Effect of anti-asthmatic drugs on the response to inhaled endotoxin

The therapeutic effects of mesenchymal stem cell (MSCs) exosomes in covid-19 disease; Focusing on dexamethasone therapy

The study of diseases, specifically their aetiologies, their step-by-step progressions (pathogenesis), and their impact on normal structure and function, is the focus of pathology, a branch of science and medicine. In therapeutic fields, it is critical to decrease significantly elevated levels of proinflammatory cytokines. The immunomodulatory drugs such as dexamethasone have been used in several of inflammatory diseases such as Covid-19. The use of dexamethasone alone or in combination with other drugs or method such as mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) is one of the most up-to-date discussions about Covid-19. In this review, we first examined the effects of dexamethasone as monotherapy on inflammatory cytokines and then examined studies that used combination therapy of dexamethasone and other drugs such as Baricitinib, Tofacitinib and tocilizumab. Also, therapeutic aspects of MSCs are examined in this review.

Role of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in asthma and other pulmonary conditions

Endotoxin significantly contaminates house dust and is an enhancing factor for asthma severity. Natural exposure to endotoxin in early life could influence immune development and protect from the risk of developing atopy. This article will focus on published data showing that home environmental contamination by endotoxin can participate in chronic airways diseases, in particular asthma.

LPS exacerbates functional and inflammatory responses to ovalbumin and decreases sensitivity to inhaled fluticasone propionate in a guinea pig model of asthma

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Asthma exacerbations contribute to corticosteroid insensitivity. LPS is ubiquitous in the environment. It causes bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation and may therefore exacerbate allergen responses. This study examined whether LPS and ovalbumin co-administration could exacerbate the airway inflammatory and functional responses to ovalbumin in conscious guinea pigs and whether these exacerbated responses were insensitive to inhaled corticosteroid treatment with fluticasone propionate (FP).

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Guinea pigs were sensitized and challenged with ovalbumin and airway function recorded as specific airway conductance by whole body plethysmography. Airway inflammation was measured from lung histology and bronchoalveolar lavage. Airway hyper-reactivity (AHR) to inhaled histamine was examined 24 h after ovalbumin. LPS was inhaled alone or 24 or 48 h before ovalbumin and combined with ovalbumin. FP (0.05-1 mg·mL(-1) ) or vehicle was nebulized for 15 min twice daily for 6 days before ovalbumin or LPS exposure.

KEY RESULTS

Ovalbumin inhalation caused early (EAR) and late asthmatic response (LAR), airway hyper-reactivity to histamine and influx of inflammatory cells into the lungs. LPS 48 h before and co-administered with ovalbumin exacerbated the response with increased length of the EAR, prolonged response to histamine and elevated inflammatory cells. FP 0.5 and 1 mg·mL(-1) reduced the LAR, AHR and cell influx with ovalbumin alone, but was ineffective when guinea pigs were exposed to LPS before and with ovalbumin.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

LPS exposure exacerbates airway inflammatory and functional responses to allergen inhalation and decreases corticosteroid sensitivity. Its widespread presence in the environment could contribute to asthma exacerbations and corticosteroid insensitivity in humans.

An official american thoracic society statement: work-exacerbated asthma

RATIONALE

Occupational exposures can contribute to the exacerbation as well as the onset of asthma. However, work-exacerbated asthma (WEA) has received less attention than occupational asthma (OA) that is caused by work.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this Statement is to summarize current knowledge about the descriptive epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and management and treatment of WEA; propose a case definition for WEA; and discuss needs for prevention and research.

METHODS

Information about WEA was identified primarily by systematic searches of the medical literature. Statements about prevention and research needs were reached by consensus.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

WEA is defined as the worsening of asthma due to conditions at work. WEA is common, with a median prevalence of 21.5% among adults with asthma. Different types of agents or conditions at work may exacerbate asthma. WEA cases with persistent work-related symptoms can have clinical characteristics (level of severity, medication needs) and adverse socioeconomic outcomes (unemployment, reduction in income) similar to those of OA cases. Compared with adults with asthma unrelated to work, WEA cases report more days with symptoms, seek more medical care, and have a lower quality of life. WEA should be considered in any patient with asthma that is getting worse or who has work-related symptoms. Management of WEA should focus on reducing work exposures and optimizing standard medical management, with a change in jobs only if these measures are not successful.

