<strong>Chest</strong> & <strong>Heart</strong> Journal Vol. <strong>35</strong>, <strong>No</strong>.-2, July <strong>2011</strong>dosing <strong>and</strong> maximize Omalizumab therapy. <strong>The</strong>reis, at present, no reported clinical experience withsuch approaches. 9,10,11CostOmalizumab is considerably more expensive thanconventional asthma therapy. <strong>The</strong> cost <strong>of</strong>treatment may range from $4,000 to $20,000 peryear, depending on the dose, with an average <strong>of</strong>approximately $12,000 per year. This compareswith approximate costs per year <strong>of</strong> $1,280 forMontelukast, $2,160 for the combination <strong>of</strong>Fluticasone dipropionate <strong>and</strong> Salmeterol, <strong>and</strong> $680for extended release <strong>The</strong>ophylline. 12Response to treatmentResponse to treatment can take several weeks tobecome apparent. 11 Among patients in a clinicaltrial who had had a response to Omalizumab by 16weeks, 87% had done so by 12 weeks. <strong>The</strong>se datasuggest that patients should be treated for at least12 weeks before efficacy is assessed. Given thatserum IgE levels <strong>and</strong> the numbers <strong>of</strong> FcåRIsincrease after therapy is discontinued 12 , it seemsthat treatment needs to be continued for efficacyto persist, but no studies have been reported onthe duration <strong>of</strong> effects after discontinuation. Iftreatment is interrupted before nine months haveelapsed since the last injection, treatment shouldbe resumed at the dose initially prescribed. 11,12Dosing may need to be adjusted in the event <strong>of</strong>substantial changes in body weight (Table 1).Adverse EffectsPotential safety concerns identified by the Food<strong>and</strong> Drug Administration (FDA) in reviewing trialdata on Omalizumab included risks <strong>of</strong> thedevelopment <strong>of</strong> cancer <strong>and</strong> anaphylaxis. Cancerdeveloped in more patients exposed toOmalizumab than in those who received placebo(20 <strong>of</strong> 4127 [0.5%] <strong>and</strong> 5 <strong>of</strong> 2236 [0.2%],respectively). <strong>The</strong>y were predominantly epithelialor solid-organ cancers; one case <strong>of</strong> haematologicor lymphatic cancer was noted. Since the majority<strong>of</strong> patients treated with Omalizumab have beenobserved for only a year, the effect <strong>of</strong> longerexposure or <strong>of</strong> use in patients who are at increasedrisk for cancer is not known. <strong>The</strong>refore,Omalizumab probably should not be used inpatients with a history <strong>of</strong> cancer or a strong familyhistory <strong>of</strong> cancer until this risk relationship isbetter understood. 11,12,13Omalizumab is intended to prevent any risk <strong>of</strong>anaphylaxis, since the agent cannot interact withIgE that is already bound to cell surfaces. However,in clinical trials, three patients (
Incorporating Omalizumab into Asthma Management: A ReviewMd. Khairul Hassan Jessy et al.have negative allergy skin tests, has not beendefined. It is also not clear to what extentOmalizumab might be effective in patients withtotal serum IgE levels outside the trial ranges (30to 700 IU per milliliter for patients 12 to 75 years<strong>of</strong> age).In clinical practice, there is considerable variability<strong>of</strong> response to Omalizumab therapy. <strong>The</strong> reasonsfor this variability have not been established;studies are needed to determine whether specificcharacteristics <strong>of</strong> individual patients may help topredict response. 11,13<strong>The</strong> clinical trials performed to date haveevaluated Omalizumab only as adjunctive therapywith inhaled corticosteroids as compared withplacebo. <strong>The</strong>y have not evaluated the relativebenefit <strong>of</strong> this agent in comparison with otheravailable therapies, such as Leukotriene modifiersor <strong>The</strong>ophylline. Also needed are comparisons withasthma therapies that are available for patientsfor whom low-dose inhaled corticosteroids do notcontrol the asthma <strong>and</strong> who need step-upmanagement (i.e., an increased dose <strong>of</strong> thecorticosteroid or the addition <strong>of</strong> anothermedication). Furthermore, the clinician shouldgive consideration to the actual clinical relevance<strong>of</strong> the moderate corticosteroid-sparing effectsobserved in the trials, even if these reductions weresignificant, as well as to the substantialimprovements noted in placebo groups. Given thatthe cost <strong>of</strong> Omalizumab is substantially greaterthan that <strong>of</strong> conventional asthma therapy, thepotential cost effectiveness <strong>of</strong> this form <strong>of</strong>treatment will be important to assess. 