Implementation of a clinical decision rule for selecting empiric treatment for invasive aspergillosis in a setting with high triazole resistance.

World-wide, emerging triazole resistance increasingly complicates treatment of invasive aspergillosis (IA). In settings with substantial (>10%) prevalence of triazole resistance, empiric combination therapy with both a triazole and liposomal amphotericin B (LAmB) can be considered because of the low yields of susceptibility testing. To avoid toxicity while optimizing outcome, a strategy with monotherapy would be preferable. A newly designed treatment algorithm based on literature and expert consensus provided guidance for empiric monotherapy with either voriconazole or LAmB. Over a four and a half year period, all adult patients in our hospital treated for IA were included and patient data were collected. An independent committee reviewed the attributability of death to IA for each patient. Primary outcomes were 30- and 100-day crude mortality and attributable mortality. In total, 110 patients were treated according to the treatment algorithm. Fifty-six patients (51%) were initially treated with voriconazole and 54 patients (49%) with LAmB. Combined attributable and contributable mortality was 13% within 30 days and 20% within 100 days. Treatment switch to LAmB was made in 24/56 (43%) of patients who were initially treated with voriconazole. Combined contributable and attributable 100-day mortality in this subgroup was 21% and was not increased when compared with patients initially treated with LAmB (P = 0.38). By applying a comprehensive clinical decision algorithm, an antifungal-sparing regime was successfully introduced. Further research is warranted to explore antifungal treatment strategies that account for triazole-resistance. LAY SUMMARY: Due to resistance of Aspergillus against triazoles, combination therapy with liposomal amphotericin B (LAmB) is applied more often as primary therapy against invasive aspergillosis. This study presents the results of a decision tool which differentiated between triazole or LAmB monotherapy.

Effectiveness of myAirCoach: A mHealth Self-Management System in Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Self-management programs have beneficial effects on asthma control, but their implementation in clinical practice is poor. Mobile health (mHealth) could play an important role in enhancing self-management. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness and technology acceptance of myAirCoach-supported self-management on top of usual care in patients with asthma using inhalation medication. METHODS: Patients were recruited in 2 separate studies. The myAirCoach system consisted of an inhaler adapter, an indoor air-quality monitor, a physical activity tracker, a portable spirometer, a fraction exhaled nitric oxide device, and an app. The primary outcome was asthma control; secondary outcomes were exacerbations, quality of life, and technology acceptance. In study 1, 30 participants were randomized to either usual care or myAirCoach support for 3 to 6 months; in study 2, 12 participants were provided with the myAirCoach system in a 3-month before-after study. RESULTS: In study 1, asthma control improved in the intervention group compared with controls (Asthma Control Questionnaire difference, 0.70; P = .006). A total of 6 exacerbations occurred in the intervention group compared with 12 in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.31; P = .06). Asthma-related quality of life improved (mini Asthma-related Quality of Life Questionnaire difference, 0.53; P = .04), but forced expiratory volume in 1 second was unchanged. In study 2, asthma control improved by 0.86 compared with baseline (P = .007) and quality of life by 0.16 (P = .64). Participants reported positive attitudes toward the system. DISCUSSION: Using the myAirCoach support system improves asthma control and quality of life, with a reduction in severe asthma exacerbations. Well-validated mHealth technologies should therefore be further studied.

Clinically masked increases in bronchial inflammation in guideline-treated persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines generally recommend a combination of inhaled corticosteroids and a Beta2-agonist for persistent asthma. The adjustment of anti-inflammatory therapy in persistent asthma is advised to be guided mainly by the presence of symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether clinically masked increases in bronchial inflammation occur in guideline-treated, persistent asthma following allergen exposure. METHODS: After a 4-week steroid-run-in period (fluticasone 250 microg twice daily) 48 allergic patients with persistent asthma underwent a bronchial challenge with a single dose of allergen, after inhalation of salbutamol (400 microg, nebulized dose). FEV1 and sputum markers of bronchial inflammation were measured before and after allergen challenge. Furthermore, additional rescue-salbutamol usage was recorded following allergen challenge. RESULTS: After allergen challenge there was a significant increase in sputum eosinophil numbers (geometric mean number x 10(4)/g [95% CI]: 0.5 [0.3; 1.0] before, and 2.4 [1.3; 4.2] after challenge, p=0.01). The mean change in FEV1 between 4 and 8h after challenge relative to baseline was -0.04% [95% CI-2.3; 2.2], p>0.9. None of the patients took additional rescue salbutamol over 8 h after allergen challenge. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically masked increases in bronchial inflammation occur in guideline-treated, persistent asthma following allergen exposure. This finding underscores the need for additional guides for the adjustment of anti-inflammatory therapy in persistent asthma.

Adding salmeterol to an inhaled corticosteroid reduces allergen-induced serum IL-5 and peripheral blood eosinophils.

BACKGROUND: Adding a long-acting beta(2)-agonist to inhaled corticosteroids results in better symptomatic asthma control than increasing the dose of inhaled corticosteroids. OBJECTIVE: Investigating whether adding the long-acting beta(2)-agonist salmeterol to the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone propionate has an effect on allergen-induced allergic inflammation in asthma. METHODS: Bronchial allergen challenges were performed in 26 patients with allergic asthma, pretreating them with a single dose of either fluticasone/salmeterol (100/50 microg) or fluticasone alone (100 microg), in a double-blind, randomized, cross-over design. Sputum and serum markers of bronchial inflammation were measured after allergen challenge, as well as lung function parameters. Primary outcomes were sputum eosinophil numbers and eosinophil cationic protein. RESULTS: Asthmatic responses after allergen challenge were significantly reduced after pretreatment with fluticasone/salmeterol relative to fluticasone alone. Sputum inflammatory markers after allergen challenge were not significantly affected by fluticasone/salmeterol pretreatment. By contrast, serum IL-5 was significantly reduced (geometric mean serum IL-5 [SEM]: 0.5 [0.3] vs 1.1 [0.3] pg/mL 1 hour and 0.6 [0.3] vs 1.1 [0.3] pg/mL 6 hours after challenge with fluticasone/salmeterol vs fluticasone alone pretreatment, respectively; P values < .05). Also, peripheral blood eosinophils were significantly reduced (geometric mean number x 10(6)/L [SEM]: 172 [0.1] vs 237 [0.1] at 6 hours and 271 [0.1] vs 351 [0.1] at 24 hours with fluticasone/salmeterol vs fluticasone alone pretreatment, respectively; P < .05). CONCLUSION: Adding salmeterol to fluticasone reduces allergen-induced serum IL-5 and peripheral blood eosinophils. This phenomenon may contribute to the improved clinical outcomes that result from adding a long-acting beta(2)-agonist to inhaled corticosteroids.