Efficacy Of Omalizumab Research Articles

Relevance of the basophil activation test in a cohort of 240 patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria.

Basophil activation test (BAT) is considered to be the best biomarker to predict autoimmune chronic spontaneous urticaria (aiCSU). To date, few studies have investigated the utility of BAT in real-life clinical practice, the role of aiCSU biomarkers in relation to omalizumab therapy and the association between aiCSU tests. This study aimed to analyze the clinical and laboratory features of a prospective cohort with CSU according to their BAT status, as well as to study omalizumab efficacy according to aiCSU biomarkers. A prospective study was conducted from 2010 to 2024 in patients with CSU. BAT alongside other laboratory tests were performed, and clinical and therapeutic features were prospectively collected. Data obtained was compared according to BAT status. Furthermore, omalizumab drug survival was typified according to aiCSU biomarkers. A total of 240 patients were included in the study. BAT positive patients presented more frequently low IgE levels, higher occurrence of IgG anti-thyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO) positivity, autologous serum skin test (ASST) positivity, basopenia, and eosinopenia. The multivariate logistic regression revealed that ASST (OR:7.69, 95%CI: 2.81-21.0) and anti-TPO (OR:2.63, 95%CI: 1.05-6.61) were associated to BAT positivity. All aiCSU biomarkers (BAT, ASST, combined ASST/BAT positivity and low IgE/anti-TPO+) associated significantly shorter omalizumab survival due to failure. In the cohort, both low IgE/anti-TPO+ and ASST were concordant and associated to BAT. The use of BAT in clinical practice delineates a subgroup of patients with specific clinical, laboratory and therapeutic features, including increased omalizumab failure.

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab combined with allergen immunotherapy in children with moderate to severe allergic asthma.

Omalizumab enables children who are intolerant to AIT to initiate AIT successfully. Combination therapy better improves asthma and rhinitis symptoms, FeNO, and lung function compared to single SCIT or omalizumab treatment. Combination therapy reduces the incidence of adverse reactions during the initial phase of SCIT and enhances its safety.

Improvement in health-related quality of life questionnaires with biologic treatment in severe asthma and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyposis: a real-life experience.

Patients with severe asthma frequently have comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with or without nasal polyps, that can increase the symptom burden and complicate treatment. Real-life clinical data on the impact of biologic treatments on CRS-specific quality-of-life questionnaires are still lacking. In this retrospective real-life study, we collected data from patients with severe asthma with comorbid CRS with/without nasal polyposis at baseline, and after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment with omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab or dupilumab. In particular, we evaluated improvements in HRQoL as measured by SinoNasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22, 0 - 110), Visual Analog Scale symptom scores (VAS, 0-10), and Asthma Control Test (ACT, 5-25) and the proportion of patients meeting the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Disease-specific HRQoL, as measured by SNOT 22 and VAS score improved in all patients at 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment compared with baseline (SNOT-22: 14, IQR: 0-52 vs 10, IQR:0-30 vs 0, IQR:0-15 vs 0, IQR:0-12, p < 0.001, VAS score: 1, IQR: 0-5 vs 0, IQR:0-3 vs 0, IQR:0-2 vs 0, IQR 0-1, p < 0.001). After 3 months of treatment >80% of patients reached the MCID for ACT, while only patients on dupilumab showed to reach a MCID in 100% of cases. The effect size depended upon the symptom burden at baseline. The study confirms the efficacy of omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in a real-life setting, with a rapid improvement in CRS-specific HRQoL and general health status. These data highlight the importance of targeting type 2 inflammation in asthmatic patients with co-existing upper and lower airways disease.The Authors disclose that preliminary data and analysis of the present study have been presented in abstract form during the "X International Workshop on Lung Health - Respiratory Disease and Immune Response", held in Nice on 19-21 January 2023.

Omalizumab in the treatment of bullous pemphigoid: A single-center series of 15 cases.

