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-

Clinical trial design of biologic therapies in COPD: MATINEE study of mepolizumab

Mepolizumab for Eosinophilic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Mepolizumab response in patients with COPD and an eosinophilic phenotype with/without chronic bronchitis (CB): A METREX/METREO post hoc analysis

Mepolizumab for Eosinophil-Associated COPD: Analysis of METREX and METREO

AERIFY-1/2: two phase 3, randomised, controlled trials of itepekimab in former smokers with moderate-to-severe COPD

Mepolizumab in patients with asthma and features of COPD: A MENSA/MUSCA post hoc analysis

Long-Term Clinical and Sustained REMIssion in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma treated with Mepolizumab: The REMI-M study

Treating severe paediatric asthma with mepolizumab or omalizumab: a protocol for the TREAT randomised non-inferiority trial

Remission outcomes in severe eosinophilic asthma with mepolizumab therapy: Analysis of the REDES study

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

Efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in a Chinese population with severe asthma: a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Exploring PI3Kδ Molecular Pathways in Stable COPD and Following an Acute Exacerbation, Two Randomized Controlled Trials

Real-world outcomes of mepolizumab for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma in Canada: an observational study

Effectiveness of Mepolizumab in patients with late-onset severe eosinophilic asthma and fixed obstruction, a 2-Year Follow-Up: The MESILICO study

Anti-inflammatory effects of oral prednisolone at stable state in people treated with mepolizumab: a proteomic and bulk transcriptomics analysis

Benefit of switching to mepolizumab from omalizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma based on patient characteristics

Airway proteomics reveals broad residual anti-inflammatory effects of prednisolone in mepolizumab-treated asthma

Evaluation of Clinical Remission in Best-Performing Severe Asthmatic Patients Treated for Three Years with Mepolizumab

Clinical variables associated with achieving improvement in asthma control with mepolizumab in patients from the REDES study

Long-Term Efficacy of Mepolizumab at 3 Years in Patients with Severe Asthma: Comparison with Clinical Trials and Super Responders