Alternative agents for anti-inflammatory treatment of asthma

Update in Pediatric Asthma: Selected Issues

Asthma is a complex condition that affects 14% of the world's children and the approach to management includes both pharmacologic as well as non-pharmacologic strategies including attention to complex socioeconomic status phenomena. After an historical consideration of asthma, allergic and immunologic aspects of asthma in children and adolescents are presented. Concepts of socioeconomic aspects of asthma are considered along with environmental features and complications of asthma disparities. Also reviewed are links of asthma with mental health disorders, sleep disturbances and other comorbidities. A stepwise approach to asthma management is discussed that includes pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic strategies in the pediatric population. The role of immunotherapy and use of various immunomodulators are considered as well.

Asthma: Diagnosis and Treatment

Asthma is an obstructive lung disease affecting >230 million people worldwide and a significant cause of morbidity in patients of all ages. It is a heterogeneous disease with a complex pathophysiology and phenotype. Diagnosis is made with thorough history-taking and physical examination, and the condition is characterised by variable airflow obstruction and airway hyper-responsiveness. Understanding the severity of the disease is important, and treatment is aimed at symptom control and the prevention of future exacerbations. Pharmacologic treatment with beta-agonists for intermittent asthma and inhaled corticosteroids and a combination of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-2 agonists for persistent asthma are recommended. Additional and alternative treatments with leukotriene modifiers, anticholinergics, biologics, and bronchial thermoplasty are also available. However, understanding an individual’s disease phenotype, endotype, and comorbidities is necessary for asthma treatment, with appropriate consultation with asthma specialists required for those with severe asthma.

Treating Pediatric Asthma According Guidelines

Asthma is a common chronic inflammatory disorder of the lower respiratory airways in childhood. The management of asthma exacerbations and the disease control are major concerns for clinical practice. The Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention, published by GINA, updated in 2017, the British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network, revised in 2016, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence asthma guideline consultation, available in 2017, are widely accepted documents, frequently implemented, with conflicting advices, and different conclusion on asthma definition and treatment. An International Consensus on Pediatric Asthma was carried out in 2012 by a Committee with expertise in the field, to critically review differences on current guidelines. In addition, the specific issue of treating severe and difficult asthma has been recently highlighted throughout the International European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guidelines on severe asthma. The aim of this paper is to describe conventional treatments and some new therapeutic approaches to pediatric asthma according to guidelines, highlighting key aspects, and differences on proposed clinical recommendations for asthma management. Age specific therapy are proposed in steps, according to clinical severity and the level of disease control. If control is not achieved within 3 months, stepping-up should be considered; otherwise, if control is achieved after 3 months, stepping down may be considered. The most used drug classes of asthma medications are beta-2 adrenergic agonists, corticosteroids, and leukotriene modifiers. Intramuscolar triamcinolone has been used for severe asthma treatment. Chromones and xanthines have been extensively used in the past, but they have shown limits related to their efficacy and safety profile. Omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody against IgE, is an immunomodulatory biological agent, used as new drug in patients with confirmed IgE-mediated allergic asthma, only for patient's specific range of total IgE level. There are low evidences in the efficacy of metotrexate, as well as macrolide antibiotics in children with asthma. Antifungal agents are also not recommended in asthmatic patients. Non-pharmacological measures that may improve patient's quality of life should also be attempted. We conclude that treatment decisions on childhood asthma management should be critically made, pondering the differences suggested by agreed international consensus documents.

International consensus on (ICON) pediatric asthma

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.

Development and characterisation of a novel and rapid lung eosinophil influx model in the rat

Eosinophils play a major role in the development and severity of asthma. Robust and rapid preclinical animal models are desirable to profile novel therapeutics inhibiting the influx of eosinophils into the airways. To develop a rapid, airway eosinophil recruitment model in the rat, Brown-Norway (BN) rats were immunised with ovalbumin (OVA)/alum on day 0, 1 and 2 and challenged with OVA aerosol on day 5 and 6. On day 7 bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) was analysed for eosinophil numbers, eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) activity and cytokines. Lung sections were also examined. The immunised animals showed a strong selective influx of eosinophils into the airways correlating with enhanced EPO activity, Interleukin (IL-4), IL-5 and monocytes chemo attractant protein levels in the BALF in comparison to sham-sensitised rats. In addition the immunised rats developed goblet cell metaplasia in the lung and showed OVA specific IgG1 and IgE levels in the serum but no airway hyperreactivity after metacholine challenge. Airway inflammation was suppressed by applying the steroids Budesonide (intra tracheally) and Prednisolone (per orally), Roflumilast a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, and the H1 receptor antagonists Epinastine and Ketotifen. Montelukast, a Leukotriene receptor antagonist and Chromoglycate, a mast cell stabiliser, had no effect in this model. In summary, in this novel preclinical rat model therapeutics expected to inhibit the development of airway eosinophilia can rapidly be tested.

