Effect of Individual Patient Characteristics and Treatment Choices on Reliever Medication Use in Moderate-Severe Asthma: A Poisson Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Even though increased use of reliever medication, including short-acting beta agonists (SABA), provides an indirect measure of symptom worsening, there have been limited efforts to assess how different patterns of reliever use correlate with symptom control and future risk of exacerbations. Here, we evaluate the effect of individual baseline characteristics on reliever use in patients with moderate-severe asthma on regular maintenance therapy with fluticasone propionate (FP) or combination therapy with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR). METHODS: A drug-disease model describing the number of 24-h puffs and overnight occasions was developed with data from five clinical studies (N = 6212). The model was implemented using a nonlinear mixed effects approach and a Poisson function, considering clinical and demographic baseline characteristics. Goodness of fit and model predictive performance were assessed. Heatmaps were created to summarise the effect of concurrent baseline factors on reliever utilisation. RESULTS: The final model accurately described individual patterns of reliever use, which is significantly increased with time since diagnosis, smoking, higher Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) score and higher body mass index (BMI) at baseline. Whilst the number of puffs decreases slowly after an initial drop relative to the start of treatment, exacerbating patients utilise significantly more reliever than those who do not exacerbate. The mean effect of FP/SAL (median dose: 250/50 µg BID) on reliever use was slightly higher than that of BUD/FOR (median dose: 160/4.5 µg BID), i.e. a 75.3% vs 69.3% reduction in reliever use, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of individual-level patient data in conjunction with a parametric approach enabled the characterisation of interindividual differences in the patterns of reliever use in patients with moderate-severe asthma. Taken together, individual demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as exacerbation history, can be considered an indicator of the degree of asthma control. High SABA reliever use suggests suboptimal clinical management of patients on maintenance therapy.

In this study, we tried to understand how patients with moderate to severe asthma use their quick-relief inhalers (like albuterol), how it relates to their symptoms and the risk of having asthma attacks. To evaluate whether differences in reliever inhaler use between patients are associated with factors like smoking or their asthma symptoms at the beginning of treatment, we gathered data from five clinical studies (n = 6212 patients). These data allowed us to create a model that predicts how often patients use their reliever inhalers (expressed as number of puffs in 24 h) during maintenance therapy with inhaled corticosteroids alone or in combination with long-acting beta agonists. The final model showed that reliever inhaler use is higher in patients who have been diagnosed with asthma for > 10 years, are smokers, have higher asthma symptom scores, and are obese or extremely obese. Patients who had asthma attacks also used their reliever inhalers more often. In addition, to understand how relief inhalers are used in real-life situations, we also created heatmaps that include a wide range of patient characteristics. By using individual patient data together with this model, we have learned that smoking, asthma control, BMI, long history of asthma and previous asthma attacks significantly influence reliever use. This information can help physicians and healthcare professionals understand know how well someone's asthma is managed. A patient who uses their reliever inhaler often is likely not to have their asthma well controlled by their regular medications.

Modelling ASthma TrEatment Responses (MASTER): Effect of individual patient characteristics on the risk of exacerbation in moderate or severe asthma: A time-to-event analysis of randomized clinical trials.

AIMS: There is limited understanding of how clinical and demographic characteristics are associated with exacerbation risk in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, and how these factors correlate with symptom control and treatment response. Here we assess the relationship between baseline characteristics and exacerbation risk during regular dosing with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) monotherapy or in combination with long-acting beta2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in clinical trial patients with varying levels of symptom control, as assessed by the asthma control questionnaire (ACQ-5). METHODS: A time-to-event model was developed using pooled patient data (N = 16 282) from nine clinical studies [Correction added on 26 July 2023, after first online publication: The N value in the preceding sentence has been corrected in this version.]. A parametric hazard function was used to describe the time-to-first exacerbation. Covariate analysis included the assessment of the effect of seasonal variation, clinical and demographic baseline characteristics on baseline hazard. Predictive performance was evaluated by standard graphical and statistical methods. RESULTS: An exponential hazard model best described the time-to-first exacerbation in moderate-to-severe asthma patients. Body mass index, smoking status, sex, ACQ-5, % predicted forced expiratory volume over 1 s (FEV1 p) and season were identified as statistically significant covariates affecting baseline hazard irrespective of ICS or ICS/LABA use. Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) combination therapy resulted in a significant reduction in the baseline hazard (30.8%) relative to FP monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Interindividual differences at baseline and seasonal variation affect the exacerbation risk independently from drug treatment. Moreover, it appears that even when a comparable level of symptom control is achieved in a group of patients, each individual may have a different exacerbation risk, depending on their baseline characteristics and time of the year. These findings highlight the importance of personalized interventions in moderate-to-severe asthma patients.

