Reliever-Triggered Inhaled Glucocorticoid in Black and Latinx Adults with Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Black and Latinx patients bear a disproportionate burden of asthma. Efforts to reduce the disproportionate morbidity have been mostly unsuccessful, and guideline recommendations have not been based on studies in these populations. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label trial, we randomly assigned Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma to use a patient-activated, reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid strategy (beclomethasone dipropionate, 80 µg) plus usual care (intervention) or to continue usual care. Participants had one instructional visit followed by 15 monthly questionnaires. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included monthly asthma control as measured with the Asthma Control Test (ACT; range, 5 [poor] to 25 [complete control]), quality of life as measured with the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI; range, 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater impairment), and participant-reported missed days of work, school, or usual activities. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 1201 adults (603 Black and 598 Latinx), 600 were assigned to the intervention group and 601 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.78) in the intervention group and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.999; P = 0.048). ACT scores increased by 3.4 points (95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) in the intervention group and by 2.5 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 2.8) in the usual-care group (difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.2); ASUI scores increased by 0.12 points (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.13) and 0.08 points (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09), respectively (difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.05). The annualized rate of missed days was 13.4 in the intervention group and 16.8 in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). Serious adverse events occurred in 12.2% of the participants, with an even distribution between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, provision of an inhaled glucocorticoid and one-time instruction on its use, added to usual care, led to a lower rate of severe asthma exacerbations. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02995733.).

Asthma morbidity measures across Black ethnic subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Black adults are disproportionately affected by asthma and are often considered a homogeneous group in research studies despite cultural and ancestral differences. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if asthma morbidity differs across adults in Black ethnic subgroups. METHODS: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited across the continental United States and Puerto Rico for the PREPARE (PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief) trial. Using self-identifications, we categorized multiethnic Black (ME/B) participants (n = 226) as Black Latinx participants (n = 146) or Caribbean, continental African, or other Black participants (n = 80). African American (AA/B) participants (n = 518) were categorized as Black participants who identified their ethnicity as being American. Baseline characteristics and retrospective asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids [SCs], emergency department/urgent care [ED/UC] visits, hospitalizations) were compared across subgroups using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Compared with AA/B participants, ME/B participants were more likely to be younger, residing in the US Northeast, and Spanish speaking and to have lower body mass index, health literacy, and <1 comorbidity, but higher blood eosinophil counts. In a multivariable analysis, ME/B participants were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.04-1.72) and SC use (IRR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.00-1.62) for asthma than AA/B participants. Of the ME/B subgroups, Puerto Rican Black Latinx participants (n = 120) were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (IRR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.22-2.21) and SC use for asthma (IRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.06-1.92) than AA/B participants. There were no significant differences in hospitalizations for asthma among subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: ME/B adults, specifically Puerto Rican Black Latinx adults, have higher risk of ED/UC visits and SC use for asthma than other Black subgroups.

Preference for and impact of telehealth vs in-person asthma visits among Black and Latinx adults.

BACKGROUND: Black and Latinx adults experience disproportionate asthma-related morbidity and limited specialty care access. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic expanded telehealth use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate visit type (telehealth [TH] vs in-person [IP]) preferences and the impact of visit type on asthma outcomes among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS: For this PREPARE trial ancillary study, visit type preference was surveyed by e-mail or telephone post-trial. Emergency medical record data on visit types and asthma outcomes were available for a subset (March 2020 to April 2021). Characteristics associated with visit type preferences, and relationships between visit type and asthma outcomes (control [Asthma Control Test] and asthma-related quality of life [Asthma Symptom Utility Index]), were tested using multivariable regression. RESULTS: A total of 866 participants consented to be surveyed, with 847 respondents. Among the participants with asthma care experience with both visit types, 42.0% preferred TH for regular checkups, which associated with employment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.39; P = .02), lower asthma medication adherence (OR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .03), and having more historical emergency department and urgent care asthma visits (OR = 1.10 for each additional visit; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18; P = .02), after adjustment. Emergency medical record data were available for 98 participants (62 TH, 36 IP). Those with TH visits were more likely Latinx, from the Southwest, employed, using inhaled corticosteroid-only controller therapy, with lower body mass index, and lower self-reported asthma medication adherence vs those with IP visits only. Both groups had comparable Asthma Control Test (18.4 vs 18.9, P = .52) and Asthma Symptom Utility Index (0.79 vs 0.84, P = .16) scores after adjustment. CONCLUSION: TH may be similarly efficacious as and often preferred over IP among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, especially for regular checkups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02995733.

