Clinical response and on-treatment clinical remission with tezepelumab in a broad population of patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma: results over 2 years from the NAVIGATOR and DESTINATION studies.

BACKGROUND: In asthma, clinical response is characterized by disease improvement with treatment, whereas clinical remission is characterized by long-term disease stabilization with or without ongoing treatment. The proportion of patients receiving tezepelumab who responded to treatment and those who achieved on-treatment clinical remission was assessed in the NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) and DESTINATION (NCT03706079) studies of severe, uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: NAVIGATOR and DESTINATION were phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies; DESTINATION was an extension of NAVIGATOR. Complete clinical response was defined as achieving all of the following: ≥50% reduction in exacerbations versus the previous year, improvements in pre-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of ≥100 mL or ≥5%, improvements in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-6 score of ≥0.5 and physicians' assessment of asthma improvement. On-treatment clinical remission was defined as an ACQ-6 total score ≤1.5, stable lung function (pre-BD FEV1 >95% of baseline) and no exacerbations or use of oral corticosteroids during the time periods assessed. RESULTS: Higher proportions of tezepelumab than placebo recipients achieved complete clinical response over weeks 0-52 (46% versus 24%; OR: 2.83 [95% CI: 2.10-3.82]), and on-treatment clinical remission over weeks 0-52 (28.5% versus 21.9%; OR: 1.44 [95% CI: 0.95-2.19]) and weeks >52-104 (33.5% versus 26.7%; OR: 1.44 [95% CI: 0.97-2.14]). Tezepelumab recipients who achieved on-treatment clinical remission versus complete clinical response at week 52 had better preserved lung function and lower inflammatory biomarkers at baseline, and fewer exacerbations in the 12 months before the study. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, tezepelumab treatment was associated with an increased likelihood of achieving complete clinical response and on-treatment clinical remission compared with placebo. Both are clinically important outcomes but may be driven by different patient characteristics.

Long-term safety, durability of response, cessation and switching of biologics.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe asthma patients suffer from decreased quality of life, and increased asthma symptoms, exacerbations, hospitalizations, and risk of death. Biologics have revolutionized treatment for severe asthma. However, with multiple biologic agents now available, clinicians must consider initial selection the long-term effectiveness of biologics. Additionally, patients have overlapping eligibilities and clinicians may consider switching between biologics for improved response. Finally, careful assessment of biologics cessation is needed for severe asthma patients who depend on these add-on therapies for asthma control. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence for long-term durability and safety varies by biologic agent. In general, initial benefits noted from these agents (ex. exacerbation reduction) is, at minimum, sustained with long term use. Rates of adverse events and serious adverse events, including those requiring cessation of a biologics are low with long term use. Further studies are needed to understand the development of antidrug antibodies but currently their prevalence rates are low. Adverse events and insufficient efficacy are common reasons for biologic cessation or switching. Discontinuation maybe associated with waning of benefits but can be considered in certain situations. Biologic switching can be associated with improved asthma control. SUMMARY: Biologics are safe and effective long-term therapies for the management of asthma. Discontinuation must be carefully considered and if possible avoided. Reasons for insufficient efficacy must be evaluated and if needed, biologic switching should be considered.

Association between asthma and periodontitis: A case-control analysis of risk factors, related medications, and allergic responses.

AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the association between asthma, related allergies and medication use, and the presence and severity of periodontitis among individuals at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry. METHODS: Employing a case-control design, the study analyzed data from 892 patients, half with asthma and half without asthma. Data collection included demographics, asthma history, medication use, allergies, and periodontal examination outcomes, including probing pocket depth (PPD), mobility, furcation involvement, and radiographic bone loss (RBL). Logistic regression models assessed the relationship between asthma and periodontitis, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Asthmatic patients exhibited significantly lower odds of periodontitis (OR = 0.10, p < .001) and were less likely to present with advanced stages (OR = 0.23, p < .001) and grades of the disease (OR = 0.31, p < .001) compared to non-asthmatic patients. The study also found a higher proportion of females in the asthmatic group (67% vs. 51.8%, p < .001). Smoking was identified as a significant factor associated with periodontitis in patients with asthma, with former smokers at more than double the odds (OR = 2.28, p = .035) and current smokers at a slightly lower yet significant odds (OR = 1.87, p = .050). Additionally, asthmatic patients on adrenergic inhalers had an increased likelihood of developing periodontitis (OR = 1.76, p = .045). Allergies to codeine and latex were associated with higher odds of periodontitis, with ORs of 3.41 and 6.09, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma was found to be associated with lower odds of periodontitis. However, this association appears to be modified by smoking habits and the use of certain asthma medications, which are related to an increased likelihood of periodontitis among asthmatic patients.

