ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Med., 25 October 2024

Sec. Pulmonary Medicine

Volume 11 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1449194

Updated insights into adverse events associated with mepolizumab: a disproportionality analysis from the FDA adverse event reporting system database

  • 1. Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan, China

  • 2. Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Center of Respiratory Medicine, National Center for Respiratory Medicine, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China

Article metrics

View details

5

Citations

2,8k

Views

693

Downloads

Abstract

Background:

Mepolizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-5, is used to treat severe eosinophilic asthma and other eosinophilia-related conditions. Given its growing use, there is a pressing need for the latest data to improve the understanding and management of its adverse events (AEs). This study aimed to investigate the safety of mepolizumab by analyzing the pharmacovigilance database of the US Food and Drug Administration.

Methods:

The AE signals associated with mepolizumab from 2015 to 2024 were analyzed and the correlations using reporting ratios (RORs) quantified. Subgroup analyses were conducted to understand AEs in individuals ≤ 18 years of age. We also used time-to-onset (TTO) analysis to examine AE occurrence patterns.

Results:

In total, 82,478 AE reports linked to mepolizumab therapy were included. Our analysis, involving 24,156 patients, revealed a predominance of female patients, with the highest incidence of AEs occurring in those aged 18–65 years. Disproportionality analyses revealed significant signals across various system organ classifications (SOCs), most prominently respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders (ROR = 5.12, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 5.03–5.21), infections and infestations (ROR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.81–1.90), and immune system disorders (ROR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.08–1.21). The highest ROR was found for asthma crisis (ROR = 104.90, 95% CI 95.31–115.44) at the preferred term (PT) level, and the other notables were coronavirus infection (ROR = 7.33, 95% CI 6.05–8.88) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (ROR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.23–1.47). A subgroup analysis of patients ≤ 18 years old identified four significant SOC signals, with the highest ROR in respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders (ROR = 5.28, 95% CI 4.17–6.68). PT analysis revealed significant AEs, such as wheezing, bronchospasm, and chest discomfort. TTO analysis revealed that 18.5% of AEs occurred within the first 30 days of treatment. The Weibull shape parameter indicated an “early failure-type” pattern for mepolizumab-associated AEs, underscoring the need for vigilant monitoring during the initial stages of therapy.

Conclusion:

Our study highlights the importance of post-market surveillance for monitoring the safety of mepolizumab, which revealed significant AE signals, particularly for respiratory diseases, infections, and immune system complications. The association with opportunistic infections, including COVID-19, highlights the need for vigilant surveillance and further research.

Introduction

Asthma is a prevalent chronic inflammatory respiratory condition characterized by airway hyperreactivity, inflammation, and reversible obstruction (1). Clinically, it manifests with diverse symptoms, including recurrent wheezing, coughing, chest tightness, and breathing difficulties that intensify at night or early in the morning. However, severe asthma episodes can escalate to acute respiratory failure. The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 300 million individuals are affected by asthma globally, although its prevalence varies across regions and countries (2). The incidence of asthma is influenced by genetic factors; environmental conditions such as air pollution and allergen exposure; and lifestyle choices, including smoking and diet (3, 4).

Asthma pathogenesis involves a complex interplay between genetic predispositions, environmental factors, and the immune system. Asthma develops as a chronic inflammatory response in the airways that leads to increased airway responsiveness, structural remodeling, and symptom manifestation (5). Several cytokines and chemokines play pivotal roles in this inflammatory response. Of these, interleukin-5 (IL-5) produced primarily by Th2 type T cells is critical for the growth, differentiation, recruitment, and activation of eosinophils, which are key effector cells in the inflammatory process (6). Eosinophils release various mediators contributing to airway damage and are a key factor in symptomatology. Elevated IL-5 levels are closely linked to the pathological processes in asthma, particularly in eosinophilic phenotypes of the disease (7). Thus, targeting IL-5 with monoclonal antibodies, such as mepolizumab, has proven to be an effective for severe eosinophilic asthma treatment. Approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015, mepolizumab reduces eosinophil-mediated inflammation and tissue damage by inhibiting the biological activities of eosinophils and reducing their levels. It is indicated for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, hypereosinophilic syndrome, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (8, 9).

Despite the established clinical efficacy, tolerability, and safety of mepolizumab, which has been demonstrated in controlled trials and real-world studies, common adverse effects such as headaches and back pain are frequently reported (1012). Additionally, severe adverse events (AEs) have been documented, including the exacerbation of symptoms associated with hypereosinophilic syndrome, infections caused by Mycobacterium abscessus, eosinophilic gastroenteritis, and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (13). Furthermore, existing studies on mepolizumab-related AEs have relied on outdated data, which undermines their relevance and applicability to the drug's current clinical profile (14, 15). The dynamic nature of drug safety reports and the evolving clinical use of mepolizumab necessitates continuous updates to ensure that safety assessments accurately reflect the latest data. This pressing need underscores the significance of this research for the development of more effective and safer therapeutic strategies for managing mepolizumab-related AEs. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database is the largest publicly accessible pharmacovigilance database. This database compiles reports of drug-related adverse events from both domestic and international sources (16). This study aimed to evaluate the AEs associated with mepolizumab by analyzing post-marketing data, thereby providing valuable insights for ongoing clinical monitoring and identifying potential risks associated with mepolizumab therapy.

Methods

Guideline

This pharmacovigilance disproportionality analysis has been prepared in accordance with the latest Reporting of A Disproportionality Analysis for Drug Safety Signal Detection Using Individual Case Safety Reports in Pharmacovigilance (READUS-PV) guidelines (17). These guidelines are designed to enhance the transparency, completeness, and accuracy of reporting, ensuring proper interpretation and evidence-based decision-making in drug safety.

Study design and data sources

In this study, we performed a disproportionality analysis using FAERS database to explore the association between mepolizumab and its AEs. Our methodology involved a comparative analysis of the incidence rates of AEs associated with mepolizumab with those associated with all other drugs recorded in the FAERS database. The data for this study were sourced from the publicly available FAERS quarterly data extraction files accessible through the FDA website. To align with the FDA-approved administration schedule for mepolizumab, we included all relevant reports from the FAERS database spanning from the fourth quarter of 2015 to the first quarter of 2024, thereby providing a robust and extensive dataset for our analysis.

