Pranlukast reduces asthma exacerbations during autumn especially in 1- to 5-year-old boys

Metabolite Dysregulation by Pranlukast in Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Mycobacterium tuberculosis has been infecting millions of people worldwide over the years, causing tuberculosis. Drugs targeting distinct cellular mechanisms including synthesis of the cell wall, lipids, proteins, and nucleic acids in Mtb are currently being used for the treatment of TB. Although extensive research is being carried out at the molecular level in the infected host and pathogen, the identification of suitable drug targets and drugs remains under explored. Pranlukast, an allosteric inhibitor of MtArgJ (Mtb ornithine acetyltransferase) has previously been shown to inhibit the survival and virulence of Mtb. The main objective of this study was to identify the altered metabolic pathways and biological processes associated with the differentially expressed metabolites by PRK in Mtb. Here in this study, metabolomics was carried out using an LC-MS/MS-based approach. Collectively, 50 metabolites were identified to be differentially expressed with a significant p-value through a global metabolomic approach using a high-resolution mass spectrometer. Metabolites downstream of argJ were downregulated in the arginine biosynthetic pathway following pranlukast treatment. Predicted human protein interactors of pranlukast-treated Mtb metabolome were identified in association with autophagy, inflammation, DNA repair, and other immune-related processes. Further metabolites including N-acetylglutamate, argininosuccinate, L-arginine, succinate, ergothioneine, and L-phenylalanine were validated by multiple reaction monitoring, a targeted mass spectrometry-based metabolomic approach. This study facilitates the understanding of pranlukast-mediated metabolic changes in Mtb and holds the potential to identify novel therapeutic approaches using metabolic pathways in Mtb.

Managing Exacerbations in Thunderstorm Asthma: Current Insights

Epidemic thunderstorm asthma (ETSA) occurs following a thunderstorm due to the interaction of environmental and immunologic factors. Whilst first reported in the 1980s, the world's largest event in Melbourne, Australia, on November 21, 2016 has led to a wealth of clinical literature seeking to identify its mechanisms, susceptibility risk factors, and management approaches. Thunderstorm asthma (TA) typically presents during an aeroallergen season in individuals sensitized to perennial rye grass pollen (RGP) in Australia, or fungus in the United Kingdom, in combination with meteorological factors such as thunderstorms and lightning activity. It is now well recognized that large pollen grains, which usually lodge in the upper airway causing seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), are ruptured during these events, leading to sub-pollen particles respirable to the lower respiratory tract causing acute asthma. The identified risk factors of aeroallergen sensitization, specifically to RGP in Australians with a history of SAR, and individuals born in Australia of South-East Asian descent as a risk factor for TA has been key in selecting appropriate patients for preventative management. Moreover, severity-determining risk factors for ETSA-related asthma admission or mortality, including pre-existing asthma or prior hospitalization, poor inhaled corticosteroid adherence, and outdoor location at the time of the storm are important in identifying those who may require more aggressive treatment approaches. Basic treatments include optimizing asthma control and adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy, treatment of SAR, and education regarding TA to increase recognition of at-risk days. Precision treatment approaches may be more beneficial in select individuals, including the use of allergen immunotherapy and even biologic treatment to mitigate asthma severity. Finally, we discuss the importance of environmental health literacy in the context of concerns surrounding the increased frequency of ETSA due to climate change and its implications for the frequency and severity of future events.

Montelukast Drug May Improve COVID-19 Prognosis: A Review of Evidence

With the lack of effective therapy, chemoprevention and vaccination, focusing on the immediate repurposing of existing drugs gives hope of curbing the pandemic. Interestingly, montelukast, a drug usually used in asthma, may be proposed as a potential adjuvant therapy in COVID-19. The aim of the present article was to review the properties of montelukast that could be beneficial in COVID-19. Ten experimentally supported properties were retrieved, either related to SARS-CoV-2 (antiviral properties, prevention of endotheliitis and of neurological disorders linked to SARS-CoV-2), and/or related to the host (improvement of atherogenic vascular inflammation, limitation of the ischemia/reperfusion phenomenon, improvement of respiratory symptoms), and/or related to serious COVID-19 outcomes (limitation of the cytokine storm, mitigation of acute respiratory distress syndrome), and/or related to tissue sequelae (antioxidant properties, anti-fibrosis effects). Based on gathered theoretical evidence, we argue that montelukast should be further tested to prevent and treat COVID-19 outcomes.