Positioning of glucocorticosteroids in asthma and allergic rhinitis guidelines (versus other therapies)

Asthma and allergic rhinitis are both characterized by airway inflammation, and glucocorticosteroids form the cornerstone of their pharmacologic treatment. All patients with asthma should be prescribed rapid-acting inhaled beta2-agonists as needed to use as rescue therapy in case of symptoms. As soon as patients experience symptoms at least once a week, controller medications should be started on a daily basis to achieve and maintain control of their asthma. Intranasal corticosteroids are given as first-line therapy for moderate to severe persistent rhinitis. Depending on the dominant symptom, H1-antihistamines, decongestants, or ipratropium can be added after re-evaluation.

Preclinical properties of budesonide: translation to the clinical setting

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) nearly 30 years ago, the management of asthma has been transformed. It is now understood that asthma is primarily a disease of chronic inflammation, even in its milder forms, and that to delay treatment may lead to deterioration in lung function. International treatment guidelines for asthma recommend early intervention with a potent ICS, with the greatest benefit observed when treatment is started within 2 years of the onset of symptoms. Each of the currently available ICSs has distinct physical and pharmacokinetic properties and is delivered via different devices.

OBJECTIVE

This article brings together the findings and concepts presented in this supplement. It provides an overview of budesonide's predicted clinical efficacy and tolerability in patients with asthma based on its physical properties and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide's physical properties and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles help predict its clinical efficacy and tolerability when used as early intervention in asthma. Study results indicate that lung deposition of budesonide is increased by delivery via dry-powder inhaler, enhancing the drug's efficacy in patients with newly diagnosed mild persistent asthma. The preclinical, clinical, and safety data support budesonide's predicted performance in the clinical setting.

Azathioprine as an oral corticosteroid sparing agent for asthma

BACKGROUND

For the majority of chronic asthmatics, symptoms are best controlled by using inhaled steroids. However, for a small group of asthmatics, symptoms can only be controlled by high doses of oral steroids. Continuous use of oral steroid is associated with severe side-effects, but it has been suggested that azathioprine, an immunosuppressive anti-metabolite, often used to reduce the immune response in chronic active hepatitis and severe rheumatoid arthritis, could be useful as an oral steroid sparing agent. There is a need to systematically evaluate the evidence regarding its use to reduce or eliminate oral corticosteroid usage.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to assess the efficacy of adding azathioprine in patients with stable asthma who are dependent on oral corticosteroids with the intention of eventually minimizing or eliminating the use of these steroids.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches of the Cochrane Airways Group asthma and wheeze trials register were undertaken with predefined search terms. Searches were current as of February 2003

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only studies with a randomised placebo-controlled design met the inclusion criteria for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for suitability for inclusion in the review. Data were extracted and entered into RevMan 4.2.2.

MAIN RESULTS

Two small trials recruiting 23 participants met the inclusion criteria for the review. Participants may have been suffering from comorbid lung disease. No data on oral steroid consumption were reported. No significant differences were observed in the studies for FEV(1), FVC, PaO(2) and symptoms. One study reported a statistically significant difference in SGaw, but the clinical importance of this is uncertain. Due to concerns over the small sample sizes and methodological shortcomings in terms of inadequate washout in one study, and methods used in outcome assessment for both studies, the findings of the studies are not generalisable to the issue of steroid tapering.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is a clear lack of evidence to support the use of azathioprine in the treatment of chronic asthma as a steroid sparing-agent. Large, long-term studies with pre-defined steroid reducing protocols are required before recommendations for clinical practice can be made.

Management of asthma in adults: current therapy and future directions

Asthma is increasing in prevalence worldwide and results in significant use of healthcare resources. Although most patients with asthma can be adequately treated with inhaled corticosteroids, an important number of patients require additional therapy and an increasing number of options are available. A further minority of patients develop severe persistent asthma which remains difficult to manage despite current pharmacological therapies. This review discusses the various treatment options currently available for each stage of asthma severity, highlights some of the limitations of current management, and outlines directions which may improve the management of asthma in the future.

