Tezepelumab decreases airway epithelial IL-33 and T2-inflammation in response to viral stimulation in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory virus infections are main triggers of asthma exacerbations. Tezepelumab, an anti-TSLP mAb, reduces exacerbations in patients with asthma, but the effect of blocking TSLP on host epithelial resistance and tolerance to virus infection is not known. AIM: To examine effects of blocking TSLP in patients with asthma on host resistance (IFNß, IFNλ, and viral load) and on the airway epithelial inflammatory response to viral challenge. METHODS: Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF, n = 39) and bronchial epithelial cells (BECs) were obtained from patients with uncontrolled asthma before and after 12 weeks of tezepelumab treatment (n = 13) or placebo (n = 13). BECs were cultured in vitro and exposed to the viral infection mimic poly(I:C) or infected by rhinovirus (RV). Alarmins, T2- and pro-inflammatory cytokines, IFNß IFNλ, and viral load were analyzed by RT-qPCR and multiplex ELISA before and after stimulation. RESULTS: IL-33 expression in unstimulated BECs and IL-33 protein levels in BALF were reduced after 12 weeks of tezepelumab. Further, IL-33 gene and protein levels decreased in BECs challenged with poly(I:C) after tezepelumab whereas TSLP gene expression remained unaffected. Poly(I:C)-induced IL-4, IL-13, and IL-17A release from BECs was also reduced with tezepelumab whereas IFNß and IFNλ expression and viral load were unchanged. CONCLUSION: Blocking TSLP with tezepelumab in vivo in asthma reduced the airway epithelial inflammatory response including IL-33 and T2 cytokines to viral challenge without affecting anti-viral host resistance. Our results suggest that blocking TSLP stabilizes the bronchial epithelial immune response to respiratory viruses.

Cardiac output during exercise: a comparison of four methods.

Several techniques assessing cardiac output (Q) during exercise are available. The extent to which the measurements obtained from each respective technique compares to one another, however, is unclear. We quantified Q simultaneously using four methods: the Fick method with blood obtained from the right atrium (Q(Fick-M)), Innocor (inert gas rebreathing; Q(Inn)), Physioflow (impedance cardiography; Q(Phys)), and Nexfin (pulse contour analysis; Q(Pulse)) in 12 male subjects during incremental cycling exercise to exhaustion in normoxia and hypoxia (FiO2 = 12%). While all four methods reported a progressive increase in Q with exercise intensity, the slopes of the Q/oxygen uptake (VO2) relationship differed by up to 50% between methods in both normoxia [4.9 ± 0.3, 3.9 ± 0.2, 6.0 ± 0.4, 4.8 ± 0.2 L/min per L/min (mean ± SE) for Q(Fick-M), Q(Inn), QP hys and Q(Pulse), respectively; P = 0.001] and hypoxia (7.2 ± 0.7, 4.9 ± 0.5, 6.4 ± 0.8 and 5.1 ± 0.4 L/min per L/min; P = 0.04). In hypoxia, the increase in the Q/VO2 slope was not detected by Nexfin. In normoxia, Q increases by 5-6 L/min per L/min increase in VO2, which is within the 95% confidence interval of the Q/VO2 slopes determined by the modified Fick method, Physioflow, and Nexfin apparatus while Innocor provided a lower value, potentially reflecting recirculation of the test gas into the pulmonary circulation. Thus, determination of Q during exercise depends significantly on the applied method.