Key recommendations for primary care from the 2022 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) update.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) was established in 1993 by the World Health Organization and the US National Heart Lung and Blood Institute to improve asthma awareness, prevention and management worldwide. GINA develops and publishes evidence-based, annually updated resources for clinicians. GINA guidance is adopted by national asthma guidelines in many countries, adapted to fit local healthcare systems, practices, and resource availability. GINA is independent of industry, funded by the sale and licensing of its materials. This review summarizes key practical guidance for primary care from the 2022 GINA strategy report. It provides guidance on confirming the diagnosis of asthma using spirometry or peak expiratory flow. GINA recommends that all adults, adolescents and most children with asthma should receive inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapy to reduce the risk of severe exacerbations, either taken regularly, or (for adults and adolescents with "mild" asthma) as combination ICS-formoterol taken as needed for symptom relief. For patients with moderate-severe asthma, the preferred regimen is maintenance-and-reliever therapy (MART) with ICS-formoterol. Asthma treatment is not "one size fits all"; GINA recommends individualized assessment, adjustment, and review of treatment. As many patients with difficult-to-treat or severe asthma are not referred early for specialist review, we provide updated guidance for primary care on diagnosis, further investigation, optimization and treatment of severe asthma across secondary and tertiary care. While the GINA strategy has global relevance, we recognize that there are special considerations for its adoption in low- and middle-income countries, particularly the current poor access to inhaled medications.

Utility of biomarkers in the diagnosis and monitoring of asthmatic children.

Asthma imposes a heavy morbidity burden during childhood; it affects over 10% of children in Europe and North America and it is estimated to exceed 400 million people worldwide by the year 2025. In clinical practice, diagnosis of asthma in children is mostly based on clinical criteria; nevertheless, assessment of both physiological and pathological processes through biomarkers, support asthma diagnosis, aid monitoring, and further lead to better treatment outcomes and reduced morbidity. Recently, identification and validation of biomarkers in pediatric asthma has emerged as a top priority across leading experts, researchers, and clinicians. Moreover, the implementation of non-invasive biomarkers for the assessment and monitoring of paediatric patients with asthma, has been prioritized; however, only a proportion of them are currently included in the clinical practise. Although, the use of non-invasive biomarkers is highly supported in recent asthma guidelines for documenting diagnosis and supporting monitoring of asthmatic patients, data on the Pediatric population are limited. In the present report, the Pediatric Asthma Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO), aims to summarize and discuss available data for the implementation of non-invasive biomarkers in the diagnosis and monitoring in children with asthma. Information on the most studied biomarkers, including spirometry, oscillometry, markers of allergic sensitization, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and the most recent exhaled breath markers and "omic" approaches, will be reviewed. Practical limitations and considerations based on both experts' opinion and critical review of the literature, on the utility of all "well-known" and newly introduced non-invasive biomarkers will be presented. A critical commentary on biomarkers' use in diagnosing and monitoring asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic, cost and availability of biomarkers in different settings and in developing countries, the differences on the biomarkers use between Primary Practitioners, Pediatricians, and Specialists and their role on the longitudinal aspect of asthma is provided.

Global Initiative for Asthma Strategy 2021. Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, "MART") in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting ß2-agonist (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment, and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Asthma management in low and middle income countries: case for change.

