Real-world Evidence of Improved Patient Outcomes With Reslizumab in Non-exacerbating Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma (SEA): A Subgroup Analysis

Outcomes from a real-world study reflected the effectiveness of reslizumab in U.S. clinical practice. Here we present the subgroup analyses of patients without CAEs, pre- and post-reslizumab treatment. Patient-level data on adults with SEA receiving reslizumab for ≥7 months were collated via a multicenter, retrospective chart review. Patient outcomes during the 6 month pre- and post-reslizumab initiation included FEV1 percent predicted (FEV1PP), healthcare resource usage (HRU), and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores. A subgroup of 76 non-exacerbating patients were identified from the full study sample (N=215). Statistically significant improvements were seen pre- versus post-reslizumab treatment in FEV1PP responses (64.3% vs 72.0%; p<0.001), and ACT scores (14.5 vs 17.6; p<0.001). Clinically meaningful improvements in FEV1PP of ≥5% and ACT scores ≥3 points were reported in 60.5% and 51.4% of the subgroup patients, respectively. Significant reductions in HRU were observed pre-versus post-reslizumab initiation: inpatient admissions, 40.8% vs 18.4% (p<0.001); ER visits, 59.2% vs 31.6% (p<0.001), urgent care visits; 56.1% vs 33.3% (p=0.001), unscheduled outpatient visits; 72.9% vs 50.0% (p<0.001). This real-world reslizumab patient population differed from cohorts treated with anti-IL5 biologics in clinical trials, who were typically selected for prior CAE history. While patients in this subgroup analysis did not have CAEs, pre- or post-reslizumab, their baseline ACT scores indicated a high symptom burden. Study outcomes showed that these patients had clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms and significant reductions in HRU following treatment with reslizumab; suggesting a clinical and economic benefit of reslizumab in clinical practice, even among non-exacerbating patients.