Open-inhaler versus single-inhaler triple therapy (long-acting muscarinic antagonist, inhaled corticosteroid, and long-acting ß2-agonist) in asthma patients: a narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the use of open-inhaler (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] plus long-acting ß2-agonist [LABA] with separate add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) versus single-inhaler triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA combination) and the merits of add-on LAMA to ICS/LABA in patients with uncontrolled asthma. DATA SOURCES: Original research articles were identified from PubMed using the search term "triple therapy asthma." Information was also retrieved from the ClinicalTrials.gov website. STUDY SELECTIONS: Articles detailing the use of add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open-inhaler triple therapy), and closed triple therapy compared with ICS plus LABA dual therapy, addressing patient symptoms, exacerbations, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Open-inhaler triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of hospitalizations and emergency department visits and a decrease in ICS dose, oral corticosteroids use, and antibiotics use. Exacerbations and acute respiratory events were also reduced. Single-inhaler triple therapy showed a greater improvement in lung function, asthma control, and health status and was noninferior to open-inhaler triple therapy for Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores. Single-inhaler triple therapy may also lead to improved therapy adherence. CONCLUSION: Add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open- or single-inhaler triple therapy) improves the response in patients who remain symptomatic and provides a reasonable alternative to ICS dose escalation in treatment-refractory patients.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update.

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Clinician Wellness During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Extraordinary Times and Unusual Challenges for the Allergist/Immunologist.

The global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused sudden and dramatic societal changes. The allergy/immunology community has quickly responded by mobilizing practice adjustments and embracing new paradigms of care to protect patients and staff from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 exposure. Social distancing is key to slowing contagion but adds to complexity of care and increases isolation and anxiety. Uncertainty exists across a new COVID-19 reality, and clinician well-being may be an underappreciated priority. Wellness incorporates mental, physical, and spiritual health to protect against burnout, which impairs both coping and caregiving abilities. Understanding the stressors that COVID-19 is placing on clinicians can assist in recognizing what is needed to return to a point of wellness. Clinicians can leverage easily accessible tools, including the Strength-Focused and Meaning-Oriented Approach to Resilience and Transformation approach, wellness apps, mindfulness, and gratitude. Realizing early warning signs of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and posttraumatic stress disorder is important to access safe and confidential resources. Implementing wellness strategies can improve flexibility, resilience, and outlook. Historical parallels demonstrate that perseverance is as inevitable as pandemics and that we need not navigate this unprecedented time alone.

Asthma/obstructive pulmonary disease overlap: update on definition, biomarkers, and therapeutics.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO) continues to be a poorly understood condition. This review discusses newly proposed criteria and potential biomarkers in ACO, to aid in diagnosis and research studies, and prudent therapeutic approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: A global expert panel proposed an operational definition consisting of major and minor criteria as a step toward defining ACO. Serum periostin and YKL-40 may serve as biomarkers for ACO. Clinically, a reasonable therapeutic approach to ACO is the early addition of a long-acting ß-agonist (LABA) and/or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) to an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). SUMMARY: Both the proposed criteria and the described biomarkers for ACO can help guide clinicians in identifying this condition as well as aid researchers in designing much needed future studies. In the meantime, clinicians can treat potential ACO patients using the above approach, until therapeutic studies in clearly defined ACO patients are performed.

Treatment strategies for the yellow zone.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate relevant studies and documents that address treatment strategies for acute loss of asthma control (yellow zone). DATA SOURCES: Publications available on various treatment strategies for the yellow zone, Global Initiative for Asthma, and FDA Drug Safety Communication. STUDY SELECTIONS: Studies that assessed the effectiveness of specific therapies as yellow zone strategies were included in this review. RESULTS: Multiple yellow zone strategies exist, but only a few have been shown consistently effective. No specific evidence suggests that scheduled SABA can prevent exacerbation. Results for intermittent leukotriene receptor antagonist use have been mixed. Strong evidence supports intermittent inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosing for preschool-aged children with intermittent viral-induced wheeze, but data regarding this strategy for older children and adults are limited. As for short-term increase in scheduled ICS controller, doubling the dose seems to be ineffective, whereas results for a more substantial increase in ICS dose (quadrupling and quintupling) have been mixed. Dynamic dosing appears most promising, because symptom-driven ICS in tandem with rescue beta agonist use (whether short- or long-acting) is the strategy with the most robust data demonstrating reduction in exacerbations while minimizing ICS exposure. CONCLUSION: Varying study designs and the heterogeneity of asthma itself likely account for the difference in outcomes seen with the various yellow zone intervention strategies studied. More studies are needed to determine the right yellow zone therapies for the right patients, but this is likely to be most effective through a personalized approach.

