Effects of low-dose clarithromycin added to fluticasone on inflammatory markers and pulmonary function among children with asthma: A randomized clinical trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis of macrolides in the management of adult patients with asthma

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of macrolides in the management of asthma has been studied but remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of macrolides in the management of adult patients with asthma.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of macrolides used in adult patients with asthma were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases to evaluate the efficacy and safety of macrolides.

RESULTS

Seventeen reports with macrolide treatment durations ranging from 6 to 48 weeks were included. Macrolides did not reduce exacerbations requiring hospitalization, severe exacerbations, or rescue use of short-acting beta-2 agonist inhalers; improve lung function; decrease peripheral blood or sputum neutrophil counts; or decrease fractional exhaled nitric oxide compared to placebo. Macrolides statistically improved asthma control and quality of life but by less than the minimal clinically important difference. Peripheral blood eosinophil counts as well as serum and sputum eosinophilic cationic protein concentrations were significantly decreased with macrolides compared to placebo. The improvement of asthma symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness varied by study. The safety profile of macrolides was comparable to that of placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Although macrolides have some useful clinical aspects, there is not sufficient evidence to recommend their use in the management of adult patients with asthma.

Long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotic treatment in pediatric chronic airway diseases

Macrolide antibiotics are one of the most commonly used broad-spectrum antibiotics. They have an inhibitory effect on a variety of respiratory pathogens; besides, they have non-anti-infective effects, including anti-inflammatory, regulating airway secretion, immune regulation, and other effects. A growing number of studies have shown that the non-anti-infective effects of macrolides have important and potential value in the treatment of pediatric chronic airway diseases; the therapy was described as "long-term, low-dose usage"; unfortunately, there is no guideline or consensus that applies to children. To better carry out the mechanism and clinical research of non-anti-infective effect and promote its rational use in children, the authors summarize the evidence of the usage of long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotic therapy (LLMAT) in the treatment of chronic airway diseases in children and the progress in recent years. IMPACT: This review summarizes the evidence (mostly in recent 5 years) of the usage of long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotic therapy in the treatment of chronic airway diseases. The recent studies and guidelines support and enrich the point that long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotic therapy has potential benefit for children with severe asthma, CF, non-CF bronchiectasis, and BO, which provides clinical references and is of clinical interest. Long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotic therapy has good safety, and no serious events have been reported; however, potential cardiac side effects and macrolide resistance should be clinically noted.

