Search

The traditional healthcare model is focused on diseases (medicine and natural science) and does not acknowledge patients' resources and abilities to be experts in their own lives based on their lived experiences. Improving healthcare safety, quality, and coordination, as well as quality of life, is an important aim in the care of patients with chronic conditions. Person-centered care needs to ensure that people's values and preferences guide clinical decisions. This paper reviews current knowledge to develop (1) digital care pathways for rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity and (2) digitally enabled, person-centered care. 1 It combines all relevant research evidence, including the so-called real-world evidence, with the ultimate goal to develop digitally enabled, patient-centered care. The paper includes (1) Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), a 2-decade journey, (2) Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), the evidence-based model of guidelines in airway diseases, (3) mHealth impact on airway diseases, (4) From guidelines to digital care pathways, (5) Embedding Planetary Health, (6) Novel classification of rhinitis and asthma, (7) Embedding real-life data with population-based studies, (8) The ARIA-EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) strategy for the management of airway diseases using digital biomarkers, (9) Artificial intelligence, (10) The development of digitally enabled, ARIA person-centered care, and (11) The political agenda. The ultimate goal is to propose ARIA 2024 guidelines centered around the patient to make them more applicable and sustainable., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Black adults are disproportionately affected by asthma and are often considered a homogeneous group in research studies despite cultural and ancestral differences., Objective: We sought to determine if asthma morbidity differs across adults in Black ethnic subgroups., Methods: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited across the continental United States and Puerto Rico for the PREPARE (PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief) trial. Using self-identifications, we categorized multiethnic Black (ME/B) participants (n = 226) as Black Latinx participants (n = 146) or Caribbean, continental African, or other Black participants (n = 80). African American (AA/B) participants (n = 518) were categorized as Black participants who identified their ethnicity as being American. Baseline characteristics and retrospective asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids [SCs], emergency department/urgent care [ED/UC] visits, hospitalizations) were compared across subgroups using multivariable regression., Results: Compared with AA/B participants, ME/B participants were more likely to be younger, residing in the US Northeast, and Spanish speaking and to have lower body mass index, health literacy, and <1 comorbidity, but higher blood eosinophil counts. In a multivariable analysis, ME/B participants were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.04-1.72) and SC use (IRR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.00-1.62) for asthma than AA/B participants. Of the ME/B subgroups, Puerto Rican Black Latinx participants (n = 120) were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (IRR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.22-2.21) and SC use for asthma (IRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.06-1.92) than AA/B participants. There were no significant differences in hospitalizations for asthma among subgroups., Conclusions: ME/B adults, specifically Puerto Rican Black Latinx adults, have higher risk of ED/UC visits and SC use for asthma than other Black subgroups., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Black and Latinx adults experience disproportionate asthma-related morbidity and limited specialty care access. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic expanded telehealth use., Objective: To evaluate visit type (telehealth [TH] vs in-person [IP]) preferences and the impact of visit type on asthma outcomes among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma., Methods: For this PREPARE trial ancillary study, visit type preference was surveyed by e-mail or telephone post-trial. Emergency medical record data on visit types and asthma outcomes were available for a subset (March 2020 to April 2021). Characteristics associated with visit type preferences, and relationships between visit type and asthma outcomes (control [Asthma Control Test] and asthma-related quality of life [Asthma Symptom Utility Index]), were tested using multivariable regression., Results: A total of 866 participants consented to be surveyed, with 847 respondents. Among the participants with asthma care experience with both visit types, 42.0% preferred TH for regular checkups, which associated with employment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.39; P = .02), lower asthma medication adherence (OR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .03), and having more historical emergency department and urgent care asthma visits (OR = 1.10 for each additional visit; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18; P = .02), after adjustment. Emergency medical record data were available for 98 participants (62 TH, 36 IP). Those with TH visits were more likely Latinx, from the Southwest, employed, using inhaled corticosteroid-only controller therapy, with lower body mass index, and lower self-reported asthma medication adherence vs those with IP visits only. Both groups had comparable Asthma Control Test (18.4 vs 18.9, P = .52) and Asthma Symptom Utility Index (0.79 vs 0.84, P = .16) scores after adjustment., Conclusion: TH may be similarly efficacious as and often preferred over IP among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, especially for regular checkups., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02995733., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the center of the health system and is likely to optimize the practice of allergy. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomized controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, was embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of-life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of "one-airway-one-disease," coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitization and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definitions, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches, and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut, and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the "Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis." This review determined that the "one-airway-one-disease" concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme "allergic" (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis. Rhinitis alone and rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity represent two distinct diseases with the following differences: (i) genomic and transcriptomic background (Toll-Like Receptors and IL-17 for rhinitis alone as a local disease; IL-33 and IL-5 for allergic and non-allergic multimorbidity as a systemic disease), (ii) allergen sensitization patterns (mono- or pauci-sensitization versus polysensitization), (iii) severity of symptoms, and (iv) treatment response. In conclusion, rhinitis alone (local disease) and rhinitis with asthma multimorbidity (systemic disease) should be considered as two distinct diseases, possibly modulated by the microbiome, and may be a model for understanding the epidemics of chronic and autoimmune diseases., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air ® app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs., Methods: We used MASK-air ® data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air ® data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air ® , and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT])., Results: We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air ® use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820)., Conclusion: The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Patients with severe asthma frequently have associated comorbidities, which can compound existing symptoms, complicating asthma management., Objective: To describe the real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab in patients with severe asthma stratified by common overlapping comorbidities., Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients with asthma from the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Database initiating mepolizumab treatment (index date). Eligible patients had more than or equal to 1 claim (excluding claims for diagnostic tests) with a diagnosis code for more than or equal to 1 of 7 comorbidities (atopic disease, nasal polyps, chronic sinusitis, obesity, respiratory infections, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and depression/anxiety) during the 12-month preindex baseline period; these were used to stratify patients into 7 nonmutually exclusive subgroups. Outcomes included asthma exacerbations and exacerbation-related health care resource utilization during the 12-month baseline and follow-up periods. Each patient acted as their own control., Results: Of the 639 patients included, the most common comorbidities were atopic diseases (73.2%), respiratory infections (55.6%), and chronic sinusitis (45.1%). Across all 7 comorbidity subgroups, there were significant (P < .05) reductions of 38% to 55% and 57% to 83% in exacerbations and exacerbations requiring hospitalization, respectively, during the follow-up vs baseline period, except for exacerbations requiring hospitalization in the nasal polyp subgroup, owing to the small subgroup sample size. During the follow-up vs baseline periods, mean number of oral corticosteroids claims was significantly (P < .001) reduced by 29% to 38%; 39% to 47% of patients achieved greater than or equal to 50% oral corticosteroids dose reduction. Significant reductions in exacerbation-related health care resource utilization were also observed., Conclusion: Mepolizumab treatment provided real-world clinical benefits in patients., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although there are many asymptomatic patients, one of the problems of COVID-19 is early recognition of the disease. COVID-19 symptoms are polymorphic and may include upper respiratory symptoms. However, COVID-19 symptoms may be mistaken with the common cold or allergic rhinitis. An ARIA-EAACI study group attempted to differentiate upper respiratory symptoms between the three diseases., Methods: A modified Delphi process was used. The ARIA members who were seeing COVID-19 patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the upper airway symptoms of COVID-19, common cold and allergic rhinitis., Results: Among the 192 ARIA members who were invited to respond to the questionnaire, 89 responded and 87 questionnaires were analysed. The consensus was then reported. A two-way ANOVA revealed significant differences in the symptom intensity between the three diseases (p < .001)., Conclusions: This modified Delphi approach enabled the differentiation of upper respiratory symptoms between COVID-19, the common cold and allergic rhinitis. An electronic algorithm will be devised using the questionnaire., (© 2021 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Digital anamorphosis is used to define a distorted image of health and care that may be viewed correctly using digital tools and strategies. MASK digital anamorphosis represents the process used by MASK to develop the digital transformation of health and care in rhinitis. It strengthens the ARIA change management strategy in the prevention and management of airway disease. The MASK strategy is based on validated digital tools. Using the MASK digital tool and the CARAT online enhanced clinical framework, solutions for practical steps of digital enhancement of care are proposed., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor α, is approved as add-on maintenance treatment for inadequately controlled type 2 severe asthma. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled severe asthma. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Three RCTs including 2735 subjects >12 years old and 24-52 weeks of follow-up were included. Dupilumab reduced with high certainty severe asthma exacerbations (Incidence rate ratio 0.51; 95% CI 0.45-0.59) and the percentage use of oral corticosteroid use (mean difference (MD) -28.2 mg/d; 95% CI -40.7 to -15.7). Asthma control (ACQ-5), quality of life (AQLQ) and rescue medication use [puffs/d] improved, without reaching the minimal important clinical difference: ACQ-5 MD -0.28 (95% CI -0.39 to -0.17); AQLQ MD +0.28 (95% CI 0.20-0.37); and rescue medication MD -0.35 (95% CI -0.73 to +0.02). FEV 1 increased (MD +0.15; 95% CI +0.11 to +0.18) (moderate certainty). There was an increased rate of dupilumab-related adverse events (AEs) (moderate certainty) and of drug-related serious AEs (low certainty). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus standard therapy was 464 000$/QALY (moderate certainty). More data on long-term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Allergic asthma is a frequent asthma phenotype. Both IgE and type 2 cytokines are increased, with some degree of overlap with other phenotypes. Systematic reviews assessed the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab (alphabetical order) vs standard of care for patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. All three biologicals reduced with high certainty the annualized asthma exacerbation rate: benralizumab incidence rate ratios (IRR) 0.63 (95% CI 0.50 - 0.81); dupilumab IRR 0.58 (95%CI 0.47 - 0.73); and omalizumab IRR 0.56 (95%CI 0.42 - 0.73). Benralizumab and dupilumab improved asthma control with high certainty and omalizumab with moderate certainty; however, none reached the minimal important difference (MID). Both benralizumab and omalizumab improved QoL with high certainty, but only omalizumab reached the MID. Omalizumab enabled ICS dose reduction with high certainty. Benralizumab and omalizumab showed an increase in drug-related adverse events (AEs) with low to moderate certainty. All three biologicals had moderate certainty for an ICER/QALY value above the willingness to pay threshold. There was high certainty that in children 6-12 years old omalizumab decreased the annualized exacerbation rate [IRR 0.57 (95%CI 0.45-0.72)], improved QoL [relative risk 1.43 (95%CI 1.12 -1.83)], reduced ICS [mean difference (MD) -0.45 (95% CI -0.58 to -0.32)] and rescue medication use [ MD -0.41 (95%CI -0.66 to -0.15)]., (© 2020 John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV 1 , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV 1 . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Allergic asthma is defined as asthma associated with sensitization to aeroallergens, which leads to asthma symptoms and airway inflammation. Allergic asthma is the most common asthma phenotype. The onset of allergic asthma is most often in childhood and is usually accompanied by other comorbidities including atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis. It is often persistent although there is a wide variation in disease severity. It is a T H 2-driven process. Biomarkers have been identified to distinguish patients with allergic asthma, particularly serum IgE levels, tests to indicate sensitization to aeroallergens such as specific IgE or skin prick test positivity, blood and sputum eosinophil levels, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, and periostin. Treatments for allergic asthma include environmental control measures, allergen immunotherapy, and glucocorticoids. Biologics, targeting the T H 2 pathway, have been shown to be effective in the treatment of allergic asthma., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis aims to control the disease and depends on many factors. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines have considerably improved the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, there is an increasing trend toward use of real-world evidence to inform clinical practice, especially because randomized controlled trials are often limited with regard to the applicability of results. The Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif (MACVIA) algorithm has proposed an allergic rhinitis treatment by a consensus group. This simple algorithm can be used to step up or step down allergic rhinitis treatment. Next-generation guidelines for the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis were developed by using existing GRADE-based guidelines for the disease, real-world evidence provided by mobile technology, and additive studies (allergen chamber studies) to refine the MACVIA algorithm., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a proven therapeutic option for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. Many guidelines or national practice guidelines have been produced but the evidence-based method varies, many are complex and none propose care pathways. This paper reviews care pathways for AIT using strict criteria and provides simple recommendations that can be used by all stakeholders including healthcare professionals. The decision to prescribe AIT for the patient should be individualized and based on the relevance of the allergens, the persistence of symptoms despite appropriate medications according to guidelines as well as the availability of good-quality and efficacious extracts. Allergen extracts cannot be regarded as generics. Immunotherapy is selected by specialists for stratified patients. There are no currently available validated biomarkers that can predict AIT success. In adolescents and adults, AIT should be reserved for patients with moderate/severe rhinitis or for those with moderate asthma who, despite appropriate pharmacotherapy and adherence, continue to exhibit exacerbations that appear to be related to allergen exposure, except in some specific cases. Immunotherapy may be even more advantageous in patients with multimorbidity. In children, AIT may prevent asthma onset in patients with rhinitis. mHealth tools are promising for the stratification and follow-up of patients., (© 2019 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: The primary lung function endpoint in clinical trials in adolescent and adult patients with asthma is usually forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 ). The objective of our analysis was to assess whether peak expiratory flow (PEF) is a suitable alternative primary lung function endpoint., Methods: For this assessment, we calculated post hoc the correlation between pre-dose FEV 1 and pre-dose PEF measured under supervision in the clinic and, for both lung function parameters, the correlations between supervised clinic and unsupervised home measurements, using the results from the 8 Phase III parallel-group trials of the global clinical development programme with tiotropium Respimat® in patients with asthma aged 12 to 75 years., Results: Across all 8 trials included in this analysis, changes in lung function from baseline correlated well between pre-dose FEV 1 and pre-dose PEF when both were measured under supervision in the clinic. Correlation between supervised in-clinic and unsupervised home measurements was stronger for pre-dose PEF than for pre-dose FEV 1 ., Conclusions: Pre-dose PEF measured at home could be an alternative primary lung function endpoint for trials in adolescent and adult patients with asthma. Using home-measured PEF could facilitate trial conduct and improve the convenience for patients by relocating scheduled assessments from the clinic to the patient's home., Trial Registration: Adolescents aged 12 to 17 years: RubaTinA-asthma® ( NCT01257230 ), PensieTinA-asthma® ( NCT01277523 ). Adults aged 18 to 75 years: GraziaTinA-asthma® ( NCT01316380 ), MezzoTinA-asthma® ( NCT01172808 / NCT01172821 ), CadenTinA-asthma® ( NCT01340209 ), PrimoTinA-asthma® ( NCT00772538 / NCT00776984 ). All from Clinicaltrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ).

Background: The 4G4G genotype of plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) is associated with increased plasma PAI-1 levels and poor asthma control. Previous studies suggest that soy isoflavones can reduce PAI-1 levels., Objective: We sought to investigate PAI-1 genotype-specific differences of the soy isoflavone response in asthma outcomes., Methods: A PAI-1 functional polymorphism (rs1799768, 4G5G) was characterized in subjects with poorly controlled asthma enrolled in a randomized clinical trial of soy isoflavones (n = 265). Genotype-specific treatment responses on asthma outcomes were compared between soy isoflavones and placebo. Normal human bronchial epithelial cells were cultured with or without TGF-β1, genistein, or both, and PAI-1 levels were measured., Results: The 4G4G/4G5G genotype was associated with a greater risk for allergy-related worsened asthma symptoms and eczema at baseline compared with the 5G5G genotype. There was a significant interaction between the genotype and soy isoflavone intervention on oral corticosteroid use for asthma exacerbation (P = .005). In a subgroup analysis soy isoflavones significantly reduced the use of oral corticosteroids (number of events/person-year) by 4-fold compared with placebo in the 4G4G/4G5G genotype (0.2 vs 0.8; relative risk, 0.28; P < .001) but not in the 5G5G genotype. Soy isoflavones reduced plasma PAI-1 levels compared with placebo. Genistein treatment reduced TGF-β1-induced PAI-1 production in normal human bronchial epithelial cells., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that soy isoflavone treatment provides a significant benefit in reducing the number of severe asthma exacerbations in asthmatic patients with the high PAI-1-producing genotype. PAI-1 polymorphisms can be used as a genetic biomarker for soy isoflavone-responsive patients with asthma., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases organized a workshop to develop trial concepts that could improve the use and effectiveness of aeroallergen immunotherapy (AAIT). Expert groups were formed to accomplish the following tasks: (1) propose a study design to compare the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous versus sublingual AAIT; (2) propose a study design to compare the effectiveness and safety of AAIT by using 1 or a few allergens versus all or most allergens to which a patient is sensitized; (3) propose a study design to determine whether AAIT can alter the progression of childhood allergic airways disease; and (4) propose a study design to determine the optimal dose and duration of AAIT to achieve maximal effectiveness with acceptable safety. Study designs were presented by the workgroups, extensively discussed at the workshop, and revised for this report. The proposed trials would be of long duration and require large highly characterized patient populations. Scientific caveats and feasibility matters are discussed. These concepts are intended to help the development of clinical trials that can address some of the major questions related to the practice of AAIT for the management and prevention of allergic airways disease., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Several classifications of systemic adverse reactions (SARs) during allergen immunotherapy have been proposed, but the comparison of their usefulness in daily clinical practice is lacking., Objective: The present post hoc analysis was aimed at investigating the practicality of the most relevant international classifications proposed