Background: The study aims to analyze the safety and efficacy of Mepolizumab and Dupilumab in the treatment of patients affected by severe chronic rhinosinusitis not controlled with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) from a tertiary care regional referral center, with the aim of improving the concept of personalized medicine. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 72 adult patients selected for biologic therapy according to EPOS/EUFOREA criteria. The patients received either Mepolizumab or Dupilumab. Primary endpoints were reduction in nasal polyp size, improvement in disease-specific quality of life (sinonasal outcome test-22, visual analog scale), olfactory recovery, and asthma control. Secondary outcomes were the assessment of adverse events. Results: Both monoclonal antibodies significantly improved nasal polyps score (NPS), sinonasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22), and asthma control test (ACT) over time, with no statistically significant differences between Mepolizumab and Dupilumab. In contrast, blood eosinophil counts showed significant differences: Dupilumab was associated with a transient increase in eosinophil levels (absolute Δ = 660.08% Δ = 9%; p < 0.001), while Mepolizumab produced a marked reduction (absolute Δ = 192.52% Δ = 2%; p < 0.001). Both treatments were well tolerated, with only mild adverse events reported. Conclusions: Mepolizumab and Dupilumab are both effective and safe in improving sinonasal symptoms and quality of life in severe uncontrolled CRSwNP. While improvements in NPS, SNOT-22, and ACT scores were comparable, Mepolizumab achieved a significant reduction in eosinophil counts, whereas Dupilumab was associated with faster clinical improvement but a transient eosinophilia. These findings suggest that biologic choice may be guided by individual patient profiles and inflammatory patterns.
Bertolini et al. (Fri,) studied this question.