Oral Corticosteroid-dependent Asthma Research Articles

Tezepelumab for Severe Asthma: One Drug Targeting Multiple Disease Pathways and Patient Types.

Asthma is a heterogeneous inflammatory disease of the airways, affecting many children, adolescents, and adults worldwide. Up to 10% of people with asthma have severe disease, associated with a higher risk of hospitalizations, greater healthcare costs, and poorer outcomes. Patients with severe asthma generally require high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and additional controller medications to achieve disease control; however, many patients remain uncontrolled despite this intensive treatment. The treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma has improved with greater understanding of asthma pathways and phenotypes as well as the advent of targeted biologic therapies. Tezepelumab, a monoclonal antibody, blocks thymic stromal lymphopoietin, an epithelial cytokine that has multifaceted effects on the initiation and persistence of asthma inflammation and pathophysiology. Unlike other biologic treatments, tezepelumab has demonstrated efficacy across severe asthma phenotypes, with the magnitude of effects varying by phenotype. Here we describe the anti-inflammatory effects and efficacy of tezepelumab across the most relevant phenotypes of severe asthma. Across clinical studies, tezepelumab reduced annualized asthma exacerbation rates versus placebo by 63-71% in eosinophilic severe asthma, by 58-68% in allergic severe asthma, by 67-71% in allergic and eosinophilic severe asthma, by 34-49% in type 2-low asthma, and by 31-41% in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. Furthermore, in all these asthma phenotypes, tezepelumab demonstrated higher efficacy in reducing exacerbations requiring hospitalizations or emergency department visits versus placebo. In patients with severe uncontrolled asthma, who commonly have multiple drivers of inflammation and disease, tezepelumab may modulate airway inflammation more extensively, as other available biologics block only specific downstream components of the inflammatory cascade.

Efficacy and Safety of Biologics for Oral Corticosteroid–Dependent Asthma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

A maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) in addition to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2-agonists in patients with severe asthma leads to long-term adverse events. Oral corticosteroid-sparing agents are of high priority. This network meta-analysis assessed biologics' comparative efficacy and safety in OCS-dependent patients with asthma. We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials that addressed the efficacy and safety of biologics compared with placebo in OCS-dependent patients with asthma from inception to July 2023. The primary outcome was an overall reduction in the OCS dose while asthma control was maintained. We included seven randomized controlled trials involving 1,052 OCS-dependent patients with asthma. Compared with placebo, benralizumab every 8 weeks, benralizumab every 4 weeks, dupilumab, and mepolizumab were efficacious in achieving a reduction in the OCS dose with low to moderate confidence (odds ratio [95% CI]: 4.12 [2.22-7.64]; 4.09 [2.22-7.55]; 3.25 [1.90-5.55]; and 2.39 [1.25-4.57], respectively) whereas tralokinumab, tezepelumab, and subcutaneous reslizumab were ineffective. An indirect comparison found no significant differences among benralizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab. Efficacy in reducing exacerbations was consistent with the primary analysis. High baseline blood eosinophil counts benefit from anti-IL-5 therapies, whereas high FeNO levels favor dupilumab regardless of blood eosinophil counts. Adverse events between biologics and placebo were comparable, except for eosinophilia with dupilumab. In OCS-dependent patients with asthma, benralizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab were superior to placebo in reducing the OCS dose. Evaluating baseline biomarkers helps in choosing the proper biologics to maximize treatment effects.

EPH35 Comorbidities in Elderly Patients with Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Asthma in South Korea

To examine the adverse effects of oral corticosteroid (OCS) on elderly asthma patients in South Korea, we aimed to estimate the prevalence and odds of potential OCS-related comorbidities in OCS-dependent asthma patients compared with patients who did not use OCS.

