Early Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD and Asthma - A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Many persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma have not received a diagnosis, so their respiratory symptoms remain largely untreated. METHODS: We used a case-finding method to identify adults in the community with respiratory symptoms without diagnosed lung disease. Participants who were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma on spirometry were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether early diagnosis and treatment reduces health care utilization for respiratory illness and improves health outcomes. Participants were assigned to receive the intervention (evaluation by a pulmonologist and an asthma-COPD educator who were instructed to initiate guideline-based care) or usual care by their primary care practitioner. The primary outcome was the annualized rate of participant-initiated health care utilization for respiratory illness. Secondary outcomes included changes from baseline to 1 year in disease-specific quality of life, as assessed with the St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better health status); symptom burden, as assessed with the COPD Assessment Test (CAT; scores range from 0 to 40, with lower scores indicating better health status); and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). RESULTS: Of 38,353 persons interviewed, 595 were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma and 508 underwent randomization: 253 were assigned to the intervention group and 255 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of a primary-outcome event was lower in the intervention group than in the usual-care group (0.53 vs. 1.12 events per person-year; incidence rate ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.63; P<0.001). At 12 months, the SGRQ score was lower than the baseline score by 10.2 points in the intervention group and by 6.8 points in the usual-care group (difference, -3.5 points; 95% CI, -6.0 to -0.9), and the CAT score was lower than the baseline score by 3.8 points and 2.6 points, respectively (difference, -1.3 points; 95% CI, -2.4 to -0.1). The FEV1 increased by 119 ml in the intervention group and by 22 ml in the usual-care group (difference, 94 ml; 95% CI, 50 to 138). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the trial groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial in which a strategy was used to identify adults in the community with undiagnosed asthma or COPD, those who received pulmonologist-directed treatment had less subsequent health care utilization for respiratory illness than those who received usual care. (Funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research; UCAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03148210.).

Airway hyperresponsiveness in asthma: The role of the epithelium.

Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) is a key clinical feature of asthma. The presence of AHR in people with asthma provides the substrate for bronchoconstriction in response to numerous diverse stimuli, contributing to airflow limitation and symptoms including breathlessness, wheeze, and chest tightness. Dysfunctional airway smooth muscle significantly contributes to AHR and is displayed as increased sensitivity to direct pharmacologic bronchoconstrictor stimuli, such as inhaled histamine and methacholine (direct AHR), or to endogenous mediators released by activated airway cells such as mast cells (indirect AHR). Research in in vivo human models has shown that the disrupted airway epithelium plays an important role in driving inflammation that mediates indirect AHR in asthma through the release of cytokines such as thymic stromal lymphopoietin and IL-33. These cytokines upregulate type 2 cytokines promoting airway eosinophilia and induce the release of bronchoconstrictor mediators from mast cells such as histamine, prostaglandin D2, and cysteinyl leukotrienes. While bronchoconstriction is largely due to airway smooth muscle contraction, airway structural changes known as remodeling, likely mediated in part by epithelial-derived mediators, also lead to airflow obstruction and may enhance AHR. In this review, we outline the current knowledge of the role of the airway epithelium in AHR in asthma and its implications on the wider disease. Increased understanding of airway epithelial biology may contribute to better treatment options, particularly in precision medicine.

Real-world biologics response and super-response in the International Severe Asthma Registry cohort.

BACKGROUND: Biologic asthma therapies reduce exacerbations and long-term oral corticosteroids (LTOCS) use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there are limited data on outcomes among patients ineligible for RCTs. Hence, we investigated responsiveness to biologics in a real-world population of adults with severe asthma. METHODS: Adults in the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) with ≥24 weeks of follow-up were grouped into those who did, or did not, initiate biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5/IL5R, anti-IL4/13). Treatment responses were examined across four domains: forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) increase by ≥100 mL, improved asthma control, annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction ≥50%, and any LTOCS dose reduction. Super-response criteria were: FEV1 increase by ≥500 mL, new well-controlled asthma, no exacerbations, and LTOCS cessation or tapering to ≤5 mg/day. RESULTS: 5.3% of ISAR patients met basic RCT inclusion criteria; 2116/8451 started biologics. Biologic initiators had worse baseline impairment than non-initiators, despite having similar biomarker levels. Half or more of initiators had treatment responses: 59% AER reduction, 54% FEV1 increase, 49% improved control, 49% reduced LTOCS, of which 32%, 19%, 30%, and 39%, respectively, were super-responses. Responses/super-responses were more frequent in biologic initiators than in non-initiators; nevertheless, ~40-50% of initiators did not meet response criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with severe asthma are ineligible for RCTs of biologic therapies. Biologics are initiated in patients who have worse baseline impairments than non-initiators despite similar biomarker levels. Although biologic initiators exhibited clinical responses and super-responses in all outcome domains, 40-50% did not meet the response criteria.

Endotyping in ARDS: one step forward in precision medicine.

BACKGROUND: The Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) includes only clinical characteristics. Understanding unique patient pathobiology may allow personalized treatment. We aimed to define and describe ARDS phenotypes/endotypes combining clinical and pathophysiologic parameters from a Canadian ARDS cohort. METHODS: A cohort of adult ARDS patients from multiple sites in Calgary, Canada, had plasma cytokine levels and clinical parameters measured in the first 24 h of ICU admission. We used a latent class model (LCM) to group the patients into several ARDS subgroups and identified the features differentiating those subgroups. We then discuss the subgroup effect on 30 day mortality. RESULTS: The LCM suggested three subgroups (n1 = 64, n2 = 86, and n3 = 30), and 23 out of 69 features made these subgroups distinct. The top five discriminating features were IL-8, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-a, and serum lactate. Mortality distinctively varied between subgroups. Individual clinical characteristics within the subgroup associated with mortality included mean PaO2/FiO2 ratio, pneumonia, platelet count, and bicarbonate negatively associated with mortality, while lactate, creatinine, shock, chronic kidney disease, vasopressor/ionotropic use, low GCS at admission, and sepsis were positively associated. IL-8 and Apache II were individual markers strongly associated with mortality (Area Under the Curve = 0.84). PERSPECTIVE: ARDS subgrouping using biomarkers and clinical characteristics is useful for categorizing a heterogeneous condition into several homogenous patient groups. This study found three ARDS subgroups using LCM; each subgroup has a different level of mortality. This model may also apply to developing further trial design, prognostication, and treatment selection.

Pharmacological evidence that the inhibitory effects of prostaglandin E2 are mediated by the EP2 and EP4 receptors in human neutrophils.

Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is a recognized inhibitor of granulocyte functions. However, most of the data supporting this was obtained when available pharmacological tools mainly targeted the EP2 receptor. Herein, we revisited the inhibitory effect of PGE2 on reactive oxygen species production, leukotriene biosynthesis, and migration in human neutrophils. Our data confirm the inhibitory effect of PGE2 on these functions and unravel that the effect of PGE2 on human neutrophils is obtained by the combined action of EP2 and EP4 agonism. Accordingly, we also demonstrate that the inhibitory effect of PGE2 is fully prevented only by the combination of EP2 and EP4 receptor antagonists, underscoring the importance of targeting both receptors in the effect of PGE2. Conversely, we also show that the inhibition of ROS production by human eosinophils only involves the EP4 receptor, despite the fact that they also express the EP2 receptor.