HuR-Targeted Inhibition Impairs Th2 Proinflammatory Responses in Asthmatic CD4+ T Cells.

RNA-binding protein HuR (ELAVL1) is a master regulator of gene expression in human pathophysiology. Its dysregulation plays an important role in many diseases. We hypothesized that HuR plays an important role in Th2 inflammation in asthma in both mouse and human. To address this, we used a model of airway inflammation in a T cell-specific knockout mouse model, distal lck-Cre HuRfl/fl, as well as small molecule inhibitors in human peripheral blood-derived CD4+ T cells. Peripheral CD4+ T cells were isolated from 26 healthy control subjects and 45 asthmatics (36 type 2 high and 9 non-type 2 high, determined by blood eosinophil levels and fraction of exhaled NO). Our mouse data showed conditional ablation of HuR in T cell-abrogated Th2 differentiation, cytokine production, and lung inflammation. Studies using human T cells showed that HuR protein levels in CD4+ T cells were significantly higher in asthmatics compared with healthy control subjects. The expression and secretion of Th2 cytokines were significantly higher in asthmatics compared with control subjects. AMP-activated protein kinase activator treatment reduced the expression of several cytokines in both type 2 high and non-type 2 high asthma groups. However, the effects of CMLD-2 (a HuR-specific inhibitor) were more specific to endotype-defining cytokines in type 2 high asthmatics. Taken together, these data suggest that HuR plays a permissive role in both allergen and non-allergen-driven airway inflammation by regulating key genes, and that interfering with its function may be a novel method of asthma treatment.

Questions in Mild Asthma: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: Patients with mild asthma are believed to represent the majority of patients with asthma. Disease-associated risks such as exacerbations, lung function decline, and death have been understudied in this patient population. There have been no prior efforts from major societies to describe research needs in mild asthma. Methods: A multidisciplinary, diverse group of 24 international experts reviewed the literature, identified knowledge gaps, and provided research recommendations relating to mild asthma definition, pathophysiology, and management across all age groups. Research needs were also investigated from a patient perspective, generated in conjunction with patients with asthma, caregivers, and stakeholders. Of note, this project is not a systematic review of the evidence and is not a clinical practice guideline. Results: There are multiple unmet needs in research on mild asthma driven by large knowledge gaps in all areas. Specifically, there is an immediate need for a robust mild asthma definition and an improved understanding of its pathophysiology and management strategies across all age groups. Future research must factor in patient perspectives. Conclusions: Despite significant advances in severe asthma, there remain innumerable research areas requiring urgent attention in mild asthma. An important first step is to determine a better definition that will accurately reflect the heterogeneity and risks noted in this group. This research statement highlights the topics of research that are of the highest priority. Furthermore, it firmly advocates the need for engagement with patient groups and for more support for research in this field.

