Association between pre-biologic T2-biomarker combinations and response to biologics in patients with severe asthma.

Background: To date, studies investigating the association between pre-biologic biomarker levels and post-biologic outcomes have been limited to single biomarkers and assessment of biologic efficacy from structured clinical trials. Aim: To elucidate the associations of pre-biologic individual biomarker levels or their combinations with pre-to-post biologic changes in asthma outcomes in real-life. Methods: This was a registry-based, cohort study using data from 23 countries, which shared data with the International Severe Asthma Registry (May 2017-February 2023). The investigated biomarkers (highest pre-biologic levels) were immunoglobulin E (IgE), blood eosinophil count (BEC) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). Pre- to approximately 12-month post-biologic change for each of three asthma outcome domains (i.e. exacerbation rate, symptom control and lung function), and the association of this change with pre-biologic biomarkers was investigated for individual and combined biomarkers. Results: Overall, 3751 patients initiated biologics and were included in the analysis. No association was found between pre-biologic BEC and pre-to-post biologic change in exacerbation rate for any biologic class. However, higher pre-biologic BEC and FeNO were both associated with greater post-biologic improvement in FEV1 for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R, with a trend for anti-IL4Rα. Mean FEV1 improved by 27-178 mL post-anti-IgE as pre-biologic BEC increased (250 to 1000 cells/µL), and by 43-216 mL and 129-250 mL post-anti-IL5/5R and -anti-IL4Rα, respectively along the same BEC gradient. Corresponding improvements along a FeNO gradient (25-100 ppb) were 41-274 mL, 69-207 mL and 148-224 mL for anti-IgE, anti-IL5/5R, and anti-IL4Rα, respectively. Higher baseline BEC was also associated with lower probability of uncontrolled asthma (OR 0.392; p=0.001) post-biologic for anti-IL5/5R. Pre-biologic IgE was a poor predictor of subsequent pre-to-post-biologic change for all outcomes assessed for all biologics. The combination of BEC + FeNO marginally improved the prediction of post-biologic FEV1 increase (adjusted R2: 0.751), compared to BEC (adjusted R2: 0.747) or FeNO alone (adjusted R2: 0.743) (p=0.005 and <0.001, respectively); however, this prediction was not improved by the addition of IgE. Conclusions: The ability of higher baseline BEC, FeNO and their combination to predict biologic-associated lung function improvement may encourage earlier intervention in patients with impaired lung function or at risk of accelerated lung function decline.

Allergen skin test responses in broad U.S. asthma population in those with and without rhinitis.

Background: Asthma and allergic rhinitis are pathologically interlinked conditions. Despite skin testing (ST) being pivotal for evaluating allergic sensitization, U.S. data that date back to 1960s on ST reactivity patterns in subjects with asthma remain sparse. Objective: The purpose of this study was to elucidate seasonal, perennial ST responses, and their relationship with asthma severity, early versus late onset disease, and immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels. Methods: Five hundred patients with asthma were randomly selected from the National Jewish Health electronic medical record over a 3-year span. Demographic, clinical, and allergen ST reactivity data for a battery of seasonal and perennial allergens were procured, including total IgE levels, asthma onset, and severity, by using t-tests, χ² tests, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), patterns of reactivity were assessed for overall, seasonal, and perennial allergens in relation to IgE levels, asthma onset, and severity. Results: Of the 500 patients, 398 were analyzed. 63.3% were women, 50.1% had adult-onset asthma, and 86.1% had rhinitis; 75.3% tested positive to one or more allergens, with men demonstrating higher overall (p = 0.039) and perennial (p = 0.035) sensitization. ST reactivity varied based on the presence of rhinitis for seasonal (p = 0.028) but not perennial (p = 0.733) allergens. Asthma severity was not significantly associated with ST reactivity (p > 0.10). ST positivity for perennial (p < 0.001) but not seasonal (p = 0.128) allergens was higher in childhood-onset asthma versus adult-onset asthma despite both groups having a large percentage of reactors. Elevated IgE levels correlated with ST reactivity (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Our study represents a unique comprehensive evaluation of ST reactivity in a U.S. asthma population, which is lacking in the literature, when factoring in asthma onset, severity, and IgE levels. Our findings underscore the importance of allergen sensitization in asthma, regardless of severity, concurrent rhinitis symptoms, or asthma onset, which challenge some of the prevailing assumptions about the relationship between allergen sensitization and asthma onset.