Dupilumab (Dupixent)


 CADTH reimbursement reviews are comprehensive assessments of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, as well as patient and clinician perspectives, of a drug or drug class.
 The assessments inform non-binding recommendations that help guide the reimbursement decisions of Canada's federal, provincial, and territorial governments, with the exception of Quebec.
 This review assesses dupilumab (Dupixent), 200 mg or 300 mg, single-use syringe, solution for subcutaneous injection.
 Indication: As an add-on maintenance treatment in patients aged ≥ 6 years with severe asthma with a type 2 or eosinophilic phenotype or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma.

The long-term effect of dupilumab on dyspnea, sleep, and activity in oral corticosteroid-dependent severe asthma

BackgroundSevere asthma impacts quality of life (QoL), including dyspnea, sleep, and activity limitation. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukins-4 and -13, which are key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation. Phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA VENTURE (NCT02528214) and LIBERTY ASTHMA TRAVERSE open-label extension (NCT02134028) evaluated dupilumab 300 mg vs placebo every 2 weeks for 24 weeks (VENTURE) and dupilumab only for an additional 48 to 96 weeks (TRAVERSE) in patients with oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent severe asthma. ObjectiveTo assess dupilumab's impact on Asthma QoL Questionnaire (AQLQ) items related to breathing symptoms, sleep, and activity limitation, and on OCS reduction. MethodsThe proportion of patients with AQLQ scores of 6 or 7 for breathing symptoms-, sleeping-, and activity-related items in VENTURE and TRAVERSE, together with OCS dose reductions in VENTURE. ResultsIn VENTURE, significantly greater proportions of dupilumab- vs placebo-treated patients achieved scores of 6 or 7 by week 24 in breathing symptoms-related (42.7%-60.2% vs 22.4%-39.3%), sleeping-related (45.6%-65.0% vs 27.1%-47.7%), and activity-related (44.7%-51.5% vs 22.4%-34.6%) AQLQ items. Improvements were maintained through TRAVERSE in the dupilumab/dupilumab group and increased to dupilumab treatment levels in the placebo/dupilumab group. Significant OCS dose reductions were observed in VENTURE; up to 90% and 60% of dupilumab-treated vs 65% and 41% of placebo-treated patients with AQLQ scores of 6 or 7 in breathing symptoms-, sleeping-, and activity-related items achieved greater than or equal to 50% dose reduction and eliminated OCS at week 24, respectively. ConclusionIn patients with severe OCS-dependent asthma, dupilumab improved QoL related to breathing symptoms, sleep, and activity limitation, and reduced OCS use. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02528214 and NCT02134028.

CO54 Dupilumab vs Placebo Improves Symptoms, Asthma Control, and Asthma-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Severe Asthma Through 48 Weeks of Follow up

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4/-13 (key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation), had an acceptable safety profile and showed clinical efficacy in patients aged ≥12 years with oral corticosteroid (OCS)–dependent severe asthma. This post hoc analysis assessed dupilumab efficacy in patients enrolled in TRAVERSE (NCT02134028), on open-label extension of VENTURE (NCT02528214).

Efficacy and Safety of Masitinib in Corticosteroid-Dependent Severe Asthma: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

BackgroundMasitinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that selectively targets mast cell activity and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) signaling, both of which are implicated in various mechanisms of asthma pathogenesis.ObjectiveAssessment of masitinib as an add-on to standard maintenance therapy as compared with placebo in the treatment of oral corticosteroid-dependent severe asthma.MethodsWe conducted a randomized (2:1), placebo-controlled study of masitinib (6 mg/kg/d) in adults with severe asthma uncontrolled by high dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-adrenoreceptor agonists plus oral corticosteroids (OCS) (≥7.5 mg/d). No minimum baseline blood eosinophil count was specified. Following a protocol amendment, the primary endpoint was reduction of annualized severe asthma exacerbation rate adjusted for the overall time on treatment (SAER). Subgroup analysis according to yearly cumulative OCS intake was also performed, a higher OCS dose indicating more severe asthma that is harder to control.ResultsFollowing an average exposure of approximately 13 months, masitinib (n = 240) reduced the SAER by 35% relative to placebo (n = 115) (rate ratio (RR) 0.65 (95% CI [0.47–0.90]; P = 0.010)). For patients with eosinophil ≥150 cell/µL, masitinib (n = 181) reduced SAER by 38% relative to placebo (n = 87); RR 0.62 (95% CI [0.42–0.91]; P = 0.016). Benefit of masitinib was shown to increase in the most severely affected patients (OCS intake of >1000 mg/year), with a significant (P < 0.01) reduction in SAER of 50%–70%. Safety was consistent with the known masitinib profile.ConclusionOrally administered masitinib reduces the risk of asthma exacerbations in severe asthma patients, with an acceptable safety profile. Masitinib may potentially provide a new treatment option for oral corticosteroid-dependent severe asthma.