Airway microbiota and immune mediator relationships differ in obesity and asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma and obesity are both complex conditions characterized by chronic inflammation, and obesity-related severe asthma has been associated with differences in the microbiome. However, whether the airway microbiome and microbiota-immune response relationships differ between obese persons with or without nonsevere asthma is unestablished. OBJECTIVE: We compared the airway microbiome and microbiota-immune mediator relationships between obese and nonobese subjects, with and without mild-moderate asthma. METHODS: We performed cross-sectional analyses of the airway (induced sputum) microbiome and cytokine profiles from blood and sputum using 16S ribosomal RNA gene and internal transcribed spacer region sequencing to profile bacteria and fungi, and multiplex immunoassays. Analysis tools included QIIME 2, linear discriminant analysis effect size (aka LEfSe), Piphillin, and Sparse inverse covariance estimation for ecological association inference (aka SPIEC-EASI). RESULTS: Obesity, irrespective of asthma status, was associated with significant differences in sputum bacterial community structure and composition (unweighted UniFrac permutational analysis of variance, P = .02), including a higher relative abundance of Prevotella, Gemella, and Streptococcus species. Among subjects with asthma, additional differences in sputum bacterial composition and fungal richness were identified between obese and nonobese individuals. Correlation network analyses demonstrated differences between obese and nonobese asthma in relationships between cytokine mediators, and these together with specific airway bacteria involving blood PAI-1, sputum IL-1ß, GM-CSF, IL-8, TNF-α, and several Prevotella species. CONCLUSION: Obesity itself is associated with an altered sputum microbiome, which further differs in those with mild-moderate asthma. The distinct differences in airway microbiota and immune marker relationships in obese asthma suggest potential involvement of airway microbes that may affect mechanisms or outcomes of obese asthma.

Asthma exacerbations are associated with a decline in lung function: a longitudinal population-based study.

RATIONALE: Progressive lung function (LF) decline in patients with asthma contributes to worse outcomes. Asthma exacerbations are thought to contribute to this decline; however, evidence is limited with mixed results. METHODS: This historical cohort study of a broad asthma patient population in the Optimum Patient Care Research Database, examined asthma patients with 3+eligible post-18th birthday peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) records (primary analysis) or records of forced expiratory flow in 1 s (FEV1) (sensitivity analysis). Adjusted linear growth models tested the association between mean annual exacerbation rate (AER) and LF trajectory. RESULTS: We studied 1 09 182 patients with follow-up ranging from 5 to 50 years, of which 75 280 had data for all variables included in the adjusted analyses. For each additional exacerbation, an estimated additional -1.34 L/min PEF per year (95% CI -1.23 to -1.50) were lost. Patients with AERs >2/year and aged 18-24 years at baseline lost an additional -5.95 L/min PEF/year (95% CI -8.63 to -3.28) compared with those with AER 0. These differences in the rate of LF decline between AER groups became progressively smaller as age at baseline increased. The results using FEV1 were consistent with the above. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study is the largest nationwide cohort of its kind and demonstrates that asthma exacerbations are associated with faster LF decline. This was more prominent in younger patients but was evident in older patients when it was related to lower starting LF, suggesting a persistent deteriorating phenotype that develops in adulthood over time. Earlier intervention with appropriate management in younger patients with asthma could be of value to prevent excessive LF decline.

Patterns of rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a clinical encounter for an asthma exacerbation.

BACKGROUND: A "window of opportunity" has been proposed where anti-inflammatory therapy administration in response to symptoms could prevent exacerbation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a severe asthma exacerbation serious enough to require a face-to-face clinical encounter. METHODS: Merative MarketScan research databases (US administrative claims 2011 to 2017) were analyzed for patients aged ≥4 years, with an asthma diagnosis code, who filled short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) and Global Initiative for Asthma Steps 3 to 5 maintenance therapies. Patients were indexed on a random SABA claim and had 12 months' continuous health plan eligibility pre- and post-index. Serious exacerbations were severe exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids prescribed from an outpatient clinic, urgent care or emergency department, or hospitalization for asthma. SABA and maintenance claims 30 days pre- and post-event were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 319,342 patients (30% children 4 to 11 years; 70% adults or adolescents ≥12 years), 27.2% of children and 16.8% of adolescents or adults experienced ≥ 1 serious exacerbation (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.85 [95% confidence interval, 1.81-1.88]). In the 30 days pre-event, 42.6% filled ≥1 SABA (children: 44.3%; adolescents or adults: 41.5%; OR, 1.12 [1.09-1.16]) and 57.4% filled maintenance (children: 59.0%; adolescents or adults: 56.3%; OR, 1.12 [1.08-1.15]). In the 30 days post-event, 61.4% filled SABA (children: 69.7%; adolescents or adults: 55.6%; OR, 1.84 [1.78-1.90]) and 94.8% filled maintenance (children: 98.6%; adolescents or adults: 92.2%; OR, 6.09 [5.45-6.81]). CONCLUSION: Many patients treated as having moderate-to-severe asthma escalate SABA claims before a serious exacerbation, but approximately 40% have no anti-inflammatory maintenance fill, highlighting a "window of opportunity" to prevent exacerbations using inhaled corticosteroids concomitantly with SABA as rescue.

