Blood transcriptomic signature in type-2 biomarker-low severe asthma and asthma control.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type-2 (T2) cytokine-low severe asthma often have persistent symptoms despite suppression of T2 inflammation with corticosteroids. OBJECTIVES: We sought to analyze whole blood transcriptome from 738 samples in T2-biomarker-high/-low patients with severe asthma to relate transcriptomic signatures to T2 biomarkers and asthma symptom scores. METHODS: Bulk RNA-seq data were generated for blood samples (baseline, week 24, week 48) from 301 participants recruited to a randomized clinical trial of corticosteroid optimization in severe asthma. Unsupervised clustering, differential gene expression analysis, and pathway analysis were performed. Patients were grouped by T2-biomarker status and symptoms. Associations between clinical characteristics and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) associated with biomarker and symptom levels were investigated. RESULTS: Unsupervised clustering identified 2 clusters; cluster 2 patients were blood eosinophil-low/symptom-high and more likely to be receiving oral corticosteroids (OCSs). Differential gene expression analysis of these clusters, with and without stratification for OCSs, identified 2960 and 4162 DEGs, respectively. Six hundred twenty-seven of 2960 genes remained after adjusting for OCSs by subtracting OCS signature genes. Pathway analysis identified dolichyl-diphosphooligosaccharide biosynthesis and assembly of RNA polymerase I complex as significantly enriched pathways. No stable DEGs were associated with high symptoms in T2-biomarker-low patients, but numerous associated with elevated T2 biomarkers, including 15 that were upregulated at all time points irrespective of symptom level. CONCLUSIONS: OCSs have a considerable effect on whole blood transcriptome. Differential gene expression analysis demonstrates a clear T2-biomarker transcriptomic signature, but no signature was found in association with T2-biomarker-low patients, including those with a high symptom burden.

A Randomized Trial of a Composite T2-Biomarker Strategy Adjusting Corticosteroid Treatment in Severe Asthma: A Post Hoc Analysis by Sex.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% to 10% of patients with asthma have severe disease, with a consistent preponderance in females. Current asthma guidelines recommend stepwise treatment to achieve symptom control with no differential treatment considerations for either sex. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patient sex affects outcomes when using a composite T2-biomarker score to adjust corticosteroid (CS) treatment in patients with severe asthma compared with standard care. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis, stratifying patient outcomes by sex, of a 48-week, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing a biomarker-defined treatment algorithm with standard care. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a reduction in CS treatment (inhaled and oral corticosteroids). Secondary outcomes included exacerbation rates, hospital admissions, and lung function. RESULTS: Of the 301 patients randomized, 194 (64.5%) were females and 107 (35.5%) were males. The biomarker algorithm led to a greater proportion of females being on a lower CS dose versus standard care, which was not seen in males (effect estimate: females, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.14-11.18 vs males, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.16-1.80). In T2-biomarker-low females, reducing CS dose was not associated with increased exacerbations. Females scored higher in all domains of the 7-item Asthma Control Questionnaire, apart from FEV1, but with no difference when adjusted for body mass index/anxiety and/or depression. Dissociation between symptoms and T2 biomarkers were noted in both sexes, with a higher proportion of females being symptom high/T2-biomarker low (22.8% vs 15.6%; P = .0002), whereas males were symptom low/T2-biomarker high (22.3% vs 11.4%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory post hoc analysis identified that females achieved a greater benefit from biomarker-directed CS optimization versus symptom-directed treatment.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lebrikizumab in adolescent patients with uncontrolled asthma (ACOUSTICS).