Evaluation of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab in adults with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma (SOURCE): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study

Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of thymic stromal lymphopoietin. SOURCE evaluated the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab in adults with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. We conducted this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study across 60 sites in seven countries. Participants aged 18-80 years with physician-diagnosed asthma, who had been receiving medium-dose or high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and had at least one asthma exacerbation in the 12 months before screening were eligible. Patients who were receiving medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids must have had their dose increased to a high dose for at least 3 months before screening. After an oral corticosteroid optimisation phase of up to 8 weeks, participants were randomly assigned according to a computer-generated fixed block randomisation sequence to receive tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks during a 48 week treatment period (4 week induction phase, 36 week oral corticosteroid reduction phase, and 8 week maintenance phase). Randomisation was stratified by region. Participants, investigators, and site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the categorised percentage reduction from baseline in daily oral corticosteroid dose at week 48 without the loss of asthma control. Efficacy and safety endpoints were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03406078. Between March 5, 2018, and Sept 27, 2019, 150 participants were randomly assigned to receive tezepelumab 210 mg (n=74) or placebo (n=76). The cumulative odds of achieving a category of greater percentage reduction in an oral corticosteroid dose for daily maintenance at week 48 were similar with tezepelumab or placebo in the overall population (odds ratio [OR] 1·28 [95% CI 0·69-2·35], p=0·43; the primary endpoint was not met). The cumulative odds were higher with tezepelumab than with placebo in participants with baseline blood eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells per μL (2·58 [1·16-5·75]), but not in participants with counts below 150 cells per μL (0·40 [0·14-1·13]). Tezepelumab was well tolerated, with no safety concerns identified. 53 (72%) of 74 tezepelumab-assigned participants and 65 (86%) of 76 placebo-assigned participants reported an adverse event. Serious adverse events were reported in 12 (16%) participants in the tezepelumab group and 16 (21%) participants in the placebo group. We did not observe a significant improvement in oral corticosteroid dose reduction with tezepelumab versus placebo in the overall population of this oral corticosteroid-sparing study, although an improvement was observed in participants with baseline blood eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells per μL. AstraZeneca and Amgen.

Dupilumab (Dupixent)

&#x0D; Clinical evidence suggests that Dupixent should be reimbursed to treat patients aged 12 years and older with severe asthma and with a type 2 or eosinophilic phenotype or oral corticosteroid–dependent asthma.&#x0D; Economic evidence suggests that a 93% price reduction is needed to ensure Dupixent is cost-effective at a $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold relative to standard of care alone.&#x0D; Cost-effectiveness versus other biologics is unknown.&#x0D; CADTH was unable to estimate the budget impact due to a high degree of uncertainty.&#x0D;

SOURCE: a phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in reducing oral corticosteroid use in adults with oral corticosteroid dependent asthma

