Factors affecting adherence with treatment advice in a clinical trial of patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Understanding why patients with severe asthma do not follow healthcare provider (HCP) advice to adjust treatment is critical to achieving personalised disease management. METHODS: We reviewed patient choice to follow HCP advice to adjust asthma treatment in a UK-based randomised, controlled, single-blind (study participant), multicentre, parallel group 48-week clinical study comparing biomarker-directed treatment adjustment with standard care in severe asthma. RESULTS: Of 1572 treatment advisories (291 participants), instructions were followed in 1377 cases (87.6%). Patients were more likely to follow advice to remain on treatment (96.7%) than to either reduce (70.3%) or increase (67.1%) their treatment, with 64% of patients following all treatment advice. Multivariate analysis associated belonging to an ethnic minority group (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.68-5.73) and prior study medication changes (two or more changes: OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.51-5.10) with failure to follow treatment advice. In contrast, emergency room attendance in the prior year (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.92) was associated with following treatment advice. The largest effect was seen with transition onto or off oral corticosteroids (OR 29.28, 95% CI 16.07-53.36) when compared with those requested to maintain treatment. Centre was also an important determinant regarding the likelihood of patients to follow treatment advice. CONCLUSIONS: Belonging to an ethnic minority group and multiple prior treatment adjustments were associated with not following HCP treatment advice. Patients also responded differently to HCP advice across UK specialist centres. These findings have implications for the generalisability of models of care in severe asthma and require further focused studies.

Severe asthma assessment, management and the organisation of care in Australia and New Zealand: expert forum roundtable meetings.

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on individuals, families and the healthcare system. Treatment is complex, due to disease heterogeneity, comorbidities and complexity in care pathways. New approaches and treatments improve health outcomes for people with severe asthma. However, emerging multidimensional and targeted treatment strategies require a reorganisation of asthma care. Consensus is required on how reorganisation should occur and what areas require further research. The Centre of Excellence in Severe Asthma convened three forums between 2015 and 2018, hosting experts from Australia, New Zealand and the UK. The forums were complemented by a survey of clinicians involved in the management of people with severe asthma. We sought to: (i) identify areas of consensus among experts; (ii) define activities and resources required for the implementation of findings into practice; and (iii) identify specific priority areas for future research. Discussions identified areas of unmet need including assessment and diagnosis of severe asthma, models of care and treatment pathways, add-on treatment approaches and patient perspectives. We recommend development of education and training activities, clinical resources and standards of care documents, increased stakeholder engagement and public awareness campaigns and improved access to infrastructure and funding. Further, we propose specific future research to inform clinical decision-making and develop novel therapies. A concerted effort is required from all stakeholders (including patients, healthcare professionals and organisations and government) to integrate new evidence-based practices into clinical care and to advance research to resolve questions relevant to improving outcomes for people with severe asthma.

Indirect comparison of bronchial thermoplasty versus omalizumab for uncontrolled severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) as an add-on therapy for uncontrolled severe asthma is an alternative to biologic therapies like omalizumab (OM). We conducted an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) to appraise comparative effectiveness of BT and OM. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified relevant randomized controlled trials. The ITC followed accepted methodology. RESULTS: The ITC comprised a sham-controlled trial of BT (AIR2) and two placebo-controlled trials of OM (INNOVATE; EXTRA). Comparing the BT post-treatment period to ongoing treatment with OM, showed no significant differences in the rate ratios (RRs) for severe exacerbations (RR of BT versus OM = 0.91 [95% CI: 0.64, 1.30]; p = 0.62) or hospitalizations (RR = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.17, 1.86]; p = 0.53); emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 75% with BT (RR = 0.25 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.91]; p = 0.04); the proportions of patients with clinically meaningful response on the asthma quality-of-life questionnaire were comparable (RR = 1.06 [95% CI: 0.86, 1.34]; p = 0.59). The RR for exacerbations statistically favours OM over the total study period in AIR2 (RR = 1.50 [95% CI: 1.11, 2.02]; p = 0.009) likely reflecting a transient increase in events during the BT peri-treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: The ITC should be interpreted cautiously considering the differences between patient populations in the included trials. However, based on the analysis, BT compares well with a potentially more costly pharmacotherapy for asthma. Clinicians evaluating the relative merits of using these treatments should consider the totality of evidence and patient preferences to make an informed decision.