Asthma is the most common noncommunicable disease in children, and among the most common in adults. The great majority of people with asthma live in low and middle income countries (LMICs), which have disproportionately high asthma-related morbidity and mortality. Essential inhaled medications, particularly those containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), are often unavailable or unaffordable, and this explains much of the global burden of preventable asthma morbidity and mortality. Guidelines developed for LMICs are generally based on the outdated assumption that patients with asthma symptoms <1-3 times per week do not need (or benefit from) ICS. Even when ICS are prescribed, many patients manage their asthma with oral or inhaled short-acting ß2-agonists (SABA) alone, owing to issues of availability and affordability. A single ICS-formoterol inhaler-based approach to asthma management for all severities of asthma, from mild to severe, starting at diagnosis, might overcome SABA overuse/over-reliance and reduce the burden of symptoms and severe exacerbations. However, ICS-formoterol inhalers are currently very poorly available or unaffordable in LMICs. There is a pressing need for pragmatic clinical trial evidence of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of this and other strategies to improve asthma care in these countries. The global health inequality in asthma care that deprives so many children, adolescents and adults of healthy lives and puts them at increased risk of death, despite the availability of highly effective therapeutic approaches, is unacceptable. A World Health Assembly Resolution on universal access to affordable and effective asthma care is needed to focus attention and investment on addressing this need.

Estrategia Global para el Manejo del Asma 2021. Resumen ejecutivo y razones de los cambios clave / Global Initiative for Asthma Strategy 2021. Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting β2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS–formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS–formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as needed only in Steps 1–2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS–formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, “MART”) in Steps 3–5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS–long-acting β2-agonist (Steps 3–5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6–11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3–4. Across all age groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment, and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes. Keywords: Asthma Asthma diagnosis Asthma management Asthma prevention

El Informe sobre la Estrategia Global para el Manejo y la Prevención del Asma (GINA) proporciona a los clínicos una estrategia basada en la evidencia que se actualiza anualmente para el manejo y la prevención del asma, la cual puede adaptarse a las circunstancias locales (por ejemplo, en cuanto a acceso a medicamentos). Este artículo resume las recomendaciones clave de la GINA 2021 y la evidencia que apoya los cambios recientes. La GINA recomienda que el asma en adultos y adolescentes no se trate con agonistas β2 de acción corta (SABA) en monoterapia, debido a los riesgos que acompañan a la monoterapia con SABA y a su uso excesivo, y a la evidencia que demuestra los beneficios del uso de corticosteroides inhalados (ICS). Diversos ensayos clínicos de gran tamaño muestran que la combinación de ICS-formoterol a demanda reduce el número de exacerbaciones graves en el asma leve en ≥ 60% en comparación con los SABA en monoterapia, presentando también resultados similares en las exacerbaciones, síntomas, función pulmonar y efectos antiinflamatorios que el uso diario de ICS más SABA a demanda. Los cambios clave en la GINA 2021 incluyen la división del algoritmo de tratamiento para adultos y adolescentes en dos vías. La vía 1 (la preferencial) cuenta con ICS–formoterol a dosis bajas como tratamiento de rescate en todos los escalones: a demanda solo en los escalones 1–2 (asma leve), y como tratamiento de mantenimiento diario (control y rescate, MART) en los pasos 3–5. La vía 2 (la alternativa) cuenta con SABA a demanda en todos los escalones, más tratamiento regular con ICS (paso 2) o ICS-Agonista β2 de acción prolongada en los escalones 3–5. Para los adultos con asma moderada a grave, la GINA realiza recomendaciones adicionales en el escalón 5, con el agregado de agonistas muscarínicos de larga duración y azitromicina y de tratamientos biológicos en el asma grave. Para los niños entre seis y 11 años, se han añadido opciones nuevas de tratamiento en los escalones 3 y 4. En todos los grupos de edad y gravedad, sigue siendo esencial una valoración personalizada regular, el tratamiento de los factores de riesgo modificables, la educación para el autocontrol de síntomas, técnicas y habilidades del paciente, el ajuste apropiado de la medicación y las revisiones para optimizar la evolución del asma. Palabras clave: Asma Diagnóstico del asma Gestión del asma Prevención del asma

