Asthma
Read Time: 5 mins

Tackling ‘People Remodelling’ in Corticosteroid-dependent Asthma with Type-2 Targeting Biologics and a Formal Corticosteroid Weaning Protocol

Published Online: October 19th 2022 touchREVIEWS in Respiratory & Pulmonary Diseases. 2022;7(2):Online ahead of journal publication
Authors: Olivier St-Germain, Philippe Lachapelle, Ian D Pavord, Simon Couillard
Quick Links:
Abstract
Article
Article Information
Abstract:
Overview

People with severe corticosteroid-dependent asthma have greater morbidity, mortality and corticosteroid side effects than any other people with asthma. Just as type-2 inflammation and recurrent asthma attacks remodel airways, we propose the concept of ‘people remodelling’ to represent the utter disruption of people’s lives by the consequences of severe asthma and its associated corticosteroid treatments. To tackle this important problem, three biologics targeting type-2 inflammation – mepolizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab – have shown efficacy in tapering corticosteroids in dedicated phase III trials. We herein review the literature and propose an evidence-based, dose- and agent-specific corticosteroid weaning protocol for busy clinicians looking to achieve the best outcomes possible for their patients: independence from corticosteroids and reversal of people remodelling.

Keywords

Asthma, biologics, biomarkers, corticosteroids, eosinophils, inflammation, corticosteroid-sparing therapy

Article:

Asthma is a common and heterogeneous disease affecting approximately 10% of the population.1 Severe asthma – a subset of the disease that affects a fraction of patients with asthma but comprises more than half of the morbidity, mortality and costs relating to asthma – is predominantly caused by smouldering type-2 eosinophilic airway inflammation.2,3 Until now, the main strategy for tackling this incendiary process and the ensuing bronchial remodelling, asthma attacks and premature deaths has been to douse the fire with oral corticosteroids (OCS).4 The persistence of eosinophilic airway inflammation in some patients with severe asthma indicates that the airway mucosal mechanisms driving the recruitment of eosinophils towards the airway epithelium are or have become resistant to the effects of inhaled corticosteroids. In this situation, OCS are helpful because they deplete the reservoir of circulating eosinophils, thus preventing eosinophil recruitment even in the presence of a strong chemotactic pull towards the airway epithelium.5

While OCS may prevent the inflammation from remodelling airways, they have been shown to reshape the appearance, health status and life of patients.6–9 Consequently, the traditional treatment with OCS contributes to what could be called ‘people remodelling’.

Short and infrequent OCS burst therapies are generally considered safe by physicians; however, they are not.6,8 In both inpatients and outpatients, mood changes and insomnia caused by OCS can lead to disturbing situations for the patients, their family, neighbours and physicians.10 Furthermore, dyspepsia and gastrointestinal ulcers lead to increased healthcare use, while fluid retention is uncomfortable for many patients.6 The frequency and severity of acute and long-term complications related to treatments significantly increase with a lifetime cumulative dose as low as 500–1,000 mg of prednisolone or equivalent.6 Although the treatment is most often necessary, prescribing this treatment implies that we inadvertently start harming patients after two-to-four bursts of OCS in a lifetime.7,8

The long-term impacts of corticosteroid dependence are well recognized. The consequences of even a small daily dose of OCS are, at worst, premature mortality and, at best, the likely possibility of experiencing weight gain and a Cushingoid appearance, as well as an increased risk of osteoporosis and fracture, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disorders.6–8 Evidence also suggests that adrenal insufficiency, a potentially life-threatening condition, might affect 60% of OCS-treated patients with asthma.10 Compared with non-corticosteroid-dependent patients with asthma, those treated with OCS have excess incident morbidity of 12 comorbidities per 1,000 patients/year and are estimated to require up to three times more healthcare resources.7,8

The scope, rigour and reproducibility of these toxicological data highlight the importance of making OCS avoidance a shared treatment goal in severe asthma.4 The need for incisive action is especially dire in corticosteroid-dependent asthma. Fortunately, dedicated phase III trials have demonstrated the steroid-sparing effect of three of the six biologics approved for use in asthma.11 They also provide a framework for developing formal weaning protocols.

