What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to assess the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in treating eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

May 20, 2026

A34-14 Mepolizumab vs Placebo in Eosinophilic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Key Points

This research aims to assess the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in treating eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Systematic review of RCTs comparing mepolizumab and placebo in eosinophilic COPD.
Data pooled using random-effects meta-analysis; outcomes included risk ratios and hazard ratios.
Four RCTs included, totaling 1,945 patients, with 768 receiving mepolizumab and 1,177 receiving placebo.
Mepolizumab significantly reduced the rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (IRR 0.80; 95% CI 0.73–0.89; p<0.01).
No significant difference in time to first exacerbation (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.03), but landmark analysis favored mepolizumab in the first 26 weeks (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90).
No benefits observed on quality of life measures or all-cause mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.29).

Abstract

Abstract Rationale Eosinophilic airway inflammation is present in 20–40% of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Recent trials suggest promising results of mepolizumab in patients with eosinophilic COPD. Objective To evaluate efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in patients with eosinophilic COPD. Methods We systematically searched Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase from inception to June 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mepolizumab versus placebo in patients with eosinophilic COPD. Risk ratios (RR), rate ratio (IRR), mean differences (MD), and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Individual patient data (IPD) were estimated from Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves. Statistical analyses were performed using R version 4.5.0 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Results We included four RCTs, encompassing 1,945 patients (mean age range 65.0–69.1 years; 49–69% male), of whom 768 (39.5%) received mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks and 1,177 (60.5%) received placebo. Compared with placebo, mepolizumab significantly reduced the rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (IRR 0.80; 95% CI 0.73–0.89; p 0.01; I² = 0%). IPD-KM showed no difference for time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.03), yet landmark analysis revealed differences during the first 26 weeks favoring mepolizumab (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90). We found no significant differences between treatment arms COPD Assessment Test score (MD − 0.28 points; 95% CI − 1.05 to 0.49), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score (MD − 1.12 points; 95% CI − 2.53 to 0.30), emergency department visits/hospitalizations (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.61–1.08), and all-cause mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.29). Mepolizumab demonstrated a safe profile, with no difference in the risk of any adverse event compared with placebo. Conclusion Patients with eosinophilic COPD taking mepolizumab showed a mild reduction in moderate-to-severe exacerbation rate, yet no delay in the first episode of exacerbation. We found no benefit of mepolizumab for symptoms, quality of life, or mortality. This abstract is funded by: None

Bookmark

Cite This Study

Caletti et al. (Fri,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0d5089f03e14405aa9c616 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ajrccm/aamag162.1632

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Bookmark