• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美泊利珠单抗、贝那利珠单抗和度匹鲁单抗治疗嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘的疗效比较:一项贝叶斯网状荟萃分析。

Comparative efficacy of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Channing Division of Network Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md.

Georgetown College of Medicine, Washington, DC.

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2022 Nov;150(5):1097-1105.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.05.024. Epub 2022 Jun 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2022.05.024
PMID:35772597
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9643621/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The comparative safety and efficacy of the biologics currently approved for asthma are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the safety and efficacy of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in individuals with severe eosinophilic asthma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published 2000 to 2021. We studied Bayesian network meta-analyses of exacerbation rates, prebronchodilator FEV, the Asthma Control Questionnaire, and serious adverse events in individuals with eosinophilic asthma.

RESULTS

Eight randomized clinical trials (n = 6461) were identified. We found in individuals with eosinophils ≥300 cells/μL the following: in reducing exacerbation rates compared to placebo: dupilumab (risk ratio [RR], 0.32; 95% credible interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.45), mepolizumab (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.45), and benralizumab (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.55); in improving FEV: dupilumab (mean difference in milliliters [MD] 230; 95% CI, 160 to 300), benralizumab (MD, 150; 95% CI, 100 to 200), and mepolizumab (MD, 150; 95% CI, 66 to 220); and in reducing Asthma Control Questionnaire scores: mepolizumab (MD, -0.63; 95% CI, -0.81 to -0.45), dupilumab (MD, -0.48; 95% CI, -0.83 to -0.14), and benralizumab (MD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.21). In individuals with eosinophils 150-299 cells/μL, benralizumab (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.73) and dupilumab (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.95) were associated with lower exacerbation rates; and only benralizumab (MD, 81; 95% CI, 8 to 150) significantly improved FEV. These differences were minimal compared to clinically important thresholds. For serious adverse events in the overall population, mepolizumab (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.92) and benralizumab (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.93) were associated with lower odds of a serious adverse event, while dupilumab was not different from placebo (odds ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.4).

CONCLUSION

There are minimal differences in the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma.

摘要

背景

目前批准用于哮喘的生物制剂的安全性和疗效尚不清楚。

目的

我们比较了美泊利珠单抗、贝那利珠单抗和度匹鲁单抗在重度嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘患者中的安全性和疗效。

方法

我们对 2000 年至 2021 年发表的同行评议文献进行了系统评价。我们研究了嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘患者的加重率、支气管扩张剂前 FEV1、哮喘控制问卷和严重不良事件的贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

结果

确定了 8 项随机临床试验(n=6461)。我们发现,与安慰剂相比,在嗜酸性粒细胞≥300 个/μL的患者中:减少加重率:度匹鲁单抗(风险比[RR],0.32;95%可信区间[CI],0.23 至 0.45)、美泊利珠单抗(RR,0.37;95%CI,0.30 至 0.45)和贝那利珠单抗(RR,0.49;95%CI,0.43 至 0.55);改善 FEV1:度匹鲁单抗(毫升[MD]差值,230;95%CI,160 至 300)、贝那利珠单抗(MD,150;95%CI,100 至 200)和美泊利珠单抗(MD,150;95%CI,66 至 220);降低哮喘控制问卷评分:美泊利珠单抗(MD,-0.63;95%CI,-0.81 至-0.45)、度匹鲁单抗(MD,-0.48;95%CI,-0.83 至-0.14)和贝那利珠单抗(MD,-0.32;95%CI,-0.43 至-0.21)。在嗜酸性粒细胞为 150-299 个/μL 的患者中,贝那利珠单抗(RR,0.62;95%CI,0.52 至 0.73)和度匹鲁单抗(RR,0.60;95%CI,0.38 至 0.95)与较低的加重率相关;仅贝那利珠单抗(MD,81;95%CI,8 至 150)显著改善了 FEV1。与临床重要阈值相比,这些差异微不足道。对于总体人群中的严重不良事件,美泊利珠单抗(比值比,0.67;95%CI,0.48 至 0.92)和贝那利珠单抗(比值比,0.74;95%CI,0.59 至 0.93)与严重不良事件的发生几率较低相关,而度匹鲁单抗与安慰剂无差异(比值比,1.0;95%CI,0.74 至 1.4)。