Effectiveness of a Maintenance and Reliever Digihaler System in Asthma: 24-Week Randomized Study (CONNECT2).

BACKGROUND: Digital health tools have been shown to help address challenges in asthma control, including inhaler technique, treatment adherence, and short-acting ß2-agonist overuse. The maintenance and reliever Digihaler System (DS) comprises 2 Digihaler inhalers (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and albuterol) with an associated patient App and web-based Dashboard. Clinicians can review patients' inhaler use and Digihaler inhalation parameter data to support clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: CONNECT2 evaluated asthma control in participants using the DS versus standard-of-care (SoC) maintenance and reliever inhalers. METHODS: Participants (13 years or older) with uncontrolled asthma (Asthma Control Test [ACT] score <19) were randomized 4:3 (open-label) to the DS (n = 210) or SoC (n = 181) for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving well-controlled asthma (ie, an ACT score ≥20 or increase from baseline of ≥3 units at week 24). RESULTS: There was an 88.7% probability that participants using the DS would have greater odds of achieving improvement in asthma control compared with SoC after 24 weeks. The mean odds ratio (95% credible interval) for DS versus SoC was 1.35 (0.846-2.038), indicating a 35% higher odds of improved asthma control with the DS. The DS group had more clinician-participant interactions versus SoC, mainly addressing a poor inhaler technique. DS participants' maintenance treatment adherence was good (month 1: 79.2%; month 6: 68.6%); reliever use decreased by 38.2% versus baseline. App and Dashboard usability was rated "good." CONCLUSION: The positive results in asthma control in this study after 24 weeks demonstrate the effectiveness of the DS in asthma management.

Tezepelumab reduces exacerbations across all seasons in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma (NAVIGATOR).

BACKGROUND: Asthma exacerbation frequencies vary throughout the year owing to seasonal triggers. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that targets thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study (NCT03347279), tezepelumab significantly reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) vs placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of tezepelumab on asthma exacerbations across all seasons in NAVIGATOR patients (post hoc). METHODS: NAVIGATOR was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (12-80 years old) were randomized 1:1 to tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. AAER over 52 weeks was assessed by season. Data from patients in the Southern Hemisphere were transformed to align with Northern Hemisphere seasons. RESULTS: Tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo by 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52-72) in winter, 46% (95% CI, 26-61) in spring, 62% (95% CI, 48-73) in summer, and 54% (95% CI, 41-64) in fall. In matched climates, during the spring allergy season (March 1 to June 15) and ragweed allergy season (September), tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo in patients with seasonal allergy by 59% (95% CI, 29-77) and 70% (95% CI, 33-87), respectively. In patients with perennial allergy and in those with seasonal allergy, tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo across all seasons. CONCLUSION: Tezepelumab reduced exacerbations across all seasons vs placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, including patients with seasonal and perennial allergies. These data further support the efficacy of tezepelumab in a broad population of patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03347279 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03347279).

Impact of Initiating Biologics in Patients With Severe Asthma on Long-Term Oral Corticosteroids or Frequent Rescue Steroids (GLITTER): Data From the International Severe Asthma Registry.

BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of biologics has neither been established in patients with high oral corticosteroid exposure (HOCS) nor been compared with effectiveness of continuing with HOCS alone. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of initiating biologics in a large, real-world cohort of adult patients with severe asthma and HOCS. METHODS: This was a propensity score-matched, prospective cohort study using data from the International Severe Asthma Registry. Between January 2015 and February 2021, patients with severe asthma and HOCS (long-term OCSs for ≥1 year or ≥4 courses of rescue OCSs within a 12-month period) were identified. Biologic initiators were identified and, using propensity scores, matched 1:1 with noninitiators. The impact of biologic initiation on asthma outcomes was assessed using generalized linear models. RESULTS: We identified 996 matched pairs of patients. Both groups improved over the 12-month follow-up period, but improvement was greater for biologic initiators. Biologic initiation was associated with a 72.9% reduction in the average number of exacerbations per year versus noninitiators (0.64 vs 2.06; rate ratio, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.10-0.71]). Biologic initiators were 2.2 times more likely than noninitiators to take a daily long-term OCS dose of less than 5 mg (risk probability, 49.6% vs 22.5%; P = .002) and had a lower risk of asthma-related emergency department visits (relative risk, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21-0.58]; rate ratio, 0.26 [0.14-0.48]) and hospitalizations (relative risk, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.18-0.52]; rate ratio, 0.25 [0.13-0.48]). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, including patients with severe asthma and HOCS from 19 countries, and within an environment of clinical improvement, initiation of biologics was associated with further improvements across multiple asthma outcomes, including exacerbation rate, OCS exposure, and health care resource utilization.

