RESUMO
PURPOSE: Asthma exacerbations are inflammatory events that rarely result in full hospitalization following an ER visit. Unfortunately, certain patients require prolonged support, including occasional external lung support through ECMO or ECCOR (with subsequent further exposure to other life-threatening issues), and some die. In parallel, biologics are revolutionizing severe asthma management, mostly in T2 high patients. METHODS: We extensively reviewed the current unmet needs surrounding ICU-admitted asthma exacerbations, with a focus on currently available drugs and the underlying biological processes involved. We explored whether currently available T2-targeting drugs can reasonably be seen as potential players not only for relapse prevention but also as candidate drugs for a faster resolution of such episodes. The patient's perspective was also sought. RESULTS: About 30% of asthma exacerbations admitted to the ICU do not resolve within five days. Persistent severe airway obstruction despite massive doses of corticosteroids and maximal pharmacologically induced bronchodilation is the main cause of treatment failure. Previous ICU admission is the main risk factor for such episodes and may eventually be considered as a T2 surrogate marker. Fatal asthma cases are hallmarked by poorly steroid-sensitive T2-inflammation associated with severe mucus plugging. New, fast-acting T2-targeting biologics (already used for preventing asthma exacerbations) have the potential to circumvent steroid sensitivity pathways and decrease mucus plugging. This unmet need was confirmed by patients who reported highly negative, traumatizing experiences. CONCLUSIONS: There is room for improvement in the management of ICU-admitted severe asthma episodes. Clinical trials assessing how biologics might improve ICU outcomes are direly needed.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Produtos Biológicos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , PulmãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) is a frequently underdiagnosed disease due to diverse triggers, clinical presentations, and test results. This is especially relevant in geographic areas with a broad spectrum of pollen sensitization, such as Southern Europe. OBJECTIVES: To elucidate similarities and differences of PFAS in nine Southern European centers and identify associated characteristics and unique markers of PFAS. METHODS: As part of the @IT.2020 Multicenter Study, 815 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), aged 10-60 years, were recruited in seven countries. They completed questionnaires regarding SAR, comorbidities, family history, and PFAS, and underwent skin prick testing (SPT) and serum IgE testing. RESULTS: Of the 815 patients, 167 (20.5%) reported PFAS reactions. Most commonly, eliciting foods were kiwi (58, 34.7%), peach (43, 25.7%), and melon (26, 15.6%). Reported reactions were mostly local (216/319, 67.7%), occurring within 5 min of contact with elicitors (209/319, 65.5%). Associated characteristics included positive IgE to at least one panallergen (profilin, PR-10, or nsLTP) (p = 0.007), maternal PFAS (OR: 3.716, p = 0.026), and asthma (OR: 1.752, p = 0.073). Between centers, heterogeneity in prevalence (Marseille: 7.5% vs. Rome: 41.4%, p < 0.001) and of clinical characteristics was apparent. Cypress played a limited role, with only 1/22 SPT mono-sensitized patients reporting a food reaction (p < 0.073). CONCLUSIONS: PFAS is a frequent comorbidity in Southern European SAR patients. Significant heterogeneity of clinical characteristics in PFAS patients among the centers was observed and may be related to the different pollen sensitization patterns in each geographic area. IgE to panallergen(s), maternal PFAS, and asthma could be PFAS-associated characteristics.
Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal , Alérgenos , Reações Cruzadas , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/epidemiologia , Humanos , Pólen , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/diagnóstico , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/epidemiologia , Testes CutâneosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The adequate definition of pollen seasons is essential to facilitate a correct diagnosis, treatment choice, and outcome assessment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. A position paper by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) proposed season definitions for Northern and Middle Europe. OBJECTIVE: To test the pollen season definitions proposed by EAACI in six Mediterranean cities for seven pollen taxa. METHODS: As part of the @IT.2020 multi-center study, pollen counts for Poaceae, Oleaceae, Fagales, Cupressaceae, Urticaceae (Parietaria spp.), and Compositae (Ambrosia spp., Artemisia spp.) were collected from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Based on these data, pollen seasons were identified according to EAACI criteria. A unified monitoring period for patients in AIT trials was created and assessed for feasibility. RESULTS: The analysis revealed a great heterogeneity between the different locations in terms of pattern and length of the examined pollen seasons. Further, we found a fragmentation of pollen seasons in several segments (max. 8) separated by periods of low pollen counts (intercurrent periods). Potential monitoring periods included often many recording days with low pollen exposure (max. 341 days). CONCLUSION: The Mediterranean climate leads to challenging pollen exposure times. Monitoring periods for AIT trials based on existing definitions may include many intermittent days with low pollen concentrations. Therefore, it is necessary to find an adapted pollen season definition as individual solution for each pollen and geographical area.