BackgroundMany patients with severe asthma continue to experience asthma symptoms and exacerbations despite standard-of-care treatment. A substantial proportion of these patients require long-term treatment with oral corticosteroids (OCS), often at high doses, which are associated with considerable multiorgan adverse effects, including metabolic disorders, osteoporosis and adrenal insufficiency. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of the epithelial cytokine thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the PATHWAY phase 2b study (NCT02054130), tezepelumab significantly reduced exacerbations by up to 71% in adults with severe, uncontrolled asthma. Several ongoing phase 3 trials (SOURCE, NCT03406078; NAVIGATOR, NCT03347279; DESTINATION, NCT03706079) are assessing the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. Here, we describe the design and objectives of SOURCE, a phase 3 OCS-sparing study.MethodsSOURCE is an ongoing phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of tezepelumab 210 mg administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks on OCS dose reduction in adults with OCS-dependent asthma. The study comprises a 2-week screening and enrolment period, followed by an OCS optimization phase of up to 8 weeks and a 48-week treatment period, which consists of a 4-week induction phase, followed by a 36-week OCS reduction phase and an 8-week maintenance phase. The primary objective is to assess the effect of tezepelumab compared with placebo in reducing the prescribed OCS maintenance dose. The key secondary objective is to assess the effect of tezepelumab on asthma exacerbation rates. Other secondary objectives include the proportion of patients with a reduction in OCS dose (100% or 50% reduction or those receiving < 5 mg) and the effect of tezepelumab on lung function and patient-reported outcomes.ConclusionsSOURCE is evaluating the OCS-sparing potential of tezepelumab in patients with OCS-dependent asthma. SOURCE also aims to demonstrate that treatment with tezepelumab in patients with severe asthma is associated with reductions in exacerbation rates and improvements in lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life, while reducing OCS dose.Trial registrationNCT03406078 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Registered 23 January 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406078

Cost effectiveness of benralizumab for severe, uncontrolled oral corticosteroid–dependent asthma in Sweden

Aim: We investigated cost effectiveness of benralizumab vs. standard of care (SOC) plus oral corticosteroids (OCS) for patients with severe, eosinophilic OCS-dependent asthma in Sweden.Materials and methods: A three-state, cohort-based Markov model of data from three Phase III benralizumab clinical trials (ZONDA [NCT02075255], SIROCCO [NCT01928771], and CALIMA [NCT01914757]) was used to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of benralizumab vs. SOC plus OCS. Health outcomes were estimated in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The model included costs and disutilities associated with extrapolated OCS-related adverse events. Patients with severe asthma were defined as those receiving OCS ≥5 mg/day.Results: Benralizumab demonstrated a cost-effectiveness ratio vs. SOC plus OCS of 2018 Swedish Kronor (SEK) 366,855 (€34,127) per QALY gained, based on increases of 1.33 QALYs and SEK 488,742 (€45,344) per patient. Benralizumab treatment costs contributed most to incremental costs. The probability of benralizumab’s being cost-effective with willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds between SEK 429,972 (€40,000) and SEK 752,452 (€70,000) ranged from 75% to 99%.Limitations: Potential limitations of these analyses include the use of combined data from three different clinical trials, a one-way sensitivity analysis that did not include mortality and transition estimates, and Observational & Pragmatic Research Institute (OPRI) data from the UK as a proxy of the Swedish health care system.Conclusions: The results of these analyses demonstrate that benralizumab has a high probability of being cost-effective compared with SOC plus OCS for a subgroup of patients with severe, eosinophilic asthma receiving regular OCS treatment and may support clinicians, payers and patients in making treatment decisions.

Conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic, inflammatory skin disorder with high physical and emotional burden. Robust evidence suggests that interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 are key cytokines in the immunopathogenesis of AD. New emerging agents include dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody directed against the IL-4 receptor a subunit that blocks both IL-4 and IL-13 signaling and has shown significant efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Dupilumab is approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD, moderate-to-severe eosinophilic or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Data from phase phase 2 and 3 studies have revealed that dupilumab generally has a low rate of adverse events, although an increased incidence of mild-to-moderate conjunctivitis has been reported for dupilumab compared with placebo.The present paper reviews the data of dupilumab-associated conjunctivitis and risk factors in adults with moderate-to-severe AD and other atopic diseases in dupilumab clinical trials and addresses the characteristics and treatment options available for this clinically highly relevant condition. Additionally, it presents data from ten studies in the real-life setting with dupilumab. Dupilumab-associated conjunctivitis incidence is higher in AD, although most cases are mild-to-moderate and have good response to topical treatment, with no need to suspend dupilumab therapy.