11,13,14<strong>The</strong> efficacy <strong>and</strong> safety <strong>of</strong> Omalizumab have notbeen established for durations <strong>of</strong> treatment thatexceed one year, <strong>and</strong> it is not known how longclinical effects may persist after therapy isdiscontinued. Since asthma is a chronic disease,long-term studies, especially in children, areneeded to evaluate the effect <strong>of</strong> serum IgEsuppression throughout development; adverseeffects may become apparent only with follow-upinto adulthood. We know <strong>of</strong> only one study to datethat has been performed exclusively in the pediatricage group. Efficacy <strong>and</strong> safety studies are alsoneeded for geriatric <strong>and</strong> nonwhite patients.Summary:Asthma continues to impose a significant clinical<strong>and</strong> economic burden on society. Patients with suboptimallycontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthmapose a considerable challenge to physicians <strong>and</strong>are among the most frequent users <strong>of</strong> health careresources. Current treatment strategiesrecommend the use <strong>of</strong> multiple medications tocontrol symptoms <strong>and</strong> to preserve surrogatemarkers <strong>of</strong> clinical efficacy, such as FEV1. <strong>The</strong>complexity <strong>of</strong> these regimens contributes to patientnon-adherence.Successful asthma management is also hinderedbecause <strong>of</strong> the cost <strong>of</strong> asthma care <strong>and</strong> limitedaccess to health care resources. <strong>No</strong>vel treatments,such as IgE blockers, have demonstrated a directimpact on disease indicators by minimizingexacerbations, reducing hospitalization <strong>and</strong>emergency department visits, <strong>and</strong> improvingquality <strong>of</strong> life in patients with moderate-to-severe,sub-optimally controlled asthma. Proposedtreatment guidelines encourage the use <strong>of</strong> IgEblockers in these patients. <strong>The</strong> use <strong>of</strong> suchtherapies has proved beneficial in reducing theclinical <strong>and</strong> economic burden <strong>of</strong> asthma <strong>and</strong>therefore has important implications for patients,health care providers, <strong>and</strong> third-party payers.As additional clinical experience is gained, theultimate role <strong>of</strong> IgE blockers will be further defined.Issues such as cost, long-term acceptability, <strong>and</strong>safety remain to be addressed.References:1. Gold DR, Wright R. Population disparitiesin asthma. Ann Rev Public Health 2005; 26:89-1132. Rosenwasser LJ. Incorporating Omalizumabinto Asthma Treatment Guidelines: ConsensusPanel Recommendations. Pharmacy <strong>and</strong><strong>The</strong>rapeutics 2003; 28(6): 400-103. Castro M, Schechtman KB, Halstead J,Bloomberg G. Risk factors for asthmamorbidity <strong>and</strong> mortality in a largemetropolitan city. J Asthma 2001; 38: 625-<strong>35</strong>4. Geha RS, Jabara HH, Brodeur SR. <strong>The</strong>regulation <strong>of</strong> immunoglobulin E class switchrecombination. Nat Rev Immunol 2003; 3:721-32125
- Page 3 and 4:
THE CHEST & HEART ASSOCIATION OF BA
- Page 5 and 6: Chest & Heart JournalVol. 35, No. 2
- Page 7 and 8: Instruction to Authors About Unifor
- Page 9 and 10: Chest & Heart JournalVol. 35, No. 2
- Page 11 and 12: Assessment of Diagnostic Value of C
- Page 13 and 14: Assessment of Diagnostic Value of C
- Page 16 and 17: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 18 and 19: Chest & Heart JournalVol. 35, No. 2
- Page 20 and 21: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 22 and 23: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 24 and 25: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 26 and 27: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 28 and 29: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 30 and 31: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 32 and 33: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 34 and 35: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 36 and 37: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 38 and 39: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 40 and 41: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 42 and 43: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 44 and 45: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 46 and 47: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 48 and 49: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 50 and 51: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 52 and 53: Chest & Heart JournalVol. 35, No. 2
- Page 54 and 55: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 58 and 59: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 60 and 61: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 62 and 63: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 64 and 65: Chest & Heart JournalVol. 35, No. 2
- Page 66 and 67: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 68 and 69: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-
- Page 70 and 71: Chest & Heart Journal Vol. 35, No.-