Response to Monoclonal Antibodies in Asthma: Definitions, Potential Reasons for Failure, and Therapeutic Options for Suboptimal Response.

Real-life data reveal that more than half of severe asthma patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) do not achieve a complete response. Response to mAbs must be assessed holistically, considering all the clinically meaningful therapeutic goals, not only reduction of exacerbations and oral corticosteroids. There are 2 different ways of measuring the response to mAbs. One, qualitative, classifies patients according to the degree of disease control they have achieved, without explaining how much a given patient improves relative to the baseline (pre-mAb) clinical situation; the other, quantitative, scores the changes occurring after treatment. Both methods are complementary and essential to making clinical decisions on whether to continue treatment. The various potential causes of suboptimal response to mAbs include incorrect identification of the specific T2 pathways, comorbidities that reduce the room for improvement, insufficient dose, autoimmune phenomena, infections, change in the initial inflammatory endotype, and adverse events. Once a suboptimal response has been confirmed, a well-structured and multifaceted assessment of the potential causes of failure should be performed, with emphasis on the resulting inflammatory process of the airway after mAb therapy and the presence of chronic or recurrent infection. This investigation should guide the decision on the best therapeutic approach. The present review aims to help clinicians gain insights into how to measure response to mAbs and proceed in cases of suboptimal response.

Exacerbations Among Patients With Asthma Are Largely Dependent on the Presence of Multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Comorbidities can influence asthma control and promote asthma exacerbations (AEs). However, the impact of multimorbidity in AEs, assessed based on long-term follow-up of patients with asthma of different degrees of severity, has received little attention in real-life conditions. To describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics and predictors of AEs in patients who had presented at least 1 AE in the previous year in the MEchanism of Genesis and Evolution of Asthma (MEGA) cohort. METHODS: The work-up included a detailed clinical examination, pulmonary function testing, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), blood counts, induced sputum, skin prick-tests, asthma questionnaires, and assessment of multimorbidity. The number of moderate-severe AEs in the preceding year was registered for each patient. RESULTS: The study population comprised 486 patients with asthma (23.7% mild, 35% moderate, 41.3% severe). Disease remained uncontrolled in 41.9%, and 47.3% presented ≥1 moderate-severe AE, with a mean (SD) annual exacerbation rate of 0.47 (0.91) vs 2.11 (2.82) in mild and severe asthma, respectively. Comorbidity was detected in 56.4% (66.6% among those with severe asthma). Bronchiectasis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, atopy, psychiatric illnesses, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension were significantly associated with AEs. No associations were found for FeNO, blood eosinophils, or total serum IgE. Sputum eosinophilia and a high-T2 inflammatory pattern were significantly associated with AEs. Multivariable regression analysis showed a significant association with asthma severity, uncontrolled disease, and low prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a high frequency of AE in the MEGA cohort. This was strongly associated with multimorbidity, asthma severity, poor asthma control, airflow obstruction, higher sputum eosinophils, and a very high-T2 inflammatory pattern.

Improvement in Olfaction in Patients With CRSwNP and Severe Asthma Taking Anti-IgE and Anti-IL-5 Biologics: A Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), which is characterized by partial loss of smell (hyposmia) or total loss of smell (anosmia), is commonly associated with asthma and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD). CRSwNP worsens disease severity and quality of life. The objective of this real-world study was to determine whether biological treatments prescribed for severe asthma can improve olfaction in patients with CRSwNP. A further objective was to compare the improvement in in olfaction in N-ERD and non-N-ERD subgroups. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, noninterventional, retrospective, observational study of 206 patients with severe asthma and CRSwNP undergoing biological treatment (omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, or reslizumab). RESULTS: Olfaction improved after treatment with all 4 monoclonal antibodies (omalizumab [35.8%], mepolizumab [35.4%], reslizumab [35.7%], and benralizumab [39.1%]), with no differences between the groups. Olfaction was more likely to improve in patients with atopy, more frequent use of short-course systemic corticosteroids, and larger polyp size. The proportion of patients whose olfaction improved was similar between the N-ERD (37%) and non-N-ERD (35.7%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first real-world study to compare improvement in olfaction among patients undergoing long-term treatment with omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, or benralizumab for severe asthma and associated CRSwNP. Approximately 4 out of 10 patients reported a subjective improvement in olfaction (with nonsignificant differences between biologic drugs). No differences were found for improved olfaction between the N-ERD and non-N-ERD groups.

