RESUMEN
Background: Increased serum interleukin (IL)-33 predicts poor outcomes in patients hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We examined the efficacy and safety of tozorakimab, a monoclonal antibody that neutralises IL-33, in improving outcomes in ACCORD-2 (EudraCT: 2020-001736-95). Methods: ACCORD-2 was an open-label, phase 2a study in adults hospitalised with COVID-19. Patients were randomised 1:1 to tozorakimab 300â mg plus standard of care (SoC) or SoC alone. The primary end-point was time to clinical response (sustained clinical improvement of ≥2â points on the World Health Organization ordinal scale, discharge from hospital or fit for discharge) by day 29. Other end-points included death or respiratory failure, mortality and intensive care unit admission by day 29, and safety. Serum IL-33/soluble stimulated-2 (sST2) complex levels were measured by high-sensitivity immunoassay. Results: Efficacy analyses included 97 patients (tozorakimab+SoC, n=53; SoC, n=44). Median time to clinical response did not differ between the tozorakimab and SoC arms (8.0 and 9.5â days, respectively; HR 0.96, 80% CI 0.70-1.31; one-sided p=0.33). Tozorakimab was well tolerated and the OR for risk of death or respiratory failure with treatment versus SoC was 0.55 (80% CI 0.27-1.12; p=0.26), while the OR was 0.31 (80% CI 0.09-1.06) in patents with high baseline serum IL-33/sST2 complex levels. Conclusions: Overall, ACCORD-2 results suggest that tozorakimab could be a novel therapy for patients hospitalised with COVID-19, warranting further investigation in confirmatory phase 3 studies.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with type-2 (T2) cytokine-low severe asthma often have persistent symptoms despite suppression of T2 inflammation with corticosteroids. OBJECTIVES: We sought to analyze whole blood transcriptome from 738 samples in T2-biomarker-high/-low patients with severe asthma to relate transcriptomic signatures to T2 biomarkers and asthma symptom scores. METHODS: Bulk RNA-seq data were generated for blood samples (baseline, week 24, week 48) from 301 participants recruited to a randomized clinical trial of corticosteroid optimization in severe asthma. Unsupervised clustering, differential gene expression analysis, and pathway analysis were performed. Patients were grouped by T2-biomarker status and symptoms. Associations between clinical characteristics and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) associated with biomarker and symptom levels were investigated. RESULTS: Unsupervised clustering identified 2 clusters; cluster 2 patients were blood eosinophil-low/symptom-high and more likely to be receiving oral corticosteroids (OCSs). Differential gene expression analysis of these clusters, with and without stratification for OCSs, identified 2960 and 4162 DEGs, respectively. Six hundred twenty-seven of 2960 genes remained after adjusting for OCSs by subtracting OCS signature genes. Pathway analysis identified dolichyl-diphosphooligosaccharide biosynthesis and assembly of RNA polymerase I complex as significantly enriched pathways. No stable DEGs were associated with high symptoms in T2-biomarker-low patients, but numerous associated with elevated T2 biomarkers, including 15 that were upregulated at all time points irrespective of symptom level. CONCLUSIONS: OCSs have a considerable effect on whole blood transcriptome. Differential gene expression analysis demonstrates a clear T2-biomarker transcriptomic signature, but no signature was found in association with T2-biomarker-low patients, including those with a high symptom burden.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Transcriptoma , Humanos , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/genética , Asma/diagnóstico , Perfilación de la Expresión Génica , Biomarcadores , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéuticoAsunto(s)
Cambio Climático , Política Ambiental , Hidrocarburos Fluorados , Ozono Estratosférico , Humanos , Clima , Ozono , Rayos UltravioletaRESUMEN
Acute COVID-19 infection is followed by prolonged symptoms in approximately one in ten cases: known as Long COVID. The disease affects ~65 million individuals worldwide. Many pathophysiological processes appear to underlie Long COVID, including viral factors (persistence, reactivation, and bacteriophagic action of SARS CoV-2); host factors (chronic inflammation, metabolic and endocrine dysregulation, immune dysregulation, and autoimmunity); and downstream impacts (tissue damage from the initial infection, tissue hypoxia, host dysbiosis, and autonomic nervous system dysfunction). These mechanisms culminate in the long-term persistence of the disorder characterized by a thrombotic endothelialitis, endothelial inflammation, hyperactivated platelets, and fibrinaloid microclots. These abnormalities of blood vessels and coagulation affect every organ system and represent a unifying pathway for the various symptoms of Long COVID.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Trombosis , Humanos , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , InflamaciónRESUMEN
