Evaluating Safety and Effectiveness of Switching Biologics in Managing Severe Asthma Patients.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY
Journal of Asthma and Allergy Pub Date : 2025-08-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JAA.S516225
Leena Al Awn, Maha AlAmmari, Dalal AlAbdulkarim, Reem AlAhmed, Bijesh Yadav, Hamdan Al-Jahdali
{"title":"Evaluating Safety and Effectiveness of Switching Biologics in Managing Severe Asthma Patients.","authors":"Leena Al Awn, Maha AlAmmari, Dalal AlAbdulkarim, Reem AlAhmed, Bijesh Yadav, Hamdan Al-Jahdali","doi":"10.2147/JAA.S516225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Saudi Initiative for Asthma (SINA) defines severe asthma as asthma that is uncontrolled at SINA step 4 despite optimized management. Choosing the biologic agent that is most appropriate for each patient can be difficult for clinicians. Thus, switching to another biologic agent due to no or suboptimal response is a common practice among asthma specialists. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching biologics in patients with severe asthma at a tertiary care center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an observational retrospective cohort single-center study conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City-Central Region, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. All adult patients ≥18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of severe asthma and who were switched from one biologic agent (omalizumab, mepolizumab and dupilumab) to another were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis. In the majority of patients (81%), switching occurred due to lack of clinical efficacy. Most patients were maintained on the first and second biologic for 6 months or more. Most switching occurred from omalizumab to mepolizumab and dupilumab was the most frequently used last-line biologic (54%). Compared to the first biologic, the mean number of exacerbations decreased after switching to a different biologic (6.6 vs 3.9, p = 0.1). On the other hand, sinus symptoms improved after patients were switched to a different biologic (18.5% vs 37.5%, p = 0.1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Switching from one biologic agent to another is effective and safe in patients who are not optimally controlled on the initial treatment. National and international guidelines should define and include criteria for switching biologics.</p>","PeriodicalId":15079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","volume":"18 ","pages":"1161-1166"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335250/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JAA.S516225","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Saudi Initiative for Asthma (SINA) defines severe asthma as asthma that is uncontrolled at SINA step 4 despite optimized management. Choosing the biologic agent that is most appropriate for each patient can be difficult for clinicians. Thus, switching to another biologic agent due to no or suboptimal response is a common practice among asthma specialists. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching biologics in patients with severe asthma at a tertiary care center.

Methods: This was an observational retrospective cohort single-center study conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City-Central Region, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. All adult patients ≥18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of severe asthma and who were switched from one biologic agent (omalizumab, mepolizumab and dupilumab) to another were included.

Results: Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis. In the majority of patients (81%), switching occurred due to lack of clinical efficacy. Most patients were maintained on the first and second biologic for 6 months or more. Most switching occurred from omalizumab to mepolizumab and dupilumab was the most frequently used last-line biologic (54%). Compared to the first biologic, the mean number of exacerbations decreased after switching to a different biologic (6.6 vs 3.9, p = 0.1). On the other hand, sinus symptoms improved after patients were switched to a different biologic (18.5% vs 37.5%, p = 0.1).

Conclusion: Switching from one biologic agent to another is effective and safe in patients who are not optimally controlled on the initial treatment. National and international guidelines should define and include criteria for switching biologics.

评价转用生物制剂治疗重症哮喘患者的安全性和有效性。
背景:沙特哮喘倡议(SINA)将严重哮喘定义为尽管进行了优化管理,但在SINA第4步仍未得到控制的哮喘。对于临床医生来说,选择最适合每位患者的生物制剂可能很困难。因此,由于没有或次优反应而改用另一种生物制剂是哮喘专家的常见做法。因此,本研究旨在评估转换生物制剂在三级保健中心重症哮喘患者中的安全性和有效性。方法:这是一项在沙特阿拉伯利雅得阿卜杜勒阿齐兹国王医疗城中心地区进行的观察性回顾性队列单中心研究。所有确诊为严重哮喘且从一种生物制剂(omalizumab, mepolizumab和dupilumab)切换到另一种生物制剂的≥18岁的成年患者被纳入研究。结果:33例患者纳入最终分析。在大多数患者(81%)中,由于缺乏临床疗效而发生切换。大多数患者使用第一种和第二种生物制剂维持6个月或更长时间。大多数切换发生在从omalizumab到mepolizumab,而dupilumab是最常用的最后一线生物药物(54%)。与第一种生物制剂相比,切换到另一种生物制剂后,平均恶化次数减少(6.6 vs 3.9, p = 0.1)。另一方面,患者改用不同的生物制剂后,鼻窦症状得到改善(18.5% vs 37.5%, p = 0.1)。结论:对于初始治疗控制不佳的患者,从一种生物制剂转向另一种生物制剂是有效和安全的。国家和国际指南应定义并包括转换生物制剂的标准。
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
Journal of Asthma and Allergy
Journal of Asthma and Allergy Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
185
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An international, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, reports, editorials and commentaries on the following topics: Asthma; Pulmonary physiology; Asthma related clinical health; Clinical immunology and the immunological basis of disease; Pharmacological interventions and new therapies. Although the main focus of the journal will be to publish research and clinical results in humans, preclinical, animal and in vitro studies will be published where they shed light on disease processes and potential new therapies.
×
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