Expert Consensus on SABA Use for Asthma Clinical Decision-Making: A Delphi Approach.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A modified Delphi process was undertaken to provide a US expert-led consensus to guide clinical action on short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA) use. This comprised an online survey (Phase 1), forum discussion and statement development (Phase 2), and statement adjudication (Phase 3). RECENT FINDINGS: In Phase 1 (n = 100 clinicians), 12% routinely provided patients with ≥4 SABA prescriptions/year, 73% solicited SABA use frequency at every patient visit, and 21% did not consult asthma guidelines/expert reports. Phase 3 experts (n = 8) reached consensus (median Likert score, interquartile range) that use of ≥3 SABA canisters/year is associated with increased risk of exacerbation and asthma-related death (5, 4.75-5); SABA use history should be solicited at every patient visit (5, 4.75-5); usage patterns over time, not absolute thresholds, should guide response to SABA overuse (5, 4.5-5). Future asthma guidelines should include clear recommendations regarding SABA usage, using expert-led thresholds for action.

Impact of mepolizumab in patients with high-burden severe asthma within a managed care population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the real-world impact of mepolizumab on the incidence of asthma exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and asthma exacerbation-related costs in patients with high-burden severe asthma. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Databases in patients with high-burden severe asthma (≥80th percentile of total healthcare expenditure and/or significant comorbidity burden). Patients were ≥12 years of age upon mepolizumab initiation (index date November 1, 2015-December 31, 2018) and had ≥2 mepolizumab administrations during the 6 months post-index. Asthma exacerbation frequency (primary outcome), use of OCS (secondary outcome), and asthma exacerbation-related costs (exploratory outcome) were assessed during the 12 months pre-index (baseline) and post-index (follow-up). RESULTS: In total, 281 patients were analyzed. Mepolizumab significantly reduced the proportion of patients with any asthma exacerbation (P < 0.001) or exacerbations requiring hospitalization (P = 0.004) in the follow-up versus baseline period. The mean number of exacerbations decreased from 2.5 to 1.5 events/patient/year (relative reduction: 40.0%; P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with ≥1 OCS claim also decreased significantly from 94.0% to 81.9% (relative reduction: 12.9%; P < 0.001), corresponding to a decrease from 6.6 to 4.7 claims/person/year (P < 0.001). Of the 264 patients with ≥1 OCS claim during baseline, 191 (72.3%) showed a decrease in mean daily OCS use by ≥50% in 117 patients (61.3%). Total asthma exacerbation-related costs were significantly lower after mepolizumab was initiated (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mepolizumab reduced exacerbation frequency, OCS use and asthma exacerbation-related costs in patients with high-cost severe asthma. Mepolizumab provides real-world benefits to patients, healthcare systems and payers.

Mometasone or Tiotropium in Mild Asthma with a Low Sputum Eosinophil Level.