There is a strong scientific rationale to use nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in treating patients with COVID-19. This pilot study investigated whether nebulised UFH was safe and had any impact on mortality, length of hospitalisation and clinical progression, in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. This parallel group, open label, randomised trial included adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to two hospitals in Brazil. One hundred patients were planned to be randomised to either "standard of care" (SOC) or SOC plus nebulized UFH. The trial was stopped after randomisation of 75 patients due to falling COVID-19 hospitalisation rates. Significance tests were 1-sided test (10% significance level). The key analysis populations were intention to treat (ITT) and modified ITT (mITT) which excluded (from both arms) subjects admitted to ITU or who died within 24 h of randomisation. In the ITT population (n = 75), mortality was numerically lower for nebulised UFH (6 out of 38 patients; 15.8%) versus SOC (10 out of 37 patients; 27.0%), but not statistically significant; odds ratio (OR) 0.51, p = 0.24. However, in the mITT population, nebulised UFH reduced mortality (OR 0.2, p = 0.035). Length of hospital stay was similar between groups, but at day 29, there was a greater improvement in ordinal score following treatment with UFH in the ITT and mITT populations (p = 0.076 and p = 0.012 respectively), while mechanical ventilation rates were lower with UFH in the mITT population (OR 0.31; p = 0.08). Nebulised UFH did not cause any significant adverse events. In conclusion, nebulised UFH added to SOC in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was well tolerated and showed clinical benefit, particularly in patients who received at least 6 doses of heparin. This trial was funded by The J.R. Moulton Charity Trust and registered under REBEC RBR-8r9hy8f (UTN code: U1111-1263-3136).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Heparina/efectos adversos , Proyectos Piloto , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitalización , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% to 10% of patients with asthma have severe disease, with a consistent preponderance in females. Current asthma guidelines recommend stepwise treatment to achieve symptom control with no differential treatment considerations for either sex. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patient sex affects outcomes when using a composite T2-biomarker score to adjust corticosteroid (CS) treatment in patients with severe asthma compared with standard care. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis, stratifying patient outcomes by sex, of a 48-week, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing a biomarker-defined treatment algorithm with standard care. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a reduction in CS treatment (inhaled and oral corticosteroids). Secondary outcomes included exacerbation rates, hospital admissions, and lung function. RESULTS: Of the 301 patients randomized, 194 (64.5%) were females and 107 (35.5%) were males. The biomarker algorithm led to a greater proportion of females being on a lower CS dose versus standard care, which was not seen in males (effect estimate: females, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.14-11.18 vs males, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.16-1.80). In T2-biomarker-low females, reducing CS dose was not associated with increased exacerbations. Females scored higher in all domains of the 7-item Asthma Control Questionnaire, apart from FEV1, but with no difference when adjusted for body mass index/anxiety and/or depression. Dissociation between symptoms and T2 biomarkers were noted in both sexes, with a higher proportion of females being symptom high/T2-biomarker low (22.8% vs 15.6%; P = .0002), whereas males were symptom low/T2-biomarker high (22.3% vs 11.4%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory post hoc analysis identified that females achieved a greater benefit from biomarker-directed CS optimization versus symptom-directed treatment.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Masculino , Femenino , Humanos , Corticoesteroides , Quimioterapia Combinada , BiomarcadoresRESUMEN
