Longitudinal changes in sputum and blood inflammatory mediators during FeNO suppression testing

Choosing the Right Biologic for the Right Patient With Severe Asthma

In this instalment of the How I Do It series on severe asthma, we tackle the clinical conundrum of choosing the right biologic for the right patient with severe asthma. With 6 biologics now approved for use in this area comprising 4 different targeting strategies (anti-Ig E: omalizumab; anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5-receptor: mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab; anti-IL-4-receptor: dupilumab; anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin: tezepelumab), this question is increasingly complex. Recognizing that no head-to-head trial has compared biologics, we based our review on the expected effects of inhibiting different aspects of type 2 airway inflammation, supported whenever possible by clinical trial and real-world data. We use 4 variations of a case of severe uncontrolled asthma to develop concepts and considerations introduced in the previous installment ("Workup of Severe Asthma") and discuss pregnancy-related, biomarker-related, comorbidity-related, and corticosteroid dependency-related considerations when choosing a biologic. The related questions of deciding when, why, and how to switch from one biologic to another also are discussed. Overall, we consider that the choice of biologics should be based on the available clinical trial data for the desired efficacy outcomes, the biomarker profile of the patient, safety profiles (eg, when pregnancy is considered), and opportunities to target 2 comorbidities with 1 biologic. Using systemic and airway biomarkers (blood eosinophils and exhaled nitric oxide) and other phenotypic characteristics, we suggest a framework to facilitate therapeutic decision-making. Post hoc studies and new comparative studies are needed urgently to test this framework and to determine whether it allows us to make other clinically useful predictions.

Domiciliary monitoring of exhaled nitric oxide in the management of asthma: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Whether asthma patients could benefit from home monitoring for fractional exhaled nitric oxide (flow of 50 mL/s, FeNO50) is unknown. We explore the application value of home monitoring FeNO50 in daily asthma management.

METHODS

Twenty-two untreated, uncontrolled asthma patients were selected. Medical history, blood and sputum samples, pulmonary function, Asthma Control Test (ACT), and other clinical data of the subjects were collected. All subjects underwent daily monitoring for four weeks using a FeNO50 monitor and mobile spirometry (mSpirometry). The diurnal differences and dynamic changes were described. Compare the effect-acting time and the relative plateau of treatment between FeNO50 and mSpirometry monitoring.

RESULTS

In the first two weeks, the morning median (IQR) level of FeNO50 was 44 (35, 56) ppb, which was significantly higher than the evening median level [41 (32, 53) ppb, P = 0.028]. The median (IQR) effect-acting time assessed by FeNO50 was 4 (3, 5) days, which was significantly earlier than each measure of mSpirometry (P < 0.05). FeNO50 reached the relative plateau significantly earlier than FEV1 (15 ± 2 days vs. 21 ± 3 days, P < 0.001). After treatment, the daily and weekly variation rates of FeNO50 showed a gradually decreasing trend (P < 0.05). The ACT score, sputum eosinophils, and blood eosinophils also significantly improved (P ≤ 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The daily home monitoring of FeNO50 in asthmatic patients showed significant circadian rhythm, and the sensitivity of FeNO50 in evaluating the response to treatment was higher than mSpirometry. The daily and weekly variation rates of FeNO50 change dynamically with time, which may be used to assess the condition of asthma.

Phenotyping of Severe Asthma in the Era of Broad-Acting Anti-Asthma Biologics

Severe asthma is associated with significant morbidity and mortality despite the maximal use of inhaled corticosteroids and additional controller medications, and has a high economic burden. Biologic therapies are recommended for the management of severe, uncontrolled asthma to help to prevent exacerbations and to improve symptoms and health-related quality of life. The effective management of severe asthma requires consideration of clinical heterogeneity that is driven by varying clinical and inflammatory phenotypes, which are reflective of distinct underlying disease mechanisms. Phenotyping patients using a combination of clinical characteristics such as the age of onset or comorbidities and biomarker profiles, including blood eosinophil counts and levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide and serum total immunoglobulin E, is important for the differential diagnosis of asthma. In addition, phenotyping is beneficial for risk assessment, selection of treatment, and monitoring of the treatment response in patients with asthma. This review describes the clinical and inflammatory phenotypes of asthma, provides an overview of biomarkers routinely used in clinical practice and those that have recently been explored for phenotyping, and aims to assess the value of phenotyping in severe asthma management in the current era of biologics.

Understanding the Clinical Implications of Individual Patient Characteristics and Treatment Choice on the Risk of Exacerbation in Asthma Patients with Moderate-Severe Symptoms

INTRODUCTION

The assessment of future risk has become an important feature in the management of patients with asthma. However, the contribution of patient-specific characteristics and treatment choices to the risk of exacerbation is poorly understood. Here we evaluated the effect of interindividual baseline differences on the risk of exacerbation and treatment performance in patients receiving regular maintenance doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or ICS/long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) combination therapy.