CONCLUSIONS

WEA is a common and underrecognized adverse outcome resulting from conditions at work. Additional research is needed to improve the understanding of the risk factors for, and mechanisms and outcomes of, WEA, and to inform and evaluate preventive interventions.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids versus same dose inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting inhaled ss(2)-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) are recommended as 'add-on' medication to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the maintenance therapy of asthmatic adults and children aged two years and above.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify in asthmatic patients the safety and efficacy of the addition of LABAs to ICS in patients insufficiently controlled on ICS alone.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs and correspondence with manufacturers until May 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs if they compared the addition of inhaled LABAs versus placebo to the same dose of ICS in children aged two years and above and in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was the relative risk (RR) of asthma exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function tests (PFTs), rescue beta2-agonist use, symptoms, withdrawals and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-seven studies met the entry criteria and randomised 21,248 participants (4625 children and 16,623 adults). Participants were generally symptomatic at baseline with moderate airway obstruction despite their current ICS regimen. Formoterol or salmeterol were most frequently added to low-dose ICS (200 to 400 microg/day of beclomethasone (BDP) or equivalent) in 49% of the studies. The addition of a daily LABA to ICS reduced the risk of exacerbations requiring oral steroids by 23% from 15% to 11% (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87, 28 studies, 6808 participants). The number needed to treat with the addition of LABA to prevent one use of rescue oral corticosteroids is 41 (29, 72), although the event rates in the ICS groups varied between 0% and 38%. Studies recruiting adults dominated the analysis (6203 adult participants versus 605 children). The subgroup estimate for paediatric studies was not statistically significant (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.39) and includes the possibility of the superiority of ICS alone in children.Higher than usual dose of LABA was associated with significantly less benefit. The difference in the relative risk of serious adverse events with LABA was not statistically significant from that of ICS alone (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.30). The addition of LABA led to a significantly greater improvement in FEV(1) (0.11 litres, 95% 0.09 to 0.13) and in the proportion of symptom-free days (11.88%, 95% CI 8.25 to 15.50) compared to ICS monotherapy. It was also associated with a reduction in the use of rescue short-acting ss(2)-agonists (-0.58 puffs/day, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.35), fewer withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61), and fewer withdrawals due to any reason (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.87). There was no statistically significant group difference in the risk of overall adverse effects (RR 1.00, 95% 0.97 to 1.04), withdrawals due to adverse health events (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26) or any of the specific adverse health events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults who are symptomatic on low to high doses of ICS monotherapy, the addition of a LABA at licensed doses reduces the rate of exacerbations requiring oral steroids, improves lung function and symptoms and modestly decreases use of rescue short-acting ss(2)-agonists. In children, the effects of this treatment option are much more uncertain. The absence of group difference in serious adverse health events and withdrawal rates in both groups provides some indirect evidence of the safety of LABAs at usual doses as add-on therapy to ICS in adults, although the width of the confidence interval precludes total reassurance.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled steroids versus higher dose inhaled steroids in adults and children with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