Comparative effectiveness of anti-IL5 and anti-IgE biologic classes in patients with severe asthma eligible for both.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma may present with characteristics representing overlapping phenotypes, making them eligible for more than one class of biologic. Our aim was to describe the profile of adult patients with severe asthma eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R and to compare the effectiveness of both classes of treatment in real life. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study that included adult patients with severe asthma from 22 countries enrolled into the International Severe Asthma registry (ISAR) who were eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R. The effectiveness of anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R was compared in a 1:1 matched cohort. Exacerbation rate was the primary effectiveness endpoint. Secondary endpoints included long-term-oral corticosteroid (LTOCS) use, asthma-related emergency room (ER) attendance, and hospital admissions. RESULTS: In the matched analysis (n = 350/group), the mean annualized exacerbation rate decreased by 47.1% in the anti-IL5/5R group and 38.7% in the anti-IgE group. Patients treated with anti-IL5/5R were less likely to experience a future exacerbation (adjusted IRR 0.76; 95% CI 0.64, 0.89; p < 0.001) and experienced a greater reduction in mean LTOCS dose than those treated with anti-IgE (37.44% vs. 20.55% reduction; p = 0.023). There was some evidence to suggest that patients treated with anti-IL5/5R experienced fewer asthma-related hospitalizations (IRR 0.64; 95% CI 0.38, 1.08), but not ER visits (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61, 1.43). CONCLUSIONS: In real life, both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R improve asthma outcomes in patients eligible for both biologic classes; however, anti-IL5/5R was superior in terms of reducing asthma exacerbations and LTOCS use.

Curcumin does not significantly affect immediate skin tests.

Background: Curcumin has been shown to decrease allergic symptoms and biomarkers in some animal and human studies. Objective: Our study aimed to determine if curcumin affects immediate skin-prick testing. Methods: We enrolled 34 participants sensitized to select antigens. The participants were randomized to treatment with curcumin or placebo in a double-blind fashion. The participants underwent titrated skin-prick testing before and after 1 week of treatment, and the pre- and posttreatment skin test wheals and flares were compared. Results: Curcumin did not have a statistically significant effect on immediate skin-prick test wheal or flare size. Conclusion: Although curcumin may attenuate allergic symptoms and biomarkers, it does not have a significant effect on immediate skin-prick test results and does not need to be discontinued before testing.

Characterization of Patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry with High Steroid Exposure Who Did or Did Not Initiate Biologic Therapy.

Background: Many severe asthma patients with high oral corticosteroid exposure (HOCS) often do not initiate biologics despite being eligible. This study aimed to compare the characteristics of severe asthma patients with HOCS who did and did not initiate biologics. Methods: Baseline characteristics of patients with HOCS (long-term maintenance OCS therapy for at least 1 year, or ≥4 courses of steroid bursts in a year) from the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR; https://isaregistries.org/), who initiated or did not initiate biologics (anti-lgE, anti-IL5/5R or anti-IL4R), were described at the time of biologic initiation or registry enrolment. Statistical relationships were tested using Pearson's chi-squared tests for categorical variables, and t-tests for continuous variables, adjusting for potential errors in multiple comparisons. Results: Between January 2015 and February 2021, we identified 1412 adult patients with severe asthma from 19 countries that met our inclusion criteria of HOCS, of whom 996 (70.5%) initiated a biologic and 416 (29.5%) did not. The frequency of biologic initiation varied across geographical regions. Those who initiated a biologic were more likely to have higher blood eosinophil count (483 vs 399 cells/µL, p=0.003), serious infections (49.0% vs 13.3%, p<0.001), nasal polyps (35.2% vs 23.6%, p<0.001), airflow limitation (56.8% vs 51.8%, p=0.013), and uncontrolled asthma (80.8% vs 73.2%, p=0.004) despite greater conventional treatment adherence than those who did not start a biologic. Both groups had similar annual asthma exacerbation rates in the previous 12 months (5.7 vs 5.3, p=0.147). Conclusion: Around one third of severe HOCS asthma patients did not receive biologics despite a similar high burden of asthma exacerbations as those who initiated a biologic therapy. Other disease characteristics such as eosinophilic phenotype, serious infectious events, nasal polyps, airflow limitation and lack of asthma control appear to dictate biologic use.

