Tezepelumab 210mg/1.91ml solution for injection pre-filled syringes

To compare the efficacy of tezepelumab with other approved biologics via indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) in patients aged ≥ 12 years with severe uncontrolled asthma. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from a systematic literature review were synthesized using two different ITC approaches: network meta-analysis (NMA) and simulated treatment comparison (STC). Outcomes of interest were annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) and AAER for exacerbations leading to hospitalization or emergency room visit. To address potential heterogeneity between study populations, various subgroup analyses were performed for the NMA (based on blood eosinophil count, fractional exhaled nitric oxide level, and presence of allergic asthma), and for the STC, models were adjusted for potential treatment effect modifiers. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of study design (exclusion of non-placebo-controlled studies and non-phase 3 or 4 studies). Results were reported as rate ratios (RRs) with 95% credible/confidence intervals and ranking statistics were computed for the NMAs. Sixteen RCTs were included in at least one of the ITCs. All biologics (tezepelumab, dupilumab, benralizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, and omalizumab) had similar efficacy, with no statistically significant RRs for either exacerbation outcome; however, tezepelumab was favorably associated with numerically lower AAERs and was ranked first in the network for both types of exacerbation outcome. This trend was consistent in the subgroup and sensitivity analyses. As with the primary NMA, the STC results did not demonstrate any significant differences between biologics, but point estimates were favorable towards tezepelumab. Heterogeneity between trials was observed among eligibility criteria and clinically important patient characteristics; however, the impact on findings is expected to be low, based on consistency across analyses. Findings from both ITCs (NMA and STC) support the use of tezepelumab in a broad patient population of severe uncontrolled asthma of any phenotype.</p

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Abstract Background Patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma have a significant unmet need for new treatments that have broader effects on airway inflammation, and that provide greater improvements in asthma outcomes than currently approved biologics and standard-of-care therapies. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of the epithelial cytokine thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the PATHWAY phase 2b study (NCT02054130), tezepelumab significantly reduced exacerbations by up to 71% in adults with severe, uncontrolled asthma, irrespective of baseline disease phenotype. This article reports the design and objectives of the pivotal phase 3 NAVIGATOR study. Methods NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) is an ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults (18–80 years old) and adolescents (12–17 years old) with severe, uncontrolled asthma, who are receiving treatment with medium- or high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus at least one additional controller medication with or without oral corticosteroids ( N  = 1061). The study population includes approximately equal proportions of patients with high (≥ 300 cells/μL) and low (< 300 cells/μL) blood eosinophil counts. The study comprises a 5–6-week screening period, a 52-week treatment period and a 12-week post-treatment follow-up period. All patients will receive their prescribed controller medications without change throughout the study. The primary efficacy endpoint is the annualized asthma exacerbation rate during the 52-week treatment period. Key secondary endpoints include the effect of tezepelumab on lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life. Discussion NAVIGATOR is evaluating the effect of tezepelumab in patients with a broad range of severe asthma phenotypes at baseline, including those with low blood eosinophil counts. The target sample size for NAVIGATOR ( N  = 1060) was achieved, and it is the largest clinical study of tezepelumab in severe, uncontrolled asthma to date. NAVIGATOR aims to further investigate the effect of tezepelumab on exacerbations and build on observations from the phase 2b PATHWAY study, and to demonstrate further the potential of tezepelumab to provide patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with improvements in lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life. Trial registration NCT03347279 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Registered 20 November 2017.

Abstract licence: CC BY 4.0

Background: Airway mucus plugging is a key but long-overlooked mechanism of persistent airflow obstruction in both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Type 2 (T2) cytokines, particularly interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, drive goblet cell metaplasia, MUC5AC overexpression, and impaired mucociliary clearance, while eosinophil-derived products increase mucus viscosity and promote plug persistence. Methods: A comprehensive narrative review was conducted by searching PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to February 2026. Search terms included "mucus plugs," "mucus plugging," "biologics," "dupilumab," "tezepelumab," "mepolizumab," "benralizumab," "IL-4," "IL-13," "MUC5AC," "quantitative CT," "functional respiratory imaging," "asthma," and "COPD." Studies were included if they reported original data or systematic evidence on mucus plug quantification, biologic-mediated changes in mucus plug scores, or imaging modalities for mucus assessment in asthma or COPD. Editorials, case reports with fewer than three patients, and studies not available in English were excluded. Two authors (P.-V.M. and A.C.) independently screened titles and abstracts; discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and preclinical studies evaluating mucus plug outcomes and T2-targeted therapies were included. Reference lists of retrieved articles were hand-searched for additional relevant publications. Results: A recent systematic review identified multiple randomized controlled trials and observational studies that showed CT-assessed mucus plug scores go down with biologic therapies targeting the T2 pathway in asthma. Observational data extend this evidence to anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα agents. The VESTIGE trial provided the first functional respiratory imaging evidence of mucus plug resolution with dupilumab. In COPD, the BOREAS/NOTUS and MATINEE trials established the efficacy of dupilumab and mepolizumab in eosinophilic phenotypes; however, differences in inclusion criteria-particularly regarding FeNO thresholds and prior exacerbation burden-may explain divergent effects on lung function endpoints. Mucus plug outcomes have not been evaluated in COPD biologic trials. Quantitative imaging modalities, including HRCT mucus plug scoring, functional respiratory imaging, and hyperpolarized gas MRI, now enable objective assessment of mucus burden. Conclusions: Mucus plugging meets the definition of a treatable trait: it can be measured with CT scoring, it matters clinically, and it responds to T2 cytokine blockade. Adding mucus plug assessment to routine clinical evaluation, together with mucolytic strategies where needed, could move treatment decisions from empirical to biology-based across the asthma-COPD spectrum. Further studies are needed to confirm that mucus plug scoring works as a biomarker of treatment response in COPD and to test whether combining biologics with mucolytics improves outcomes.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background and Objectives: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a heterogeneous type 2 inflammatory disease for which biologic therapies have expanded treatment options; however, biomarkers capable of guiding biologic selection remain poorly defined. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the available evidence regarding predictive and prognostic biomarkers associated with currently available biologic agents for CRSwNP (omalizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, reslizumab, and tezepelumab). Materials and Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library identified studies published between January 2006 and September 2025. Results: Twenty-five eligible studies, including 12 randomized controlled trials, 12 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and one indirect treatment comparison study, were analyzed. Multiple biomarkers, including blood eosinophils, total IgE, periostin, eotaxins, eosinophil cationic protein, IL-5, TARC, PARC, and urinary leukotriene E4, were evaluated across biologics targeting IgE, IL-4/IL-13, and IL-5 pathways. Conclusions: Although several biomarkers reflected the modulation of type 2 inflammation and disease activity, no validated biomarker has reliably predicted the superiority of one biologic over another. Nasal IL-5 showed potential for predicting the response to anti-IL-5 therapy but requires further validation. Current evidence supports biomarker use primarily for confirming type 2 inflammation rather than guiding biologic selection. Prospective biomarker-driven and head-to-head comparative studies are needed to enable precision medicine approaches in CRSwNP.

Abstract licence: CC BY