Anti-interleukin-13 and anti-interleukin-4 agents versus placebo, anti-interleukin-5 or anti-immunoglobulin-E agents, for people with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Targeting the immunoglobulin E pathway and the interleukin-5 pathway with specific monoclonal antibodies directed against the cytokines or their receptors is effective in patients with severe asthma. However, there are patients who have suboptimal responses to these biologics. Since interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, signalling through the interleukin-4 receptor, have multiple effects on the biology of asthma, therapies targeting interleukin-4 and -13 (both individually and combined) have been developed. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of anti-interleukin-13 or anti-interleukin-4 agents, compared with placebo, anti-immunoglobulin E agents, or anti-interleukin-5 agents, for the treatment of children, adolescents, or adults with asthma. SEARCH METHODS: We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which is maintained by the Information Specialist for the Group and through searches of the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The search was carried out on the 16 October 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials that compared anti-interleukin-13 or -4 agents (or agents that target both interleukin-13 and interleukin-4) with placebo in adolescents and adults (aged 16 years or older) or children (younger than 16 years), with a diagnosis of asthma; participants could receive their usual short- or long-acting medications (e.g. inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), long-acting beta adrenoceptor agonists (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), and/or leukotriene receptor antagonists) provided that they were not part of the randomised treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We identified and included 41 RCTs. Of these, 29 studies contributed data to the quantitative analyses, randomly assigning 10,604 people with asthma to receive an anti-interleukin-13 (intervention) or anti-interleukin-4 agent (intervention), or placebo (comparator). No relevant studies were identified where the comparator was an anti-immunoglobulin agent or an anti-interleukin-5 agent. Studies had a duration of between 2 and 52 (median 16) weeks. The mean age of participants across the included studies ranged from 22 to 55 years. Only five studies permitted enrolment of children and adolescents, accounting for less than 5% of the total participants contributing data to the present review. The majority of participants had moderate or severe uncontrolled asthma. Concomitant ICS use was permitted or required in the majority (21 of 29) of the included studies. The use of maintenance systemic corticosteroids was not permitted in 19 studies and was permitted or required in five studies (information not reported in five studies). Regarding the most commonly assessed anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents, four studies evaluated dupilumab (300 mg once every week (Q1W), 200 mg once every two weeks (Q2W), 300 mg Q2W, 200 mg once every four weeks (Q4W), 300 mg Q4W, each administered by subcutaneous (SC) injection); eight studies evaluated lebrikizumab (37.5 mg Q4W, 125 mg Q4W, 250 mg Q4W each administered by SC injection); and nine studies (3259 participants) evaluated tralokinumab (75 mg Q1W, 150 mg Q1W, 300 mg Q1W, 150 mg Q2W, 300 mg Q2W, 600 mg Q2W, 300 mg Q4W, each administered by SC injection; 1/5/10 mg/kg administered by intravenous (IV) injection); all anti-interleukin-13 or-4 agents were compared with placebo. The risk of bias was generally considered to be low or unclear (insufficient detail provided); nine studies were considered to be at high risk for attrition bias and three studies were considered to be at high risk for reporting bias. The following results relate to the primary outcomes. The rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or emergency department (ED) visit was probably lower in participants receiving tralokinumab versus placebo (rate ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.98; moderate-certainty evidence; data available for tralokinumab (anti-interleukin-13) only). In participants receiving an anti-interleukin-13/-4 agent, the mean improvement versus placebo in adjusted asthma quality of life questionnaire score was 0.18 units (95% CI 0.12 to 0.24; high-certainty evidence); however, this finding was deemed not to be a clinically relevant improvement. There was likely little or no difference between groups in the proportion of patients who reported all-cause serious adverse events (anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents versus placebo, OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.09; moderate-certainty evidence). In terms of secondary outcomes, there may be little or no difference between groups in the proportion of patients who experienced exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents versus placebo, rate ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.32; low-certainty evidence). Anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents probably improve asthma control based on asthma control questionnaire score (anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents versus placebo, mean difference -0.19; 95% CI -0.24 to -0.14); however, the magnitude of this result was deemed not to be a clinically relevant improvement. The proportion of patients experiencing any adverse event was greater in those receiving anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents compared with those receiving placebo (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.30; high-certainty evidence); the most commonly reported adverse events in participants treated with anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents were upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, headache and injection site reaction. The pooled results for the exploratory outcome, the rate of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (OCS) or hospitalisation or emergency department visit, may be lower in participants receiving anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents versus placebo (rate ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.77; low-certainty evidence). Results were generally consistent across subgroups for different classes of agent (anti-interleukin-13 or anti-interleukin-4), durations of study and severity of disease. Subgroup analysis based on category of T helper 2 (TH2) inflammation suggested greater efficacy in patients with higher levels of inflammatory biomarkers (blood eosinophils, exhaled nitric oxide and serum periostin). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the totality of the evidence, compared with placebo, anti-interleukin-13/-4 agents are probably associated with a reduction in exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or ED visit, at the cost of increased adverse events, in patients with asthma. No clinically relevant improvements in health-related quality of life or asthma control were identified. Therefore, anti-interleukin-13 or anti-interleukin-4 agents may be appropriate for adults with moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma who have not responded to other treatments. These conclusions are generally supported by moderate or high-certainty evidence based on studies with an observation period of up to one year.

