Effectiveness of biological therapy in severe asthma: a retrospective real-world study.

IF 1.5 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

Croatian Medical Journal Pub Date : 2025-02-28

Marina Lampalo, Anamarija Štajduhar, Dina Rnjak, Hana Safić Stanić, Sanja Popović-Grle

{"title":"Effectiveness of biological therapy in severe asthma: a retrospective real-world study.","authors":"Marina Lampalo, Anamarija Štajduhar, Dina Rnjak, Hana Safić Stanić, Sanja Popović-Grle","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim- To compare the effectiveness of different biologic medications for the treatment of severe asthma.Methods: We retrospectively collected data on 74 patients treated with one of four different biologics (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, or benralizumab) at the Jordanovac Clinic for Pulmonary Diseases, Zagreb, Croatia for at least two years. The patients were compared in terms of the number of exacerbations, dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS), asthma control test (ACT), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), number of blood eosinophils, and total immunoglobulin E (IgE).Results: All treatment outcome measures, except FeNO, significantly improved in the two-year period (P<0.001). The number of acute exacerbations decreased in all groups. Reslizumab-treated patients showed the greatest improvement in ACT score, and the omalizumab-treated patients experienced the least (P=0.018). The benralizumab group showed the greatest reduction in eosinophil number, and the omalizumab group the lowest (P<0.001). The mepolizumab group showed the greatest improvement in FEV1.Conclusion: Both anti-IgE and anti-IL-5 treatments effectively reduced exacerbation rates, OCS daily needs, and symptom burden. Multiple predictive biomarkers are needed for the best individual monitoring.","PeriodicalId":10796,"journal":{"name":"Croatian Medical Journal","volume":"66 1","pages":"3-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11947975/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Croatian Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim- To compare the effectiveness of different biologic medications for the treatment of severe asthma.

Methods: We retrospectively collected data on 74 patients treated with one of four different biologics (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, or benralizumab) at the Jordanovac Clinic for Pulmonary Diseases, Zagreb, Croatia for at least two years. The patients were compared in terms of the number of exacerbations, dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS), asthma control test (ACT), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), number of blood eosinophils, and total immunoglobulin E (IgE).

Results: All treatment outcome measures, except FeNO, significantly improved in the two-year period (P<0.001). The number of acute exacerbations decreased in all groups. Reslizumab-treated patients showed the greatest improvement in ACT score, and the omalizumab-treated patients experienced the least (P=0.018). The benralizumab group showed the greatest reduction in eosinophil number, and the omalizumab group the lowest (P<0.001). The mepolizumab group showed the greatest improvement in FEV1.

Conclusion: Both anti-IgE and anti-IL-5 treatments effectively reduced exacerbation rates, OCS daily needs, and symptom burden. Multiple predictive biomarkers are needed for the best individual monitoring.

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Croatian Medical Journal 医学-医学：内科

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

5.30%

发文量

105

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Croatian Medical Journal (CMJ) is an international peer reviewed journal open to scientists from all fields of biomedicine and health related research. Although CMJ welcomes all contributions that increase and expand on medical knowledge, the two areas are of the special interest: topics globally relevant for biomedicine and health and medicine in developing and emerging countries.