Leukotriene receptor antagonists in addition to usual care for acute asthma in adults and children

Pharmacological interventions for pruritus in adult palliative care patients

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of the original Cochrane review published in 2013 (issue 6), which was updated in 2016 (issue 11). Pruritus occurs in patients with disparate underlying diseases and is caused by different pathologic mechanisms. In palliative care patients, pruritus is not the most prevalent but is a burdening symptom. It can cause considerable discomfort and negatively affect patients' quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different pharmacological treatments compared with active control or placebo for preventing or treating pruritus in adult palliative care patients.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OVID) and Embase (OVID) up to 6 July 2022. In addition, we searched trial registries and checked the reference lists of all relevant studies, key textbooks, reviews and websites, and we contacted investigators and specialists in pruritus and palliative care regarding unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of different pharmacological treatments, compared with a placebo, no treatment, or an alternative treatment, for preventing or treating pruritus in palliative care patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the identified titles and abstracts, performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias and methodological quality. We summarised the results descriptively and quantitatively (meta-analyses) according to the different pharmacological interventions and the diseases associated with pruritus. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created 13 summary of findings tables.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, we included 91 studies and 4652 participants in the review. We added 42 studies with 2839 participants for this update. Altogether, we included 51 different treatments for pruritus in four different patient groups. The overall risk of bias profile was heterogeneous and ranged from high to low risk. The main reason for giving a high risk of bias rating was a small sample size (fewer than 50 participants per treatment arm). Seventy-nine of 91 studies (87%) had fewer than 50 participants per treatment arm. Eight (9%) studies had low risk of bias in the specified key domains; the remaining studies had an unclear risk of bias (70 studies, 77%) or a high risk of bias (13 studies, 14%). Using GRADE criteria, we judged that the certainty of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. pruritus) was high for kappa-opioid agonists compared to placebo and moderate for GABA-analogues compared to placebo. Certainty of evidence was low for naltrexone, fish-oil/omega-3 fatty acids, topical capsaicin, ondansetron and zinc sulphate compared to placebo and gabapentin compared to pregabalin, and very low for cromolyn sodium, paroxetine, montelukast, flumecinol, and rifampicin compared to placebo. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence mainly due to serious study limitations regarding risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. For participants suffering from uraemic pruritus (UP; also known as chronic kidney disease (CKD)-associated pruritus (CKD-aP)), treatment with GABA-analogues compared to placebo likely resulted in a large reduction of pruritus (visual analogue scale (VAS) 0 to 10 cm): mean difference (MD) -5.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.56 to -4.55; five RCTs, N = 297, certainty of evidence: moderate. Treatment with kappa-opioid receptor agonists (difelikefalin, nalbuphine, nalfurafine) compared to placebo reduced pruritus slightly (VAS 0 to 10 cm, MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.71; six RCTs, N = 1292, certainty of evidence: high); thus, this treatment was less effective than GABA-analogues. Treatment with montelukast compared to placebo may result in a reduction of pruritus, but the evidence is very uncertain (two studies, 87 participants): SMD -1.40, 95% CI -1.87 to -0.92; certainty of evidence: very low. Treatment with fish-oil/omega-3 fatty acids compared to placebo may result in a large reduction of pruritus (four studies, 160 observations): SMD -1.60, 95% CI -1.97 to -1.22; certainty of evidence: low. Treatment with cromolyn sodium compared to placebo may result in a reduction of pruritus, but the evidence is very uncertain (VAS 0 to 10 cm, MD -3.27, 95% CI -5.91 to -0.63; two RCTs, N = 100, certainty of evidence: very low). Treatment with topical capsaicin compared with placebo may result in a large reduction of pruritus (two studies; 112 participants): SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.57; certainty of evidence: low. Ondansetron, zinc sulphate and several other treatments may not reduce pruritus in participants suffering from UP. In participants with cholestatic pruritus (CP), treatment with rifampicin compared to placebo may reduce pruritus, but the evidence is very uncertain (VAS: 0 to 100, MD -42.00, 95% CI -87.31 to 3.31; two RCTs, N = 42, certainty of evidence: very low). Treatment with flumecinol compared to placebo may reduce pruritus, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR > 1 favours treatment group; RR 2.32, 95% CI 0.54 to 10.1; two RCTs, N = 69, certainty of evidence: very low). Treatment with the opioid antagonist naltrexone compared to placebo may reduce pruritus (VAS: 0 to 10 cm, MD -2.42, 95% CI -3.90 to -0.94; two RCTs, N = 52, certainty of evidence: low). However, effects in participants with UP were inconclusive (percentage of difference -12.30%, 95% CI -25.82% to 1.22%, one RCT, N = 32). In palliative care participants with pruritus of a different nature, the treatment with the drug paroxetine (one study), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, compared to placebo may reduce pruritus slightly by 0.78 (numerical analogue scale from 0 to 10 points; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.37; one RCT, N = 48, certainty of evidence: low). Most adverse events were mild or moderate. Two interventions showed multiple major adverse events (naltrexone and nalfurafine).