UK consensus statement on the diagnosis of inducible laryngeal obstruction in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, laryngoscopy was the mandatory gold standard for the accurate assessment and diagnosis of inducible laryngeal obstruction. However, upper airway endoscopy is considered an aerosol-generating procedure in professional guidelines, meaning routine procedures are highly challenging and the availability of laryngoscopy is reduced. In response, we have convened a multidisciplinary panel with broad experience in managing this disease and agreed a recommended strategy for presumptive diagnosis in patients who cannot have laryngoscopy performed due to pandemic restrictions. To maintain clinical standards whilst ensuring patient safety, we discuss the importance of triage, information gathering, symptom assessment and early review of response to treatment. The consensus recommendations will also be potentially relevant to other future situations where access to laryngoscopy is restricted, although we emphasize that this investigation remains the gold standard.

Cardiorespiratory considerations for return-to-play in elite athletes after COVID-19 infection: a practical guide for sport and exercise medicine physicians.

SARS-CoV-2 is the causative virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. This pandemic has necessitated that all professional and elite sport is either suspended, postponed or cancelled altogether to minimise the risk of viral spread. As infection rates drop and quarantine restrictions are lifted, the question how athletes can safely resume competitive sport is being asked. Given the rapidly evolving knowledge base about the virus and changing governmental and public health recommendations, a precise answer to this question is fraught with complexity and nuance. Without robust data to inform policy, return-to-play (RTP) decisions are especially difficult for elite athletes on the suspicion that the COVID-19 virus could result in significant cardiorespiratory compromise in a minority of afflicted athletes. There are now consistent reports of athletes reporting persistent and residual symptoms many weeks to months after initial COVID-19 infection. These symptoms include cough, tachycardia and extreme fatigue. To support safe RTP, we provide sport and exercise medicine physicians with practical recommendations on how to exclude cardiorespiratory complications of COVID-19 in elite athletes who place high demand on their cardiorespiratory system. As new evidence emerges, guidance for a safe RTP should be updated.

Speech and language therapy for management of chronic cough.