Assuntos
Pólen , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal , Alérgenos , Cidades , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/diagnóstico , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/epidemiologia , Estações do AnoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patient skepticism concerning medical innovations can have major consequences for current public health and may threaten future progress, which greatly relies on clinical research. The primary objective of this study is to determine the variables associated with patient acceptation or refusal to participate in clinical research. Specifically, we sought to evaluate if distrust in pharmaceutical companies and associated psychosocial factors could represent a recruitment bias in clinical trials and thus threaten the applicability of their results. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter survey consisted in the administration of a self-questionnaire to patients during a pulmonology consultation. The 1025 questionnaires distributed collected demographics, socio-professional and basic health literacy characteristics. Patients were asked to rank their level of trust for pharmaceutical companies and indicate their willingness to participate in different categories of research (pre or post marketing, sponsored by an academic institution or pharmaceutical company). Logistic regression was used to determine factors contributing to "trust" versus "distrust" group membership and willingness to participate in each category of research. RESULTS: One thousand patients completed the survey, corresponding to a response rate of 97.5%. Data from 838 patients were analyzed in this study. 48.3% of respondents declared that they trusted pharmaceutical companies, while 35.5% declared distrust. Being female (p = 0.042), inactive in the employment market(p = 0.007), and not-knowing the name of one's disease(p = 0.010) are factors related to declared distrust. Distrust-group membership is associated with unwillingness to participate in certain categories of trials such as pre-marketing and industry-sponsored trials. CONCLUSION: Distrust in pharmaceutical companies is associated with a specific patient profile and with refusal to participate in certain subcategories of trials. This potential recruitment bias may explain the under-representation of certain categories of patients such as women in pre-marketing drug trials.
Assuntos
Preparações Farmacêuticas , Confiança , Altruísmo , Indústria Farmacêutica , Feminino , Humanos , Marketing , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, all efforts should be made to prevent exacerbations because each event modifies the trajectory of the disease. Treatment recommendations are mostly built on results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) whose methodology ensure internal validity. However, their relevance may be compromised by the lack of generalizability, due to poor representability of study populations compared to real-life patients. In order to delimit to whom the results of studies on current and future treatments apply, we sought to identify and characterize the fraction of COPD population that would be eligible for inclusion into RCTs aiming at decreasing exacerbation risk. METHODS: We used the Initiatives-BPCO database, a French cohort of 1309 real-life COPD patients monitored in academic centers. We identified industry-sponsored phase III and IV trials that enrolled more than 500 patients, lasted at least one year and used exacerbations related endpoints. Eligibility criteria were extracted from each trial and applied to the patients. RESULTS: The eligibility criteria of 16 RCTs were applied to the 1309 patients. The most discriminating eligibility criteria were FEV1, minimum exacerbation rate in the previous year and smoking history, responsible for the exclusion of 39.9, 36.7 and 16.8% of patients, respectively. Altogether, 2.3 to 46.7% of our patients would have satisfied all eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: These analyses confirm that an important gap exists between real-life patients and clinical trials populations in COPD, which limits the relevance of results and therefore should be considered when grading levels of evidence and designing future studies.
Assuntos
Progressão da Doença , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Broncodilatadores/uso terapêutico , Difusão de Inovações , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Volume Expiratório Forçado , Humanos , Seleção de Pacientes , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/fisiopatologia , Qualidade de Vida , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de DoençaRESUMO
U-BIOPRED is a European Union consortium of 20 academic institutions, 11 pharmaceutical companies and six patient organisations with the objective of improving the understanding of asthma disease mechanisms using a systems biology approach.This cross-sectional assessment of adults with severe asthma, mild/moderate asthma and healthy controls from 11 European countries consisted of analyses of patient-reported outcomes, lung function, blood and airway inflammatory measurements.Patients with severe asthma (nonsmokers, n=311; smokers/ex-smokers, n=110) had more symptoms and exacerbations compared to patients with mild/moderate disease (n=88) (2.5 exacerbations versus 0.4 in the preceding 12â months; p<0.001), with worse quality of life, and higher levels of anxiety and depression. They also had a higher incidence of nasal polyps and gastro-oesophageal reflux with lower lung function. Sputum eosinophil count was higher in severe asthma compared to mild/moderate asthma (median count 2.99% versus 1.05%; p=0.004) despite treatment with higher doses of inhaled and/or oral corticosteroids.Consistent with other severe asthma cohorts, U-BIOPRED is characterised by poor symptom control, increased comorbidity and airway inflammation, despite high levels of treatment. It is well suited to identify asthma phenotypes using the array of "omic" datasets that are at the core of this systems medicine approach.