Background: Lebrikizumab is a monoclonal antibody that modulates activity of interleukin-13. The Phase 3 ACOUSTICS study assessed lebrikizumab efficacy and safety in adolescents with uncontrolled asthma despite standard-of-care treatment. Methods: Adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with uncontrolled asthma, prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s 40%-90% predicted, and stable background therapy were randomised 1:1:1 to receive lebrikizumab 125 or 37.5 mg or placebo subcutaneously once every 4 weeks. Primary efficacy endpoint was asthma exacerbation rate over 52 weeks. Results: Between August 2013 and July 2016, 579 patients were screened and 346 were randomised; 224 (65%) completed the study with 52 weeks of treatment. Lebrikizumab 125 mg (n = 116) reduced the exacerbation rate at 52 weeks versus placebo (n = 117; adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.49 [95% CI 0.28-0.83]; 51% rate reduction). Lebrikizumab 37.5 mg (n = 113) was less effective at reducing exacerbations (RR 0.60 [95% CI 0.35-1.03]; 40% rate reduction). In patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/µl, both lebrikizumab doses reduced exacerbations (125 mg: RR 0.44 [95% CI 0.21-0.89]; 37.5 mg: 0.42 [95% CI 0.19-0.93]). Treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and adverse events leading to study discontinuation occurred in 155 (68%), 7 (3%), and 5 (2%) of 229 patients who received lebrikizumab (both 125 and 37.5 mg doses) and in 72 (62%), 4 (3%), and 1 (1%) of 117 who received placebo, respectively. No deaths occurred. Conclusion: Lebrikizumab 125 mg reduced asthma exacerbation rates in adolescents with uncontrolled asthma. However, the study was prematurely terminated (sponsor's decision) potentially limiting interpretation of results. Clinical trial registration: NCT01875003 (www.ClinicalTrials.gov).

Exacerbation Profile and Risk Factors in a Type-2-Low Enriched Severe Asthma Cohort: A Clinical Trial to Assess Asthma Exacerbation Phenotypes.

Rationale: The past 25 years have seen huge progress in understanding of the pathobiology of type-2 (T2) asthma, identification of measurable biomarkers, and the emergence of novel monoclonal antibody treatments. Although present in a minority of patients with severe asthma, very little is known about the mechanisms underlying T2-low asthma, making it a significant unmet need in asthma research. Objectives: The objective of this study was to explore the differences between study exacerbators and nonexacerbators, to describe physiological changes at exacerbation in those who are T2HIGH and T2LOW at the time of exacerbation, and to evaluate the stability of inflammatory phenotypes when stable and at exacerbation. Methods: Exacerbation assessment was a prespecified secondary analysis of data from a 48-week, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical study comparing the use of biomarkers and symptoms to adjust steroid treatment in a T2-low severe asthma-enriched cohort. Participants were phenotyped as T2LOW (fractional exhaled nitric oxide ⩽ 20 ppb and blood eosinophil count ⩽ 150 cells/µl) or T2HIGH (fractional exhaled nitric oxide > 20 or blood eosinophil count > 150) at study enrollment and at each exacerbation. Here, we report the findings of the exacerbation analyses, including comparison of exacerbators and nonexacerbators, the physiological changes at exacerbation in those who had evidence of T2 biology at exacerbation versus those that did not, and the stability of inflammatory phenotypes when stable and at exacerbation. Measurements and Main Results: Of the 301 participants, 60.8% (183) had one or more self-reported exacerbations (total of 390). Exacerbators were more likely to be female, have a higher body mass index, and have more exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroid and unscheduled primary care attendances for exacerbations. At enrollment, 23.6% (71) were T2LOW and 76.4% (230) T2HIGH. The T2LOW group had more asthma primary care attendances, were more likely to have a previous admission to HDU (high dependency unit)/ICU and to be receiving maintenance oral corticosteroids. At exacerbation, the T2LOW events were indistinguishable from T2HIGH exacerbations in terms of lung function (mean fall in T2LOW FEV1, 200 [400] ml vs. T2HIGH 200 [300] ml; P = 0.93) and symptom increase (ACQ5: T2LOW, 1.4 [0.8] vs. T2HIGH, 1.3 [0.8]; P = 0.72), with no increase in T2 biomarkers from stable to exacerbation state in the T2LOW exacerbations. The inflammatory phenotype within individual patients was dynamic; inflammatory phenotype at study entry did not have a significant association with exacerbation phenotype. Conclusions: Asthma exacerbations demonstrating a T2LOW phenotype were physiologically and symptomatically similar to T2HIGH exacerbations. T2LOW asthma was an unstable phenotype, suggesting that exacerbation phenotyping should occur at the time of exacerbation. The clinically significant exacerbations in participants without evidence of T2 biology at the time of exacerbation highlight the unmet and pressing need to further understand the mechanisms at play in non-T2 asthma. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02717689).