Effectiveness of a Digital Inhaler System for Patients With Asthma: A 12-Week, Open-Label, Randomized Study (CONNECT1).

BACKGROUND: The albuterol Digihaler (albuterol 90 µg/dose) transmits data wirelessly to a smart device application, which synchronizes with a Digital Health Platform to store and transfer data to a web-based Dashboard. The Reliever Digihaler System (RDS) comprises the albuterol Digihaler, application, Digital Health Platform and Dashboard. This allows patients and health care professionals to review reliever inhaler usage and inhalation quality to aid clinical decision making. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the effectiveness, as measured by change in asthma control, of the RDS compared with standard of care. METHODS: In this 12-week study, participants aged 13 years or older with suboptimal asthma control (Asthma Control Test [ACT] score < 19) were randomized to use either RDS or standard of care albuterol reliever inhalers. The health care professionals were recommended at study start to check each participant's inhalation data (including inhalation quantity and quality parameters) 1 or more times per week. Primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving clinically meaningful improvement in asthma control (ACT score ≥ 20 at week 12 and/or increase ≥ 3 units from baseline). Bayesian statistical analysis provided a posterior probability distribution for odds ratios with corresponding credible intervals. RESULTS: Participants using the RDS (n = 167) had an 85.3% probability of greater odds of clinically meaningful asthma control improvements than those using SoC (n = 166) after 3 months (mean odds ratio 1.33; 95% credible interval 0.813-2.050). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, participants using the RDS had greater odds of clinically meaningful improvements in asthma control versus SoC after 3 months. Further investigation of the potential of the RDS to help improve asthma management is warranted.

Clinical Remission in Severe Asthma: A Pooled Post Hoc Analysis of the Patient Journey with Benralizumab.

INTRODUCTION: Consensus definitions for clinical remission and super-response were recently established for severe asthma. Benralizumab is an interleukin-5 (IL-5) receptor α-directed monoclonal antibody for severe, uncontrolled asthma; efficacy and safety were demonstrated in previous pivotal phase 3 trials (SIROCCO, CALIMA, ZONDA). This analysis applied a composite remission definition to characterize individual responses to benralizumab after 6 and 12 months. METHODS: In previous phase 3 studies, eligible patients were those with severe, uncontrolled asthma receiving medium- or high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß2-agonists. This post hoc analysis included patients randomized to the approved benralizumab dose and not receiving oral corticosteroids (OCS) at baseline (SIROCCO/CALIMA) or OCS ≤ 12.5 mg per day (ZONDA). Individual remission components were zero exacerbations; zero OCS use; Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6) score < 1.5 or ≤ 0.75; and pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) increase ≥ 100 mL; clinical remission incorporated zero exacerbations, zero OCS use, ACQ-6 score ≤ 0.75, and pre-bronchodilator FEV1 increase ≥ 100 mL after 6 or 12 months. RESULTS: Overall, 609 patients (N = 301 and N = 308) and 586 patients (N = 293 and N = 293) receiving benralizumab in SIROCCO and CALIMA were included at 6 and 12 months, respectively; 40 ZONDA patients were included after 6 months. In SIROCCO/CALIMA, similar to 6-month findings, approx. 83% and approx. 49% receiving benralizumab, and 77% and 37% on placebo achieved ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 remission components after 12 months; 14.5% (85/586) on benralizumab and 7.7% (48/620) on placebo achieved clinical remission at 12 months. Among ZONDA patients, 75% and approx. 48% on benralizumab and 35% and 20% on placebo achieved ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 remission components at 6 months, respectively; 22.5% (9/40) on benralizumab and 7.5% on placebo achieved clinical remission. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates clinical remission is achievable by targeting the underlying drivers of inflammation. Precision medicines can help shift treatment paradigms toward treat-to-target, with clinical remission as the ultimate therapeutic goal in severe asthma. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: SIROCCO (NCT01928771); CALIMA (NCT01914757); ZONDA (NCT02075255).