Data extraction and descriptive analysis

The FAERS database has been meticulously structured into seven principal data files: demographic information (DEMO), drug details (DRUG), adverse event descriptions (REAC), patient outcomes (OUTC), reporting sources (RPSR), medication dates (THER), and indications for medication use (INDI). In addition, a separate file is maintained for entries deleted by the US FDA or the manufacturer for reasons such as duplications or mergers. For our analysis, all data were imported into R software version 4.2.2, and a rigorous deduplication process was implemented prior to statistical analysis. Master IDs were used to link datasets, and case IDs were used as primary filters to eliminate duplicates. To identify relevant cases, both the common name (mepolizumab) and brand name (Nucala) were used in the DRUG file, with the role_code field used to identify drugs classified as primary suspects. A manual review process was crucial when selecting records for inclusion in the study, especially when duplicate case IDs were identified; in such cases, records with the highest primary ID was retained. AEs reported in FAERS were coded using the preferred terminology (PT) from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), organized into 27 system organ categories (SOCs). Owing to the nuanced structure of MedDRA, where one PT may correspond to multiple SOCs, MedDRA version 26.0 was used to ensure accurate categorization of AEs at the precise SOC level in R. Wherever possible, a detailed description of the clinical characteristics associated with each report has been provided, including variables such as sex, age, weight, reporting region, drug indication, outcome, and the identity of the reporter. However, the total number of outcomes may exceed the total number of reports owing to certain entries documenting multiple outcomes. Figure 1 illustrates a detailed flowchart outlining the comprehensive process of data extraction, deduplication, and analysis and provides a clear and structured overview of the methodology used in our study.

Figure 1

Figure 1

The process of selecting mepolizumab-associated AEs from FAERS database. FDA, Food and Drug Administration; AEs, adverse events; FAERS, FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.

Statistical analysis

Our analysis is underpinned by the reporting odds ratio (ROR) algorithm, which is crucial for synthesizing data based on a structured 2 × 2 table. This algorithm is a part of a comprehensive analytical framework that incorporates the Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) and Bayesian methods (Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean [EBGM]). Our study specifically examined the signal strength of mepolizumab-related reports in the FAERS database, focusing on its association with AEs across all SOC levels. A significant aspect of our methodology involved identifying positive signals, recognized when the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the ROR exceeded a threshold value of 1. This threshold indicates a statistically significant increased likelihood of AEs compared to other drugs within the same database, suggesting potential safety signals that warrant further investigation.

Time-to-onset analysis

In our study, the time to onset (TTO) was meticulously defined as the interval from the initiation of mepolizumab treatment, noted as START_DT in the THER file, to the occurrence of an AE, marked by EVENT_DT in the DEMO file. To maintain the integrity of our TTO analysis, reports compromised by data entry errors such as AEs recorded before the treatment start date, inaccurate date entries, or missing information were excluded.

TTO analysis included examining the medians and quartiles to provide a comprehensive overview of the data distribution. In addition, we employed the Weibull shape parameter (WSP) test to evaluate the changes in the incidence of AEs over time. This assessment is pivotal for understanding the risk dynamics associated with mepolizumab use. The Weibull distribution, forms the basis of this test and is characterized by two main parameters: the scale (α) and shape (β), which determine whether the likelihood of experiencing an AE increases or decreases over time.

The methodology and selection criteria for these specific parameters were based on insights from previous studies (18, 19). WSP tests were performed using the R statistical software, ensuring a thorough and reliable analysis of the TTOs associated with mepolizumab use, thereby providing vital insights into its safety profile over time.

Results

Descriptive analysis

We carefully curated data from the FAERS database and compiled 82,478 AE reports after diligently eliminating duplicates. The detailed clinical characteristics in these cases are described in Table 1. Our demographic analysis, encompassing 24,156 patients, showed a predominance of females (11, 136) compared to males (5, 174). The highest incidence of AEs was noted in the 18–65 age group, representing 17.1% of the cases (n = 4,127). Regarding the sources of AE reports, healthcare professionals were the primary reporters at 31.45% (n = 7,598), whereas consumer reports comprised a substantial 67.28% (n = 16,253). Geographically, 55.8% of the AE reports originated in the United States, with the remaining 44.1% originating from non-U.S. regions, with hospitalization being the most frequent outcome among these AEs, accounting for 21.0% of the cases (n = 6,034). Notably, a significant proportion of AEs occurred within the first 30 days after dosing (18.5%, n = 708), with additional occurrences reported beyond 360 days (43.6%, n = 1,669). These findings highlight the critical-risk periods for patients treated with mepolizumab and underscore the need for heightened vigilance during these specific intervals.

Table 1

Characteristics Case number Case proportion, %
Gender
Female 11,136 0.461
Male 5,174 0.214
Not Specified 7,846 0.325
Age (Years)
< 18 161 0.007
≥18, < 65 4,127 0.171
≥65, < 85 2,615 0.108
≥85 85 0.004
Not Specified 17,168 0.711
Weight
< 50 kg 72 0.003
50–100 kg 956 0.04
>100 kg 233 0.01
Not Specified 22,895 0.948
Reporters
Health-professional 16,253 0.6728
Consumer 7,598 0.3145
Not specified 305 0.0126
Report countries
US 13,476 0.558
Non-US 10,646 0.441
Not specified 34 0.001
Reporting year
2015 3 0.0001
2016 409 0.0169
2017 1,181 0.0489
2018 2,268 0.0939
2019 3,213 0.133
2020 2,868 0.1187
2021 2,087 0.0864
2022 5,050 0.2091
2023 4,856 0.201
2024 2,221 0.0919
Outcome
CA 13 0
DE 1,379 0.048
DS 119 0.004
HO 6,034 0.21
LT 179 0.006
OT 9,784 0.34
RI 16 0.001
Not specified 11,269 0.391
Time to onset (days)
0–30 708 0.185
31–60 296 0.077
61–90 217 0.057
91–180 410 0.107
181–360 527 0.138
>360 1,669 0.436

Clinical characteristics of patients with mepolizumab-related AEs.

AEs, adverse events; US, United States; HO, hospitalization; LT, life-threatening; DS, disability; RI, required intervention; DE, death; OT, other outcomes.

Disproportionality analysis of SOC levels

In our analysis, we identified mepolizumab-associated AE signals across all 27 SOCs, as detailed in Table 2 and illustrated in Figure 2. Notably, several SOCs were flagged as significant based on the ROR-positive signaling criteria, which included respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders, with a substantial ROR of 5.12 (95% CI 5.03–5.21), suggesting a notably higher incidence of AEs in these systems. Additionally, social circumstances were signaled with an ROR of 2.43 (95% CI 2.27–2.59), and surgical and medical procedures were also marked by an elevated ROR of 2.41 (95% CI 2.32–2.50). Other notable findings included infections and infestations with an ROR of 1.86 (95% CI 1.81–1.90); injury, poisoning, and procedural complications with an ROR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.32–1.37); and immune system disorders with an ROR of 1.14 (95% CI 1.08–1.21). These six SOC signaling findings highlight the specific organ systems in which mepolizumab-induced AEs were most frequently reported, highlighting critical areas that warrant further attention and detailed investigation, emphasizing the need for targeted monitoring and potential revisions to patient management strategies.