Eosinophilia Induced by Blocking the IL-4/IL-13 Pathway: Potential Mechanisms and Clinical Outcomes.

Five biological drugs are currently marketed for treatment of uncontrolled severe asthma. They all block type 2 inflammatory pathways by targeting IgE (omalizumab), the IL-5 pathway (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), or the IL-4/IL-13 pathway (dupilumab). Hypereosinophilia has been observed in 4%-25% of patients treated with dupilumab and is transient in most cases, although there have been reports of persistent cases of symptomatic hypereosinophilia consistent with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), eosinophilic pneumonia, eosinophilic vasculitis, and sudden worsening of asthma symptoms. Cases of EGPA have been reported with all biologics, including anti-IL-5 agents, and with leukotriene receptor antagonists in publications or in the EudraVigilance database. In many cases, EGPA appears during tapering of systemic corticosteroids or after switching from an anti-IL-5 biologic to dupilumab, suggesting that systemic corticosteroids or the anti-IL-5 agent were masking vasculitis. This review investigates plausible mechanisms of dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia and review cases of symptomatic hypereosinophilia associated with dupilumab. Blockade of the IL-4/IL-13 pathway reduces eosinophil migration and accumulation of blood by inhibiting eotaxin-3, VCAM-1, and TARC without simultaneously inhibiting eosinophilopoiesis in bone marrow. When choosing the optimal biologic, it seems necessary to consider the presence of hypereosinophilia (>1500/µL), in which case an anti-IL-5/IL-5R agent is preferable. Furthermore, when switching from an anti-IL-5/5R to an anti-IL-4/13R agent, blood eosinophils and clinical progress should be closely monitored. Nevertheless, dual therapy with anti-IL-5/5R and anti-IL4/IL-13R agents may be needed for optimal control, since both the IL-5 and the IL-4/IL-13 pathways can simultaneously contribute to airway inflammation. This approach can prevent the development of EGPA and other types of symptomatic hypereosinophilia while maintaining control of nasal polyposis. In the near future, it will be possible to use a new generation of biological therapies for the treatment of severe asthma. These act at a higher level of the inflammatory cascade, as is the case of the antialarmins tezepelumab and itepekimab.

Serum microRNAs Catalog Asthma Patients by Phenotype.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory condition of the airways with a complex pathophysiology. Stratification of asthma subtypes into phenotypes and endotypes should move the field forward, making treatment more effective and personalized. Eosinophils are the key inflammatory cells involved in severe eosinophilic asthma. Given the health threat posed by eosinophilic asthma, there is a need for reliable biomarkers to identify affected patients and treat them properly with novel biologics. microRNAs (miRNAs) are a promising diagnostic tool. The aim of this study was to identify serum miRNAs that can phenotype asthma patients. METHODS: Serum miRNAs of patients with eosinophilic asthma (N=40) and patients with noneosinophilic asthma (N=36) were evaluated using next-generation sequencing, specifically miRNAs-seq, and selected miRNAs were validated using RT-qPCR. Pathway enrichment analysis of deregulated miRNAs was performed. RESULTS: Next-generation sequencing revealed 15 miRNAs that were expressed differentially between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma patients, although no differences were observed in the miRNome between atopic and nonatopic asthma patients. Of the 15 miRNAs expressed differentially between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma patients, hsa-miR-26a-1-3p and hsa-miR-376a-3p were validated by RT-qPCR. Expression levels of these 2 miRNAs were higher in eosinophilic than in noneosinophilic asthma patients. Furthermore, expression values of hsa-miR-26a-1-3p correlated inversely with peripheral blood eosinophil count, and hsa-miR-376a-3p expression values correlated with FeNO values and the number of exacerbations. Additionally, in silico pathway enrichment analysis revealed that these 2 miRNAs regulate signaling pathways associated with the pathogenesis of asthma. CONCLUSIONS: hsa-miR-26a-1-3p and hsa-miR-376a-3p could be used to differentiate between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma.