by the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the American Academy of Asthma, Allergology and Clinical Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAACI/ACAAI), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) using data provided by the longitudinal European Survey on Adverse Systemic Reactions in Allergen Immunotherapy (EASSI) based on daily clinical practice in 3 countries in Europe., Methods: One hundred nine SARs over 4363 allergen immunotherapy courses were classified as mild (n = 78 [71.5%]), moderate (n = 27 [24.8%]), and severe (n = 4 [3.7%]) by EASSI-doctors, which served as a criterion standard. Every SAR was further classified according to the following grading systems: EAACI 2006 Grading System (EAACI2006), WAO 2010 Grading System (WAO2010), WAO 2017 Grading System (WAO2017), and AAAAI/ACAAI Grading System. All SAR rankings were also cross-compared among each other (Kendall correlation coefficient Tau-b). In general, a low epinephrine use was identified, severe reactions occurred within 15 minutes, and milder reactions were skin only., Results: The analysis indicated disparities in mild and moderate SARs in the different grading systems. The correlation between EASSI-severity and EAACI2006, WAO2010, WAO2017, and AAAAI/ACAAI Grading System was 0.639, 0.502, 0.315, and 0.663, respectively (P < .001 in all cases). However, correlation of severe reactions was good. The best correlation with the onset of the reaction and the number of System Organ Class involved were detected in WAO grading systems., Conclusions: Despite having a lower correlation than EAACI and AAAAI/ACAAI, the WAO grading appears to provide a moderate correlation among these classifications. The analysis might help to inform clinicians and investigators on selecting the most appropriate classification., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) has evolved from a guideline by using the best approach to integrated care pathways using mobile technology in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma multimorbidity. The proposed next phase of ARIA is change management, with the aim of providing an active and healthy life to patients with rhinitis and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the lifecycle irrespective of their sex or socioeconomic status to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease. ARIA has followed the 8-step model of Kotter to assess and implement the effect of rhinitis on asthma multimorbidity and to propose multimorbid guidelines. A second change management strategy is proposed by ARIA Phase 4 to increase self-medication and shared decision making in rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity. An innovation of ARIA has been the development and validation of information technology evidence-based tools (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network [MASK]) that can inform patient decisions on the basis of a self-care plan proposed by the health care professional., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent efficacy studies of asthma biologics have included highly enriched patient populations. Using a similar approach, we examined factors that predict response to omalizumab to facilitate selection of patients most likely to derive the greatest clinical benefit from therapy., Methods: Data from two phase III clinical trials of omalizumab in patients with allergic asthma were examined. Differences in rates of asthma exacerbations between omalizumab and placebo groups during the 16-week inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose-stable phase were evaluated with respect to baseline blood eosinophil counts (eosinophils <300/μL [low] vs ≥300/μL [high]) and baseline markers of asthma severity (emergency asthma treatment in prior year, asthma hospitalization in prior year, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV 1 ; FEV 1 <65% vs ≥65% predicted], inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate dose [<600 vs ≥600 μg/day], and long-acting beta-agonist [LABA] use [yes/no])., Results: Adults/adolescents (N = 1071) were randomized to receive either omalizumab (n = 542) or placebo (n = 529). In the 16-week ICS dose-stable phase, rates of exacerbations requiring ≥3 days of systemic corticosteroid treatment were 0.066 and 0.147 with omalizumab and placebo, respectively, representing a relative rate reduction in omalizumab-treated patients of 55% (95% CI, 32%-70%; P = .002). For patients with eosinophils ≥300/μL or with more severe asthma, this rate reduction was significantly more pronounced., Conclusion: In patients with allergic asthma, baseline blood eosinophil levels and/or clinical markers of asthma severity predict response to omalizumab., (© 2017 The Authors Allergy Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 10% to 40% of the population. It reduces quality of life and school and work performance and is a frequent reason for office visits in general practice. Medical costs are large, but avoidable costs associated with lost work productivity are even larger than those incurred by asthma. New evidence has accumulated since the last revision of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in 2010, prompting its update., Objective: We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines., Methods: The ARIA guideline panel identified new clinical questions and selected questions requiring an update. We performed systematic reviews of health effects and the evidence about patients' values and preferences and resource requirements (up to June 2016). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision frameworks to develop recommendations., Results: The 2016 revision of the ARIA guidelines provides both updated and new recommendations about the pharmacologic treatment of AR. Specifically, it addresses the relative merits of using oral H 1 -antihistamines, intranasal H 1 -antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists either alone or in combination. The ARIA guideline panel provides specific recommendations for the choice of treatment and the rationale for the choice and discusses specific considerations that clinicians and patients might want to review to choose the management most appropriate for an individual patient., Conclusions: Appropriate treatment of AR might improve patients' quality of life and school and work productivity. ARIA recommendations support patients, their caregivers, and health care providers in choosing the optimal treatment., (Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative commenced during a World Health Organization (WHO) workshop in 1999. The initial goals were (i) to propose a new allergic rhinitis classification, (ii) to promote the concept of multi-morbidity in asthma and rhinitis and (iii) to develop guidelines with all stakeholders for global use in all countries and populations. ARIA- disseminated and implemented in over 70 countries globally- is now focusing on the implementation of emerging technologies for individualized and predictive medicine. MASK (MACVIA (Contre les MAladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif)-ARIA Sentinel NetworK) uses mobile technology to develop care pathways in order to enable the management of rhinitis and asthma by a multi-disciplinary group or by patients themselves. An App (Android and iOS) is available in 20 countries and 15 languages. It uses a visual analogue scale to assess symptom control and work productivity as well as a clinical decision support system. It is associated with an inter-operable tablet for physicians and other health care professionals. The scaling up strategy uses the recommendations of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing. The aim of the novel ARIA approach is to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers, whatever their age, sex or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequalities incurred by the disease.