BACKGROUND: In many patients with mild, persistent asthma, the percentage of eosinophils in sputum is less than 2% (low eosinophil level). The appropriate treatment for these patients is unknown. METHODS: In this 42-week, double-blind, crossover trial, we assigned 295 patients who were at least 12 years of age and who had mild, persistent asthma to receive mometasone (an inhaled glucocorticoid), tiotropium (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist), or placebo. The patients were categorized according to the sputum eosinophil level (<2% or ≥2%). The primary outcome was the response to mometasone as compared with placebo and to tiotropium as compared with placebo among patients with a low sputum eosinophil level who had a prespecified differential response to one of the trial agents. The response was determined according to a hierarchical composite outcome that incorporated treatment failure, asthma control days, and the forced expiratory volume in 1 second; a two-sided P value of less than 0.025 denoted statistical significance. A secondary outcome was a comparison of results in patients with a high sputum eosinophil level and those with a low level. RESULTS: A total of 73% of the patients had a low eosinophil level; of these patients, 59% had a differential response to a trial agent. However, there was no significant difference in the response to mometasone or tiotropium, as compared with placebo. Among the patients with a low eosinophil level who had a differential treatment response, 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48 to 66) had a better response to mometasone, and 43% (95% CI, 34 to 52) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.14). In contrast 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) had a better response to tiotropium, whereas 40% (95% CI, 32 to 49) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.029). Among patients with a high eosinophil level, the response to mometasone was significantly better than the response to placebo (74% vs. 26%) but the response to tiotropium was not (57% vs. 43%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with mild, persistent asthma had a low sputum eosinophil level and had no significant difference in their response to either mometasone or tiotropium as compared with placebo. These data provide equipoise for a clinically directive trial to compare an inhaled glucocorticoid with other treatments in patients with a low eosinophil level. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; SIENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02066298.).

Step-Up Therapy in Black Children and Adults with Poorly Controlled Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity from asthma is disproportionately higher among black patients than among white patients, and black patients constitute the minority of participants in trials informing treatment. Data indicate that patients with inadequately controlled asthma benefit more from addition of a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) than from increased glucocorticoids; however, these data may not be informative for treatment in black patients. METHODS: We conducted two prospective, randomized, double-blind trials: one involving children and the other involving adolescents and adults. In both trials, the patients had at least one grandparent who identified as black and had asthma that was inadequately controlled with low-dose inhaled glucocorticoids. We compared combinations of therapy, which included the addition of a LABA (salmeterol) to an inhaled glucocorticoid (fluticasone propionate), a step-up to double to quintuple the dose of fluticasone, or both. The treatments were compared with the use of a composite measure that evaluated asthma exacerbations, asthma-control days, and lung function; data were stratified according to genotypic African ancestry. RESULTS: When quintupling the dose of fluticasone (to 250 µg twice a day) was compared with adding salmeterol (50 µg twice a day) and doubling the fluticasone (to 100 µg twice a day), a superior response occurred in 46% of the children with quintupling the fluticasone and in 46% of the children with doubling the fluticasone and adding salmeterol (P = 0.99). In contrast, more adolescents and adults had a superior response to added salmeterol than to an increase in fluticasone (salmeterol-low-dose fluticasone vs. medium-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 28% [P = 0.003]; salmeterol-medium-dose fluticasone vs. high-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 31% [P = 0.02]). Neither the degree of African ancestry nor baseline biomarkers predicted a superior response to specific treatments. The increased dose of inhaled glucocorticoids was associated with a decrease in the ratio of urinary cortisol to creatinine in children younger than 8 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to black adolescents and adults, almost half the black children with poorly controlled asthma had a superior response to an increase in the dose of an inhaled glucocorticoid and almost half had a superior response to the addition of a LABA. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BARD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01967173.).

Adrenal function recovery after durable oral corticosteroid sparing with benralizumab in the PONENTE study.

BACKGROUND: Oral corticosteroid (OCS) dependence among patients with severe eosinophilic asthma can cause adverse outcomes, including adrenal insufficiency. PONENTE's OCS reduction phase showed that, following benralizumab initiation, 91.5% of patients eliminated corticosteroids or achieved a final dosage ≤5 mg·day-1 (median (range) 0.0 (0.0-40.0) mg). METHODS: The maintenance phase assessed the durability of corticosteroid reduction and further adrenal function recovery. For ∼6 months, patients continued benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks without corticosteroids or with the final dosage achieved during the reduction phase. Investigators could prescribe corticosteroids for asthma exacerbations or increase daily dosages for asthma control deteriorations. Outcomes included changes in daily OCS dosage, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-6 and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), as well as adrenal status, asthma exacerbations and adverse events. RESULTS: 598 patients entered PONENTE; 563 (94.1%) completed the reduction phase and entered the maintenance phase. From the end of reduction to the end of maintenance, the median (range) OCS dosage was unchanged (0.0 (0.0-40.0) mg), 3.2% (n=18/563) of patients experienced daily dosage increases, the mean ACQ-6 score decreased from 1.26 to 1.18 and 84.5% (n=476/563) of patients were exacerbation free. The mean SGRQ improvement (-19.65 points) from baseline to the end of maintenance indicated substantial quality-of-life improvements. Of patients entering the maintenance phase with adrenal insufficiency, 32.4% (n=104/321) demonstrated an improvement in adrenal function. Adverse events were consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients successfully maintained maximal OCS reduction while achieving improved asthma control with few exacerbations and maintaining or recovering adrenal function.