Factors affecting adherence with treatment advice in a clinical trial of patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Understanding why patients with severe asthma do not follow healthcare provider (HCP) advice to adjust treatment is critical to achieving personalised disease management. METHODS: We reviewed patient choice to follow HCP advice to adjust asthma treatment in a UK-based randomised, controlled, single-blind (study participant), multicentre, parallel group 48-week clinical study comparing biomarker-directed treatment adjustment with standard care in severe asthma. RESULTS: Of 1572 treatment advisories (291 participants), instructions were followed in 1377 cases (87.6%). Patients were more likely to follow advice to remain on treatment (96.7%) than to either reduce (70.3%) or increase (67.1%) their treatment, with 64% of patients following all treatment advice. Multivariate analysis associated belonging to an ethnic minority group (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.68-5.73) and prior study medication changes (two or more changes: OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.51-5.10) with failure to follow treatment advice. In contrast, emergency room attendance in the prior year (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.92) was associated with following treatment advice. The largest effect was seen with transition onto or off oral corticosteroids (OR 29.28, 95% CI 16.07-53.36) when compared with those requested to maintain treatment. Centre was also an important determinant regarding the likelihood of patients to follow treatment advice. CONCLUSIONS: Belonging to an ethnic minority group and multiple prior treatment adjustments were associated with not following HCP treatment advice. Patients also responded differently to HCP advice across UK specialist centres. These findings have implications for the generalisability of models of care in severe asthma and require further focused studies.

Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend increasing corticosteroid dose to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. This approach is potentially flawed because symptomatic asthma can occur without corticosteroid responsive type-2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation, and inappropriately high-dose corticosteroid treatment might have little therapeutic benefit with increased risk of side-effects. We compared a biomarker strategy to adjust corticosteroid dose using a composite score of T2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FENO], blood eosinophils, and serum periostin) with a standardised symptom-risk-based algorithm (control). METHODS: We did a single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in adults (18-80 years of age) with severe asthma (at treatment steps 4 and 5 of the Global Initiative for Asthma) and FENO of less than 45 parts per billion at 12 specialist severe asthma centres across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomly assigned (4:1) to either the biomarker strategy group or the control group by an online electronic case-report form, in blocks of ten, stratified by asthma control and use of rescue systemic steroids in the previous year. Patients were masked to study group allocation throughout the entirety of the study. Patients attended clinic every 8 weeks, with treatment adjustment following automated treatment-group-specific algorithms: those in the biomarker strategy group received a default advisory to maintain treatment and those in the control group had their treatment adjusted according to the steps indicated by the trial algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with corticosteroid dose reduction at week 48, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary outcomes were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at the end of the study; cumulative dose of ICS during the study; proportion of patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) at study end; rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient year; time to first severe exacerbation; number of hospital admissions for asthma; changes in lung function, Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and T2 biomarkers from baseline to week 48; and whether patients declined to progress to OCS. A secondary aim of our study was to establish the proportion of patients with severe asthma in whom T2 biomarkers remained low when corticosteroid therapy was decreased to a minimum ICS dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 and has been completed. FINDINGS: Patients were recruited from Jan 8, 2016, to July 12, 2018. Of 549 patients assessed, 301 patients were included in the ITT population and were randomly assigned to the biomarker strategy group (n=240) or to the control group (n=61). 28·4% of patients in the biomarker strategy group were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 compared with 18·5% of patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·71 [95% CI 0·80-3·63]; p=0·17). In the per-protocol (PP) population (n=121), a significantly greater proportion of patients were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 in the biomarker strategy group (30·7% of patients) compared with the control group (5·0% of patients; aOR 11·48 [95% CI 1·35-97·83]; p=0·026). Patient choice to not follow treatment advice was the principle reason for loss to PP analysis. There was no difference in secondary outcomes between study groups and no loss of asthma control among patients in the biomarker strategy group who reduced their corticosteroid dose. INTERPRETATION: Biomarker-based corticosteroid adjustment did not result in a greater proportion of patients reducing corticosteroid dose versus control. Understanding the reasons for patients not following treatment advice in both treatment strategies is an important area for future research. The prevalence of T2 biomarker-low severe asthma was low. FUNDING: This study was funded, in part, by the Medical Research Council UK.