Table 2

SOC a b c d ROR (95% CI) PRR (χ2) EBGM (Lower limit of the 95% CI)
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 16,136 66,342 1,623,032 34,149,902 5.12 (5.03–5.21) 4.31 (42,592.6) 4.28 (4.22)
Social circumstances 900 81,578 161,743 35,611,191 2.43 (2.27–2.59) 2.41 (744.25) 2.41 (2.28)
Surgical and medical procedures 2,712 79,766 498,195 35,274,739 2.41 (2.32–2.5) 2.36 (2,146.29) 2.35 (2.28)
Infections and infestations 7,995 74,483 1,955,341 33,817,593 1.86 (1.81–1.9) 1.77 (2,841.35) 1.77 (1.74)
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications 12,568 69,910 4,208,192 31,564,742 1.35 (1.32–1.37) 1.3 (956.42) 1.29 (1.27)
Immune system disorders 1,136 81,342 432,311 35,340,623 1.14 (1.08–1.21) 1.14 (19.64) 1.14 (1.08)
General disorders and administration site conditions 14,257 68,221 6,371,543 29,401,391 0.96 (0.95–0.98) 0.97 (15.51) 0.97 (0.96)
Product issues 1,287 81,191 630,502 35,142,432 0.88 (0.84–0.93) 0.89 (19.42) 0.89 (0.85)
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 3,757 78,721 1,858,061 33,914,873 0.87 (0.84–0.9) 0.88 (68.23) 0.88 (0.85)
Ear and labyrinth disorders 308 82,170 156,321 35,616,613 0.85 (0.76–0.96) 0.85 (7.64) 0.85 (0.78)
Cardiac disorders 1,222 81,256 729,526 35,043,408 0.72 (0.68–0.76) 0.73 (128.2) 0.73 (0.69)
Investigations 3,270 79,208 2,084,922 33,688,012 0.67 (0.64–0.69) 0.68 (521.01) 0.68 (0.66)
Endocrine disorders 145 82,333 94,104 35,678,830 0.67 (0.57–0.79) 0.67 (23.9) 0.67 (0.58)
Nervous system disorders 4,304 78,174 2,773,592 32,999,342 0.66 (0.64–0.68) 0.67 (739.85) 0.67 (0.66)
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 2,925 79,553 2,035,958 33,736,976 0.61 (0.59–0.63) 0.62 (705.92) 0.62 (0.6)
Eye disorders 989 81,489 694,944 35,077,990 0.61 (0.58–0.65) 0.62 (239.03) 0.62 (0.59)
Vascular disorders 957 81,521 687,041 35,085,893 0.6 (0.56–0.64) 0.6 (252.72) 0.6 (0.57)
Metabolism and nutrition disorders 684 81,794 723,365 35,049,569 0.41 (0.38–0.44) 0.41 (591.71) 0.41 (0.39)
Gastrointestinal disorders 2,892 79,586 2,966,487 32,806,447 0.4 (0.39–0.42) 0.42 (2,481.67) 0.42 (0.41)
Psychiatric disorders 1,751 80,727 1,909,836 33,863,098 0.38 (0.37–0.4) 0.4 (1,686.03) 0.4 (0.38)
Renal and urinary disorders 578 81,900 698,752 35,074,182 0.35 (0.33–0.38) 0.36 (675.03) 0.36 (0.34)
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) 865 81,613 1,095,325 34,677,609 0.34 (0.31–0.36) 0.34 (1,125.2) 0.34 (0.32)
Hepatobiliary disorders 217 82,261 291,581 35,481,353 0.32 (0.28–0.37) 0.32 (310.61) 0.32 (0.29)
Congenital, familial and genetic disorders 74 82,404 99,726 35,673,208 0.32 (0.26–0.4) 0.32 (105.96) 0.32 (0.27)
Reproductive system and breast disorders 176 82,302 268,293 35,504,641 0.28 (0.24–0.33) 0.28 (318.83) 0.28 (0.25)
Blood and lymphatic system disorders 321 82,157 586,024 35,186,910 0.23 (0.21–0.26) 0.24 (798.02) 0.24 (0.22)
Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions 52 82,426 138,054 35,634,880 0.16 (0.12–0.21) 0.16 (223.57) 0.16 (0.13)

Disproportionality analysis of mepolizumab-related AEs in SOC level.

AEs, adverse events; SOC, system organ classes; ROR, reporting odds ratio; PRR, proportional reporting ratio; EBGM, empirical Bayesian geometric mean; CI, confidence interval.

Figure 2

Figure 2

System organ classes distribution of mepolizumab-related AEs. SOC, system organ classes; AEs, adverse events.

Disproportionality analysis of PTs level

Based on the SOC and adherence to the ROR signal criterion, we conducted a deeper analysis of significant PT signals within each SOC stratum that reported more than 100 cases (Table 3). Within the infections and infestations category, the three most significant PT signals identified were coronavirus infection (ROR = 7.33, 95% CI 6.05–8.88), pneumonia (ROR = 4.90, 95% CI 4.69–5.12), and respiratory tract infection (ROR = 4.81, 95% CI 4.14–5.59). Among the SOC of investigations, the strongest PT signal was observed for eosinophil count increased (ROR = 9.24, 95% CI 7.6–11.23). In the respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal diseases category, particularly alarming were the incidences of asthma crises (ROR = 104.9, 95% CI 95.31–115.44) and wheezing (ROR = 16.32, 95% CI 15.42–17.28). In the psychiatric disorders category, the most significant finding was sleep disorders (ROR = 17.42, 95% CI 15.55–19.51). Additionally, within the immune system disorders, anaphylactic reaction was notably significant (ROR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.91–2.63). The comprehensive details of these findings are presented in Table 3 and Figures 3, 4, illustrating the scope and specificity of the AE signals linked to mepolizumab.

