Comparative Effectiveness of Mepolizumab Versus Dupilumab in Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with Asthma: A Real-World Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION: Mepolizumab and dupilumab are biologic therapies used to manage uncontrolled asthma, though direct comparative real-world evidence between these two agents is limited. This study compared asthma-related hospitalizations and asthma exacerbations between mepolizumab and dupilumab among an older and clinically complex population of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries with asthma. METHODS: Data from Komodo Research Database (01/01/2018-05/31/2025) were used to identify Medicare FFS beneficiaries with asthma and a first claim for mepolizumab or dupilumab on or after January 1, 2019 (index date), as well as a subgroup of patients adherent to the index biologic for ≥ 6 months. Cohorts were balanced using overlap weighting based on a propensity score model. Rates of asthma-related hospitalizations and asthma exacerbations were evaluated while on treatment as the number of events per patient-year (PPY) and compared between weighted cohorts using rate ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Rates of asthma-related hospitalizations were assessed for non-inferiority using a fixed-margin approach. RESULTS: Overall, 1055 and 1218 patients were included in the mepolizumab and dupilumab cohorts, respectively (mean age 70.1 and 67.4 years). Baseline characteristics were well balanced after weighting. Mepolizumab demonstrated non-inferiority to dupilumab for asthma-related hospitalizations within the overall population (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.46, 1.08; p = 0.113; non-inferiority margin 1.10) and superiority to dupilumab within the adherent subgroup (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30, 0.99; p = 0.047). Mepolizumab was also associated with significantly lower rates of asthma exacerbations than dupilumab in the overall population (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72, 1.00; p = 0.047) and directionally favorable rates in the adherent subgroup (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.63, 1.05; p = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare FFS beneficiaries, mepolizumab demonstrated comparable real-world effectiveness to dupilumab for asthma-related hospitalizations and was associated with significantly lower rates of asthma exacerbations, supporting mepolizumab as an effective treatment option for older, clinically complex patients with asthma.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Advances in Therapy
Published
2026-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-026-03825-8
Primary Topic
Asthma and respiratory diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Effectiveness of Mepolizumab Versus Dupilumab in Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with Asthma: A Real-World Cohort Study

François Laliberté, Emily Burrows, Arijita Deb, Guillaume Germain et al.
Advances in Therapy
Asthma and respiratory diseases
article

Comparative Effectiveness of Mepolizumab Versus Dupilumab in Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries with Asthma: A Real-World Cohort Study

François Laliberté, Emily Burrows, Arijita Deb, Guillaume Germain, J. Klimek, Patrick Gravelle
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Mepolizumab and dupilumab are biologic therapies used to manage uncontrolled asthma, though direct comparative real-world evidence between these two agents is limited. This study compared asthma-related hospitalizations and asthma exacerbations between mepolizumab and dupilumab among an older and clinically complex population of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries with asthma. METHODS: Data from Komodo Research Database (01/01/2018-05/31/2025) were used to identify Medicare FFS beneficiaries with asthma and a first claim for mepolizumab or dupilumab on or after January 1, 2019 (index date), as well as a subgroup of patients adherent to the index biologic for ≥ 6 months. Cohorts were balanced using overlap weighting based on a propensity score model. Rates of asthma-related hospitalizations and asthma exacerbations were evaluated while on treatment as the number of events per patient-year (PPY) and compared between weighted cohorts using rate ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Rates of asthma-related hospitalizations were assessed for non-inferiority using a fixed-margin approach. RESULTS: Overall, 1055 and 1218 patients were included in the mepolizumab and dupilumab cohorts, respectively (mean age 70.1 and 67.4 years). Baseline characteristics were well balanced after weighting. Mepolizumab demonstrated non-inferiority to dupilumab for asthma-related hospitalizations within the overall population (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.46, 1.08; p = 0.113; non-inferiority margin 1.10) and superiority to dupilumab within the adherent subgroup (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30, 0.99; p = 0.047). Mepolizumab was also associated with significantly lower rates of asthma exacerbations than dupilumab in the overall population (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72, 1.00; p = 0.047) and directionally favorable rates in the adherent subgroup (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.63, 1.05; p = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare FFS beneficiaries, mepolizumab demonstrated comparable real-world effectiveness to dupilumab for asthma-related hospitalizations and was associated with significantly lower rates of asthma exacerbations, supporting mepolizumab as an effective treatment option for older, clinically complex patients with asthma.

Advances in Therapy
GlaxoSmithKline (United States) (US), Group for Research in Decision Analysis (CA), Analysis Group (United States) (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Asthma and respiratory diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.