Summary Background Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)‐4 and IL‐13. It is approved in the U.S.A. for patients aged ≥ 12 years with moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD) uncontrolled by topical prescription medicines or who cannot use topical medicines, for patients in Japan whose AD is uncontrolled with existing therapies, for patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD in Europe who are candidates for systemic therapy and for patients aged ≥ 12 years for maintenance treatment of moderate‐to‐severe asthma uncontrolled with their current medicines. AD trials have reported increased incidence of conjunctivitis for dupilumab vs. placebo. Objectives To characterize further the occurrence and risk factors of conjunctivitis in dupilumab clinical trials. Methods We evaluated randomized placebo‐controlled trials of dupilumab in AD (n = 2629), asthma (n = 2876), chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) (n = 60) and eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) (n = 47). Results In most AD trials, dupilumab‐treated patients had higher conjunctivitis incidence than placebo controls. Higher baseline AD severity and previous history of conjunctivitis were associated with increased conjunctivitis incidence. Conjunctivitis was mostly mild to moderate. Most cases recovered or resolved during the treatment period; two patients permanently discontinued dupilumab due to conjunctivitis or keratitis. Common treatments included ophthalmic corticosteroids, antibiotics, and antihistamines or mast cell stabilizers. Most cases were diagnosed by the investigators. In asthma and CRSwNP trials, the incidence of conjunctivitis was lower for both dupilumab and placebo than in AD trials; dupilumab did not increase the incidence compared with placebo. In the EoE trial, no patients had conjunctivitis. Conclusions Conjunctivitis was more frequent with dupilumab treatment in most AD trials. In dupilumab trials in other type 2 diseases, incidence of conjunctivitis was overall very low, and was similar for dupilumab and placebo. In AD, the incidence of conjunctivitis was associated with AD severity and prior history of conjunctivitis. The aetiology and treatment of conjunctivitis in dupilumab‐treated patients require further study. What's already known about this topic? Ocular disorders, including allergic conjunctivitis, are common in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). In most dupilumab AD trials, dupilumab‐treated patients had higher conjunctivitis incidence than those receiving placebo. Most cases were mild to moderate and recovered or were recovering during study treatment; study treatment discontinuation due to conjunctivitis was rare. Conjunctivitis incidence was very low and similar for dupilumab and placebo in clinical trials in asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and eosinophilic oesophagitis. What does this study add? This analysis confirms and extends the results of the individual clinical trials. Baseline disease‐related factors, including AD severity, prior conjunctivitis history and certa...

Summary Conjunctivitis is a common condition that causes the eye to become red, itchy and oozing. It is common in patients with atopic dermatitis (also called eczema), and in other allergic diseases, including asthma. Apart from allergies, conjunctivitis can also be caused by infections, chemicals, irritants, and other diseases. Dupilumab is a prescription medicine approved in the USA for people 12 years and older with moderate‐to‐severe AD uncontrolled by topical (applied to the skin) prescription medicines or who cannot use topical medicines, for adults in other countries whose AD is uncontrolled with existing therapies, and for people 12 years and older for maintenance treatment of moderate‐to‐severe asthma uncontrolled with their current medicines. Dupilumab blocks activity of specific substances that cause these allergic diseases. In most AD studies, more dupilumab‐treated patients had conjunctivitis than patients on placebo (dummy drug). To investigate this effect, the authors assessed rates, risk factors, severity, and outcomes of conjunctivitis in 11 dupilumab studies in AD, asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). In 5 of 6 AD studies, dupilumab‐treated patients were more likely to get conjunctivitis than placebo‐treated patients. No conjunctivitis was confirmed to be caused by infection, and it does not seem to be allergic in nature. Patients who entered these studies with more severe AD or who previously had conjunctivitis were more likely to get conjunctivitis. In asthma and CRSwNP studies, conjunctivitis rates were less frequent for both dupilumab and placebo than in AD studies, and were similar for dupilumab and placebo. In the EoE study, nobody had conjunctivitis. In all studies, conjunctivitis was mostly mild to moderate; most cases recovered during the treatment period. Causes of conjunctivitis in dupilumab‐treated patients require further study.

