• Chest · Sep 2024

    Review

    How I do it. Choosing the right biologic for the right patient with severe asthma.

    • Simon Couillard, David J Jackson, Ian D Pavord, and Michael E Wechsler.
    • Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences de la Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada. Electronic address: s.couillard@usherbrooke.ca.
    • Chest. 2024 Sep 6.

    AbstractIn this instalment of the How I Do It series on severe asthma, we tackle the clinical conundrum of choosing the right biologic for the right patient with severe asthma. With six biologics now approved for use in this area comprising four different targeting strategies (anti-Ig E: omalizumab; anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5-receptor: mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab; anti-IL-4-receptor: dupilumab; anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin: tezepelumab), this question is increasingly complex. Recognizing that no head-to-head trial has compared biologics, we based our review on the expected effects of inhibiting different aspects of type 2 airway inflammation, supported whenever possible by clinical trial and real-world data. We use four variations of a case of severe uncontrolled asthma to develop concepts and considerations introduced in the previous installment ("Workup of Severe Asthma") and discuss pregnancy-related, biomarker-related, comorbidity-related, and corticosteroid dependency-related considerations when choosing a biologic. The related questions of deciding when, why, and how to switch from one biologic to another also are discussed. Overall, we consider that the choice of biologics should be based on the available clinical trial data for the desired efficacy outcomes, the biomarker profile of the patient, safety profiles (eg, when pregnancy is considered), and opportunities to target two comorbidities with one biologic. Using systemic and airway biomarkers (blood eosinophils and exhaled nitric oxide [Feno]) and other phenotypic characteristics, we suggest a framework to facilitate therapeutic decision-making. Post hoc studies and new comparative studies are needed urgently to test this framework and to determine whether it allows us to make other clinically useful predictions.Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…