Global Initiative for Asthma Strategy 2021: Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting ß2 -agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, "MART") in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting ß2 -agonist (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment, and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Global Initiative for Asthma Strategy 2021: Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ⩾60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, "MART") in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting ß2-agonist (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment, and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Global Initiative for Asthma Strategy 2021: Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, "MART") in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting ß2-agonist (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment, and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Management of asthma in childhood: study protocol of a systematic evidence update by the Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical recommendations for childhood asthma are often based on data extrapolated from studies conducted in adults, despite significant differences in mechanisms and response to treatments. The Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank aspires to develop recommendations based on the best available evidence from studies in children. An overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on paediatric asthma maintenance management and an SR of treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, requiring an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission will be conducted. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Standard methodology recommended by Cochrane will be followed. Maintenance pharmacotherapy of childhood asthma will be evaluated in an overview of SRs published after 2005 and including clinical trials or real-life studies. For evaluating pharmacotherapy of acute asthma attacks leading to an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission, we opted to conduct de novo synthesis in the absence of adequate up-to-date published SRs. For the SR of acute asthma pharmacotherapy, we will consider eligible SRs, clinical trials or real-life studies without time restrictions. Our evidence updates will be based on broad searches of Pubmed/Medline and the Cochrane Library. We will use A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, V.2, Cochrane risk of bias 2 and REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, controlled clinical trials and real-life studies, respectively.Next, we will further assess interventions for acute severe asthma attacks with positive clinical results in meta-analyses. We will include both controlled clinical trials and observational studies and will assess their quality using the previously mentioned tools. We will employ random effect models for conducting meta-analyses, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess certainty in the body of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for SRs. Our findings will be published in peer reviewed journals and will inform clinical recommendations being developed by the PeARL Think Tank. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBERS: CRD42020132990, CRD42020171624.

Shorter telomeres in children with severe asthma, an indicative of accelerated aging.

Severe therapy-resistant asthma (STRA) is closely associated with distinct clinical and inflammatory pheno-endotypes, which may contribute to the development of age-related comorbidities. Evidence has demonstrated a contribution of accelerated telomere shortening on the poor prognosis of respiratory diseases in adults. Eotaxin-1 (CCL11) is an important chemokine for eosinophilic recruitment and the progression of asthma. In the last years has also been proposed as an age-promoting factor. This study aimed to investigate the association of relative telomere length (rTL) and eotaxin-1 in asthmatic children. Children aged 8-14 years (n=267) were classified as healthy control (HC, n=126), mild asthma (MA, n=124) or severe therapy-resistant asthma (STRA, n=17). rTL was performed by qPCR from peripheral blood. Eotaxin-1 was quantified by ELISA from fresh-frozen plasma. STRA had shorter telomeres compared to HC (p=0.02) and MA (p=0.006). Eotaxin-1 levels were up-regulated in STRA [median; IQR25-75)] [(1,190 pg/mL; 108-2,510)] compared to MA [(638 pg/mL; 134-1,460)] (p=0.03) or HC [(627 pg/mL; 108-1,750)] (p<0.01). Additionally, shorter telomeres were inversely correlated with eotaxin-1 levels in STRA (r=-0.6, p=0.013). Our results suggest that short telomeres and up-regulated eotaxin-1, features of accelerated aging, could prematurely contribute to a senescent phenotype increasing the risk for early development of age-related diseases in asthma.