In asthmatic patients inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids and/or those with moderate persistent asthma, two main options are recommended: the combination of a long-acting inhaled ss2 agonist (LABA) with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or use of a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of the combination of long-acting ss(2) agonists and inhaled corticosteroids compared to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids on the risk of asthma exacerbations, pulmonary function and on other measures of asthma control, and to look for characteristics associated with greater benefit for either treatment option.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs, clinical trial registries and correspondence with manufacturers until May 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared the combination of inhaled LABA and ICS to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids, in children and adults with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was the number of patients experiencing one or more asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 48 studies (15,155 participants including 1155 children and 14,000 adults). Participants were inadequately controlled on their current ICS regimen, experiencing ongoing symptoms and with generally moderate (FEV1 60% to 79% of predicted) airway obstruction. The studies tested the combination of salmeterol or formoterol with a median dose of 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or equivalent (BDP-eq) compared to a median of 1000 mcg/day of BDP-eq, usually for 24 weeks or less. There was a statistically significantly lower risk of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids in patients treated with LABA and ICS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.98, 27 studies, N = 10,578) from 11.45% to 10%, with a number needed to treat of 73 (median study duration: 12 weeks). The study results were dominated by adult studies; trial data from three paediatric studies showed a trend towards increased risk of rescue oral steroids (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.66) and hospital admission (RR 2.21, 95% CI 0.74 to 6.64) associated with combination therapy. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk ratios for either hospital admission (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.56) or serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.37). The combination of LABA and ICS resulted in significantly greater but modest improvement from baseline in lung function, symptoms and rescue medication use than with higher ICS dose. Despite no significant group difference in the risk of overall adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03), there was an increase in the risk of tremor (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.82) and a lower risk of oral thrush (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.86)) in the LABA and ICS compared to the higher ICS group. There was no significant difference in hoarseness or headache between the treatment groups. The rate of withdrawals due to poor asthma control favoured the combination of LABA and ICS (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adolescents and adults with sub-optimal control on low dose ICS monotherapy, the combination of LABA and ICS is modestly more effective in reducing the risk of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids than a higher dose of ICS. Combination therapy also led to modestly greater improvement in lung function, symptoms and use of rescue ss(2) agonists and to fewer withdrawals due to poor asthma control than with a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids. Apart from an increased rate of tremor and less oral candidiasis with combination therapy, the two options appear relatively safe in adults although adverse effects associated with long-term ICS treatment were seldom monitored. In children, combination therapy did not lead to a significant reduction, but rather a trend towards an increased risk, of oral steroid-treated exacerbations and hospital admissions. These trends raised concern about the safety of combination therapy in view of modest improvement in children under the age of 12 years.

Addition of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled steroids as first line therapy for persistent asthma in steroid-naive adults and children

BACKGROUND

Consensus statements recommend the addition of long-acting inhaled ss2-agonists (LABA) only in asthmatic patients who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). It is not uncommon for some patients to be commenced on ICS and LABA together as initial therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of combining inhaled corticosteroids with long-acting ss2-agonists (ICS+LABA) with inhaled corticosteroids alone (ICS alone) in steroid-naive children and adults with persistent asthma. We assessed two protocols: (1) LABA + ICS versus a similar dose of ICS (comparison 1) and (2) LABA + ICS versus a higher dose of ICS (comparison 2).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials through electronic database searches (May 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing ICS + LABA with ICS alone in children and adults with asthma who had no inhaled corticosteroids in the preceding 28 days prior to enrolment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed studies independently for risk of bias and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was rate of patients with one or more asthma exacerbations requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids. Results are expressed as relative risks (RR) for dichotomous data and as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight study comparisons drawn from 27 trials (22 adult; five paediatric) met the review entry criteria (8050 participants). Baseline data from the studies indicated that trial populations had moderate or mild airway obstruction (FEV1>/=65% predicted), and that they were symptomatic prior to randomisation. In comparison 1, the combination of ICS and LABA was not associated with a significantly lower risk of patients with exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (RR 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.47) or requiring hospital admissions (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.09 to 1.65) compared to a similar dose of ICS alone. The combination of LABA and ICS led to a significantly greater improvement from baseline in FEV1 (0.12 L/sec; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17), in symptoms (SMD -0.26; 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14) and in rescue ss2-agonist use (-0.41 puffs/day; 95% CI -0.73 to -0.09) compared with a similar dose of ICS alone. There was no significant group difference in the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.64 to 2.09), any adverse events (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09), study withdrawals (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.11), or withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.41).In comparison 2, the combination of LABA and ICS was associated with a higher risk of patients requiring oral corticosteroids (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1 to 1.53) and study withdrawal (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.59) than a higher dose of ICS alone. For every 100 patients treated over 43 weeks, nine patients using a higher dose ICS compared to 11 (95% CI 9 to 14) on LABA and ICS suffered one or more exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids. There was a high level of statistical heterogeneity for FEV1 and morning peak flow. There was no statistically significant group difference in the risk of serious adverse events. Due to insufficient data we could not aggregate results for hospital admission, symptoms and other outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In steroid-naive patients with mild to moderate airway obstruction, the combination of ICS and LABA does not significantly reduce the risk of patients with exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids over that achieved with a similar dose of ICS alone. However, it significantly improves lung function, reduces symptoms and marginally decreases rescue ss2-agonist use. Initiation of a higher dose of ICS is more effective at reducing the risk of exacerbations requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids, and of withdrawals, than combination therapy. Although children appeared to respond similarly to adults, no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding combination therapy in steroid-naive children, given the small number of children contributing data.