Table 3

PT a b c d SOC ROR (95% CI) PRR (χ2) EBGM (Lower limit of the 95% CI)
Diabetes mellitus 135 82,343 36,962 35,735,972 Metabolism and nutrition disorders 1.59 (1.34–1.88) 1.58 (29) 1.58 (1.37)
Coronavirus infection 107 82,371 6,338 35,766,596 Infections and infestations 7.33 (6.05–8.88) 7.32 (574.51) 7.22 (6.15)
Pneumonia 2,141 80,337 193,520 35,579,414 Infections and infestations 4.9 (4.69–5.12) 4.8 (6402.3) 4.76 (4.59)
Respiratory tract infection 173 82,305 15,632 35,757,302 Infections and infestations 4.81 (4.14–5.59) 4.8 (514.98) 4.76 (4.2)
Lower respiratory tract infection 252 82,226 28,639 35,744,295 Infections and infestations 3.83 (3.38–4.33) 3.82 (519.62) 3.79 (3.42)
Herpes zoster 299 82,179 34,811 35,738,123 Infections and infestations 3.74 (3.33–4.19) 3.73 (591.65) 3.7 (3.37)
Influenza 450 82,028 68,755 35,704,179 Infections and infestations 2.85 (2.6–3.13) 2.84 (533.5) 2.83 (2.62)
Bronchitis 283 82,195 42,388 35,730,546 Infections and infestations 2.9 (2.58–3.26) 2.9 (349.31) 2.88 (2.61)
Sinusitis 357 82,121 61,159 35,711,775 Infections and infestations 2.54 (2.29–2.82) 2.53 (329.5) 2.52 (2.31)
Nasopharyngitis 538 81,940 113,561 35,659,373 Infections and infestations 2.06 (1.89–2.24) 2.05 (290.86) 2.05 (1.91)
Cellulitis 130 82,348 28,568 35,744,366 Infections and infestations 1.98 (1.66–2.35) 1.97 (62.21) 1.97 (1.7)
COVID-19 483 81,995 156,089 35,616,845 Infections and infestations 1.34 (1.23–1.47) 1.34 (42.18) 1.34 (1.24)
Infection 262 82,216 86,317 35,686,617 Infections and infestations 1.32 (1.17–1.49) 1.32 (19.92) 1.32 (1.19)
Eosinophil count increased 103 82,375 4,840 35,768,094 Investigations 9.24 (7.6–11.23) 9.23 (740.22) 9.06 (7.69)
Full blood count abnormal 183 82,295 19,886 35,753,048 Investigations 4 (3.46–4.63) 3.99 (406.75) 3.96 (3.51)
Oxygen saturation decreased 227 82,251 33,772 35,739,162 Investigations 2.92 (2.56–3.33) 2.92 (284) 2.9 (2.6)
Heart rate increased 206 82,272 53,150 35,719,784 Investigations 1.68 (1.47–1.93) 1.68 (56.7) 1.68 (1.5)
Blood pressure increased 303 82,175 90,291 35,682,643 Investigations 1.46 (1.3–1.63) 1.46 (43.16) 1.45 (1.32)
Headache 1,141 81,337 361,852 35,411,082 Nervous system disorders 1.37 (1.29–1.46) 1.37 (113.56) 1.37 (1.3)
Back pain 708 81,770 133,099 35,639,835 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 2.32 (2.15–2.5) 2.31 (523.51) 2.3 (2.16)
Myalgia 276 82,202 90,819 35,682,115 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 1.32 (1.17–1.48) 1.32 (21.18) 1.32 (1.19)
Asthmatic crisis 522 81,956 2,172 35,770,762 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 104.9 (95.31–115.44) 104.24 (43,034.77) 84.23 (77.75)
Sputum discolored 261 82,217 6,213 35,766,721 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 18.27 (16.14–20.69) 18.22 (4,077.31) 17.53 (15.8)
Wheezing 1,242 81,236 33,472 35,739,462 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 16.32 (15.42–17.28) 16.09 (16,968.96) 15.55 (14.83)
Productive cough 559 81,919 29,433 35,743,501 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 8.29 (7.62–9.01) 8.24 (3,491.27) 8.1 (7.55)
Obstructive airways disorder 151 82,327 7,624 35,765,310 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 8.6 (7.32–10.11) 8.59 (993.27) 8.44 (7.38)
Pulmonary congestion 121 82,357 6,303 35,766,631 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 8.34 (6.96–9.98) 8.33 (765.47) 8.19 (7.04)
Bronchospasm 104 82,374 6,892 35,766,042 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 6.55 (5.4–7.95) 6.54 (481.39) 6.46 (5.5)
Dyspnoea exertional 280 82,198 22,786 35,750,148 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 5.34 (4.75–6.01) 5.33 (973.53) 5.28 (4.78)
Dyspnoea 3,185 79,293 313,136 35,459,798 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 4.55 (4.39–4.71) 4.41 (8,392.24) 4.38 (4.25)
Cough 1,688 80,790 168,314 35,604,620 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 4.42 (4.21–4.64) 4.35 (4,331.82) 4.32 (4.15)
Respiratory disorder 164 82,314 15,928 35,757,006 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 4.47 (3.83–5.22) 4.47 (436.81) 4.43 (3.89)
Nasal congestion 314 82,164 34,452 35,738,482 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 3.96 (3.55–4.43) 3.95 (687.1) 3.93 (3.58)
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 253 82,225 27,682 35,745,252 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 3.97 (3.51–4.5) 3.96 (556.08) 3.94 (3.55)
Lung disorder 237 82,241 27,666 35,745,268 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 3.72 (3.28–4.23) 3.72 (466.73) 3.69 (3.32)
Rhinorrhoea 221 82,257 40,498 35,732,436 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 2.37 (2.08–2.71) 2.37 (173.7) 2.36 (2.11)
Dysphonia 188 82,290 34,258 35,738,676 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 2.38 (2.06–2.75) 2.38 (149.78) 2.37 (2.1)
Oropharyngeal pain 254 82,224 56,234 35,716,700 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 1.96 (1.73–2.22) 1.96 (118.91) 1.95 (1.76)
Sleep disorder due to a general medical condition 311 82,167 7,772 35,765,162 Psychiatric disorders 17.42 (15.55–19.51) 17.36 (4,610.17) 16.73 (15.21)
Anaphylactic reaction 152 82,326 29,474 35,743,460 Immune system disorders 2.24 (1.91–2.63) 2.24 (103.5) 2.23 (1.95)
Hypersensitivity 300 82,178 110,697 35,662,237 Immune system disorders 1.18 (1.05–1.32) 1.18 (7.86) 1.17 (1.07)
Urticaria 306 82,172 90,597 35,682,337 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 1.47 (1.31–1.64) 1.46 (45.12) 1.46 (1.33)
Secretion discharge 140 82,338 7,983 35,764,951 General disorders and administration site conditions 7.62 (6.44–9) 7.61 (789.63) 7.49 (6.51)
Chest discomfort 486 81,992 54,946 35,717,988 General disorders and administration site conditions 3.85 (3.52–4.21) 3.84 (1,011.77) 3.81 (3.54)
Therapeutic product effect incomplete 552 81,926 85,511 35,687,423 General disorders and administration site conditions 2.81 (2.59–3.06) 2.8 (636.1) 2.79 (2.6)
Ill-defined disorder 241 82,237 42,202 35,730,732 General disorders and administration site conditions 2.48 (2.19–2.82) 2.48 (211.27) 2.47 (2.22)
Illness 333 82,145 66,341 35,706,593 General disorders and administration site conditions 2.18 (1.96–2.43) 2.18 (211.26) 2.17 (1.98)
Therapeutic response unexpected 144 82,334 29,367 35,743,567 General disorders and administration site conditions 2.13 (1.81–2.51) 2.13 (85.61) 2.12 (1.85)
Condition aggravated 843 81,635 192,677 35,580,257 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.91 (1.78–2.04) 1.9 (358.32) 1.89 (1.79)
Malaise 1,099 81,379 264,616 35,508,318 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.81 (1.71–1.92) 1.8 (393.07) 1.8 (1.71)
Influenza like illness 175 82,303 41,475 35,731,459 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.83 (1.58–2.13) 1.83 (65.69) 1.83 (1.61)
Chest pain 312 82,166 89,408 35,683,526 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.52 (1.36–1.69) 1.51 (54.31) 1.51 (1.38)
Injection site pain 502 81,976 155,982 35,616,952 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.4 (1.28–1.53) 1.4 (56.43) 1.39 (1.3)
Pyrexia 589 81,889 190,844 35,582,090 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.34 (1.24–1.45) 1.34 (50.56) 1.34 (1.25)
Fatigue 1,279 81,199 478,883 35,294,051 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.16 (1.1–1.23) 1.16 (28) 1.16 (1.11)
Swelling face 105 82,373 34,199 35,738,735 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.33 (1.1–1.61) 1.33 (8.65) 1.33 (1.13)
Discomfort 107 82,371 38,116 35,734,818 General disorders and administration site conditions 1.22 (1.01–1.47) 1.22 (4.15) 1.22 (1.04)
Cardiac disorder 133 82,345 46,857 35,726,077 Cardiac disorders 1.23 (1.04–1.46) 1.23 (5.76) 1.23 (1.07)
Cataract 172 82,306 34,004 35,738,930 Eye disorders 2.2 (1.89–2.55) 2.19 (111.29) 2.19 (1.93)