The first marketed steroid-sparing biologic drug was mepolizumab, an anti-interleukin (IL)-5 monoclonal antibody. In the 2014 SIRIUS trial (Mepolizumab steroid-sparing study in subjects with severe refractory asthma; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01691508),12 mepolizumab demonstrated a 50% versus 0% reduction of the median dose of OCS at 24 weeks when compared with placebo, while also reducing the exacerbation rate, improving quality of life and improving lung function. The 4-weekly weaning protocol was initiated 4 weeks after the first injection on the basis of asthma and adrenal insufficiency symptoms.12

The 2017 ZONDA trial demonstrated significant results with benralizumab, an anti-IL-5 alpha-receptor monoclonal antibody (Efficacy and safety study of benralizumab to reduce OCS use in patients with uncontrolled asthma on high dose inhaled corticosteroid plus LABA and chronic OCS therapy; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02075255).13 In this trial, which employed a similar weaning protocol to the SIRIUS trial, the OCS median dose reduction at 28 weeks was 75% with benralizumab versus 25% with placebo. The exacerbation rate was also significantly lower in the treatment group, and symptoms and lung function showed a trend towards improvement.13

More recently, the PONENTE study has held special interest (Study to evaluate efficacy and safety of benralizumab in reducing oral corticosteroid use in adult patients with severe asthma; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03557307).10 The focus of this single-arm study was on rapid OCS tapering in benralizumab-treated patients. The weaning strategy was nearly four times quicker than in ZONDA and SIRIUS, insofar as reductions occurred every 1, 2 or 4 weeks depending on asthma symptoms and programmed adrenal testing. During the 24-week observation period, the median OCS reduction was 100%, and 91% of patients achieved a dose of ≤5 mg prednisolone. Exacerbation rate and asthma control were improved compared with those of the year preceding the study. The positive effect of this large reduction in OCS exposure on people remodelling and other aspects of benralizumab treatment was reflected by a large 1.0-point improvement in the Asthma Control Questionnaire score (minimally important difference: 0.5 points) compared with the score at enrollment.10

Dupilumab, an anti-IL-4 alpha-receptor monoclonal antibody, was also shown to be effective in corticosteroid sparing in the 2018 VENTURE study (Evaluation of dupilumab in patients with severe steroid dependent asthma; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02528214).14 Corticosteroid weaning occurred in weeks 4–20 of treatment. Dupilumab-treated patients had a median OCS dose reduction of 100% at 24 weeks compared with a 50% reduction in the placebo group. Exacerbation rate and lung function improved in the biologics group. The quality-of-life evaluation, although showing a tendency towards improvement with treatment, did not meet the clinical endpoint.14 Of these trials, only VENTURE did not require raised type-2 biomarkers for patients to enrol. However, most patients had raised biomarkers (Appendix 1). Therefore, none of the biologic drugs can be assumed with certainty to be corticosteroid sparing in type-2-low asthma.

The ambitious 2022 SOURCE trial evaluated tezepelumab, an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin monoclonal antibody (Study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in reducing oral corticosteroid use in adults with oral corticosteroid dependent asthma; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03406078).15 The alarmin anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin plays a role upstream, where it sets off type-2 and non-type-2 inflammatory pathways. However, blocking this protein did not translate into a statistically significant OCS-sparing effect in the SOURCE trial. Noteworthy methodological differences with the trials mentioned above were the longer weaning period (44 weeks in total) and the possibility of continuing weaning after an asthma attack occurred.15 These differences might have accounted for the differences in outcomes between the SOURCE trial and the other trials, although it is possible that tezepelumab, which acts primarily on the abnormally activated airway epithelium, does not suppress the reservoir of circulating eosinophils enough to be OCS sparing. Nevertheless, significant differences in the OCS-sparing effect of tezepelumab were observed in people with greater baseline blood eosinophil counts. Lastly, omalizumab and reslizumab, the two other biologics approved for severe asthma, have undergone no dedicated corticosteroid-sparing trial.

Across the corticosteroid-weaning trials, adverse events were reported equally between the biologics and placebo groups.10,12–14 Anti-drug antibodies were identified in less than 10% of both patients treated with biologics and with placebo. These antibodies did not seem to have any impact on the treatment’s efficacy during the observation period.

