[Expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of respiratory diseases exacerbated by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs （2024, Chengdu）].

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-exacerbated respiratory disease （N-ERD） is a chronic respiratory disease characterized by eosinophilic inflammation, featuring chronic rhinosinusitis （CRS）, asthma, and intolerance to cyclooxygenase 1 （COX-1） inhibitors. The use of these medications can lead to an acute worsening of rhinitis and asthma symptoms. This condition has not yet received sufficient attention in China, with a high rate of misdiagnosis and a lack of related research. The Chinese Rhinology Research Group convened a group of leading young experts in otolaryngology from across the country, based on the latest domestic and international evidence-based medical practices to formulate this consensus.The consensus covers the epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, diagnostic methods, and treatment strategies for N-ERD, including pharmacotherapy, surgery, biologic treatments, and desensitization therapy. The goal is to improve recognition of N-ERD, reduce misdiagnosis, and enhance treatment outcomes.

[Importance of aspirin challenges in patients with NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease]. / Stellenwert von ASS-Provokationen beim Analgetika-Intoleranz-Syndrom.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD) is often characterized by a severe course of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), comorbid asthma, and NSAID hypersensitivity. The gold standard for N-ERD diagnosis is challenge with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). In expert recommendations, the diagnosis of N-ERD is established based on a plausible positive history of NSAID hypersensitivity and CRSwNP with asthma. OBJECTIVE: The following review describes the performance of ASA challenges and their sensitivity and specificity. It also examines the extent to which a positive history of NSAID hypersensitivity correlates with ASA challenge results in clinical trials and when ASA challenges should be performed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: ASA challenges have high sensitivity and specificity. In clinical ASA challenge studies, there is a high concordance between a positive history of NSAID hypersensitivity obtained by rhinologists and the measured data of ASA challenge in patients with CRSwNP and comorbid asthma. Therefore, ASA challenge is primarily indicated in patients with an unclear history of NSAID hypersensitivity.

[Biologic therapy in patients with severe NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease and previous aspirin desensitization : Results of a multicentric study]. / Biologikatherapie bei schwer erkrankten Patienten mit "NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease" und stattgehabter ASS­Desaktivierung : Ergebnisse einer multizentrischen Studie.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a type­2 inflammatory disease of the upper airways, with severe impairment of quality of life. Persons affected by NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD) usually present with highly dynamic recurrence of polyps and disease despite prior treatment with sinus surgeries, oral corticosteroids, and aspirin desensitization (ATAD). Biologic therapy has fundamentally changed the choice of therapeutic concept; however, limited data exist on subgroups such as NERD patients. The aim of the current article is to report on a multicenter retrospective study on add-on therapy with dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab in patients with NERD. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients (NERD+, status after ATAD) in three reference centers in Germany (Munich, Mainz, Berlin). Subjective and objective parameters were collected at 4, 8, and 12 months after biologic therapy initiation in accordance with current EPOS/EUFOREA (European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps/European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases) guidelines. Biologic agents were chosen depending on availability and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Treatment was commenced in 122 patients meeting the criteria for CRSwNP and NERD. The endoscopic polyp score, SNOT-22 questionnaire score, visual analogue scoring of total symptoms/severity of disease, and sense of smell (psychophysical testing with Sniffin'Sticks/Brief Smell Identification Test, B­SIT; Sensonics, Inc., Haddon Heights, NJ, USA) improved significantly after 4 and 12 months of add-on therapy (p < 0.0001). All three biologic agents significantly improved one or more disease parameter. Adverse events were not life threatening but led to change of biologic agent in 4 cases. Patients rated biologic therapy significantly better than ATAD, with improved long-term disease control. CONCLUSION: Add-on biologic therapy is effective, safe, and widely accepted among CRSwNP + NERD patients. Future studies might allow for personalized algorithms with sequential surgery, ATAD, and/or biologic therapy.

Efficacy of EDS-FLU for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Two Randomized Controlled Trials (ReOpen1 and ReOpen2).