AUTHORS CONCLUSIONS

Different interventions (GABA-analogues, kappa-opioid receptor agonists, cromolyn sodium, montelukast, fish-oil/omega-3 fatty acids and topical capsaicin compared to placebo) were effective for uraemic pruritus. GABA-analogues had the largest effect on pruritus. Rifampin, naltrexone and flumecinol tended to be effective for cholestatic pruritus. However, therapies for patients with malignancies are still lacking. Due to the small sample sizes in most meta-analyses and the heterogeneous methodological quality of the included trials, the results should be interpreted cautiously in terms of generalisability.

Aerosol deposition and airflow dynamics in healthy and asthmatic human airways during inhalation

Inhalation of aerosols such as pharmaceutical aerosols or virus aerosol uptake is of great concern to the human population. To elucidate the underlying aerosol dynamics, the deposition fractions (DFs) of aerosols in healthy and asthmatic human airways of generations 13-15 are predicted. The Navier-stokes equations governing the gaseous phase and the discrete phase model for particles' motion are solved using numerical methods. The main forces responsible for deposition are inertial impaction forces and complex secondary flow velocities. The curvatures and sinusoidal folds in the asthmatic geometry lead to the formation of complex secondary flows and hence higher DFs. The intensities of complex secondary flows are strongest at the generations affected by asthma. The DF in the healthy airways is 0%, and it ranges from 1.69% to 52.93% in the asthmatic ones. From this study, the effects of the pharmaceutical aerosol particle diameters in the treatment of asthma patients can be established, which is conducive to inhibiting the inflammation of asthma airways. Furthermore, with the recent development of COVID-19 which causes pneumonia, the predicted physics and effective simulation methods of bioaerosols delivery to asthma patients are vital to prevent the exacerbation of the chronic ailment and the epidemic.

[Paediatric Life Support]

The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Paediatric Life Support (PLS) guidelines are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). This section provides guidelines on the management of critically ill or injured infants, children and adolescents before, during and after respiratory/cardiac arrest.