The Impact of Insulin Resistance on Loss of Lung Function and Response to Treatment in Asthma.

Rationale: The role of obesity-associated insulin resistance (IR) in airflow limitation in asthma is uncertain. Objectives: Using data in the Severe Asthma Research Program 3 (SARP-3), we evaluated relationships between homeostatic measure of IR (HOMA-IR), lung function (cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses), and treatment responses to bronchodilators and corticosteroids. Methods: HOMA-IR values were categorized as without (<3.0), moderate (3.0-5.0), or severe (>5.0). Lung function included FEV1 and FVC measured before and after treatment with inhaled albuterol and intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide and yearly for 5 years. Measurements and Main Results: Among 307 participants in SARP-3, 170 (55%) were obese and 140 (46%) had IR. Compared with patients without IR, those with IR had significantly lower values for FEV1 and FVC, and these lower values were not attributable to obesity effects. Compared with patients without IR, those with IR had lower FEV1 responses to ß-adrenergic agonists and systemic corticosteroids. The annualized decline in FEV1 was significantly greater in patients with moderate IR (-41 ml/year) and severe IR (-32 ml/year,) than in patients without IR (-13 ml/year, P < 0.001 for both comparisons). Conclusions: IR is common in asthma and is associated with lower lung function, accelerated loss of lung function, and suboptimal lung function responses to bronchodilator and corticosteroid treatments. Clinical trials in patients with asthma and IR are needed to determine if improving IR might also improve lung function.

Clinical and molecular implications of RGS2 promoter genetic variation in severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) 2 terminates bronchoconstrictive Gαq signaling; murine RGS2 knockout demonstrate airway hyperresponsiveness. While RGS2 promoter variants rs2746071 and rs2746072 associate with a clinical mild asthma phenotype, their impact on human airway smooth muscle (HASM) contractility and asthma severity outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether reductions in RGS2 expression seen with these 2 RGS2 promoter variants augment HASM contractility and associate with an asthma severity phenotype. METHODS: We transfected HASM with a range of RGS2-specific small interfering RNA (siRNA) concentrations and determined RGS2 protein expression by Western blot analysis and intracellular calcium flux induced by histamine (a Gαq-coupled H1 receptor bronchoconstrictive agonist). We conducted regression-based genotype association analyses of RGS2 variants from 611 patients from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Severe Asthma Research Program 3. RESULTS: RGS2-specific siRNA caused dose-dependent increases in histamine-stimulated bronchoconstrictive intracellular calcium signaling (2-way ANOVA, P < .0001) with a concomitant decrease in RGS2 protein expression. RGS2-specific siRNA did not affect Gαq-independent ionomycin-induced intracellular calcium signaling (P = .42). The minor allele frequency of rs2746071 and rs2746072 was 0.46 and 0.28 among African American/non-Hispanic Black patients and was 0.28 and 0.27 among non-Hispanic White patients, among whom these single nucleotide polymorphisms were in stronger linkage disequilibrium (r2 = 0.97). Among non-Hispanic White patients, risk allele homozygotes for rs2746072 and rs2746071 each had nearly 2-fold greater asthma exacerbation rates relative to alternative genotypes with wild-type alleles (Padditive = 2.86 × 10-5/Precessive = 5.22 × 10-6 and Padditive = 3.46 × 10-6/Precessive = 6.74 × 10-7, respectively) at baseline, which was confirmed by prospective longitudinal exacerbation data. CONCLUSION: RGS2 promoter variation associates with a molecular and clinical phenotype characterized by enhanced bronchoconstrictive stimulation in vitro and higher asthma exacerbations rates in non-Hispanic White patients.