Background: New treatment options are required for patients with asthma not sufficiently controlled with inhaled therapies. In a Phase 2a trial, CYT003, a Toll-like receptor-9 agonist immunomodulator, improved asthma control during inhaled glucocorticosteroid reduction in patients with allergic asthma. This double-blind Phase 2b study assessed the efficacy and safety of CYT003 in patients with persistent moderate-to-severe allergic asthma not sufficiently controlled on standard inhaled glucocorticosteroid therapy with/without long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs)., Methods: Overall, 365 patients received seven doses of subcutaneous CYT003 (0.3, 1, or 2 mg) or placebo as add-on therapy to conventional controller medication. Change from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included change in forced expiratory volume, Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, and safety., Results: All groups, including placebo, showed a clinically important improvement in ACQ score; however, there was no significant difference between the CYT003 and placebo groups at week 12 (least-squares mean difference 0.3 mg: -0.027 [95% confidence interval -0.259 to 0.204]; 1 mg: 0.097 [-0.131 to 0.325]; 2 mg: 0.081 [-0.148 to 0.315]). No significant differences were seen in secondary outcomes. CYT003 was well tolerated; the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were injection site reactions. Due to lack of efficacy, the study was prematurely terminated at the end of the treatment phase with no further follow-up., Conclusions: Toll-like receptor-9 agonism with CYT003 showed no additional benefit in patients with insufficiently controlled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma receiving standard inhaled glucocorticosteroid therapy with or without LABAs., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The goal of asthma treatment is to control the disease according to guidelines issued by bodies such as the Global Initiative for Asthma. Effective control is dependent upon evaluation of symptoms, initiation of appropriate treatment and minimization of the progressive adverse effects of the disease and its therapies. Although individual outcome measures have been shown to correlate with asthma control, composite endpoints are preferred to enable more accurate and robust monitoring of the health of the individual patient. A number of validated instruments are utilized to capture these component endpoints; however, there is no consensus on the optimal instrument for use in clinical trials. The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) has been shown to be a valid, reliable instrument that allows accurate and reproducible assessment of asthma control that compares favourably with other commonly used instruments. This analysis provides a summary of the use of ACQ in phase II, III and IV asthma trials. Comparisons between the ACQ and other instruments are also presented. Our analysis suggests that the ACQ is a valid and robust measure for use as a primary or secondary endpoint in future clinical trials., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children., (Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Asthma is the most common chronic lower respiratory disease in childhood throughout the world. Several guidelines and/or consensus documents are available to support medical decisions on pediatric asthma. Although there is no doubt that the use of common systematic approaches for management can considerably improve outcomes, dissemination and implementation of these are still major challenges. Consequently, the International Collaboration in Asthma, Allergy and Immunology (iCAALL), recently formed by the EAACI, AAAAI, ACAAI, and WAO, has decided to propose an International Consensus on (ICON) Pediatric Asthma. The purpose of this document is to highlight the key messages that are common to many of the existing guidelines, while critically reviewing and commenting on any differences, thus providing a concise reference. The principles of pediatric asthma management are generally accepted. Overall, the treatment goal is disease control. To achieve this, patients and their parents should be educated to optimally manage the disease, in collaboration with healthcare professionals. Identification and avoidance of triggers is also of significant importance. Assessment and monitoring should be performed regularly to re-evaluate and fine-tune treatment. Pharmacotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment. The optimal use of medication can, in most cases, help patients control symptoms and reduce the risk for future morbidity. The management of exacerbations is a major consideration, independent of chronic treatment. There is a trend toward considering phenotype-specific treatment choices; however, this goal has not yet been achieved., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Patients with severe asthma suffer persistent symptoms and/or frequent exacerbations despite high-intensity treatment. Their severe unrelenting symptoms have a huge impact on healthcare resources owing to frequent hospital admissions and requirement for intensive treatments. Consequently, there is an undeniable need for more-effective and safer medications. Expanding knowledge of innate and adaptive immune responses is leading to the development of novel therapies for severe asthma. Herein, we review efficacy and safety data from human clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies that are approved or under investigation for use in asthma. Future drug candidates directed at key targets and the specific role of monoclonal antibodies in distinctively targeted sub-populations of severe asthmatics will be also discussed., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Concepts of disease severity, activity, control and responsiveness to treatment are linked but different. Severity refers to the loss of function of the organs induced by the disease process or to the occurrence of severe acute exacerbations. Severity may vary over time and needs regular follow-up. Control is the degree to which therapy goals are currently met. These concepts have evolved over time for asthma in guidelines, task forces or consensus meetings. The aim of this paper is to generalize the approach of the uniform definition of severe asthma presented to WHO for chronic allergic and associated diseases (rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, chronic urticaria and atopic dermatitis) in order to have a uniform definition of severity, control and risk, usable in most situations. It is based on the appropriate diagnosis, availability and accessibility of treatments, treatment responsiveness and associated factors such as comorbidities and risk factors. This uniform definition will allow a better definition of the phenotypes of severe allergic (and related) diseases for clinical practice, research (including epidemiology), public health purposes, education and the discovery of novel therapies., (Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Allergic rhinitis and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently co-exist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization (WHO) workshop in 1999 and was published in 2001. ARIA has reclassified allergic rhinitis as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification schema closely reflects the impact of allergic rhinitis on patients. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of allergic rhinitis and asthma co-morbidities based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). ARIA has been disseminated and implemented in over 50 countries of the world. In Turkey, it is important to make a record of ARIA achievements and to identify the still unmet clinical, research and implementation needs in order to strengthen the 2011 EU Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

