Real-life Evaluation of the Efficacy of Biologicals in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyposis (CRSwNP)

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) has a prevalence of 5-10% in adults. It is often associated with other comorbidities, such as asthma (30-70% of CRSwNP patients) and aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) (16% of CRSwNP patients) leading to a significant reduced quality of life (QoL). CRSwNP is diagnosed in patients with nasal polyps who have 2 or more of the following symptoms for more than 12 weeks:

• Nasal blockage or nasal congestion

• Runny nose or postnasal drip

• Impaired sense of smell

• Facial pain/pressure. Nasal rinses, intranasal or systemic corticosteroids, long-term antibiotics, and sinus surgery are the current standard of care. However, many patients fail to achieve complete therapeutic benefit and relapse after time, even after surgery. Moreover, oral corticosteroids are associated with significant side effects, and repeated sino-nasal surgery becomes progressively more complex with higher risk of complications. Patients with CRSwNP and most patients with asthma share a common type 2 inflammatory response, characterised by elevated levels of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-13, eosinophils, T helper 2 (Th2)cells, and type 2 innate lymphoid cells. In addition, locally produced immunoglobulin E (IgE) is able to activate mast cells and induce local inflammation in CRSwNP.

Biologicals are a specific kind of treatment with recombinant DNA-derived humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds specific targets in the inflammatory cascade which contributes to the pathophysiology of CRSwNP. Different biologicals have already been reimbursement for the treatment of Asthma for years, slowly these biologicals start to get their approval and reimbursement for CRSwNP. In Belgium (omalizumab (Xolair®), mepolizumab (Nucala®) and dupilumab (Dupixent ®) are reimbursed for patients with CRSwNP. Their efficacy has been demonstrated through large double-blind placebo-controlled clinical studies. However, until now only very limited reports on real-world data regarding this therapy have been published. This real-world data is important because it enables us to go beyond data gathered throughout a traditional randomised controlled trial (RCT). Traditional RCTs gather data from a controlled sample population with limited comorbidities and concomitant medications, who are likely to be compliant with the study requirements, whereas in real life patients might have poorer performance status and compliance and consist of a higher proportion of elderly patients.

Therefore, this real-world data study aims to investigate how clinical outcomes of biologic therapy in real-world application (real-world efficacy) corresponds to outcomes in clinical trials (efficacy) and to look into factors that might explain an efficacy gap.