Socioeconomic status associates with worse asthma morbidity among Black and Latinx adults.

BACKGROUND: Asthma disproportionately affects African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) patients and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES), but the relationship between SES and asthma morbidity within these racial/ethnic groups is inadequately understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between SES and asthma morbidity among AA/B and H/L adults with moderate to severe asthma using multidomain SES frameworks and mediation analyses. METHODS: We analyzed enrollment data from the PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief randomized trial, evaluating inhaled corticosteroid supplementation to rescue therapy. We tested for direct and indirect relationships between SES and asthma morbidity using structural equation models. For SES, we used a latent variable defined by poverty, education, and unemployment. For asthma morbidity, we used self-reported asthma exacerbations in the year before enrollment (corticosteroid bursts, emergency room/urgent care visits, or hospitalizations), and Asthma Control Test scores. We tested for mediation via health literacy, perceived stress, and self-reported discrimination. All models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, ethnicity, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 990 AA/B and H/L adults, low SES (latent variable) was directly associated with hospitalizations (ß = 0.24) and worse Asthma Control Test scores (ß = 0.20). Stress partially mediated the relationship between SES and increased emergency room/urgent care visits and worse asthma control (ß = 0.03 and = 0.05, respectively). Individual SES domains were directly associated with asthma morbidity. Stress mediated indirect associations between low educational attainment and unemployment with worse asthma control (ß = 0.05 and = 0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lower SES is directly, and indirectly through stress, associated with asthma morbidity among AA/B and H/L adults. Identification of stressors and relevant management strategies may lessen asthma-related morbidity among these populations.

Caribbean Latinx with moderate-severe asthma bear greater asthma morbidity than other Latinx.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic/Latinx (HL) ethnicity encompasses racially and culturally diverse subgroups. Studies suggest that Puerto Ricans (PR) may bear greater asthma-related morbidity than Mexicans, but these were conducted in children or had limited clinical characterization. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether disparities in asthma morbidity exist among HL adult subgroups. METHODS: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited from US clinics, including from Puerto Rico, for the Person Empowered Asthma Relief (PREPARE) trial. Considering the shared heritage between PR and other Caribbean HL (Cubans and Dominicans [C&D]), the investigators compared baseline self-reported clinical characteristics between Caribbean HL (CHL) (PR and C&D: n = 457) and other HLs (OHL) (Mexicans, Spaniards, Central/South Americans; n = 141), and between CHL subgroups (C&D [n = 56] and PR [n = 401]). This study compared asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits, hospitalizations, health care utilization) through negative binomial regression. RESULTS: CHL compared to OHL were similar in age, body mass index, poverty status, blood eosinophils, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide but were prescribed more asthma controller therapies. Relative to OHL, CHL had significantly increased odds of asthma exacerbations (odds ratio [OR]: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.4-2.4), ED/UC visits (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.4-2.5), hospitalization (OR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.06-3.7), and health care utilization (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.44-2.53). Of the CHL subgroups, PR had significantly increased odds of asthma exacerbations, ED/UC visits, hospitalizations, and health care utilization compared to OHL, whereas C&D only had increased odds of exacerbations compared to OHL. PR compared to C&D had greater odds of ED/UC and health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: CHL adults, compared with OHL, adults reported nearly twice the asthma morbidity; these differences are primarily driven by PR. Novel interventions are needed to reduce morbidity in this highly impacted population.

The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone (PrecISE) Asthma Network: An overview of Network organization, procedures, and interventions.