Asthma pharmacotherapy: an update on leukotriene treatments

Introduction: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways with a large heterogeneity of clinical phenotypes. There has been increasing interest regarding the role of cysteinyl leukotriene (LT) and leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) in asthma treatment.Areas covered: This review summarized the data (published in PubMed during 1984-2019) regarding LTRA treatment in asthma and LTs-related airway inflammation mechanisms. Involvement of LTs C₄/D₄/E₄ has been demonstrated in the several aspects of airway inflammation and remodeling. Novel pathways related to LTE₄, the most potent mediator, and its respective receptors have recently been studied. Antagonists against cysteinyl leukotriene receptor (CysLTR) type 1, including montelukast, pranlukast and zafirlukast, have been widely prescribed in clinical practices; however, some clinical trials have shown insignificant responses to LTRAs in adult asthmatics, while some phenotypes of adult asthma showed more favorable responses to LTRAs including aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, elderly asthma, asthma associated with smoking, obesity and allergic rhinitis.Expert opinion: Further investigations are needed to understand the role of LTs in airway inflammation and remodeling of the asthmatic airways. There is a lack of biomarkers to predict responsiveness to LTRA, especially in adult asthmatics. Besides CysLTR1 antagonists, targets aiming other LT pathways should be considered.

Interventions for autumn exacerbations of asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Asthma exacerbations in school-aged children peak in autumn, shortly after children return to school following the summer holiday. This might reflect a combination of risk factors, including poor treatment adherence, increased allergen and viral exposure, and altered immune tolerance. Since this peak is predictable, interventions targeting modifiable risk factors might reduce exacerbation-associated morbidity and strain upon health resources. The peak occurs in September in the Northern Hemisphere and in February in the Southern Hemisphere.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions enacted in anticipation of school return during autumn that are designed to reduce asthma exacerbations in children during this period.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, reference lists of primary studies and existing reviews, and manufacturers' trial registries (Merck, Novartis and Ono Parmaceuticals). We searched databases from their inception to 1 December 2017, and imposed no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials comparing interventions aimed specifically at reducing autumn exacerbations with usual care, (no systematic change in management in preparation for school return). We included studies providing data on children aged 18 years or younger.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently screened records identified by the search and then extracted data and assessed bias for trials meeting the inclusion criteria. A third review author checked for accuracy and mediated consensus on disagreements. The primary outcome was proportion of children experiencing one or more asthma exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or oral corticosteroids during the autumn period.

MAIN RESULTS

Our searches returned 546 trials, of which five met our inclusion criteria. These studies randomised 14,252 children to receive either an intervention or usual care. All studies were conducted in the Northern Hemisphere. Three interventions used a leukotriene receptor antagonist, one used omalizumab or a boost of inhaled corticosteroids, and the largest study, (12,179 children), used a medication reminder letter. Whilst the risk of bias within individual studies was generally low, we downgraded the evidence quality due to imprecision associated with low participant numbers, poor consistency between studies, and indirect outcome ascertainment.A US study of 513 children with mild/severe asthma and allergic sensitisation was the only study to provide data for our primary outcome. In this study, the proportion of participants experiencing an exacerbation requiring oral corticosteroids or hospital admission in the 90 days after school return was significantly reduced to 11.3% in those receiving omalizumab compared to 21.0% in those receiving placebo (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.92, moderate-quality evidence). The remaining studies used alternative exacerbation definitions. When data from two leukotriene receptor antagonist studies with comparable outcomes were combined in a random-effects model, there was no evidence of an effect upon exacerbations. There was no evidence that a seasonal medication reminder letter decreased unscheduled contacts for a respiratory diagnosis between September and December.Four studies recorded adverse events. There was no evidence that the proportion of participants experiencing at least one adverse event differed between intervention and usual care groups. Lack of data prevented planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Seasonal omalizumab treatment from four to six weeks before school return might reduce autumn asthma exacerbations. We found no evidence that this strategy is associated with increased adverse effects other than injection site pain, but it is costly. There were no data upon which to judge the effect of this or other seasonal interventions on asthma control, quality of life, or asthma-related death. In future studies definitions of exacerbations should be provided, and standardised where possible. To investigate possible differential effects according to subgroup, participants in future trials should be well characterised with respect to baseline asthma severity and exacerbation history in addition to age and gender.