Viral-induced wheezing episodes in preschool children: approaches to therapy

Management of Preschool Wheezing: Guideline from the Emilia-Romagna Asthma (ERA) Study Group

Preschool wheezing should be considered an umbrella term for distinctive diseases with different observable and measurable phenotypes. Despite many efforts, there is a large gap in knowledge regarding management of preschool wheezing. In order to fill this lack of knowledge, the aim of these guidelines was to define management of wheezing disorders in preschool children (aged up to 5 years). A multidisciplinary panel of experts of the Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy, addressed twelve different key questions regarding the management of preschool wheezing. Clinical questions have been formulated by the expert panel using the PICO format (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) and systematic reviews have been conducted on PubMed to answer these specific questions, with the aim of formulating recommendations. The GRADE approach has been used for each selected paper, to assess the quality of the evidence and the degree of recommendations. These guidelines represent, in our opinion, the most complete and up-to-date collection of recommendations on preschool wheezing to guide pediatricians in the management of their patients, standardizing approaches. Undoubtedly, more research is needed to find objective biomarkers and understand underlying mechanisms to assess phenotype and endotype and to personalize targeted treatment.

Role of montelukast in multitrigger wheezers attending chest clinic in Punjab, India

BACKGROUND

Wheeze is seen in 40% of preschool children, one-third of these may develop recurrent wheeze. Montelukast is an oral, once a day, easy to give therapy but there is no definite evidence to support its use in a recent meta-analysis. Present study was done to evaluate role of daily montelukast and various factors affecting the outcome after therapy in multitrigger wheeze (MTW).

METHODS

A prospective study conducted in Pediatric chest clinic over 18 months at DMCH, Ludhiana. Children from 6 months to 5 years, diagnosed cases of MTW were started on montelukast. Diagnosis based on symptoms of recurrent wheeze triggered by various allergens/precipitants was made by pediatrician in charge of chest clinic. Children were followed up at 1 and 3 months. They were labeled as controlled, partially controlled, or uncontrolled as per global initiative for asthma guidelines. Data were used to compare the outcome related to various factors.

RESULTS

Total 139 out of 150 children came for regular follow-up. At the end of 3 months, 94 (67.7%) were controlled, 8 (5.7%) partially controlled, and 37 (26.6%) children remained uncontrolled on montelukast. Factors associated with poor control were onset of symptoms at younger age (<6 months of age), family history of allergies, prior multiple visits or hospitalizations due to MTW, use of MDI in the past. No significant side effects were reported by parents.

CONCLUSION

Symptomatically two-third of children became better after starting montelukast. There were few factors which resulted in poorer control in subset of patients.

Risk factors for wheezing in primary health care settings in the tropics

BACKGROUND

The International Study of Wheezing in Infants (EISL) is a cross-sectional, population-based study, based on ISAAC (http://www.isaac.auckland.ac.nz). It uses a validated questionnaire on early wheezing and risk/protective factors.

OBJECTIVE

To apply the EISL questionnaire regarding wheezing events in 0- to 12-month-old infants with or without atopic background searching for risk factors in the tropics.

METHODS

The population was toddlers coming in for a checkup or 12-months' vaccination in primary health care clinics of a tropical city. Apart from child factors (eg, daycare attendance), we evaluated home factors (eg, air conditioning, bathroom, carpet, >6 persons, pollution) and mothers' factors (eg, education level, employment, cellphone). Data analysis was descriptive and case-control, with as cases atopic (AW) or non-atopic (NAW) wheezing children vs healthy controls. Wheezing-associated factors were evaluated using multivariate analysis, adjusted for the relation of AW/NAW with factors that were significant in prior univariate analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 999 toddlers. Any wheeze: 31.3%, recurrent wheeze (≥3 episodes): 12.1%. Major risk factors for AW (OR; 95%CI) included smoking (11.39; 2.36-54.99), common cold before 3 months of life (3.72; 2.59-5.36), mold (3.48; 2.28-5.30), kitchen indoors (2.40; 1.27-4.54), and pets (1.69; 1.09-2.62); breastfeeding was almost protective. For NAW, common cold and pets were risk factors, but cesarean section (0.44; 0.23-0.82), more than 1 sibling (0.33; 0.18-0.61), and breastfeeding for longer than 3 months (0.50; 0.28-0.91) were protective.

CONCLUSION

Wheezing is a health care burden. We found potential new risk factors for AW, some possibly unique for tropical climates. We suggest testing several hypotheses: could early AW be reduced in the tropics by attacking mold growth? Enhancing cooking place ventilation? Keeping pets outside? Or by postponing daycare attendance until after 4 months of age and avoiding (passive) smoking during pregnancy?