Using prednisolone and cortisol assays to assess adherence in oral corticosteroid dependant asthma: An analysis of test-retest repeatability.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Non-adherence is an important issue within severe asthma. Prednisolone and cortisol assays have been proposed as an inexpensive, objective measure of adherence for oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent asthmatics, however, little is known about the reliability of these tests. METHODS: 41 severe OCS-dependent asthmatics had their prednisolone and cortisol measured during six study visits over a three month time period. Subjects were classed as non-adherent/variably-adherent if they had undetectable prednisolone and/or cortisol >100 nmol/L. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess the test-retest reliability of prednisolone and cortisol, and Gwets AC1 kappa was used to assess the reliability of the adherence classification. Mean change in blood eosinophils for adherent and variably/non-adherent visits were calculated and linear regression with cluster-robust standard errors was used to test for differences. RESULTS: 30 subjects were included in the analysis. Reliability was poor for prednisolone (ICC: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.59), and moderate for cortisol (ICC: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.74). Using the combined rule, subjects were classified as adherent during 141 (88%) visits, with 21 subjects (70%) adherent during all study visits. The adherence classification had almost perfect reliability (Kappa: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.95). Blood eosinophils were decreased by 47 cells/µl (95% CI: 11, 84) during adherent visits but increased by 65 cells/µl (95% CI: 4, 134; Pdifference = 0.03) during variably/non-adherent visits. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing adherence to maintenance OCS using a simple rule based on prednisolone and cortisol assays is highly reliable and correlated with blood eosinophil changes. Clinicians should have confidence in the results of this rule.

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating effects of lebrikizumab on airway eosinophilic inflammation and remodelling in uncontrolled asthma (CLAVIER).

BACKGROUND: The anti-interleukin 13 (IL-13) monoclonal antibody lebrikizumab improves lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma, but its effects on airway inflammation and remodelling are unknown. CLAVIER was designed to assess lebrikizumab's effect on eosinophilic inflammation and remodelling. OBJECTIVE: To report safety and efficacy results from enrolled participants with available data from CLAVIER. METHODS: We performed bronchoscopy on patients with uncontrolled asthma before and after 12 weeks of randomized double-blinded treatment with lebrikizumab (n = 31) or placebo (n = 33). The pre-specified primary end-point was relative change in airway subepithelial eosinophils per mm2 of basement membrane (cells/mm2 ). Pre-specified secondary and exploratory outcomes included change in IL-13-associated biomarkers and measures of airway remodelling. RESULTS: There was a baseline imbalance in tissue eosinophils and high variability between treatment groups. There was no discernible change in adjusted mean subepithelial eosinophils/mm2 in response to lebrikizumab (95% CI, -82.5%, 97.5%). As previously observed, FEV1 increased after lebrikizumab treatment. Moreover, subepithelial collagen thickness decreased 21.5% after lebrikizumab treatment (95% CI, -32.9%, -10.2%), and fractional exhaled nitric oxide, CCL26 and SERPINB2 mRNA expression in bronchial tissues also reduced. Lebrikizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with other lebrikizumab asthma studies. CONCLUSIONS & CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We did not observe reduced tissue eosinophil numbers in association with lebrikizumab treatment. However, in pre-specified exploratory analyses, lebrikizumab treatment was associated with reduced degree of subepithelial fibrosis, a feature of airway remodelling, as well as improved lung function and reduced key pharmacodynamic biomarkers in bronchial tissues. These results reinforce the importance of IL-13 in airway pathobiology and suggest that neutralization of IL-13 may reduce asthmatic airway remodelling. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02099656.

Seasonal variability of lung function and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire Scores in adults with uncontrolled asthma.

Introduction: Asthma exacerbations spike in the spring and autumn months, yet the seasonal variation of asthma symptoms and lung function is poorly studied. Methods: Seasonal variation of lung function, rescue medication use and patient-reported symptoms was evaluated by post hoc analyses of the Phase III lebrikizumab (anti-IL-13) LAVOLTA I and II studies in 2148 subjects with uncontrolled asthma. Lung function measurements (prebronchodilator FEV1, forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak expiratory flow (PEF)), rescue medication use and Standardised Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ(S)) were measured every 4 weeks over 52 weeks. By-month estimates normalised by hemispheric season were based on mixed-effect models with repeated measures (MMRM), adjusted by study stratification factors as covariates when appropriate. The dependency of clinical outcomes with seasonal variability was assessed by employing linear contrasts comparing hemisphere normalised December versus July group means from an MMRM regression and presented as the difference in means (adjusted 95% CI). Results: FEV1, FVC and PEF, rescue medication use and AQLQ(S) progressively worsened towards winter, unlike spring and autumn surges in asthma exacerbations. The December versus July mean differences were: (1) PEF=-6.5 (-8.7 to -4.2) L/min, 2) prebronchodilator FEV1=-42 (-57 to -27) mL, (3) FVC=-41 (-59 to -23) mL and (4) AQLQ(S)=-0.15 (-0.19 to -0.1) units. Among AQLQ questions, discomfort or distress related to cough was most variable with respect to season (-0.33 (-0.42 to -0.24) units). Discussion: Interpretation of interventional studies biased by seasonal exposures may be confounded by seasonal variability. Trials registration numbers: NCT01867125 and NCT01868061.