Rationale: The past 25 years have seen huge progress in understanding of the pathobiology of type-2 (T2) asthma, identification of measurable biomarkers, and the emergence of novel monoclonal antibody treatments. Although present in a minority of patients with severe asthma, very little is known about the mechanisms underlying T2-low asthma, making it a significant unmet need in asthma research. Objectives: The objective of this study was to explore the differences between study exacerbators and nonexacerbators, to describe physiological changes at exacerbation in those who are T2HIGH and T2LOW at the time of exacerbation, and to evaluate the stability of inflammatory phenotypes when stable and at exacerbation. Methods: Exacerbation assessment was a prespecified secondary analysis of data from a 48-week, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical study comparing the use of biomarkers and symptoms to adjust steroid treatment in a T2-low severe asthma-enriched cohort. Participants were phenotyped as T2LOW (fractional exhaled nitric oxide ⩽ 20 ppb and blood eosinophil count ⩽ 150 cells/µl) or T2HIGH (fractional exhaled nitric oxide > 20 or blood eosinophil count > 150) at study enrollment and at each exacerbation. Here, we report the findings of the exacerbation analyses, including comparison of exacerbators and nonexacerbators, the physiological changes at exacerbation in those who had evidence of T2 biology at exacerbation versus those that did not, and the stability of inflammatory phenotypes when stable and at exacerbation. Measurements and Main Results: Of the 301 participants, 60.8% (183) had one or more self-reported exacerbations (total of 390). Exacerbators were more likely to be female, have a higher body mass index, and have more exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroid and unscheduled primary care attendances for exacerbations. At enrollment, 23.6% (71) were T2LOW and 76.4% (230) T2HIGH. The T2LOW group had more asthma primary care attendances, were more likely to have a previous admission to HDU (high dependency unit)/ICU and to be receiving maintenance oral corticosteroids. At exacerbation, the T2LOW events were indistinguishable from T2HIGH exacerbations in terms of lung function (mean fall in T2LOW FEV1, 200 [400] ml vs. T2HIGH 200 [300] ml; P = 0.93) and symptom increase (ACQ5: T2LOW, 1.4 [0.8] vs. T2HIGH, 1.3 [0.8]; P = 0.72), with no increase in T2 biomarkers from stable to exacerbation state in the T2LOW exacerbations. The inflammatory phenotype within individual patients was dynamic; inflammatory phenotype at study entry did not have a significant association with exacerbation phenotype. Conclusions: Asthma exacerbations demonstrating a T2LOW phenotype were physiologically and symptomatically similar to T2HIGH exacerbations. T2LOW asthma was an unstable phenotype, suggesting that exacerbation phenotyping should occur at the time of exacerbation. The clinically significant exacerbations in participants without evidence of T2 biology at the time of exacerbation highlight the unmet and pressing need to further understand the mechanisms at play in non-T2 asthma. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02717689).
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Fenotipo , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of switching from a pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI)-based to a dry powder inhaler (DPI)-based maintenance therapy versus continued usual care on greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide equivalents, CO2e) and asthma control. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis was based on a subset of 2236 (53%) patients from the Salford Lung Study in Asthma who at baseline were using a pMDI-based controller therapy. During the study patients were randomised to fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) via the ELLIPTA DPI (switched from pMDI to DPI) (n=1081) or continued their usual care treatment (n=1155), and were managed in conditions close to everyday clinical practice. Annual CO2e (kg) was calculated for the total number of maintenance and rescue inhalers prescribed. Asthma control was assessed by the proportion of ACT responders (composite of ACT total score ≥20 and/or increase from baseline ≥3). RESULTS: The groups were well matched for demographic characteristics and baseline Asthma Control Test (ACT) total score (mean age: 49 years; mean ACT score: usual care, 16.6; FF/VI, 16.5). Annual CO2e kg per patient (maintenance plus rescue therapy) was significantly lower with FF/VI DPI treatment ('switch' group) than usual care (least squares geometric mean 108 kg (95% CI 102 to 114) vs 240 kg (95% CI 229 to 252), p<0.001). Asthma control was consistently superior over the 12 months in the FF/VI DPI group compared with usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients switching from a pMDI-based to a DPI-based maintenance therapy more than halved their inhaler carbon footprint without loss of asthma control. The remaining inhaler carbon footprint could be reduced through switches from pMDI to DPI rescue medications or alternative lower-carbon footprint rescue inhalers if available. Asthma control improved in both groups, with greater control demonstrated in those initiated on FF/VI DPI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01706198.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Inhaladores de Polvo Seco , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inhaladores de Dosis Medida , Administración por Inhalación , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Polvos/uso terapéutico , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