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, with multiple underlying inflammatory pathways and structural airway abnormalities that impact disease persistence and severity. Recent progress has been made in developing targeted asthma therapeutics, especially for subjects with eosinophilic asthma. However, there is an unmet need for new approaches to treat patients with severe and exacerbation-prone asthma, who contribute disproportionately to disease burden. Extensive deep phenotyping has revealed the heterogeneous nature of severe asthma and identified distinct disease subtypes. A current challenge in the field is to translate new and emerging knowledge about different pathobiologic mechanisms in asthma into patient-specific therapies, with the ultimate goal of modifying the natural history of disease. Here, we describe the Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma (PrecISE) Network, a groundbreaking collaborative effort of asthma researchers and biostatisticians from around the United States. The PrecISE Network was designed to conduct phase II/proof-of-concept clinical trials of precision interventions in the population with severe asthma, and is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health. Using an innovative adaptive platform trial design, the PrecISE Network will evaluate up to 6 interventions simultaneously in biomarker-defined subgroups of subjects. We review the development and organizational structure of the PrecISE Network, and choice of interventions being studied. We hope that the PrecISE Network will enhance our understanding of asthma subtypes and accelerate the development of therapeutics for severe asthma.

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.).

Responsiveness to Parenteral Corticosteroids and Lung Function Trajectory in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Asthma.

Rationale: It is unclear why select patients with moderate-to-severe asthma continue to lose lung function despite therapy. We hypothesized that participants with the smallest responses to parenteral corticosteroids have the greatest risk of undergoing a severe decline in lung function.Objectives: To evaluate corticosteroid-response phenotypes as longitudinal predictors of lung decline.Methods: Adults within the NHLBI SARP III (Severe Asthma Research Program III) who had undergone a course of intramuscular triamcinolone at baseline and at ≥2 annual follow-up visits were evaluated. Longitudinal slopes were calculated for each participant's post-bronchodilator FEV1% predicted. Categories of participant FEV1 slope were defined: severe decline, >2% loss/yr; mild decline, >0.5-2.0% loss/yr; no change, 0.5% loss/yr to <1% gain/yr; and improvement, ≥1% gain/yr. Regression models were used to develop predictors of severe decline.Measurements and Main Results: Of 396 participants, 78 had severe decline, 91 had mild decline, 114 had no change, and 113 showed improvement. The triamcinolone-induced difference in the post-bronchodilator FEV1% predicted (derived by baseline subtraction) was related to the 4-year change in lung function or slope category in univariable models (P < 0.001). For each 5% decrement in the triamcinolone-induced difference the FEV1% predicted, there was a 50% increase in the odds of being in the severe decline group (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.8), when adjusted for baseline FEV1, exacerbation history, blood eosinophils and body mass index.Conclusions: Failure to improve the post-bronchodilator FEV1 after a challenge with parenteral corticosteroids is an evoked biomarker for patients at risk for a severe decline in lung function.

PrecISE: Precision Medicine in Severe Asthma: An adaptive platform trial with biomarker ascertainment.

Severe asthma accounts for almost half the cost associated with asthma. Severe asthma is driven by heterogeneous molecular mechanisms. Conventional clinical trial design often lacks the power and efficiency to target subgroups with specific pathobiological mechanisms. Furthermore, the validation and approval of new asthma therapies is a lengthy process. A large proportion of that time is taken by clinical trials to validate asthma interventions. The National Institutes of Health Precision Medicine in Severe and/or Exacerbation Prone Asthma (PrecISE) program was established with the goal of designing and executing a trial that uses adaptive design techniques to rapidly evaluate novel interventions in biomarker-defined subgroups of severe asthma, while seeking to refine these biomarker subgroups, and to identify early markers of response to therapy. The novel trial design is an adaptive platform trial conducted under a single master protocol that incorporates precision medicine components. Furthermore, it includes innovative applications of futility analysis, cross-over design with use of shared placebo groups, and early futility analysis to permit more rapid identification of effective interventions. The development and rationale behind the study design are described. The interventions chosen for the initial investigation and the criteria used to identify these interventions are enumerated. The biomarker-based adaptive design and analytic scheme are detailed as well as special considerations involved in the final trial design.