Change in type-2 biomarkers and related cytokines with prednisolone in uncontrolled severe oral corticosteroid dependent asthmatics: an interventional open-label study.

Type-2 biomarkers and related cytokines (IL-5, IL-13), lung function and asthma symptoms were measured in 44 poorly-controlled severe oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent asthmatics for up to 88 days after a 7-day prednisolone boost (0.5 mg/kg). High-dose OCS reduced median blood eosinophils (-60 cells/µl; 95% CI -140 to 10), periostin (-8.4 ng/mL; -11.6 to -2.8), FeNO (-19.0 ppb; -28.5 to -4.0), IL-5 (-0.17 pg/mL; -0.28 to -0.08) and IL-13 (-0.15 pg/mL; -0.27 to -0.03). There were small improvements in mean FEV1 (0.16 L; 0.05 to 0.27) and (Asthma Control Questionnaire) ACQ-7 score (0.3; 0.0 to 0.7). Study measures returned to baseline 1-month postintervention. Following rescue OCS, 1 month is sufficient before using type-2 biomarkers to guide long-term treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01948401.

Change in biomarkers of type-2 inflammation following severe exacerbations of asthma.

We investigated the time course of change of type-2 asthma biomarkers after a severe asthma exacerbation. Blood eosinophils were lowest immediately after treatment was initiated (0.07 vs 0.33×109/L, p<0.001) while serum IgE levels were at their highest (339 vs 249 U/L, p<0.001). Fractional exhaled Nitric Oxide levels were lowest 2 weeks after treatment (23 vs 33 ppb, p=0.06) and serum periostin levels were lowest 1 week after treatment (45·9 vs 50·9 ng/mL, p<0.001). A delay of 4-8 weeks following a severe exacerbation is required if these biomarkers are used to guide the ongoing management of patients with asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Post-results; The Australia New Zealand Trial Registry, >ACTRN12614000443695.

U-BIOPRED: evaluation of the value of a public-private partnership to industry.

Unbiased Biomarkers for the Prediction of Respiratory Disease Outcomes (U-BIOPRED) was initiated in the first year of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI). It was an ambitious plan to tackle the understanding of asthma through an integration of clinical and multi-'omics approaches that necessitated the bringing together of industry, academic, and patient representatives because it was too large to be managed by any one of the partners in isolation. It was a novel experience for all concerned. In this review, we describe the main features of the U-BIOPRED experience from the industry perspective. We list some of the key advantages and learnings from the perspective of the authors, and also improvements that we feel could be made in future projects.

Efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab in adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma not receiving inhaled corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a heterogeneous and complex disease in both its clinical course and response to treatment. IL-13 is central to Type 2 inflammation and contributes to many features of asthma. In a previous Phase 2 study, lebrikizumab, an anti-IL-13 monoclonal antibody, did not significantly improve FEV1 in mild-to-moderate asthma patients not receiving ICS therapy. This Phase 3 study was designed to further assess the efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab in adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma treated with daily short-acting ß2-agonist therapy alone. METHODS: Adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma were randomised to receive lebrikizumab 125 mg subcutaneously (SC), placebo SC, or montelukast 10 mg orally for 12 weeks, with an 8-week follow-up period. The primary efficacy endpoint was absolute change in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 from baseline at Week 12. FINDINGS: A total of 310 patients were randomised and dosed in the study. The mean absolute change in FEV1 from baseline at Week 12 was higher in the lebrikizumab-treated arm compared with placebo (150 mL versus 67 mL); however, this improvement did not achieve statistical significance (overall adjusted difference of 83 mL [95% CI: -3, 170]; p = .06). Montelukast did not improve FEV1 as compared with placebo. Lebrikizumab was generally safe and well tolerated during the study. INTERPRETATION: Lebrikizumab did not significantly improve FEV1 in mild-to-moderate asthma patients at a dose expected to inhibit the IL-13 pathway. Inhibiting IL-13 in this patient population was not sufficient to improve lung function. These data support the findings of a previous trial of lebrikizumab in patients not receiving ICS. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY NUMBER: This trial was registered under NCT02104674 at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