Procedural and short-term safety of bronchial thermoplasty in clinical practice: evidence from a national registry and Hospital Episode Statistics.

OBJECTIVE: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is a novel treatment for severe asthma. Its mode of action and ideal target patient group remain poorly defined, though clinical trials provided some evidence on efficacy and safety. This study presents procedural and short-term safety evidence from routine UK clinical practice. METHODS: Patient characteristics and safety outcomes (procedural complications, 30-day readmission and accident and emergency (A&E) attendance, length of stay) were assessed using two independent data sources, the British Thoracic Society UK Difficult Asthma Registry (DAR) and Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) database. A matched cohort (with records in both) was used to estimate safety outcome event rates and compare them with clinical trials. RESULTS: Between June 2011 and January 2015, 215 procedure records (83 patients; 68 treated in England) were available from DAR and 203 (85 patients) from HES. 152 procedures matched (59 patients; 6 centres), and of these, 11.2% reported a procedural complication, 11.8% resulted in emergency respiratory readmission, 0.7% in respiratory A&E attendance within 30 days (20.4% had at least one event) and 46.1% involved a post-procedure stay. Compared with published clinical trials which found lower hospitalisation rates, BT patients in routine clinical practice were, on average, older, had worse baseline lung function and asthma quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of patients experienced adverse events compared with clinical trials. The greater severity of disease amongst patients treated in clinical practice may explain the observed rate of post-procedural stay and readmission. Study of long-term safety and efficacy requires continuing data collection.

T1-weighted Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging of the Lung in Asthma: Semiquantitative Analysis for the Assessment of Contrast Agent Kinetic Characteristics.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the contrast agent kinetics of dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in healthy lungs and asthmatic lungs by using non-model-based semiquantitative parameters and to explore the relationships with pulmonary function testing and eosinophil level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the National Research Ethical Committee (reference no. 11/NW/0387), and written informed consent was obtained from all individuals. Ten healthy subjects and 30 patients with asthma underwent pulmonary function tests, blood and sputum eosinophil counts, and 1.5-T DCE MR imaging within 7 days. Semiquantitative parameters of contrast agent kinetics were calculated from the relative signal intensity-time course curves on a pixel-by-pixel basis and were summarized by using whole-lung median values. The distribution heterogeneity was assessed by using the regional coefficient of variation. DCE MR imaging readouts were compared between groups by using one-way analysis of variance, and the relationships with pulmonary function testing and eosinophil counts were assessed by using Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS: Asthmatic patients showed significantly lower peak enhancement (P < .001) and initial areas under the relative signal intensity curve in the first 60 seconds (P = .002) and significantly reduced late-phase washout slope (P = .002) when compared with healthy control subjects. The distribution heterogeneity of bolus arrival time (P = .029), time to peak (P = .008), upslope of the first-pass peak (P = .011), and late-phase washout slope (P = .032), estimated by using the median coefficient of variation, were significantly higher in asthmatic patients than in healthy control subjects. These imaging readouts also showed significant linear correlations with measurements of pulmonary function testing but not with eosinophil level in patients with asthma. CONCLUSION: The contrast agent kinetic characteristics of T1-weighted DCE MR images of asthmatic lungs are different from those of healthy lungs and are related to measurements of pulmonary function testing but not to eosinophil level.

Efficacy and safety of nebulised amphotericin B (NAB) in severe asthma with fungal sensitisation (SAFS) and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA).