Interventions for escalation of therapy for acute exacerbations of asthma in children: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Asthma is an illness that commonly affects adults and children, and it serves as a common reason for children to attend emergency departments. An asthma exacerbation is characterised by acute or subacute worsening of shortness of breath, cough, wheezing, and chest tightness and may be triggered by viral respiratory infection, poor compliance with usual medication, a change in the weather, or exposure to allergens or irritants. Most children with asthma have mild or moderate exacerbations and respond well to first-line therapy (inhaled short-acting beta-agonists and systemic corticosteroids). However, the best treatment for the small proportion of seriously ill children who do not respond to first-line therapy is not well understood. Currently, a large number of treatment options are available and there is wide variation in management.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective - To summarise Cochrane Reviews with or without meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of second-line treatment for children with acute exacerbations of asthma (i.e. after first-line treatments, titrated oxygen delivery, and administration of intermittent inhaled short-acting beta₂-agonists and oral corticosteroids have been tried and have failed) Secondary objectives - To identify gaps in the current evidence base that will inform recommendations for future research and subsequent Cochrane Reviews - To categorise information on reported outcome measures used in trials of escalation of treatment for acute exacerbations of asthma in children, and to make recommendations for development and reporting of standard outcomes in future trials and reviews - To identify relevant randomised controlled trials that have been published since the date of publication of each included review METHODS: We included Cochrane Reviews assessing interventions for children with acute exacerbations of asthma. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The search is current to 28 December 2019. We also identified trials that were potentially eligible for, but were not currently included in, published reviews. We assessed the quality of included reviews using the ROBIS criteria (tool used to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews). We presented an evidence synthesis of data from reviews alongside an evidence map of clinical trials. Primary outcomes were length of stay, hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, and adverse effects. We summarised all findings in the text and reported data for each outcome in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 potentially eligible Cochrane Reviews but extracted data from, and rated the quality of, 13 reviews that reported results for children alone. We excluded four reviews as one did not include any randomised controlled trials (RCTs), one did not provide subgroup data for children, and the last two had been updated and replaced by subsequent reviews. The 13 reviews included 67 trials; the number of trials in each review ranged from a single trial up to 27 trials. The vast majority of comparisons included between one and three trials, involving fewer than 100 participants. The total number of participants included in reviews ranged from 40 to 2630. All studies included children; 16 (24%) included children younger than two years of age. Most of the reviews reported search dates older than four years. We have summarised the published evidence as outlined in Cochrane Reviews. Key findings, in terms of our primary outcomes, are that (1) intravenous magnesium sulfate was the only intervention shown to reduce hospital length of stay (high-certainty evidence); (2) no evidence suggested that any intervention reduced the risk of intensive care admission (low- to very low-certainty evidence); (3) the risk of hospital admission was reduced by the addition of inhaled anticholinergic agents to inhaled beta₂-agonists (moderate-certainty evidence), the use of intravenous magnesium sulfate (high-certainty evidence), and the use of inhaled heliox (low-certainty evidence); (4) the addition of inhaled magnesium sulfate to usual bronchodilator therapy appears to reduce serious adverse events during hospital admission (moderate-certainty evidence); (5) aminophylline increased vomiting compared to placebo (moderate-certainty evidence) and increased nausea and nausea/vomiting compared to intravenous beta₂-agonists (low-certainty evidence); and (6) the addition of anticholinergic therapy to short-acting beta₂-agonists appeared to reduce the risk of nausea (high-certainty evidence) and tremor (moderate-certainty evidence) but not vomiting (low-certainty evidence). We considered 4 of the 13 reviews to be at high risk of bias based on the ROBIS framework. In all cases, this was due to concerns regarding identification and selection of studies. The certainty of evidence varied widely (by review and also by outcome) and ranged from very low to high.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up-to-date evidence on interventions for escalation of therapy for acute exacerbations of asthma in children from Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials. A vast majority of comparisons involved between one and three trials and fewer than 100 participants, making it difficult to assess the balance between benefits and potential harms. Due to the lack of comparative studies between various treatment options, we are unable to make firm practice recommendations. Intravenous magnesium sulfate appears to reduce both hospital length of stay and the risk of hospital admission. Hospital admission is also reduced with the addition of inhaled anticholinergic agents to inhaled beta₂-agonists. However, further research is required to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from these therapies. Due to the relatively rare incidence of acute severe paediatric asthma, multi-centre research will be required to generate high-quality evidence. A number of existing Cochrane Reviews should be updated, and we recommend that a new review be conducted on the use of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy. Important priorities include development of an internationally agreed core outcome set for future trials in acute severe asthma exacerbations and determination of clinically important differences in these outcomes, which can then inform adequately powered future trials.

The Hidden Burden of Severe Asthma: From Patient Perspective to New Opportunities for Clinicians

Severe asthma is an important topic in respiratory diseases, due to its high impact on morbidity and mortality as well as on health-care resources. The many challenges that still exist in the management of the most difficult-to-treat forms of the disease, and the acknowledgement of the existence of unexplored areas in the pathophysiological mechanisms and the therapeutic targets represent an opportunity to gather experts in the field with the immediate goals to summarize current understanding about the natural history of severe asthma and to identify gaps in knowledge and research opportunities, with the aim to contribute to improved medical care and health outcomes. This article is a consensus document from the “International Course on Severe Asthma” that took place in Palermo, Italy, on May 10–11, 2019. Emerging topics in severe asthma were addressed and discussed among experts, with special focus on patient’s needs and research opportunities, with the aim to highlight the unanswered questions in the diagnostic process and therapeutic approach.

Acute Severe Asthma in Adolescent and Adult Patients: Current Perspectives on Assessment and Management

Asthma is a chronic airway inflammatory disease that is associated with variable expiratory flow, variable respiratory symptoms, and exacerbations which sometimes require hospitalization or may be fatal. It is not only patients with severe and poorly controlled asthma that are at risk for an acute severe exacerbation, but this has also been observed in patients with otherwise mild or moderate asthma. This review discusses current aspects on the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of acute severe asthma exacerbations and provides the current perspectives on the management of acute severe asthma attacks in the emergency department and the intensive care unit.

Methodology for determining the correlation of the clinical efficacy of therapy with the addition of a drug (for example, anti-asthma therapy in children)

Introduction: In the recent years, much attention has been paid to the use of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) in the treatment of bronchial asthma (BA). It has been even proposed to use them as alternatives to hormone therapy. Yet, there are studies demonstrating the advantage of montelukast as similar to placebo. The objective was to create a methodology for determining the correlation of the clinical efficacy of therapy with the addition of a drug (on example, clinical efficacy of montelukast in an anti-asthmatic therapy in pediatric patients).

Materials and methods: The data on prescribed regimens was retrospectively extracted from the inpatient records of 608 BA patients admitted to hospital in 2014–2015. Mathematical evaluation was based on the risk factor concept.