Widely accepted definitions for disease remission are already established for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, and cancer, among others. Two separate expert groups recently collaborated to discuss clinical remission/super-response to treatment in patients with severe asthma. Both groups developed separate, yet similar ways to determine whether a patient should be considered "in remission." In this study, we used the results from three previous trials (SIROCCO, CALIMA, and ZONDA) that were conducted to assess a therapy called benralizumab in patients with severe asthma to identify patients who met some or all of the criteria for disease remission in severe asthma. These criteria included zero asthma exacerbations; zero oral steroid (OCS) use; asthma control score; and improvement in lung function. Across all three trials, about three quarters of the patients achieved two or more remission components and about half achieved three or more remission components after 6 months of treatment; furthermore, these rates were generally similar to the numbers of patients who achieved two or more components and three or more components of remission after 12 months of treatment. Overall, 15­23% of patients achieved clinical remission in 6 months, and approximately 15% achieved remission within 12 months. The results show that biologic therapies like benralizumab help improve the symptoms of severe asthma and allow patients to achieve disease remission.

Allergic and eosinophilic asthma in the era of biomarkers and biologics: similarities, differences and misconceptions.

OBJECTIVE: Severe asthma is associated with substantial personal and economic burden; maintaining disease control is the key management goal. Increased understanding of asthma heterogeneity and development of type 2 (T2)-targeting biologics has substantially advanced disease management and outcomes; however, despite both being driven by T2 inflammation, allergic and eosinophilic asthma have different treatment recommendations. We sought to better understand the similarities and differences between allergic and eosinophilic asthma and highlight where misconceptions may arise. DATA SOURCES: Published articles, pivotal trials, post hoc analyses, and asthma clinical guidelines sourced from PubMed. STUDY SELECTIONS: Sources reporting allergic and eosinophilic asthma classifications, disease mechanisms, and biomarkers associated with treatment response. RESULTS: This review highlights that severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma are both driven by T2 inflammation with eosinophils playing a cardinal role. Despite this overlap, treatment recommendations differ based on asthma classification. T2 cytokine gene expression is a reasonably well-established research tool, but not a well-established biomarker in clinical practice, unlike blood eosinophil counts, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and immunoglobulin E; the clinical relevance of immunoglobulin E as a predictive biomarker remains unclear. CONCLUSION: Asthma classifications that can be easily characterized at patient level to ensure accurate diagnosis, predict disease trajectory, and treatment response are required. The current dichotomy of allergic and eosinophilic asthma classifications is likely too simplistic, given the similar eosinophil-mediated disease pathophysiology in both classifications. Our results provide future directions to guide clinically meaningful interpretation of asthma endophenotypes, which may improve understanding of severe asthma characterization and aid future advances in defining responders more precisely with personalized medicine approaches.