Evaluation of oral corticosteroids and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor on the acute inflammation induced by inhaled lipopolysaccharide in human

BACKGROUND

Endotoxins are pro-inflammatory substances present in the environment. In man, inhalation of its purified derivative lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induces inflammation related to macrophages and neutrophils. Corticosteroids and phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors have inhibiting effects on macrophages and neutrophils, respectively. This study investigated the effect of prednisolone and of the PDE-4 inhibitor cilomilast on the LPS-induced acute inflammation.

METHODS

The study was a placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover design. On three occasions, at 2 weeks interval, 16 healthy subjects inhaled 50 microg LPS after a 6-day treatment with cilomilast (15 mg bd), prednisolone (10 mg bd) or placebo. For the assessment of the inflammatory response, induced sputum was obtained before inclusion and 6h post-LPS while blood samples were collected before, 6 and 24 h post-LPS.

RESULTS

Inhaled LPS induced an increase in sputum neutrophils (p<0.0001), logMMP-9 (p<0.05), logMMP-9/TIMP-1 (p<0.01) and logTNF-alpha (p<0.02). At the blood level there were significant rise in neutrophilia (p<0.001), E-selectin (p<0.02), C-reactive protein (CRP) (p<0.001) and LPS-binding protein (p<0.001). There was both a slight, but not significant, increase in body temperature and decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)). Neither prednisolone nor cilomilast had protective effect on the LPS-induced airways' inflammation. The LPS-induced CRP acute-phase protein of inflammation (0.58+/-0.13 and 3.52+/-0.41 mg/dL, before and after LPS, respectively) was significantly inhibited by a pre-treatment with prednisolone (1.39+/-0.32 mg/dL, p<0.01) and attenuated (2.65+/-0.30 mg/dL, p=0.09) with cilomilast.

CONCLUSION

In healthy subjects, while the LPS-induced airways' inflammation was not modified either by oral prednisolone or by PDE-4 inhibitor cilomilast (at actual dosage), the LPS-induced acute phase of blood inflammation was reduced by prednisolone.

Lipopolysaccharide exposure makes allergic airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness less responsive to dexamethasone and inhibition of iNOS

Allergic airway disease can be refractory to anti-inflammatory treatment, whose cause is unclarified. Therefore, in the present experiment, we have tested the hypothesis that co-exposure to lipopolysacharide (Lps) and allergen results in glucocorticoid-resistant eosinophil airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness (AHR). Ovalbumin (Ova)-sensitized BALB/c mice were primed with 10 microg intranasal Lps 24 h before the start of Ova challenges (20 min on 3 consecutive days). Dexamethasone (5 mg/kg/day) was given on the last 2 days of Ova challenges. AHR, cellular build-up, cytokine and nitrite concentrations of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung histology were examined. To assess the role of iNOS-derived NO in airway responsiveness, mice were treated with a selective inhibitor of this enzyme (1400W) 2 h before AHR measurements. More severe eosinophil inflammation and higher nitrite formation were found in Lps-primed than in non-primed allergized mice. After Lps priming, AHR and concentrations of T-helper type 2 cytokines in BALF were decreased, but still remained significantly higher than in controls. Eosinophil inflammation was partially, while nitrite production and AHR were observed to be largely dexamethasone resistant in Lps-primed allergized animals. 1400W effectively and rapidly diminished the AHR in Ova-sensitized and challenged mice, but failed to affect it after Lps priming plus allergization. In conclusion, Lps inhalation may exaggerate eosinophil inflammation and reduce responsiveness to anti-inflammatory treatment in allergic airway disease.

Safety of incremental inhaled lipopolysaccharide challenge in humans

BACKGROUND

Inhalation of environmental endotoxin is important in the pathogenesis of asthma and other environmental airway diseases. Inhaled airway challenge using lipopolysaccharide in humans has been performed for over 20 years to assess the airway response to endotoxin. However, there are no published data on the short-term safety of endotoxin inhalation protocols.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the safety and tolerability of incremental inhaled lipopolysaccharide challenge in humans.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data obtained from 119 subjects who underwent inhaled challenge with up to 41.5 mug of lipopolysaccharide. We measured pulmonary function, temperature, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and systemic symptoms for 3 h after challenge.

