Are Biologics a Threat or an Asset to the ENT Community?

Is prescribing biologics in the best interests of surgeons or patients?

Until five years ago, most patients with severe Nasal Polyp Syndrome, also called #CRSwNP, were given sinus surgery, and/or received oral steroids in case of lack of control. However, we understand far more about the underlying inflammatory nature of the disease. The treatment of CRSwNP has shifted beyond belief in recent years. Over the past 20 years that knowledge has grown, and with it has sprung up new medical treatment options called biologics or monoclonal antibodies. That has had a huge impact on care and as a result, patients with severe Nasal Polyp Syndrome now have far more treatment options, including using one of three registered biologics for CRSwNP.

So most patients with severe Nasal Polyp Syndrome now have sinus surgery and then if that fails, they are now given one of three major treatment options – oral steroids, revision sinus surgery or biologics. The irony of this is since the widespread availability of biologics, ENT surgeons are now seeing the number of patients undergoing revision sinus surgery drop significantly, which is causing a major change of practice. This revolution of care for CRSwNP is causing something of an ethical dilemma.

To learn more about this topic, EUFOREA invited Dr Sven Schneider (Consultant in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery at the Medical University of Vienna & EUFOREA CRS/EPOS Expert Panel Member) and Dr Stella Lee (Member of the Faculty of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at Harvard Medical School, Director of the Brigham Sinus Center at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital & EUFOREA CRS/EPOS Expert Panel Member).