Results and discussion: The absolute efficacies (AEs) was estimated to be 91.85% (95% CI 90.15–93.55%) in the exposed group; the attributable efficacy (AtE) was found to be 17.00% (95% CI 10.91–23.09%); the relative efficacy (RE) was found to be 1.23 (95% CI 0.21–2.24); and the population attributable efficacy (PAtE) was found to be 7.55% (95% CI 2.49–12.61%).

Conclusions: The AtE, RE, and PAtE were statistically significant. The RE was found to be 1.23. However, the lower limit of its 95% CI (0.21–2.24) was less than 1, indicating that the increase in clinical efficacy was not found to be statistically significant. In the studied sample positive outcome rates were 91.85% (95% CI 90.15–93.55%) in the exposed group and 74.85% (95% CI 72.49–77.21%) in the comparator group. He presented methodology for determining the correlation of the clinical efficacy of the pharmacotherapy regimen with the addition of a drug can be successfully applied in the future.

Exercise training as an adjunctive therapy to montelukast in children with mild asthma: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of exercise training (ET) as an adjunctive therapy to montelukast for children with mild asthma (MA).

METHODS

A total of 72 children, ages 4 to 12 years with MA were randomly assigned to a treatment group or a control group at a ratio of 1:1. The subjects in the treatment group received ET plus montelukast, while the participants in the control group received montelukast alone. The primary endpoint was lung function, as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and ratio between FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC). The secondary endpoints included the symptom improvements, as measured by clinical assessment score, and quality of life (QoL), as assessed with Paediatric Allergic Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (PADQLQ) scores. In addition, adverse events were also assessed during the period of this study. All outcomes were measured at baseline, at the end of 6-week treatment and 2-week follow-up after the treatment.

RESULTS

After 6-week treatment and 2-week follow-up, although ET plus montelukast did not show better effectiveness in improving lung function, as evaluated by the FEV1 (P > .05) and FEV1/FVC (P > .05) than montelukast alone, significant relief in clinical symptoms (P < .01), and improvement in QoL (P < .01) have achieved. Additionally, both groups had similar safety profile.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that ET as an adjunctive therapy to montelukast may benefit for children with MA. Further studies are still needed to warrant the results of this study.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists for eczema

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common, chronic, inflammatory skin condition that is frequently associated with atopic conditions, including asthma. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) have a corticosteroid-sparing role in asthma, but their role in eczema remains controversial. Currently available topical therapies for eczema are often poorly tolerated, and use of systemic agents is restricted by their adverse effect profile. A review of alternative treatments was therefore warranted.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the possible benefits and harms of leukotriene receptor antagonists for eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to September 2017: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the GREAT database. We also searched five trial registries, and handsearched the bibliographies of all extracted studies for further relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of LTRAs alone or in combination with other (topical or systemic) treatments compared with other treatments alone such as topical corticosteroids or placebo for eczema in the acute or chronic (maintenance) phase of eczema in adults and children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome measures were change in disease severity, long-term symptom control, and adverse effects of treatment. Secondary outcomes were change in corticosteroid requirement, reduction of pruritis, quality of life, and emollient requirement. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Only five studies (including a total of 202 participants) met the inclusion criteria, all of which assessed oral montelukast; hence, we found no studies assessing other LTRAs. Treatment ranged from four to eight weeks, and outcomes were assessed at the end of treatment; therefore, we could only report short-term measurements (defined as less than three months follow-up from baseline). Montelukast dosing was 10 mg for adults (age 14 years and above) and 5 mg for children (age 6 years to 14 years). One study included children (aged 6 years and above) among their participants, while the remaining studies only included adults (participant age ranged from 16 to 70 years). The participants were diagnosed with moderate-to-severe eczema in four studies and moderate eczema in one study. The study setting was unclear in two studies, multicentre in two studies, and single centre in one study; the studies were conducted in Europe and Bangladesh. Two studies were industry funded. The comparator was placebo in three studies and conventional treatment in two studies. The conventional treatment comparator was a combination of antihistamines and topical corticosteroids (plus oral antibiotics in one study).Four of the studies did not adequately describe their randomisation or allocation concealment method and were considered as at unclear risk of selection bias. Only one study was at low risk of performance and detection bias. However, we judged all studies to be at low risk of attrition and reporting bias.We found no evidence of a difference in disease severity of moderate-to-severe eczema after short-term use of montelukast (10 mg) when compared with placebo. The outcome was assessed using the modified EASI (Eczema Area and Severity Index) score and SASSAD (Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis) severity score (standardised mean difference 0.29, with a positive score showing montelukast is favoured, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.23 to 0.81; 3 studies; n = 131; low-quality evidence).When short-term montelukast (10 mg) treatment was compared with conventional treatment in one study, the mean improvement in severity of moderate-to-severe eczema was greater in the intervention group (measured using SCORAD (SCORing of Atopic Dermatitis) severity index) (mean difference 10.57, 95% CI 4.58 to 16.56; n = 31); however, another study of 32 participants found no significant difference between groups using the same measure (mean improvement was 25.2 points with montelukast versus 23.9 points with conventional treatment; no further numerical data provided). We judged the quality of the evidence as very low for this outcome, meaning the results are uncertain.All studies reported their adverse event rate during treatment. Four studies (136 participants) reported no adverse events. In one study of 58 participants with moderate eczema who received montelukast 10 mg (compared with placebo), there was one case of septicaemia and one case of dizziness reported in the intervention group, both resulting in study withdrawal, although whether these effects were related to the medication is unclear. Mild side effects (e.g. headache and mild gastrointestinal disturbances) were also noted, but these were fairly evenly distributed between the montelukast and placebo groups. The quality of evidence for this outcome was low.No studies specifically evaluated emollient requirement or quality of life. One study that administered treatment for eight weeks specifically evaluated pruritus improvement at the end treatment and topical corticosteroid use during treatment. We found no evidence of a difference between montelukast (10 mg) and placebo for both outcomes (low-quality evidence, n = 58). No other study assessed these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review are limited to montelukast. There was a lack of evidence addressing the review question, and the quality of the available evidence for most of the measured outcomes was low. Some primary and secondary outcomes were not addressed at all, including long-term control.We found no evidence of a difference between montelukast (10 mg) and placebo on disease severity, pruritus improvement, and topical corticosteroid use. Very low-quality evidence means we are uncertain of the effect of montelukast (10 mg) compared with conventional treatment on disease severity. Participants in only one study reported adverse events, which were mainly mild (low-quality evidence).There is no evidence that LTRA is an effective treatment for eczema. Serious limitations were that all studies focused on montelukast and only included people with moderate-to-severe eczema, who were mainly adults; and that each outcome was evaluated with a small sample size, if at all.Further large randomised controlled trials, with a longer treatment duration, of adults and children who have eczema of all severities may help to evaluate the effect of all types of LTRA, especially on eczema maintenance.