BACKGROUND: Cough both protects and clears the airway. Cough has three phases: breathing in (inspiration), closure of the glottis, and a forced expiratory effort. Chronic cough has a negative, far-reaching impact on quality of life. Few effective medical treatments for individuals with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough (UCC) are known. For this group, current guidelines advocate the use of gabapentin. Speech and language therapy (SLT) has been considered as a non-pharmacological option for managing UCC without the risks and side effects associated with pharmacological agents, and this review considers the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of SLT in this context. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of speech and language therapy for treatment of people with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trials registries, and reference lists of included studies. Our most recent search was 8 February 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs in which participants had a diagnosis of UCC having undergone a full diagnostic workup to exclude an underlying cause, as per published guidelines or local protocols, and where the intervention included speech and language therapy techniques for UCC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of 94 records. Two clinical trials, represented in 10 study reports, met our predefined inclusion criteria. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for each study and extracted outcome data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or geometric mean differences. We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and serious adverse events (SAEs). MAIN RESULTS: We found two studies involving 162 adults that met our inclusion criteria. Neither of the two studies included children. The duration of treatment and length of sessions varied between studies from four sessions delivered weekly, to four sessions over two months. Similarly, length of sessions varied slightly from one 60-minute session and three 45-minute sessions to four 30-minute sessions. The control interventions were healthy lifestyle advice in both studies.One study contributed HRQoL data, using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), and we judged the quality of the evidence to be low using the GRADE approach. Data were reported as between-group difference from baseline to four weeks (MD 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 2.85; participants = 71), revealing a statistically significant benefit for people receiving a physiotherapy and speech and language therapy intervention (PSALTI) versus control. However, the difference between PSALTI and control was not observed between week four and three months. The same study provided information on SAEs, and there were no SAEs in either the PSALTI or control arms. Using the GRADE approach we judged the quality of evidence for this outcome to be low.Data were also available for our prespecified secondary outcomes. In each case data were provided by only one study, therefore there were no opportunities for aggregation; we judged the quality of this evidence to be low for each outcome. A significant difference favouring therapy was demonstrated for: objective cough counts (ratio for mean coughs per hour on treatment was 59% (95% CI 37% to 95%) relative to control; participants = 71); symptom score (MD 9.80, 95% CI 4.50 to 15.10; participants = 87); and clinical improvement as defined by trialists (OR 48.13, 95% CI 13.53 to 171.25; participants = 87). There was no significant difference between therapy and control regarding subjective measures of cough (MD on visual analogue scale of cough severity: -9.72, 95% CI -20.80 to 1.36; participants = 71) and cough reflex sensitivity (capsaicin concentration to induce five coughs: 1.11 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.54; participants = 49) times higher on treatment than on control). One study reported data on adverse events, and there were no adverse events reported in either the therapy or control arms of the study. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The paucity of data in this review highlights the need for more controlled trial data examining the efficacy of SLT interventions in the management of UCC. Although a large number of studies were found in the initial search as per protocol, we could include only two studies in the review. In addition, this review highlights that endpoints vary between published studies.The improvements in HRQoL (LCQ) and reduction in 24-hour cough frequency seen with the PSALTI intervention were statistically significant but short-lived, with the between-group difference lasting up to four weeks only. Further studies are required to replicate these findings and to investigate the effects of SLT interventions over time. It is clear that SLT interventions vary between studies. Further research is needed to understand which aspects of SLT interventions are most effective in reducing cough (both objective cough frequency and subjective measures of cough) and improving HRQoL. We consider these endpoints to be clinically important. It is also important for future studies to report information on adverse events.Because of the paucity of data, we can draw no robust conclusions regarding the efficacy of SLT interventions for improving outcomes in unexplained chronic cough. Our review identifies the need for further high-quality research, with comparable endpoints to inform robust conclusions.

The views of patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on advance care planning: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of death worldwide and there are concerns that end-of-life care for these patients is inadequate. Advance care planning is encouraged, with the hope that it will improve communication and avoid unwanted interventions, which have been particular concerns; in practice, these discussions rarely occur. We have little knowledge of the views of patients with COPD on advance care planning. Understanding this could help integrate advance care planning into the routine management of patients with COPD. AIM: To explore the views of people with severe COPD about advance care planning. DESIGN: Qualitative design, with data collection incorporating audio recorded semi-structured interviews. Analysis followed a grounded theory approach. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Patients with severe COPD (n =10, Gold Standards Framework criteria) were recruited from primary and secondary care settings. RESULTS: Participants felt they had not been given enough information about their diagnosis and prognosis, and were keen for more discussion with healthcare professionals. They wanted more involvement in decisions about their treatment when those decisions were required. Participants were happy to discuss their general views about future care, but felt uncomfortable with the traditional model of binding 'advance directives'. CONCLUSIONS: Considering advance care planning as a repeated process of discussion of prognosis, concerns and probable preferences for care would be more useful than encouraging binding advance decisions. Further research should assess the effectiveness of this approach. Local coordination of who is responsible for information provision is needed, and greater involvement of patients with COPD in management decisions as they arise.

Randomized controlled trial of oral antifungal treatment for severe asthma with fungal sensitization: The Fungal Asthma Sensitization Trial (FAST) study.

