Frank C Albers1, Hana Müllerová2, Necdet B Gunsoy3, Ji-Yeon Shin4, Linda M Nelsen5, Eric S Bradford1, Sarah M Cockle6, Robert Y Suruki7,8. 1. a Respiratory Medical Franchise, GSK , Research Triangle Park , NC , USA. 2. b Real World Evidence, GSK , Stockley Park, Uxbridge , Middlesex , UK. 3. c Clinical Statistics, GSK , Stockley Park, Uxbridge , Middlesex , UK. 4. d GSK , Seoul , South Korea. 5. e Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK , Collegeville , PA , USA. 6. f Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK House , Brentford , Middlesex , UK. 7. g Worldwide Epidemiology, GSK , Research Triangle Park , NC , USA. 8. h Department of Epidemiology, UCB Biosciences , Research Triangle Park , NC , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Severe asthma comprises several distinct phenotypes. Consequently, patients with severe asthma can be eligible for more than one biologic treatment targeting Th2 inflammation, such as anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E. The objective of this study was to describe treatment eligibility and overlap in treatment eligibility for mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), omalizumab (anti-IgE) and reslizumab (anti-IL-5) in patients with severe asthma, who were recruited from clinical practice. METHODS: This cross-sectional, single-visit, observational study in six countries enrolled patients with severe asthma (defined by American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society guidelines). Assessable patients were analysed as a total cohort and a sub-cohort, who were not currently receiving omalizumab. Treatment eligibility was defined according to the local prescribing information or protocol-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients currently receiving omalizumab were automatically categorised as omalizumab-eligible. RESULTS: The total cohort comprised 670 patients who met the analysis criteria, of whom 20% were eligible for mepolizumab, 31-41% were eligible for omalizumab (depending on eligibility criteria used), and 5% were eligible for reslizumab. In patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 502), proportions eligible for each biologic were similar (mepolizumab: 20%, reslizumab 6%) or lower (omalizumab 7-21%) than those for the total cohort. Overlap in treatment eligibility varied; in mepolizumab-eligible patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 101), 27-37% were omalizumab-eligible and 18% were reslizumab-eligible. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment eligibility for mepolizumab and omalizumab was higher than that for reslizumab. Although there was some overlap in treatment eligibility, the patient groups eligible for treatment with anti-IL-5 or anti-IgE therapies were often distinct, emphasising the different phenotypes and endotypes in severe asthma.
OBJECTIVES: Severe asthma comprises several distinct phenotypes. Consequently, patients with severe asthma can be eligible for more than one biologic treatment targeting Th2 inflammation, such as anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E. The objective of this study was to describe treatment eligibility and overlap in treatment eligibility for mepolizumab (anti-IL-5), omalizumab (anti-IgE) and reslizumab (anti-IL-5) in patients with severe asthma, who were recruited from clinical practice. METHODS: This cross-sectional, single-visit, observational study in six countries enrolled patients with severe asthma (defined by American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society guidelines). Assessable patients were analysed as a total cohort and a sub-cohort, who were not currently receiving omalizumab. Treatment eligibility was defined according to the local prescribing information or protocol-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients currently receiving omalizumab were automatically categorised as omalizumab-eligible. RESULTS: The total cohort comprised 670 patients who met the analysis criteria, of whom 20% were eligible for mepolizumab, 31-41% were eligible for omalizumab (depending on eligibility criteria used), and 5% were eligible for reslizumab. In patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 502), proportions eligible for each biologic were similar (mepolizumab: 20%, reslizumab 6%) or lower (omalizumab 7-21%) than those for the total cohort. Overlap in treatment eligibility varied; in mepolizumab-eligible patients not currently receiving omalizumab (n = 101), 27-37% were omalizumab-eligible and 18% were reslizumab-eligible. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment eligibility for mepolizumab and omalizumab was higher than that for reslizumab. Although there was some overlap in treatment eligibility, the patient groups eligible for treatment with anti-IL-5 or anti-IgE therapies were often distinct, emphasising the different phenotypes and endotypes in severe asthma.
Authors: Abhaya P Trivedi; Chase Hall; Charles W Goss; Daphne Lew; James G Krings; Mary Clare McGregor; Maanasi Samant; Jered P Sieren; Huashi Li; Ken B Schechtman; Joshua Schirm; Stephen McEleney; Sam Peterson; Wendy C Moore; Eugene R Bleecker; Deborah A Meyers; Elliot Israel; George R Washko; Bruce D Levy; Joseph K Leader; Sally E Wenzel; John V Fahy; Mark L Schiebler; Sean B Fain; Nizar N Jarjour; David T Mauger; Joseph M Reinhardt; John D Newell; Eric A Hoffman; Mario Castro; Ajay Sheshadri Journal: Radiology Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Mark C Liu; Bradley Chipps; Xavier Munoz; Gilles Devouassoux; Miguel Bergna; Steven G Smith; Robert G Price; Dmitry V Galkin; Jay Azmi; Dalal Mouneimne; Frank C Albers; Kenneth R Chapman Journal: Respir Res Date: 2021-05-10
Authors: Molly M Jeffery; Jonathan W Inselman; Jacob T Maddux; Regina W Lam; Nilay D Shah; Matthew A Rank Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2021-02-27
Authors: Eleftherios Zervas; Konstantinos Samitas; Andriana I Papaioannou; Petros Bakakos; Stelios Loukides; Mina Gaga Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2018-03-06