结论

在嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘中,美泊利珠单抗、贝那利珠单抗和度匹鲁单抗在疗效和安全性方面差异极小。

相似文献

1
Comparative efficacy of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.美泊利珠单抗、贝那利珠单抗和度匹鲁单抗治疗嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘的疗效比较:一项贝叶斯网状荟萃分析。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2022 Nov;150(5):1097-1105.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.05.024. Epub 2022 Jun 27.
2
Comparative efficacy of tezepelumab to mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.特泽泊单抗对比美泊利珠单抗、贝那利珠单抗和度普利尤单抗治疗嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘的疗效:一项贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2023 Mar;151(3):747-755. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.11.021. Epub 2022 Dec 17.
3
Anti-IL5 therapies for asthma.用于哮喘的抗白细胞介素-5疗法。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 21;9(9):CD010834. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010834.pub3.
4
Anti-IL-5 therapies for asthma.哮喘的抗 IL-5 治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 12;7(7):CD010834. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010834.pub4.
5
Efficacy and Safety of Biologics for Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Asthma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.生物制剂用于口服糖皮质激素依赖型哮喘的疗效与安全性:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2024 Feb;12(2):409-420. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2023.11.007. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
6
Real-world efficacy of treatment with benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab for severe asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.真实世界中贝那鲁肽、度普利尤单抗、美泊利单抗和瑞利珠单抗治疗严重哮喘的疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Clin Exp Allergy. 2022 May;52(5):616-627. doi: 10.1111/cea.14112. Epub 2022 Mar 9.
7
Systemic treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis.湿疹的全身治疗:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 14;9(9):CD013206. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013206.pub2.
8
Biologics or tofacitinib for people with rheumatoid arthritis naive to methotrexate: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.生物制剂或托法替布用于初治类风湿关节炎患者:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 8;5(5):CD012657. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012657.
9
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
10
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
The Comparative Effectiveness of Mepolizumab and Benralizumab in the Treatment of Eosinophilic Asthma.美泊利珠单抗和贝那利珠单抗治疗嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘的比较疗效
Adv Respir Med. 2025 Jun 20;93(4):21. doi: 10.3390/arm93040021.
2
Exploring dupilumab for asthma: from mechanistic insights to clinical outcomes, safety, and cost-effectiveness.探索度普利尤单抗用于治疗哮喘:从机制洞察到临床疗效、安全性及成本效益
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 6;16:1631321. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1631321. eCollection 2025.
3
Safety and Efficacy of Dupilumab, Omalizumab, and Mepolizumab in Moderate-to-Severe Asthma: A Systematic Review.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparative efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies and aspirin desensitization for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.慢性鼻-鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉中单抗药物和阿司匹林脱敏治疗的疗效和安全性比较:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2022 Apr;149(4):1286-1295. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2021.09.009. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
2
Lower Use of Biologics for the Treatment of Asthma in Publicly Insured Individuals.公众保险人群中生物制剂治疗哮喘的使用率较低。
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Nov;9(11):3969-3976. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.01.039. Epub 2021 Feb 6.
3
度普利尤单抗、奥马珠单抗和美泊利单抗治疗中重度哮喘的安全性和有效性:一项系统评价
Cureus. 2025 Jul 18;17(7):e88236. doi: 10.7759/cureus.88236. eCollection 2025 Jul.
4
The clinical and pathological histology efficacy of biological therapy for severe asthma with a phenotype of type 2 inflammation - systematic review.2型炎症表型重度哮喘生物治疗的临床及病理组织学疗效——系统评价