RATIONALE: Some patients with severe asthma are immunologically sensitized to one or more fungi, a clinical entity categorized as severe asthma with fungal sensitization (SAFS). It is not known whether SAFS responds to antifungal therapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the response of SAFS to oral itraconazole. METHODS: Patients with severe asthma sensitized to at least one of seven fungi by skin prick or specific IgE testing were recruited. All had total IgE less than 1,000 IU/ml and negative Aspergillus precipitins. They were treated with oral itraconazole (200 mg twice daily) or placebo for 32 weeks, with follow-up for 16 weeks. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was change in the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) score, with rhinitis score, total IgE, and respiratory function as secondary end points. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled, of whom 41% had been hospitalized in the previous year. Baseline mean AQLQ score was 4.13 (range, 1-7). At 32 weeks, the improvement (95% confidence interval) in AQLQ score was +0.85 (0.28, 1.41) in the antifungal group, compared with a -0.01 (-0.43, 0.42) change in the placebo group (P = 0.014). Rhinitis score improved (-0.43) in the antifungal, and deteriorated (+0.17) in the placebo group (P = 0.013). Morning peak flow improved (20.8 L/minute, P = 0.028) in the antifungal group. Total serum IgE decreased in the antifungal group (-51 IU/ml) but increased in placebo group (+30 IU/ml) (P = 0.001). No severe adverse events were observed, but seven patients developed adverse events requiring discontinuation, five in the antifungal group. CONCLUSIONS: SAFS responds to oral antifungal therapy as judged by large improvements in quality of life in about 60% of patients.

Heliox for inducible laryngeal obstruction (vocal cord dysfunction): A systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic literature review on the use of Heliox with patients with inducible laryngeal obstruction/vocal cord dysfunction to: i) identify current evidence base; and ii) establish the methodological quality of published research. METHODS: Articles published up to March 2018 were searched for key words and terms using Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Dynamed. Studies were included if they presented original research into the use of Heliox for vocal cord dysfunction. RESULTS: Only three studies met the inclusion criteria for review. All reported favorable results for the use of Heliox as an adjunctive therapy for vocal cord dysfunction but none had sufficient methodological quality to support their conclusions. CONCLUSION: Despite review articles recommending the use of Heliox in vocal cord dysfunction, there is a lack of good quality research to support this conclusion. There is a need for further research to investigate the effectiveness of Heliox as an adjunctive therapy for vocal cord dysfunction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Detecting laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with upper airways symptoms: Symptoms, signs or salivary pepsin?

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) can induce laryngeal hyper-responsiveness, a unifying feature underlying chronic cough and vocal cord dysfunction. The diagnosis of LPR currently relies on invasive oesophageal pH impedance testing. We compared symptoms, laryngeal signs and salivary pepsin as potential diagnostic methods for identifying LPR in patients with upper airway symptoms. METHODS: Symptoms were assessed using the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and signs of laryngeal inflammation quantified using the Reflux Finding Score (RFS) during laryngoscopy. Saliva samples were analysed for the presence of pepsin. A sub-group of patients with severe symptoms and signs of LPR were investigated with oesophageal pH monitoring and impedance study. RESULTS: Seventy eight patients with chronic cough and/or suspected vocal cord dysfunction were recruited, mean (SD) age, 54.6 (15.6) years. The majority (87%) had significant symptoms of reflux (RSI>13). There were clinical signs of LPR (RFS>7) in 51% of cases. Pepsin was detected in the saliva of 63% of subjects and 78% of those with a high RFS. Salivary pepsin had a sensitivity of 78% and specificity of 53% for predicting a high RFS. There was a correlation between the RSI and RFS (r = 0.51, p < 0.001) and between the severity of laryngeal inflammation and the concentration of pepsin (r = 0.28, p = 0.01). All cases investigated with pH-impedance study had objective evidence of proximal reflux. CONCLUSION: Salivary pepsin may be used as a screening adjunct to supplement the RFS in the clinical workup of patients with extra-oesophageal symptoms and upper respiratory tract presentations of reflux.

Late-onset respiratory failure due to TK2 mutations causing multiple mtDNA deletions.

Mutations in nuclear genes involved in the maintenance of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) are associated with an extensive spectrum of clinical phenotypes, manifesting as either mtDNA depletion syndromes or multiple mtDNA deletion disorders.(1.)