Assuntos
Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Antiasmáticos/administração & dosagem , Asma/complicações , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Ansiedade/epidemiologia , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Comorbidade , Estudos Transversais , Depressão/epidemiologia , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Refluxo Gastroesofágico/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Óxido Nítrico/análise , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Fumar/epidemiologia , Espirometria , Inquéritos e Questionários , Biologia de SistemasAssuntos
Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/métodos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Voluntários Saudáveis/psicologia , Participação do Paciente , Idoso , Pesquisa Biomédica , Feminino , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Motivação , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
The incidence of breast implants and silicone injections has continuously increased since their FDA approval for use in the 1960's. The prevalence of overall adverse events is approximately 20%. The actual incidence of pulmonary adverse events is unknown. This review focuses on the pulmonary adverse events of breast implants and silicone injections. Vascular complications are represented by acute and chronic embolisation syndromes with a clinico-radiological presentation of alveolar hemorrhage. Inflammatory complications are numerous, including siliconoma, which is a granulomatous reaction mimicking a mesothelioma. On the other hand, there are some reports arguing a link between the development of auto-immune diseases and breast implants, such as scleroderma, rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren's syndrome, and dermatomyositis. Finally, for patients with asthma, breast implants may contribute to poor disease control. Cases of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangeitis have been described. Thus, it is of interest to decipherate mechanisms and incidence of these effects in prospective studies to better manage pulmonary diseases in patients wearing breast implants in order to understand their role as culprits or bystanders. In addition, characterization of subpopulations with increased risk of adverse events is needed as we highlighted that some subpopulations seem to be at greater risk of developing them, notably asthmatics.
Assuntos
Implantes de Mama , Silicones , Humanos , Implantes de Mama/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Silicones/efeitos adversos , Síndrome de Sjogren , FemininoAssuntos
Fibrilação Atrial/complicações , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Fibrose Pulmonar Idiopática/complicações , Tromboflebite/complicações , Tromboflebite/tratamento farmacológico , Varfarina/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Evolução Fatal , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current practices for assessing response to anti-interleukin 5/R treatment in severe asthma patients are heterogeneous. The objective of this study was to achieve an expert consensus defining failure criteria for anti-interleukin 5/R treatment in severe asthma patients. METHODS: Experts were invited to a 5-round Delphi exercise if they were pulmonologists managing ⩾30 patients at a nationally recognized severe asthma expert centre. Following two rounds of statement-generating brainstorming, the expert panel ranked each statement according to a 5-point Likert-type scale during three additional rounds. Positive consensus was considered achieved when ⩾80% of experts agreed with a statement with >50% strong agreement and <15% disagreement. RESULTS: Twenty experts participated in the study. All experts agreed that predefined treatment goals defining effectiveness should be personalized during shared decision making via a patient contract. Treatment failure was defined as (1) absence of a reduction in exacerbation rates by ⩾25% or (2) absence of a reduction in oral corticosteroid therapy by ⩾25% of the initial dosage or (3) occurrence of emergency room visits or hospitalizations after 6 months of treatment. Treatment failure should result in discontinuation. For partial responders, treatment discontinuation was not recommended unless an alternative from another therapeutic class exists and should be discussed in a multidisciplinary consultation. CONCLUSION: The present study provides objective criteria for anti IL5 or IL5R failure in severe asthma and suggests consensus based guidelines for prescription, evaluation and discontinuation decision-making.
Assuntos
Asma , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiologia , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Hospitalização , Humanos , Falha de TratamentoRESUMO
Acetylcholine (neuronal and non-neuronal origin) regulates bronchoconstriction, and mucus secretion. It has an inflammatory effect by inducing attraction, survival and cytokine release from inflammatory cells. Muscarinic receptors throughout the bronchial tree are mainly restricted to muscarinic M1, M2 and M3 receptors. Three long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) were approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Europe: once-daily tiotropium bromide; once-daily glycopyrronium bromide; and twice-daily aclidinium bromide. All have higher selectivity for M3 receptors than for M2 receptors, and dissociate more slowly from the M3 receptors than they do from the M2 receptors. Some LAMAs showed anti-inflammatory effects [inhibition of neutrophil chemotactic activity and migration of alveolar neutrophils, decrease of several cytokines in the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) including interleukin (IL)-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and leukotriene (LT)B4] and antiremodeling effects (inhibition of mucus gland hypertrophy and decrease in MUC5AC-positive goblet cell number, decrease in MUC5AC overexpression). In the clinic, LAMAs showed a significant improvement of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), quality of life, dyspnea and reduced the number of exacerbations in COPD and more recently in asthma. This review will focus on the three LAMAs approved in Europe in the treatment of chronic airway diseases.