Strategies for choosing a biologic for your patient with allergy or asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the therapeutic effects and safety of biologics either approved or in clinical development for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, urticaria, nasal polyps, atopic dermatitis, and eosinophilic esophagitis. This review attempts to provide some guidance when choosing among agents. DATA SOURCES: Recently published articles obtained through PubMed database searches including research articles, review articles, and case reports. STUDY SELECTIONS: PubMed database searches were conducted using the following keywords: biologics, asthma, COPD, urticaria, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, nasal polyps, and eosinophilic esophagitis. RESULTS: The approval of omalizumab by the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 for patients with asthma paved the way for the development of multiple biologics for a variety of respiratory and allergic diseases. Agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration include mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, and several more are in the late stages of clinical development. Owing to the overlap in the pathogenesis of respiratory and allergic diseases, many of these biologics target multiple respiratory and allergic diseases simultaneously. CONCLUSION: The numerous biologic options have made the selection of the best biologic for each patient a potential conundrum for clinicians. Adequate point of care biomarkers to facilitate personalized medical therapy are generally lacking. Furthermore, although clinically effective and generally safe, none of the biologics discussed in this review have induced long-standing disease remission. Nevertheless, these agents have given us the opportunity to treat the most severe patients and to better understand the biology of respiratory and allergic diseases. As knowledgeable physicians, we should embrace and be educated on these novel therapies and the pathways they target.

Evidence for Exacerbation-Prone Asthma and Predictive Biomarkers of Exacerbation Frequency.

Rationale: Cross-sectional studies suggest an exacerbation-prone asthma (EPA) phenotype and the utility of blood eosinophils and plasma IL-6 as predictive biomarkers.Objectives: To prospectively test for EPA phenotype and utility of baseline blood measures of eosinophils and IL-6 as predictive biomarkers.Methods: Three-year asthma exacerbation data were analyzed in 406 adults in the Severe Asthma Research Program-3. Transition models were used to assess uninformed and informed probabilities of exacerbation in year 3. Binomial regression models were used to assess eosinophils and IL-6 as predictive biomarkers.Measurements and Main Results: Eighty-three participants (21%) had ≥1 exacerbation in each year (EPA) and 168 participants (41%) had no exacerbation in any year (exacerbation-resistant asthma). The uninformed probability of an exacerbation in Year 3 was 40%, but the informed probability increased to 63% with an exacerbation in Year 2 and 82% with an exacerbation in Years 1 and 2. The probability of a Year 3 exacerbation with no Year 1 or 2 exacerbations was 13%. Compared with exacerbation-resistant asthma, EPA was characterized by lower FEV1 and a higher prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. High-plasma IL-6 occurred in EPA, and the incident rate ratio for exacerbation increased 10% for each 1-pg/µl increase in baseline IL-6 level. Although high blood eosinophils did not occur in EPA, the incident rate ratio for exacerbations increased 9% for each 100-cell/µl increase in baseline eosinophil number.Conclusions: Longitudinal analysis confirms an EPA phenotype characterized by features of metabolic dysfunction. Blood measures of IL-6, but not eosinophils, were significantly associated with EPA, and IL-6 and eosinophils predicted exacerbations in the sample as a whole.

Management of severe asthma: a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guideline.

This document provides clinical recommendations for the management of severe asthma. Comprehensive evidence syntheses, including meta-analyses, were performed to summarise all available evidence relevant to the European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society Task Force's questions. The evidence was appraised using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach and the results were summarised in evidence profiles. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by a multidisciplinary Task Force of asthma experts, who made specific recommendations on six specific questions. After considering the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, quality of evidence, feasibility, and acceptability of various interventions, the Task Force made the following recommendations: 1) suggest using anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor α for severe uncontrolled adult eosinophilic asthma phenotypes; 2) suggest using a blood eosinophil cut-point ≥150 µL-1 to guide anti-IL-5 initiation in adult patients with severe asthma; 3) suggest considering specific eosinophil (≥260 µL-1) and exhaled nitric oxide fraction (≥19.5 ppb) cut-offs to identify adolescents or adults with the greatest likelihood of response to anti-IgE therapy; 4) suggest using inhaled tiotropium for adolescents and adults with severe uncontrolled asthma despite Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step 4-5 or National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) step 5 therapies; 5) suggest a trial of chronic macrolide therapy to reduce asthma exacerbations in persistently symptomatic or uncontrolled patients on GINA step 5 or NAEPP step 5 therapies, irrespective of asthma phenotype; and 6) suggest using anti-IL-4/13 for adult patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and for those with severe corticosteroid-dependent asthma regardless of blood eosinophil levels. These recommendations should be reconsidered as new evidence becomes available.

