A comprehensive analysis on the safety of two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab

Yu Xiao, Wanying Yang, Muyang Wang
{"title":"A comprehensive analysis on the safety of two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab","authors":"Yu Xiao, Wanying Yang, Muyang Wang","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2024.1435370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dupilumab was approved for the treatment of several dermatologic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, such as atopic dermatitis and bullous pemphigoid; whereas omalizumab is the first biological agent which was approved to treat chronic spontaneous urticaria. None of the published meta-analyses has provided the sufficient data regarding the safety of these two biologics, especially regarding their potential serious adverse events (SAEs). The aim of this study was, to comprehensively evaluate the safety of the two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab. In this study, we included 32 randomized trials, and performed meta-analyses on 113 types of SAEs regarding dupilumab and 61 types of SAEs regarding omalizumab. We identified that: (1) use of dupilumab was significantly associated with the lower incidence of atopic dermatitis, while use of omalizumab was significantly associated with the lower incidence of asthma; and (2) use of dupilumab was not significantly associated with the incidences of 112 other kinds of SAEs including various infectious diseases, while use of omalizumab was not significantly associated with the incidences of 60 other kinds of SAEs including various infectious diseases. This meta-analysis for the first time assessed the association between use of dupilumab or omalizumab and incidences of various SAEs, and identified that neither dupilumab use nor omalizumab use was associated with the increased risks of any SAEs including various infectious diseases. These findings further confirm the general safety of the two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab. This informs clinicians that there is no need to worry too much about the safety issues of these two biologics.","PeriodicalId":502302,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"50 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1435370","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dupilumab was approved for the treatment of several dermatologic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, such as atopic dermatitis and bullous pemphigoid; whereas omalizumab is the first biological agent which was approved to treat chronic spontaneous urticaria. None of the published meta-analyses has provided the sufficient data regarding the safety of these two biologics, especially regarding their potential serious adverse events (SAEs). The aim of this study was, to comprehensively evaluate the safety of the two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab. In this study, we included 32 randomized trials, and performed meta-analyses on 113 types of SAEs regarding dupilumab and 61 types of SAEs regarding omalizumab. We identified that: (1) use of dupilumab was significantly associated with the lower incidence of atopic dermatitis, while use of omalizumab was significantly associated with the lower incidence of asthma; and (2) use of dupilumab was not significantly associated with the incidences of 112 other kinds of SAEs including various infectious diseases, while use of omalizumab was not significantly associated with the incidences of 60 other kinds of SAEs including various infectious diseases. This meta-analysis for the first time assessed the association between use of dupilumab or omalizumab and incidences of various SAEs, and identified that neither dupilumab use nor omalizumab use was associated with the increased risks of any SAEs including various infectious diseases. These findings further confirm the general safety of the two biologics dupilumab and omalizumab. This informs clinicians that there is no need to worry too much about the safety issues of these two biologics.
对两种生物制剂杜必鲁单抗和奥马珠单抗安全性的全面分析
杜匹单抗被批准用于治疗几种皮肤免疫介导的炎症性疾病,如特应性皮炎和大疱性类天疱疮;而奥马珠单抗则是首个被批准用于治疗慢性自发性荨麻疹的生物制剂。已发表的荟萃分析报告均未提供有关这两种生物制剂安全性的充足数据,尤其是有关其潜在严重不良事件(SAE)的数据。本研究旨在全面评估两种生物制剂杜必鲁单抗和奥马珠单抗的安全性。在这项研究中,我们纳入了 32 项随机试验,并对有关杜必鲁单抗的 113 种 SAE 和有关奥马珠单抗的 61 种 SAE 进行了荟萃分析。我们发现(1)使用杜匹单抗与特应性皮炎的低发病率显著相关,而使用奥马珠单抗与哮喘的低发病率显著相关;(2)使用杜匹单抗与包括各种感染性疾病在内的 112 种其他 SAE 的发病率无显著相关,而使用奥马珠单抗与包括各种感染性疾病在内的 60 种其他 SAE 的发病率无显著相关。这项荟萃分析首次评估了使用杜匹单抗或奥马珠单抗与各种SAE发病率之间的关联,结果发现,使用杜匹单抗或奥马珠单抗均与包括各种感染性疾病在内的任何SAE风险的增加无关。这些研究结果进一步证实了杜匹单抗和奥马珠单抗这两种生物制剂的总体安全性。这告诉临床医生不必过分担心这两种生物制剂的安全性问题。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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