Trial reportAllergy2019
The clinical benefit of mepolizumab replacing omalizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma.
Trial report in Allergy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
77 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 157 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns and Clinical Efficacy of Biologics Switching in Patients With Severe Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Allergy · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Incidence of Anti-Drug Antibodies to Monoclonal Antibodies in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Benefit of switching to mepolizumab from omalizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma based on patient characteristics.Respiratory research · 2021Trial
- The clinical benefit of mepolizumab replacing omalizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma.Allergy · 2019Trial
- The shifting landscape of asthma in the United States: An over 20-year analysis of prevalence, severity, and medication paradigms, 1999-2023.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness of mepolizumab and omalizumab in patients eligible for both: a retrospective cohort study.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2026Article
- Biologic Switching in Patients with Severe Asthma: Effects on Exacerbations, Corticosteroid Use and Lung Function.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy of mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Choosing and switching biologics for patients with severe asthma: Real-world data from the German Asthma Net (GAN).Allergologie select · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes after switching from omalizumab to anti-IL-5/IL-5R biologics in severe asthma: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Biologic Therapies and Quality of Life in Pediatric Patients with Asthma: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Biomarker-Associated Remission After Switching to Dupilumab in Severe Asthma Following Failure of Prior Biologics.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Multiomic Integration Analysis for Monitoring Severe Asthma Treated With Mepolizumab or Omalizumab.Allergy · 2025Article
- Real-world evidence on biologic use in paediatric asthma: there but not there yet?ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Improving patient outcomes: Mepolizumab's impact in IL-5-mediated diseases.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Long-Term Response to Biological Therapy in Severe Asthma and Considerations for Treatment Adjustment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Biologic therapies targeting type 2 cytokines are effective at improving asthma symptoms and control-a systematic review and meta-analysis.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2025Article
- Review
17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMepolizumab and omalizumab are treatments for distinct but overlapping severe asthma phenotypes.
objectiveTo assess if patients eligible for both biologics but not optimally controlled with omalizumab experience improved asthma control when switched directly to mepolizumab.
methodsOSMO was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, 32-week trial in patients with ≥2 asthma exacerbations in the year prior to enrollment, despite receiving high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and other controller(s), plus omalizumab (≥4 months). At baseline, patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL (or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year) and an Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score ≥1.5 discontinued omalizumab and immediately commenced mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks. Endpoints included change from baseline in ACQ-5 score (primary), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and the proportions of ACQ-5 and SGRQ responders, all at Week 32, and the annualized exacerbation rate over the study period.
resultsAt Week 32 (intent-to-treat population [n = 145]), the least squares (LS) mean changes (standard error [SE]) in ACQ-5 and SGRQ total scores were -1.45 (0.107) and -19.0 (1.64) points; with 77% and 79% of patients achieving the minimum clinically important differences (ACQ-5: ≥0.5 points; SGRQ: ≥4 points), respectively. The annualized rate of clinically significant exacerbations was 1.18 events/year, a 64% reduction from 3.26 events/year during the previous year. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were consistent with previous trials.
conclusionAfter directly switching from omalizumab to mepolizumab, patients with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma experienced clinically significant improvements in asthma control, health status, and exacerbation rate, with no tolerability issues reported.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.