Introduction: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is an acquired, life-threatening blood disease. While PNH is known to be a rare disease, the incidence and prevalence of the condition has been described only in a few small studies. In addition, while the International PNH registry is a rich source of data on real-world PNH patients globally, it is not possible to estimate the incidence and prevalence of PNH directly from the registry. As complement inhibitors are becoming the standard of care for PNH treatment, we also sought to explore how patients are managed following an incident PNH diagnosis. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence and prevalence of PNH and to describe real-world treatment patterns among patients newly diagnosed with PNH in the United States (US). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Truven US MarketScan Commercial/Medicare data (1 Jan 2015 to 30 June 2018), an employer-sponsored insurance claims database including annually approximately 30 million insured patients and their dependents' complete longitudinal records of inpatient services, outpatient services, and prescription drug claims covered under a variety of fee-for-service and capitated health plans. While these data are considered nationally representative of Americans with employer-provided health insurance, data come mainly from large employers. To estimate prevalence, we identified patients with ≥ 1 PNH diagnosis (ICD10: D59.5) among persons continually enrolled in the databases in 2017. To estimate incidence, we required ≥1-year of baseline enrolment and no PNH diagnosis or eculizumab exposure, identified using national drug codes [NDC] or procedure codes for drug administration, during the baseline period. Person-time accrued post-baseline until PNH diagnosis, end of study period, or disenrollment. We stratified incidence and prevalence estimates by age and sex and described patients with incident PNH in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and past-year healthcare resource utilization. Using Kaplan-Meier estimators, we estimated incidence of eculizumab initiation, timing of initiation, treatment duration, and risk of discontinuation/treatment holiday (>42 days between eculizumab exposures [i.e. 14-day exposure period + 28-day grace period between infusions], the equivalent of missing 2 infusions assuming a bi-weekly infusion schedule for eculizumab) following the incident PNH diagnosis. While accounting for censoring, we also investigated patterns of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, identified using procedure codes, in terms of incidence and timing of first transfusion following an incident PNH diagnosis. Results: The prevalence of PNH varied little between 2016 and 2017, from 12 to 13 per 1,000,000. The incidence rate over the study period was 5.7 per 1,000,000 person-years, representing 257 incident PNH cases. The incidence rate of PNH increased with age and was similar across sex. At diagnosis, mean age was 50.0 years (standard deviation [SD]: 18.6), 3.1% (8/257) were less than 18 years, 52.1% were women, 19.5% had a past-year diagnosis of aplastic anemia, 8.2% had a past-year diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome, 14.0% had a past-year RBC transfusion, and 31.5% had been hospitalized in the past-year. Over a mean follow-up time of 385.6 days (SD: 253.2), 10.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.3-14.1%) of patients initiated eculizumab on average 60.5 days (SD: 55.9) from PNH diagnosis. At 1 year, about one third of patients discontinued eculizumab or had taken a treatment holiday; average treatment duration was 328.2 days (SD:245.4). Cumulative incidence of RBC transfusions at 6 months and 1 year was 14.6% (10.1-18.9%) and 17.4% (12.2-22.3%), respectively. On average, the first RBC transfusion occurred within 63.6 days (SD: 114.4) of an incident PNH diagnosis. Conclusions: In routine clinical practice, only a minority of patients recently diagnosed with PNH are initiated on eculizumab. Among PNH patients treated with eculizumab, less than 70% remain on treatment after 1 year. Findings must be interpreted in the context of limitations including lack of information on clone size, symptom burden, measures of disease activity, or bone marrow failure state which may affect treatment course. Future studies should explore factors affecting eculizumab initiation and persistence on treatment. Disclosures Jalbert: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chaudhari:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Weyne:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shammo:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Apellis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Astex Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; CTI Pharma: Research Funding.

No abstract

Peer-reviewed literature suggests that olopatadine is clinically superior to the other anti-allergic molecules because of its strong anti-histaminic qualities and its unique ocular mast cell stabilizing properties.