Despite the impressive evidence supporting OCS dose reduction in patients treated with mepolizumab, benralizumab or dupilumab, many challenges still prevent effective dose lowering, even when these biologics are safe and clinically appropriate. The most important obstacle to OCS reduction is patients’ adherence to dose-modification advice. According to Busby et al.,16 up to 30% of patients did not reduce their OCS doses when advised to do so, even though they voluntarily and knowingly enrolled in an algorithm-driven reduction trial. Strikingly, the adherence levels were largely dependent on the recruiting centre, suggesting that the local culture and the manner in which healthcare professionals present the advice are important factors.16 This may translate into even lower adherence to advice in a real-world clinical setting.

In practice, it is difficult for clinicians to taper OCS treatments of patients dependent on corticosteroids without prespecified trajectories. To our knowledge, few institutions use a standardized protocol to systematically enact these changes or provide resources for patients who are understandably worried about stepping down from a previously life-saving salvage treatment. Inspired by the SIRIUS, ZONDA, VENTURE and PONENTE trial protocols10,12–14 and by pharmacodynamic data indicating that benralizumab acts immediately,17 we herein propose an agent- and patient-dependent protocol for corticosteroid weaning when initiating a biologic treatment (Figure 1).

Conclusion

In conclusion, although life-saving, corticosteroids induce a debilitating process of ‘people remodelling’. Reducing OCS while maintaining asthma control is possible with mepolizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. However, many challenges still stand in the way of corticosteroid reduction by clinicians. The proposed personalized corticosteroid weaning protocol (Figure 1) is intended to alleviate some of these obstacles.

Article Information:
Disclosure

Philippe Lachapelle reports speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Regeneron, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis outside of the submitted work. In the last 5 years, Ian D Pavord has received speaker honoraria for sponsored meetings from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Aerocrine AB, Almirall, Novartis, Teva, Chiesi, Sanofi-Regeneron, Menarini, and GlaxoSmithKline and payments for organizing educational events from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Regeneron, and Teva. He has received honoraria for attending advisory panels with Genentech, Sanofi-Regeneron, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Teva, Merck, Circassia, Chiesi, and Knopp and payments to support FDA approval meetings from GlaxoSmithKline. He has received sponsorship to attend international scientific meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Teva and Chiesi. He has received grants from Chiesi and Sanofi. He is a co-patent holder of the rights to the Leicester Cough Questionnaire and has received payments for its use in clinical trials from Merck, Bayer and Insmed. In 2014 and 2015, he was an expert witness for a patent dispute involving AstraZeneca and Teva. Outside of the submitted work, Simon Couillard has received non-restricted research grants from Sanofi, the Quebec Respiratory Health Research Network, and the Association Pulmonaire du Québec; speaker honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Regeneron and AstraZeneca; reimbursement for conference attendance by AstraZeneca. Further, he is on the advisory board of Biometry Inc. Olivier St-Germain has no financial or non-financial interests or activities to declare in relation to this article.

Compliance With Ethics

This study involves a review of the literature and did not involve any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors

Review Process

Double-blind peer review.

Authorship

The named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship of this manuscript, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given final approval for the version to be published.

Correspondence

Simon Couillard, Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences de la Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001 12e Avenue Nord pièce 2616, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada. E: s.couillard@usherbrooke.ca

Support

This article was supported by the Research Chair of the Association Pulmonaire du Québec. No funding was received for the publication of this article.

Access

This article is freely accessible at touchRESPIRATORY.com. © Touch Medical Media 2022

Data Availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the writing of this article.