Benralizumab improves symptoms of patients with severe, eosinophilic asthma with a diagnosis of nasal polyposis.

BACKGROUND: Clinically meaningful improvement in the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) was observed in patients with severe, eosinophilic asthma, and nasal polyposis (NP) treated with benralizumab in the ANDHI trial. A post hoc assessment of the effects of benralizumab on SNOT-22 response and asthma efficacy measures in these patients was conducted for further characterization of the efficacy and safety of benralizumab for patients with severe asthma and NP. METHODS: Adults with severe, eosinophilic asthma who had experienced ≥2 prior-year exacerbations despite high-dosage inhaled corticosteroid plus additional controller[s] were randomized to 24 weeks of benralizumab or placebo. Patients with physician-diagnosed chronic rhinosinusitis with NP of any severity ongoing at baseline who consented to participate were included in the current ANDHI NP substudy population. Effect on NP symptoms was assessed by the SNOT-22, with an improvement of at least 8.9 defined as clinically significant (responder). Effects on chronic asthma outcomes were assessed by means of annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AER), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1 ), and Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6). All p-values were nominal. RESULTS: Of the ANDHI population (n = 656), 23% (n = 153) participated in the NP substudy (n = 96 benralizumab; n = 57 placebo). Patients were 50% female, with mean age of 53 years, had prior-year AER = 3.3; mean pre-bronchodilator FEV1  = 55% predicted; and median blood eosinophil count â€‹= 510 cells/µl. For patients with high baseline SNOT-22 scores (>30), benralizumab treatment improved symptoms of NP as measured by SNOT-22 from baseline to Week 24 compared with placebo (Week 24: -10.44 [p = .0176]). Percentage of responders to SNOT-22 was greater for benralizumab vs. placebo (71.3% vs. 45.5%; p = .0036), and effect was enhanced for patients with high baseline SNOT-22 scores (>30). A 69% reduction vs. placebo in annualized AER (0.77 vs. 2.47; p < .0001) and greater clinically meaningful improvements from baseline in SGRQ total score (-16.7), FEV1 (+0.32 L), and ACQ-6 (-0.88) were observed (p < .0001). Benralizumab was well-tolerated. Frequency of adverse events (AEs) was similar for benralizumab (76.0%) and placebo (73.7%) groups. Most common AEs (frequency ≥5%) reported at a greater frequency in benralizumab vs. placebo included headache, sinusitis, pyrexia, and influenza. CONCLUSIONS: These substudy data from ANDHI demonstrated the efficacy profile of benralizumab for patients with severe, eosinophilic asthma and NP, with improvement in SNOT-22 and asthma outcomes.

Allergic and eosinophilic asthma in the era of biomarkers and biologics: similarities, differences and misconceptions.