Biologics for oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma.

Background: Oral corticosteroid (OCS) dependent asthma is one of the severe asthma phenotypes that requires personalized treatment. Objective: To review the role of biologic treatments in OCS-dependent asthma. Methods: A nonsystematic review was performed of emerging multiple novel biologics for potential treatment of OCS-dependent asthma. Results: The serious adverse effects of OCS can be seen as a result of their regular long-term administration. Anti-interleukin (IL) 5 (mepolizumab), anti-IL-5R (benralizumab), and anti-IL-4Rα (dupilumab) are the therapies of choice for OCS-dependent severe asthma. Results of studies showed the efficacy of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, especially in patients with the OCS-dependent severe eosinophilic asthma phenotype and with nasal polyps. Dupilumab may be the therapy of choice of monoclonal antibodies in cases of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis accompanied by OCS-dependent severe asthma. For reslizumab and omalizumab, placebo controlled double-blind studies conducted with OCS-dependent patient populations are needed. Conclusion: Biologics are effective in the "OCS-dependent asthma" phenotype as add-on therapy. It seems that chronic OCS use in OCS-dependent asthma will be replaced by biologic agents that specifically target type 2 inflammation, along with a much better safety profile. However, real-life studies that compare these biologics in OCS-dependent severe asthma are urgently needed.

Effect of fixed-dose subcutaneous reslizumab on asthma exacerbations in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma and corticosteroid sparing in patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma: results from two phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

Reslizumab 3 mg/kg administered intravenously is approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. We assessed the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous reslizumab 110 mg in two trials in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma and increased blood eosinophils. The aim was to establish whether subcutaneous reslizumab 110 mg can reduce exacerbation rates in these patients (study 1) or reduce maintenance oral corticosteroid dose in patients with corticosteroid-dependent asthma (study 2). Both studies were randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies. Entry criteria for study 1 were uncontrolled severe asthma, two or more asthma exacerbations in the previous year, a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per μL or more (including no more than 30% patients with an eosinophil count <400 cells/μL), and at least a medium dose of inhaled corticosteroids with one or more additional asthma controllers. Patients in study 2 had severe asthma, a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per μL or more, daily maintenance oral corticosteroid (prednisone 5-40 mg, or equivalent), and high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus another controller. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to subcutaneous reslizumab (110 mg) or placebo once every 4 weeks for 52 weeks in study 1 and 24 weeks in study 2. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Primary efficacy outcomes were frequency of exacerbations during 52 weeks in study 1 and categorised percentage reduction in daily oral corticosteroid dose from baseline to weeks 20-24 in study 2. Primary efficacy analyses were by intention to treat, and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02452190 (study 1) and NCT02501629 (study 2). Between Aug 12, 2015, and Jan 31, 2018, 468 patients in study 1 were randomly assigned to placebo (n=232) or subcutaneous reslizumab (n=236), and 177 in study 2 to placebo (n=89) or subcutaneous reslizumab (n=88). In study 1, we found no significant difference in the exacerbation rate between reslizumab and placebo in the intention-to-treat population (rate ratio 0·79, 95% CI 0·56-1·12; p=0·19). Subcutaneous reslizumab reduced exacerbation frequency compared with placebo in the subgroup of patients with blood eosinophil counts of 400 cells per μL or more (0·64, 95% CI 0·43-0·95). Greater reductions in annual exacerbation risk (p=0·0035) and longer time to first exacerbation were observed for patients with higher trough serum reslizumab concentrations. In study 2, we found no difference between placebo and fixed-dose subcutaneous reslizumab in categorised percentage reduction in daily oral corticosteroid dose (odds ratio for a lower category of oral corticosteroid use in the reslizumab group vs the placebo group, 1·23, 95% CI 0·70-2·16; p=0·47). The frequency of adverse events and serious adverse events with reslizumab were similar to those with placebo in both studies. Fixed-dose (110 mg) subcutaneous reslizumab was not effective in reducing exacerbation frequency in patients with uncontrolled asthma and increased blood eosinophils (≥300 cells/μL), or in reducing the daily maintenance oral corticosteroid dose in patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent severe eosinophilic asthma. Higher exposures than those observed with 110 mg subcutaneous reslizumab are required to achieve maximal efficacy. Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D.

