Tipos polinicos presentes no corpo de abelhas em assentamentos agrosilvipastoris do Município de Parauapebas e Nova Ipixuna, Pará.

Organizado por Daiana Rockenbach Boardman

Drop-out rate among patients treated with omalizumab for severe asthma: Literature review and real-life experience

BACKGROUND: In patients with asthma, particularly severe asthma, poor adherence to inhaled drugs negatively affects the achievement of disease control. A better adherence rate is expected in the case of injected drugs, such as omalizumab, as they are administered only in a hospital setting. However, adherence to omalizumab has never been systematically investigated. The aim of this study was to review the omalizumab drop-out rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-life studies. A comparative analysis was performed between published data and the Italian North East Omalizumab Network (NEONet) database. RESULTS: In RCTs the drop-out rate ranged from 7.1 to 19.4 %. Although the reasons for withdrawal were only occasionally reported, patient decision and adverse events were the most frequently reported causes. In real-life studies the drop-out rate ranged from 0 to 45.5 %. In most cases lack of efficacy was responsible for treatment discontinuation. According to NEONet data, 32 % of treated patients dropped out, with an increasing number of drop outs observed over time. Patient decision and lack of efficacy accounted for most treatment withdrawals. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment adherence is particularly crucial in patients with severe asthma considering the clinical impact of the disease and the cost of non-adherence. The risk of treatment discontinuation has to be carefully considered both in the experimental and real-life settings. Increased knowledge regarding the main reasons for patient withdrawal is important to improve adherence in clinical practice

Long-term effectiveness of benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma patients treated for 96-weeks: data from the ANANKE study

Background: The efficacy of benralizumab has been broadly demonstrated in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA), but only few real-life studies evaluated its long-term effects. Here we present novel data from the ANANKE study in which a large cohort of SEA patients was treated for up to 96 weeks. Methods: ANANKE (NCT04272463) is an observational retrospective Italian study investigating the key characteristics of SEA patients (collected during the 12 months prior to benralizumab initiation) and the clinical outcomes during benralizumab treatment (annual exacerbation rate [AER], lung function, asthma control, OCS use, healthcare resource utilization). A post hoc analysis was also conducted in groups of patients based on history of previous biologic therapy (bio-experienced versus naïve patients). Analyses were descriptive only. Results: Before benralizumab initiation, evaluable SEA patients (N = 162, 61.1% females, mean age 56.0 ± 12.7) showed a median blood eosinophil count (BEC) of 600 cells/mm3 (IQR: 430–890). Patients experienced frequent exacerbations (annualized exacerbation rate [AER]: 4.10, severe AER: 0.98), with impaired lung function and poor asthma control (median ACT score: 14) despite 25.3% reported oral corticosteroid (OCS) use. Nasal polyposis was present in 53.1% patients; 47.5% patients were atopic. After 96 weeks since the start of benralizumab, nearly 90% patients were still on treatment; benralizumab dramatically decreased exacerbations (AER: − 94.9%; severe AER: − 96.9%), improved respiratory parameters (median increase in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume [pre-BD FEV1]: + 400 mL) and asthma control (median ACT score: 23) while eliminating OCS in 60% patients. Importantly, benralizumab effects were either maintained or progressively improved over time, accompanied by a nearly complete depletion of BEC. Benralizumab reduced AER both in naïve (any AER: − 95.9%; severe AER: − 97.5%) and bio-experienced patients (any AER: − 92.4%; severe AER: − 94.0%). Conclusions: Profound and sustained improvements in all asthma outcomes were observed with benralizumab. The correct identification of patients’ eosinophilic-driven asthma phenotype was essential to ensure the achievement of such remarkable results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04272463

Unlocking the Long-Term Effectiveness of Benralizumab in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Three-Year Real-Life Study