When selecting the best inhaler and drug combination for a patient with respiratory disease, a number of factors should be considered. While efficacy and safety of medical treatments are always a priority, in recent years the environmental impacts of all aspects of life have become an increasingly necessary consideration and inhaled therapies are no exception. The carbon footprint of an item, individual or organisation is one of the most important and quantifiable environmental impacts, assessed by the amount of greenhouse gases (often expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalents) generated throughout the life cycle. The two most commonly prescribed and manufactured inhaler types worldwide are pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) containing hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) propellants and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Most of the carbon footprint of current pMDIs is a result of the propellants that they contain (HFC-134a and HFC-227ea, which are potent greenhouse gases). In comparison, the powder in DPIs is dispersed by the patient's own inhalation, meaning DPIs do not contain a propellant and have a lower carbon footprint than most pMDIs currently available. Soft mist inhalers are another propellant-free option: the device contains a spring, which provides the energy to disperse the aqueous medication. In this review, we examine the published data on carbon footprint data for inhalers, providing an analysis of potential implications for treatment decision making and industry initiatives.
Asunto(s)
Gases de Efecto Invernadero , Administración por Inhalación , Inhaladores de Polvo Seco , Ambiente , Humanos , Inhaladores de Dosis Medida , Nebulizadores y VaporizadoresRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Etnicidad , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Grupos Minoritarios , Método Simple CiegoRESUMEN
The propellants in metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) are powerful greenhouse gases, which account for approximately 13% of the NHS's carbon footprint related to the delivery of care. Most MDI use is in salbutamol relievers in patients with poorly controlled disease. The UK lags behind Europe in this regard, with greater reliance on salbutamol MDI and correspondingly greater greenhouse gas emissions, roughly treble that of our European neighbours. There has been a broad switch towards MDIs in asthma treatment in the UK over the last 20 years to reduce financial costs, such that the treatment for two-thirds of asthma patients in the UK is dominated by salbutamol MDI. Strategies that replace overuse of reliever MDIs with regimes emphasising inhaled corticosteroids have the potential to improve asthma control alongside significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Real-world evidence shows that once-daily long-acting combination dry-powder inhalers (DPIs) can improve compliance and asthma control, and reduce the carbon footprint of care. Similarly, maintenance and reliever therapy (MART), which uses combination reliever and inhaled steroids in one device (usually a DPI), can simplify therapy, improve asthma control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Both treatment strategies are popular with patients, most of whom would be willing to change treatment to reduce their carbon footprint. By focussing on patients who are currently using high amounts of salbutamol MDI and prioritising inhaled steroids via DPIs, there are golden opportunities to make asthma care in the UK more effective, safer and greener.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Gases de Efecto Invernadero , Administración por Inhalación , Albuterol , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhaladores de Polvo Seco , Ambiente , Humanos , Inhaladores de Dosis MedidaAsunto(s)
COVID-19 , Inhibidores de las Cinasas Janus , Administración por Inhalación , Humanos , Quinasas Janus , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
Evidence to support clinical decision making must be based on safety data that have been captured, analysed and interpreted in a robust and reliable way. Randomised real-world evidence (RRWE) studies provide the opportunity to evaluate the use of medicines in patients and settings representative of routine clinical practice. However, elements that underpin the design of RRWE studies can have a significant impact upon the analysis, interpretation and implications of safety data. In this narrative review, we use data from the Salford Lung Study; two prospective, 12-month, open-label, parallel-group, phase III randomised controlled trials conducted in primary care in the UK; to highlight the importance of capturing treatment modifications when attempting to evaluate safety events according to actual treatment exposure. We demonstrate that analysing safety data by actual treatment received (i.e. accounting for the treatment modifications that occur routinely in the primary care setting) provides additional insight beyond analysing according to randomised treatment strategy only. It is therefore proposed that understanding of safety data from RRWE trials can be optimised by analysing both by randomised group and by actual treatment received.