Effect of long-term treatment with inhaled budesonide or theophylline on lung function, airway reactivity and asthma symptoms

Asthma is characterized by inflammation of the airways and long-term treatment with inhaled glucocorticosteroids improve clinical control in patients previously treated with inhaled rescue beta-2 agonist. We investigated whether the dose of inhaled glucocorticosteroid was related to outcome compared with oral theophylline. Budesonide 800 microg bd, budesonide 200 microg bd, or theophylline (Theo-Dur 300 mg bd was given double-blind, double-dummy and randomized, in a parallel group design for 9 months; when therapy was stopped patients were followed for an additional 3 months. Forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1), bronchial reactivity and asthma symptom scores were assessed before entering the study and after 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 months of treatment and monthly after treatment was stopped. Eighty-five patients (38 females and 47 males) were enrolled in the study during 1 1/2 year. Withdrawal from the study due to exacerbations during the treatment period was significantly increased (P <0.01) in the theophylline group. After treatment was stopped more patients withdrew in the budesonide group. In the budesonide 800 microg bd group, FEV1 improved significantly after 1 months treatment (P <0.01) and persisted throughout the study period. In the budesonide 200 microg bd group, FEV1 improved slightly and reached significance (P=0.05) after 5 months of treatment. In the theophylline group, FEV1 was unchanged during the 9 months of treatment. In both budesonide groups, FEV1 deteriorated significantly (P<0.01 and P<0.02, respectively) after termination of study medication and reached pretreatment values during the first month. In the budesonide 800 microg bd group, the concentration of histamine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) increased significantly (P<0.01) after 1 months treatment and increased further after 9 months (P<0.0001), equivalent to two doubling dilutions. In the budesonide 200 microg bd, group PC20 histamine significantly increased (P <0.005) after 2 months of treatment and remained constant; theophylline was unchanged. After treatment with budesonide 800 microg bd and 200 microg bd were stopped, PC20 decreased significantly (P<0.002 and P=0.05, respectively) within the first month. PC20 remained unchanged after theophylline was stopped. After budesonide 800 microg bd and 200 microg bd treatment, symptom severity decreased in a dose-related and highly significant manner (P < 0.00001 and P < 0.0001, respectively). With theophylline, asthma symptoms decreased slightly after 1 and 2 months treatment (P < 0.01 and P < 0.02, respectively) and when treatment was stopped no increase in asthma symptoms was evident. Oral theophylline slightly reduced airways symptoms and had no influence on FEV1 and PC20 histamine. Maintenance treatment with inhaled budesonide gave a dose-related reduction in airways obstruction, bronchial reactivity and asthma symptom severity. The efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid was superior to oral theophylline.

Childhood asthma: new insights into management

Recently, a concerted effort has been made to reverse the trend of increasing asthma mortality and morbidity. One additional strategy might be to recognize patients at risk for persistent asthma and to intervene early. This review summarizes new information on asthma pathogenesis that has helped shape a new direction in managing childhood asthma. At the core is the recognition that asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease. Subsequently, inhaled steroids, the most potent anti-inflammatory asthma medications, have emerged as the cornerstone of the management of persistent asthma. The recent report of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Childhood Asthma Management Program provides a comprehensive "profile of performance" for 3 treatment choices for the management of persistent asthma. This study answers questions regarding the benefits and shortcomings of the medications evaluated and prompts a closer evaluation of the long-term effects of other treatment strategies, including medications currently being developed. Although intervention with inhaled steroids offers new opportunities to control the development of asthma, one must be cognizant of potential risks in early and long-term therapeutic intervention. This review provides a perspective on our present knowledge, the rationale for early intervention, and opportunities for more aggressive therapy, as well as speculation on how ongoing clinical research will continue to play a role in advancing asthma care and moving toward a "cure" for this life-threatening disease.

Impact of inhaled antiinflammatory therapy on hospitalization and emergency department visits for children with asthma

OBJECTIVE

Although the efficacy of inhaled antiinflammatory therapy in improving symptoms and lung function in childhood asthma has been shown in clinical trials, the effectiveness of these medications in real-world practice settings in reducing acute health care use has not been well-evaluated. This study examined the effect of inhaled antiinflammatory therapy on hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits by children for asthma.