Dupilumab Reduces Oral Corticosteroid Use and Severe Exacerbations and Improves Lung Function in Patients With Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Severe Asthma With and Without Comorbid Allergic Rhinitis in the Phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA VENTURE Study

Dupilumab Reduces Oral Corticosteroid Use and Severe Exacerbations and Improves Lung Function in Patients With Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Severe Asthma With and Without Comorbid Allergic Rhinitis in the Phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA VENTURE Study

Precision medicine applications for severe asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous condition in which multiple pathological pathways manifest with similar symptoms. Severe asthma (SA) is challenging to manage and comprises a significant health and economic burden. Many studies have been conducted in an attempt to define different clinical phenotypes that translate into biological endotypes, with the goal of tailoring treatment based on precision medicine. This review summarizes the current evidence for the treatments of SA, and in particular, the biologic treatments that are currently available: omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. We found only limited high-quality direct evidence regarding treatment with anti-IgE (omalizumab) in SA patients. Data regarding anti-interleukin (IL)-5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab and benralizumab) showed beneficial effects in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) with different levels of blood eosinophils used in clinical trials. Dupilumab, anti-IL-4/IL-13, was shown to be effective in SEA and is the only agent currently FDA-approved for the indication of oral corticosteroid dependent asthma, regardless of the blood eosinophil level. This review also summarizes the existing knowledge regarding the characteristics of the patient who may respond to the different therapies. As of today, more studies are needed to better understand the diverse mechanisms that underlie SA phenotypes. We have not yet adequately reached the goal of precision medicine. Additional studies are necessary in order to find novel surrogate markers that can predict the response to a specific biologic therapy, especially in patients who are oral corticosteroid dependent. In addition, efforts must be invested into research looking for new treatment options for patients with non-type-2 inflammation SA. Statement of novelty: we review the current evidence regarding tailored treatment therapies in SA, with a particular focus on the knowledge regarding patient selection for specific biologic treatments.

Efficacy of Intravenous Reslizumab in Oral Corticosteroid–Dependent Asthma

Reslizumab displays efficacy in patients with inadequately controlled eosinophilic asthma; previous reports in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma are limited. To assess efficacy of reslizumab in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients and benefits on oral corticosteroid burden. We report post hoc analyses of pooled data from duplicate, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Patients aged 12 to 75 years with inadequately controlled, moderate-to-severe asthma were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg or placebo every 4 weeks for 52 weeks, stratified by oral corticosteroid use at enrollment and by region. Assessments included efficacy and predictors of clinical asthma exacerbation response in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients, and systemic corticosteroids burden in the overall population. Patients were randomized to reslizumab (n= 477) or placebo (n= 476); 73 (15%) patients in each group were taking oral corticosteroids at baseline. Reslizumab was favored over placebo for all efficacy end points in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients, with numerically greater improvements in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients than the overall population. Having 2 or more versus 1 clinical asthma exacerbation in the previous 12 months was the strongest positive predictor of reduced exacerbation risk with reslizumab (risk reduction, 77.5% vs 15.2%; P ≤ .02). Significantly fewer new systemic corticosteroid prescriptions were issued per patient receiving reslizumab versus placebo (mean ± SD, 0.5 ± 1.07 vs 1.0 ± 1.52; P < .0001). Total and per-patient systemic corticosteroid burdens were lower: 121,135 versus 290,977 mg and 254 versus 611 mg/patient, respectively (both P < .0001). Oral corticosteroid-dependent patients benefited from reslizumab across asthma efficacy outcome measures. Reslizumab-treated patients required fewer new systemic corticosteroid prescriptions and had a lower systemic corticosteroid burden compared with placebo.