Guideline on management of the acute asthma attack in children by Italian Society of Pediatrics

BACKGROUND

Acute asthma attack is a frequent condition in children. It is one of the most common reasons for emergency department (ED) visit and hospitalization. Appropriate care is fundamental, considering both the high prevalence of asthma in children, and its life-threatening risks. Italian Society of Pediatrics recently issued a guideline on the management of acute asthma attack in children over age 2, in ambulatory and emergency department settings.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was adopted. A literature search was performed using the Cochrane Library and Medline/PubMed databases, retrieving studies in English or Italian and including children over age 2 year.

RESULTS

Inhaled ß2 agonists are the first line drugs for acute asthma attack in children. Ipratropium bromide should be added in moderate/severe attacks. Early use of systemic steroids is associated with reduced risk of ED visits and hospitalization. High doses of inhaled steroids should not replace systemic steroids. Aminophylline use should be avoided in mild/moderate attacks. Weak evidence supports its use in life-threatening attacks. Epinephrine should not be used in the treatment of acute asthma for its lower cost / benefit ratio, compared to β2 agonists. Intravenous magnesium solphate could be used in children with severe attacks and/or forced expiratory volume1 (FEV1) lower than 60% predicted, unresponsive to initial inhaled therapy. Heliox could be administered in life-threatening attacks. Leukotriene receptor antagonists are not recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

This Guideline is expected to be a useful resource in managing acute asthma attacks in children over age 2.

Comparison of oral montelukast with oral ozagrel in acute asthma: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Background:

The need for more effective management of acute asthma has led to research on drugs which are otherwise approved for use in chronic asthma.

Objective:

To study and compare the effects of oral montelukast with oral ozagrel in acute asthma.

Materials and Methods:

One hundred and twenty patients with acute asthma were recruited for the study. Out of 120 study patients, forty each were randomized into placebo, montelukast, and ozagrel groups. After the first dose of the drug or placebo was administered, peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), number of rescue medications and also vital signs were noted at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and at discharge. In addition, same recordings were done on the morning (8 a.m. – 10 a.m.) following admission. The difference in mean PEFR of each group at above-mentioned time points was the primary endpoint whereas need for rescue medications the secondary end-point.

