Angioedema in the omalizumab chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria pivotal studies.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema, present in some patients with chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria (CIU/CSU), may have a negative effect on patient quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To describe patient-reported angioedema and its management in the pivotal omalizumab studies (ASTERIA I, ASTERIA II, GLACIAL). METHODS: Enrolled patients with CIU/CSU remained symptomatic despite treatment with histamine1 (H1)-antihistamines at licensed doses (ASTERIA I, ASTERIA II) or H1-antihistamines at up to 4 times the approved dose plus H2-antihistamines and/or a leukotriene receptor antagonist (GLACIAL). All studies administered omalizumab (75, 150, or 300 mg in ASTERIA I and ASTERIA II; 300 mg in GLACIAL) or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for at least 12 weeks. Urticaria Patient Daily Diary entries were completed by patients and summarized. RESULTS: At baseline, angioedema prevalence was higher in GLACIAL (53.1%) than in ASTERIA I (47.5%) or ASTERIA II (40.7%). The mean proportion of angioedema-free days during weeks 4 to 12 was greater for patients treated with 300 mg of omalizumab than placebo in ASTERIA I (96.1% vs 88.2%, P < .001), ASTERIA II (95.5% vs 89.2%, P < .001), and GLACIAL (91.0% vs 88.7%, P = .006). Most patient-reported angioedema was managed by low-intensity interventions (doing nothing or taking medication). CONCLUSION: Treatment with 300 mg of omalizumab was efficacious in reducing patient-reported angioedema. Low-intensity interventions were generally used to manage angioedema episodes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01287117 (ASTERIA I), NCT01292473 (ASTERIA II), and NCT01264939 (GLACIAL).

The minimal important difference for measures of urticaria disease activity: Updated findings.

BACKGROUND: The Urticaria Patient Daily Diary (UPDD) is a validated patient-reported outcome that captures key measures of urticaria disease activity. OBJECTIVE: To update estimates of the minimal important difference (MID) for urticaria disease activity measures in the UPDD, including the weekly itch severity score, weekly number of hives score, weekly average size of largest hive score, and the composite measure of itch severity and number of hives over 7 days, or urticaria activity score 7 (UAS7). METHODS: A total of 975 subjects with chronic idiopathic urticaria from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies completed the UPDD and other patient-reported outcome assessments (the Dermatology Life Quality Index, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, the Chronic Urticaria Quality-of-Life Questionnaire, the EuroQoL-5 Dimension Questionnaire) multiple times. MIDs were estimated through a combination of distribution- and anchor-based methods. RESULTS: MID estimates ranged from 4.5 to 5.0 for the weekly itch severity score, 5.0 to 5.5 for weekly hives count score, 9.5 to 10.5 for the UAS7, and 4.0 to 4.5 for the weekly size of the largest hive score. CONCLUSION: This analysis provided confirmation of the previous MID estimates for the urticaria disease activity measures in the UPDD.

Changes in asthma control, work productivity, and impairment with omalizumab: 5-year EXCELS study results.

BACKGROUND: Asthma poses a significant disease burden worldwide. Current guidelines emphasize achieving and maintaining asthma control. OBJECTIVE: To describe longitudinal changes of asthma control and asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma treated with omalizumab and those who did not receive omalizumab in a real-world setting. METHODS: This study used 5 years of data from patients ages ≥12 years old with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma who were enrolled in the Evaluating Clinical Effectiveness and Long-term Safety in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma observational study. Asthma control was assessed with the Asthma Control Test for 5 years, and asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment was measured with the Work Productivity/Activity Impairment-Asthma questionnaire for the first 2 years. RESULTS: The percentage of patients treated with omalizumab (n = 4930) and with well-controlled asthma (Asthma Control Test score, >20) increased from 45% at baseline to 61% at month 60, and it was 49% (baseline) and 67% (month 60) for the non-omalizumab-treated cohort (n = 2779). For new starters to omalizumab (n = 576), the percentage with well-controlled asthma increased from 25% at baseline to 51% at month 6, and to 60% at month 60. Patients in the omalizumab-treated cohort and those in the non-omalizumab-treated cohort experienced a reduction in asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment. The amount of improvement in asthma control achieved and the reduction in asthma-related work, school, and activity impairment were similar, regardless of asthma severity. CONCLUSION: On average, patients in the Evaluating Clinical Effectiveness and Long-term Safety in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma observational study who initiated omalizumab experienced clinically significant improvement in asthma control, which was observed within 6 months and persisted for 5 years.

Population-based efficacy modeling of omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma inadequately controlled with standard therapy.

Omalizumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, is the first approved anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) agent for the treatment of subjects with moderate to severe persistent allergic asthma that are inadequately controlled by the standard of care. The objective of this study was to quantitatively characterize relationships between serum free IgE and pulmonary function (as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]) as well as serum free IgE and airway inflammation (as measured by fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]) using population-based efficacy models. Data were collected from patients in the EXTRA trial who received omalizumab or placebo 150 to 375 mg subcutaneously every 2 or 4 weeks from week 0 to 48 with constant standard of care as background therapy. None of the covariates evaluated, including demographics, disease status, and baseline pharmacodynamic biomarkers, were significant in explaining the variability in the FEV1 or FeNO response to omalizumab. Results from the efficacy models further confirmed the current omalizumab dosing rationale based on the mean target free IgE level of 25 ng/ml and quantified the variability for the target. In addition, the resulting population models could be used to predict population FEV1 or FeNO response for omalizumab and/or other anti-IgE therapeutics for which PK-IgE models are constructed.

A randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of single-dose omalizumab in patients with H1-antihistamine-refractory chronic idiopathic urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Proof-of-concept studies with omalizumab in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) have shown significant decreases in mean urticaria activity scores (UASs). OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with CIU who remain symptomatic despite concomitant H(1)-antihistamine therapy. METHODS: This phase II, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study investigated omalizumab in patients aged 12 to 75 years in the United States and 18 to 75 years in Germany with a UAS over 7 days (UAS7) of 12 or greater despite antihistamine therapy. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive a single subcutaneous dose of 75, 300, or 600 mg of omalizumab or placebo added to a stable dose of H(1)-antihistamine. The primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline to week 4 in UAS7. Patients were followed for an additional 12 weeks to monitor safety. RESULTS: Ninety patients from the United States or Germany were enrolled. Both the 300-mg omalizumab group (-19.9 vs -6.9, P < .001) and the 600-mg omalizumab group (-14.6 vs -6.9, P = .047) showed greater improvement versus the placebo group in UAS7. No meaningful difference was observed for the 75-mg omalizumab group. Similar results were seen for key secondary end points of weekly hive and itch scores. Onset of effect occurred after 1 to 2 weeks. Omalizumab was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events was similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that a fixed dose of 300 or 600 mg of omalizumab provides rapid and effective treatment of CIU in patients who are symptomatic despite treatment with H(1)-antihistamines.

Omalizumab in severe allergic asthma inadequately controlled with standard therapy: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting ß(2)-agonists (LABAs) are recommended in patients with asthma that is not well-controlled; however, many patients continue to have inadequately controlled asthma despite this therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with inadequately controlled severe asthma who are receiving high-dose ICS and LABAs, with or without additional controller therapy. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00314575). SETTING: 193 investigational sites in the United States and 4 sites in Canada. PATIENTS: 850 patients aged 12 to 75 years who had inadequately controlled asthma despite treatment with high-dose ICS plus LABAs, with or without other controllers. INTERVENTION: Omalizumab (n = 427) or placebo (n = 423) was added to existing medication regimens for 48 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was the rate of protocol-defined exacerbations over the study period. Secondary efficacy end points included the change from baseline to week 48 in mean daily number of puffs of albuterol, mean total asthma symptom score, and mean overall score on the standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ[S]). Safety end points included the frequency and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: During 48 weeks, the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations was significantly reduced for omalizumab compared with placebo (0.66 vs. 0.88 per patient; P = 0.006), representing a 25% relative reduction (incidence rate ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.92]). Omalizumab improved mean AQLQ(S) scores (0.29 point [CI, 0.15 to 0.43]), reduced mean daily albuterol puffs (-0.27 puff/d [CI, -0.49 to -0.04 puff/d]), and decreased mean asthma symptom score (-0.26 [CI, -0.42 to -0.10]) compared with placebo during the 48-week study period. The incidence of adverse events (80.4% vs. 79.5%) and serious adverse events (9.3% vs. 10.5%) were similar in the omalizumab and placebo groups, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The results are limited by early patient discontinuation (20.8%). The study was not powered to detect rare safety events or the treatment effect in the oral corticosteroid subgroup. CONCLUSION: In this study, omalizumab provided additional clinical benefit for patients with severe allergic asthma that is inadequately controlled with high-dose ICS and LABA therapy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Genentech and Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Development of a daily diary for patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) is a disease characterized by itching and skin hives or wheals of unknown cause that vary in size and last for at least 6 weeks. The criterion standard for measuring disease activity is the urticaria activity score (UAS). However, content validity of the UAS has not been previously reported. OBJECTIVES: To identify outcomes important to patients with CIU, create an urticaria patient daily diary based on the UAS and input from patients, and assess its content validity. METHODS: A qualitative research study was conducted in 2 stages using one-on-one telephone interviews of patients with CIU. In stage 1, patients were asked to discuss the impact of CIU on aspects of their life and to evaluate the content of the UAS. On the basis of this information, a patient daily diary, including UAS items, was developed. In stage 2, patients were interviewed to determine whether the urticaria patient daily diary was comprehensive and easily understood. RESULTS: Stage 1 interviews showed that CIU has an extensive impact on patients, from the primary symptoms of itching, hives, and angioedema to the broader aspects of sleep and health-related quality of life. Stage 2 interviews demonstrated the content validity of the urticaria patient daily diary and resulted in minor modifications to the diary. When the urticaria patient daily diary was administered in conjunction with the Dermatology Life Quality Index and Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, patients considered the assessment to be comprehensive, although some recommendations were made to include more items on emotional issues and other aspects of angioedema. CONCLUSIONS: The final urticaria patient daily diary is an easy-to-administer, comprehensive assessment of symptoms for CIU patients. Future research is needed to establish its additional psychometric properties.