Background: To date, there have not been any direct comparative
studies assessing clinical outcomes in CRSwNP between biologic and
surgical therapies. Objective: To directly compare the effect
of dupilumab to FESS using subjective and objective outcomes of CRSwNP
patients in a prospective longitudinal study. Methods: We
prospectively enrolled 20 CRSwNP patients and counseled them on both
biologic and surgical options. Patients were able to decide on either
therapy, and data collected at baseline and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months
with subjective outcomes including the nasal congestion score (NCS) and
SNOT-22 questionnaires, and objectively by degree of smell (UPSIT-40)
and nasal polyp score (NPS). Results: All subjects met criteria
for either biologic therapy or surgery, with NPS >5,
Lund-Mackay score (LMK-CT)>16, SNOT-22>54, and
were graded as anosmic/hyposmic. There were no significant differences
in age, sex, comorbid asthma/Aspirin Exacerbated Respiratory Disease, or
prior FESS between groups. Both dupilumab and FESS significantly
improved outcomes by one year in patients with severe CRSwNP when
compared to baseline. At one-year, patients on dupilumab had greater
improvement in NCS, UPSIT and asthma control relative to one year post
FESS. In a subgroup of patients with a history of prior sinus surgery
and asthma, dupilumab had lower polyp recurrence rate compared to one
year post FESS. Conclusions: Both dupilumab and FESS can
significantly improve outcomes by one year in CRSwNP patients. However,
in those with a history of asthma and prior surgery, dupilumab is more
effective in reducing polyp recurrence and improving sinonasal outcomes
than FESS.