Respiratory System Dynamics.

While static mechanical forces govern resting lung volumes, dynamic forces determine tidal breathing, airflow, and changes in airflow and lung volume during normal and abnormal breathing. This section will examine the mechanisms, measurement methodology, and interpretation of the dynamic changes in airflow and lung volume that occur in health and disease. We will first examine how the total work of breathing can be described by the parameters of the equation of motion, which determine the pressure required to move air into and out of the lung. This will include a detailed description of airflow characteristics and airway resistance. Next, we will review the changes in pressure and flow that determine maximal forced inspiration and expiration, which result in the maximal flow-volume loop and the clinically important forced expired volume in 1 second. We will also assess the mechanisms and interpretation of bronchodilator responsiveness, dynamic hyperinflation, and airways hyperresponsiveness.

Inhaled anti-TSLP antibody fragment, ecleralimab, blocks responses to allergen in mild asthma.

BACKGROUND: Thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) is a key upstream regulator driving allergic inflammatory responses. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ecleralimab, a potent inhaled neutralising antibody fragment against human TSLP, using allergen inhalation challenge (AIC) in subjects with mild atopic asthma. METHODS: This was a 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, multicentre allergen bronchoprovocation study conducted at 10 centres across Canada and Germany. Subjects aged 18-60 years with stable mild atopic asthma were randomised (1:1) to receive 4 mg once-daily inhaled ecleralimab or placebo. Primary end-points were the allergen-induced change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) during the late asthmatic response (LAR) measured by area under the curve (AUC3-7h) and maximum percentage decrease (LAR%) on day 84, and the safety of ecleralimab. Allergen-induced early asthmatic response (EAR), sputum eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (F ENO) were secondary and exploratory end-points. RESULTS: 28 subjects were randomised to ecleralimab (n=15) or placebo (n=13). On day 84, ecleralimab significantly attenuated LAR AUC3-7h by 64% (p=0.008), LAR% by 48% (p=0.029), and allergen-induced sputum eosinophils by 64% at 7 h (p=0.011) and by 52% at 24 h (p=0.047) post-challenge. Ecleralimab also numerically reduced EAR AUC0-2h (p=0.097) and EAR% (p=0.105). F ENO levels were significantly reduced from baseline throughout the study (p<0.05), except at 24 h post-allergen (day 43 and day 85). Overall, ecleralimab was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Ecleralimab significantly attenuated allergen-induced bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation, and was safe in subjects with mild atopic asthma.

Sounding the alarmins-The role of alarmin cytokines in asthma.

The alarmin cytokines thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), interleukin (IL)-33, and IL-25 are epithelial cell-derived mediators that contribute to the pathobiology and pathophysiology of asthma. Released from airway epithelial cells exposed to environmental triggers, the alarmins drive airway inflammation through the release of predominantly T2 cytokines from multiple effector cells. The upstream positioning of the alarmins is an attractive pharmacological target to block multiple T2 pathways important in asthma. Blocking the function of TSLP inhibits allergen-induced responses including bronchoconstriction, airway hyperresponsiveness, and inflammation, and subsequent clinical trials of an anti-TSLP monoclonal antibody, tezepelumab, in asthma patients demonstrated improvements in lung function, airway responsiveness, inflammation, and importantly, a reduction in the rate of exacerbations. Notably, these improvements were observed in patients with T2-high and with T2-low asthma. Clinical trials blocking IL-33 and its receptor ST2 have also shown improvements in lung function and exacerbation rates; however, the impact of blocking the IL-33/ST2 axis in T2-high versus T2-low asthma is unclear. To date, there is no evidence that IL-25 blockade is beneficial in asthma. Despite the considerable overlap in the cellular functions of IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP, they appear to have distinct roles in the immunopathology of asthma.

Effect of daily dosing with tiotropium against methacholine induced bronchoconstriction in asthmatics.