Adherence to adding inhaled corticosteroids to rescue therapy in a pragmatic trial with adults with asthma: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Underuse of guideline-recommended inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) controller therapy is a risk factor for greater asthma burden. ICS concomitantly used with rescue inhalers (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered ICS ['PARTICS']) reduced asthma exacerbations in efficacy trials, but whether PARTICS is effective in pragmatic trials is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this pilot to determine the feasibility of executing a large-scale pragmatic PARTICS trial and to improve study protocols. METHODS: Four sites recruited 33 Hispanic or black adults with persistent asthma, randomized them approximately 3:1 to intervention or usual care, and followed them for 12 weeks. All participants received asthma guideline-based educational videos; intervention participants received video-based instructions on implementing PARTICS plus usual medications. The study involved 1 randomization visit and monthly questionnaires. Timely questionnaire responses (±2 weeks) were monitored. Participants underwent qualitative phone interviews to assess self-reported adherence to PARTICS and understand barriers to completing study procedures. RESULTS: Timely questionnaire response rates were 61%, 64%, and 70% at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, respectively. Self-reported adherence to PARTICS was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%-94% [n = 21]), 88% (95%CI, 72%-100% [n = 16]), and 62% (95%CI, 36%-88% [n = 13]) at weeks 1, 6, and 12, respectively. Barriers to completing study procedures included difficulties with questionnaire access, remembering to use ICS and rescue inhalers together, and obtaining refills. Only 22% of participants recognized their short-acting bronchodilator as "reliever" or "rescue." CONCLUSION: Recruitment was feasible within the allocated period. Adherence to PARTICS was incomplete, questionnaire completion was suboptimal, and common rescue inhaler nomenclature usage was limited. We have modified the full study protocol to attempt to improve adherence to PARTICS and minimize barriers to study procedures. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: pilot study for 'PeRson EmPowered Asthma Relief' (PREPARE, NCT02995733).

The precision interventions for severe and/or exacerbation-prone asthma (PrecISE) adaptive platform trial: statistical considerations.

The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-prone Asthma (PrecISE) study is an adaptive platform trial designed to investigate novel interventions to severe asthma. The study is conducted under a master protocol and utilizes a crossover design with each participant receiving up to five interventions and at least one placebo. Treatment assignments are based on the patients' biomarker profiles and precision health methods are incorporated into the interim and final analyses. We describe key elements of the PrecISE study including the multistage adaptive enrichment strategy, early stopping of an intervention for futility, power calculations, and the primary analysis strategy.

A trial of type 12 purinergic (P2Y12) receptor inhibition with prasugrel identifies a potentially distinct endotype of patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is characterized by asthma, recurrent nasal polyposis, and respiratory reactions on ingestion of COX-1 inhibitors. Increased numbers of platelet-leukocyte aggregates are present in the sinus tissue and blood of patients with AERD compared with that of aspirin-tolerant patients, and platelet activation can contribute to aspirin-induced reactions. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether treatment with prasugrel, which inhibits platelet activation by blocking the type 12 purinergic (P2Y12) receptor, would attenuate the severity of sinonasal and respiratory symptoms induced during aspirin challenge in patients with AERD. METHODS: Forty patients with AERD completed a 10-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of prasugrel. All patients underwent oral aspirin challenges after 4 weeks of prasugrel and after 4 weeks of placebo. The primary outcome was a change in the provocative dose of aspirin that would elicit an increase in Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) of 2 points. Changes in lung function, urinary eicosanoids, plasma tryptase, platelet-leukocyte aggregates, and platelet activation were also recorded. RESULTS: Prasugrel did not significantly change the mean increase in TNSS of 2 points (79 ± 15 for patients receiving placebo and 139 ± 32 for patients receiving prasugrel, P = .10), platelet-leukocyte aggregates, or increases in urinary leukotriene E4 and prostaglandin D2 metabolite levels during aspirin-induced reactions in the study population as a whole. Five subjects (responders) reacted to aspirin while receiving placebo but did not have any reaction to aspirin challenge after the prasugrel arm. In contrast to prasugrel nonresponders (35 subjects), the prasugrel responders had smaller reaction-induced increases in TNSS; did not have significant aspirin-induced increases in urinary leukotriene E4, prostaglandin D2 metabolite, or thromboxane B2 levels; and did not display increases in serum tryptase levels during aspirin reactions on the placebo arm, all of which were observed in the nonresponders. CONCLUSION: In the overall study population, prasugrel did not attenuate aspirin-induced symptoms, possibly because it failed to decrease the frequencies of platelet-adherent leukocytes or to diminish aspirin-induced mast cell activation. In a small subset of patients with AERD who had greater baseline platelet activation and milder upper respiratory symptoms during aspirin-induced reactions, P2Y12 receptor antagonism with prasugrel completely inhibited all aspirin-induced reaction symptoms, suggesting a contribution from P2Y12 receptor signaling in this subset.

