Abstract:Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are a major cause of hospital admissions, disease‐related morbidity and mortality. COPD is a heterogeneous disease with distinct inflammatory phenotypes, including eosinophilia, which may drive acute exacerbations in a subgroup of patients. Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin 5 (IL‐5) or its receptor (IL‐5R) have a role in the care of people with severe eosinophilic asthma, and may similarly provide therapeutic benefit for people with COPD of eosinophilic phenotype. To assess the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibody therapies targeting IL‐5 signalling (anti‐IL‐5 or anti‐IL‐5Rα) compared with placebo in the treatment of adults with COPD. We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, clinical trials registries, manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies. Our most recent search was 23 September 2020. We included randomised controlled trials comparing anti‐IL‐5 therapy with placebo in adults with COPD. Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a random‐effects model.The primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring antibiotics or oral steroids, hospitalisations due to exacerbation of COPD, serious adverse events, and quality of life. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. Six studies involving a total of 5542 participants met our inclusion criteria. Three studies used mepolizumab (1530 participants), and three used benralizumab (4012 participants). The studies were on people with COPD, which was similarly defined with a documented history of COPD for at least one year. We deemed the risk of bias to be generally low, with all studies contributing data of robust methodology. Mepolizumab 100 mg reduces the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations by 19% in those with an eosinophil count of at least 150/μL (rate ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.93; participants = 911; studies = 2, high‐certainty evidence). When participants with lower eosinophils are included, mepolizumab 100 mg probably reduces the exacerbation rate by 8% (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; participants = 1285; studies = 2, moderate‐certainty evidence). Mepolizumab 300 mg probably reduces the rate of exacerbations by 14% in participants all of whom had raised eosinophils (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.06; participants = 451; studies = 1, moderate‐certainty evidence); the evidence was uncertain for a single small study of mepolizumab 750 mg. In participants with high eosinophils, mepolizumab probably reduces the rate of hospitalisation by 10% (100 mg, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.24; participants = 911; studies = 2, moderate‐certainty evidence) and 17% (300 mg, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.35; participants = 451; studies = 1, moderate‐certainty evidence). Mepolizumab 100 mg increases the time to first moderate or severe exacerbation compared to the placebo group, in people with the eosinophilic phenotype (hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.92; participants = 981; studies 2, high‐certainty evidence). When participants with lower eosinophils were included this difference was smaller and less certain (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.0; participants = 1285; studies 2, moderate‐certainty evidence). Mepolizumab 300 mg probably increases the time to first moderate or severe exacerbation in participants who all had eosinophilic phenotype (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99; participants = 451; studies = 1, moderate‐certainty evidence). Benralizumab 100 mg reduces the rate of severe exacerbations requiring hospitalisation in those with an eosinophil count of at least 220/μL (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.81; participants = 1512; studies = 2, high‐certainty evidence). Benralizumab 10 mg probably reduces the rate of severe exacerbations requiring hospitalisation in those with an eosinophil count of at least 220/μL (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94; participants = 765; studies = 1, moderate‐certainty evidence). There was probably little or no difference between the intervention and placebo for quality of life measures. Where there were differences the mean difference fell below the pre‐specified minimum clinically significant difference. Treatment with mepolizumab and benralizumab appeared to be safe. All pooled analyses showed that there was probably little or no difference in serious adverse events, adverse events, or side effects between the use of a monoclonal antibody therapy compared to placebo. We found that mepolizumab and benralizumab probably reduce the rate of moderate and severe exacerbations in the highly selected group of people who have both COPD and higher levels of blood eosinophils. This highlights the importance of disease phenotyping in COPD, and may play a role in the personalised treatment strategy in disease management. Further research is needed to -Abstract Truncated-

Anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5R biologics for severe asthma. Are there any differences in their effects?

A comparison of the impact of anti-IL5/5R therapies in allergic versus non-allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-life setting

Efficacy and Safety of Benralizumab for Eosinophilic Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Targeting the IL-5 pathway in eosinophilic asthma: A comparison of anti-IL-5 versus anti-IL-5 receptor agents

Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting IL-5 or IL-5Rα in Eosinophilic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Effects of biologics in obese severe asthmatic patients

Biologics in severe eosinophilic asthma treatment: four years of a single-centre follow-up

Anti-IL-5 therapies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Differences in asthma-related outcomes by anti-IL-5 biologics, omalizumab, and dupilumab based on blood eosinophil counts

Titration of anti-IL-5 biologics in severe asthma: an open-label randomised controlled trial (the OPTIMAL study)

Anti-IL-5 Pathway Agents in Eosinophilic-Associated Disorders Across the Lifespan

Sustained Effectiveness of Benralizumab in Naïve and Biologics-Experienced Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Patients: Results from the ANANKE Study

Impact of anti-eosinophilic biologic strategies on bronchial hyperreactivity in severe asthma

Severe Asthma or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with Eosinophilic Inflammation? From Uncertainty to Remission under Anti IL-5R Therapy

Profile of anti-IL-5 mAb mepolizumab in the treatment of severe refractory asthma and hypereosinophilic diseases

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab) for severe eosinophilic asthma. A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines ‐ recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma

Mepolizumab and benralizumab in patients with severe asthma and a history of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis

Features of severe asthma response to anti-IL5/IL5r therapies: identikit of clinical remission

Remission could be predicted by sputum markers in severe asthma after therapy targeting anti interleukin-5 receptor

Characteristics and evolution of patients treated with Biologicals in severe asthma of Getafe University hospital

Effectiveness and safety of biological therapy in patients with severe asthma in a real clinical practice