The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2021
Appraisal of the Real-World Effectiveness of Biologic Therapies in Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wangberg Hannah, Spierling Bagsic Samantha R, Osuna Lilliana, White Andrew A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are no head-to-head studies for patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) comparing any of the 5 Food and Drug Administration-approved respiratory biologic therapies.
OBJECTIVE: Explore outcomes in subjects with AERD using biologic therapies in a real-world clinic setting.
METHODS: A retrospective pilot study was conducted for subjects with AERD who had been prescribed omalizumab (anti-IgE), mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), reslizumab (anti-IL-5), benralizumab (anti-IL-5 receptor alpha [anti-IL-5Rα]), or dupilumab (anti-IL-4 receptor alpha [anti-IL-4Rα]). Clinical outcomes pre- versus postinitiation of biologic therapy were explored including symptoms, 22-item sino-nasal outcome test scores, systemic corticosteroid and antibiotic prescriptions, and emergency room visits related to AERD.
RESULTS: Of the 74 subjects, 58.1% (n = 43) had used 1 biologic, though many (41.9%, n = 31) trialed more than 1 biologic. Of the 50 subjects who had used anti-IL-4Rα therapy, 98% (49 of 50) still had this therapy prescribed at study completion compared with 48.6% (17 of 35) and 26.9% (7 of 26) of those who used anti-IgE and anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor alpha (anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα) therapy, respectively. Among those on anti-IL-4Rα therapy, there was a significant reduction in median total 22-item sino-nasal outcome test scores (51 to 19, P = .0002), corticosteroid bursts (2 to 0, P < .0001), and median number of antibiotic courses for respiratory disease (1 to 0, P = .0469) prebiologic versus postbiologic initiation. No statistically significant difference in those outcomes was observed for individuals on anti-IgE or anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Anti-IL-4Rα therapy led to significantly higher rates of clinical improvement in AERD when compared with anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα and anti-IgE biologic therapies. Prospective studies would help clarify best practices for the use of biologic therapies in AERD.
OBJECTIVE: Explore outcomes in subjects with AERD using biologic therapies in a real-world clinic setting.
METHODS: A retrospective pilot study was conducted for subjects with AERD who had been prescribed omalizumab (anti-IgE), mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), reslizumab (anti-IL-5), benralizumab (anti-IL-5 receptor alpha [anti-IL-5Rα]), or dupilumab (anti-IL-4 receptor alpha [anti-IL-4Rα]). Clinical outcomes pre- versus postinitiation of biologic therapy were explored including symptoms, 22-item sino-nasal outcome test scores, systemic corticosteroid and antibiotic prescriptions, and emergency room visits related to AERD.
RESULTS: Of the 74 subjects, 58.1% (n = 43) had used 1 biologic, though many (41.9%, n = 31) trialed more than 1 biologic. Of the 50 subjects who had used anti-IL-4Rα therapy, 98% (49 of 50) still had this therapy prescribed at study completion compared with 48.6% (17 of 35) and 26.9% (7 of 26) of those who used anti-IgE and anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor alpha (anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα) therapy, respectively. Among those on anti-IL-4Rα therapy, there was a significant reduction in median total 22-item sino-nasal outcome test scores (51 to 19, P = .0002), corticosteroid bursts (2 to 0, P < .0001), and median number of antibiotic courses for respiratory disease (1 to 0, P = .0469) prebiologic versus postbiologic initiation. No statistically significant difference in those outcomes was observed for individuals on anti-IgE or anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Anti-IL-4Rα therapy led to significantly higher rates of clinical improvement in AERD when compared with anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα and anti-IgE biologic therapies. Prospective studies would help clarify best practices for the use of biologic therapies in AERD.