Safety of Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma: An Analysis of Suspected Adverse Reactions Reported in the WHO Pharmacovigilance Database.

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
BioDrugs Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-15 DOI:10.1007/s40259-024-00653-6
Paola Maria Cutroneo, Elena Arzenton, Fabiana Furci, Fabio Scapini, Maria Bulzomì, Nicoletta Luxi, Marco Caminati, Gianenrico Senna, Ugo Moretti, Gianluca Trifirò
{"title":"Safety of Biological Therapies for Severe Asthma: An Analysis of Suspected Adverse Reactions Reported in the WHO Pharmacovigilance Database.","authors":"Paola Maria Cutroneo, Elena Arzenton, Fabiana Furci, Fabio Scapini, Maria Bulzomì, Nicoletta Luxi, Marco Caminati, Gianenrico Senna, Ugo Moretti, Gianluca Trifirò","doi":"10.1007/s40259-024-00653-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9022,"journal":{"name":"BioDrugs","volume":" ","pages":"425-448"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11055782/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioDrugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-024-00653-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs.

Objective: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database.

Methods: We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3).

Results: Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab.

Conclusions: The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.

Abstract Image

治疗严重哮喘的生物疗法的安全性:世界卫生组织药物警戒数据库报告的可疑不良反应分析》。
背景:自新型生物疗法问世以来,无法控制的重症哮喘的治疗已得到极大改善。截至 2022 年 8 月,已有五种生物制剂获批用于治疗 2 型哮喘表型:抗 IgE(奥马珠单抗)、抗 IL5(mepolizumab、reslizumab、benralizumab)和抗 IL4(dupilumab)单克隆抗体。这些药物通常耐受性良好,但长期安全性信息有限,一些不良事件尚未完全定性。自发报告系统是检测潜在信号和评估所有上市药物实际安全性的基石:本研究旨在利用世界卫生组织全球药物警戒数据库 VigiBase 提供治疗严重哮喘的生物制剂安全性数据概览:我们选取了VigiBase中截至2022年8月31日已获批的5种治疗重症哮喘的生物制剂(奥马珠单抗、美博利珠单抗、瑞舒珠单抗、苯拉珠单抗和杜匹单抗)的所有去重复的个体病例安全报告(ICSR)。对整个类别和单个产品的 ICSR 进行了描述性频率分析。与所有其他可疑药物(参照组 1,RG1)或吸入性皮质类固醇加长效 β-激动剂(ICS/LABAs)(参照组 2,RG2)或口服皮质类固醇(OCSs)(参照组 3,RG3)相比,用报告几率比(ROR)和 95% 置信区间(CIs)来衡量与研究药物相关的可疑药物不良反应(ADRs)的比例失调情况:VigiBase共发现31,724,381份ICSR,其中167,282份(0.5%)与研究药物有关;其余报告被视为RG1。按治疗适应症对所有生物制剂相关 ICSR 进行分层,约 29.4%(n = 48,440)涉及哮喘用药;奥马珠单抗是主要的可疑药物(n = 20,501),其次是杜匹单抗、美博利珠单抗、苯拉珠单抗和雷利珠单抗。大多数哮喘 ICSR 涉及成人(57%)和女性(64.1%)。哮喘生物制剂的严重疑似 ADR 报告频率高于 RG1(41.3% 对 32.3%)。报告最多的疑似不良反应包括哮喘、呼吸困难、产品使用问题、药物无效、咳嗽、头痛、疲劳和喘息。哮喘生物制剂与几种未知或记录较少的不良事件的相关性不成比例,如奥马利珠单抗引起的恶性肿瘤、肺栓塞和深静脉血栓;杜匹单抗引起的脱发和扁平苔藓;美博利珠单抗引起的脱发和疱疹感染;苯拉珠单抗引起的脱发、带状疱疹和嗜酸性粒细胞肉芽肿伴多血管炎;以及雷利珠单抗引起的脱发:VigiBase中最常报告的哮喘生物制剂疑似不良反应证实了一些众所周知的不良反应的存在,如全身失调、注射部位反应、鼻咽炎、头痛和过敏,而其他一些不良反应(如哮喘再激活或治疗失败)则可归因于使用适应症。此外,对报告比例失调信号的分析表明,存在恶性肿瘤、对心血管系统的影响、脱发和自身免疫性疾病,需要进一步评估和调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BioDrugs
BioDrugs 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: An essential resource for R&D professionals and clinicians with an interest in biologic therapies. BioDrugs covers the development and therapeutic application of biotechnology-based pharmaceuticals and diagnostic products for the treatment of human disease. BioDrugs offers a range of additional enhanced features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist patients, caregivers and others in understanding important medical advances. The journal also provides the option to include various other types of enhanced features including slide sets, videos and animations. All enhanced features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. Peer review is conducted using Editorial Manager®, supported by a database of international experts. This database is shared with other Adis journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信