A randomised pragmatic trial of corticosteroid optimization in severe asthma using a composite biomarker algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose versus standard care: study protocol for a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with difficult-to-control asthma consume 50-60% of healthcare costs attributed to asthma and cost approximately five-times more than patients with mild stable disease. Recent evidence demonstrates that not all patients with asthma have a typical type 2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation. These asthmatics have been called 'T2-low asthma' and have a minimal response to corticosteroid therapy. Adjustment of corticosteroid treatment using sputum eosinophil counts from induced sputum has demonstrated reduced severe exacerbation rates and optimized corticosteroid dose. However, it has been challenging to move induced sputum into the clinical setting. There is therefore a need to examine novel algorithms to target appropriate levels of corticosteroid treatment in difficult asthma, particularly in T2-low asthmatics. This study examines whether a composite non-invasive biomarker algorithm predicts exacerbation risk in patients with asthma on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (± long-acting beta agonist) treatment, and evaluates the utility of this composite score to facilitate personalized biomarker-specific titration of corticosteroid therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients recruited to this pragmatic, multi-centre, single-blinded randomised controlled trial are randomly allocated into either a biomarker controlled treatment advisory algorithm or usual care group in a ratio of 4:1. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients with any reduction in ICS or oral corticosteroid dose from baseline to week 48. Secondary outcomes include the rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient per year, time to first severe exacerbation from randomisation, dose of inhaled steroid at the end of the study, cumulative dose of inhaled corticosteroid during the study, proportion of patients on oral corticosteroids at the end of the study, proportion of patients who decline to progress to oral corticosteroids despite composite biomarker score of 2, frequency of hospital admission for asthma, change in the 7-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophil count, and periostin levels from baseline to week 48. Blood will also be taken for whole blood gene expression; serum, plasma, and urine will be stored for validation of additional biomarkers. DISCUSSION: Multi-centre trials present numerous logistical issues that have been addressed to ensure minimal bias and robustness of study conduct. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 . Registered on 16 March 2016.

Model-based clinical pharmacology profiling and exposure-response relationships of the efficacy and biomarker of lebrikizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.

Lebrikizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to interleukin-13 and has been evaluated as a treatment for moderate-to-severe asthma. Objectives of this work were to characterize lebrikizumab pharmacokinetics (PK), identify influential covariates, and graphically explore exposure-response relationships in moderate-to-severe asthmatics. Pooled PK data from 11 studies were used in the population PK model development. Full covariate modeling was used to evaluate the impact of pre-specified covariates. Response data (exacerbation rate, forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1], and fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]) were obtained from moderate-to-severe asthmatics (n = 2148) who received placebo, lebrikizumab 37.5 mg or 125 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) in two replicate phase 3 studies. Graphical exposure-response analyses were stratified by numerous covariates, including biomarker subgroups defined by serum periostin level and blood eosinophil count at baseline. Lebrikizumab PK was described by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption. Population typical values were estimated as 0.156 L/day for clearance (CL), 4.10 L for central volume (Vc), and 0.239 day-1 for absorption rate (ka), 85.6% for bioavailability (inter-subject variability: CL, 33.3%; Vc, 36.3%; ka, 40.8%). The estimated mean terminal half-life was 25.7 days. Body weight was the most influential covariate. Generally, the exposure-response analyses of FEV1 and FeNO showed increased response at higher exposure quartiles, while flat or unclear exposure-response relationships were observed in exacerbation rate. Lebrikizumab PK is as expected for a typical immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody. Results from the exposure-response analyses suggested that, compared to 125 mg Q4W, the 37.5 mg Q4W dose did not achieve the maximum responses for FEV1 and FeNO, although it appeared to maximize the effect on exacerbation reduction. This suggests that the antibody levels needed to improve these outcomes may not be the same. In addition, the role of IL-13 in airflow obstruction/airway inflammation and asthma exacerbations might be different and targeting multiple pathways may be required to treat this heterogeneous disease and provide clinically meaningful benefits to asthma patients.

Efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab in patients with uncontrolled asthma (LAVOLTA I and LAVOLTA II): replicate, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: In phase 2 trials, lebrikizumab, an anti-interleukin-13 monoclonal antibody, reduced exacerbation rates and improved FEV1 in patients with uncontrolled asthma, particularly in those with high concentrations of type 2 biomarkers (eg, periostin or blood eosinophils). We undertook replicate phase 3 studies to assess the efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite inhaled corticosteroids and at least one second controller medication. METHODS: Adult patients with uncontrolled asthma, pre-bronchodilator FEV1 40-80% predicted, and stable background therapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) with an interactive voice-web-based response system to receive lebrikizumab 37·5 mg or 125 mg, or placebo subcutaneously, once every 4 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by screening serum periostin concentration, history of asthma exacerbations within the last 12 months, baseline asthma medications, and country. The primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of asthma exacerbations over 52 weeks in biomarker-high patients (periostin ≥50 ng/mL or blood eosinophils ≥300 cells per µL), analysed with a Poisson regression model corrected for overdispersion with Pearson χ2 that included terms for treatment group, number of asthma exacerbations within the 12 months before study entry, baseline asthma medications, geographic region, screening periostin concentration, and blood eosinophil counts as covariates. Both trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, LAVOLTA I, number NCT01867125, and LAVOLTA II, number NCT01868061. FINDINGS: 1081 patients were treated in LAVOLTA I and 1067 patients in LAVOLTA II. Over 52 weeks, lebrikizumab reduced exacerbation rates in biomarker-high patients in the 37·5 mg dose group (rate ratio [RR] 0·49 [95% CI 0·34-0·69], p<0·0001) and in the 125 mg dose group (RR 0·70 [0·51-0·95], p=0·0232) versus placebo in LAVOLTA I. Exacerbation rates were also reduced in biomarker-high patients in both dose groups versus placebo in LAVOLTA II (37·5 mg: RR 0·74 [95% CI 0·54-1·01], p=0·0609; 125 mg: RR 0·74 [0·54-1·02], p=0·0626). Pooling both studies, the proportion of patients who experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (79% [1125 of 1432 patients] for both lebrikizumab doses vs 80% [576 of 716 patients] for placebo), serious adverse events (8% [115 patients] for both lebrikizumab doses vs 9% [65 patients] for placebo), and adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation (3% [49 patients] for both lebrikizumab doses vs 4% [31 patients] for placebo) were similar between lebrikizumab and placebo. The following serious adverse events were reported in the placebo-controlled period: one event of aplastic anaemia and five serious adverse events related to raised concentrations of eosinophils in patients treated with lebrikizumab and one event of eosinophilic pneumonia in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Lebrikizumab did not consistently show significant reduction in asthma exacerbations in biomarker-high patients. However, it blocked interleukin-13 as evidenced by the effect on interleukin-13-related pharmacodynamic biomarkers, and clinically relevant changes could not be ruled out. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Roles of Periostin in Respiratory Disorders.

Periostin is a matricellular protein that has been implicated in many disease states. It interacts with multiple signaling cascades to modulate the expression of downstream genes that regulate cellular interactions within the extracellular matrix. This review focuses on the role of periostin in respiratory diseases, including asthma and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and its potential to help guide treatment or assess prognosis. Epithelial injury is a common feature of many respiratory diseases, resulting in the secretion, among others, of periostin, which is subsequently involved in airway remodeling and other aspects of pulmonary pathophysiology. In asthma, periostin is recognized as a biomarker of type 2 inflammation; POSTN gene expression is up-regulated in bronchial epithelial cells by IL-13 and IL-4. Serum periostin has been evaluated for the identification of patients with increased clinical benefit from treatment with anti-IL-13 (lebrikizumab, tralokinumab) and anti-IgE (omalizumab) therapy and may be prognostic for increased risk of asthma exacerbations and progressive lung function decline. Furthermore, in asthma, periostin may regulate subepithelial fibrosis and mucus production and may serve as a systemic biomarker of eosinophilic airway inflammation. Periostin is also highly expressed in the lungs of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and its serum levels may predict clinical progression. Overall, periostin contributes to multiple pathogenic processes across respiratory diseases, and peripheral blood levels of periostin may have utility as a biomarker of treatment response and disease progression.