Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
PHASE4
234 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-05-20
2027-05-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The costs related to OMA are high and frequent injections represent severe constraints for patients. For all these reasons, evaluating whether shortening duration of OMA therapy is feasible while maintaining acceptable asthma control is a critical point. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate asthma control after OMA discontinuation after at least 33 months of treatment when asthma is well controlled.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab in Patients With Severe Persistent Asthma
NCT00046748
Effect of Omalizumab in Patients With Severe Persistent Non-atopic Uncontrolled Asthma
NCT01007149
Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab Treatment on ICS Reduction for Severe IgE-mediated Asthma
NCT01912872
Preventing Asthma in High Risk Kids
NCT02570984
Omalizumab in Adult and Adolescent Patients With Severe Persistent Allergic Asthma
NCT00264849
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
However, despite commercialized since 2006 in France, the optimal duration of the treatment remains unclear when asthma is well controlled. In particular, there is no guideline to apply the "step down theory" to biologics in well controlled patients.
It seems clear that a treatment given for less than one year is associated with an early relapse of the disease. However, in a randomized controlled study including 176 patients, stopping the treatment after 5 years induced a small, but acceptable loss of control (average decrease of asthma control test (ACT) by 2.88 and 1.16 point, p= 0.18), but some patients had uncontrolled asthma when the treatment was stopped. In a smaller cohort of 49 patients in Spain who voluntarily accepted to discontinue OMA treatment after 6 years of therapy, asthma deterioration (defined by one or more exacerbation and any Asthma Control Test change during the 1st year) was observed in 24% of patients during the first year following discontinuation , with a maximal rate of 2 exacerbations/yr. After 4 years of discontinuation, 60% of patients still take advantage of the 6 yrs of treatment with OMA. A retrospective study in France found that 14/26 patients treated for at least 3 years kept the same level of control after discontinuation. All these data suggest that a large part of patients with well controlled asthma can discontinue OMA therapy without any asthma control deterioration or with an acceptable decrease in asthma control.
Inducing long term asthma remissions, rather than complete cure, is one potential goal of biologics. OMA is supposed to have disease modifying effects , explaining why there is a hope for a good asthma control being maintained after discontinuation. For this reason, French experts propose that omalizumab can be given for "3 to 5 yrs if asthma remains well controlled" . After an asthma relapse, OMA can be prescribed again theoretically, but no data regarding clinical response after a "second line" of treatment with the same biologic are available. The question of optimal treatment duration is also questioned with other biologics.
The costs related to OMA are high (estimated to 12 k€/year/patient). Frequent injections (1 subcutaneous injection every 4 weeks for the lowest dose to 4 injections every 2 weeks for the highest dose) represent severe constraints for patients, especially for the youngest ones. For all these reasons, evaluating whether shortening duration of OMA therapy is feasible while maintaining acceptable asthma control is a critical point. The main objective is to demonstrate the non-inferiority (i.e. no more exacerbations at 12 months) of OMA withdrawal attempt compared to OMA continuation in asthma-controlled patients treated for at least 33 months with OMA. Secondary objectives are to compare OMA withdrawal attempt versus OMA continuation in asthma-controlled patients treated for at least 33 months with OMA on other asthma control features at 6 and 12 months.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
OMA withdrawal attempt
Patients will be told to stop abruptly (no progressive decrease of the dose) their Omalizumab treatment and they will not be prescribed new OMA
Attempt to withdrawal OMA treatment
Patients will be told to stop abruptly (no progressive decrease of the dose) their Omalizumab treatment and they will not be prescribed new OMA. In case of loss of control, pulmonologist can adapt asthma treatment, as in usual care. In that case, OMA can be prescribed for a second line
OMA continuation
Patients will be prescribed the same dosage of Omalizumab than they received before randomization
Continuation of OMA treatment
Patients will be prescribed the same dosage of Omalizumab than they received before randomization, according to their weight and total circulating IgE levels.
In case of safety concerns or loss of control, pulmonologist can modify the patient treatment regimen of OMA or other co-medications, as in usual care.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Attempt to withdrawal OMA treatment
Patients will be told to stop abruptly (no progressive decrease of the dose) their Omalizumab treatment and they will not be prescribed new OMA. In case of loss of control, pulmonologist can adapt asthma treatment, as in usual care. In that case, OMA can be prescribed for a second line
Continuation of OMA treatment
Patients will be prescribed the same dosage of Omalizumab than they received before randomization, according to their weight and total circulating IgE levels.
In case of safety concerns or loss of control, pulmonologist can modify the patient treatment regimen of OMA or other co-medications, as in usual care.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Treated with OMA, prescribed by a pulmonologist , for at least 33 months for severe allergic asthma
* Well controlled with the treatment (ACT score ⩾ 18) and having experienced no more than one exacerbation in the year preceding inclusion. An exacerbation is defined as an oral or injectable steroid course for at least 2 days and/or a minimum doubling of the usual steroid dose for at least 2 days for steroid dependent patients
Exclusion Criteria
* Patient with other reason other than good asthma control to stop OMA, such as a side effect, planned or ongoing pregnancy, or planned switch to another step 5 asthma treatment (mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, reslizumab, daily oral steroids, bronchial thermoplasty, …)
* Patient not covered by Health Insurance
* Patient under curatorship, guardianship or safeguarding of justice
* Patient whose adherence to asthma treatments is considered poor or questionable by the investigator
* Patient participating in another intervention research
* Pregnant or lactating patient
* Patient refusing to sign consent
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Camille TAILLE, Professor
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard
Paris, Île-de-France Region, France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2024-513427-17-00
Identifier Type: CTIS
Identifier Source: secondary_id
2020-000883-42
Identifier Type: EUDRACT_NUMBER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
APHP180614
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.