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a chronic autoimmune disease affecting the elderly population and characterized by the formation of subepidermal tense bullae. Treatment options include topical steroids, systemic steroids, immunosuppressants, and antimicrobials, and there is emerging evidence of the efficacy of omalizumab. In this study, we aimed to demonstrate omalizumab's efficacy for treating BP, and we also reported treatment-related adverse events. The retrospective cohort study included patients with BP who were followed up in our clinic's bullous diseases department between 2016 and 2023. Patients who received omalizumab were included in the study. Treatment responses of all patients were assessed by BP Disease Area Index activity and damage scores, treatment scale scoring, steroid dose reduction, and the presence/absence of pruritus. Also, total IgE levels of patients before the treatment onset and at the last visit were compared. There were 15 (male/female = 8/7) BP patients receiving omalizumab treatment. Omalizumab therapy allowed steroid dose reduction at a median of 1 month. Omalizumab (25.5 mg, 95% confidence interval 17.2-33.9, P < .001) provided a significant steroid dose reduction at the last visit compared to the beginning of treatment. Omalizumab resulted in a decrease in BP Disease Area Index activity score of 80.8 (95% confidence interval 71.8-89.8, P < .001). Also, omalizumab caused significant decline in IgE levels compared to baseline (1102.5 ± 834.5 vs 834.6 ± 613.6, P = .002). In this study, omalizumab treatment was an effective and safe option in BP patients with high baseline IgE levels who are refractory to or cannot tolerate other immunosuppressive therapies.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Omalizumab in Severe Cedar Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis in Japan.

Traditional treatments for cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis include second-generation antihistamines, nasal corticosteroids, and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Omalizumab (Xolair®), an anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody, is an additional option for severe cases unresponsive to existing therapies. Numerous studies have demonstrated the therapeutic effectiveness of omalizumab for cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis; however, most reported results after only up to four weeks of follow-up. Therefore, this study evaluates the clinical efficacy of omalizumab throughout one whole cedar pollen season. Subjects and methods: This study included patients from our department and the Otorhinolaryngology Department of Minami Osaka Hospital between 2021 and 2023 who were ≥ 12 years old and had serum total IgE levels of 30-1,500 IU/mL, a baseline weight of 30-150 kg, and persistent severe nasal symptoms despite conventional treatments. Patients taking oral steroids at the time of enrollment or had fewer than two omalizumab doses were excluded. Forty-six patients (26 males, 20 females; mean age, 19.1 ± 11.2 years) met these criteria and received subcutaneous omalizumab every 2 or 4 weeks based on their IgE levels and weight. Symptoms were assessed at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 weeks post-administration using the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) and the Japanese Standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (JRQLQ No. 1) for allergic rhinitis. Results: Thirty-six patients were followed up for 8 weeks and 13 for 12 weeks. TNSS significantly improved from 6.6 to 4.5 at 4 weeks, 4.2 at 8 weeks, and 4.1 at 12 weeks (p<0.05). Nasal discharge, sneezing, nasal obstruction, itchy eyes, and tearfulness showed significant improvements (p<0.05). Quality of life scores improved in daily activities, sleep, and physical health from week 4 to week 12. Discussion: Consistent with previous findings, omalizumab significantly improved nasal and ocular symptoms and quality of life in patients with severe cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis. Despite many patients discontinuing the drug after eight weeks due to high costs, the drug's effectiveness in preventing symptom recurrence suggests potential long-term benefits. Combining omalizumab with SLIT showed no significant differences in outcomes; however, further pharmacoeconomic studies are warranted to evaluate cost-effectiveness. Conclusion: Omalizumab proved to be an effective treatment for severe cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis, providing significant symptom relief and quality of life improvements. Further studies should investigate its long-term efficacy and safety, including potential adverse effects and the development of anti-omalizumab antibodies.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Omalizumab and Mepolizumab in Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease

Introduction: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is heterogeneous in both phenotypes and endotypes. Due to insufficient head-to-head comparison studies, it is hard to decide which biological to initiate. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of omalizumab and mepolizumab which can be used in the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma diagnosed with N-ERD. Methods: The population of this observational, cross-sectional study comprised of N-ERD patients who received omalizumab or mepolizumab for at least 6 months for severe asthma. Outcomes included the asthma control test (ACT), and sino-nasal outcome test scores (SNOT-22), blood eosinophil counts at initiation of biological treatment (T0, baseline) and at the end of 6th months (T6). Adverse effects related to biological treatment and changes of oral corticosteroids dose was recorded. Results: The study included a total of 22 patients, of whom 11 received mepolizumab and 11 received omalizumab. The change in ACT, SNOT-22, eosinophil counts, and adverse effects related to biologicals were similar at T6 (p = 0.606, p = 0.168, p = 0.05, p = 0.053, respectively). However, when examining the SNOT-22 and ACT based on the cumulative distribution curve (SUCRA), mepolizumab (SUCRA value: 0.61, 0.72, respectively) demonstrated greater efficacy compared to omalizumab (SUCRA value: 0.19, 0.35, respectively). The oral corticosteroids discontinuation rate was similar between the two groups (p = 0.05). Conclusion: We found both omalizumab and mepolizumab to be effective in treatment; however, we determined that mepolizumab may have a potential superiority in efficacy.

The Efficacy of Omalizumab in Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps and Comorbid Severe Allergic Asthma.

Chronic rhinosinusitis whit nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is the most common comorbid disease accompanying asthma. Omalizumab is a recombinant anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E antibody, and studies suggest that omalizumab may also affect CRSwNP regardless of asthma. We aimed to assess the effect of omalizumab treatment on CRSwNP accompanying severe allergic asthma (SAA) patients. Clinical data including spirometry measurements, serum/nasal secretion biomarker levels were collected. NP scores and CRS scores (Lund-Mancay [LM] scores) were also recorded before omalizumab treatment, as well as at the 4th and 12th months of omalizumab treatment. Twenty-one patients with both CRSwNP and SAA who underwent omalizumab therapy were assessed. There was a significant difference among forced expiratory volume (FEV1), ACT scores, NP scores, LM scores, serum IgE, and blood eosinophil levels of the patients before omalizumab therapy at the 4th and 12th months of omalizumab treatment. A significant negative correlation was observed between ∆FEV1 and ∆NP scores (r=-0.485), between ∆ACT and ∆NP scores (r=-0.469), and ∆ACT and ∆LM scores (r=-0.436). When we grouped the patients who benefited from 1 year of omalizumab therapy and those who did not in terms of NP, there was no difference between the two groups related to local eosinophil and local IgE levels in the nasal polyp biopsy. Omalizumab treatment is effective for asthma and CRSwNP in patients with CRSwNP accompanied by SAA. Improvement in asthma is associated with improvement in CRSwNP. The efficacy of omalizumab on NP in patients with CRSwNP accompanied by SAA is independent of local IgE and eosinophil counts.

Omalizumab for the reduction of allergic reactions to foods: a narrative review.

The frequency of food allergies varies between 2% and 10%, depending on characteristics including age, region, race, and method of diagnosis self-reported by patients or oral food challenges (OFCs). The most common allergies reported are tree nuts (1.2%), milk (1.9%), peanuts (2.2%), and shellfish (1.3%). Omalizumab injection has now been approved by the FDA for the treatment of immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies in specific adults and children aged one year or older. This medication reduces the risk of allergic reactions (Type I), which can include anaphylaxis, when an individual accidentally encounters one or more food allergens. Omalizumab functions by binding to IgE and altering IgE-mediated pathways, which lessens IgE's capacity to cause allergic reactions. Promising outcomes from clinical trials and case studies include lowered anaphylactic risk and enhanced tolerance to allergens. Omalizumab, however, may have adverse effects; thus, close observation is required. Overall, this review sheds light on the efficacy, safety, and clinical implications of omalizumab, highlighting its potential as a useful intervention for IgE-mediated food allergies.

