In the quiet work of comparing two medicines, researchers at a Phoenix allergy meeting asked a question that matters to anyone living with chronic hives: how soon does relief arrive? Their answer, drawn from earlier trials rather than a new head-to-head study, suggests that omalizumab and remibrutinib may begin easing symptoms at a similar pace over the first two weeks. Such a finding is a hopeful sketch rather than a settled truth, for it was assembled after the fact, without matching the patients, and with funding from the company that sells one of the drugs.
Omalizumab and Remibrutinib Show Similar Early CSU Gains in Unmatched Indirect Analysis
No head-to-head trial has been run.
In the quiet work of comparing two medicines, researchers at a Phoenix allergy meeting asked a question that matters to anyone living with chronic hives: how soon does relief arrive? Their answer, drawn from earlier trials rather than a new head-to-head study, suggests that omalizumab and remibrutinib may begin easing symptoms at a similar pace over the first two weeks. Such a finding is a hopeful sketch rather than a settled truth, for it was assembled after the fact, without matching the patients, and with funding from the company that sells one of the drugs.
At the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology meeting in Phoenix this November, a poster led by Shyam Joshi, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University asked a practical question for people with chronic spontaneous urticaria: how fast does treatment begin to work? The team compared omalizumab with remibrutinib across the first fourteen days and found the two looked similar.
The work began with omalizumab alone. Pooling data from the phase 3 ASTERIA I and II trials, the researchers tracked daily urticaria activity scores over two weeks. The gap between omalizumab and placebo opened early. By week two, 39% of omalizumab patients had reached a weekly score of 6 or less, against 6% on placebo, and complete responses were 13% versus 3%.
The remibrutinib comparison drew on the REMIX-1 and REMIX-2 trials. The investigators set placebo-adjusted improvements side by side using unmatched comparisons. The baseline groups were broadly alike, though women made up a larger share of the omalizumab arm. On that basis, no significant difference appeared at day 2, day 7, or day 14.
The limits are plain. The analysis was post hoc and unadjusted, it compared trials conducted about a decade apart, and it was funded by Genentech, whose employees include three of the six authors. No head-to-head trial exists. Confirming that the two drugs share the same early pace will require one.
At the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology annual meeting in Phoenix, held November 12 to 16, 2026, a poster (number 8059) took on a practical question for people with chronic spontaneous urticaria: how fast does treatment start to work? The authors, led by Shyam Joshi, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University, compared omalizumab with remibrutinib over the first 14 days of therapy and found the two looked similar.
Both drugs are approved for CSU in patients who stay symptomatic despite H1-antihistamines. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE antibody. Remibrutinib is an oral Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Omalizumab's response at week 12 is well established, and up to 24% of patients reach complete response by week 4. Joshi and colleagues noted that, given how much CSU affects quality of life, a fast response is an important consideration.
The first step was to look at omalizumab alone. The team pooled data from the phase 3 ASTERIA I and II trials, comparing daily urticaria activity scores (UAS, on a 0 to 6 scale) over 14 days in 160 patients on omalizumab 300 mg and 159 on placebo. Mean daily UAS fell more with omalizumab than with placebo throughout the period.
The weekly figures show how early the gap opens. At week 1, 6% of omalizumab patients had a response, defined as a weekly UAS (UAS7) of 6 or less, compared with 2% on placebo. No one in either group had a complete response, meaning a UAS7 of 0. By week 2, response reached 39% with omalizumab versus 6% with placebo, and complete response was 13% versus 3%.
Next came the comparison with remibrutinib. The investigators used published data from the pooled phase 3 REMIX-1 and REMIX-2 trials, which included 613 patients on remibrutinib and 312 on placebo. They compared placebo-adjusted differences in mean daily UAS between the two drugs using unmatched comparisons and two-sample t tests.
The trial populations were broadly alike at baseline. Mean UAS7 was 30.4 in the omalizumab arm and 30.6 and 30.2 in the two remibrutinib arms. Dermatology Life Quality Index scores ranged from 12.9 to 14.2 across all arms. One difference stood out: women made up 76.9% of the omalizumab arm, against 67.7% and 65.7% in the remibrutinib arms.
The placebo-adjusted improvements in mean daily UAS did not differ significantly between the drugs at day 2 (P = .52), day 7 (P = .39), or day 14 (P = .15). The authors concluded that improvements appeared similar over the first 14 days, and that omalizumab remains an effective option for CSU.
The limits are considerable. The analysis was post hoc and unadjusted, and it drew on trials conducted roughly a decade apart. No head-to-head trial has been run. Genentech, which markets omalizumab, funded the work, and three of the six authors are its employees. Safety results for both programs were published earlier and not reanalyzed. Confirming that the two drugs truly act at the same early pace would take a direct trial.
Citações Notáveis
By post hoc indirect comparison, improvements in disease activity appeared similar for omalizumab vs remibrutinib during the first 14 days, and omalizumab remains an effective option.— Shyam Joshi, MD, and colleagues, ACAAI 2026 poster
Quer a matéria completa?
Leia o original em HCPLive ↗