DESIGN

Defined population cohort study over 1 year. Setting. Three managed care organizations (MCOs) in Seattle, Boston, and Chicago participating in the Pediatric Asthma Care-Patient Outcome Research and Treatment II trial. Participants. All 11 195 children, between 3 to 15 years old, with a diagnosis of asthma who were enrolled in the 3 MCOs between July 1996 and June 1997.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We identified children with 1 or more asthma diagnoses using automated encounter data. Medication dispensings were identified from automated pharmacy data. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to calculate effects of inhaled antiinflammatory therapy on the adjusted relative risk (RR) for hospitalization and ED visits for asthma.

RESULTS

Over 12 months, 217 (1.9%) of children had an asthma hospitalization, and 757 (6.8%) had an ED visit. After adjustment for age, gender, MCO, and reliever dispensing, compared with children who did not receive controllers, the adjusted RRs for an ED visit were: children with any (>/=1) dispensing of cromolyn, 0.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.3, 0.5); any inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), 0.5 (95% CI: 0.4, 0.6); any cromolyn or ICS combined (any controller), 0.4 (95% CI: 0.3, 0.5). For hospitalization, the adjusted RR for cromolyn was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.4, 0.9), for ICS 0.4 (95% CI: 0.3, 0.7), and for any controller 0.4 (95% CI: 0.3, 0.6). A significant protective effect for both events was seen among children with 1 to 5 and with >5 antiinflammatory dispensings. When the analysis was stratified by frequency of reliever dispensing, there was a significant protective effect for controllers on ED visits for children with 1 to 5 and with >5 reliever dispensings and on the risk of hospitalization for children with >5 reliever dispensings.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled antiinflammatory therapy is associated with a significant protective effect on the risk for hospitalization and ED visits in children with asthma. Cromolyn and ICSs were associated with similar effects on risks.asthma drug therapy, inhaled antiinflammatory agents, health maintenance organizations, hospitalization, emergency department.

Drug treatment of airway inflammation in asthma

Several methods are available for assessing drug effects on airway inflammation and the antiinflammatory effects of drugs for asthma. Cromolyn and theophylline are well-established drugs for the treatment of asthma, and each has antiinflammatory properties. Drugs in development include those aimed at inhibiting inflammatory mediators and immunoglobulin E function; clinical studies, however, have been conducted largely in patients with moderate to severe asthma.

Assessing the quality of asthma care provided to Medicaid patients enrolled in managed care organizations in Connecticut

BACKGROUND

Many states have enrolled Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care organizations (MCOs). Few assessments of the quality of asthma care provided by these new programs are available.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the quality of care provided to asthmatic Medicaid children enrolled in MCOs.

METHODS

For this cross-sectional survey, a chart abstraction tool was developed to evaluate fulfillment of key performance measures chosen from a national guideline for asthma diagnosis and management. These measures were prescription of an inhaled anti-inflammatory medication, accomplishment of patient education, evaluation of exposure to environmental triggers of asthma, and administration of influenza vaccination. From State of Connecticut administrative databases, a random sampling of Medicaid children, ages 5 to 18 years, enrolled in four MCOs was selected. Chart entries from July 1, 1996 to June 30, 1997 were reviewed using the abstraction tool. Accomplishment of performance measures was evaluated for the total sample and for children who were high utilizers of medical services (at least one ED visit or hospitalization during the study period).

RESULTS

For 80 high utilizers among 315 children, completion of performance measures was suboptimal: 46% were prescribed inhaled steroids; an action plan was outlined for 43%; evaluation of patient or family tobacco use was documented for 56%; evaluation of the presence of a pet for 43% or mite exposure for 19%; and allergy skin testing or RAST was accomplished for 15%.

CONCLUSIONS

This information suggests that opportunities exist to improve the quality of care for these children.

Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination provides more effective asthma control than low-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus montelukast

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a disease of chronic inflammation and bronchoconstriction. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) provide important anti-inflammatory treatment but may not provide optimal control of asthma when taken alone. Two therapeutic alternatives for enhanced asthma control are to substitute the combination of fluticasone propionate (FP) and salmeterol (FP/Salm Combo) through the Diskus inhaler or to add montelukast to existing ICS therapy.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the efficacy and safety of FP/Salm Combo through the Diskus inhaler versus montelukast added to FP (FP + montelukast) in patients whose symptoms were suboptimally controlled with ICS therapy.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 12-week study in 447 patients with asthma who were symptomatic at baseline while receiving low-dose FP. Patients were treated for 12 weeks with one of the following: (1) combination of FP 100 microg plus salmeterol 50 microg twice daily through the Diskus inhaler, or (2) FP 100 microg twice daily through the Diskus inhaler plus oral montelukast 10 mg once daily.

RESULTS

FP/Salm Combo treatment provided better overall asthma control than FP + montelukast with significantly greater improvements in morning peak expiratory flow (+24.9 L/min vs +13.0 L/min, P <.001), evening peak expiratory flow (+18.9 L/min vs +9.6 L/min, P <.001), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (+0.34 L vs +0.20 L, P <.001), as well as a change in the percentage of days with no albuterol use (+26.3% vs +19.1%, P =.032) and the shortness of breath symptom score (-0.56 vs -0.40, P =.017). The groups had comparable improvements in chest tightness, wheeze, and overall symptom scores. Asthma exacerbation rates were significantly lower (P =.031) in the FP/Salm Combo group (4 patients, 2%) than in the FP + montelukast group (13 patients, 6%). Adverse event profiles were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Symptomatic patients on low-dose ICS therapy had significantly greater improvement in asthma control when switched to the FP/Salm Combo than when montelukast was added to ICS therapy.

Budesonide inhalation suspension: a review of its use in infants, children and adults with inflammatory respiratory disorders

Budesonide, a topically active corticosteroid, has a broad spectrum of clinically significant local anti-inflammatory effects in patients with inflammatory lung diseases including persistent asthma. In infants and young children with persistent asthma, day- and night-time symptom scores, and the number of days in which beta2-agonist bronchodilators were required, were significantly lower during randomised, double-blind treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension 0.5 to 2 mg/day than placebo in 3 multicentre trials. Significantly fewer children discontinued therapy with budesonide inhalation suspension than with placebo because of worsening asthma symptoms in a study that included children who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids at baseline. Recent evidence indicates that budesonide inhalation suspension is significantly more effective than nebulised sodium cromoglycate in improving control of asthma in young children with persistent asthma. At a dosage of 2 mg/day, budesonide inhalation suspension significantly reduced the number of asthma exacerbations and requirements for systemic corticosteroids in preschool children with severe persistent asthma. In children with acute asthma or wheezing, the preparation was as effective as, or more effective than oral prednisolone in improving symptoms. In children with croup, single 2 or 4mg dosages of budesonide inhalation suspension were significantly more effective than placebo and as effective as oral dexamethasone 0.6 mg/kg or nebulised L-epinephrine (adrenaline) 4mg in alleviating croup symptoms and preventing or reducing the duration of hospitalisation. Early initiation of therapy with budesonide inhalation suspension 1 mg/day appears to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and decrease overall corticosteroid usage in preterm very low birthweight infants at risk for chronic lung disease. In adults with persistent asthma, budesonide inhalation suspension < or =8 mg/day has been compared with inhaled budesonide 1.6 mg/day and fluticasone propionate 2 mg/day administered by metered dose inhaler. Greater improvements in asthma control occurred in patients during treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension than with budesonide via metered dose inhaler, whereas fluticasone propionate produced greater increases in morning peak expiratory flow rates than nebulised budesonide. Several small studies suggest that the preparation has an oral corticosteroid-sparing effect in adults with persistent asthma and that it may be as effective as oral corticosteroids during acute exacerbations of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The frequency of adverse events was similar in children receiving budesonide inhalation suspension 0.25 to 2 mg/day or placebo in 12-week studies. During treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension 0.5 to 1 mg/day in 3 nonblind 52-week studies, growth velocity in children was generally unaffected; however, a small but statistically significant decrease in growth velocity was detected in children who were not using inhaled corticosteroids prior to the introduction of budesonide inhalation suspension. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function was not affected by short (12 weeks) or long (52 weeks) term treatment with nebulised budesonide. In conclusion, budesonide inhalation suspension is the most widely available nebulised corticosteroid, and in the US is the only inhaled corticosteroid indicated in children aged > or =1 year with persistent asthma. The preparation is suitable for use in infants, children and adults with persistent asthma and in infants and children with croup.