OBJECTIVE: Severe asthma is associated with substantial personal and economic burden; maintaining disease control is the key management goal. Increased understanding of asthma heterogeneity and development of type 2 (T2)-targeting biologics has substantially advanced disease management and outcomes; however, despite both being driven by T2 inflammation, allergic and eosinophilic asthma have different treatment recommendations. We sought to better understand the similarities and differences between allergic and eosinophilic asthma and highlight where misconceptions may arise. DATA SOURCES: Published articles, pivotal trials, post hoc analyses, and asthma clinical guidelines sourced from PubMed. STUDY SELECTIONS: Sources reporting allergic and eosinophilic asthma classifications, disease mechanisms, and biomarkers associated with treatment response. RESULTS: This review highlights that severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma are both driven by T2 inflammation with eosinophils playing a cardinal role. Despite this overlap, treatment recommendations differ based on asthma classification. T2 cytokine gene expression is a reasonably well-established research tool, but not a well-established biomarker in clinical practice, unlike blood eosinophil counts, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and immunoglobulin E; the clinical relevance of immunoglobulin E as a predictive biomarker remains unclear. CONCLUSION: Asthma classifications that can be easily characterized at patient level to ensure accurate diagnosis, predict disease trajectory, and treatment response are required. The current dichotomy of allergic and eosinophilic asthma classifications is likely too simplistic, given the similar eosinophil-mediated disease pathophysiology in both classifications. Our results provide future directions to guide clinically meaningful interpretation of asthma endophenotypes, which may improve understanding of severe asthma characterization and aid future advances in defining responders more precisely with personalized medicine approaches.

Biologic use and outcomes among adults with severe asthma treated by US subspecialists.

BACKGROUND: Multiple biologics are now available for severe asthma (SA) treatment and can improve outcomes for patients. However, few available data describe the real-world use and effectiveness of multiple approved biologics, including biologic switching, among subspecialists in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate biologic use and associated exacerbation outcomes in a large cohort of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For enrolled patients, sites report asthma exacerbations and medication use starting 12 months before enrollment. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021, biologic use and exacerbation outcomes before and after biologic initiation are described. RESULTS: Among 2793 enrolled patients, 66% (n = 1832) were receiving biologics. The most used biologic (> 1 biologic use per patient allowed) was omalizumab (47%), followed by benralizumab (27%), mepolizumab (26%), dupilumab (18%), and reslizumab (3%). Overall, 16% of patients had biologic switches, 13% had stops, and 89% had ongoing biologic use. Patients starting and switching biologics experienced a 58% (1.80 vs 0.76 per patient-year) and 49% (1.47 vs 0.75 per patient-year) reduction in exacerbations, respectively (both P < .001), with a numerically greater reduction observed among those starting non-anti-immunoglobulin E biologics compared with anti-immunoglobulin E. CONCLUSION: Real-world starting and switching of biologic therapies for SA were associated with meaningful reductions in exacerbations. With increasing biologic options available, individualized approaches to therapy may improve patient outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03373045.

Asthma and coronavirus disease 2019-related outcomes in hospitalized patients: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Several chronic conditions have been associated with a higher risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including asthma. However, there are conflicting conclusions regarding risk of severe disease in this population. OBJECTIVE: To understand the impact of asthma on COVID-19 outcomes in a cohort of hospitalized patients and whether there is any association between asthma severity and worse outcomes. METHODS: We identified hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with confirmatory polymerase chain reaction testing with (n = 183) and without asthma (n = 1319) using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes between March 1 and December 30, 2020. We determined asthma maintenance medications, pulmonary function tests, highest historical absolute eosinophil count, and immunoglobulin E. Primary outcomes included death, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Analysis was adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, and timing of illness in the pandemic. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, we found no difference in our primary outcomes between patients with asthma and patients without asthma. However, in adjusted analyses, patients with asthma were more likely to have mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-2.44; P = .04), ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.09-2.29; P = .02), longer hospital length of stay (risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.09-1.55; P < .003), and higher mortality (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.33; P = .04) compared with the non-asthma cohort. Inhaled corticosteroid use and eosinophilic phenotype were not associated with considerabledifferences. Interestingly, patients with moderate asthma had worse outcomes whereas patients with severe asthma did not. CONCLUSION: Asthma was associated with severe COVID-19 after controlling for other factors.

