治疗儿童和青少年哮喘的生物制剂的安全性:一项系统综述。

IF 9 1区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
European Respiratory Review Pub Date : 2025-06-18 Print Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1183/16000617.0269-2024
Elisa Wirthgen, Susann Quickert, Julia Weitzel, Birgit Salewski, Manfred Ballmann
{"title":"治疗儿童和青少年哮喘的生物制剂的安全性:一项系统综述。","authors":"Elisa Wirthgen, Susann Quickert, Julia Weitzel, Birgit Salewski, Manfred Ballmann","doi":"10.1183/16000617.0269-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Despite the clinical benefits, the administration of biologics in asthma is not without adverse effects. However, there is a lack of information on the safety profile, particularly in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide a systematic review of the range of reported adverse events (AEs) of biologic treatments approved for paediatric asthma (Xolair, Nucala, Dupixent, Fasenra and Tezspire).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science) and one registry (ClinicalTrials.gov).</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>This review included randomised clinical trials, prospective clinical studies, real-world studies, exploratory studies, registry analyses, case series and case reports, which met predefined inclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Study characteristics and AEs were extracted into predefined forms and then summarised in terms of their frequency and study duration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 45 reports and 13 clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for data evaluation, of which eight studies were placebo-controlled. Overall, paediatric asthma patients' most frequently reported AEs were headache, injection site reactions, upper respiratory tract infections, pyrexia and urticaria. The systematic analysis revealed a similar safety profile of the biologics to that reported on the product labels.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The small number of paediatric patients, missing placebo control groups, variant definitions of AEs and a lack of statistical evaluation limited the validation of specific AEs to individual biologics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this systematic review, no new safety concerns regarding the use of biologics in paediatric asthma were identified, even after an observation period of up to 7 years. In order to record rare side-effects and possible long-term consequences, further data from paediatric study cohorts are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12166,"journal":{"name":"European Respiratory Review","volume":"34 176","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12175077/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety of biologics for the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Elisa Wirthgen, Susann Quickert, Julia Weitzel, Birgit Salewski, Manfred Ballmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/16000617.0269-2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Despite the clinical benefits, the administration of biologics in asthma is not without adverse effects. However, there is a lack of information on the safety profile, particularly in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide a systematic review of the range of reported adverse events (AEs) of biologic treatments approved for paediatric asthma (Xolair, Nucala, Dupixent, Fasenra and Tezspire).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science) and one registry (ClinicalTrials.gov).</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>This review included randomised clinical trials, prospective clinical studies, real-world studies, exploratory studies, registry analyses, case series and case reports, which met predefined inclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Study characteristics and AEs were extracted into predefined forms and then summarised in terms of their frequency and study duration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 45 reports and 13 clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for data evaluation, of which eight studies were placebo-controlled. Overall, paediatric asthma patients' most frequently reported AEs were headache, injection site reactions, upper respiratory tract infections, pyrexia and urticaria. The systematic analysis revealed a similar safety profile of the biologics to that reported on the product labels.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The small number of paediatric patients, missing placebo control groups, variant definitions of AEs and a lack of statistical evaluation limited the validation of specific AEs to individual biologics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this systematic review, no new safety concerns regarding the use of biologics in paediatric asthma were identified, even after an observation period of up to 7 years. In order to record rare side-effects and possible long-term consequences, further data from paediatric study cohorts are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Respiratory Review\",\"volume\":\"34 176\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12175077/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Respiratory Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0269-2024\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Respiratory Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0269-2024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管有临床益处,但在哮喘中使用生物制剂并非没有副作用。然而,缺乏关于安全性的信息,特别是在儿童中。目的:对已批准用于儿科哮喘的生物药物(Xolair、Nucala、Dupixent、Fasenra和Tezspire)的不良事件(ae)范围进行系统回顾。数据来源:数据库(MEDLINE、CENTRAL、Scopus和Web of Science)和一个注册表(ClinicalTrials.gov)。研究选择:本综述包括随机临床试验、前瞻性临床研究、真实世界研究、探索性研究、注册分析、病例系列和病例报告,符合预定义的纳入标准。数据提取:将研究特征和ae提取为预定义的形式,然后根据其频率和研究持续时间进行总结。结果:总体而言,45篇报道和13项临床试验符合数据评价的纳入标准,其中8项研究为安慰剂对照。总的来说,儿童哮喘患者最常见的不良反应是头痛、注射部位反应、上呼吸道感染、发热和荨麻疹。系统分析显示,生物制剂的安全性与产品标签上的报告相似。局限性:儿科患者数量少,缺少安慰剂对照组,不良反应的不同定义和缺乏统计评估,限制了对个别生物制剂的特定不良反应的验证。结论:在本系统评价中,即使经过长达7年的观察期,也未发现有关儿童哮喘使用生物制剂的新的安全性问题。为了记录罕见的副作用和可能的长期后果,需要来自儿科研究队列的进一步数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Safety of biologics for the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents: a systematic review.

Context: Despite the clinical benefits, the administration of biologics in asthma is not without adverse effects. However, there is a lack of information on the safety profile, particularly in children.

Objective: To provide a systematic review of the range of reported adverse events (AEs) of biologic treatments approved for paediatric asthma (Xolair, Nucala, Dupixent, Fasenra and Tezspire).

Data sources: Databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science) and one registry (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Study selection: This review included randomised clinical trials, prospective clinical studies, real-world studies, exploratory studies, registry analyses, case series and case reports, which met predefined inclusion criteria.

Data extraction: Study characteristics and AEs were extracted into predefined forms and then summarised in terms of their frequency and study duration.

Results: Overall, 45 reports and 13 clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for data evaluation, of which eight studies were placebo-controlled. Overall, paediatric asthma patients' most frequently reported AEs were headache, injection site reactions, upper respiratory tract infections, pyrexia and urticaria. The systematic analysis revealed a similar safety profile of the biologics to that reported on the product labels.

Limitations: The small number of paediatric patients, missing placebo control groups, variant definitions of AEs and a lack of statistical evaluation limited the validation of specific AEs to individual biologics.

Conclusions: In this systematic review, no new safety concerns regarding the use of biologics in paediatric asthma were identified, even after an observation period of up to 7 years. In order to record rare side-effects and possible long-term consequences, further data from paediatric study cohorts are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信