Background: Randomized trials provide evidence to inform treatment decisions. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement is a set of recommendations for the reporting of trials., Objective: We sought to assess the quality of reporting allergen-specific immunotherapy trials according to CONSORT criteria., Methods: The reporting of the procedure, randomization, dropouts, strict conduct of intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, and sample size calculation according to CONSORT were assessed in the 46 subcutaneous and 48 sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) blind, placebo-controlled randomized trials published between 1996 and 2009 in English., Results: One subcutaneous immunotherapy (2.2%) and 3 SLIT (6.6%) trials met CONSORT Statement criteria. These were used for the registration of sublingual tablets to the European Medicines Agency. In subcutaneous immunotherapy, 16 (35%) studies reported a CONSORT flow chart, and 12 (26%) provided a description of dropouts. Adequate randomization was reported in 9 (35%) studies, and incomplete randomization was reported in 15 (33%). Power analysis was reported in 15 (33%) studies. In SLIT, 20 (42%) studies reported a CONSORT flow chart, and 16 (32%) a description of dropouts. ITT analysis was carried out in 1 (2.2%) SLIT study, and a modified ITT analysis was used in 1 (2.2%) subcutaneous immunotherapy study and 2 (4.4%) SLIT studies. Adequate randomization was reported in 6 (12%) studies, and incomplete randomization was reported in 16 (32%). Power analysis was reported in 15 (27%) studies., Conclusion: As in other areas of medicine, the quality of reporting of most immunotherapy trials is low, and only 4.2% of SLIT randomized controlled trials met all of the criteria of the CONSORT Statement. Use of the CONSORT criteria should be encouraged., (Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although specific immunotherapy is a valuable treatment option for patients with allergic asthma, the potential for systemic allergic reactions has limited its use, especially for patients with symptomatic disease., Objective: To evaluate omalizumab's effect on the tolerability of specific immunotherapy in patients with symptomatic persistent asthma not adequately controlled with inhaled corticosteroids., Methods: This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study randomized patients to treatment with omalizumab or placebo, after which they received specific immunotherapy to at least 1 of 3 perennial aeroallergens (cat, dog, and house dust mite) according to a 4-week, 18-injection cluster regimen, followed by 7 weeks of maintenance therapy. The primary efficacy variable, a systemic allergic reaction after immunotherapy, was analyzed by using the Cochrane-Mantel-Haenszel test., Results: A total of 248 randomized patients (126 omalizumab, 122 placebo) received at least 1 dose of immunotherapy and were evaluated for efficacy. Patients receiving omalizumab experienced significantly fewer systemic allergic reactions to immunotherapy than those receiving placebo (17/126 [13.5%] vs 32/122 [26.2%]; P = .017; 95% CI, 2.91% to 22.56%) and had fewer respiratory-related (grade 3) systemic allergic reactions (6 vs 24, respectively). Grade 4 reactions were reported in 2 patients in each group. More omalizumab patients were able to reach the target maintenance immunotherapy dose (110 [87.3%] vs 88 [72.1%], respectively; P = .004)., Conclusion: Use of omalizumab in patients whose asthma was symptomatic despite use of inhaled corticosteroids was associated with fewer systemic allergic reactions to specific immunotherapy and enabled more patients to achieve the target immunotherapy maintenance dose., (Copyright 2010 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Omalizumab (Xolair) is a recombinant humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody with proven efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe and severe persistent allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma., Objective: To review clinical study data to assess the safety profile of omalizumab., Methods: We analysed the safety of omalizumab using data from completed clinical studies (up to 1 year) involving more than 7500 patients with asthma, rhinitis or related conditions and up to 4 years in one study of patients with severe allergic asthma, as well as post-marketing safety data. Analysis focuses on the risk of immune-system effects, hypersensitivity reactions, malignant neoplasia, parasitic infections and thrombocytopenia., Results: Omalizumab exhibited a good safety and tolerability profile that was maintained up to 4 years in one study. The incidence of anaphylaxis was 0.14% in omalizumab-treated patients and 0.07% in control patients. No omalizumab-treated patient developed measurable anti-omalizumab antibodies. Post-marketing, based on estimated exposure of 57,300 patients (June 2003-December 2006), the frequency of anaphylaxis attributed to omalizumab use was estimated to be at least 0.2% of patients. Current clinical trial data do not support an increased risk of malignant neoplasia or thrombocytopenia with omalizumab., Conclusion: Data indicate that the proven efficacy of add-on omalizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe or severe allergic asthma is accompanied by a favourable safety and tolerability profile.

Concepts of asthma severity and control are important in the evaluation of patients and their response to treatment but the terminology is not standardised and the terms are often used interchangeably. This review, arising from the work of an American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Task Force, identifies the need for separate concepts of control and severity, describes their evolution in asthma guidelines and provides a framework for understanding the relationship between current concepts of asthma phenotype, severity and control. "Asthma control" refers to the extent to which the manifestations of asthma have been reduced or removed by treatment. Its assessment should incorporate the dual components of current clinical control (e.g. symptoms, reliever use and lung function) and future risk (e.g. exacerbations and lung function decline). The most clinically useful concept of asthma severity is based on the intensity of treatment required to achieve good asthma control, i.e. severity is assessed during treatment. Severe asthma is defined as the requirement for (not necessarily just prescription or use of) high-intensity treatment. Asthma severity may be influenced by the underlying disease activity and by the patient's phenotype, both of which may be further described using pathological and physiological markers. These markers can also act as surrogate measures for future risk.

Background: A controlled-release (CR) formulation of zileuton was developed to simplify administration from 600 mg 4 times daily (Zyflo) to 1,200 mg twice daily., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of zileuton CR, two 600-mg tablets twice daily, compared with placebo., Methods: Patients with moderate asthma treated with short-acting beta-agonists only were randomized to receive zileuton CR, 1,200 mg twice daily (n = 206); placebo CR, twice daily (n = 203); zileuton immediate-release (IR), 600 mg 4 times daily (n = 101); or placebo IR, 4 times daily (n = 103), for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was change from baseline in morning trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)., Results: Improvement in trough FEV1 was observed after 2 weeks of treatment (P = .001) and was maintained throughout the study. After 12 weeks of dosing, FEV1 improved by a mean of 0.39 L (20.8%) in the zileuton CR group vs 0.27 L (12.7%) in the placebo CR group (P = .02). A significant decline in beta-agonist use and a smaller proportion of patients reporting asthma exacerbations were observed in the zileuton CR group vs the placebo CR group. Adverse event profiles were similar across treatment groups. Elevations in alanine aminotransferase levels at least 3 times the upper limit of normal that reversed after drug withdrawal were seen in 5 zileuton CR-treated patients (2.5%) vs 1 placebo CR-treated patient (0.5%)., Conclusions: Treatment with zileuton CR, 1,200 mg twice daily, resulted in a significant improvement in asthma control, and the safety and efficacy profile was similar to that observed with zileuton IR, 600 mg 4 times daily (Zyflo).

