Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis

Chong, Lee Yee; Piromchai, Patorn; Sharp, Steve; Snidvongs, Kornkiat; Philpott, Carl; Hopkins, Claire; Burton, Martin J

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013513

Cited by 32 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies with mepolizumab have shown a significant reduction in patients’ need for surgery and an improvement in symptoms [ 5 , 124 , 125 ]. A Cochrane review summarized that mepolizumab may improve both disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life (HRQL), yet its effect to reduce surgery or improve nasal polyp score is uncertain [ 126 ]. At the moment, phase 3 RCTs are ongoing for both benralizumab and mepolizumab, altogether with over 800 patients with severe CRSwNP [ 41 ].…”

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It also diminished the need for rescue treatment with systemic corticosteroids and sinus surgery [ 128 ]. A Cochrane review summarizes that dupilumab has been shown to improve disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo, and it might improve symptoms and generic HRQL and reduce the need for further surgery [ 126 ]. Moreover, there is no evidence of an increased risk of serious adverse events; however, there may be little or no difference in the risk of nasopharyngitis [ 126 ].…”

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A Cochrane review summarizes that dupilumab has been shown to improve disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo, and it might improve symptoms and generic HRQL and reduce the need for further surgery [ 126 ]. Moreover, there is no evidence of an increased risk of serious adverse events; however, there may be little or no difference in the risk of nasopharyngitis [ 126 ]. Among dupilumab-treated atopic dermatitis patients, conjunctivitis is the most common side effect [ 129 ].…”

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Monoclonal Antibodies and Airway Diseases

Lyly

Laulajainen‐Hongisto

Gevaert

et al. 2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monoclonal antibodies, biologics, are a relatively new treatment option for severe chronic airway diseases, asthma, allergic rhinitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). In this review, we focus on the physiological and pathomechanisms of monoclonal antibodies, and we present recent study results regarding their use as a therapeutic option against severe airway diseases. Airway mucosa acts as a relative barrier, modulating antigenic stimulation and responding to environmental pathogen exposure with a specific, self-limited response. In severe asthma and/or CRS, genome–environmental interactions lead to dysbiosis, aggravated inflammation, and disease. In healthy conditions, single or combined type 1, 2, and 3 immunological response pathways are invoked, generating cytokine, chemokine, innate cellular and T helper (Th) responses to eliminate viruses, helminths, and extracellular bacteria/fungi, correspondingly. Although the pathomechanisms are not fully known, the majority of severe airway diseases are related to type 2 high inflammation. Type 2 cytokines interleukins (IL) 4, 5, and 13, are orchestrated by innate lymphoid cell (ILC) and Th subsets leading to eosinophilia, immunoglobulin E (IgE) responses, and permanently impaired airway damage. Monoclonal antibodies can bind or block key parts of these inflammatory pathways, resulting in less inflammation and improved disease control.

show abstract

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Monoclonal Antibodies and Treatment Of Airway Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Monoclonal Antibodies and Airway Diseases

Lyly

Laulajainen‐Hongisto

Gevaert

et al. 2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rhinosinusitis (acute or chronic) is a common disease that affects patients' quality of life. 1 Common symptoms are nasal blockage and discharge, though some patients may also experience postnasal drip, facial pain, loss of smell, or sleep disturbance. [2][3][4] The prevalence of acute rhinosinusitis ranges between 1500 to 4000 per 100 000 population, while the incidence of chronic rhinosinusitis is around 1800 to 2300 per 100 000 population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rhinosinusitis (acute or chronic) is a common disease that affects patients' quality of life 1 . Common symptoms are nasal blockage and discharge, though some patients may also experience postnasal drip, facial pain, loss of smell, or sleep disturbance 2‐4 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multicenter survey on the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices in rhinosinusitis patients

Piromchai

Puvatanond

Kirtsreesakul

et al. 2020

Laryngoscope Investig Oto

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Nasal irrigation is widely used as an adjunctive treatment for rhinosinusitis. However, there is little information available regarding the efficacy of the devices used in this procedure. The objective of this study was thus to evaluate the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices based on the experiences of patients with rhinosinusitis. Methods: We conducted a multicenter survey study between November 2017 and December 2019. The questionnaire was developed based on the available literature and expert opinion and submitted to the otolaryngology residents and staff of each center as well as those in their networks. Results: Four hundred eighteen patients were enrolled in this study: 76 with acute viral rhinosinusitis (18%), 53 with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (13%), 156 with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (37%), and 133 with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (32%). We found that high-volume devices were most effective in helping to clear secretion in patients with acute viral rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps, and acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .017, .009, .002, respectively) and in reducing post-nasal drip in those with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .040). There were no statistically significant differences among devices in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Conclusions: Nasal irrigation with high-volume devices was an effective treatment for rhinosinusitis and was more effective at clearing nasal secretion and reducing post-nasal drip than that with other types of devices.

show abstract