Macrolides versus placebo for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic disease in which inflammation of the airways causes symptomatic wheezing, coughing and difficult breathing. Macrolides are antibiotics with antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory activities that have been explored for the long-term control of asthma symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of macrolides compared with placebo for managing chronic asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register up to March 2021. We also manually searched bibliographies of previously published reviews and conference proceedings and contacted study authors. We included records published in any language in the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) involving both children and adults with asthma treated with macrolides versus placebo for four or more weeks. Primary outcomes were exacerbation requiring hospitalisation, severe exacerbations (exacerbations requiring emergency department (ED) visits or systemic steroids, or both), symptom scales, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ, score from 0 totally controlled, to 6 severely uncontrolled), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ, with score from 1 to 7 with higher scores indicating better QoL), rescue medication puffs per day, morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF; litres per minutes), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1; litres), bronchial hyperresponsiveness, and oral corticosteroid dose. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (including mortality), withdrawal, blood eosinophils, sputum eosinophils, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in serum, and ECP in sputum.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently examined all records identified in the searches then reviewed the full text of all potentially relevant articles before extracting data in duplicate from all included studies. As per protocol, we used a fixed-effect model. We conducted a sensitivity analysis for analyses with high heterogeneity (I2 greater than 30%). GRADE was used to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, randomising 1973 participants to receive macrolide or placebo for at least four weeks. Most of the included studies reported data from adults (mean age 21 to 61 years) with persistent or severe asthma, while four studies included children. All participants were recruited in outpatient settings. Inclusion criteria, interventions and outcomes were highly variable. The evidence suggests macrolides probably deliver a moderately sized reduction in exacerbations requiring hospitalisations compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.12; studies = 2, participants = 529; moderate-certainty evidence). Macrolides probably reduce exacerbations requiring ED visits and/or treatment with systemic steroids (rate ratio (RaR) 0.65, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.80; studies = 4, participants = 640; moderate-certainty evidence). Macrolides may reduce symptoms (as measured on symptom scales) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.46, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.11; studies = 4, participants = 136 ; very low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may result in a little improvement in ACQ (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.03; studies = 5, participants = 773; low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may have little to no effect on AQLQ (mean difference (MD) 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35; studies = 6, participants = 802; very low-certainty evidence). For both the ACQ and the AQLQ the suggested effect of macrolides versus placebo did not reach a minimal clinically important difference (MCID, 0.5 for ACQ and AQLQ) (ACQ: low-certainty evidence; AQLQ: very low-certainty evidence). Due to high heterogeneity (I2 > 30%), we conducted sensitivity analyses on the above results, which reduced the size of the suggested effects by reducing the weighting on the large, high quality studies.  Macrolides may result in a small effect compared to placebo in reducing need for rescue medication (MD -0.43 puffs/day, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.04; studies = 4, participants = 314; low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may increase FEV1, but the effect is almost certainly below a level discernible to patients (MD 0.04 L, 95% CI 0 to 0.08; studies = 10, participants = 1046; low-certainty evidence). It was not possible to pool outcomes for non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness or lowest tolerated oral corticosteroid dose (in people requiring oral corticosteroids at baseline). There was no evidence of a difference in severe adverse events (including mortality), although less than half of the studies reported the outcome (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.31; studies = 8, participants = 854; low-certainty evidence). Reporting of specific adverse effects was too inconsistent across studies for a meaningful analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Existing evidence suggests an effect of macrolides compared with placebo on the rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation. Macrolides probably reduce severe exacerbations (requiring ED visit and/or treatment with systemic steroids) and may reduce symptoms. However, we cannot rule out the possibility of other benefits or harms because the evidence is of very low quality due to heterogeneity among patients and interventions, imprecision and reporting biases. The results were mostly driven by a well-designed, well powered RCT, indicating that azithromycin may reduce exacerbation rate and improve symptom scores in severe asthma. The review highlights the need for researchers to report outcomes accurately and according to standard definitions. Macrolides can reduce exacerbation rate in people with severe asthma. Future trials could evaluate if this effect is sustained across all the severe asthma phenotypes, the comparison with newer biological drugs, whether effects persist or wane after treatment cessation and whether effects are associated with infection biomarkers.

Challenges faced in managing adult asthma: A perspective from Asian countries

Asthma imposes a significant burden on the health system and patients' quality of life. Within Asia, there is large variability in several cultural, social and economic factors ultimately influencing the management of asthma. Differences in risk factors and asthma management practices across Asia make asthma a truly 'mixed-bag' phenomenon. With the advent of biological agents and the consequent emphasis on asthma phenotyping and endotyping, it is more important than ever to understand the diverse nature of asthma as a disease. This is a collaborative review within Asia to highlight the differences in management of adult asthma, and the local modifications that are made to international guidelines. This review paves the way for a future Asian collaborative network in asthma epidemiological research.