INTRODUCTION: Loss of bronchoprotection against direct and indirect acting stimuli following regular use of inhaled beta2-agonists occurs with both short and long-acting formulations. Comparatively little is known about the development of tolerance following regular use of inhaled muscarinic receptor antagonists. Two investigations with the short-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist ipratropium bromide have reported no tolerance after regular use against inhaled methacholine. To our knowledge, there are no data regarding loss of bronchoprotection following regular use of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist. We therefore looked at the effect of daily dosing with tiotropium on methacholine induced bronchoconstriction in a population of mild asthmatics. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over study comparing tiotropium Respimat® 5 µg to placebo in adult asthmatics. Each treatment arm began with baseline methacholine challenge followed immediately by treatment administration. One hour later a post treatment methacholine challenge was performed. Participants dosed daily (two puffs) at home for the next six days and returned to the lab on Day 8 for a final dose of treatment 1 h prior to methacholine challenge. RESULTS: The average doubling dose increase in methacholine PD20 following a single dose of tiotropium was 3.9 doubling doses whereas that following placebo was 0.93 (p = 0.003). After regular use, methacholine PD20 was further increased to 6.4 doubling doses following tiotropium whereas that following placebo decreased by 0.57 doubling doses (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: LAMA are indicated for use as add-on monotherapy or in triple therapy combination for poorly controlled asthma. It may be reassuring to know therefore, that regular use does not result in loss of bronchoprotection like that which occurs with beta2-agonist bronchodilators.

Muscarinic Receptor Antagonism and Allergen Induced Airway Responses in Allergic Asthma: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this scoping review was to identify existing clinical and basic science knowledge surrounding the effect of muscarinic receptor antagonism on allergen-induced airway responses to inform future clinical research in this area. METHODS: Multiple advanced searches were performed using the National Library of Medicine PubMed search engine. Each search began with two terms; for example, "atropine and asthma" or "tiotropium and airway inflammation". Results were then further refined to include terms such as "allergen" or "ovalbumin (OVA)". Abstracts of refined searches were reviewed for relevance to allergic asthma and allergen-induced airway responses including the early and late asthmatic responses, airway inflammation and tissue remodelling. There was no restriction regarding publication date. Reference lists of selected papers were also reviewed for relevant publications. RESULTS: Nine human clinical trial publications and fourteen animal model publications were identified. In humans, single dose atropine (n=4), ipratropium (n=4) or oxitropium (n=1) administered pre-challenge produced equivocal effects on allergen-induced early asthmatic responses as reported but favored inhibition in eight of nine studies after re-analyses. Animal model investigations (n=14) showed mostly favorable results, especially with respect to airway inflammation and tissue remodelling, although two studies were negative, and one study showed a worsening in allergen induced airway inflammation following muscarinic receptor antagonism. CONCLUSION: Existing human and animal model data suggest muscarinic receptor antagonism may be beneficial in preventing allergen induced airway responses in those with allergic asthma. Additional human research utilizing current standardized methodologies is required.

Allergen provocation tests in respiratory research: building on 50†years of experience.

The allergen provocation test is an established model of allergic airway diseases, including asthma and allergic rhinitis, allowing the study of allergen-induced changes in respiratory physiology and inflammatory mechanisms in sensitised individuals as well as their associations. In the upper airways, allergen challenge is focused on the clinical and pathophysiological sequelae of the early allergic response, and is applied both as a diagnostic tool and in research settings. In contrast, bronchial allergen challenge has almost exclusively served as a research tool in specialised research settings with a focus on the late asthmatic response and the underlying type 2 inflammation. The allergen-induced late asthmatic response is also characterised by prolonged airway narrowing, increased nonspecific airway hyperresponsiveness and features of airway remodelling including the small airways, and hence allows the study of several key mechanisms and features of asthma. In line with these characteristics, allergen challenge has served as a valued tool to study the cross-talk of the upper and lower airways and in proof-of-mechanism studies of drug development. In recent years, several new insights into respiratory phenotypes and endotypes including the involvement of the upper and small airways, innovative biomarker sampling methods and detection techniques, refined lung function testing as well as targeted treatment options further shaped the applicability of the allergen provocation test in precision medicine. These topics, along with descriptions of subject populations and safety, in line with the updated Global Initiative for Asthma 2021 document, will be addressed in this review.

Direct and indirect bronchoprovocation tests in dose-response studies of inhaled corticosteroids: Past, present, and future directions.

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a mainstay of treatment in eosinophilic asthma. Many studies have explored the dose-response effect of different formulations of ICS through direct or indirect bronchoprovocation testing. Such studies are important for investigating efficacy and identifying the relative potency between formulations. However, lack of consistency in methods and designs has hindered the comparability of study findings. This review discusses current knowledge of the dose-response, or lack thereof, of different formulations of ICS through direct and indirect bronchoprovocation testing. The strengths and weaknesses of past studies inform recommendations for future methodological considerations in this field, such as utilizing a randomized double-blind crossover design, enrolling participants likely to respond to ICS therapy, and carefully selecting treatment durations and washout periods to assess incremental improvement in airway hyperresponsiveness while reducing the likelihood of a carryover effect.