Meta-analysis of the adoption of omalizumab in the treatment of pediatric allergic diseases

IntroductionAllergic diseases are common chronic conditions in children, omalizumab has a wide range of adoptions in various diseases. A meta-analysis was implemented to demonstrate the efficacy of omalizumab in the therapy of pediatric allergic diseases. Materials and methodsEnglish databases were searched. The search terms included “Omalizumab”, “Children”, “Allergic asthma”, and “Atopic dermatitis”. The literature was screened regarding inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were extracted and analyzed using RevMan5.3. Resultsa total of six suitable studies, comprising 2761 patients, were selected for inclusion. The meta-analysis results implied that at 24 weeks, OR for worsening of symptoms in children was 0.10 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.03–0.41), Z = 3.24, P = 0.001 (P < 0.05); at 52 weeks, OR was 0.27 (95 % CI 0.09–0.83), Z = 2.28, P = 0.02 (P < 0.05); and during treatment, OR for adverse events in children was 0.87 (95 % CI 0.60–1.29), Z = 0.68, P = 0.49 (P > 0.05). Conclusionthe study comprised six investigations that examined the effectiveness of omalizumab in treating pediatric allergic diseases. The findings demonstrated that, in comparison to standard treatment, omalizumab can greatly alleviate allergy-related clinical symptoms in children, slow down disease progression, and has a higher safety profile with fewer adverse reactions. These results have practical implications and highlight the potential value of omalizumab in pediatric allergy treatment.

Efficacy of omalizumab for the treatment of bullous pemphigoid: Spanish multicentre real-world experience.

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Most patients are older and have associated multiple comorbidities. Topical and systemic corticosteroids are considered the first-line treatment for BP, and immunosuppressants are used as steroid-sparing treatments. However, both have side-effects and contraindications, which are even more common in this older population. New treatments targeting interleukins and receptors related to BP pathogenesis have been proposed to decrease these side-effects while achieving equal or better effectiveness and response rates. Omalizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets IgE and has been proposed for the treatment of BP due to the evidence that IgE autoantibodies play an essential role in BP pathogenesis. To assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for the treatment of BP. We carried out a multicentre, retrospective, observational study including patients diagnosed with BP who received omalizumab for ≥ 3 months from 15 tertiary hospitals in Spain. IgE levels prior to treatment were measured, and we evaluated the possible correlation with clinical response. We excluded patients treated with omalizumab for < 3 months, as we consider this duration to be insufficient for a comprehensive assessment of its efficacy. To evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment, we used the percentage of body surface area improvement. We included 36 patients. The vast majority had associated multiple comorbidities, and all patients had used other systemic therapies apart from corticosteroids before omalizumab. In total, 83% experienced some kind of treatment response and 42% of all patients treated achieved complete response. We did not find any correlation between higher IgE levels and a better response (P = 0.2). All patients tolerated omalizumab without reported side-effects. Omalizumab is a good therapeutic alternative for BP as it provided clinical response in most patients, and nearly one-half of the cases achieved complete response. It showed no side-effects, which is crucial in older patients with BP.

Efficacy of biological agents combined with oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionFood allergy affects a large population throughout the world. Recently, oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been reported as an effective treatment for severe food allergy. Although OIT was successful in numerous...

Efficacy of omalizumab in adult patients with allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis: a multicentre study in China

Despite conventional glucocorticoid and antifungal therapy, acute exacerbation and hospitalization occur frequently in patients with allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA). Whether omalizumab is an effective and safe treatment for adult patients with ABPA complicating asthma. Patients with ABPA complicating asthma who were treated with omalizumab from October 2019 to May 2023 were collected from five tertiary hospitals and evaluated. The frequencies of acute exacerbation and hospitalization; the number of eosinophils; the total IgE levels; and the average monthly medical dosages after 3, 6, and 12 months of omalizumab treatment were analysed, and the data before and after treatment (up to one year) were compared. The efficacy and safety of omalizumab treatment were assessed. In total, 26 patients were enrolled. The average monthly glucocorticoid dosage significantly decreased (median 0 vs. 24 mg/m) after 6 months of omalizumab treatment compared with 3 months; 73.68% of patients discontinued glucocorticoids after ≤ 12 months of treatment. Similarly, the average monthly dosage of antifungal agents was significantly decreased (median 0 vs. 3.49 g/m) after 12 months of treatment compared with 3 months. The average monthly glucocorticoid dosage (median 213.75 vs. 65.42 mg/m, P = 0.002) and the frequency of acute exacerbation (median 0.94 vs. 0.44 events, P = 0.033) were considerably reduced after omalizumab treatment. Omalizumab is effective in reducing the frequency of acute exacerbation and the necessary dosage of glucocorticoids in adult patients with ABPA complicating asthma. Patient age and BMI may affect the efficacy of treatment.