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Antifungal therapy for severe asthma with fungal sensitisation (SAFS) and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) remains poorly studied. We assessed the efficacy and safety of NAB as second and third line therapy in SAFS and ABPA. METHODS: 21 adult asthmatics with SAFS (n = 11) and ABPA (n = 10) who had either failed itraconazole (n = 8), voriconazole proceeded by itraconazole (n = 5) or developed adverse events (AEs) to either agent (n = 7) were treated with 10mg of NAB (Fungizone) twice daily. We audited clinical and immunological response, using the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-J) scores, asthma control, FEV1, healthcare utilisation and IgE. Patients were followed up for 12 months. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were treated (SAFS, n = 11) and (ABPA, n = 10), M: F = 8:12, median age 65 years (range, 24-78). The median duration of therapy was 30 days (0-1825). Clinical benefit was observed in three (14.3 %) in which overall mean AQLQ-J score improved by + 2.9, mean FEV1 improved by 0.5 L and there was improvement in overall asthma control. Seven (33%) failed initial dose (bronchospasm). Eleven (52.4%) discontinued within 12 months of therapy due to delayed bronchospasm (n = 3, within 4 weeks), equipment problems (n = 2, within 4 weeks) and lack of clinical benefit (n = 4, within 16 weeks). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the overall efficacy of NAB in this group of patients is poor and associated with bronchospasm. However, the excellent response in 3 patients, suggest it may be considered when other alternatives have been exhausted. Overcoming the initial bronchospasm may improve tolerability.

Does BCG vaccination protect against childhood asthma? Final results from the Manchester Community Asthma Study retrospective cohort study and updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Manchester Community Asthma Study (MANCAS) found a protective effect against the risk of wheeze at age 6 to 11 years for children given neonatal BCG vaccination. Our subsequent systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that BCG vaccination did not protect against allergic sensitization but might have exerted a protective effect against nonatopic asthma. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess whether the protective effect of BCG vaccination on wheeze observed in the MANCAS cohort was maintained at age 13 to 17 years and to incorporate the findings from this final MANCAS analysis into an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: BCG vaccination status was determined from health records and respiratory outcomes from questionnaire responses. We updated the systematic review and used fixed-effects and random-effects modeling to undertake meta-analyses. RESULTS: There were 1608 participants in the final MANCAS analysis. The 12-month prevalence of wheeze was 15.1%. There was no difference in prevalence between those who were and were not BCG vaccinated (15.8% vs 14.3%; relative risk, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.19). The updated meta-analysis incorporated 4 new studies: this showed that the protective effect of BCG vaccination against the development of asthma identified in our previous meta-analysis was attenuated (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00). No protective effect of BCG was seen for sensitization, eczema/atopic dermatitis, rhinoconjunctivitis, or allergy in general. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, the final results of the MANCAS cohort and the updated systematic review and meta-analysis provide clearer evidence that any protective effect of BCG vaccination on childhood asthma is likely to be transient.

Clinical outcomes and inflammatory biomarkers in current smokers and exsmokers with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes are worse in current smokers and exsmokers with mild-to-moderate asthma compared with never smokers, but little is known about the influence of smoking status in patients with severe asthma. OBJECTIVES: We sought to examine the association of current or previous cigarette smoking with clinical and inflammatory variables in patients with severe asthma. METHODS: We compared patients' demographics, disease characteristics, and biomarkers of inflammation in current smokers (n=69 [9%]), exsmokers (n=210 [28%]), and never smokers (n=461 [62%]) with severe asthma (n=760) recruited to the British Thoracic Society Severe Asthma Registry. RESULTS: Current smokers had poorer asthma control, more unscheduled health care visits, more rescue courses of oral steroids, and higher anxiety and depression scale scores than exsmokers or never smokers. Current smokers had a reduced proportion of sputum eosinophils compared with never smokers (1% and 4%, respectively) and lower fraction of expired nitric oxide (50 mL/s; 14 ppb and 35 ppb, respectively). Exsmokers compared with never smokers had an increased proportion of sputum neutrophils (59% and 43%, respectively) but a similar proportion of sputum eosinophils (3%) and fraction of expired nitric oxide (50 mL/s; 35 ppb). Both current smokers and exsmokers had reduced serum specific IgE levels to several common environmental allergens. CONCLUSION: Current smokers with severe asthma exhibit worse clinical and health care outcomes compared with exsmokers and never smokers with severe asthma. Their inflammatory profiles in sputum and blood differ.

