Tiotropium in children and adolescents with asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a major cause of morbidity in children, despite the availability of various treatments. In adults, tiotropium-a long-acting muscarinic antagonist-as add-on therapy to an inhaled corticosteroid with or without a long-acting β₂-agonist provides clinical benefit with a safety profile similar to placebo.

OBJECTIVE

To review published evidence on the efficacy and safety of tiotropium as add-on a long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy in children and adolescents with asthma that is uncontrolled despite use of an inhaled corticosteroid with or without additional controller medication(s).

METHODS

We searched PubMed from inception until June 12, 2018, for randomized controlled trials of children and adolescents aged 1 to 17 years treated with tiotropium and reporting a primary outcome of any pulmonary function test and a secondary outcome of adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, 7 randomized controlled trials of 1902 preschool children (aged 1-5 years; n = 102), school-age children (aged 6-11 years; n = 905), and adolescents (aged 12-17 years; n = 895) with moderate to severe asthma were included in the analysis. Once-daily tiotropium (5, 2.5, or 1.25 μg) improved lung function parameters, including peak and trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second, vs placebo. Commonly reported adverse events across treatment groups included asthma worsening or exacerbations, decreased peak expiratory flow rate, nasopharyngitis, viral respiratory tract infection, and respiratory tract infection.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily tiotropium as add-on therapy is efficacious and safe in adolescents and children with moderate to severe asthma. These results support the expanded indication by regulatory authorities for add-on tiotropium in patients 6 years or older.

Dupilumab Efficacy in Patients with Uncontrolled, Moderate-to-Severe Allergic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for IL-4 and IL-13, key drivers of type 2 inflammation, including IgE-mediated allergic inflammation in asthma. In the LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST (NCT02414854) study, dupilumab reduced severe asthma exacerbations and improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with greater efficacy observed in patients with elevated type 2 inflammatory biomarkers (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide) at baseline.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed dupilumab's effect on key asthma outcomes in QUEST patients with/without evidence of allergic asthma (total serum IgE ≥30 IU/mL and ≥1 perennial aeroallergen-specific IgE ≥0.35 kU/L at baseline).

METHODS

Severe exacerbation rates and change from baseline in FEV₁, asthma control, and markers of type 2 inflammation during the 52-week treatment period were assessed.

RESULTS

In the allergic asthma subgroup (n = 1083), dupilumab 200/300 mg every 2 weeks versus placebo reduced severe asthma exacerbation rates (-36.9%/-45.5%; both P < .01), improved FEV₁ at week 12 (0.13 L/0.16 L; both P < .001; improvements were evident by the first evaluation at week 2) with greater efficacy observed in patients with elevated type 2 inflammatory biomarkers at baseline, and improved asthma control. Dupilumab treatment also resulted in rapid and sustained reductions in type 2 inflammatory biomarkers. Comparable results were observed in patients without evidence of allergic asthma (n = 819).

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab reduced severe exacerbation rates, improved FEV₁ and asthma control, and suppressed type 2 inflammatory biomarkers in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with or without evidence of allergic asthma, highlighting the key role of IL-4 and IL-13 in airway inflammation.

Dupilumab Efficacy in Uncontrolled, Moderate-to-Severe Asthma with Self-Reported Chronic Rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for IL-4 and IL-13 signaling, key drivers of type 2 inflammation. In the phase 3 study (NCT02414854), add-on dupilumab 200 mg/300 mg every 2 weeks, versus placebo, significantly reduced severe asthma exacerbations and improved pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) and quality-of-life measures in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma, with greater efficacy observed in those with a high baseline type 2 phenotype.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with or without self-reported comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS or non-CRS).

METHODS

Comorbid CRS was self-reported by patients using an e-diary. Annualized severe exacerbation rates, changes from baseline in pre- and post-bronchodilator FEV₁, patient-reported outcomes, type 2 biomarkers, and safety were assessed.

RESULTS

CRS was self-reported by 382 of 1902 (20.1%) patients. Dupilumab 200 mg/300 mg reduced annualized severe exacerbation rates by 63%/61%, respectively, in patients with CRS, and by 42%/40% in patients without CRS (all P < .001 vs placebo). Dupilumab also improved lung function and patient-reported asthma control and quality of life, and suppressed type 2 biomarkers versus placebo in both subgroups. Clinical responses were rapid, with near-maximal responses observed at the earliest measured time points and sustained at week 52. Improvements observed in the CRS subgroup were similar to or numerically greater than those in the non-CRS subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab showed efficacy and was generally well tolerated in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with or without CRS.

Symptoms and perception of airway obstruction in asthmatic patients: Clinical implications for use of reliever medications

BACKGROUND

Asthma causes the unpleasant sensation of breathlessness (dyspnea) caused by airway obstruction. Patients with poor perception of airway obstruction are at risk of delay in seeking medical attention and undertreatment, which can lead to avoidable deaths. Conversely, those with heightened perception are at risk of overtreatment and iatrogenic adverse effects with reliever medications, anxiety, and unnecessary use of health care resources.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to review evidence about symptom misperception in asthmatic patients and how to identify and manage affected patients, particularly with regard to reliever medications.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search for studies of perception of airway function in asthmatic patients. We searched the OVID (Medline and Medline [R] in process [PubMed]), Embase, and Adisearch/Odyssey databases, restricting our search to human studies published in English from 1990-2018, with no restrictions on age, sex, or racial origin.