Disproportionality analysis of mepolizumab-related AEs in PT level (a ≥ 100).

AEs, adverse events; PT, preferred term; ROR, reporting odds ratio; PRR, proportional reporting ratio; EBGM, empirical Bayesian geometric mean; CI, confidence interval.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Forest plot of ROR for mepolizumab-associated AEs (a ≥ 100). AEs, adverse events; ROR, reporting odds ratio.

Figure 4

Figure 4

Heatmap of ROR for mepolizumab-associated AEs (a ≥ 100). AEs, adverse events.

Subgroup analysis

Considering the diverse indications for mepolizumab, we conducted a subgroup analysis of patients aged < 18 years old. Four significant SOC signals were associated with mepolizumab use (Table 4) were identified based on the ROR-positive signaling criteria, indicating a substantial correlation with AEs in this age group. Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders were the most noteworthy, with a high ROR of 5.48 (95% CI 4.17–6.68). Ear and labyrinthine disorders also showed significant signals with an ROR of 3.44 (95% CI 1.29–9.21), followed by general disorders and administration site conditions (ROR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.19–1.88), and injury, poisoning, and procedural complications (ROR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.00–1.58). These results highlight the specific organ systems in which mepolizumab-induced AEs are most frequently reported in individuals under 18 years of age. Notable PT results within these SOC strata included wheezing, bronchospasms, and chest discomfort. Further details of these PT findings are shown in Figure 5 and outlined in Table 5, which provides a comprehensive view of mepolizumab-associated risk in this demographic.

Table 4

SOC a b c d ROR (95% CI) PRR (χ2) EBGM (Lower limit of the 95% CI)
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 18 454 31,125 1,239,644 1.58 (0.99–2.53) 1.56 (3.67) 1.56 (1.05)
General disorders and administration site conditions 89 383 170,996 1,099,773 1.49 (1.19–1.88) 1.4 (11.81) 1.4 (1.16)
Nervous system disorders 31 441 95,225 1,175,544 0.87 (0.6–1.25) 0.88 (0.58) 0.88 (0.65)
Gastrointestinal disorders 21 451 87,685 1,183,084 0.63 (0.41–0.97) 0.64 (4.41) 0.64 (0.45)
Vascular disorders 3 469 20,690 1,250,079 0.39 (0.12–1.2) 0.39 (2.9) 0.39 (0.15)
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 84 388 50,061 1,220,708 5.28 (4.17–6.68) 4.52 (239.12) 4.51 (3.70)
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications 92 380 205,319 1,065,450 1.26 (1–1.58) 1.21 (3.87) 1.21 (1)
Psychiatric disorders 10 462 82,293 1,188,476 0.31 (0.17–0.58) 0.33 (14.79) 0.33 (0.19)
Infections and infestations 22 450 74,848 1,195,921 0.78 (0.51–1.2) 0.79 (1.29) 0.79 (0.55)
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 36 436 145,798 1,124,971 0.64 (0.45–0.9) 0.66 (6.87) 0.66 (0.5)
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) 1 471 11,140 1,259,629 0.24 (0.03–1.71) 0.24 (2.4) 0.24 (0.05)
Immune system disorders 8 464 18,952 1,251,817 1.14 (0.57–2.29) 1.14 (0.13) 1.14 (0.63)
Investigations 13 459 66,326 1,204,443 0.51 (0.3–0.89) 0.53 (5.8) 0.53 (0.33)
Surgical and medical procedures 4 468 11,034 1,259,735 0.98 (0.36–2.61) 0.98 (0) 0.98 (0.43)
Blood and lymphatic system disorders 5 467 31,300 1,239,469 0.42 (0.18–1.02) 0.43 (3.87) 0.43 (0.21)
Ear and labyrinth disorders 4 468 3,148 1,267,621 3.44 (1.29–9.21) 3.42 (6.86) 3.42 (1.5)
Renal and urinary disorders 2 470 15,864 1,254,905 0.34 (0.08–1.35) 0.34 (2.6) 0.34 (0.11)
Eye disorders 12 460 21,074 1,249,695 1.55 (0.87–2.74) 1.53 (2.26) 1.53 (0.95)
Cardiac disorders 2 470 20,573 1,250,196 0.26 (0.06–1.04) 0.26 (4.23) 0.26 (0.08)
Metabolism and nutrition disorders 1 471 26,403 1,244,366 0.1 (0.01–0.71) 0.1 (8.08) 0.1 (0.02)
Social circumstances 2 470 3,515 1,267,254 1.53 (0.38–6.15) 1.53 (0.37) 1.53 (0.48)
Reproductive system and breast disorders 1 471 15,498 1,255,271 0.17 (0.02–1.22) 0.17 (3.98) 0.17 (0.03)
Product issues 9 463 38,664 1,232,105 0.62 (0.32–1.2) 0.63 (2.06) 0.63 (0.36)
Endocrine disorders 1 471 4,414 1,266,355 0.61 (0.09–4.33) 0.61 (0.25) 0.61 (0.12)
Hepatobiliary disorders 1 471 11,995 1,258,774 0.22 (0.03–1.59) 0.22 (2.71) 0.22 (0.04)

Disproportionality analysis of mepolizumab-associated AEs at SOC level in people < 18 years old.

AEs, adverse events; SOC, system organ classes; ROR, reporting odds ratio; PRR, proportional reporting ratio; EBGM, empirical Bayesian geometric mean; CI, confidence interval.

Figure 5

Figure 5

Forest plot of ROR for mepolizumab-associated AEs in people < 18 years old (a ≥ 3). AEs, adverse events; ROR, reporting odds ratio.