Omalizumab as a long-term treatment for patients with severe asthma. Is it safe?: A ten-year study

Abstract Background anti-IgE (Omalizumab) is one of the targeted therapies for severe bronchial asthma. Its real-life safety is still under scrutiny. The aim of the study was to evaluate the persistent efficacy and safety of Omalizumab as a long-term treatment of severe bronchial asthma. Patients and methods A prospective cohort study was conducted on 74 patients who had severe bronchial asthma eligible for Omalizumab subcutaneous treatment with a long-term regular follow-up to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of Omalizumab. Results This study was conducted on 74 patients who had severe bronchial asthma: 33 patients (44.6%) were males with a mean±SD (37.2 ± 4), and 41 females (55.4%) with a mean±SD (35.9 ± 6). Those patients were eligible for Omalizumab treatment with a long-term regular follow-up (from 7 to 10 years) to assess the long-term safety of Omalizumab. Omalizumab treatment has a significant improvement in the clinical condition of severe bronchial asthma as it decreased the number of patients who used oral steroids from 63 patients (before starting treatment) to 6 patients after 6 months of treatment, and 2 patients after 12 months of the dose. The use of tiotropium bromide had a significant decrease because the number of patients fell from 61 patients (before the start of treatment) to 13 patients after 6 months. It also reduced the number of acute exacerbations of bronchial asthma from 7 times per year (before the start of treatment) to 3 times after 6 months, and 2 times after 12 months of treatment. Patients’ pulmonary functions (FEV1, FEV1/ FVC, PEFR) improved significantly from (43.7 ± 9, 52.3 ± 11, 51.1 ± 4) before starting Omalizumab treatment to (64.1 ± 11,71.3 ± 13, 68.2 ± 7) after 6 months of usage; and to (69.4 ± 12, 73.3 ± 14, 72.1 ± 6) after 12 months of treatment. Long-term use of Omalizumab has less severe side effects as 70% of patients had injection site reactions in the form of local tenderness and swelling, 24.3% had a headache, 12% had nausea, 9.4% had myalgia, and 17.5% had a fever while the serious side effects as cancer, anaphylaxis or myocardial infarction has not recorded. All the side effects occurred in the first year of treatment. Conclusion Long term use of Omalizumab in severe bronchial asthma management has persistent efficacy and no serious side effects such as cancer, myocardial infarction or anaphylaxis and has only minimal side effects that occurred mostly in the first year of Omalizumab treatment, meaning that the physician cannot stop giving patients the medication.

Does Comorbid Food Allergy Affect Response to Omalizumab in Patients with Asthma?

The intrinsic link between food allergy and asthma is well-established, and comorbidity can exacerbate both conditions. Omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody, has the biological plausibility to manage both conditions, but only a few small studies have assessed omalizumab in patients with comorbid asthma and food allergy. We conducted a post hoc analysis of placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (IA05 in children and 008/009 in adolescents/adults) and real-world observational studies (EXCELS and PROSPERO). For each study, patients with asthma were stratified by whether they had physician-reported food allergy, as per baseline characteristics data. For patients with comorbid food allergy, there was evidence for increased atopy at baseline (numerically higher total IgE levels and atopic comorbidities). The collective body of evidence found that omalizumab consistently improved general and asthma-specific patient-centered outcomes (food allergy-specific outcomes were not available). For patients with asthma, omalizumab improved healthcare resource use (emergency room visits, hospitalizations, unscheduled doctor visits), quality of life (asthma-specific Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire), productivity (missed work/school days and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Asthma), and asthma outcomes (asthma exacerbations and Asthma Control Test score) regardless of comorbid food allergy. There was no loss of omalizumab efficacy even though patients with both asthma and food allergy appeared to be generally more atopic. Omalizumab may be a viable management option for patients with these comorbidities. NCT00079937; NCT01922037; NCT00252135.