Oral steroid-sparing effect of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids in asthma.

The proportion of the efficacy of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma that is due to systemic effects is uncertain. This study aimed to estimate the ICS dose-response relationship for oral corticosteroid-sparing effects in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, and to determine the proportion of oral corticosteroid-sparing effects due to their systemic effects, based on the comparative dose-response relationship of ICS versus oral corticosteroids on adrenal suppression. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials reporting oral corticosteroid-sparing effects of high-dose ICS in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. In addition, reports of oral corticosteroid to ICS dose-equivalence in terms of adrenal suppression were retrieved. The primary outcome was the proportion of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of ICS that could be attributed to systemic absorption, per 1000 µg increase of ICS, expressed as a ratio. This ratio estimates the oral corticosteroid sparing effect of ICS due to systemic effects. 11 studies including 1283 participants reporting oral corticosteroid-sparing effects of ICS were identified. The prednisone dose decrease per 1000 µg increase in ICS varied from 2.1 mg to 4.9 mg, depending on the type of ICS. The ratio of the prednisone-sparing effect due to the systemic effects per 1000 µg of fluticasone propionate was 1.02 (95% CI 0.68-2.08) and for budesonide was 0.93 (95% CI 0.63-1.89). In patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, the limited available evidence suggests that the majority of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of high-dose ICS is likely to be due to systemic effects.

Infections in Dupilumab Clinical Trials in Atopic Dermatitis: A Comprehensive Pooled Analysis.

BackgroundPatients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) have increased infection risk, including skin infections and systemic infections. Immunomodulators (e.g., anti-tumor necrosis factors, anti-interleukin [anti-IL]-23, anti-IL-17, Janus kinase inhibitors) increase risk of infections. Dupilumab (a monoclonal antibody blocking the shared receptor component for IL-4 and IL-13) is approved for inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe AD and for moderate-to-severe eosinophilic or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma.ObjectiveThe aim was to determine the impact of dupilumab on infection rates in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.MethodsThis analysis pooled data from seven randomized, placebo-controlled dupilumab trials in adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Exposure-adjusted analyses assessed infection rates.ResultsOf 2932 patients, 1091 received placebo, 1095 dupilumab 300 mg weekly, and 746 dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks. Treatment groups had similar infection rates overall per 100 patient-years (placebo, 155; dupilumab weekly, 150; dupilumab every 2 weeks, 156; dupilumab combined, 152), and similar non-skin infection rates. Serious/severe infections were reduced with dupilumab (risk ratio 0.43; p < 0.05), as were bacterial and other non-herpetic skin infections (risk ratio 0.44; p < 0.001). Although herpesviral infection rates overall were slightly higher with dupilumab than placebo, clinically important herpesviral infections (eczema herpeticum, herpes zoster) were less common with dupilumab (risk ratio 0.31; p < 0.01). Systemic anti-infective medication use was lower with dupilumab.ConclusionsDupilumab is associated with reduced risk of serious/severe infections and non-herpetic skin infections and does not increase overall infection rates versus placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifiersNCT01548404, NCT02210780, NCT01859988, NCT02277743, NCT02277769, NCT02260986, and NCT02755649.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40257-019-00445-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A review of dupilumab in the treatment of atopic diseases

ABSTRACT Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal IgG4 antibody directed against the alpha subunit of the IL-4 receptor and prevents the signaling of IL-4 and IL-13, two type 2 cytokines known to be important drivers of atopic diseases. In March of 2017, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dupilumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults that is uncontrolled with topical medications, becoming the first biologic agent approved to treat this chronic skin condition. In October of 2018, Dupilumab received approval by the FDA as an add-on maintenance therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma aged 12 years or older with an eosinophilic phenotype or with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. This review summarizes the characteristics of dupilumab and the clinical research that has been published to date, including treatment efficacy and adverse events.