Results:

The respective mean PEFR recordings of the placebo, montelukast, and ozagrel groups at various time points were as follows: at 6 h (235.19 ± 3.18, 242.86 ± 3.26, 228.18 ± 3.25); at 12 h (254.37 ± 5.23, 265.62 ± 5.38, 242.99 ± 5.36); at 24 h (267.46 ± 7.41, 291.39 ± 7.61, 268.14 ± 7.58); and at 48 h (277.99 ± 7.35, 303.22 ± 7.56, 285.27 ± 7.53); and discharge (301.94 ± 7.07, 317.32 ± 7.27, 298.99 ± 7.23). The mean PEFR between the treatment groups were not statistically significant (P = 0.102). The mean PEFR in the three groups at 8–10 a.m. following admission was 257.60 ± 5.52, 264.23 ± 5.98, and 249.94 ± 5.96; P = 0.266. Total number of rescue doses needed were 7, 4, and 13, respectively (P = 0.67).

Conclusion:

Montelukast or ozagrel when added to the standard treatment of acute asthma does not result in any additional benefit.

Outpatient Management for Acute Exacerbations of Obstructive Lung Diseases

Primary care providers tasked with treating acute exacerbations of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease must be able to recognize exacerbation of symptoms and triage patients based on exacerbation severity to the appropriate level of care. Early treatment with bronchodilators and corticosteroids should be followed by repeated assessments of treatment efficacy. Primary care providers should also provide symptom-guided action plans to empower patients to manage their disease.

Japanese guidelines for adult asthma 2017

Adult bronchial asthma is characterized by chronic airway inflammation, and presents clinically with variable airway narrowing (wheezes and dyspnea) and cough. Long-standing asthma induces airway remodeling, leading to intractable asthma. The number of patients with asthma has increased; however, the number of patients who die of asthma has decreased (1.2 per 100,000 patients in 2015). The goal of asthma treatment is to enable patients with asthma to attain normal pulmonary function and lead a normal life, without any symptoms. A good relationship between physicians and patients is indispensable for appropriate treatment. Long-term management by therapeutic agents and elimination of the causes and risk factors of asthma are fundamental to its treatment. Four steps in pharmacotherapy differentiate between mild and intensive treatments; each step includes an appropriate daily dose of an inhaled corticosteroid, varying from low to high levels. Long-acting β₂-agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, sustained-release theophylline, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist are recommended as add-on drugs, while anti-immunoglobulin E antibody and oral steroids are considered for the most severe and persistent asthma related to allergic reactions. Bronchial thermoplasty has recently been developed for severe, persistent asthma, but its long-term efficacy is not known. Inhaled β₂-agonists, aminophylline, corticosteroids, adrenaline, oxygen therapy, and other approaches are used as needed during acute exacerbations, by choosing treatment steps for asthma in accordance with the severity of exacerbations. Allergic rhinitis, eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, eosinophilic otitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aspirin-induced asthma, and pregnancy are also important issues that need to be considered in asthma therapy.

Is the perceived placebo effect comparable between adults and children? A meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

A potential larger perceived placebo effect in children compared with adults could influence the detection of the treatment effect and the extrapolation of the treatment benefit from adults to children. This study aims to explore this potential difference, using a meta-epidemiological approach.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was done to identify trials included in meta-analyses evaluating a drug intervention with separate data for adults and children. The standardized mean change and the proportion of responders (binary outcomes) were used to calculate the perceived placebo effect. A meta-regression analysis was conducted to test for the difference between adults and children of the perceived placebo effect.

RESULTS

For binary outcomes, the perceived placebo effect was significantly more favorable in children compared with adults (β = 0.13; P = 0.001). Parallel group trials (β = -1.83; P < 0.001), subjective outcomes (β = -0.76; P < 0.001), and the disease type significantly influenced the perceived placebo effect.

CONCLUSION

The perceived placebo effect is different between adults and children for binary outcomes. This difference seems to be influenced by the design, the disease, and outcomes. Calibration of new studies for children should consider cautiously the placebo effect in children.