Background: Benralizumab has been shown to restore good control of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). Robust data on benralizumab effectiveness over periods longer than 2 years are scarce. Methods: This retrospective multicentric study was conducted on 108 Italian SEA patients treated with benralizumab for up to 36 months. Partial and complete clinical remission (CR) were assessed. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics or using linear, logistic, and negative binomial mixed-effect regression models. Results: At 36 months, benralizumab reduced the exacerbation rate by 89% and increased the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (+440 mL at 36 months, p < 0.0001). Benralizumab improved asthma control as well as sinonasal symptoms in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). Up to 93.33% of patients either reduced or discontinued OCS; benralizumab also decreased ICS use and other asthma medications. Overall, 84.31% of patients achieved partial or complete CR. Conclusions: Benralizumab improved asthma and sinonasal outcomes up to 36 months. These findings support the potential of benralizumab to induce CR, emphasizing its role as a disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drug for the management of SEA. Further research is warranted to expand these findings by minimizing data loss and assessing benralizumab’s long-term safety

Minimal clinically important difference for asthma endpoints: an expert consensus report

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) can be defined as the smallest change or difference in an outcome measure that is perceived as beneficial and would lead to a change in the patient's medical management.The aim of the current expert consensus report is to provide a "state-of-the-art" review of the currently available literature evidence about MCID for end-points to monitor asthma control, in order to facilitate optimal disease management and identify unmet needs in the field to guide future research.A series of MCID cut-offs are currently available in literature and validated among populations of asthmatic patients, with most of the evidence focusing on outcomes as patient reported outcomes, lung function and exercise tolerance. On the contrary, only scant and partial data are available for inflammatory biomarkers. These clearly represent the most interesting target for future development in diagnosis and clinical management of asthma, particularly in view of the several biologic drugs in the pipeline, for which regulatory agencies will soon require personalised proof of efficacy and treatment response predictors

COVID-19 in Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) patients: Clinical features, impact of comorbidities and treatments

none17noNo abstract availablenoneHeffler, Enrico; Detoraki, Aikaterini; Contoli, Marco; Papi, Alberto; Paoletti, Giovanni; Malipiero, Giacomo; Brussino, Luisa; Crimi, Claudia; Morrone, Daniela; Padovani, Marianna; Guida, Giuseppe; Gerli, Alberto Giovanni; Centanni, Stefano; Senna, Gianenrico; Paggiaro, Pierluigi; Blasi, Francesco; Canonica, Giorgio WalterHeffler, Enrico; Detoraki, Aikaterini; Contoli, Marco; Papi, Alberto; Paoletti, Giovanni; Malipiero, Giacomo; Brussino, Luisa; Crimi, Claudia; Morrone, Daniela; Padovani, Marianna; Guida, Giuseppe; Gerli, Alberto Giovanni; Centanni, Stefano; Senna, Gianenrico; Paggiaro, Pierluigi; Blasi, Francesco; Canonica, Giorgio Walte

A survey of clinical features of allergic rhinitis in adults

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) has high prevalence and substantial socio-economic burden. Material/Methods: The study included 35 Italian Centers recruiting an overall number of 3383 adult patients with rhinitis (48% males, 52% females, mean age 29.1, range 18–45 years). For each patient, the attending physician had to fill in a standardized questionnaire, covering, in particular, some issues such as the ARIA classification of allergic rhinitis (AR), the results of skin prick test (SPT), the kind of treatment, the response to treatment, and the satisfaction with treatment. Results: Out of the 3383 patients with rhinitis, 2788 (82.4%) had AR: 311 (11.5%) had a mild intermittent, 229 (8.8%) a mild persistent, 636 (23.5%) a moderate-severe intermittent, and 1518 (56.1%) a moderate-severe persistent form. The most frequently used drugs were oral antihistamines (77.1%) and topical corticosteroids (60.8%). The response to treatment was judged as excellent in 12.2%, good in 41.3%, fair in 31.2%, poor in 14.5%, and very bad in 0.8% of subjects. The rate of treatment dissatisfaction was significantly higher in patients with moderate-to-severe AR than in patients with mild AR (p<0.0001). Indication to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) was significantly more frequent (p<0.01) in patients with severe AR than with mild AR. . Conclusions: These fndings confirm the appropriateness of ARIA guidelines in classifying the AR patients and the association of severe symptoms with unsuccessful drug treatment. The optimal targeting of patients to be treated with AIT needs to be reassessed