Mepolizumab for Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis: A European Multicenter Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mepolizumab proved to be an efficacious treatment for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) at a dose of 300 mg every 4 weeks in the randomized, controlled MIRRA trial. In a few recently reported studies, successful real-life experiences with the approved dose for treating severe eosinophilic asthma (100 mg every 4 weeks) were observed. We undertook this study to assess the effectiveness and safety of mepolizumab 100 mg every 4 weeks and 300 mg every 4 weeks in a large European EGPA cohort. METHODS: We included all patients with EGPA treated with mepolizumab at the recruiting centers in 2015-2020. Treatment response was evaluated from 3 months to 24 months after initiation of mepolizumab. Complete response to treatment was defined as no disease activity (Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score [BVAS] = 0) and a prednisolone or prednisone dose (or equivalent) of ≤4 mg/day. Respiratory outcomes included asthma and ear, nose, and throat (ENT) exacerbations. RESULTS: Two hundred three patients, of whom 191 received a stable dose of mepolizumab (158 received 100 mg every 4 weeks and 33 received 300 mg every 4 weeks) were included. Twenty-five patients (12.3%) had a complete response to treatment at 3 months. Complete response rates increased to 30.4% and 35.7% at 12 months and 24 months, respectively, and rates were comparable between mepolizumab 100 mg every 4 weeks and 300 mg every 4 weeks. Mepolizumab led to a significant reduction in BVAS score, prednisone dose, and eosinophil counts from 3 months to 24 months, with no significant differences observed between 100 mg every 4 weeks and 300 mg every 4 weeks. Eighty-two patients (40.4%) experienced asthma exacerbations (57 of 158 [36%] who received 100 mg every 4 weeks; 17 of 33 [52%] who received 300 mg every 4 weeks), and 31 patients (15.3%) experienced ENT exacerbations. Forty-four patients (21.7%) experienced adverse events (AEs), most of which were nonserious AEs (38 of 44). CONCLUSION: Mepolizumab at both 100 mg every 4 weeks and 300 mg every 4 weeks is effective for the treatment of EGPA. The 2 doses should be compared in the setting of a controlled trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".