Bronchial thermoplasty: Long-term safety and effectiveness in patients with severe persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) has previously been shown to improve asthma control out to 2 years in patients with severe persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the effectiveness and safety of BT in asthmatic patients 5 years after therapy. METHODS: BT-treated subjects from the Asthma Intervention Research 2 trial (ClinicalTrials.govNCT01350414) were evaluated annually for 5 years to assess the long-term safety of BT and the durability of its treatment effect. Outcomes assessed after BT included severe exacerbations, adverse events, health care use, spirometric data, and high-resolution computed tomographic scans. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two (85.3%) of 190 BT-treated subjects from the Asthma Intervention Research 2 trial completed 5 years of follow-up. The proportion of subjects experiencing severe exacerbations and emergency department (ED) visits and the rates of events in each of years 1 to 5 remained low and were less than those observed in the 12 months before BT treatment (average 5-year reduction in proportions: 44% for exacerbations and 78% for ED visits). Respiratory adverse events and respiratory-related hospitalizations remained unchanged in years 2 through 5 compared with the first year after BT. Prebronchodilator FEV1 values remained stable between years 1 and 5 after BT, despite a 18% reduction in average daily inhaled corticosteroid dose. High-resolution computed tomographic scans from baseline to 5 years after BT showed no structural abnormalities that could be attributed to BT. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate the 5-year durability of the benefits of BT with regard to both asthma control (based on maintained reduction in severe exacerbations and ED visits for respiratory symptoms) and safety. BT has become an important addition to our treatment armamentarium and should be considered for patients with severe persistent asthma who remain symptomatic despite taking inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonists.

Safety of bronchial thermoplasty in patients with severe refractory asthma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe refractory asthma treated with bronchial thermoplasty (BT), a bronchoscopic procedure that improves asthma control by reducing excess airway smooth muscle, were followed up for 5 years to evaluate long-term safety of this procedure. OBJECTIVES: To assess long-term safety of BT for 5 years. METHODS: Patients with asthma aged 18 to 65 years requiring high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) (>750 µg/d of fluticasone propionate or equivalent) and long-acting ß2-agonists (LABAs) (at least 100 µg/d of salmeterol or equivalent), with or without oral prednisone (≤30 mg/d), leukotriene modifiers, theophylline, or other asthma controller medications were enrolled in the Research in Severe Asthma (RISA) Trial. Patients had a prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 50% or more of predicted, demonstrated methacholine airway hyperresponsiveness, had uncontrolled symptoms despite taking maintenance medication, abstained from smoking for 1 year or greater, and had a smoking history of less than 10 pack-years. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (of the 15 who received active treatment in the RISA Trial) participated in the long-term follow-up study for 5 years. The rate of respiratory adverse events (AEs per patient per year) was 1.4, 2.4, 1.7, and 2.4, respectively, in years 2 to 5 after BT. There was a decrease in hospitalizations and emergency department visits for respiratory symptoms in each of years 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 compared with the year before BT treatment. Measures of lung function showed no deterioration for 5 years. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that BT is safe for 5 years after BT in patients with severe refractory asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00401986.

Fungi and allergic lower respiratory tract diseases.

Asthma is a common disorder that in 2009 afflicted 8.2% of adults and children, 24.6 million persons, in the United States. In patients with moderate and severe persistent asthma, there is significantly increased morbidity, use of health care support, and health care costs. Epidemiologic studies in the United States and Europe have associated mold sensitivity, particularly to Alternaria alternata and Cladosporium herbarum, with the development, persistence, and severity of asthma. In addition, sensitivity to Aspergillus fumigatus has been associated with severe persistent asthma in adults. Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is caused by A fumigatus and is characterized by exacerbations of asthma, recurrent transient chest radiographic infiltrates, coughing up thick mucus plugs, peripheral and pulmonary eosinophilia, and increased total serum IgE and fungus-specific IgE levels, especially during exacerbation. The airways appear to be chronically or intermittently colonized by A fumigatus in patients with ABPA. ABPA is the most common form of allergic bronchopulmonary mycosis (ABPM); other fungi, including Candida, Penicillium, and Curvularia species, are implicated. The characteristics of ABPM include severe asthma, eosinophilia, markedly increased total IgE and specific IgE levels, bronchiectasis, and mold colonization of the airways. The term severe asthma associated with fungal sensitization (SAFS) has been coined to illustrate the high rate of fungal sensitivity in patients with persistent severe asthma and improvement with antifungal treatment. The immunopathology of ABPA, ABPM, and SAFS is incompletely understood. Genetic risks identified in patients with ABPA include HLA association and certain T(H)2-prominent and cystic fibrosis variants, but these have not been studied in patients with ABPM and SAFS. Oral corticosteroid and antifungal therapies appear to be partially successful in patients with ABPA. However, the role of antifungal and immunomodulating therapies in patients with ABPA, ABPM, and SAFS requires additional larger studies.