Real-Life Effects of Omalizumab on Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is an inflammatory disease of the nasal and sinus mucosa. This inflammatory process is supported by a multitude of cytokines, including IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 produced by Th2 cells, as well as by IgE produced by B lymphocytes in response to a stimulus. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody with well-recognized roles in allergic asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of omalizumab in a cohort of 13 patients suffering from chronic rhinosinusitis with CRSwNP. The inclusion criteria considered were as follows: 18 years of age, with a diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis with severe nasal polyposis expressed by an NPS greater than or equal to 5 and/or a SNOT-22 greater than or equal to 50. In addition, in the enrolled patients, the classic treatment with corticosteroids had to have been suspended due to recurrence after surgery or lack of response. Our results highlighted that omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks improved the parameters analyzed: SNOT-22, NPS, NRS, and NCS. The clinical efficacy of omalizumab was further strengthened by a significant improvement in respiratory function as well as reductions in the nasal polyps' size and in the associated symptoms.

Comparative efficacy of ligelizumab versus omalizumab in chronic spontaneous urticaria

Comparative efficacy of ligelizumab versus omalizumab in chronic spontaneous urticaria

Safety of omalizumab in chronic urticaria during pregnancy: a real-life study.

Managing a pregnant patient with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is often challenging. Recent data have shown that most CSU treatments in pregnant patients are second-generation H1 antihistamines (sgAHs), while data on the safety of omalizumab are scant. To evaluate, in a routine clinical practice setting, the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with severe CSU refractory to sgAHs who either became pregnant during treatment or who started the drug during pregnancy. We conducted a retrospective study of women aged ≥ 18 years who were pregnant, who received one or more doses of omalizumab at any time during their pregnancy or who were taking omalizumab at the time of, or in the 8 weeks before, conception. Twenty-nine pregnant patients were evaluated: 23 (79%) conceived a child while taking omalizumab (group A), while 6 (21%) started omalizumab treatment during pregnancy (group B). Among patients in group A, we observed 23 births (21 liveborn singletons and 1 liveborn twin pair) and 1 miscarriage. Fifteen (65%) patients discontinued omalizumab after confirming their pregnancy, while eight (35%) were exposed to omalizumab during their entire pregnancy. In group B, omalizumab was introduced at a mean (SD) 10.83 (3.60) weeks' gestation and all patients were exposed to it until the end of pregnancy. In this group, there were seven liveborn infants (five singletons and one twin pair). No adverse events, pregnancy complications or congenital anomalies in newborns were recorded in either group. Omalizumab for CSU treatment before and during pregnancy does not appear to have negative effects on maternal or fetal outcomes.

IgE directly affects eosinophil migration in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps through CCR3 and predicts the efficacy of omalizumab

Whether IgE affects eosinophil migration in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) remains largely unclear. Moreover, our understanding of local IgE, eosinophils, and omalizumab efficacy in CRSwNP remains limited. We investigated whether IgE acts directly on eosinophils and determined its role in omalizumab therapy. Eosinophils and their surface receptors were detected by hematoxylin and eosin staining and flow cytometry. IgE and its receptors, eosinophil peroxidase (EPX), eosinophilic cationic protein, and CCR3 were detected by immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence. Functional analyses were performed on blood eosinophils and polyp tissues. Logistic regression was performed to screen for risk factors. Receiver operating characteristic curve was generated to evaluate the accuracy. Both FcεRI and CD23 were expressed on eosinophils. The expression of FcεRI and CD23 on eosinophil in nasal polyp tissue was higher than in peripheral blood (both P< .001). IgE and EPX colocalized in CRSwNP. IgE directly promoted eosinophil migration by upregulating CCR3 in CRSwNP but not in healthy controls. Omalizumab and lumiliximab were found to be effective in restraining this migration, indicating CD23 was involved in IgE-induced eosinophil migration. Both IgE+ and EPX+ cells were significantly reduced after omalizumab treatment in those who experienced response (IgE+ cells, P= .001; EPX+ cells, P= .016) but not in those with no response (IgE+ cells, P= .060; EPX+ cells, P= .151). Baseline IgE+ cell levels were higher in those with response compared to those without response (P= .024). The baseline local IgE+ cell count predicted omalizumab efficacy with an accuracy of 0.811. IgE directly promotes eosinophil migration, and baseline local IgE+ cell counts are predictive of omalizumab efficacy in CRSwNP.