Severe asthma exacerbation rates are increased among female, Black, Hispanic, and younger adult patients: results from the US CHRONICLE study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical outcomes in patients with severe asthma (SA) by common sociodemographic determinants of health: sex, race, ethnicity, and age. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an observational study of subspecialist-treated, United States adults with SA receiving biologic therapy, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2020, clinical characteristics and asthma outcomes were assessed by sex, race, ethnicity, age at enrollment, and age at diagnosis. Treating subspecialists reported exacerbations, exacerbation-related emergency department visits, and asthma hospitalizations from 12 months before enrollment through the latest data collection. Patients completed the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Test at enrollment. RESULTS: Among 1884 enrolled patients, the majority were female (69%), reported White race (75%), non-Hispanic ethnicity (69%), and were diagnosed with asthma as adults (60%). Female, Black, Hispanic, and younger patients experienced higher annualized rates of exacerbations that were statistically significant compared with male, White, non-Hispanic, and older patients, respectively. Black, Hispanic, and younger patients also experienced higher rates of asthma hospitalizations. Female and Black patients exhibited poorer symptom control and poorer health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary, real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated adults with SA, female sex, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and younger age were important determinants of health, potentially attributable to physiologic and social factors. Knowledge of these disparities in SA disease burden among subspecialist-treated patients may help optimize care for all patients.Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .

Phenotyping, Precision Medicine, and Asthma.

The traditional one-size-fits all approach based on asthma severity is archaic. Asthma is a heterogenous syndrome rather than a single disease entity. Studies evaluating observable characteristics called phenotypes have elucidated this heterogeneity. Asthma clusters demonstrate overlapping features, are generally stable over time and are reproducible. What the identification of clusters may have failed to do, is move the needle of precision medicine meaningfully in asthma. This may be related to the lack of a straightforward and clinically meaningful way to apply what we have learned about asthma clusters. Clusters are based on both clinical factors and biomarkers. The use of biomarkers is slowly gaining popularity, but phenotyping based on biomarkers is generally greatly underutilized even in subspecialty care. Biomarkers are more often used to evaluate type 2 (T2) inflammatory signatures and eosinophils (sputum and blood), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and serum total and specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E reliably characterize the underlying inflammatory pathways. Biomarkers perform variably and clinicians must be familiar with their advantages and disadvantages to accurately apply them in clinical care. In addition, it is increasingly clear that clinical features are critical in understanding not only phenotypic characterization but in predicting response to therapy and future risk of poor outcomes. Strategies for asthma management will need to leverage our knowledge of biomarkers and clinical features to create composite scores and risk prediction tools that are clinically applicable. Despite significant progress, many questions remain, and more work is required to accurately identify non-T2 biomarkers. Adoption of phenotyping and more consistent use of biomarkers is needed, and we should continue to encourage this incorporation into practice.

Resident alveolar macrophage-derived vesicular SOCS3 dampens allergic airway inflammation.

Resident alveolar macrophages (AMs) suppress allergic inflammation in murine asthma models. Previously we reported that resident AMs can blunt inflammatory signaling in alveolar epithelial cells (ECs) by transcellular delivery of suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 (SOCS3) within extracellular vesicles (EVs). Here we examined the role of vesicular SOCS3 secretion as a mechanism by which AMs restrain allergic inflammatory responses in airway ECs. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) levels of SOCS3 were reduced in asthmatics and in allergen-challenged mice. Ex vivo SOCS3 secretion was reduced in AMs from challenged mice and this defect was mimicked by exposing normal AMs to cytokines associated with allergic inflammation. Both AM-derived EVs and synthetic SOCS3 liposomes inhibited the activation of STAT3 and STAT6 as well as cytokine gene expression in ECs challenged with IL-4/IL-13 and house dust mite (HDM) extract. This suppressive effect of EVs was lost when they were obtained from AMs exposed to allergic inflammation-associated cytokines. Finally, inflammatory cell recruitment and cytokine generation in the lungs of OVA-challenged mice were attenuated by intrapulmonary pretreatment with SOCS3 liposomes. Overall, AM secretion of SOCS3 within EVs serves as a brake on airway EC responses during allergic inflammation, but is impaired in asthma. Synthetic liposomes encapsulating SOCS3 can rescue this defect and may serve as a framework for novel therapeutic approaches targeting airway inflammation.