Voriconazole and posaconazole improve asthma severity in allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis and severe asthma with fungal sensitization.

Rationale and objectives. Severe asthma with fungal sensitization (SAFS) and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) are progressive allergic fungal lung diseases whose effective treatment remains to be established. Current treatment with itraconazole is associated with a 40% failure rate and adverse events (AEs). We assessed the effect of voriconazole or posaconazole as second- and third-line therapies. Methods. We conducted a retrospective review of adult asthmatic patients with either ABPA or SAFS receiving voriconazole or posaconazole. Clinical, radiological, and immunological evaluation was used to assess response. Results. There were 25 patients, ABPA (n = 20) or SAFS (n = 5), 10 males, median age = 58 years. All patients had failed itraconazole (n = 14) or developed AEs (n = 11). There were 33 courses of therapy analyzed, 24 with voriconazole and 9 with posaconazole. Clinical response to voriconazole was observed in 17/24 (70%) patients at 3 months, 15/20 (75%) at 6 months, and 12/16 (75%) at 12 months compared with 7/9 (78%) at 3, 6, and 12 months for posaconazole. Eighteen of 24 (75%) patients discontinued oral corticosteroids (OCS), 12 of them within 3 months of therapy. Asthma severity was downgraded from severe to moderate (n = 8) and moderate to mild (n = 1) asthma in 9 of 24 (38%) asthmatic patients. There was a marked reduction in OCS and short-acting beta-2 agonist use, health-care utilization due to asthma, and improvement in overall health status. Furthermore, there was a statistically significant reduction in immunological markers appearing at 9 months (p = .008) for total IgE and at 12 months for radioallergosorbent test IgE for Aspergillus fumigatus (p = .0056). Six of 23 (26%) patients on voriconazole had AEs requiring discontinuation before 6 months compared with none on posaconazole (p = .15). Four relapsed (57%), one at 3 months and three at 12 months after discontinuation. Conclusion. Both voriconazole and posaconazole are potentially effective alternative treatment options for SAFS and ABPA and may improve asthma control and reduce severity, though larger prospective studies are required to support these retrospective study findings.

Effectiveness and safety of bronchial thermoplasty in the treatment of severe asthma: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial.

RATIONALE: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is a bronchoscopic procedure in which controlled thermal energy is applied to the airway wall to decrease smooth muscle. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of BT versus a sham procedure in subjects with severe asthma who remain symptomatic despite treatment with high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists. METHODS: A total of 288 adult subjects (Intent-to-Treat [ITT]) randomized to BT or sham control underwent three bronchoscopy procedures. Primary outcome was the difference in Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) scores from baseline to average of 6, 9, and 12 months (integrated AQLQ). Adverse events and health care use were collected to assess safety. Statistical design and analysis of the primary endpoint was Bayesian. Target posterior probability of superiority (PPS) of BT over sham was 95%, except for the primary endpoint (96.4%). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The improvement from baseline in the integrated AQLQ score was superior in the BT group compared with sham (BT, 1.35 +/- 1.10; sham, 1.16 +/- 1.23 [PPS, 96.0% ITT and 97.9% per protocol]). Seventy-nine percent of BT and 64% of sham subjects achieved changes in AQLQ of 0.5 or greater (PPS, 99.6%). Six percent more BT subjects were hospitalized in the treatment period (up to 6 wk after BT). In the posttreatment period (6-52 wk after BT), the BT group experienced fewer severe exacerbations, emergency department (ED) visits, and days missed from work/school compared with the sham group (PPS, 95.5, 99.9, and 99.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: BT in subjects with severe asthma improves asthma-specific quality of life with a reduction in severe exacerbations and healthcare use in the posttreatment period. Clinical trial registered with www.clinialtrials.gov (NCT00231114).