RESULTS

Fever occurred in 30% of subjects and was associated with a higher cumulative dose of lipopolysaccharide. Reduced mean arterial pressure occurred in 21% of subjects and was dose-related. There was no association between fever or decreased mean arterial pressure and airway responsiveness to inhaled lipopolysaccharide. Common symptoms reported by subjects included: chills (64%), malaise (56%), cough (56%), chest tightness (49%), headache (43%), and myalgias (27%). None of the subjects experienced delayed discharge or a serious adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled lipopolysaccharide causes dose-related systemic responses that include fever, reduced blood pressure, and constitutional symptoms that are not associated with the airway response to inhaled lipopolysaccharide. Systemic responses to inhaled lipopolysaccharide should be expected and subjects undergoing inhaled lipopolysaccharide challenge in the research setting should be carefully monitored for non-pulmonary adverse events for several hours after challenge.

Long-acting beta2-agonists versus placebo in addition to inhaled corticosteroids in children and adults with chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Long-acting inhaled beta2-adrenergic agonists are recommended as 'add-on' medication to inhaled corticosteroids in the maintenance therapy of asthmatic adults and children aged two years and above.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify in asthmatic patients the safety and efficacy of the addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids on the incidence of asthma exacerbations, pulmonary function and other measures of asthma control.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs and correspondence with manufacturers, until April 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were included that compared the addition of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists to corticosteroids with inhaled corticosteroids alone for asthma therapy in children aged two years and above and in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed independently by two review authors for methodological quality and data extraction. Confirmation was obtained from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was rate of asthma exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function tests (PFTs), symptom scores, adverse events and withdrawal rates.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 594 identified citations, 49 trials met the inclusion criteria: 27 full-text publications, one unpublished full-text report and 21 abstracts. Twenty-three citations (21 abstracts and two full-text publications) provided data in insufficient detail, 26 trials contributed to this systematic review. All but three trials were of high methodological quality. Most interventions (N = 26) were of four-month duration or less. Eight trials focused on children and 18 on adults, with participants generally symptomatic with moderate airway obstruction despite their current inhaled steroid regimen. If a trial had more than one intervention or control group, additional control to intervention comparisons were considered separately. Formoterol (N = 17) or salmeterol (N = 14) were most frequently added to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (200 to 400 microg/day of beclomethasone (BDP) or equivalent). The addition of a daily long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) reduced the risk of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids by 19% (relative risk (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.90). The number needed to treat for one extra patient to be free from exacerbation for one year was 18 (95% CI 13 to 33). The addition of LABA significantly improved FEV1 (weighted mean difference (WMD) 170 mL, 95% CI 110 to 240) using a random-effects model, increased the proportion of symptom-free days (WMD 17%, 95% CI 12 to 22, N = 6 trials) and rescue-free days (WMD 19%, 95% CI 12 to 26, N = 2 trials). The group treated with LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid showed a reduction in the use of rescue short-acting beta2-agonists (WMD -0.7 puffs/day, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.2), experienced less withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.7) and less withdrawals due to any reason (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8 to 0.98), using a random-effects model. There was no group difference in risk of overall adverse effects (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05), withdrawals due to adverse health events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75) or specific adverse health events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients who are symptomatic on low to high doses of inhaled corticosteroids, the addition of a long-acting beta2-agonist reduces the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, improves lung function, symptoms and use of rescue short-acting beta2-agonists. The similar number of serious adverse events and withdrawal rates in both groups provides some indirect evidence of the safety of long-acting beta2-agonists as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids.