Table 5

PT a b c d SOC ROR (95% CI) PRR (χ2) EBGM (Lower limit of the 95% CI)
Headache 15 457 10,840 1,259,929 Nervous system disorders 3.81 (2.28–6.38) 3.73 (30.12) 3.72 (2.42)
Dyspnoea 14 458 5,651 1,265,118 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 6.84 (4.02–11.65) 6.67 (67.61) 6.66 (4.26)
Rash 11 461 13,076 1,257,693 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 2.3 (1.26–4.17) 2.26 (7.84) 2.26 (1.37)
Wheezing 8 464 931 1,269,838 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 23.52 (11.66–47.44) 23.13 (168.1) 22.95 (12.75)
Back pain 7 465 1,719 1,269,050 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 11.11 (5.26–23.48) 10.96 (63.21) 10.92 (5.84)
Exposure via skin contact 7 465 510 1,270,259 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications 37.49 (17.69–79.49) 36.95 (241.65) 36.47 (19.45)
Fatigue 6 466 6,890 1,263,879 General disorders and administration site conditions 2.36 (1.06–5.29) 2.34 (4.65) 2.34 (1.19)
Chest discomfort 5 467 1,047 1,269,722 General disorders and administration site conditions 12.98 (5.37–31.41) 12.86 (54.46) 12.8 (6.11)
Cough 5 467 5,390 1,265,379 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 2.51 (1.04–6.07) 2.5 (4.5) 2.5 (1.19)
Urticaria 5 467 5,589 1,265,180 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 2.42 (1–5.85) 2.41 (4.13) 2.41 (1.15)
Therapy non-responder 5 467 1,503 1,269,266 General disorders and administration site conditions 9.04 (3.74–21.86) 8.96 (35.27) 8.93 (4.27)
Eczema 4 468 2,665 1,268,104 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 4.07 (1.52–10.89) 4.04 (9.16) 4.04 (1.77)
Therapeutic response unexpected 3 469 651 1,270,118 General disorders and administration site conditions 12.48 (4–38.94) 12.41 (31.33) 12.35 (4.77)
Therapeutic product effect decreased 3 469 1,279 1,269,490 General disorders and administration site conditions 6.35 (2.04–19.78) 6.32 (13.4) 6.3 (2.44)
Migraine 3 469 1,058 1,269,711 Nervous system disorders 7.68 (2.46–23.93) 7.63 (17.26) 7.62 (2.94)
Bronchospasm 3 469 531 1,270,238 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders 15.3 (4.9–47.77) 15.21 (39.62) 15.13 (5.84)
Treatment non-compliance 3 469 1,646 1,269,123 General disorders and administration site conditions 4.93 (1.58–15.36) 4.91 (9.33) 4.9 (1.89)
Angioedema 3 469 1,291 1,269,478 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 6.29 (2.02–19.6) 6.26 (13.23) 6.24 (2.41)
Injection site erythema 3 469 1,750 1,269,019 General disorders and administration site conditions 4.64 (1.49–14.45) 4.62 (8.49) 4.61 (1.78)

Disproportionality analysis of mepolizumab-related AEs at PT level in people < 18 years old (a ≥ 3).

AEs, adverse events; PT, preferred term; ROR, reporting odds ratio; PRR, proportional reporting ratio; EBGM, empirical Bayesian geometric mean; CI, confidence interval.

TTO and WSP analysis

Figure 6 provides a comprehensive visual representation of the TTO analysis of all AEs associated with mepolizumab use. This figure illustrates the temporal distribution of these events, offering valuable insights into the timing of post-treatment initiation.

Figure 6

Figure 6

Time-to-onset analysis of mepolizumab-related AEs. AEs, adverse events.

Building on this, our subsequent analysis using the WSP revealed critical insights. Both the shape parameter (β) and the upper limit of its 95% CI were below 1, as detailed in Table 6. This finding indicates a trend toward an “early failure-type” pattern for mepolizumab-related AEs, suggesting that these AEs are more likely to occur soon after treatment initiation rather than at later stages of the treatment course. These findings emphasize the need for increased monitoring and precautions during the initial stages of mepolizumab therapy.

Table 6

Weibull distribution
Scale parameter Shape parameter Failure type
α (95% CI) β (95% CI) Early failure
415.47 (395.67–435.27) 0.70 (0.68–0.72)

Time-to-onset and WSP analysis of mepolizumab-induced AEs.

AEs, adverse events; WSP, Weibull Shape Parameter; CI, confidence interval.

Discussion

In this study, we conducted a comprehensive exploration of the safety profile of mepolizumab-use based on the FAERS database. Several new AEs associated with mepolizumab treatment were identified, including pneumonitis, wheezing, vocal difficulties, and sleep disturbances. Additionally, both the long-term safety of mepolizumab and its specific safety considerations in patients under 18 years of age were evaluated. To the best of our knowledge, this represents the most recent pharmacovigilance analysis focused on the post-marketing safety of mepolizumab. The insights gained from this study provide a valuable resource for further refinement of clinical management and utilization of mepolizumab to enhance treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes.

Mepolizumab, an IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody, targets IL-5, a crucial cytokine involved in eosinophil growth, differentiation, aggregation, activation, and survival. It binds to IL-5 and inhibits its biological activity, preventing IL-5 from interacting with the α chain of the IL-5 receptor complex on the surface of eosinophils. With the increasing use of mepolizumab, there has been a corresponding increase in the number of documented AEs, underscoring the need for ongoing surveillance of these events. Our findings revealed significant positive signals at the SOC level in six categories: respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders; social circumstances; surgical and medical procedures; infections and infestations; injury, poisoning, and procedural complications; and immune system disorders. These results are not entirely consistent with those of two publications that analyzed AEs associated with mepolizumab (14, 15). However, as the number of AE reports has substantially increased, using the most recent AE data helps minimize the likelihood of false positives, affirming that respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders remain among the most critical classes of adverse reactions linked to mepolizumab use. Asthma crisis emerged as the strongest signal. While previous clinical trials consistently identified headache and nasopharyngitis as the most common AEs, asthma crisis was considered significant and serious (2022). The COLUMBA study specifically identified asthma crisis as the most prevalent AE following long-term mepolizumab therapy (12). Similarly, the COSMEX study noted that asthma exacerbations ranked as the second most frequent AE after nasopharyngitis, particularly among patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (11). Importantly, patients with treatment intervals exceeding 12 weeks experienced deteriorating asthma symptoms, underscoring the risks associated with discontinuing monoclonal antibody therapy, which can exacerbate asthma symptoms. Additionally, our study identified other common AEs such as changes in sputum color, sleep disturbances, dyspnea, wheezing, and vocal difficulties. These findings highlight the importance of continued vigilance in monitoring the adverse reactions associated with mepolizumab use to enhance patient safety and treatment efficacy.