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a prevalent inflammatory disease. No medications are Food and Drug Administration-approved for the most common form, CRS without nasal polyps (also called "chronic sinusitis"). Novel biomechanics of the exhalation delivery system deliver fluticasone (EDS-FLU; XHANCE) to sinonasal areas above the inferior turbinate, especially sinus drainage pathways not reached by standard-delivery nasal sprays. OBJECTIVE: Assess EDS-FLU efficacy for CRS (irrespective of nasal polyps). METHODS: Two randomized, EDS-placebo-controlled trials in adults with CRS irrespective of polyps (ReOpen1) or exclusively without polyps (ReOpen2) were conducted at 120 sites in 13 countries. Patients received EDS-FLU 1 or 2 sprays/nostril, or EDS-placebo, twice daily for 24 weeks. Coprimary measures were composite symptom score through week 4 and ethmoid/maxillary sinus percent opacification by computed tomography at week 24. RESULTS: ReOpen1 (N = 332) composite symptom score least-squares mean change for EDS-FLU 1 or 2 sprays/nostril versus EDS-placebo was -1.58 and -1.60 versus -0.62 (P < .001, P < .001); ReOpen2 (N = 223), -1.54 and -1.74 versus -0.81 (P = .011, P = .001). In ReOpen1, sinus opacification least-squares mean change for EDS-FLU 1 or 2 sprays/nostril versus EDS-placebo was -5.58 and -6.20 versus -1.60 (P = .045, P = .018), and in ReOpen2, -7.00 and -5.14 versus +1.19 (P < .001, P = .009). Acute disease exacerbations were reduced by 56% to 66% with EDS-FLU versus EDS-placebo (P = .001). There were significant, and similar magnitude, symptom reductions in patients using standard-delivery nasal steroid products just before entering the study (P < .001). Adverse events were similar to standard-delivery intranasal steroids. CONCLUSIONS: EDS-FLU is the first nonsurgical treatment demonstrated to reduce symptoms, intrasinus opacification, and exacerbations in replicate randomized clinical trials in CRS, regardless of polyp status.

The role of aspirin desensitization in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) / O papel da dessensibilização à aspirina em pacientes portadores de doença respiratória exacerbada por aspirina (DREA)

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) consists of a classic tetrad: moderate/severe asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis, nasal polyps, and intolerance to aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Clinical control with drugs, surgery, and desensitization are treatment options. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin desensitization in patients with AERD. METHODS: Periodic symptom assessment and endoscopy in patients with AERD undergoing surgery who were desensitized. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were desensitized. Eight patients completed the desensitization and were followed for a minimum of a one-year period (mean 3.1 years). These patients showed improvement in all symptoms. Moreover, surgical reassessment was not indicated in any of these patients and there was a decrease in costs with medication and procedures. Eight patients did not complete desensitization, mainly due to procedure intolerance and uncontrolled asthma, whereas another patient was lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Aspirin desensitization, when tolerated, was effective in patients with AERD and with poor clinical/surgical response.

Resumo Introdução: A doença respiratória exacerbada por aspirina é composta pela tétrade clássica: asma moderada/grave, rinossinusite crônica, pólipos nasais e intolerância à aspirina ou outro anti-inflamatório não esteroide. Controle clínico com medicamentos, cirurgias e dessensibilização são opções de tratamento. Objetivo: Avaliar a eficácia e tolerabilidade da dessensibilização à aspirina em pacientes com doença exacerbada por aspirina. Método: Avaliação periódica dos sintomas e exame endoscópico em pacientes com doença respiratória exacerbada por aspirina submetidos à cirurgia e dessensibilizados. Resultados: Dezessete pacientes foram dessensibilizados, dos quais oito pacientes completaram a dessensibilização e foram acompanhados pelo tempo mínimo de 1 ano (média de 3,1 anos). Todos referiram melhora de todos os sintomas; não houve nenhuma indicação de reabordagem cirúrgica, e houve redução de gastos com medicações e procedimentos. Outros oito pacientes não completaram a dessensibilização, principalmente por intolerância ao procedimento e descontrole da asma, enquanto outro paciente perdeu o seguimento. Conclusão: A dessensibilização à aspirina, quando tolerada, mostrou-se eficaz nos pacientes com doença respiratória exacerbada por aspirina com resposta clínica/cirúrgica insatisfatória.