Front Immunol. 2025 Apr 15;16:1531986. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1531986. eCollection 2025.
5
Single-center off-label benralizumab use for refractory hypereosinophilic syndrome demonstrates satisfactory safety and efficacy.单中心非标签使用贝那利珠单抗治疗难治性嗜酸性粒细胞增多综合征显示出令人满意的安全性和疗效。
EJHaem. 2024 Dec 25;6(1):e1014. doi: 10.1002/jha2.1014. eCollection 2025 Feb.
6
Long-Term Eosinophil Depletion: A Real-World Perspective on the Safety and Durability of Benralizumab Treatment in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma.长期嗜酸性粒细胞清除:关于倍利珠单抗治疗重度嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘安全性和持久性的真实世界观点
J Clin Med. 2024 Dec 31;14(1):191. doi: 10.3390/jcm14010191.
7
Advanced Biologic Therapies in the Management of Asthma in Children and Adolescents: A Comprehensive Network Meta-Analysis.儿童和青少年哮喘管理中的先进生物疗法:一项全面的网络荟萃分析。
Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2025;186(8):733-746. doi: 10.1159/000542797. Epub 2024 Dec 21.
8
Integrative epidemiology and immunotranscriptomics uncover a risk and potential mechanism for cutaneous lymphoma unmasking or progression with dupilumab therapy.整合流行病学和免疫转录组学揭示了度普利尤单抗治疗皮肤淋巴瘤暴露或进展的风险及潜在机制。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2025 May;155(5):1584-1594. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.10.028. Epub 2024 Nov 7.
9
Successful novel use of dupilumab for gastrointestinal involvement of idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome: case report and review of the literature.成功应用度普利尤单抗治疗特发性嗜酸性粒细胞增多综合征的胃肠道受累:病例报告及文献复习。
Clin J Gastroenterol. 2024 Dec;17(6):1003-1008. doi: 10.1007/s12328-024-02036-4. Epub 2024 Sep 11.
10
Temporal variation in the effectiveness of biologics in asthma: Effect modification by changing patient characteristics.哮喘生物制剂疗效的时间变化:改变患者特征的效应修饰。
Respir Med. 2024 Nov-Dec;234:107802. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107802. Epub 2024 Sep 10.
Onset of effect and impact on health-related quality of life, exacerbation rate, lung function, and nasal polyposis symptoms for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (ANDHI): a randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial.
贝那鲁肽治疗重度嗜酸性粒细胞性哮喘患者的疗效发作和对健康相关生活质量的影响、恶化率、肺功能和鼻息肉症状:一项随机、对照、3b 期试验。
Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Mar;9(3):260-274. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30414-8. Epub 2020 Dec 22.
4
Efficacy and safety of dupilumab for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A systematic review for the EAACI biologicals guidelines.度普利尤单抗治疗中重度特应性皮炎的疗效和安全性:针对欧洲变态反应和临床免疫学会生物制剂指南的系统评价
Allergy. 2021 Jan;76(1):45-58. doi: 10.1111/all.14510. Epub 2020 Oct 4.
5
Minimal clinically important difference for asthma endpoints: an expert consensus report.哮喘终点的最小临床重要差异:专家共识报告。
Eur Respir Rev. 2020 Jun 3;29(156). doi: 10.1183/16000617.0137-2019. Print 2020 Jun 30.
6
How to compare the efficacy of biologic agents in asthma.如何比较哮喘生物制剂的疗效。
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2020 Aug;125(2):137-149. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2020.04.031. Epub 2020 May 5.
7
Effect of Anti-IL5, Anti-IL5R, Anti-IL13 Therapy on Asthma Exacerbations: A Network Meta-analysis.抗 IL-5、抗 IL-5R、抗 IL-13 疗法对哮喘恶化的影响:网络荟萃分析。
Lung. 2020 Feb;198(1):95-103. doi: 10.1007/s00408-019-00310-8. Epub 2020 Jan 1.
8
Severe asthma in the US population and eligibility for mAb therapy.美国人群中的重度哮喘及单克隆抗体疗法的适用性
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020 Apr;145(4):1295-1297.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2019.12.009. Epub 2019 Dec 19.
9
Baseline blood eosinophil count as a predictor of treatment response to the licensed dose of mepolizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma.基线嗜酸性粒细胞计数可预测中重度嗜酸粒细胞性哮喘患者对美泊利珠单抗(已获批剂量)的治疗应答。
Respir Med. 2019 Nov;159:105806. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2019.105806. Epub 2019 Nov 3.
10
Monoclonal antibodies in type 2 asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.2 型哮喘中的单克隆抗体:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Respir Res. 2019 Aug 8;20(1):179. doi: 10.1186/s12931-019-1138-3.