Moreover, mepolizumab use may be associated with an increased risk of infection. In a phase III clinical study by Pavord et al. mepolizumab was associated with an increased susceptibility to pneumonia in patients with eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (21). Our study found a correlation between mepolizumab use and upper and lower respiratory tract infections, influenza, sinusitis, nasopharyngitis, herpes zoster, cellulitis, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) AEs. While some of these AEs are documented in the drug specifications, others, such as cellulitis and COVID-19, require further attention. Asthma itself does not increase the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and previous studies have suggested a negative association between asthma and COVID-19, possibly because of decreased angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors found in patients with asthma (23, 24). We noted a correlation between mepolizumab and COVID-19, which may be attributed to the inhibition of IL-5 signaling by the drug and a reduction in Th2 responses. While mepolizumab reduces eosinophilia-related syndromes such as severe eosinophilic asthma, it may also suppress Th2 responses, which are crucial for viral immunity, thereby raising concerns about the risk of viral infections in patients treated with mepolizumab. The association of opportunistic infections, such as herpes zoster, with mepolizumab use is consistent with our results and supported by the findings of Khatri et al. (12). Additionally, Camiolo et al. observed increased ACE2 receptor expression in a subgroup of patients with asthma exhibiting elevated Th1 and reduced Th2 epithelial gene expression, suggesting that increased ACE2 receptor expression may exacerbate coronavirus-induced pneumonia, leading to potentially adverse outcomes and corroborating the potential for COVID-19 AEs (2527). A recent study showed a significant decrease in eosinophil counts in patients treated with biologics, which was not associated with increased severity or mortality in COVID-19 pneumonia (28). In summary, mepolizumab, an anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody used for severe eosinophilic asthma, may inadvertently increase the risk of opportunistic infections, including COVID-19, by altering the immune system dynamics. By targeting IL-5, mepolizumab effectively reduces eosinophil counts. Eosinophils are t only involved in allergic inflammation but also play a crucial role in antiviral defense, particularly in the respiratory tract. These cells contribute to the antiviral immunity by releasing cytotoxic granule proteins and promoting the recruitment of other immune cells. Consequently, their depletion can impair the body's ability to combat viral infections, potentially increasing the susceptibility to pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, suppression of the Th2 immune response by mepolizumab may disrupt the balance between the Th1 and Th2 pathways. While beneficial for reducing eosinophilic inflammation, an imbalanced Th1/Th2 response can weaken the overall immune function, making patients more susceptible to opportunistic infections, such as herpes zoster. Alterations in immune response may also affect ACE2 receptor expression, potentially influencing the severity of COVID-19 in patients treated with mepolizumab. These findings have significant implications for clinical practice. Healthcare providers should monitor patients receiving mepolizumab for signs of infection, particularly respiratory and opportunistic infections. Preventive measures, including vaccination and patient education on infection risks, should be integral to management plans. Clinicians should reassess the risks and benefits of continuing mepolizumab therapy on a case-by-case basis during widespread viral outbreaks and pandemics. Future longitudinal studies are required to assess the long-term risk of infection associated with mepolizumab use in larger patient populations. Mechanistic studies exploring how mepolizumab affects the immune pathways involved in antiviral defense could provide deeper insights. Additionally, real-world data analyses can help translate these findings into practical guidelines aiming to optimize treatment regimens that control asthma while also minimizing the risk of infection. Such research is crucial for formulating strategies to mitigate potential AEs and ensure that the therapeutic benefits of mepolizumab are realized without compromising patient safety.

While leveraging real-world data mining techniques through the FAERS database offers significant benefits, it is essential to acknowledge the inherent limitations of pharmacovigilance databases and their potential impact on our findings. These limitations include false, underreported, inaccurate, incomplete, and delayed reports, which can introduce various biases into the analysis. Underreporting is common and may lead to an underestimation of the true incidence of AEs, whereas over-reporting of well-known AEs can skew the data toward certain outcomes. Moreover, the FAERS database lacks detailed information on the total number of patients exposed to mepolizumab and does not include a control group, making it impossible to calculate the true incidence rates of AEs specifically linked to the drug. This limitation affected our ability to generalize the findings and accurately assess the actual risks associated with mepolizumab use. Additionally, the nature of disproportionality analyses limits our ability to establish causal relationships between mepolizumab use and the observed AEs, as these analyses were designed to identify statistical associations rather than establish causation. The associations observed may be influenced by confounding factors such as the patients' underlying conditions, concomitant medications, or demographic characteristics that were not controlled for in the analysis. Residual confounding is also a concern, as unmeasured or unknown factors may affect the relationship between mepolizumab use and AEs. For example, patients treated with mepolizumab may have a more severe disease or a higher prevalence of comorbidities, which could independently increase the risk of certain AEs. Adjusting for all the potential confounders without access to comprehensive clinical data is challenging. These limitations may have affected the validity and reliability of our findings, highlighting the need for cautious interpretation. To strengthen the robustness and validity of our results, further research is imperative. This includes well-designed experimental studies, clinical trials, and observational studies, such as case-control or cohort studies, which can control for confounding variables and more accurately assess causality. Future studies should provide a more comprehensive understanding of the safety profile of mepolizumab and validate the associations observed in the current analysis.

Conclusions

Our study underscores the critical role of post-marketing surveillance in evaluating the safety of mepolizumab using data from the FAERS database. We observed significant AE signals associated with mepolizumab use, particularly in the cases of respiratory diseases, infections, and immune system complications. We identified novel AE signals, such as COVID-19, that were previously underreported in drug documentation. These findings hold substantial clinical relevance, suggesting an elevated risk of certain opportunistic infections associated with mepolizumab use. The emergence of these novel AEs emphasizes the necessity for clinicians to remain vigilant in monitoring the signs of infection among patients treated with mepolizumab and to carefully weigh these potential risks when prescribing this medication. Furthermore, our results highlight the urgent need for continued research to confirm these associations and investigate the mechanisms underlying these AEs. This ongoing inquiry is essential to ensure optimal patient safety and provide insights for clinical guidelines.

Statements

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author contributions

SL: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DL: Software, Writing – original draft. ZG: Software, Writing – original draft. QZ: Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by the Key Project of the Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College (2023ZD008) and the Project of the Doctoral Initiation Fund (2023GC002).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Abbreviations

FDA, food and drug administration; AEs, adverse events; PT, preferred term; FAERS, FDA adverse event reporting system; MedDRA, Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities; SOC, system organ classes; ROR, reporting odds ratio; PRR, proportional reporting ratio; EBGM, empirical Bayesian geometric mean; CI, confidence interval; TTO, time-to-onset; WSP, Weibull shape parameter; IL-5, interleukin-5.

References

  • 1.

    Brusselle GG Koppelman GH . Biologic therapies for severe asthma. N Engl J Med. (2022) 386:15771. 10.1056/NEJMra2032506

  • 2.

    Denton E O'Hehir RE Hew M . The changing global prevalence of asthma and atopic dermatitis. Allergy. (2023) 78:207980. 10.1111/all.15754

  • 3.

