Search

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, with multiple underlying inflammatory pathways and structural airway abnormalities that impact disease persistence and severity. Recent progress has been made in developing targeted asthma therapeutics, especially for subjects with eosinophilic asthma. However, there is an unmet need for new approaches to treat patients with severe and exacerbation-prone asthma, who contribute disproportionately to disease burden. Extensive deep phenotyping has revealed the heterogeneous nature of severe asthma and identified distinct disease subtypes. A current challenge in the field is to translate new and emerging knowledge about different pathobiologic mechanisms in asthma into patient-specific therapies, with the ultimate goal of modifying the natural history of disease. Here, we describe the Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma (PrecISE) Network, a groundbreaking collaborative effort of asthma researchers and biostatisticians from around the United States. The PrecISE Network was designed to conduct phase II/proof-of-concept clinical trials of precision interventions in the population with severe asthma, and is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health. Using an innovative adaptive platform trial design, the PrecISE Network will evaluate up to 6 interventions simultaneously in biomarker-defined subgroups of subjects. We review the development and organizational structure of the PrecISE Network, and choice of interventions being studied. We hope that the PrecISE Network will enhance our understanding of asthma subtypes and accelerate the development of therapeutics for severe asthma.

Severe asthma accounts for almost half the cost associated with asthma. Severe asthma is driven by heterogeneous molecular mechanisms. Conventional clinical trial design often lacks the power and efficiency to target subgroups with specific pathobiological mechanisms. Furthermore, the validation and approval of new asthma therapies is a lengthy process. A large proportion of that time is taken by clinical trials to validate asthma interventions. The National Institutes of Health Precision Medicine in Severe and/or Exacerbation Prone Asthma (PrecISE) program was established with the goal of designing and executing a trial that uses adaptive design techniques to rapidly evaluate novel interventions in biomarker-defined subgroups of severe asthma, while seeking to refine these biomarker subgroups, and to identify early markers of response to therapy. The novel trial design is an adaptive platform trial conducted under a single master protocol that incorporates precision medicine components. Furthermore, it includes innovative applications of futility analysis, cross-over design with use of shared placebo groups, and early futility analysis to permit more rapid identification of effective interventions. The development and rationale behind the study design are described. The interventions chosen for the initial investigation and the criteria used to identify these interventions are enumerated. The biomarker-based adaptive design and analytic scheme are detailed as well as special considerations involved in the final trial design.

BackgroundMinority groups of African descent experience disproportionately greater asthma morbidity compared with other racial groups, suggesting that genetic variation from a common ancestry could influence exacerbation risk.ObjectiveWe evaluated clinical trial measures in the context of self-reported race and genetic ancestry to identify risk factors for asthma exacerbations.MethodsOne thousand eight hundred forty multiethnic subjects from 12 Asthma Clinical Research Network and AsthmaNet trials were analyzed for incident asthma exacerbations with Poisson regression models that included clinical measures, self-reported race (black, non-Hispanic white, and other), and estimates of global genetic African ancestry in a subgroup (n = 760).ResultsTwenty-four percent of 1840 subjects self-identified as black. Black and white subjects had common risk factors for exacerbations, including a history of 2 or more exacerbations in the previous year and FEV1 percent predicted values, whereas chronic sinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and gastroesophageal reflux disease were only associated with increased exacerbation risk in black subjects. In the combined multiethnic cohort, neither race (P = .30) nor percentage of genetic African ancestry as a continuous variable associated with exacerbation risk (adjusted rate ratio [RR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.94-1.70; P = .13]; RR per 1-SD change [32% ancestry], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.78-1.19; P = .74]). However, in 161 black subjects with genetic data, those with African ancestry greater than the median (≥82%) had a significantly greater risk of exacerbation (RR, 3.06 [95% CI, 1.09-8.6; P = .03]).ConclusionBlack subjects have unique risk factors for asthma exacerbations, of which global African genetic ancestry had the strongest effect.

BackgroundLoss of bronchoprotection (LOBP) with a regularly used long-acting β2-adrenergic receptor agonist (LABA) is well documented. LOBP has been attributed to β2-adrenergic receptor (B2AR) downregulation, a process requiring farnesylation, which is inhibited by alendronate.ObjectiveWe sought to determine whether alendronate can reduce LABA-associated LOBP in inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-treated patients.MethodsWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, proof-of-concept trial. Seventy-eight participants with persistent asthma receiving 250 μg of fluticasone twice daily for 2 weeks were randomized to receive alendronate or placebo while initiating salmeterol for 8 weeks. Salmeterol-protected methacholine challenges (SPMChs) and PBMC B2AR numbers (radioligand binding assay) and signaling (cyclic AMP ELISA) were assessed before randomization and after 8 weeks of ICS plus LABA treatment. LOBP was defined as a more than 1 doubling dose reduction in SPMCh PC20 value.ResultsThe mean doubling dose reduction in SPMCh PC20 value was 0.50 and 0.27 with alendronate and placebo, respectively (P = .62). Thirty-eight percent of participants receiving alendronate and 33% receiving placebo had LOBP (P = .81). The after/before ICS plus LABA treatment ratio of B2AR number was 1.0 for alendronate (P = .86) and 0.8 for placebo (P = .15; P = .31 for difference between treatments). The B2AR signaling ratio was 0.89 for alendronate (P = .43) and 1.02 for placebo (P = .84; P = .44 for difference). Changes in lung function and B2AR number and signaling were similar between those who did and did not experience LOBP.ConclusionThis study did not find evidence that alendronate reduces LABA-associated LOBP, which relates to the occurrence of LOBP in only one third of participants. LOBP appears to be less common than presumed in concomitant ICS plus LABA-treated asthmatic patients. B2AR downregulation measured in PBMCs does not appear to reflect LOBP.