Long-term (5 year) safety of bronchial thermoplasty: Asthma Intervention Research (AIR) trial.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is a bronchoscopic procedure that improves asthma control by reducing excess airway smooth muscle. Treated patients have been followed out to 5 years to evaluate long-term safety of this procedure. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the Asthma Intervention Research Trial were on inhaled corticosteroids ≥200 µg beclomethasone or equivalent + long-acting-beta2-agonists and demonstrated worsening of asthma on long-acting-ß2-agonist withdrawal. Following initial evaluation at 1 year, subjects were invited to participate in a 4 year safety study. Adverse events (AEs) and spirometry data were used to assess long-term safety out to 5 years post-BT. RESULTS: 45 of 52 treated and 24 of 49 control group subjects participated in long-term follow-up of 5 years and 3 years respectively. The rate of respiratory adverse events (AEs/subject) was stable in years 2 to 5 following BT (1.2, 1.3, 1.2, and 1.1, respectively,). There was no increase in hospitalizations or emergency room visits for respiratory symptoms in Years 2, 3, 4, and 5 compared to Year 1. The FVC and FEV1 values showed no deterioration over the 5 year period in the BT group. Similar results were obtained for the Control group. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of clinical complications (based on AE reporting) and the maintenance of stable lung function (no deterioration of FVC and FEV1) over a 5-year period post-BT in this group of patients with moderate to severe asthma support the long-term safety of the procedure out to 5 years.

Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend increasing corticosteroid dose to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. This approach is potentially flawed because symptomatic asthma can occur without corticosteroid responsive type-2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation, and inappropriately high-dose corticosteroid treatment might have little therapeutic benefit with increased risk of side-effects. We compared a biomarker strategy to adjust corticosteroid dose using a composite score of T2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FENO], blood eosinophils, and serum periostin) with a standardised symptom-risk-based algorithm (control). METHODS: We did a single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in adults (18-80 years of age) with severe asthma (at treatment steps 4 and 5 of the Global Initiative for Asthma) and FENO of less than 45 parts per billion at 12 specialist severe asthma centres across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomly assigned (4:1) to either the biomarker strategy group or the control group by an online electronic case-report form, in blocks of ten, stratified by asthma control and use of rescue systemic steroids in the previous year. Patients were masked to study group allocation throughout the entirety of the study. Patients attended clinic every 8 weeks, with treatment adjustment following automated treatment-group-specific algorithms: those in the biomarker strategy group received a default advisory to maintain treatment and those in the control group had their treatment adjusted according to the steps indicated by the trial algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with corticosteroid dose reduction at week 48, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary outcomes were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at the end of the study; cumulative dose of ICS during the study; proportion of patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) at study end; rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient year; time to first severe exacerbation; number of hospital admissions for asthma; changes in lung function, Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and T2 biomarkers from baseline to week 48; and whether patients declined to progress to OCS. A secondary aim of our study was to establish the proportion of patients with severe asthma in whom T2 biomarkers remained low when corticosteroid therapy was decreased to a minimum ICS dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 and has been completed. FINDINGS: Patients were recruited from Jan 8, 2016, to July 12, 2018. Of 549 patients assessed, 301 patients were included in the ITT population and were randomly assigned to the biomarker strategy group (n=240) or to the control group (n=61). 28·4% of patients in the biomarker strategy group were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 compared with 18·5% of patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·71 [95% CI 0·80-3·63]; p=0·17). In the per-protocol (PP) population (n=121), a significantly greater proportion of patients were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 in the biomarker strategy group (30·7% of patients) compared with the control group (5·0% of patients; aOR 11·48 [95% CI 1·35-97·83]; p=0·026). Patient choice to not follow treatment advice was the principle reason for loss to PP analysis. There was no difference in secondary outcomes between study groups and no loss of asthma control among patients in the biomarker strategy group who reduced their corticosteroid dose. INTERPRETATION: Biomarker-based corticosteroid adjustment did not result in a greater proportion of patients reducing corticosteroid dose versus control. Understanding the reasons for patients not following treatment advice in both treatment strategies is an important area for future research. The prevalence of T2 biomarker-low severe asthma was low. FUNDING: This study was funded, in part, by the Medical Research Council UK.

