Biologic agents licensed for severe asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

IF 9 1区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
C. Kyriakopoulos, Athena Gogali, Georgios Markozannes, K. Kostikas
{"title":"Biologic agents licensed for severe asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials","authors":"C. Kyriakopoulos, Athena Gogali, Georgios Markozannes, K. Kostikas","doi":"10.1183/16000617.0238-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Six biologic agents are now approved for patients with severe asthma. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of licensed biologic agents in patients with severe asthma, including the recently approved tezepelumab. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL to identify randomised controlled trials involving licensed biologics until 31 January 2023. We used random-effects meta-analysis models for efficacy, including subgroup analyses by individual agents and markers of T2-high inflammation (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide), and assessed safety. Results: 48 studies with 16 350 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Biologics were associated with a 44% reduction in the annualised rate of asthma exacerbations (rate ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.51–0.62) and 60% reduction of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.27–0.60), a mean increase in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 0.11 L (95% CI 0.09–0.14), a reduction in asthma control questionnaire by 0.34 points (95% CI −0.46–−0.23) and an increase in asthma quality of life questionnaire by 0.38 points (95% CI 0.26–0.49). There was heterogeneity between different classes of biologics in certain outcomes, with overall greater efficacy in patients with T2 inflammation. Overall, biologics exhibited a favourable safety profile. Conclusions: This comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrated that licensed asthma biologics reduce exacerbations and hospitalisations, improve lung function, asthma control and quality of life, and limit the use of systemic corticosteroids, with a favourable safety profile. These effects are more prominent in patients with evidence of T2 inflammation.","PeriodicalId":12166,"journal":{"name":"European Respiratory Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Respiratory Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0238-2023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Six biologic agents are now approved for patients with severe asthma. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of licensed biologic agents in patients with severe asthma, including the recently approved tezepelumab. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL to identify randomised controlled trials involving licensed biologics until 31 January 2023. We used random-effects meta-analysis models for efficacy, including subgroup analyses by individual agents and markers of T2-high inflammation (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide), and assessed safety. Results: 48 studies with 16 350 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Biologics were associated with a 44% reduction in the annualised rate of asthma exacerbations (rate ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.51–0.62) and 60% reduction of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.27–0.60), a mean increase in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 0.11 L (95% CI 0.09–0.14), a reduction in asthma control questionnaire by 0.34 points (95% CI −0.46–−0.23) and an increase in asthma quality of life questionnaire by 0.38 points (95% CI 0.26–0.49). There was heterogeneity between different classes of biologics in certain outcomes, with overall greater efficacy in patients with T2 inflammation. Overall, biologics exhibited a favourable safety profile. Conclusions: This comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrated that licensed asthma biologics reduce exacerbations and hospitalisations, improve lung function, asthma control and quality of life, and limit the use of systemic corticosteroids, with a favourable safety profile. These effects are more prominent in patients with evidence of T2 inflammation.
获准用于治疗严重哮喘的生物制剂:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景:目前已有六种生物制剂获准用于重症哮喘患者。这项荟萃分析旨在评估已获批准的生物制剂对重症哮喘患者的疗效和安全性,包括最近获批的替塞普鲁单抗。研究方法我们检索了MEDLINE、Embase和CENTRAL,以确定2023年1月31日前涉及许可生物制剂的随机对照试验。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析模型进行疗效分析,包括按单个药物和T2-高炎症标志物(血液嗜酸性粒细胞和呼出一氧化氮分数)进行亚组分析,并评估了安全性。结果荟萃分析纳入了 48 项研究,共 16 350 名患者。生物制剂可使哮喘的年加重率降低 44%(比率比为 0.56,95% CI 为 0.51-0.62),住院率降低 60%(比率比为 0.40,95% CI 为 0.27-0.60),1 秒内用力呼气容积平均增加 0.11升(95% CI 0.09-0.14),哮喘控制问卷减少0.34分(95% CI -0.46--0.23),哮喘生活质量问卷增加0.38分(95% CI 0.26-0.49)。不同类别的生物制剂在某些结果上存在异质性,T2炎症患者的总体疗效更高。总体而言,生物制剂具有良好的安全性。结论这项综合荟萃分析表明,获得许可的哮喘生物制剂可减少病情恶化和住院次数,改善肺功能、哮喘控制和生活质量,限制全身性皮质类固醇的使用,并具有良好的安全性。这些效果在有 T2 炎症证据的患者中更为突出。
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
European Respiratory Review
European Respiratory Review Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
1.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Respiratory Review (ERR) is an open-access journal published by the European Respiratory Society (ERS), serving as a vital resource for respiratory professionals by delivering updates on medicine, science, and surgery in the field. ERR features state-of-the-art review articles, editorials, correspondence, and summaries of recent research findings and studies covering a wide range of topics including COPD, asthma, pulmonary hypertension, interstitial lung disease, lung cancer, tuberculosis, and pulmonary infections. Articles are published continuously and compiled into quarterly issues within a single annual volume.
×
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