METHODS

Exacerbations and changes to asthma symptoms 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) were simulated over a 12-month period using a time-to-event and a longitudinal model developed from phase III/IV studies in patients with moderate-severe asthma (N = 16,282). Simulations were implemented to explore treatment performance across different scenarios, including randomised designs and real-world settings. Treatment options included regular dosing with ICS monotherapy [fluticasone propionate (FP)] and combination therapy [fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR)]. Exacerbation rate was analysed using the log-rank test. The cumulative incidence of events was summarised stratified by treatment.

RESULTS

Being a woman, smoker, having higher baseline ACQ-5 and body mass index (BMI) and lower forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) are associated with increased exacerbation risk (p < 0.01). This risk is bigger in winter because of the seasonal variation effect. Across the different scenarios, the use of FP/SAL resulted in a 10% lower annual incidence of exacerbations relative to FP or regular dosing BUD/FOR, independently of baseline characteristics. Similar differences in the annual incidence of exacerbations were also observed between treatments in obese patients (BMI ≥ 25-35 kg/m2) (p < 0.01) and in patients who do not achieve symptom control on FP monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual baseline characteristics and treatment choices affect future risk. Achieving comparable levels of symptom control whilst on treatment does not imply comparable risk reduction, as shown by the lower exacerbation rates in FP/SAL vs. BUD/FOR-treated patients. These factors should be considered as a basis for personalised clinical management of patients with moderate-severe asthma.

Effectiveness of FeNO-guided treatment in adult asthma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Asthma control is generally monitored by assessing symptoms and lung function. However, optimal treatment is also dependent on the type and extent of airway inflammation. Fraction of exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) is a noninvasive biomarker of type 2 airway inflammation, but its effectiveness in guiding asthma treatment remains disputed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to obtain summary estimates of the effectiveness of FeNO-guided asthma treatment.

DESIGN

We updated a Cochrane systematic review from 2016. Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Subgroup analyses were performed based on asthma severity, asthma control, allergy/atopy, pregnancy and obesity.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register was searched on 9 May 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of a FeNO-guided treatment versus usual (symptom-guided) treatment in adult asthma patients.

RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (2,116 patients), all showing high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Five RCTs reported support from a FeNO manufacturer. FeNO-guided treatment probably reduces the number of patients having ≥1 exacerbation (OR = 0.61; 95%CI 0.44 to 0.83; six RCTs; GRADE moderate certainty) and exacerbation rate (RR = 0.67; 95%CI 0.54 to 0.82; six RCTs; moderate certainty), and may slightly improve Asthma Control Questionnaire score (MD = -0.10; 95%CI -0.18 to -0.02, six RCTs; low certainty), however, this change is unlikely to be clinically important. An effect on severe exacerbations, quality of life, FEV1, treatment dosage and FeNO values could not be demonstrated. There were no indications that effectiveness is different in subgroups of patients, although evidence for subgroup analysis was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

FeNO-guided asthma treatment probably results in fewer exacerbations but may not have clinically important effects on other asthma outcomes.

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.]

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

Toward a Predict and Prevent Approach in Obstructive Airway Diseases

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are currently diagnosed and treated after the demonstration of variable airflow limitation and symptoms. Under this framework, undiagnosed and unchecked airway inflammation is associated with recurrent acute attacks, airway remodeling, airflow limitation, adverse effects of corticosteroids, and impaired quality of life, ultimately leading to the collection of side effects termed "people remodeling." This one-size-fits-all damage control approach aims to control symptoms and treat exacerbations rather than modify the underlying disease process. The advent of highly effective therapies targeting proximal drivers of airway inflammation calls for a paradigm shift; upstream-acting therapies offer potential to alter the disease course and achieve clinical remission. We propose moving away from downstream firefighting and toward a "predict and prevent" model, measuring inflammation and providing anti-inflammatory therapy early, without waiting for further clinical deterioration. Much in the same way that high blood pressure and cholesterol are used to predict and prevent heart attacks, in asthma, elevated blood eosinophils and/or exhaled nitric oxide can be used to predict and prevent asthma attacks. We also advocate moving research further upstream by identifying patients with subclinical airway inflammation or disease who may be at risk of progressing to airflow limitation and associated morbidities and intervening early to prevent them. In summary, we call for a predict and prevent approach in obstructive airway disease.

Challenges in severe asthma: Do we need new drugs or new biomarkers?

Severe asthma is a complex, heterogenous airway condition. There have been significant advances in severe asthma management in the past decade using monoclonal antibody therapies that target the inflammatory component of the disease. Patient selection has been paramount for the success of these biologicals, leading to significant interest in biomarkers to guide treatment. Some severe asthmatics remain suboptimally controlled despite trials of biologicals and many of these patients still require chronic systemic corticosteroids. New therapeutics are currently in development to address this unmet need. However, whether these patients could be better treated by using novel biomarkers that inform selection among currently available biologics, and that objectively measure disease control is unclear. In this review, we examine the currently used biomarkers that guide severe asthma management and emerging biomarkers that may improve asthma therapy in the future.