RESULTS

We found that both underperception and overperception assessed during induced bronchoconstriction or bronchodilation or during changes in airway resistance were common across all age groups and that aging, disease severity, smoking, sex, ethnicity, psychologic factors, and medication are all associated with differences in perception. Importantly, airway inflammation was associated with impaired perception and a history of severe or near-fatal asthma. We also identified knowledge gaps, such as whether an individual patient's perception varies over time and the influence perception has on patients' use of reliever medication.

CONCLUSION

We found that abnormal perception of airway obstruction has important clinical implications for the management of patients with asthma.

Harmonization of Terminology for Tolerated and Reactive Dose in Food Allergy Immunotherapy

Currently, there is no Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy for food allergy. Several new potential treatments are under investigation, including food allergen immunotherapy via various routes of administration, such as oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, subcutaneous immunotherapy, and sublingual immunotherapy. The double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) has traditionally been used for diagnostic purposes, but extrapolation of the specific terminology used in food allergy diagnosis to interpretation of efficacy in clinical trials is incongruent and difficult to apply. There is a need for standardization of the terminology used in food allergy clinical trials, because inconsistencies can lead to potential misinterpretation of end points. The reactive dose, previously referred to as the eliciting dose, is defined as the dose given that induces the onset of unequivocal allergic symptoms, or the dose that stops the challenge based on physician discretion. Conversely, the single highest tolerated dose is defined as the highest dose given during a food challenge that elicits either no symptoms or symptoms that do not meet stopping criteria per the study protocol. The evolving field of food allergy provides a novel opportunity to define those end points that are most meaningful for patients, which is fundamental for successful implementation, education, and safety.

The Asthma Controller Step-down Yardstick

Asthma guidelines recommend a control-based approach to disease management in which the assessment of impairment and risk is linked to step-based therapy. Using this model, controller treatment is adjusted-upward or downward-according to a patient's level of asthma control over time. Strategies for stepping up controller therapy are well described, and the adult and pediatric Asthma Yardsticks provide operational recommendations based on patient profiles. Strategies for stepping down controller treatment are less clear, although stepping down to the minimum effective therapy is important and should be considered when a patient's asthma has been well controlled for an adequate period as defined by risk and impairment. This Yardstick presents recommendations for when and how to step down asthma controller therapy according to guideline-defined control levels. The objective is to provide clinicians who treat patients with asthma with a practical and clinically relevant framework for implementing a step-down in controller therapy.

Racial Disparities in Asthma-Related Health Outcomes in Children with Severe/Difficult-to-Treat Asthma

BACKGROUND

There are limited data that examine differences in asthma etiology between black and white children with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To describe demographic, clinical, and asthma-related outcomes in black and white children and examine whether differences in outcomes are explained by confounding factors in sequential multivariable models.

METHODS

Black (n = 86) and white (n = 262) children aged 6-11 years from The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma: Outcomes and Treatment Regimens 3-year observational study were analyzed. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were described for both cohorts, and outcomes at month 12 were analyzed using statistical models, sequentially adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Black children were more likely to be male (79.1% vs 66.4%; P < .05), obese (12.8% vs 1.5%; P < .001), and from a lower income stratum (USD43,400 vs 55,770; P < .001) than white children. Black children had higher geometric mean IgE levels (434.8 vs 136.8 IU/mL; P < .001), were more likely to have very poorly controlled asthma (72.1% vs 53.4%), use long-term systemic corticosteroids (30.2% vs 9.2%; P < .001), have poorer quality of life (5.5 vs 6.1; P < .001), and have an emergency department visit (27.4% vs 7.7%, P < .001) in the 3 months before month 12. Differences in asthma control and the severity of exacerbations persisted even after accounting for all confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Among children with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma, asthma burden is greater in black than white children particularly related to several clinical and patient-reported outcome measures that are not explained by differences in background or clinical characteristics.

The pediatric asthma yardstick: Practical recommendations for a sustained step-up in asthma therapy for children with inadequately controlled asthma

Current asthma guidelines recommend a control-based approach to management involving assessment of impairment and risk followed by implementation of treatment strategies individualized according to the patient's needs and preferences. However, for children with asthma, achieving control can be elusive. Although tools are available to help children (and families) track and manage day-to-day symptoms, when and how to implement a longer-term step-up in care is less clear. Furthermore, treatment is challenged by the 3 age groups of childhood-adolescence (12-18 years old), school age (6-11 years old), and young children (≤5 years old)-and what works for 1 age group might not be the best approach for another. The Pediatric Asthma Yardstick provides an in-depth assessment of when and how to step-up therapy for the child with not well or poorly controlled asthma. Development of this tool follows others in the Yardstick series, presenting patient profiles and step-up strategies based on current guidance documents, but modified according to newer data and the authors' combined clinical experience. The objective is to provide clinicians who treat children with asthma practical and clinically relevant recommendations for each step-up and each intervention, with the intent of helping practitioners better treat their pediatric patients with asthma, particularly those who do not always respond to recommended therapies.