Comparison of methacholine and mannitol challenges: importance of method of methacholine inhalation.

BACKGROUND: Direct inhalation challenges (e.g. methacholine) are stated to be more sensitive and less specific for a diagnosis of asthma than are indirect challenges (e.g. exercise, non-isotonic aerosols, mannitol, etc.). However, data surrounding comparative sensitivity and specificity for methacholine compared to mannitol challenges are conflicting. When methacholine is inhaled by deep total lung capacity (TLC) inhalations, deep inhalation inhibition of bronchoconstriction leads to a marked loss of diagnostic sensitivity when compared to tidal breathing (TB) inhalation methods. We hypothesized that deep inhalation methacholine methods with resulting bronchoprotection may be the explanation for conflicting sensitivity/specificity data. METHODS: We reviewed 27 studies in which methacholine and mannitol challenges were performed in largely the same individuals. Methacholine was inhaled by dosimeter TLC methods in 13 studies and by tidal breathing in 14 studies. We compared the rates of positive methacholine (stratified by inhalation method) and mannitol challenges in both asthmatics and non-asthmatics. RESULTS: When methacholine was inhaled by TLC inhalations the prevalence of positive tests in asthmatics, 60.2% (548/910), was similar to mannitol, 58.9% (537/912). By contrast, when methacholine was inhaled by tidal breathing the prevalence of positive tests in asthmatics 83.1% (343/413) was more than double that of mannitol, 41.5% (146/351). In non-asthmatics, the two methacholine methods resulted in positive tests in 18.8% (142/756) and 16.2% (27/166) by TLC and TB inhalations respectively. This compares to an overall 8.3% (n = 76) positive rate for mannitol in 913 non-asthmatics. CONCLUSION: These data support the hypothesis that the conflicting data comparing methacholine and mannitol sensitivity and specificity are due to the method of methacholine inhalation. Tidal breathing methacholine methods have a substantially greater sensitivity for a diagnosis of asthma than either TLC dosimeter methacholine challenge methods or mannitol challenge. Methacholine challenges should be performed by tidal breathing as per recent guideline recommendations. Methacholine (more sensitive) and mannitol (more specific) will thus have complementary diagnostic features.

Anti-alarmin approaches entering clinical trials.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The alarmins, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), interleukin (IL)-25 and IL-33, are upstream regulators of T2 (type 2) inflammation and found to be expressed at high levels in airway epithelium of patients with T2 asthma. This review will summarize how alarmins regulate the inflamed asthmatic airways through previously described and newly identified mechanisms. RECENT FINDINGS: Alarmins drive allergic and nonallergic asthma through activation of innate lymphoid cell 2 (ILC2), which are a rich source of cytokines such as IL-5 and IL-13, with resulting effects on eosinophilopoeisis and remodelling, respectively. Findings from bronchial allergen challenges have illustrated widespread expression of alarmins and their receptors across many effector cells in airways, and recent studies have emphasized alarmin regulation of CD4 T lymphocytes, eosinophils and basophils, and their progenitors. Furthermore, a link between alarmins and lipid mediators is being uncovered. SUMMARY: Alarmins can drive well defined inflammatory pathways through activation of dendritic cells and polarizing T cells to produce type 2 cytokines, as well as they can directly activate many other effector cells that play a central role in allergic and nonallergic asthma. Clinical trials support a central role for TSLP in driving airway inflammation and asthma exacerbations, while ongoing trials blocking IL-33 and IL-25 will help to define their respective role in asthma.

Respiratory Duty Cycles in Individuals With and Without Airway Hyperresponsiveness.

BACKGROUND: The respiratory duty cycle (Ti/Ttot) can influence bronchoprovocation test results and nebulized drug delivery. The Ti/Ttot has not yet been examined in individuals with airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) in typical bronchoprovocation test conditions. This study investigated the mean Ti/Ttot in participants with and without AHR and whether the Ti/Ttot changes with increasing bronchoconstriction. METHODS: Fifteen participants with AHR and fifteen participants without AHR completed this randomized crossover study. An ultrasonic spirometer was used for continuous measurement of the Ti/Ttot as participants inhaled room air or aerosolized solution. Each participant completed two methacholine challenges, one using a continuous-output vibrating mesh nebulizer/ultrasonic spirometer and one with the nebulizer only. Prior to each methacholine challenge, participants inhaled room air and aerosolized saline through the nebulizer/spirometer setup to record baseline Ti/Ttot data. RESULTS: The mean Ti/Ttot findings [95% CIs] during room air inhalation were 0.392 [0.378-0.406] and 0.447 [0.426-0.468] in participants with and without AHR, respectively (P < .001). The mean Ti/Ttot during saline inhalation were 0.389 [0.373-0.405] and 0.424 [0.398-0.450] in participants with and without AHR (P = .040). The Ti/Ttot showed a nonsignificant downward trend with progressive methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction. CONCLUSIONS: The mean Ti/Ttot in participants with AHR closely resembles the assumed Ti/Ttot of 0.40 recommended for standard use when calculating methacholine challenge results. Since the Ti/Ttot did not change significantly over the course of a methacholine challenge, the same Ti/Ttot can be used to calculate the dose of methacholine inhaled, regardless of the level of bronchoconstriction. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03505489; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