Onset of Nut Allergy in a Pediatric Cohort: Clinical and Molecular Patterns in the AFRUSEN Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nut allergy is a growing problem, yet little is known about its onset in children. Objective: To characterize the onset of nut allergy in children in southern Europe. METHODS: The study population comprised consecutive patients up to 14 years of age who visited allergy departments with an initial allergic reaction to peanut, tree nut, or seed. The allergy work-up included a clinical history, food challenge, skin prick testing, determination of whole-extract sIgE, and ImmunoCAP ISAC-112 assay. RESULTS: Of the 271 children included, 260 were first diagnosed with nut allergy at a mean age of 6.5 years and at a mean (SD) of 11.8 (21.2) months after the index reaction. The most common culprit nuts at onset were walnut (36.5%), peanut (28.5%), cashew (10.4%), hazelnut (8.5%), pistachio (5.4%), and almond (5%). Onset of peanut allergy was more frequent in children ≤6 years and walnut in those aged >6 years (P=.032). In 65% of cases, the allergic reaction occurred the first time the patient consumed the nut, and 35% of reactions were anaphylactic. Overall, polysensitization to nuts was detected by skin prick testing in 64.9% of patients, although this rate was lower among walnut-allergic children (54.7%) and peanut-allergic children (54.1%) (P<.0001). Sensitization to 2S albumins was predominant (75%), especially Jug r 1 (52.8%), whereas sensitization to lipid transfer proteins was less relevant (37%). CONCLUSION: In the population we assessed, the onset of nut allergy occurred around 6 years of age, slightly later than that reported in English-speaking countries. Walnut was the main trigger, followed by peanut. 2S albumin storage proteins, especially Jug r 1, were the most relevant allergens. This study will help guide management and may contribute to preventive strategies in pediatric nut allergy.

Functional Examination of the Upper and Lower Airways in Asthma and Respiratory Allergic Diseases: Considerations in the Post-SARS-CoV-2 Era.

Airway examination procedures can potentially transmit infectious diseases to patients and to the health care professionals who perform them via various mechanisms. The COVID-19 pandemic has halted most of the activity of the clinics and laboratories involved in assessment of lung and nasal function, and clear recommendations in this regard have been made. Today, we still do not know for sure what its consequences will be in the short or long term, since important gaps remain in our knowledge of aspects as fundamental as virus transmission mechanisms, pathophysiology, immune response, and diagnosis. In this review, we study the examination techniques used to assess patients with respiratory allergy, asthma, and associated diseases during this period and highlight their possible advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, we focus on exploring the entire upper and lower airways, from the perspective of the safety of both health professionals and patients and their specific characteristics. We also analyze the intrinsic value of these interventions in terms of diagnosis and patient management. The changing situation of COVID-19 may mean that some of the assertions presented in this review will have to be modified in the future. While we seek to ensure a consistently broad approach, some differences in operational details may apply owing to local regulations.

Obesity and Asthma: Key Clinical Questions.

Obesity is a common comorbidity of asthma that is associated not only with development of the disease, but also with poorer disease control and greater severity. Recent prospective evidence supports the idea that body weight gain precedes the development of asthma, although the debate is far from over. The objective of this document is to conduct a systematic review of 3 clinical questions related to asthma and obesity: (a) Obesity and asthma: the chicken or the egg? Clinical insights from epidemiological and phenotyping studies. (b) Is obesity a confounding factor in the diagnosis and management of asthma, especially in severe or difficult-to-control asthma? (c) How do obese asthma patients respond to pharmacological treatments and to biological drugs? Do we have effective specific interventions? Revised epidemiological, pathological, and mechanistic evidence combined with data from interventional clinical trials prevent us from clearly stating that obesity causes asthma. However, the complexity and heterogeneity of both illnesses make several clinical scenarios possible. Furthermore, asthma represents an additional clinical challenge in the obese patient. Physicians need to be aware of the confounding effects created by the more marked perception of symptoms, alterations in lung function, and the various comorbidities that obese persons present. Exhaustive phenotyping of the obese asthma patient should enable us to develop a rational therapeutic plan, including both the pharmacological approach and specific antiobesity therapies such as combining diet and exercise and, in extreme cases, bariatric surgery.