Study Objectives: Oral corticosteroids (OCS) may be associated with systemic adverse events (AEs), which can be reduced by replacing OCS with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The potential of ciclesonide, a novel ICS, to reduce OCS use in patients with severe, persistent asthma was evaluated in this study., Design: A phase III, 12-week, international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study., Patients: Adult and adolescent patients (> or = 12 years old; n = 141) with severe, persistent, oral steroid (prednisone)-dependent asthma., Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive ciclesonide (640 mug/d or 1,280 microg/d [ex-actuator]) bid or placebo for 12 weeks. Weekly evaluations determined eligibility for prednisone dose reduction based on predetermined criteria., Measurements and Results: The prednisone dose was significantly reduced by 47% and 63% in the groups receiving ciclesonide, 640 microg/d, and ciclesonide, 1,280 microg/d, respectively, vs an increase of 4% in the placebo group (both p < or = 0.0003) at week 12. By week 12, prednisone was discontinued by approximately 30% of patients in the ciclesonide-treated groups, vs 11% of patients in the placebo group (both p < or = 0.04). FEV1 improved significantly at week 12 in the ciclesonide treatment groups vs placebo (p < 0.03). The occurrence of local and systemic AEs was comparable between all treatment groups., Conclusion: Study results suggest that ciclesonide significantly reduces the need for OCS in patients with severe, persistent asthma, while maintaining asthma control.

Anti-IgE therapy with omalizumab reduces serum levels of free IgE and downregulates expression of IgE receptors (Fc epsilonRI) on mast cells and basophils. In the airways of patients with mild allergic asthma, omalizumab reduces Fc epsilonRI+ and IgE+ cells and causes a profound reduction in tissue eosinophilia, together with reductions in submucosal T-cell and B-cell numbers. In patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, omalizumab inhibits the allergen-induced seasonal increases in circulating and tissue eosinophils. Omalizumab decreases Fc epsilonRI expression on circulating dendritic cells, which might lead to a reduction in allergen presentation, T(H)2 cell activation, and proliferation. As a systemic anti-IgE agent, omalizumab has demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with moderate and severe allergic asthma and in those with seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, as well as in patients with concomitant allergic asthma and allergic rhinitis. The anti-inflammatory effects of omalizumab at different sites of allergic inflammation and the clinical benefits of anti-IgE therapy in patients with allergic asthma and allergic rhinitis emphasize the fundamental importance of IgE in allergic inflammation.

Background: Prevention of serious asthma exacerbations is an important therapeutic goal in patients with asthma., Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of omalizumab (Xolair), a recombinant humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, on the rate of serious exacerbations during long-term therapy., Methods: A pooled analysis was completed of 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III studies with omalizumab in adults/adolescents aged > or =12 years (n = 1071) and in children aged 6 to 12 years (n = 334) who required treatment with inhaled corticosteroids for allergic asthma. Rates of serious asthma exacerbations were computed and compared between omalizumab- and placebo-treated patients. Serious exacerbations were those leading to unscheduled outpatient visits, emergency room treatment, or hospitalization during 1 year of treatment., Results: In all, 767 patients were treated with omalizumab (at least 0.016 mg/kg/IgE [IU/mL], administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks). Another 638 patients were treated with placebo. The rate of unscheduled, asthma-related outpatient visits was lower for the omalizumab-treated patients than for the placebo-treated patients (rate ratio [95% CI], 0.60 [0.44, 0.81]; P <.01), as were asthma-related emergency room visits (rate ratio [95% CI], 0.47 [0.24, 1.01]; P =.05). Importantly, hospitalizations for asthma were markedly reduced in patients receiving omalizumab (rate ratio [95% CI], 0.08 [0.00, 0.25]; P <.01)., Conclusion: Omalizumab reduces the rate of serious asthma exacerbations and the need for unscheduled outpatient visits, emergency room treatment, and hospitalization in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma.

Background: Suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, a potential systemic effect of inhaled corticosteroid therapy, can be quantified by monitoring serum, urinary, and salivary cortisol levels., Objectives: 1) Compare the effects on HPA axis of the inhaled corticosteroids flunisolide and fluticasone propionate versus placebo and oral prednisone. 2) Estimate dose-potency ratio for HPA-axis suppression., Methods: Multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label, 21-day trial. Active regimens were flunisolide 500 and 1,000 microg, twice daily; fluticasone propionate 110, 220, 330, and 440 microg, twice daily; and prednisone, 7.5 mg daily. Enrolled patients were nonsmokers, 18 to 50 years of age, with persistent mild-to-moderate asthma and had not used oral, nasal, or inhaled corticosteroids for 6 months before study. Main outcome measures were area under serum cortisol concentration curve for 22 hours (AUC(0-22h)); 24-hour urinary cortisol level; and 8 AM salivary cortisol level., Results: One hundred fifty-three patients were randomly assigned to active treatment or placebo; 125 patients completed the study and were at least 80% compliant with their regimens. Both fluticasone propionate and flunisolide caused dose-dependent suppression of HPA axis, which was statistically greater for fluticasone propionate (P = 0.0003). Dose-potency ratio showed 4.4 times more serum-cortisol suppression/microgram increase in dose with fluticasone propionate than with flunisolide. Diurnal pattern of serum cortisol suppression was persistent with fluticasone propionate and "remitting" with flunisolide. Salivary and urinary cortisol data were qualitatively similar to serum cortisol results., Conclusions: Fluticasone caused significantly more suppression of HPA axis than flunisolide. Flunisolide may provide a safe option for patients with asthma requiring long-term inhaled corticosteroid therapy.