Pharmacological interventions for pruritus in adult palliative care patients

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in 2013 (Issue 6). Pruritus occurs in patients with disparate underlying diseases and is caused by different pathologic mechanisms. In palliative care patients, pruritus is not the most prevalent but is one of the most puzzling symptoms. It can cause considerable discomfort and affects patients' quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different pharmacological treatments for preventing or treating pruritus in adult palliative care patients.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), and MEDLINE (OVID) up to 9 June 2016 and Embase (OVID) up to 7 June 2016. In addition, we searched trial registries and checked the reference lists of all relevant studies, key textbooks, reviews and websites, and we contacted investigators and specialists in pruritus and palliative care regarding unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of different pharmacological treatments, compared with a placebo, no treatment, or an alternative treatment, for preventing or treating pruritus in palliative care patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the identified titles and abstracts, performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias and methodological quality. We summarised the results descriptively and quantitatively (meta-analyses) according to the different pharmacological interventions and the diseases associated with pruritus. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created 10 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, we included 50 studies and 1916 participants in the review. We added 10 studies with 627 participants for this update. Altogether, we included 39 different treatments for pruritus in four different patient groups.The overall risk of bias profile was heterogeneous and ranged from high to low risk. However, 48 studies (96%) had a high risk of bias due to low sample size (i.e. fewer than 50 participants per treatment arm). Using GRADE criteria, we downgraded our judgement on the quality of evidence to moderate in seven and to low in three comparisons for our primary outcome (pruritus), mainly due to imprecision and risk of bias.In palliative care participants with pruritus of different nature, the treatment with the drug paroxetine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, reduced pruritus by 0.78 points (numerical analogue scale from 0 to 10; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.19 to -0.37; one RCT, N = 48, quality of evidence: moderate) compared to placebo.For participants suffering from uraemic pruritus (UP), gabapentin was more effective than placebo (visual analogue scale (VAS): 0 to 10), mean difference (MD) -5.91, 95% CI -6.87 to -4.96; two RCTs, N = 118, quality of evidence: moderate). The κ-opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine showed amelioration of UP (VAS 0 to 10, MD -0.95, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.58; three RCTs, N = 422, quality of evidence: moderate) and only few adverse events. Moreover, cromolyn sodium relieved UP participants from pruritus by 2.94 points on the VAS (0 to 10) (95% CI -4.04 to -1.83; two RCTs, N = 100, quality of evidence: moderate) compared to placebo.In participants with cholestatic pruritus (CP), data favoured rifampin (VAS: 0 to 100, MD -24.64, 95% CI -31.08 to -18.21; two RCTs, N = 42, quality of evidence: low) and flumecinol (RR > 1 favours treatment group; RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.39; two RCTs, N = 69, quality of evidence: low) and showed a low incidence of adverse events in comparison with placebo. The opioid antagonist naltrexone reduced pruritus for participants with CP (VAS: 0 to 10, MD -2.26, 95% CI -3.19 to -1.33; two RCTs, N = 52, quality of evidence: moderate) compared to placebo. However, effects in participants with UP were inconclusive (percentage difference -12.30%, 95% CI -25.82% to 1.22%, one RCT, N = 32). Furthermore, large doses of opioid antagonists (e.g. naltrexone) could be inappropriate in palliative care patients because of the risk of reducing analgesia.For participants with HIV-associated pruritus, it is uncertain whether drug treatment with hydroxyzine hydrochloride, pentoxifylline, triamcinolone or indomethacin reduces pruritus because the evidence was of very low quality (e.g. small sample size, lack of blinding).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Different interventions tended to be effective for CP and UP. However, therapies for patients with malignancies are still lacking. Due to the small sample sizes in most meta-analyses and the heterogeneous methodological quality of the included trials, the results should be interpreted cautiously in terms of generalisability.

Evaluating the role of leukotriene-modifying drugs in asthma management: Are their benefits 'losing in translation'?

Leukotrienes (LTs) initiate a cascade of reactions that cause bronchoconstriction and inflammation in asthma. LT-modifying drugs have been proved very effective to reduce inflammation and associated exacerbation however despite some illustrious clinical trials the usage of these drugs remains overlooked because the evidence to support their utility in asthma management has been mixed and varied between studies. Although, there are plenty of evidences which suggest that the leukotriene-modifying drugs provide consistent improvement even after just the first oral dose and reduce asthma exacerbations, the beneficial effect of these drugs has remained sparse and widely debated. And these beneficial effects are often overlooked because most of the clinical studies include a mixed population of asthmatics who do not respond to LT-modifiers equally. Therefore, in the present era of personalized medicine, it is important to properly stratify the patients and non-invasive measurements of biomarkers may warrant the possibility to characterize biological/pathological pathway to direct treatment to those who will benefit from it. Endotyping based on individual's leukotriene levels should probably ascertain a subgroup of patients that would clearly benefit from the treatment even though the trial fails to show overall significance. In this article, we have methodically evaluated contemporary literature describing the efficacy of LT-modifying drugs in the management of asthma and highlighted the importance of phenotyping the asthmatics for better treatment outcomes.

Is ketamine a lifesaving agent in childhood acute severe asthma?