This letter addresses the controversial issue of the use of oral corticosteroids during wheezing exacerbations in preschool-aged children by demonstrating findings of a prematurely terminated multi-center clinical trial, discussing lessons learned, and suggesting future directions.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with asthma morbidity in observational studies, but the factors underlying this association are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether 3 SES correlates-low income, low education, and high perceived stress-were independent risk factors for treatment failure and asthma exacerbations in the context of a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The effect of low SES (household income of 20 on a perceived stress scale) on asthma morbidity was analyzed in 381 participants by using Poisson regression models. The primary outcome was treatment failure (defined in the trial protocol as a significant clinical or airflow deterioration), and the secondary outcome was asthma exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. RESULTS: Fifty-four percent of participants had a low income, 40% had a low educational level, and 17% had high perceived stress levels. Even after adjusting for race and other important confounders, participants with lower income had higher rates of both treatment failures (rate ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = .03) and exacerbations (rate ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3; P = .02). Adherence with inhaled corticosteroids was similarly high for both income categories. Education and perceived stress were not significantly associated with either outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of a randomized controlled trial, participants with lower income were more likely to experience adverse asthma outcomes independent of education, perceived stress, race, and medication adherence.

BackgroundAfrican American subjects have a greater burden from asthma compared with white subjects. Whether the pattern of airway inflammation differs between African American and white subjects is unclear.ObjectiveWe sought to compare sputum airway inflammatory phenotypes of African American and white subjects treated or not with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs; ICS+ and ICS-, respectively).MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of self-identified African American and white subjects with asthma enrolled in clinical trials conducted by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored Asthma Clinical Research Network and AsthmaNet. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and sputum cytology after sputum induction were examined. We used a sputum eosinophil 2% cut point to define subjects with either an eosinophilic (≥2%) or noneosinophilic (

Background: Biologic therapies inhibiting the IL-4 or IL-5 pathways are very effective in the treatment of asthma and other related conditions. However, the cytokines IL-4 and IL-5 also play a role in the generation of adaptive immune responses. Although these biologics do not cause overt immunosuppression, their effect in primary severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization has not been studied completely., Objective: Our aim was to evaluate the antibody and cellular immunity after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients on biologics (PoBs)., Methods: Patients with severe asthma or atopic dermatitis who were taking benralizumab, dupilumab, or mepolizumab and had received the initial dose of the 2-dose adult SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine were enrolled in a prospective, observational study. As our control group, we used a cohort of immunologically healthy subjects (with no significant immunosuppression) who were not taking biologics (NBs). We used a multiplexed immunoassay to measure antibody levels, neutralization assays to assess antibody function, and flow cytometry to quantitate Spike-specific lymphocytes., Results: We analyzed blood from 57 patients in the PoB group and 46 control subjects from the NB group. The patients in the PoB group had lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, pseudovirus neutralization, live virus neutralization, and frequencies of Spike-specific B and CD8 T cells at 6 months after vaccination. In subgroup analyses, patients with asthma who were taking biologics had significantly lower pseudovirus neutralization than did subjects with asthma who were not taking biologics., Conclusion: The patients in the PoB group had reduced SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titers, neutralizing activity, and virus-specific B- and CD8 T-cell counts. These results have implications when considering development of a more individualized immunization strategy in patients who receive biologic medications blocking IL-4 or IL-5 pathways., Competing Interests: Disclosure statement Supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) (grants NIH/NHLBI T32HL116271 [to M.C.R., P.A.L., and N.S.]; the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the NIH (UL1TR002378 [to N.S.]; P01AI125180 [to I.S. and F.E.L.]; U54CA260563 [to I.S. and F.E.L.]; R01AI121252 [to F.E.L.]; R01AI172254 [to F.E.L.]; U01AI141993 [to F.E.L.]; and NIH P51OD011132, 1U54CA260563, and the NIH/NIAID Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Response (under contract 75N93021C00017 to Emory University). This work does not necessarily represent the views of the US government or Department of Veterans Affairs. Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: N. S. Haddad is employed by MicroB-plex, Inc, but did not receive any payments for this article. C. Swenson receives compensation and consulting fees from Insmed, Inc, that are unrelated to this article. F. Holguin is a member of the adjudication committee of the ASPEN (A Study to Assess the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Brensocatib in Participants With Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis) trial at Insmed, Inc. J. D. Roback received funding from an NIH grant in the past 36 months. I. Sanz receives royalties from BLI INC for plasma cell survival media; consulting fees from GSK, Pfizer, Kayverna, Johnson & Johnson, Celgene, Bristol-Myer Squibb, and Visterra; and honoraria for presentations from Yale and Harvard Universities. In addition, I. Sanz has a patent on plasma cell survival media. F. Eun-Hyung Lee receives or has received research grants from Genentech and the Gates Foundation; royalties from BLI INC for plasma cell survival media; consulting fees from Be Bio Pharma; honoraria for presentations at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Cincinnati, and the Gerontological Advanced Practice Nurses Association; has patents on plasma cell survival media and media of elaborated newly synthesized antibodies (MENSA); and is the founder and owner of MicroB-plex, Inc. The rest of the authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)