Loss of bronchoprotection with ICS plus LABA treatment, ß-receptor dynamics, and the effect of alendronate.

BACKGROUND: Loss of bronchoprotection (LOBP) with a regularly used long-acting ß2-adrenergic receptor agonist (LABA) is well documented. LOBP has been attributed to ß2-adrenergic receptor (B2AR) downregulation, a process requiring farnesylation, which is inhibited by alendronate. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether alendronate can reduce LABA-associated LOBP in inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-treated patients. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, proof-of-concept trial. Seventy-eight participants with persistent asthma receiving 250 µg of fluticasone twice daily for 2 weeks were randomized to receive alendronate or placebo while initiating salmeterol for 8 weeks. Salmeterol-protected methacholine challenges (SPMChs) and PBMC B2AR numbers (radioligand binding assay) and signaling (cyclic AMP ELISA) were assessed before randomization and after 8 weeks of ICS plus LABA treatment. LOBP was defined as a more than 1 doubling dose reduction in SPMCh PC20 value. RESULTS: The mean doubling dose reduction in SPMCh PC20 value was 0.50 and 0.27 with alendronate and placebo, respectively (P = .62). Thirty-eight percent of participants receiving alendronate and 33% receiving placebo had LOBP (P = .81). The after/before ICS plus LABA treatment ratio of B2AR number was 1.0 for alendronate (P = .86) and 0.8 for placebo (P = .15; P = .31 for difference between treatments). The B2AR signaling ratio was 0.89 for alendronate (P = .43) and 1.02 for placebo (P = .84; P = .44 for difference). Changes in lung function and B2AR number and signaling were similar between those who did and did not experience LOBP. CONCLUSION: This study did not find evidence that alendronate reduces LABA-associated LOBP, which relates to the occurrence of LOBP in only one third of participants. LOBP appears to be less common than presumed in concomitant ICS plus LABA-treated asthmatic patients. B2AR downregulation measured in PBMCs does not appear to reflect LOBP.

Income is an independent risk factor for worse asthma outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with asthma morbidity in observational studies, but the factors underlying this association are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether 3 SES correlates-low income, low education, and high perceived stress-were independent risk factors for treatment failure and asthma exacerbations in the context of a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The effect of low SES (household income of <$50,000/y and household educational level of less than a Bachelor's degree) and high perceived stress (defined as a score of >20 on a perceived stress scale) on asthma morbidity was analyzed in 381 participants by using Poisson regression models. The primary outcome was treatment failure (defined in the trial protocol as a significant clinical or airflow deterioration), and the secondary outcome was asthma exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. RESULTS: Fifty-four percent of participants had a low income, 40% had a low educational level, and 17% had high perceived stress levels. Even after adjusting for race and other important confounders, participants with lower income had higher rates of both treatment failures (rate ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = .03) and exacerbations (rate ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3; P = .02). Adherence with inhaled corticosteroids was similarly high for both income categories. Education and perceived stress were not significantly associated with either outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of a randomized controlled trial, participants with lower income were more likely to experience adverse asthma outcomes independent of education, perceived stress, race, and medication adherence.