Asthma control during the year after bronchial thermoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty is a bronchoscopic procedure to reduce the mass of airway smooth muscle and attenuate bronchoconstriction. We examined the effect of bronchial thermoplasty on the control of moderate or severe persistent asthma. METHODS: We randomly assigned 112 subjects who had been treated with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists (LABA) and in whom asthma control was impaired when the LABA were withdrawn to either bronchial thermoplasty or a control group. The primary outcome was the frequency of mild exacerbations, calculated during three scheduled 2-week periods of abstinence from LABA at 3, 6, and 12 months. Airflow, airway responsiveness, asthma symptoms, the number of symptom-free days, use of rescue medication, and scores on the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) were also assessed. RESULTS: The mean rate of mild exacerbations, as compared with baseline, was reduced in the bronchial-thermoplasty group but was unchanged in the control group (change in frequency per subject per week, -0.16+/-0.37 vs. 0.04+/-0.29; P=0.005). At 12 months, there were significantly greater improvements in the bronchial-thermoplasty group than in the control group in the morning peak expiratory flow (39.3+/-48.7 vs. 8.5+/-44.2 liters per minute), scores on the AQLQ (1.3+/-1.0 vs. 0.6+/-1.1) and ACQ (reduction, 1.2+/-1.0 vs. 0.5+/-1.0), the percentage of symptom-free days (40.6+/-39.7 vs. 17.0+/-37.9), and symptom scores (reduction, 1.9+/-2.1 vs. 0.7+/-2.5) while fewer puffs of rescue medication were required. Values for airway responsiveness and forced expiratory volume in 1 second did not differ significantly between the two groups. Adverse events immediately after treatment were more common in the bronchial-thermoplasty group than in the control group but were similar during the period from 6 weeks to 12 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Bronchial thermoplasty in subjects with moderate or severe asthma results in an improvement in asthma control. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00214526 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Randomized controlled trial of oral antifungal treatment for severe asthma with fungal sensitization: The Fungal Asthma Sensitization Trial (FAST) study.

RATIONALE: Some patients with severe asthma are immunologically sensitized to one or more fungi, a clinical entity categorized as severe asthma with fungal sensitization (SAFS). It is not known whether SAFS responds to antifungal therapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the response of SAFS to oral itraconazole. METHODS: Patients with severe asthma sensitized to at least one of seven fungi by skin prick or specific IgE testing were recruited. All had total IgE less than 1,000 IU/ml and negative Aspergillus precipitins. They were treated with oral itraconazole (200 mg twice daily) or placebo for 32 weeks, with follow-up for 16 weeks. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was change in the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) score, with rhinitis score, total IgE, and respiratory function as secondary end points. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled, of whom 41% had been hospitalized in the previous year. Baseline mean AQLQ score was 4.13 (range, 1-7). At 32 weeks, the improvement (95% confidence interval) in AQLQ score was +0.85 (0.28, 1.41) in the antifungal group, compared with a -0.01 (-0.43, 0.42) change in the placebo group (P = 0.014). Rhinitis score improved (-0.43) in the antifungal, and deteriorated (+0.17) in the placebo group (P = 0.013). Morning peak flow improved (20.8 L/minute, P = 0.028) in the antifungal group. Total serum IgE decreased in the antifungal group (-51 IU/ml) but increased in placebo group (+30 IU/ml) (P = 0.001). No severe adverse events were observed, but seven patients developed adverse events requiring discontinuation, five in the antifungal group. CONCLUSIONS: SAFS responds to oral antifungal therapy as judged by large improvements in quality of life in about 60% of patients.