Effects of Reslizumab on Asthma Outcomes in a Subgroup of Eosinophilic Asthma Patients with Self-Reported Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 7% of patients with asthma have chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and more than 80% have at least some radiographic evidence of sinonasal inflammation. Aspirin sensitivity is strongly associated with elevated blood eosinophil levels and increased asthma severity. Intravenous (IV) reslizumab has been shown to improve asthma control in patients with nasal polyps. OBJECTIVE: These post hoc analyses of pooled data from 2 BREATH phase 3 clinical trials, studies 1 and 2 (NCT01287039 and NCT01285323), examined asthma-related outcomes in patients with comorbid, self-reported CRSwNP with and without aspirin sensitivity. METHODS: Patients aged 12-75 years with elevated blood eosinophils (≥400 cells/µL) and inadequately controlled asthma were randomized to receive placebo or reslizumab (3 mg/kg IV) every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Patients continued their background asthma maintenance therapy during the study. Information regarding the presence of CRSwNP was obtained through patient-reported medical history. RESULTS: Add-on reslizumab treatment reduced the frequency of clinical asthma exacerbations by 83% versus placebo among patients with CRSwNP. Among patients with and without aspirin sensitivity, reductions of 79% and 84%, respectively, were observed. Patients with CRSwNP (with and without aspirin sensitivity) treated with reslizumab add-on therapy also had significant improvements in lung function, as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 second, compared with placebo. Among patients with CRSwNP, reslizumab was also associated with improvements in patient-reported asthma control and asthma quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with eosinophilic asthma and self-reported CRSwNP, with and without aspirin sensitivity, are highly responsive to treatment with reslizumab for asthma-related outcomes. These findings suggest that prospective investigation of reslizumab in this patient population is warranted.

Exhaled Nitric Oxide: An Update.

Fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) is a biomarker used to identify allergic airway inflammation. Because it is noninvasive and easy to obtain, its utility has been studied in the diagnosis and management of several respiratory diseases. Much of the research has been done in asthma, and many studies support the use of FENO in aiding diagnosing asthma, predicting steroid responsiveness, and preventing exacerbations by guiding medication dosage and assessing adherence.

Recent advances in allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis affects 20 to 30% of adults in both the United States and Europe and perhaps a somewhat higher percentage of children. In addition to nasal and ocular symptoms directly related to the allergic process, interference of these symptoms with sleep leads to daytime sleepiness and impaired quality of life. Patients miss work because of symptoms but an even greater problem is interference with work productivity, or presenteeism, which has been reported to be the biggest contributor to the total economic cost of allergic rhinitis. There has been increasing awareness that many patients with either seasonal or perennial symptoms but negative skin and in vitro tests for allergen sensitivity have local nasal allergy, diagnosable by the presence of allergen-specific IgE in their nasal secretions or a positive nasal allergen challenge or both. The pharmaceutical management of allergic rhinitis rests on symptomatic treatment with antihistamines that perhaps are more effectively administered intranasally than orally and intranasal corticosteroids. Allergen immunotherapy is very effective, even for local allergic rhinitis, and the shortcomings of subcutaneous immunotherapy of inconvenience and safety are reduced by the introduction of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Use of the latter is currently somewhat limited by the lack of appropriate dosing information for SLIT liquids and the limited number of allergens for which SLIT tablets are available.

Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback Does Not Substitute for Asthma Steroid Controller Medication.

Despite previous findings of therapeutic effects for heart rate variability biofeedback (HRVB) on asthma, it is not known whether HRVB can substitute either for controller or rescue medication, or whether it affects airway inflammation. Sixty-eight paid volunteer steroid naïve study participants with mild or moderate asthma were given 3 months of HRVB or a comparison condition consisting of EEG alpha biofeedback with relaxing music and relaxed paced breathing (EEG+), in a two-center trial. All participants received a month of intensive asthma education prior to randomization. Both treatment conditions produced similar significant improvements on the methacholine challenge test (MCT), asthma symptoms, and asthma quality of life (AQOL). MCT effects were of similar size to those of enhanced placebo procedures reported elsewhere, and were 65% of those of a course of a high-potency inhaled steroid budesonide given to a sub-group of participants following biofeedback training. Exhaled nitric oxide decreased significantly only in the HRVB group, 81% of the budesonide effect, but with no significant differences between groups. Participants reported becoming more relaxed during practice of both techniques. Administration of albuterol after biofeedback sessions produced a large improvement in pulmonary function test results, indicating that neither treatment normalized pulmonary function as a potent controller medication would have done. Impulse oscillometry showed increased upper airway (vocal cord) resistance during biofeedback periods in both groups. These data suggest that HRVB should not be considered an alternative to asthma controller medications (e.g., inhaled steroids), although both biofeedback conditions produced some beneficial effects, warranting further research, and suggesting potential complementary effects. Various hypotheses are presented to explain why HRVB effects on asthma appeared smaller in this study than in earlier studies. Clinical Trial Registration NCT02766374.