The effect of deep inhalation on mannitol responsiveness.

BACKGROUND: Mannitol inhalation testing is specific for asthmatics with eosinophilic airway inflammation, a factor that has been negatively correlated with the development of deep inhalation bronchoprotection. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of deep inhalations on responsiveness to inhaled mannitol in correlation with the degree of airway inflammation. METHODS: Twenty participants with stable asthma completed this randomized, crossover study. A screening visit assessed responsiveness to methacholine and airway inflammation through fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) measures and sputum induction. Participants next completed two mannitol challenges, one with deep inhalations (standard method) and one with inhalations to half of total lung capacity, and two methacholine challenges, one with tidal breathing (standard method) and one with deep inhalations. Only the inhalation technique for dose administration differed between repeat mannitol or methacholine challenges. RESULTS: Deep inhalations did not significantly influence the provocative dose of mannitol causing a 15% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second ((P = .73; n = 7) or the mannitol dose-response slope (P = .26; n = 20). Deep inhalations produced significant bronchoprotection against methacholine (P = .03; n = 20). FeNO levels were significantly correlated to sputum eosinophilia (P = .02; n = 15), responsiveness to deep inhalation methacholine (P = .005; n = 20), the dose-response slopes from deep inhalation mannitol (P = .01; n = 20), and the dose-response slope from non-deep inhalation mannitol (P = .005; n = 20). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Deep inhalations did not produce significant bronchoprotection against inhaled mannitol. This result is in agreement with past findings linking airway inflammation with loss of deep inhalation bronchoprotection. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03505489).

Use of a vibrating mesh nebulizer for allergen challenge.

BACKGROUND: Allergen inhalation tests are a valuable research tool. The allergen dose producing an early asthmatic response (EAR) can be predicted from methacholine responsiveness and allergen skin test endpoint (STE). The Wright® jet nebulizer, which is both inefficient and increasingly difficult to obtain, has been used historically. We assessed the Solo® vibrating mesh nebulizer as an alternative for allergen and methacholine challenges. METHODS: Eighteen mild atopic asthmatics completed the study. Doubling concentration allergen prick skin tests were performed to determine the STE in allergen units/mL. The Wright® protocol was used to measure the methacholine provocation dose causing a 20% forced expired volume in one second (FEV1) fall (PD20) (µg) and the allergen PD20 (units). The Solo® protocol (0.5 mL nebulized to completion, tidal breathing inhalation) was used to determine both methacholine PD20 and allergen PD20. The nebulizer order was randomized and separated by ≥ 2 weeks. RESULTS: All data were log transformed. The allergen PD20, predicted from the methacholine PD20 and the STE, was within 2 doubling doses of the PD20 measured with the Wright® and 2.64 doubling doses of that measured with Solo®. The Wright® allergen PD20 correlated with the Wright® methacholine PD20 (r = 0.74) and the STE (r = 0.78) and more strongly with the product of the two (Wright® methacholine PD20 × STE, r = 0.91, p < 0.00001). The Solo® allergen PD20 showed similar relationships with the Solo® methacholine PD20 (r = 0.61), the STE (r = 0.75) and the product of the two (Solo® methacholine PD20 × STE, r = 0.83, p < 0.00002). The Wright® and the Solo® methacholine geometric mean PD20s were not significantly different (49.3 and 54.5 µg respectively, p = 0.62). The Wright® allergen PD20 was slightly but significantly lower than the Solo® allergen PD20 (geometric means 6.7 and 10.5 units respectively, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The Solo® allergen PD20 showed the same relationship with methacholine responsiveness and STE as did the Wright®. The Solo® allergen PD20 was slightly but significantly higher than the Wright® allergen PD20. The Solo® vibrating mesh nebulizer was well tolerated and is an acceptable alternative for allergen challenge.Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03491358.