Combination of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled steroids versus higher dose of inhaled steroids in children and adults with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

In asthmatic patients inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids and/or those with moderate persistent asthma, two main options are recommended: the combination of a long-acting inhaled beta2 agonist (LABA) with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or use of a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To determine, in asthmatic patients, the effect of the combination of long-acting beta2 agonists and inhaled corticosteroids compared to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids on the incidence of asthma exacerbations, on pulmonary function and on other measures of asthma control and to look for characteristics associated with greater benefit for either treatment option.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs and correspondence with manufacturers until April 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were included that compared the combination of inhaled LABA and ICS to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids, in children aged 2 years and older, and in adults with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed independently by two authors for methodological quality and data extraction. Confirmation was obtained from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was rate of patients experiencing one or more asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function tests (PFTs), symptoms, use of rescue beta2 agonists, adverse events and withdrawal rates. The meta-analysis was done with RevMan Analyses and the meta-regression, with Stata.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 593 citations identified, 30 (three pediatric; 27 adult) trials were analysed recruiting 9509 participants, including one study providing two control-intervention comparisons. Only one trial included corticosteroid-naive patients. Participants were symptomatic, generally (N=20 trials) presenting with moderate (FEV1 60-79% of predicted) rather than mild airway obstruction. Trials tested the combination of salmeterol (N=22) or formoterol (N=8) with a median of 400 mcg of beclomethasone or equivalent (BDP-eq) compared to a median of 800 to 1000 mcg/day of BDP-eq. Trial duration was 24 weeks or less in all but four trials. There was no significant group difference in the rate of patients with exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids [N=15, RR=0.88 (95% CI: 0.77, 1.02)]. The combination of LABA and ICS resulted in greater improvement from baseline in FEV1 [N=7, WMD=0.10 L (95% CI: 0.07, 0.12)], in symptom-free days [N=8 , WMD=11.90% (95% CI:7.37, 16.44), random effects model], and in the daytime use of rescue beta2 agonists than a higher dose of ICS [N=4, WMD= -0.99 puffs/day (95% CI: -1.41, -0.58), random effects model]. There was no significant group difference in the rate of overall adverse events [N=15, RR=0.93 (95% CI: 0.84, 1.03), random effects model], or specific side effects, with the exception of a three-fold increase rate of tremor in the LABA group [N= 10, RR=2.96 (95%CI: 1.60, 5.45)]. The rate of withdrawals due to poor asthma control favoured the combination of LABA and ICS [N=20, RR=0.69 (95%CI: 0.52, 0.93)].

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adult asthmatics, there was no significant difference between the combination of LABA and ICS and a higher dose of ICS for the prevention of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Overall, the combination therapy led to greater improvement in lung function, symptoms and use of rescue beta2 agonists, (although most of the results are from trials of up to 24 weeks duration). There were less withdrawals due to poor asthma control in this group than when using a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids. Apart from an increased rate of tremor, the two options appear safe although adverse effects associated with long-term ICS treatment were seldom monitored.

Addition of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled steroids as first line therapy for persistent asthma in steroid-naive adults

BACKGROUND

Consensus statements recommend the addition of long-acting inhaled beta2-agonists only in asthmatic patients who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of initiating anti-inflammatory therapy using the combination of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonists (ICS+LABA) as compared to inhaled corticosteroids alone (ICS alone) in steroid-naive children and adults with persistent asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) until April 2004, bibliographies of identified RCTs and correspondence with manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing the combination of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonists (ICS + LABA) to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone in steroid-naive children and adults with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed independently by each reviewer for methodological quality and data extraction. Confirmation was obtained from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was rate of asthma exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function tests (PFTs), symptoms, use of other measures of asthma control, adverse events, and withdrawal rates.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials met the inclusion criteria; nine (totaling 1061 adults) contributed sufficient data to be analysed. Baseline forced expiratory volume in one minute (FEV1) was less than 80% predicted value in four trials and equal to or greater than 80% in five trials. The long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) formoterol (N=2) or salmeterol (N=7) were added to a dose of at least 800 microg/day of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) equivalent of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in three trials and to at least 400 microg/day in the six remaining trials. Treatment with ICS plus LABA was not associated with a lower risk of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids than ICS alone (relative risk (RR) 1.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 1.9). FEV1 improved significantly with LABA (weighted mean difference (WMD) 210 ml; 95% CI 120 to 300), as did symptom-free days (WMD 10.74%; 95% CI 1.86 to 19.62), but the change in use of rescue fast-acting beta2-agonists was not significantly different between the groups (WMD -0.4 puff/day, 95% CI -0.9 to 0.1). There was no significant group difference in adverse events (RR 1.1; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), withdrawals (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.6 to 1.2), or withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.4).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In steroid-naive patients with mild to moderate airway obstruction, the initiation of inhaled corticosteroids in combination with long-acting beta2-agonists does not significantly reduce the rate of exacerbations over that achieved with inhaled corticosteroids alone; it does improve lung function and symptom-free days but does not reduce rescue beta2-agonist use as compared to inhaled steroids alone. Both options appear safe. There is insufficient evidence at present to recommend use of combination therapy rather than ICS alone as a first-line treatment.