Alergológica 2015: A National Survey on Allergic Diseases in the Adult Spanish Population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJETIVE: The frequency of allergic diseases is increasing worldwide, particularly in industrialized countries. From a clinical, management, and public heath perspective, it is important to determine the reasons for consulting an allergist, the distribution by frequency of allergic diseases, and how health care is provided. Objective: Alergológica 2015 was carried out to obtain information on clinical practice in allergy departments in Spain, and compare it with the previous study editions. METHODS: The data cover the year 2014 and the first quarter of 2015. The target sample was 6000 patients seen at public and private centers throughout Spain. A total of 500 allergists were invited to participate. Data were collected on an electronic case report form. Data were compared with the Alergológica surveys for 1992 and 2005 to identify differences. RESULTS: The final study population comprised 2914 patients (mean age 33.6 [18.9] years, 58% women, 17% children), of whom 6.1% were foreign-born. The frequency distribution was as follows: rhinitis, 62%; asthma, 23.4%; drug allergy, 17.7%; urticaria/angioedema, 11.5%; food allergy, 10.4%; contact dermatitis, 4%; atopic dermatitis, 3%; insect venom allergy, 2%. A statistically significant increase was observed between data from 2005 and from 2015 with respect to the prevalence for allergic rhinitis, food allergy and drug hypersensitivity. An increase in the prevalence of a personal history of asthma, rhinitis, conjunctivitis, and eczema/atopic dermatitis were also observed. Besides, the number of relevant allergens in the same patient also increased. Most patients were referred from primary care, although a considerable percentage were referred by ENT specialists and dermatologists. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing trends were observed for allergic rhinitis, drug allergy, and food allergy, and a decreasing trend was observed for asthma. Findings for other diseases remained practically unchanged. Allergic patients are increasingly complex and present with a myriad of atopic manifestations.

Alergológica 2015: A National Survey on Allergic Diseases in the Spanish Pediatric Population.

BACKGROUND: Allergic diseases are highly prevalent in industrialized populations. In Spain, children suspected of having an allergic disease are usually referred by their primary care pediatrician to an allergy unit at a general hospital or a children's hospital. We report data from a subanalysis of the pediatric population in Alergológica 2015. METHODS: Data were collected from pediatric patients (age, ≤14 years) consulting an allergist for the first time in 2014 and the first quarter of 2015 in order to determine variations compared with data reported in Alergológica 2005. RESULTS: Alergológica 2015 included fewer pediatric patients than Alergológica 2005. The study population comprised 481 patients aged ≤14 years from more than 200 centers throughout Spain. Males accounted for 56.5%. Rhinoconjunctivitis was the main reason for consulting an allergist (53.8% vs 46.3% in 2005), followed by asthma (30.2% vs 34.6%), and food allergy (20.0% vs 14.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of Alergológica 2015 show a notable increased frequency of allergic rhinitis, drug allergy, and food allergy. The frequency of other allergic conditions remained unchanged, except for asthma, whose frequency decreased, as in adult patients.

Mannitol versus hypertonic saline: Safety and efficacy of mannitol and hypertonic saline in sputum induction and bronchial hyperreactivity assessment.

Eosinophilic asthma phenotype predicts good response to corticosteroids and associates to asthmatic exacerbations. Sputum induction by hypertonic saline (HS) inhalation is technically demanding. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) to osmotic agents indirectly mirrors active airway inflammation. We compared the safety and ability of HS and mannitol to induce sputum and measure BHR. We evaluated the stability of inflammatory phenotypes. We studied 35 non-smoking asthmatics randomized to undergo HS and mannitol challenges on 2 days 1 week apart. Sputum was sampled for cell analysis and phenotyped as eosinophilic (≥3% eosinophils) and non-eosinophilic (<3%) asthma. Nineteen subjects had BHR to mannitol and nine of them also had BHR to HS. Drops in forced expiratory volume in 1 s were higher from HS challenge than from mannitol challenge. Adequate sputum samples were obtained from 80% subjects (68% mannitol and 71% HS). Eosinophils and macrophages from both challenges correlated. Neutrophils were higher in sputum from HS. Ninety percent samples were equally phenotyped with HS and mannitol. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide, sputum eosinophils and BHR correlated in both challenges. HS and mannitol showed similar capacity to produce valuable sputum samples. BHR to both osmotic stimuli partially resembled airway eosinophilic inflammation but mannitol was more sensitive than HS to assess BHR. Eosinophilic phenotype remained stable in most patients with both stimuli.