Indirect Treatment Comparison of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps

Anju T. Peters*, Joseph K. Han, Peter Hellings, Enrico Heffler, Philippe Gevaert, Claus Bachert, Yingxin Xu, Chien Chia Chuang, Binod Neupane, Jérôme Msihid, Leda P. Mannent, Patricia Guyot, Siddhesh Kamat

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


Background: Among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of biologics, such as anti-interleukin-4/interleukin-13 (dupilumab) and anti-immunoglobulin E (omalizumab), have demonstrated efficacy compared with intranasal corticosteroids (INCS). However, no head-to-head RCTs exist between biologics. Objective: To perform an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of the efficacy of biologics plus INCS versus placebo (INCS) as a common comparator. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were searched for RCTs of biologics in CRSwNP. Bucher ITCs were performed for outcomes at week 24: nasal polyp score (NPS) (range, 0-8), nasal congestion (NC) (range, 0-3), loss of smell (range, 0-3), University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (range, 0-40), total symptom score (range, 0-12), 22-item sinonasal outcome test (range, 0-110), and responder analyses based on NPS or NC improvement of 1 point or greater. Results: Assessment of trial design, baseline characteristics, and outcome measures suggested that ITC was feasible with four phase 3 RCTs: dupilumab SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 (NCT02912468/NCT02898454) and omalizumab POLYP 1 and POLYP 2 (NCT03280550/NCT03280537). In the intent-to-treat population, dupilumab had significantly greater improvements from baseline to week 24 versus omalizumab across key outcomes: NPS (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval], −1.04 [−1.63 to −0.44]), NC (−0.35 [−0.60 to −0.11]), loss of smell (−0.66 [−0.90 to −0.42]), University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (6.70 [4.67-8.73]), and total symptom score (−1.18 [−1.95 to −0.41]). Improvement in the 22-item sinonasal outcome test was greater in dupilumab versus omalizumab but was not statistically significant. Dupilumab patients were significantly more likely to achieve ≥1-point improvement in NPS (odds ratio [95% CI] = 3.58 [1.82-7.04]) and NC (2.13 [1.12-4.04]) versus omalizumab. Conclusions: Although ITCs have limitations, these results demonstrated that dupilumab had consistently greater improvements in key CRSwNP outcomes versus omalizumab at week 24.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2461-2471.e5
JournalJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 2021


  • CRSwNP
  • Dupilumab
  • Indirect treatment comparison
  • Omalizumab

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy


Dive into the research topics of 'Indirect Treatment Comparison of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this