Something old, something new: indoor endotoxin, allergens and asthma

Endotoxin and allergen exposure have been explored in the context of asthma for more than a century. Building upon a pyramid of knowledge are recent observations that provide new insights to the effect of these exposures on the development of asthma. Some of these studies challenge some previously held concepts of the role of these exposures in asthma inception. Indoor allergens are well established as the basis of inflammation in sensitised asthmatics, contributing to disease severity. Then does greater exposure to indoor allergens cause allergen sensitisation and asthma as well? While risk of sensitisation to house dust mites generally increases with higher levels of exposure, this does not seem to hold for cats, where higher levels of cat allergen exposure are associated with less sensitisation. Indeed, several recent studies suggest that early childhood exposure to animals, as indoor pets or in farming stables, are associated with a lower prevalence of asthma, hay fever, and inhalant allergen sensitisation. Endotoxin in asthma provides a similar paradox. Endotoxin is a potent immune-stimulatory component of the bacterial cell wall of all gram-negative bacteria. As such, endotoxin is ubiquitous in our environment. Endotoxin exposure has been well demonstrated to underlie "Monday Asthma" or byssinosis in cotton workers, and has since emerged as a frequent cause of asthma-like symptoms in a wide range of occupational settings. Asthmatics are particularly sensitive to inhaled endotoxin, and inhalation induces both immediate and sustained airflow obstruction. The paradox of endotoxin exposure is that higher levels of exposure in early life might mitigate the development of allergy and persistent asthma. With endotoxin exposure being significantly higher in homes with animals and in farming households, where allergy and asthma are less likely to develop, endotoxin and other microbial exposures in early life may keep allergen sensitisation and asthma from developing by promoting Th1-type immune development. These observations, consistent with the "Hygiene Hypothesis" of allergy and asthma, are an encouraging glimpse of the potential for early immune modulatory approaches to asthma therapy and prevention.

Endotoxin, atopy and asthma

Endotoxin is infamous for its ability to exacerbate existing allergy and asthma symptoms. Current research supports this phenomenon, demonstrating its significance in the home, as well as in the workplace. At the same time, evidence is emerging that exposure to endotoxin may drive immune development away from the T-helper lymphocyte type 2-mediated allergy and asthma profile. This fits in nicely with the 'hygiene hypothesis', which attributes the past century's rise in allergy and asthma to a reduction in microbial burden. Indeed, infections have been associated with less atopy and asthma. Recent investigations have suggested that naturally-occurring non-infectious exposure to microbial components such as endotoxin might mitigate atopy and asthma as well.

Endotoxin exposure in allergy and asthma: reconciling a paradox

Well-established evidence links endotoxin exposure, especially in the workplace, to airways disease. Endotoxin can increase disease severity by acting as a natural adjuvant to augment asthma and atopic inflammation. Recent studies suggest that it can even act on its own, causing a distinct endotoxic form of asthma. Other studies, however, contradict the paradigm that endotoxin's influence is solely a negative one. Epidemiologic associations of environmental endotoxin exposure with allergy and asthma prevention are consistent with hygiene hypothesis associations of other microbial exposures or infections with a lower incidence of atopic disease. Currently, microbe-derived products are being developed as potential therapies for allergy and asthma. Thus it is an ideal time to consider endotoxin as a prototype of a natural intervention with microbial components. Nature's ongoing experiment with endotoxin can provide clues for the development of effective and safe microbe-based products for disease treatment and prevention. This article will discuss (1) conventional paradigms in which endotoxin-induced immune modulation by T(H)1-type induction leads to mitigation of T(H)2-type immune development, allergen sensitization, and atopic inflammation; (2) newer concepts of T(H)1-type immune responses that may provide additional asthma-protective effects by preventing airways remodeling; (3) home and environmental features that significantly contribute to endotoxin exposure; (4) different aspects of asthma mediated by endotoxin exposure; and (5) how to understand endotoxin's paradoxical nature of serving as both friend and foe.