TY - JOUR
T1 - Real-World and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Dupilumab and Other Biological Drugs for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease—A Systematic Review
AU - Freund, Ophir
AU - Wand, Ori
AU - Kutzkel, Sara
AU - Tiran, Boaz
AU - Pumin, Irina
AU - Friedman Regev, Inbal
AU - Levy, Liran
AU - Bar-Shai, Amir
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 by the authors.
PY - 2024/11
Y1 - 2024/11
N2 - Background: Over the last few decades, the efficacy of biological therapies for COPD has been evaluated by different randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Still, the evaluation of real-world data and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have not been performed in this field before. In the current work, we present a systematic literature review of the real-world data and PROMs of biological treatments for COPD. Methods: Three large databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect) were utilized for the systematic literature review. Clinical studies (RCT, cohorts, case series/reports) assessing patients with COPD treated by any biological therapy were included. Results: The review resulted in twelve eligible studies (nine randomized controlled trials and three “real-world” case series/reports). The evaluation of PROMs in the included studies was mainly limited to the severity and burden of respiratory symptoms. Most biological therapies were associated with improved PROMs compared to the baseline, although not for the placebo. Dupilumab was the only biologic therapy with proven efficacy in RCT for both objective and subjective measures. One prior study reported patients’ self-perceived drug effects, and none evaluated patients’ perceived disease status. Only 25 patients were assessed in a real-world setting for all biologic therapies combined. Real-world data were retrospective in the form of case reports or series. Conclusions: There are limited data on patients’ experience with biological therapies for COPD. While real-world data and PROMs are missing, biases such as a placebo effect must be considered, requiring their incorporation with objective outcomes from prospective controlled trials.
AB - Background: Over the last few decades, the efficacy of biological therapies for COPD has been evaluated by different randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Still, the evaluation of real-world data and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have not been performed in this field before. In the current work, we present a systematic literature review of the real-world data and PROMs of biological treatments for COPD. Methods: Three large databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect) were utilized for the systematic literature review. Clinical studies (RCT, cohorts, case series/reports) assessing patients with COPD treated by any biological therapy were included. Results: The review resulted in twelve eligible studies (nine randomized controlled trials and three “real-world” case series/reports). The evaluation of PROMs in the included studies was mainly limited to the severity and burden of respiratory symptoms. Most biological therapies were associated with improved PROMs compared to the baseline, although not for the placebo. Dupilumab was the only biologic therapy with proven efficacy in RCT for both objective and subjective measures. One prior study reported patients’ self-perceived drug effects, and none evaluated patients’ perceived disease status. Only 25 patients were assessed in a real-world setting for all biologic therapies combined. Real-world data were retrospective in the form of case reports or series. Conclusions: There are limited data on patients’ experience with biological therapies for COPD. While real-world data and PROMs are missing, biases such as a placebo effect must be considered, requiring their incorporation with objective outcomes from prospective controlled trials.
KW - biologic therapy
KW - chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
KW - eosinophils
KW - exacerbations
KW - immunologic treatment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85208412144&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/diagnostics14212390
DO - 10.3390/diagnostics14212390
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.systematicreview???
C2 - 39518358
AN - SCOPUS:85208412144
SN - 2075-4418
VL - 14
JO - Diagnostics
JF - Diagnostics
IS - 21
M1 - 2390
ER -