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/administración & dosificación , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Cálculo de Dosificación de Drogas , Enfermedad Aguda , Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Corticoesteroides/efectos adversos , Algoritmos , Antiasmáticos/efectos adversos , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Moléculas de Adhesión Celular/sangre , Eosinófilos , Femenino , Humanos , Recuento de Leucocitos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Óxido Nítrico/metabolismo , Factores de Riesgo , Método Simple CiegoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Refractory chronic cough (RCC) is a debilitating condition for which there are no licensed treatments. Lidocaine is a nonselective inhibitor of voltage-gated sodium channels with potential antitussive effects, but randomized placebo-controlled studies evaluating its efficacy in RCC are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of nebulized lidocaine and lidocaine throat spray versus matched placebos in RCC. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, 3-way crossover study, comparing the effect of single doses of nebulized lidocaine with lidocaine delivered by a throat spray and matched placebo. The primary end point was cough frequency over the 10 hours following treatment. Secondary end points were visual analog scale scores for urge-to-cough and cough severity; an exploratory analysis evaluated hourly cough rates up to 5 hours after treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-six subjects with RCC were recruited (22 females; mean age, 53.5 ± 12.1 years; FEV1 %predicted, 105.2 ± 16.8 L; forced vital capacity %predicted, 112.4 ± 18 L). Lidocaine throat spray, but not nebulized lidocaine, significantly reduced 10-hour cough frequency as compared with placebo (throat spray, 22.6 coughs/h; nebulization, 26.9 coughs/h; and placebos, 27.6 coughs/h; P = .04,). Lidocaine throat spray showed the greatest effect on cough compared with placebo in the first hour after administration (31.7 coughs/h vs 74.2 coughs/h; P = .004). Both nebulizer and spray treatments significantly alleviated urge-to-cough and cough severity visual analog scale scores compared with placebo (P < .05). There were no serious adverse events associated with lidocaine therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Lidocaine throat spray was effective in reducing cough frequency in patients with RCC. Voltage-gated sodium channel inhibitors applied to pharynx have potential as therapies for RCC.
Asunto(s)
Tos , Lidocaína , Adulto , Anciano , Anestésicos Locales , Tos/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Cruzados , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nebulizadores y Vaporizadores , FaringeRESUMEN
The pathophysiology of refractory chronic cough (RCC) is unclear. We hypothesised that endogenous inhibitory control mechanisms, such as those activated by noxiousstimuli inducing pain (conditioned pain modulation (CPM)), may be capable of inhibiting coughing and urge to cough evoked by inhaled capsaicin. Furthermore, these mechanisms may be impaired in patients with RCC.The objective was to investigate the effects of pain on cough and urge to cough (UTC) in healthy volunteers (HV) and RCC. HV and RCC patients underwent a randomised, controlled, 4-way cross-over study comparing the effect of 4 interventions on capsaicin evoked coughing and UTC. The interventions comprised immersing a hand in i) noxious cold-water, ii) warm water, iii) warm water but instructed to voluntarily supress coughing and iv) no intervention. The co-primary outcomes were numbers of evoked coughs and UTC scores.Twenty HV (mean age 50.1(±SD14.2), M:F 10:10) and 20 RCC (age 60.1(±7.9), M:F 9:11) participated. Overall, noxious cold water reduced capsaicin evoked UTC scores and cough numbers compared with warm water (1.6 (95% C.I. 1.3-2.0) versus 2.2 (1.8-2.6) p<0.001; 4.8 coughs (3.7-6.2) versus 7.9 coughs (6.7-9.5) p<0.001, respectively). HV and RCC demonstrated similar reductions in the UTC during noxious cold-water immersion, but noxious cold water and voluntary suppression interventions were less effective in RCC than HV in reducing capsaicin evoked cough (p=0.041).Endogenous inhibitory control mechanisms, specifically those activated by pain, can reduce both coughing and the UTC. Impairment of endogenous inhibitory control mechanisms may contribute to excessive coughing in RCC.