Background: We have noted several patients who had rhinitis and/or asthma symptoms when exposed to Cannabis plants in the summer months. Cannabis plants are common in the Midwest., Objectives: To examine whether Cannabis might be a clinically important allergen, we determined Cannabis pollination patterns in the Omaha area for 5 years, the prevalence of skin test positivity, and the association with respiratory symptoms., Methods: Airborne Cannabis (and other weed) pollens were collected using a Rotorod air impactor, and pollen counts were done using a standardized protocol., Results: Measurable Cannabis pollen count was not recorded until the last 2 weeks of July. Peak pollination typically occurred during mid- to late-August, and comprised up to 36% of the total pollen counts. Cannabis pollen was not observed after mid-September. To determine the prevalence of skin test positivity, we added Cannabis to the multi-test routine skin test battery. Seventy-eight of 127 patients tested (61%) were skin test positive. Thirty of the 78 patients were randomly selected to determine if they had allergic rhinitis and/or asthma symptoms during the Cannabis pollination period. By history, 22 (73%) claimed respiratory symptoms in the July through September period. All 22 of these subjects were also skin test positive to weeds pollinating during the same period as Cannabis (ragweed, pigweed, cocklebur, Russian thistle, marsh elder, or kochia)., Conclusions: The strong association between skin test reactivity, respiratory symptoms, and pollination period suggests that Cannabis could be a clinically important aeroallergen for certain patients and should be further studied.

Background: Optimal management of chronic, mild-to-moderate asthma with inhaled steroids may include use of the lowest possible doses, as recommended in guidelines, and a reduction in the frequency of daily administration for greater convenience. Lower doses and once daily treatment with inhaled steroids must be rigorously evaluated in controlled clinical trials., Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of once daily treatment with budesonide in subjects with stable asthma., Methods: Once daily budesonide was assessed in 309 adult subjects, including those who were and were not using an inhaled steroid at baseline. The subjects were stratified by inhaled steroid use and randomly assigned to one of 3 treatments: 200 microgram budesonide, 400 microgram budesonide, or placebo administered by means of Turbuhaler once daily in the morning for 6 weeks. Beyond this point, treatment was continued unchanged for another 12 weeks (maintenance) in those receiving 200 microgram budesonide once daily and placebo. In those who received 400 microgram budesonide once daily, the dose was reduced to 200 microgram once daily at week 6 and held constant for the remaining 12 weeks (400/200 microgram group). Primary efficacy endpoints were mean change from baseline in FEV1 and morning peak expiratory flow., Results: Once daily budesonide was well tolerated and resulted in significant improvements in all efficacy endpoints, even though baselines were well stabilized. Baseline lung function was elevated with little room for improvement; however, mean increases in FEV1 during the maintenance period were 0.10 L and 0.11 L in the 200 microgram and 400/200 microgram groups, respectively, versus a decrease of -0.09 L in the placebo arm (P <.001). Results for peak expiratory flow were similar. Significant improvements in secondary endpoints, including symptoms, beta-agonist use, and quality of life, also developed with budesonide 200 and 400 microgram once daily., Conclusion: Inhaled budesonide, in doses as low as 200 microgram, may be an appropriate introductory or maintenance dose in subjects with stable, mild-to-moderate asthma.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and impact on asthma-specific quality of life of salmeterol, a highly selective, long-acting beta 2-agonist, compared with that of placebo (i.e., "as-needed" albuterol)., Study Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study., Patients and Methods: Five hundred thirty-eight nonsmoking symptomatic patients 12 years of age and older meeting American Thoracic Society asthma criteria were enrolled at 55 outpatient clinics; 443 patients completed the study. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with either salmeterol aerosol 42 micrograms twice daily or placebo (as-needed albuterol) for 12 weeks. We assessed changes in quality of life using the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). Efficacy measurements included daily peak expiratory flow (PEF) rate, daytime and nighttime asthma symptoms, results of pulmonary function tests, and supplemental albuterol use. Patients recorded their PEF rate, supplemental albuterol use, and asthma-related symptoms daily. Pulmonary function tests and AQLQ assessments were performed at baseline and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of treatment. Safety measurements included vital signs, physical examination, and reports of clinical adverse events at baseline and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of treatment., Results: Mean changes from baseline in AQLQ global and domain scores were significantly greater in the salmeterol group compared with the placebo group (P < 0.001). Patients treated with salmeterol also had significant improvements in mean PEF rates, supplemental albuterol use, asthma symptom scores, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second compared with those given placebo. Both salmeterol and placebo were well tolerated and were not associated with any clinically significant changes in vital signs or physical examination findings., Conclusions: Salmeterol 42 micrograms twice daily resulted in significantly greater improvements in asthma-specific quality of life, pulmonary function, and asthma symptoms compared with placebo (as-needed albuterol) in patients with moderate persistent asthma.

Background: Cromolyn sodium is a nonsteroidal inhaled antiinflammatory agent for the treatment of asthma. As with other pressurized aerosol medications, the metered-dose inhaler (MDI) formulation currently contains chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants. Because of their harmful effects on the environment CFCs are now generally banned from production and use. Alternative propellants under production for MDIs include derivatives of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA). This study uses HFA-227 in an MDI formulation of cromolyn sodium., Objectives: The objectives of the study were (1) to examine the efficacy and safety of an HFA formulation of cromolyn sodium (Intal) MDI and (2) to compare the HFA formulation with the CFC formulation., Methods: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study with two active groups (HFA-cromolyn sodium [n = 113] and CFC-cromolyn sodium [n = 107]) and a placebo-treated group (n = 105)., Results: Patients treated with either formulation of cromolyn sodium MDI showed a statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvement of 12% to 18% compared with placebo in symptom summary score, daytime asthma symptoms, and albuterol use. No statistically significant differences were observed in pulmonary function. Patient and physician opinions of overall effectiveness favored HFA-cromolyn sodium over placebo (p = 0.01), with no other significant between-treatment differences. No statistically significant differences existed among groups in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events., Conclusion: The HFA formulation of cromolyn sodium MDI is a well- tolerated and active alternative treatment for asthma patients aged 12 years and more.