Prospects for Monoclonal Antibody Therapy in Pediatric Asthma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The profile of biologic therapies for asthma is growing rapidly. We discuss how to match the proper pediatric patient with the most effective therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Currently available biologic therapies are most effective in patients with T2 high asthma. Newer drugs are currently being studied which target TSLP and interleukin 33. These newer drugs may provide options for asthmatics who do not respond to the current anti-IgE, anti-IL5, and anti-IL4/13 therapies. Asthma is a heterogeneous disease which can be driven by different inflammatory mediators in different patients. To select the most effective biologic therapy for a pediatric patient, the asthma phenotype must first be determined. The steep cost of biologics limits their use, which makes proper pairing of patient to therapy even more crucial. Presently, several therapies exist for T2 high asthma, but it is hoped in the future that development of drugs effective for T2 low asthmatics will be available as well.

Patient Characteristics and Individualization of Biologic Therapy.

Progress in the understanding of disease processes has provided additional therapeutic targets, best exemplified by the increasing role of biologics in the clinical armamentarium. This article provides a focused review of current treatment paradigms and pathophysiology for asthma, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, as well as C1 inhibitor deficiency. It elucidates the populations in which biologics were studied for the aforementioned disease states, emphasizing characteristics to consider when selecting therapy. It is important to correctly estimate patient outcome before starting therapy based on cost analysis. Treatment decisions need to be guided by appropriate patient stratification based on each individual's underlying phenotype.

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction update-2016.

The first practice parameter on exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) was published in 2010. This updated practice parameter was prepared 5 years later. In the ensuing years, there has been increased understanding of the pathogenesis of EIB and improved diagnosis of this disorder by using objective testing. At the time of this publication, observations included the following: dry powder mannitol for inhalation as a bronchial provocation test is FDA approved however not currently available in the United States; if baseline pulmonary function test results are normal to near normal (before and after bronchodilator) in a person with suspected EIB, then further testing should be performed by using standardized exercise challenge or eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH); and the efficacy of nonpharmaceutical interventions (omega-3 fatty acids) has been challenged. The workgroup preparing this practice parameter updated contemporary practice guidelines based on a current systematic literature review. The group obtained supplementary literature and consensus expert opinions when the published literature was insufficient. A search of the medical literature on PubMed was conducted, and search terms included pathogenesis, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and therapy (both pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical) of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction or exercise-induced asthma (which is no longer a preferred term); asthma; and exercise and asthma. References assessed as relevant to the topic were evaluated to search for additional relevant references. Published clinical studies were appraised by category of evidence and used to document the strength of the recommendation. The parameter was then evaluated by Joint Task Force reviewers and then by reviewers assigned by the parent organizations, as well as the general membership. Based on this process, the parameter can be characterized as an evidence- and consensus-based document.

Is nasal saline irrigation all it is cracked up to be?

OBJECTIVE: This review examines the literature regarding nasal saline irrigation in the management of sinonasal disease. We explore the various properties of nasal irrigation solutions and their effects on nasal symptoms. DATA SOURCES: English-language studies identified from MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 2011. STUDY SELECTIONS: Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs), prospective controlled and comparative studies, and observational studies reporting on the indications, efficacy, and safety of nasal saline irrigation. RESULTS: Nasal saline irrigation has often been used as both a solo and an adjunctive treatment in sinonasal diseases, including allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis. Nasal saline irrigation has contributed to a reduction of inflammation as well as relief of nasal symptoms. Identifying the optimal technique is hampered by the fact that studies have employed various delivery devices and saline compositions, which subsequently have demonstrated different effects on mucus clearance, ciliary beat activity, and inflammatory mediators. CONCLUSION: Overall, the data appear to demonstrate some small clinical benefit to nasal saline irrigation. Nasal saline irrigation is well tolerated, with minimal side effects. Further definitive studies are needed to optimize efficacy.