Abstract
Background Anti-eosinophilic therapy with interleukin-5/interleukin-5-receptor antibodies represents an established treatment for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) but did not show clinical efficacy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Objective To evaluate treatment response to anti-eosinophilic antibody therapy in patients with Asthma and COPD.
Methods A retrospective comparison of pulmonary function testing, oral corticosteroid intake, quality of life and pulmonary symptom control in patients with SEA and COPD and 1:1 propensity score matched patients suffering from SEA alone was performed. All patients received treatment with either mepolizumab or benralizumab. Data were assessed prior to antibody treatment start and after 6 months of therapy.
Results Data from 84 patients (42 patients with SEA and COPD and 42 patients with SEA) were analysed. After 6 months of treatment, patients in both groups showed improved forced expiratory volume in one second (improvement by 11% [IQR 5; 18] in the SEA and COPD group versus 15% [IQR −3; 23]; p=0.637) and decreased oral corticosteroid dosages (median reduction by 3 mg in the SEA and COPD group versus 5 mg; p=0.070), without significant differences between groups. Pulmonary symptom control and quality of life improved in both groups. A significant decrease in eosinophils could be measured in both groups with similar cell numbers prior to treatment initiation (600 cells µL−1 in the SEA and COPD group versus 500 cells µL−1).
Conclusion Anti-eosinophilic therapy with interleukin-5/interleukin-5-receptor antibodies shows clinical efficacy in patients with SEA and COPD comparable to treatment response in patients with SEA alone.
Footnotes
This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article.
Conflict of interest: Nora Drick reports no conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest: Jan Fuge reports personal fees/speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca
Conflict of interest: Benjamin Seeliger reports no conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest: Milan Speth reports no conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest: Jens Vogel-Claussen received grants advisory/lecture/clinical trial fees and non- financial support by BMBF (German Ministry of Research and Education), Siemens Healthineers, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, MSD, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Coreline Soft all outside the submitted work
Conflict of interest: Tobias Welte T.W. and/or his institution received grants advisory/lecture/clinical trial fees and non- financial support by DFG (German Research Council), BMBF (German Ministry of Research and Education), BMG (German Ministry of Health), EU, WHO, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Biotest, Bayer, Boehringer, Berlin Chemie, GSK, Infectopharm, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Biotest, Bayer, Boehringer, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, all outside the submitted work
Conflict of interest: Hendrik Suhling reports personal fees/speaker honoraria from Astrazeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work
This is a PDF-only article. Please click on the PDF link above to read it.
- Received May 17, 2022.
- Accepted August 25, 2022.
- Copyright ©The authors 2022
This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org