    Guillien A Cadiou S Slama R Siroux V . The exposome approach to decipher the role of multiple environmental and lifestyle determinants in asthma. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021) 18:1138. 10.3390/ijerph18031138

  • 4.

    Los H Koppelman GH Postma DS . The importance of genetic influences in asthma. Eur Respir J. (1999) 14:121027. 10.1183/09031936.99.14512109

  • 5.

    Lambrecht BN Hammad H Fahy JV . The cytokines of asthma. Immunity. (2019) 50:97591. 10.1016/j.immuni.2019.03.018

  • 6.

    Fahy JV . Type 2 inflammation in asthma–present in most, absent in many. Nat Rev Immunol. (2015) 15:5765. 10.1038/nri3786

  • 7.

    Beasley R Harper J Masoli M . Anti-interleukin-5 therapy in patients with severe asthma: from clinical trials to clinical practice. Lancet Respir Med. (2020) 8:4257. 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30051-5

  • 8.

    Wechsler ME Akuthota P Jayne D Khoury P Klion A Langford CA et al . Mepolizumab or placebo for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. N Engl J Med. (2017) 376:192132. 10.1056/NEJMoa1702079

  • 9.

    Roufosse FE Kahn JE Gleich GJ Schwartz LB Singh AD Rosenwasser LJ et al . Long-term safety of mepolizumab for the treatment of hypereosinophilic syndromes. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2013) 131:4617.e75. 10.1016/j.jaci.2012.07.055

  • 10.

    McDowell PJ Diver S Yang F Borg C Busby J Brown V et al . The inflammatory profile of exacerbations in patients with severe refractory eosinophilic asthma receiving mepolizumab (the MEX study): a prospective observational study. Lancet Respir Med. (2021) 9:117484. 10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00004-7

  • 11.

    Khurana S Brusselle GG Bel EH FitzGerald JM Masoli M Korn S et al . Long-term safety and clinical benefit of mepolizumab in patients with the most severe eosinophilic asthma: the COSMEX study. Clin Ther. (2019) 41:20412056.e5. 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.07.007

  • 12.

    Khatri S Moore W Gibson PG Leigh R Bourdin A Maspero J et al . Assessment of the long-term safety of mepolizumab and durability of clinical response in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2019) 143:174251.e7. 10.1016/j.jaci.2018.09.033

  • 13.

    Aldajani A Alroqi A Alromaih S Aloulah MO Alsaleh S . Adverse events of biological therapy in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review. Am J Otolaryngol. (2022) 43:103615. 10.1016/j.amjoto.2022.103615

  • 14.

    Zou F Zhu C Lou S Cui Z Wang D Ou Y et al . A real-world pharmacovigilance study of mepolizumab in the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database. Front Pharmacol. (2023) 14:1320458. 10.3389/fphar.2023.1320458

  • 15.

    Li H Wang C Deng A Guo C . A real-world disproportionality analysis of mepolizumab based on the FDA adverse event reporting system. Front Pharmacol. (2023) 14:1280490. 10.3389/fphar.2023.1280490

  • 16.

    Sakaeda T Tamon A Kadoyama K Okuno Y . Data mining of the public version of the FDA adverse event reporting system. Int J Med Sci. (2013) 10:796803. 10.7150/ijms.6048

  • 17.

    Fusaroli M Salvo F Begaud B AlShammari TM Bate A Battini V et al . The reporting of a disproportionality analysis for drug safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in pharmacovigilance (READUS-PV): explanation and elaboration. Drug Saf. (2024) 47:58599. 10.1007/s40264-024-01423-7

  • 18.

    Sauzet O Carvajal A Escudero A Molokhia M Cornelius VR . Illustration of the weibull shape parameter signal detection tool using electronic healthcare record data. Drug Saf. (2013) 36:9951006. 10.1007/s40264-013-0061-7

  • 19.

    Nakamura M Umetsu R Abe J Matsui T Ueda N Kato Y et al . Analysis of the time-to-onset of osteonecrosis of jaw with bisphosphonate treatment using the data from a spontaneous reporting system of adverse drug events. J Pharm Health Care Sci. (2015) 1:34. 10.1186/s40780-015-0035-2

  • 20.

    Ortega HG Liu MC Pavord ID Brusselle GG FitzGerald JM Chetta A et al . Mepolizumab treatment in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. N Engl J Med. (2014) 371:1198207. 10.1056/NEJMoa1403290

  • 21.

    Pavord ID Chanez P Criner GJ Kerstjens HA Korn S Lugogo N et al . Mepolizumab for eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. (2017) 377:161329. 10.1056/NEJMoa1708208

  • 22.

    Han JK Bachert C Fokkens W Desrosiers M Wagenmann M Lee SE et al . Mepolizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (SYNAPSE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Respir Med. (2021) 9:114153. 10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00097-7

  • 23.

    Sunjaya AP Allida SM Di Tanna GL Jenkins CR . Asthma and COVID-19 risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J. (2022) 59:2101209. 10.1183/13993003.01209-2021

  • 24.

    Sunjaya AP Allida SM Di Tanna GL Jenkins C . Asthma and risk of infection, hospitalization, ICU admission and mortality from COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Asthma. (2022) 59:86679. 10.1080/02770903.2021.1888116

  • 25.

    Bradding P Richardson M Hinks TS Howarth PH Choy DF Arron JR et al . ACE2, TMPRSS2, and furin gene expression in the airways of people with asthma-implications for COVID-19. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2020) 146:20811. 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.05.013

  • 26.

    Camiolo M Gauthier M Kaminski N Ray A Wenzel SE . Expression of SARS-CoV-2 receptor ACE2 and coincident host response signature varies by asthma inflammatory phenotype. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2020) 146:315324.e7. 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.05.051

  • 27.

    Yang JM Koh HY Moon SY Yoo IK Ha EK You S et al . Allergic disorders and susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19: A nationwide cohort study. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2020) 146:7908. 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.08.008

  • 28.

    Adir Y Humbert M Saliba W . COVID-19 risk and outcomes in adult asthmatic patients treated with biologics or systemic corticosteroids: nationwide real-world evidence. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2021) 148:361367.e13. 10.1016/j.jaci.2021.06.006

Summary

Keywords

mepolizumab, asthma, adverse events, pharmacovigilance, FAERS

Citation

Lin S, Luo D, Gong Z and Zhan Q (2024) Updated insights into adverse events associated with mepolizumab: a disproportionality analysis from the FDA adverse event reporting system database. Front. Med. 11:1449194. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1449194

Received

21 June 2024

Accepted

07 October 2024

Published

25 October 2024

Volume

11 - 2024

Edited by

Yoshihiro Noguchi, Gifu Pharmaceutical University, Japan

Reviewed by

Keiko Suzuki, Gifu University, Japan

Amelia Licari, University of Pavia, Italy

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Shan Lin Qingyuan Zhan

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics