Search

Background The major complication of COVID-19 is hypoxaemic respiratory failure from capillary leak and alveolar oedema. Experimental and early clinical data suggest that the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor imatinib reverses pulmonary capillary leak. Methods This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial was done at 13 academic and non-academic teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Hospitalised patients (aged ≥18 years) with COVID-19, as confirmed by an RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, requiring supplemental oxygen to maintain a peripheral oxygen saturation of greater than 94% were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had severe pre-existing pulmonary disease, had pre-existing heart failure, had undergone active treatment of a haematological or non-haematological malignancy in the previous 12 months, had cytopenia, or were receiving concomitant treatment with medication known to strongly interact with imatinib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral imatinib, given as a loading dose of 800 mg on day 0 followed by 400 mg daily on days 1–9, or placebo. Randomisation was done with a computer-based clinical data management platform with variable block sizes (containing two, four, or six patients), stratified by study site. The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours, while being alive during a 28-day period. Secondary outcomes included safety, mortality at 28 days, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. All efficacy and safety analyses were done in all randomised patients who had received at least one dose of study medication (modified intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2020–001236–10). Findings Between March 31, 2020, and Jan 4, 2021, 805 patients were screened, of whom 400 were eligible and randomly assigned to the imatinib group (n=204) or the placebo group (n=196). A total of 385 (96%) patients (median age 64 years [IQR 56–73]) received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. Time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 h was not significantly different between the two groups (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·95 [95% CI 0·76–1·20]). At day 28, 15 (8%) of 197 patients had died in the imatinib group compared with 27 (14%) of 188 patients in the placebo group (unadjusted HR 0·51 [0·27–0·95]). After adjusting for baseline imbalances between the two groups (sex, obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease) the HR for mortality was 0·52 (95% CI 0·26–1·05). The HR for mechanical ventilation in the imatinib group compared with the placebo group was 1·07 (0·63–1·80; p=0·81). The median duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 7 days (IQR 3–13) in the imatinib group compared with 12 days (6–20) in the placebo group (p=0·0080). 91 (46%) of 197 patients in the imatinib group and 82 (44%) of 188 patients in the placebo group had at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event. The safety evaluation revealed no imatinib-associated adverse events. Interpretation The study failed to meet its primary outcome, as imatinib did not reduce the time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours in patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen. The observed effects on survival (although attenuated after adjustment for baseline imbalances) and duration of mechanical ventilation suggest that imatinib might confer clinical benefit in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but further studies are required to validate these findings.&nbsp

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous disease with different phenotypes based on clinical, functional or inflammatory parameters. In particular, the eosinophilic phenotype is associated with type 2 inflammation and increased levels of interleukin (IL)‐4, IL‐5 and IL‐13). Monoclonal antibodies that target the eosinophilic inflammatory pathways (IL‐5R and IL‐5), namely mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, are effective and safe for severe eosinophilic asthma. Eosinophils threshold represents the most indicative biomarker for response to treatment with all three monoclonal antibodies. Improvement in asthma symptoms scores, lung function, the number of exacerbations, history of late‐onset asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, low oral corticosteroids use and low body mass index represent predictive clinical markers of response. Novel Omics studies are emerging with proteomics data and exhaled breath analyses. These may prove useful as biomarkers of response and non‐response biologics. Moreover, future biomarker studies need to be undertaken in paediatric patients affected by severe asthma. The choice of appropriate biologic therapy for severe asthma remains challenging. The importance of finding biomarkers that can predict response continuous an open issue that needs to be further explored. This review describes the clinical effects of targeting the IL‐5 pathway in severe asthma in adult and paediatric patients, focusing on predictors of response and non‐response.

Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking &lt, 24 vs. &gt, 24 h before the exhaled breath, and if smoking can be considered a confounder that influences eNose results. We performed a cross-sectional analysis in adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and healthy controls. Ever-smokers were defined as patients with current or past smoking habits. eNose measurements were performed by using the SpiroNose. The principal component (PC) described the eNose signals, and linear discriminant analysis determined if PCs classified ever-smokers vs. never-smokers and smoking &lt, 24 h. The area under the receiver–operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed the accuracy of the models. We selected 593 ever-smokers (167 smoked &lt, 24 h before measurement) and 303 never-smokers and measured the exhaled breath profiles of discriminated ever- and never-smokers (AUC: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.66–0.81), and no cigarette consumption &lt, 24h (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43–0.65). In healthy controls, the eNose did not discriminate between ever or never-smokers (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.49–0.60) and recent cigarette consumption (AUC 0.60, 95% CI: 0.50–0.69). The eNose could distinguish between ever and never-smokers in asthma and COPD patients, but not recent smokers. Recent smoking is not a confounding factor of eNose breath profiles.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma not meeting the strict trial eligibility criteria for mepolizumab are now routinely treated with this biological in clinical practice, but it remains unclear whether these ineligible patients respond differently to mepolizumab treatment.OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the extent and reasons for trial ineligibility of real-life, mepolizumab-treated patients with severe asthma and compared the characteristics of these patients with trial populations. Subsequently, therapeutic response in ineligible patients was assessed on the basis of oral corticosteroid (OCS) reduction.METHODS: Trial eligibility, population differences, and therapeutic response were assessed using the baseline characteristics of mepolizumab-receiving patients with severe asthma treated in the Amsterdam University Medical Centres and OCS dose at 6 months for OCS-dependent patients extracted from patients' electronic health records. Eligibility criteria and population characteristics from trials investigating mepolizumab were extracted from their original publications.RESULTS: A total of 82.4% of 119 mepolizumab-receiving, reallife patients with severe asthma were ineligible for trial inclusion, wherein 42.9% and 39.5% were excluded on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria, respectively. The clinical care population was older, more often male and demonstrating a better lung function under lower OCS maintenance dosages in comparison with trial populations. A total of 50% of 66 ineligible, OCS-dependent mepolizumab-treated patients were able to reduce their maintenance OCS dosage to

Molecular profiling of exhaled breath by electronic nose (eNose) might be suitable as a noninvasive tool that can help in monitoring of clinically unstable COPD patients. However, supporting data are still lacking. Therefore, as a first step, this study aimed to determine the accuracy of exhaled breath analysis by eNose to identify COPD patients who recently exacerbated, defined as an exacerbation in the previous 3 months. Data for this exploratory, cross-sectional study were extracted from the multicentre BreathCloud cohort. Patients with a physician-reported diagnosis of COPD (n=364) on maintenance treatment were included in the analysis. Exacerbations were defined as a worsening of respiratory symptoms requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids, antibiotics or both. Data analysis involved eNose signal processing, ambient air correction and statistics based on principal component (PC) analysis followed by linear discriminant analysis (LDA). Before analysis, patients were randomly divided into a training (n=254) and validation (n=110) set. In the training set, LDA based on PCs 1–4 discriminated between patients with a recent exacerbation or no exacerbation with high accuracy (receiver operating characteristic (ROC)–area under the curve (AUC)=0.98, 95% CI 0.97–1.00). This high accuracy was confirmed in the validation set (AUC=0.98, 95% CI 0.94–1.00). Smoking, health status score, use of inhaled corticosteroids or vital capacity did not influence these results. Exhaled breath analysis by eNose can discriminate with high accuracy between COPD patients who experienced an exacerbation within 3 months prior to measurement and those who did not. This suggests that COPD patients who recently exacerbated have their own exhaled molecular fingerprint that could be valuable for monitoring purposes., Exhaled breath analysis by eNose can identify COPD patients who recently exacerbated with high accuracy. This suggests that these patients have their own exhaled molecular fingerprint that could be valuable for monitoring purposes. https://bit.ly/34vTyrH

Introduction: The complexity and heterogeneous nature of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) results in difficulties in diagnosing and treating patients. Biomarkers that can identify underlying mechanisms, identify patient phenotypes and to predict treatment response could be of great value for adequate treatment. Areas covered: Biomarkers play an important role for the development of novel targeted therapies in airways disease. Blood biomarkers are relatively non-invasive, easy to obtain and easy to apply in routine care. Several blood biomarkers are being used to diagnose and monitor chronic airways diseases, as well as to predict response to treatment and long-term prognosis. Blood eosinophils are the best studied biomarker, the most applied in clinical practice, and until now the most promising of all blood biomarkers. Other blood biomarkers, including serum periostin, IgE and ECP and plasma fibrinogen are less studied and less relevant in clinical practice. Recent developments include the use of antibody assays of many different cytokines at the same time, and ‘omics’ techniques and systems medicine. Expert commentary: With the exception of blood eosinophils, the use of blood biomarkers in asthma and COPD has been rather disappointing. Future research using new technologies like big-data analysis of blood samples from real-life patient cohorts will probably gain better insight into underlying mechanisms of different disease phenotypes. Identification of specific molecular pathways and associated biomarkers will then allow the development of new targets for precision medicine.

Rationale: Analysis of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by sensor-driven electronic nose (eNose) technology is a widely suggested measure for non-invasive monitoring of chronic airway diseases. While this technology allows probabilistic (clinical) advise, it is incapable of providing details regarding involved metabolites. Modelling sensor deflections by matching Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) samples could help to ascertain which VOCs induce a sensor response. Objective: To determine the association between eNose sensor deflections and exhaled VOCs measured by GC-MS. Methods: Paired samples of breath from asthma patients (n=22) were collected on sorbent tubes. One tube was analysed by four different eNoses and the second one by GC-MS. Pooling of resulting datasets consisted of 1) Partial Least Square Regression (PLSR) analysis and 2) clustered heat-mapping of PLSR loadings. Results: Matching data was available for 158 eNose sensors and 1025 GC-MS features, whereby PLSR resulted in R2‘s from 0.25 to 0.72. Figure 1 shows clustered heat-mapping outcomes. Conclusion: This explorative analysis revealed distinctive and associated patterns of exhaled VOCs between eNose and GC-MS. This data matching could help to identify which VOCs are responsible for clinically relevant results obtained by eNose and will facilitate valorisation of breathomics into clinical tests.

Introduction: COPD is a heterogeneous disease with differences in response to treatment. Efforts are ongoing to find new biomarkers that are able to stratify patients at the point-of-care. Molecular profiling of exhaled breath by electronic nose (eNose) may qualify for this in patients using LAMA/LABA with or without ICS. Aim: To determine the accuracy of exhaled breath analysis to detect COPD patients that have a history of being unstable on treatment. Methods: This was a multi-center cross-sectional study in COPD patients using LAMA/LABA with or without ICS. Exhaled breathprints were collected in duplicate by eNose (SpiroNose) [De Vries ERJ 2018]. Instability was defined as the occurrence of ≥1 exacerbation within 3 months prior to inclusion. An exacerbation was defined as a worsening of respiratory symptoms which required treatment with OCS, antibiotics or both. Data analysis involved signal processing, ambient correction and statistics based on principal component (PC) analysis followed by discriminant analysis. Results: COPD patients (n=363) using LAMA/LABA with ICS (n=227; unstable:37) or LAMA/LABA (n=136, unstable:13) were included. PC 2-4 showed a significant difference (p Conclusion: Exhaled breath analysis by SpiroNose is able to accurately identify COPD patients that are clinically unstable during the previous 3 months. This indicates that clinical instability in COPD has its own exhaled molecular fingerprint that could be valuable in COPD monitoring.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Asthma features a high degree of heterogeneity in both pathophysiology and therapeutic response, resulting in many asthma patients being treated inadequately. Biomarkers indicative of underlying pathological processes could be used to identify disease subtypes, determine prognosis and to predict or monitor treatment response. However, the newly identified as well as more established biomarkers have different applications and limitations. RECENT FINDINGS: Conventional markers for type 2-high asthma, such as blood eosinophils, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, serum IgE and periostin, feature limited sensitivity and specificity despite their significant correlations. More distinctive models have been developed by combining biomarkers and/or using omics techniques. Recently, a model with a positive predictive value of 100% for identification of type 2-high asthma based on a combination of minimally invasive biomarkers was developed. SUMMARY: Individualisation of asthma treatment regimens on the basis of biomarkers is necessary to improve asthma control. However, the suboptimal properties of currently available conventional biomarkers limit its clinical utility. Newly identified biomarkers and models based on combinations and/or omics analysis must be validated and standardised before they can be routinely applied in clinical practice. The development of robust biomarkers will allow development of more efficacious precision medicine-based treatment approaches for asthma.