Received

2022-06-17

References

  1. Global Initiative for Asthma. Global strategy for asthma management and prevention (2022 update). 2022. Available at: https://ginasthma.org(accessed 11 October 2022).
  2. Barnes PJ. Severe asthma: Advances in current management and future therapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012;12:48–59.
  3. Heaney LG, Busby J, Hanratty CE, et al. 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. Lancet Respir Med. 2021;9:57–68.
  4. Couillard S, Jackson DJ, Wechsler ME, Pavord ID. Workup of severe asthma. Chest. 2021;160:2019–29.
  5. Couillard S, Pavord ID, Heaney LG, et al. Sub-stratification of type-2 high airway disease for therapeutic decision-making: A ‘bomb’ (blood eosinophils) meets ‘magnet’ (FeNO) framework. Respirology. 2022;27:573–7.
  6. Blakey J, Chung LP, McDonald VM, et al. Oral corticosteroids stewardship for asthma in adults and adolescents: A position paper from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand. Respirology. 2021;26:1112–30.
  7. Skov IR, Madsen H, Henriksen DP, et al. Low dose oral corticosteroids in asthma associates with increased morbidity and mortality. Eur Respir J. 2022:2103054.
  8. Price D, Castro M, Bourdin A, et al. Short-course systemic corticosteroids in asthma: Striking the balance between efficacy and safety. Eur Respir Rev. 2020;29:190151.
  9. Bleecker ER, Menzies-Gow AN, Price DB, et al. Systematic literature review of systemic corticosteroid use for asthma management. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;201:276–93.
  10. Menzies-Gow A, Gurnell M, Heaney LG, et al. Oral corticosteroid elimination via a personalised reduction algorithm in adults with severe, eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (PONENTE): A multicentre, open-label, single-arm study. Lancet Respir Med.2022;10:47–58.
  11. Brusselle GG, Koppelman GH. Biologic therapies for severe asthma. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:157–71.
  12. Bel EH, Wenzel SE, Thompson PJ, et al. Oralglucocorticoid-sparing effect of mepolizumab in eosinophilic asthma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1189–97.
  13. Nair P, Wenzel S, Rabe KF, et al. Oral glucocorticoid-sparing effect of benralizumab in severe asthma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2448–58.
  14. Rabe KF, Nair P, Brusselle G, et al. Efficacy and safety of dupilumab in glucocorticoid-dependent severe asthma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:2475–85.
  15. Wechsler ME, Menzies-Gow A, Brightling CE, et al. Evaluation of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab in adults with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma (SOURCE): A randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;10:650–60.
  16. Busby J, Matthews JG, Chaudhuri R, et al. Factors affecting adherence with treatment advice in a clinical trial of patients with severe asthma. Eur Respir J. 2021;59:2100768.
  17. Moran AMAM, Ramakrishnan S, Borg CACA, et al. Blood eosinophil depletion with mepolizumab, benralizumab, and prednisolone in eosinophilic asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;202:1314–6.

Further Resources

Share this Article
Related Content In Asthma
  • Copied to clipboard!
    accredited arrow-down-editablearrow-downarrow_leftarrow-right-bluearrow-right-dark-bluearrow-right-greenarrow-right-greyarrow-right-orangearrow-right-whitearrow-right-bluearrow-up-orangeavatarcalendarchevron-down consultant-pathologist-nurseconsultant-pathologistcrosscrossdownloademailexclaimationfeedbackfiltergraph-arrowinterviewslinkmdt_iconmenumore_dots nurse-consultantpadlock patient-advocate-pathologistpatient-consultantpatientperson pharmacist-nurseplay_buttonplay-colour-tmcplay-colourAsset 1podcastprinter scenerysearch share single-doctor social_facebooksocial_googleplussocial_instagramsocial_linkedin_altsocial_linkedin_altsocial_pinterestlogo-twitter-glyph-32social_youtubeshape-star (1)tick-bluetick-orangetick-red tick-whiteticktimetranscriptup-arrowwebinar Sponsored Department Location NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-07NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-08NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-09NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-10NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-11NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-12Salary £ TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-01TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-02TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-03TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-04TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-05TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-06TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-07TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-08TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-09TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-10TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-11TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-12TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-13TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-14TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-15TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-16TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-17TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-18TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-19TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-20TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-21TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-22TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-23TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-24TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-25TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-26TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-27TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-28TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-29TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-30TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-31TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-32TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-33TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-34TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-35TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-36TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-37TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-38TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-39TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-40TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-41TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-42TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-43TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-44TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-45TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-46TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-47TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-48TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-49TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-50TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-51TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-52TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-53TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-54TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-55TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-56TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-57TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-58TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-59TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-60TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-61TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-62TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-63TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-64TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-65TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-66TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-67TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-68TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-69TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-70TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-71TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-72