scholarly journals Mepolizumab in the management of severe eosinophilic asthma in adults: current evidence and practical experience

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175346661880849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalia Emma ◽  
Jaymin B. Morjaria ◽  
Virginia Fuochi ◽  
Riccardo Polosa ◽  
Massimo Caruso
Keyword(s):  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Conventional Therapy ◽  
Atopic Asthma ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Chronic Inflammatory Condition ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Asthma Patients

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory condition involving the airways with varying pathophysiological mechanisms, clinical symptoms and outcomes, generally controlled by conventional therapies including inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2 agonists. However, these therapies are unable to successfully control symptoms in about 5–10% of severe asthma patients. Atopic asthma, characterized by high immunoglobulin (Ig)E or eosinophilia, represents about 50% of asthmatic patients. Interleukin (IL)-5 is the main cytokine responsible of activation of eosinophils, hence therapeutic strategies have been investigated and developed for clinical use. Biologics targeting IL-5 and its receptor (first mepolizumab and subsequently, reslizumab and benralizumab), have been recently approved and used as add-on therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma resulting in a reduction in the circulating eosinophil count, improvement in lung function and exacerbation reduction in asthma patients. Despite these biologics having been approved for stratified severe asthma patients that remain uncontrolled with high doses of conventional therapy, a number of patients may be eligible for more than one biologic. Presently, the lack of head-to-head studies comparing the biological agents among themselves and with conventional therapy make the choice of optimal therapy for each patient a challenge for clinicians. Moreover, discontinuation of these treatments, implications for efficacy or adverse events, in particular in long-term treatment, and needs for useful biomarkers are still matters of debate. In this review we evaluate to date, the evidence on mepolizumab that seems to demonstrate it is a well-tolerated and efficacious regimen for use in severe eosinophilic asthma, though more studies are still required.

scholarly journals Precision medicine applications for severe asthma

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-135
Author(s):  
Orit Gourgy Hacohen ◽  
Shai Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Precision Medicine ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Oral Corticosteroid ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
New Treatment

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.

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.

Phenotype and severity of asthma determines bronchial epithelial immune responses to a viral mimic

2021 ◽  
pp. 2102333
Author(s):  
Celeste Porsbjerg ◽  
Juan Jose Nieto-Fontarigo ◽  
Samuel Cerps ◽  
Sangheeta Ramu ◽  
Mandy Menzel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Response ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Atopic Asthma ◽  
Poly I:C ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Bronchial Epithelial ◽  
Asthma Phenotypes ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

BackgroundAsthma is characterised by an aggravated immune response to respiratory viral infections: This phenomenon is a clinically well-recognised driver of acute exacerbations, but how different phenotypes of asthma respond immunologically to virus is unclear.ObjectivesTo describe the association between different phenotypes and severity of asthma and bronchial epithelial immune responses to viral stimulation.MethodsIn the Immunoreact study, healthy subjects (n=10) and 50 patients with asthma were included; 30 (60%) were atopic, and 34 (68%) were eosinophilic; 14 (28%) had severe asthma. All participants underwent bronchoscopy with collection of bronchial brushings. Bronchial epithelial cells (BECs) were expanded and stimulated with the viral replication mimic poly (I:C) (TLR3 agonist) in vitro. The expression of TLR3-induced pro-inflammatory and anti-viral responses of BECs were analysed using RT-qPCR and multiplex ELISA and compared across asthma phenotypes and severity of disease.ResultsPatients with atopic asthma had increased induction of IL-4, IFN-β, IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β after poly (I:C) stimulation compared to non-atopic patients, whereas in patients with eosinophilic asthma only IL-6 and IL-8 induction was higher than in non-eosinophilic asthma. Patients with severe asthma displayed a decreased antiviral IFN-β, and increased expression of IL-8, most pronounced in atopic and eosinophilic asthmatics. Furthermore, induction of IL-33 in response to poly (I:C) was increased in severe atopic and in severe eosinophilic asthma, but TSLP only in severe eosinophilic asthma.ConclusionsThe bronchial epithelial immune response to a viral mimic stimulation differs between asthma phenotypes and severities, which may be important to consider when targeting novel asthma treatments.

scholarly journals Regulatory T cell monitoring in severe eosinophilic asthma patients treated with mepolizumab

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Bergantini ◽  
Miriana d’Alessandro ◽  
Paolo Cameli ◽  
Clara Bono ◽  
Marco Perruzza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Regulatory T Cell ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Asthma Patients ◽  
Cell Monitoring

scholarly journals Basophil activation and serum IL‐5 levels as possible monitor biomarkers in severe eosinophilic asthma patients treated with anti‐IL‐5 drugs

Allergy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiano Caruso ◽  
Stefania Colantuono ◽  
Barbara Tolusso ◽  
Clara Di Mario ◽  
Antonella Pentassuglia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Basophil Activation ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Asthma Patients

scholarly journals Severe eosinophilic bronchial asthma: new therapeutic options

2018 ◽  
pp. 44-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. M. Nenasheva
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Bronchial Asthma ◽  
Biological Agents ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Clinical Use ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Interleukin 5 ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma

Eosinophilic asthma is a common phenotype of severe asthma, occurring in at least half of patients. In recent years, there have been significant changes in the approaches to the treatment of severe bronchial asthma and, above all, eosinophilic asthma. The article discusses the role of eosinophils in the pathogenesis of severe asthma, the detection of the phenotype of severe eosinophilic asthma, and modern approaches to targeting severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype using biological agents. A special emphasis is placed on preparations of monoclonal antibodies to interleukin-5, in particular, mepolizumab, recently approved for clinical use in our country.

Biologics for oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
İnsu Yılmaz
Keyword(s):  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Oral Corticosteroid ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Severe Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Asthma Phenotype ◽  
Severe Eosinophilic Asthma ◽  
Term Administration

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document