárközy ◽  
Cristina Alexandra Man ◽  
Edith Simona Ianoși ◽  
Botond Mátyás ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Asthma Control ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Case Series ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Antibody Treatment ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Eosinophil Counts

Abstract Background: Monoclonal antibody therapy is currently an additional treatment option to reduce exacerbations and improve symptom control in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) that is uncontrolled despite treatment with high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-2 agonists. Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds to the interleukin-5 receptor (IL-5), significantly reduces symptoms and annual exacerbations, as well as the use of systemic corticosteroids in patients with SEA. However, few studies are available on the effectiveness of this biological treatment in real life. The aim of this case series was to evaluate the efficacy of benralizumab by analyzing changes in clinical parameters and blood eosinophils in patients with SEA. Methods: We analyzed four patients with SEA who started treatment with benralizumab. The history of symptoms and exacerbations, eosinophil counts, data regarding the oral corticosteroid dose, need for rescue treatment, spirometry measurements and asthma control questionnaires (ACT) regarding the level of asthma control were recorded. A positive response to treatment was defined by a significant reduction in eosinophil counts, increased ACT scores, and lower rates of exacerbations. Results and conclusions: Benralizumab monoclonal antibody was effective in all four patients. This was shown by a reduction in exacerbation rates, symptom severity, and lower dose of oral corticosteroids and rescue medication. This novel treatment was well tolerated by the analyzed patients, thus indicating that benralizumab is an attractive choice for patients due to eosinophilic count reduction as well as the less frequent dosing schedule. However, further studies are required, on larger populations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document