Comparative real‐world outcomes of dupilumab versus endoscopic sinus surgery in the treatment of severe CRSwNP patients

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionManagement of severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) has changed significantly in recent years, with different treatments now available including biologics and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), although there are still few comparative studies. We aimed to compare 1‐year outcomes of patients with severe CRSwNP treated with dupilumab or ESS plus intranasal corticosteroids (INCS).MethodsIn this retrospective, real‐life, observational, cohort study, we enrolled 101 patients with severe CRSwNP who were treated with INCS and either ESS (n = 49) or dupilumab (n = 52). The following outcomes were considered: nasal polyp score (NPS), Sino Nasal Outcome Test‐22 (SNOT‐22), visual analogue scale (VAS) for specific symptoms, Sniffin' Sticks identification test (SSIT), need for oral corticosteroids (OCS) and local eosinophilia detected by nasal cytology.ResultsΔNPS was significantly higher in the surgery group up to 12 months when the difference with dupilumab group was no longer significant (ΔNPS: 4 vs. 4.1). ΔVAS rhinorrhoea, ΔVAS smell and ΔSNOT‐22 were significantly higher in the dupilumab group at 12 months (p < .05). SSIT scores were significantly better in the dupilumab group starting from the first month of follow‐up (p < .05). In the dupilumab group, only 6.1% of patients had detectable local eosinophilia compared to 57% in the surgery group alongside with a lower need for OCS (16.3% vs. 61%).ConclusionsBoth dupilumab and ESS were effective in improving outcomes in patients with severe CRSwNP over 12 months. Nevertheless, patients treated with dupilumab had greater improvement in terms of SNOT‐22, VAS rhinorrhoea, VAS smell and SSIT scores, with better control of local inflammation and less need for OCS.