Viral respiratory infections and the oropharyngeal bacterial microbiota in acutely wheezing children

Acute viral wheeze in children is a major cause of hospitalisation and a major risk factor for the development of asthma. However, the role of the respiratory tract microbiome in the development of acute wheeze is unclear. To investigate whether severe wheezing episodes in children are associated with bacterial dysbiosis in the respiratory tract, oropharyngeal swabs were collected from 109 children with acute wheezing attending the only tertiary paediatric hospital in Perth, Australia. The bacterial community from these samples was explored using next generation sequencing and compared to samples from 75 non-wheezing controls. No significant difference in bacterial diversity was observed between samples from those with wheeze and healthy controls. Within the wheezing group, attendance at kindergarten or preschool was however, associated with increased bacterial diversity. Rhinovirus (RV) infection did not have a significant effect on bacterial community composition. A significant difference in bacterial richness was observed between children with RV-A and RV-C infection, however this is likely due to the differences in age group between the patient cohorts. The bacterial community within the oropharynx was found to be diverse and heterogeneous. Age and attendance at day care or kindergarten were important factors in driving bacterial diversity. However, wheeze and viral infection were not found to significantly relate to the bacterial community. Bacterial airway microbiome is highly variable in early life and its role in wheeze remains less clear than viral influences.

A meta-analysis of montelukast for recurrent wheeze in preschool children

There is conflicting evidence of the effectiveness of montelukast in preschool wheeze. A recent Cochrane review focused on its use in viral-induced wheeze; however, such subgroups are unlikely to exist in real life and change with time, recently highlighted in an international consensus report. We have therefore sought to investigate the effectiveness of montelukast in all children with preschool wheeze (viral-induced and multiple-trigger wheeze). The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline and Ovid EMBASE were screened for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), examining the efficacy of montelukast compared with placebo in children with the recurrent preschool wheeze. The primary endpoint examined was frequency of wheezing episodes. Five trials containing 3960 patients with a preschool wheezing disorder were analysed. Meta-analyses of studies of intermittent montelukast showed no benefit in preventing episodes of wheeze (mean difference (MD) 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.14 to 0.29; mean for montelukast 2.68 vs placebo 2.54 (p = 0.5)), reducing unscheduled medical attendances (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.07; mean for montelukast 1.62 vs placebo 1.78 (p = 0.21)) and reducing oral corticosteroids (MD -0.06, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.02; mean for montelukast 0.35 vs placebo 0.36 (p = 0.25)). The pooled results of the continuous regimen showed no significant difference in the number of wheezing episodes between the montelukast and placebo groups (MD -0.40, 95% CI -1.00 to 0.19; mean for montelukast 2.05 vs placebo 2.37 (p = 0.18)).

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights that the currently available evidence does not support the use of montelukast in preschool children with recurrent wheeze. We recommend further studies to investigate if a 'montelukast responder' phenotype exists, and how these can be easily identified in the clinical setting. What is Known: • Current guidelines recommend montelukast use in preschool children with recurrent wheeze. • A recent Cochrane review has found montelukast to be ineffective at reducing courses of oral corticosteroids for viral-induced wheeze. What is New: • This meta-analysis has examined all children with preschool wheeze and found that montelukast was not effective at preventing wheezing episodes or reducing unscheduled medical attendances. • A specific montelukast responder phenotype may exist, but such patients should be sought in larger multicentre RCTs.

Should a Preschool Child with Acute Episodic Wheeze be Treated with Oral Corticosteroids? A Pro/Con Debate

Traditionally, preschool-aged children with an acute wheezing episode have been treated with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) based on the efficacy of OCSs in older children and adolescents. However, this practice has been recently challenged based on the results of recent studies. The argument supporting the use of OCSs underscores the observation that many children with recurrent preschool wheezing develop atopic disease in early life which predicts both an increased risk to develop asthma in later life and response to OCS therapy. Further, review of the literature demonstrates heterogeneity of study designs, OCS dosage, interventions, study medication adherence, and settings and overall lack of predefined preschool wheezing phenotypes. The heterogeneity of these studies does not allow a definitive recommendation discouraging OCS use. Advocates against the use of OCSs in this population argue that most of studies investigating the efficacy of OCSs in acute episodic wheeze in preschool-aged children have not demonstrated beneficial effects. Moreover, repeated OCS bursts may be associated with adverse effects. Finally, both sides can agree that there is a significant need to conduct efficacy trials evaluating OCS treatment in preschool-aged children with recurrent wheezing targeted at phenotypes that would be expected to respond to OCSs. This article presents a summary of recent literature regarding the use of OCSs for acute episodic wheezing in preschool-aged children and a "pro" and "con" debate for such use.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists as maintenance and intermittent therapy for episodic viral wheeze in children

BACKGROUND

Episodic viral wheeze (EVW) associated with viral respiratory tract infections is a common reason for pre-school children to utilise health care resources and for carers to take time away from employment. About a third of children experience a wheezing episode before the age of five years. EVW therefore represents a significant public health problem. Many pre-school children only wheeze in association with viral infections and in such cases EVW appears to be a separate entity from atopic asthma. Some trials have explored the effectiveness of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as regular (maintenance) or episodic (intermittent) treatment in this context.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence for the efficacy and safety of maintenance and intermittent LTRAs in the management of EVW in children aged one to six years.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with pre-specified terms. We performed additional searches by consulting the authors of identified trials, online trial registries of manufacturers' web sites, and reference lists of identified primary papers and reviews. Search results are current to June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel-group or cross-over (for intermittent LTRA only) design. Maintenance was considered as treatment for more than two months and intermittent as less than 14 days. EVW was defined as a history of at least one previous episode of wheezing in association with a viral respiratory tract infection in the absence of symptoms between episodes. As far as possible, relevant specific data were obtained from authors of studies that included children of a wider age group or phenotype.  

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was number of children with one or more viral-induced episodes requiring one or more treatments with rescue oral corticosteroids. We analysed combined continuous data outcomes with the mean difference and dichotomous data outcomes with an odds ratio (OR).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five studies eligible for inclusion in the review (one investigated maintenance treatment, three intermittent therapy and one had both maintenance and intermittent treatment arms) these included 3741 participants. Each study involved oral montelukast and was of good methodological quality, but differed in choice of outcome measures thus limiting our ability to aggregate data across studies. Only primary outcome and adverse event data are reported in this abstract.For maintenance treatment, specific data obtained from a single study, pertaining to children with only an EVW phenotype, showed no statistically significant group reduction in the number of episodes requiring rescue oral corticosteroids associated with daily montelukast versus placebo (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.06, moderate quality evidence).For intermittent LTRA, pooled data showed no statistically significant reduction in the number of episodes requiring rescue oral steroids in children treated with LTRA versus placebo (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.25, moderate quality evidence). Specific data for children with an EVW phenotype obtained from a single study of intermittent montelukast treatment showed a small, but statistically significant reduction in unscheduled medical attendances due to wheeze (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98).For maintenance compared to intermittent LTRA treatment no data relating to the primary outcome of the review were identified.There were no other significant group differences identified in other secondary efficacy outcomes for maintenance or intermittent LTRA treatment versus placebo, or maintenance versus intermittent LTRA treatment. We collected descriptive data on adverse events as reported by four of the five included studies, and rates were similar between treatment and placebo groups.Potential heterogeneity in the phenotype of participants within and across trials is a limitation of the evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In pre-school children with EVW, there is no evidence of benefit associated with maintenance or intermittent LTRA treatment, compared to placebo, for reducing the number of children with one or more viral-induced episodes requiring rescue oral corticosteroids, and little evidence of significant clinical benefit for other secondary outcomes. Therefore until further data are available, LTRA should be used with caution in individual children. When used, we suggest a therapeutic trial is undertaken, during which efficacy should be carefully monitored. It is likely that children with an apparent EVW phenotype are not a homogeneous group and that subgroups may respond to LTRA treatment depending on the exact patho-physiological mechanisms involved.

Update on leukotriene receptor antagonists in preschool children wheezing disorders

Asthma is the most common chronic disease in young children. About 40% of all preschool children regularly wheeze during common cold infections. The heterogeneity of wheezing phenotypes early in life and various anatomical and emotional factors unique to young children present significant challenges in the clinical management of this problem. Anti-inflammatory therapy, mainly consisting of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), is the cornerstone of asthma management. Since Leukotrienes (LTs) are chemical mediators of airway inflammation in asthma, the leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) are traditionally used as potent anti-inflammatory drugs in the long-term treatment of asthma in adults, adolescents, and school-age children. In particular, montelukast decreases airway inflammation, and has also a bronchoprotective effect. The main guidelines on asthma management have confirmed the clinical utility of LTRAs in children older than five years. In the present review we describe the most recent advances on the use of LTRAs in the treatment of preschool wheezing disorders. LTRAs are effective in young children with virus-induced wheeze and with multiple-trigger disease. Conflicting data do not allow to reach definitive conclusions on LTRAs efficacy in bronchiolitis or post-bronchiolitis wheeze, and in acute asthma. The excellent safety profile of montelukast and the possibility of oral administration, that entails better compliance from young children, represent the main strengths of its use in preschool children. Montelukast is a valid alternative to ICS especially in poorly compliant preschool children, or in subjects who show adverse effects related to long-term steroid therapy.