TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of sputum eosinophil count as a predictor of treatment response to mepolizumab JF - ERJ Open Research JO - erjor DO - 10.1183/23120541.00560-2021 SP - 00560-2021 AU - Ian D. Pavord AU - Roland Buhl AU - Monica Kraft AU - Charlene M. Prazma AU - Robert G. Price AU - Peter H. Howarth AU - Steven W. Yancey Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://openres.ersjournals.com/content/early/2021/12/10/23120541.00560-2021.abstract N2 - For patients with asthma, eosinophilic airway inflammation is associated with poor lung function, increased disease severity, reduced quality of life, and increased risk of exacerbations [1, 2]. As such, several biologic therapies targeting cytokines involved in eosinophil survival and activation have been developed, with the aim of reducing eosinophilic inflammation [3]. The response to these cytokine-targeting biologics has typically been assessed by monitoring clinical outcomes. Reductions in blood eosinophils have also been monitored [2], since these cells are easily accessible and are reflective of eosinophilic airway inflammation [4, 5]. However, the utility of sputum eosinophils as a biomarker for assessing the therapeutic response to biologic therapies remains an area of ongoing scientific debate and has been largely unexplored, owing to logistical challenges associated with their collection and measurement.FootnotesThis 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: Ian Pavord reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. Grants or contracts received from Chiesi, outside the submitted work. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events received from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Aerocrine, Almirall, Novartis, Teva, Chiesi, Sanofi/Regeneron, GSK, Genentech, Novartis, Merck, Circassia and Knopp, outside the submitted work. Patents planned, issued or pending Leicester Cough Questionnaire: Co-patent holder of the rights to the Leicester Cough Questionnaire and has received payments for its use in clinical trials from Merck, Bayer, and Insmed.Conflict of interest: Roland Buhl reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. Grants or contracts received from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis and Roche, outside the submitted work. Consulting fees received from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Roche, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Cipla, Sanofi and Teva, outside the submitted work.Conflict of interest: Monica Kraft reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. Grants or contracts received from National Institutes of Health, American Lung Association, Chiesi, Sanofi and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. Participation on a Data Advisory Board for AstraZeneca and Sanofi/Regeneron. Other financial or non-financial interests; Chief Medical Officer for RaeSedo LLC.Conflict of interest: Charlene Prazma reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. The author also reports owning stocks/shares in GlaxoSmithKline, as well as being a current employee of GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Robert Price reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. The author also reports owning stocks/shares in GlaxoSmithKline, as well as being a current employee of GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Peter Howarth reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. The author also reports owning stocks/shares in GlaxoSmithKline, as well as being a current employee of GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Steven Yancey reports support for the present manuscript received from GlaxoSmithKline: This study was funded by GSK; Medical writing support was provided by Fishawack Indicia Ltd and was funded by GSK. The author also reports owning stocks/shares in GlaxoSmithKline, as well as being a current employee of GlaxoSmithKline. ER -