Therapeutic efficacy of omalizumab in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis.

Omalizumab has been approved for treating moderate-to-severe asthma in children aged over 6 years. Its application to asthmatic children with other allergic diseases has been rarely explored. The present study aims to explore the therapeutic efficacy of omalizumab in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis. The clinical data of children diagnosed with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis and treated with omalizumab between September 2020 and April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Lung function indexes such as Childhood Asthma Control Test (C-ACT) scores, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) percent predicted (FEV1%pred), small airway function indexes, and the clinical symptoms of chronic sinusitis were analyzed. A total of 26 children were observed for 16 weeks. After 16 weeks of omalizumab treatment, the significantly increased C-ACT scores (15.57 ± 3.25 points vs. 24.98 ± 5.21 points, F = 15.7112, P < 0.001) and decreased FeNO (31.55 ± 15.57 ppb vs. 19.86 ± 9.80 ppb, F = 4.4265, P = 0.0022), compared with those at baseline, were suggestive of well-controlled symptoms of asthma and improved lung function. FEV1%pred and FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio (the ratio of the forced expiratory volume in the first 1 s to the forced vital capacity) increased after omalizumab treatment, although no significant differences were detected (P = 0.9954 and 0.9382, respectively). Peak expiratory flow (PEF) percent predicted (PEF%pred) and forced expiratory flow at 75% of FVC (FEF75%), 50% of FVC (FEF50%), and 25%-75% of FVC (FEF25%-75%) significantly increased after omalizumab treatment (P = 0.0477, <0.001, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively). Visual analog scale scores significantly decreased after omalizumab treatment (6.40 ± 2.98 points vs. 0.85 ± 0.40 points, t = 27.2419, P < 0.001), suggesting alleviation in the clinical symptoms of chronic sinusitis. In this study, it was found that omalizumab can effectively alleviate clinical symptoms and improve lung function and quality of life in children with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma combined with chronic sinusitis.

Does NSAID exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) accompanying severe asthma affect biological treatment response? Efficacy of omalizumab and mepolizumab in N-ERD

IntroductionNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) accompanies severe asthma in about 15% of the patients and may adversely affect the prognosis. Omalizumab and mepolizumab are biologics used in patients with severe asthma. The objective of this study is to assess the respiratory improvements, after these biologics in severe asthmatic patients stratifed by the presence of concomitant Non-erosive reflux disease (N-ERD) and the effect of omalizumab and mepolizumab in severe asthmatics with N-ERD. Material & methodThe population of this three-center, retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study comprised patients using omalizumab or mepolizumab for severe asthma. Patients administered these biologics for severe asthma were comparatively analyzed for the presence of N-ERD; asthma control test (ACT) scores, number of attacks, and the changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) were assessed. Subsequently, patients who were found to have N-ERD were analyzed using visual analog scale (VAS) in terms of the changes in their nasal parameters (ie, nasal obstruction, facial pain, anterior-posterior rhinitis, and hyposmia), according to whether they use omalizumab or mepolizumab. ResultsThe use of biologics resulted in a significant improvement in ACT and FEV1 and reduction in attacks in 28 severe asthmatics with N-ERD and 125 without N-ERD. Although both biologics resulted in a significant improvement in the respiratory parameters, omalizumab treatment resulted in a significant improvement in nasal parameters except hyposmia, mepolizumab treatment resulted in a significant improvement only in posterior rhinitis, and nasal obstruction among the nasal parameters. ConclusionThis study is the first to address both omalizumab and mepolizumab treatments in severe asthmatics with N-ERD. The improvement in nasal parameters was more pronounced in patients who were administered omalizumab. Large-scale randomized controlled studies are needed to corroborate the findings of this study.