Short-term effect of once-daily fluticasone furoate on methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction in mild asthmatics.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) decrease airway inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR). Previous studies have generally investigated the effect of ICS on methacholine-induced AHR following weeks or months of medium to high dose treatment. PURPOSE: The short-term effects of once-daily fluticasone furoate (FF) 100 mcg on methacholine-induced AHR and airway inflammation were examined over the course of one week. METHODS: Eleven mild asthmatics completed this randomized, double-blind crossover study. Once-daily FF (100 mcg) and identical appearing placebo Ellipta® inhalers were given for 7 days with a 2-week washout. Methacholine challenges were performed before and 24 h after the first, third and seventh doses. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) was measured initially and at 7 days. RESULTS: FF significantly (p = 0.0009-0.0078) increased methacholine PD20 (provocative dose causing 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s) at all times. Doubling dose shifts (95% CI) were 1.23 (0.60-1.86), 1.17 (0.68-1.67) and 1.44 (0.93-1.94) after the first, third and seventh dose respectively. FeNO (geometric mean, 95% CI) decreased significantly (p = 0.0049) following FF treatment from 37.9 ppb (23.7-60.5) initially to 22.9 ppb (14.8-35.5) at 7 days. Placebo did not affect methacholine PD20 or FeNO. CONCLUSION: Single-dose FF 100 mcg decreased methacholine AHR at 24 h without significant further improvement with continued daily use over 7 days. The inhibition in AHR after one week of daily dosing coincided with a significant decrease in FeNO at 7 days. Contrary to past assumptions, the ICS FF appears to rapidly reduce AHR to methacholine.

Direct bronchoprovocation test methods: history 1945-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Bronchoprovocation inhalation challenge tests with direct acting stimuli (e.g. methacholine) are widely used clinically to aid in the diagnosis of asthma. Areas covered: The history of direct challenges with histamine and muscarinic agonists is reviewed. This began with parenteral administration of stimuli with responses monitored clinically and by VC, progressing to inhalation dose-response challenges monitored by FEV1 and FEV1/VC ratio, both (the challenge method and the technology to measure FEV1) developed by Robert Tiffeneau in the mid-1940s. Careful standardization of methods has become appreciated albeit after-the-fact. Recent guidelines recommend standardizing the methacholine PD20 at 400 µg above which a methacholine challenge is considered negative. CONCLUSIONS: The methacholine inhalation test is highly sensitive for a diagnosis of current asthma when symptoms under evaluation are clinically current and when methacholine is inhaled without deep inhalations. Under these circumstances, a methacholine PD20 > 400 µg excludes current asthma with reasonable certainty. PD20 values >25 µg and ≤400 µg will have a variable specificity and positive predictive value for asthma which increases the lower the PD20 and the higher the pre-test probability for a diagnosis of asthma. A PD20 ≤25 µg has high specificity and low sensitivity for asthma.

Bronchoprotective effect of vilanterol against methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction in mild asthmatics: A randomized three-way crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Ultra-long-acting ß2 agonists (uLABA) are relatively new anti-asthma medications of which there are three different formulations currently available: olodaterol, indacaterol, and vilanterol. The first 2 formulations have been shown to exert bronchoprotective effects; they are able to prevent airway smooth muscle contraction on exposure to constricting stimuli. However, studies have found that these 2 drugs produce different degrees and durations of bronchoprotection against methacholine. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the degree of bronchoprotection provided by vilanterol against methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction. METHODS: Fourteen patients with mild-to-moderate asthma (8 male; baseline percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] > 65%; provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% reduction in FEV1 [PC20] ≤ 8 mg/mL) completed this randomized, double-blind, 3-way crossover study. Methacholine challenges were performed before treatment administration (placebo, 100 µg fluticasone furoate, or 25 µg vilanterol + 100 µg fluticasone furoate) and at 0.5 and 24 hours posttreatment. Each treatment arm was separated by a minimum 7-day washout period. A combination therapy of vilanterol+fluticasone furoate was used, because vilanterol is not available as a monotherapy. RESULTS: Significant bronchoprotection was evident after the combination treatment at both 0.5 and 24 hours with doubling dose shifts in methacholine PC20 of 2.0 (P = .0004) and 1.6 (P = .0001), respectively. Clinically significant bronchodilation was only recorded at 24 hours after combination treatment (P < .05). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that vilanterol (in combination with fluticasone furoate) provides significant bronchoprotection against methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction for at least 24 hours in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03315000).