Children with acute severe asthma exacerbation are at risk of developing respiratory failure. Moreover, conventional aggressive management might be futile in acute severe asthma requiring intubation and invasive ventilation. The aim of this review is to detail evidence on the use of ketamine in childhood asthma exacerbations. A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed, using different combinations of the following terms: ketamine, asthma, use, exacerbation, and childhood. In addition, we searched the references of the identified articles for additional articles. We then reviewed titles and included studies that were relevant to the topic of interest. Finally, the search was limited to studies published in English and Spanish from 1918 to June 2015. Due to the scarcity in the literature, we included all published articles. The literature reports conflicting results of ketamine use for acute severe asthma in children. Taking into consideration the relatively good safety profile of the drug, ketamine might be a reasonable option in the management of acute severe asthma in children who fail to respond to standard therapy. Furthermore, pediatricians and pediatric emergency clinicians administering ketamine should be knowledgeable about the unique actions of this drug and its potential side effects.

Pharmacotherapy of critical asthma syndrome: current and emerging therapies

The critical asthma syndrome (CAS) encompasses the most severe, persistent, refractory asthma patients for the clinician to manage. Personalized pharmacotherapy is necessary to prevent the next acute severe asthma exacerbation, not just the control of symptoms. The 2007 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Expert Panel 3 provides guidelines for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma. The patient's response to recommended pharmacotherapy is highly variable which risks poor asthma control leading to frequent exacerbations that can deteriorate into CAS. Controlling asthma symptoms and preventing acute exacerbations may be two separate clinical activities with their own unique demands. Clinicians must be prepared to use the entire spectrum of asthma medications available but must concurrently be aware of potential drug toxicities some of which can paradoxically worsen asthma control. Medications normally prescribed for COPD can potentially be useful in the CAS patient, particularly those with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome. Immunomodulation with drugs like omalizumab in IgE-mediated asthma syndromes is one important approach. New and emerging drugs address unique aspects of airway inflammation and biology but at a significant financial cost. The pharmacology and toxicities of the agents that may be used in the treatment of CAS to control asthma symptoms and prevent severe exacerbations are reviewed.

The acute management of asthma

Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) or clinic with acute exacerbation of asthma (AEA) can be very challenging varying in both severity and response to therapy. High-dose, frequent or continuous nebulized short-acting beta2 agonist (SABA) therapy that can be combined with a short-acting muscarinic antagonist (SAMA) is the backbone of treatment. When patients do not rapidly clinically respond to SABA/SAMA inhalation, the early use of oral or parenteral corticosteroids should be considered and has been shown to impact the immediate need for ICU admission or even the need for hospital admission. Adjunctive therapies such as the use of intravenous magnesium and helium/oxygen combination gas for inhalation and for driving a nebulizer to deliver a SABA and or SAMA should be considered and are best used early in the treatment plan if they are likely to impact the patients' clinical course. The use of other agents such as theophylline, leukotriene modifiers, inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta2 agonist, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist currently does not play a major role in the immediate treatment of AEA in the clinic or the ED but is an important therapeutic option for physicians to be aware of and to consider initiating at the time of discharge from clinic, hospital, or ED to reduce later clinical worsening and readmission to the ED and hospital. A comprehensive summary is provided of the currently available respiratory pharmaceuticals approved for asthma and other airway syndromes. Clinicians must be prepared to use the entire spectrum of medications available for the treatment of acute asthma exacerbations and the agents that should be initiated to prevent worsening or additional exacerbations. They need to be familiar with the major potential drug toxicities associated with their use.

Cysteinyl leukotriene receptor-1 antagonists as modulators of innate immune cell function

Cysteinyl leukotrienes (cysLTs) are produced predominantly by cells of the innate immune system, especially basophils, eosinophils, mast cells, and monocytes/macrophages. Notwithstanding potent bronchoconstrictor activity, cysLTs are also proinflammatory consequent to their autocrine and paracrine interactions with G-protein-coupled receptors expressed not only on the aforementioned cell types, but also on Th2 lymphocytes, as well as structural cells, and to a lesser extent neutrophils and CD8⁺ cells. Recognition of the involvement of cysLTs in the immunopathogenesis of various types of acute and chronic inflammatory disorders, especially bronchial asthma, prompted the development of selective cysLT receptor-1 (cysLTR1) antagonists, specifically montelukast, pranlukast, and zafirlukast. More recently these agents have also been reported to possess secondary anti-inflammatory activities, distinct from cysLTR1 antagonism, which appear to be particularly effective in targeting neutrophils and monocytes/macrophages. Underlying mechanisms include interference with cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterases, 5′-lipoxygenase, and the proinflammatory transcription factor, nuclear factor kappa B. These and other secondary anti-inflammatory mechanisms of the commonly used cysLTR1 antagonists are the major focus of the current review, which also includes a comparison of the anti-inflammatory effects of montelukast, pranlukast, and zafirlukast on human neutrophils in vitro, as well as an overview of both the current clinical applications of these agents and potential future applications based on preclinical and early clinical studies.