Opportunities for understanding the COVID-19 pandemic and child health in the United States: the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program.

Objective: Ongoing pediatric cohort studies offer opportunities to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children's health. With well-characterized data from tens of thousands of US children, the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Program offers such an opportunity. Methods: ECHO enrolled children and their caregivers from community- and clinic-based pediatric cohort studies. Extant data from each of the cohorts were pooled and harmonized. In 2019, cohorts began collecting data under a common protocol, and data collection is ongoing with a focus on early life environmental exposures and five child health domains: birth outcomes, neurodevelopment, obesity, respiratory, and positive health. In April of 2020, ECHO began collecting a questionnaire designed to assess COVID-19 infection and the pandemic's impact on families. We describe and summarize the characteristics of children who participated in the ECHO Program during the COVID-19 pandemic and novel opportunities for scientific advancement. Results: This sample (n = 13,725) was diverse by child age (31% early childhood, 41% middle childhood, and 16% adolescence up to age 21), sex (49% female), race (64% White, 15% Black, 3% Asian, 2% American Indian or Alaska Native, <1% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 10% Multiple race and 2% Other race), Hispanic ethnicity (22% Hispanic), and were similarly distributed across the four United States Census regions and Puerto Rico. Conclusion: ECHO data collected during the pandemic can be used to conduct solution-oriented research to inform the development of programs and policies to support child health during the pandemic and in the post-pandemic era.

Pediatric asthma incidence rates in the United States from 1980 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined longitudinal asthma incidence rates (IRs) from a public health surveillance perspective. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to calculate descriptive asthma IRs in children over time with consideration for demographics and parental asthma history. METHODS: Data from 9 US birth cohorts were pooled into 1 population covering the period from 1980 to 2017. The outcome was earliest parental report of a doctor diagnosis of asthma. IRs per 1,000 person-years were calculated. RESULTS: The racial/ethnic backgrounds of the 6,283 children studied were as follows: 55% European American (EA), 25.5% African American (AA), 9.5% Mexican-Hispanic American (MA) and 8.5% Caribbean-Hispanic American (CA). The average follow-up was 10.4 years (SD = 8.5 years; median = 8.4 years), totaling 65,291 person-years, with 1789 asthma diagnoses yielding a crude IR of 27.5 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI = 26.3-28.8). Age-specific rates were highest among children aged 0 to 4 years, notably from 1995 to 1999, with a decline in EA and MA children in 2000 to 2004 followed by a decline in AA and CA children in 2010 to 2014. Parental asthma history was associated with statistically significantly increased rates. IRs were similar and higher in AA and CA children versus lower but similar in EA and MA children. The differential rates by sex from birth through adolescence principally resulted from a decline in rates among males but relatively stable rates among females. CONCLUSIONS: US childhood asthma IRs varied dramatically by age, sex, parental asthma history, race/ethnicity, and calendar year. Higher rates in the 0- to 4-year-olds group, particularly among AA/CA males with a parental history of asthma, as well as changes in rates over time and by demographic factors, suggest that asthma is driven by complex interactions between genetic susceptibility and variation in time-dependent environmental and social factors.

EAACI Biologicals Guidelines-Recommendations for severe asthma.

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with dupilumab for severe asthma: A systematic review of the EAACI guidelines-Recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma.

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor α, is approved as add-on maintenance treatment for inadequately controlled type 2 severe asthma. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled severe asthma. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Three RCTs including 2735 subjects >12 years old and 24-52 weeks of follow-up were included. Dupilumab reduced with high certainty severe asthma exacerbations (Incidence rate ratio 0.51; 95% CI 0.45-0.59) and the percentage use of oral corticosteroid use (mean difference (MD) -28.2 mg/d; 95% CI -40.7 to -15.7). Asthma control (ACQ-5), quality of life (AQLQ) and rescue medication use [puffs/d] improved, without reaching the minimal important clinical difference: ACQ-5 MD -0.28 (95% CI -0.39 to -0.17); AQLQ MD +0.28 (95% CI 0.20-0.37); and rescue medication MD -0.35 (95% CI -0.73 to +0.02). FEV1 increased (MD +0.15; 95% CI +0.11 to +0.18) (moderate certainty). There was an increased rate of dupilumab-related adverse events (AEs) (moderate certainty) and of drug-related serious AEs (low certainty). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus standard therapy was 464 000$/QALY (moderate certainty). More data on long-term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab) for severe eosinophilic asthma. A systematic review for the EAACI Guidelines - recommendations on the use of biologicals in severe asthma.

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV1 , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV1 . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.

NIAID, NIEHS, NHLBI, and MCAN Workshop Report: The indoor environment and childhood asthma-implications for home environmental intervention in asthma prevention and management.