Impact of COVID-19 on Pediatric Asthma: Practice Adjustments and Disease Burden.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether asthma may affect susceptibility or severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children and how pediatric asthma services worldwide have responded to the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric asthma services and on disease burden in their patients. METHODS: An online survey was sent to members of the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life think tank and the World Allergy Organization Pediatric Asthma Committee. It included questions on service provision, disease burden, and the clinical course of confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection among children with asthma. RESULTS: Ninety-one respondents, caring for an estimated population of more than 133,000 children with asthma, completed the survey. COVID-19 significantly impacted pediatric asthma services: 39% ceased physical appointments, 47% stopped accepting new patients, and 75% limited patients' visits. Consultations were almost halved to a median of 20 (interquartile range, 10-25) patients per week. Virtual clinics and helplines were launched in most centers. Better than expected disease control was reported in 20% (10%-40%) of patients, whereas control was negatively affected in only 10% (7.5%-12.5%). Adherence also appeared to increase. Only 15 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were reported among the population; the estimated incidence is not apparently different from the reports of general pediatric cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Children with asthma do not appear to be disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Outcomes may even have improved, possibly through increased adherence and/or reduced exposures. Clinical services have rapidly responded to the pandemic by limiting and replacing physical appointments with virtual encounters.

Research Priorities in Pediatric Asthma: Results of a Global Survey of Multiple Stakeholder Groups by the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric asthma remains a public health challenge with enormous impact worldwide. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize unmet clinical needs in pediatric asthma, which could be used to guide future research and policy activities. METHODS: We first identified unmet needs through an open-question survey administered to international experts in pediatric asthma who were members of the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life Think Tank. Prioritization of topics was then achieved through a second, extensive survey with global reach, of multiple stakeholders (leading experts, researchers, clinicians, patients, policy makers, and the pharmaceutical industry). Differences across responder groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 57 unmet clinical need topics identified by international experts were prioritized by 412 participants from 5 continents and 60 countries. Prevention of disease progression and prediction of future risk, including persistence into adulthood, emerged as the most urgent research questions. Stratified care, based on biomarkers, clinical phenotypes, the children's age, and demographics were also highly rated. The identification of minimum diagnostic criteria in different age groups, cultural perceptions of asthma, and best treatment by age group were priorities for responders from low-middle-income countries. There was good agreement across different stakeholder groups in all domains with some notable exceptions that highlight the importance of involving the whole range of stakeholders in formulation of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Different stakeholders agree in the majority of research and strategic (eg, prevention, personalized approach) priorities for pediatric asthma. Stakeholder diversity is crucial for highlighting divergent issues that future guidelines should consider.

Helminths and Asthma: Risk and Protection.

Helminth infections may inhibit the development of allergic diseases, including asthma. On the other hand, some helminth species may induce or worsen symptoms of asthma. This article discusses the impact of helminth infections on asthma as well as the potencial of helminth-derived molecules with regulatory characteristics in the prevention or treatment of this disease. The ability to induce regulation has been observed in animal models of asthma or cells of asthmatic individuals in vitro. Potential future clinical applications of helminth antigens or infection for prevention of asthma merit further translational research.

Pediatric asthma: An unmet need for more effective, focused treatments.

BACKGROUND: Despite remarkable advances in our understanding of asthma, there are still several unmet needs associated with the management of pediatric asthma. METHODS: A two-day, face-to-face meeting was held in London, United Kingdom, on October 28 and 29, 2017, involving a group of international expert clinicians and scientists in asthma management to discuss the challenges and unmet needs that remain to be addressed in pediatric asthma. RESULTS: These unmet needs include a lack of clinical efficacy and safety evidence, and limited availability of non-steroid-based alternative therapies in patients <6 years of age. An increased focus on children is needed in the context of clinical practice guidelines for asthma; current pediatric practice relies mostly on extrapolations from adult recommendations. Furthermore, no uniform definition of pediatric asthma exists, which hampers timely and robust diagnosis of the condition in affected patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a uniform definition of pediatric asthma, clearly distinguishable from adult asthma. Furthermore, guidelines which provide specific treatment recommendations for the management of pediatric asthma are also needed. Clinical trials and real-world evidence studies assessing anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) therapies and other monoclonal antibodies in children <6 years of age with asthma may provide further information regarding the most appropriate treatment options in these vulnerable patients. Early intervention with anti-IgE and non-steroid-based alternative therapies may delay disease progression, leading to improved clinical outcomes.