Considerations for the Use of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps.

IF 0.7
Hannah G Luk, Tyler A Janz, Farrah N Siddiqui, Scott A Hardison
{"title":"Considerations for the Use of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps.","authors":"Hannah G Luk, Tyler A Janz, Farrah N Siddiqui, Scott A Hardison","doi":"10.1177/01455613251363018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interventions such as steroids, endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), biologics, or a combination of these are available for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). However, despite evidence supporting the efficacy of each approach, factors such as timing, cost, side effects, and patient preference need to be considered. The objective of this work was to provide a comparison between current biologics and considerations for each intervention when developing a treatment plan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Recent studies are referenced in a detailed description of current and developing biologics to compare U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indications, mechanism of actions, notable side effects, dosage, and cost. Considerations for timing of treatment and duration of treatment when analyzing the utility of ESS, biologics, or a combination of both are highlighted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Currently, 3 biologics are FDA-approved for the treatment of inadequately-controlled CRSwNP and 2 biologics demonstrate promise as potential agents. The overall trend in literature suggests that the combination of ESS to relieve polyps and improve medication delivery and biologics to facilitate anti-inflammatory effects is clinically impactful.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evidence to date aligns with current recommendations that biologics are a promising maintenance option for CRSwNP patients who have failed both medical management and complete ESS.</p>","PeriodicalId":93984,"journal":{"name":"Ear, nose, & throat journal","volume":" ","pages":"1455613251363018"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ear, nose, & throat journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01455613251363018","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

Background: Interventions such as steroids, endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), biologics, or a combination of these are available for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). However, despite evidence supporting the efficacy of each approach, factors such as timing, cost, side effects, and patient preference need to be considered. The objective of this work was to provide a comparison between current biologics and considerations for each intervention when developing a treatment plan.

Methods: Recent studies are referenced in a detailed description of current and developing biologics to compare U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indications, mechanism of actions, notable side effects, dosage, and cost. Considerations for timing of treatment and duration of treatment when analyzing the utility of ESS, biologics, or a combination of both are highlighted.

Results: Currently, 3 biologics are FDA-approved for the treatment of inadequately-controlled CRSwNP and 2 biologics demonstrate promise as potential agents. The overall trend in literature suggests that the combination of ESS to relieve polyps and improve medication delivery and biologics to facilitate anti-inflammatory effects is clinically impactful.

Conclusion: Evidence to date aligns with current recommendations that biologics are a promising maintenance option for CRSwNP patients who have failed both medical management and complete ESS.

慢性鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉使用生物制剂的考虑。
背景:类固醇、内窥镜鼻窦手术(ESS)、生物制剂或这些干预措施的组合可用于治疗慢性鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉病(CRSwNP)。然而,尽管有证据支持每种方法的有效性,但需要考虑时机、成本、副作用和患者偏好等因素。这项工作的目的是在制定治疗计划时提供当前生物制剂和每种干预措施之间的比较。方法:参考最近的研究,详细描述当前和正在开发的生物制剂,比较美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)的适应症、作用机制、显著副作用、剂量和成本。在分析ESS、生物制剂或两者结合的效用时,需要考虑治疗时机和治疗持续时间。结果:目前,fda批准了3种生物制剂用于治疗控制不充分的CRSwNP, 2种生物制剂有望成为潜在的药物。文献的总体趋势表明,ESS缓解息肉、改善药物传递和生物制剂促进抗炎作用的联合应用在临床上是有效的。结论:迄今为止的证据与目前的建议一致,即对于医疗管理和完全ESS失败的CRSwNP患者,生物制剂是一种有希望的维持选择。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信