Environmental exposures have been recognized as critical in the initiation and exacerbation of asthma, one of the most common chronic childhood diseases. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and Merck Childhood Asthma Network sponsored a joint workshop to discuss the current state of science with respect to the indoor environment and its effects on the development and morbidity of childhood asthma. The workshop included US and international experts with backgrounds in allergy/allergens, immunology, asthma, environmental health, environmental exposures and pollutants, epidemiology, public health, and bioinformatics. Workshop participants provided new insights into the biologic properties of indoor exposures, indoor exposure assessment, and exposure reduction techniques. This informed a primary focus of the workshop: to critically review trials and research relevant to the prevention or control of asthma through environmental intervention. The participants identified important limitations and gaps in scientific methodologies and knowledge and proposed and prioritized areas for future research. The group reviewed socioeconomic and structural challenges to changing environmental exposure and offered recommendations for creative study design to overcome these challenges in trials to improve asthma management. The recommendations of this workshop can serve as guidance for future research in the study of the indoor environment and on environmental interventions as they pertain to the prevention and management of asthma and airway allergies.

Virus/Allergen Interaction in Asthma Exacerbation.

Allergy and viral respiratory infections have long been recognized as two of the most important risk factors for exacerbations of asthma. These observations have raised questions regarding potential interactions between these two important risk factors. For example, does allergy diminish the antiviral response, thereby promoting exacerbations of asthma? Alternately, do viral respiratory infections potentiate ongoing allergic inflammation in the airway? The answers to these questions are likely to have implications regarding the prevention and treatment of exacerbations of asthma. This article reviews that clinical evidence linking viral infections and allergy to exacerbations of asthma, reviews potential interactions between these two risk factors, and discusses possible application of new insights in virus/allergen interactions to the prevention and treatment of exacerbations of asthma.

Evidence for a causal relationship between allergic sensitization and rhinovirus wheezing in early life.

RATIONALE: Aeroallergen sensitization and virus-induced wheezing are risk factors for asthma development during early childhood, but the temporal developmental sequence between them is incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To define the developmental relationship between aeroallergen sensitization and virus-induced wheezing. METHODS: A total of 285 children at high risk for allergic disease and asthma were followed prospectively from birth. The timing and etiology of viral respiratory wheezing illnesses were determined, and aeroallergen sensitization was assessed annually for the first 6 years of life. The relationships between these events were assessed using a longitudinal multistate Markov model. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Children who were sensitized to aeroallergens had greater risk of developing viral wheeze than nonsensitized children (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.1). Allergic sensitization led to an increased risk of wheezing illnesses caused by human rhinovirus (HRV) but not respiratory syncytial virus. The absolute risk of sensitized children developing viral wheeze was greatest at 1 year of age; however, the relative risk was consistently increased at every age assessed. In contrast, viral wheeze did not lead to increased risk of subsequent allergic sensitization (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.50-1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective, repeated characterization of a birth cohort demonstrated that allergic sensitization precedes HRV wheezing and that the converse is not true. This sequential relationship and the plausible mechanisms by which allergic sensitization can lead to more severe HRV-induced lower respiratory illnesses support a causal role for allergic sensitization in this developmental pathway. Therefore, therapeutics aimed at preventing allergic sensitization may modify virus-induced wheezing and the development of asthma.

Retention strategies and predictors of attrition in an urban pediatric asthma study.

BACKGROUND: The Urban Environment and Childhood Asthma (URECA) study is a multicenter prospective birth cohort study designed to examine factors related to the development of childhood asthma and allergies in an inner-city population. The retention of these participants has been challenging due to high mobility, inconsistent phone service, custody issues, and stressful life situations. PURPOSE: In this article, we describe the specific retention challenges we encountered during the first 2 years of follow-up in URECA and the strategies we utilized to address them. We also examine how selected maternal characteristics and other factors are related to retention and missed study visits. METHODS: Strategies implemented to engage participants included: collecting updated and alternative contact information, after-hours phone calls to participants, culturally competent staff, flexible study event scheduling, clinic visit transportation, quarterly newsletters, retention events, drop-in home visits, and cell phone reimbursements. An internally developed web-based data management system enabled close monitoring by site teams and the coordinating center. The rate of deactivations was calculated using survival analysis. Characteristics of active and deactivated participants were compared using the chi-squared test with a Cochran-Mantel - Haenszel adjustment for study site. The proportion of missed visits of the total expected in the first 2 years was calculated and compared by family characteristics using an ANOVA model or a trend test controlling for study site. All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.1 (Cary, NC). RESULTS: The 2-year retention rate was 89%. Participation in the first study event predicted subsequent engagement in study activities. Mothers who did not complete the first visit were more likely to miss future events (46.1% vs. 8.9%, p<0.0001) and to be deactivated (38.5% vs. 4.5%, p<0.0001). Mothers under 18 years of age were more likely to leave the study compared to older mothers (22.7% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.02). Also, mothers who were married missed fewer events than those not married (8.8% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.01). In addition, deactivations were more common when the child had entered daycare by 3 months of age (10.9% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.05). LIMITATIONS: The URECA population is predominantly minority, thus our findings might not be generalizable to other populations. Furthermore, we may not be able to observe the effects that might exist in a more diverse population. For example, 86% of the mothers are unmarried, making it difficult to reliably examine the effect of marital status. CONCLUSION: In research, successfully engaging and retaining participants is essential for achieving the study objectives. Identifying factors related to missed visits and deactivations are the initial step in recognizing the potential at-risk participants and can enable the design of targeted strategies to retain participants.