Effects of Macrolide Treatment during the Hospitalization of Children with Childhood Wheezing Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Children are susceptible to a variety of respiratory infections. Wheezing is a common sign presented by children with respiratory infections. Asthma, bronchiolitis, and bronchitis are common causes of childhood wheezing disease (CWD) and are regarded as overlapping disease spectra. Macrolides are common antimicrobial agents with anti-inflammatory effects. We conducted a comprehensive literature search and a systematic review of studies that investigated the influences of macrolide treatment on CWD. The primary outcomes were the impact of macrolides on hospitalization courses of patients with CWD. Data pertaining to the study population, macrolide treatment, hospital courses, and recurrences were analyzed. Twenty-three studies with a combined study population of 2210 patients were included in the systematic review. Any kind of benefit from macrolide treatment was observed in approximately two-thirds of the studies (15/23). Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis to investigate the influence of macrolides on the length of stay (LOS), duration of oxygen demand (DOD), symptoms and signs of respiratory distress, and re-admission rates. Although the benefits of macrolide treatment were reported in several of the studies, no significant differences in LOS, DOD, symptoms and signs of respiratory distress, or re-admission rates were observed in patients undergoing macrolide treatment. In conclusion, any kind of benefit of macrolide treatment was observed in approximately two-thirds of the studies; however, no obvious benefits of macrolide treatment were observed in the hospitalization courses of children with CWD. The routine use of macrolides to improve the hospitalization course of children with CWD is not suggested.

The effects of macrolides in children with reactive airway disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

Childhood reactive airway diseases (RADs) are concerning problems in children’s airways and may be preceded by bronchiolitis and may progress to childhood asthma. The severity of the disease is indicated by deterioration in pulmonary functions, increased usage of rescue medications, and recurrent wheezing episodes. Macrolides have both antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory functions and have been used as adjunctive therapy in childhood RADs.

Patients and methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of macrolides in children with RAD. Literature searches were systematically conducted using an electronic database from inception to August 2018. The Cochrane review risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the quality of each randomized controlled trial.

Results

Sixteen randomized controlled trials comprising 1,415 participants were investigated in this meta-analysis. Children treated with macrolide therapy showed significantly better pulmonary functions in both forced expiratory volume in one second (% predicted) (difference in means=−9.77, 95% CI=−14.18 to −5.35, P<0.001; I²=0%) and forced expiratory flow 25–75 (% predicted) (difference in means=−14.14, 95% CI=−26.11 to −2.18, P=0.02; I²=29.56%). In addition, the short-acting β-agonist usage days and recurrent wheezing risk were significantly lowered in children with macrolide treatment (standardized difference in means=−0.34, 95% CI=−0.59 to −0.09, P=0.007, I²=27.05% and standardized difference in means=−0.53, 95% CI=−0.81 to −0.26, P<0.001, I²=0%, respectively). Furthermore, the growth of Moraxella catarrhalis from nasal swabs was less in children treated with macrolides (odds ratio=0.19, 95% CI=0.11–0.35, P<0.001). Children who took macrolides had a lower risk of adverse events (risk ratio=0.83, 95% CI=0.70–0.98, P=0.024, I²=0%).

Conclusion

This current meta-analysis suggested that adjunctive therapy with macrolides is safe and effective for achieving better outcomes in childhood RAD.

Clarithromycin decreases rhinovirus replication and cytokine production in nasal epithelial cells from subjects with bronchial asthma: effects on IL-6, IL-8 and IL-33

Rhinoviral infection is associated with an increased risk of asthma attacks. The macrolide clarithromycin decreases cytokine production in nasopharyngeal aspirates from patients with wheezing, but the effects of macrolides on cytokine production in nasal epithelial cells obtained from asthmatic subjects remain unclear. Here, human nasal epithelial cells were infected with type-14 rhinovirus (RV14), a major RV group. Titers and RNA of RV14 and cytokine concentrations, including IL-1β and IL-6, were higher in the supernatants of the cells obtained from subjects with bronchial asthma (asthmatic group) than in those from the non-asthmatic group. Pretreatment with clarithromycin decreased RV14 titers, viral RNA and cytokine concentrations, and susceptibility to RV14 infection. Pretreatment with clarithromycin also decreased IL-33 production, which was detected after infection. Pretreatment with clarithromycin decreased the expression of intercellular adhesion molecule-1, the receptor for RV14, after infection, the number and fluorescence intensity of the acidic endosomes through which RV RNA enters the cytoplasm, and the activation of nuclear factor kappa-B proteins in nuclear extracts. These findings suggested that RV replication and cytokine production may be enhanced in nasal epithelial cells obtained from subjects with bronchial asthma and may be modulated by clarithromycin.