Search

Introduction: Although some factors associated with asthma symptom deterioration and risk of exacerbation have been identified, these are not yet fully characterised. We conducted a clinical modelling and simulation study to understand baseline factors affecting symptom control, reliever use and exacerbation risk in patients with moderate-severe asthma during follow-up on regularly dosed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy, or ICS/long-acting beta 2 -agonist (LABA) combination therapy., Methods: Individual patient data from randomised clinical trials (undertaken between 2001 and 2019) were used to model the time course of symptoms (n = 7593), patterns of reliever medication use (n = 3768) and time-to-first exacerbation (n = 6763), considering patient-specific and extrinsic factors, including treatment. Model validation used standard graphical and statistical criteria. Change in symptom control scores (Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 [ACQ-5]), reduction in reliever use and annualised exacerbation rate were then simulated in patient cohorts with different baseline characteristics and treatment settings., Results: Being a smoker, having higher baseline ACQ-5 and body mass index affected symptom control scores, reliever use and exacerbation risk (p < 0.01). In addition, low forced expiratory volume in 1 s percent predicted, female sex, season and previous exacerbations were found to contribute to a further increase in exacerbation risk (p < 0.01), whereas long asthma history was associated with more frequent reliever use (p < 0.01). These effects were independent from the underlying maintenance therapy. In different scenarios, fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol was associated with greater reductions in reliever use and exacerbation rates compared with FF or fluticasone propionate (FP) alone or budesonide/formoterol, independently from other factors (p < 0.01)., Conclusions: This study provided further insight into the effects of individual baseline characteristics on treatment response and highlighted significant differences in the performance of ICS/LABA combination therapy on symptom control, reliever use and exacerbation risk. These factors should be incorporated into clinical practice as the basis for tailored management of patients with moderate-severe asthma., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) may be the prodromal phase of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA). Nevertheless, few studies have tried to recognize EGPA in the early stages of the disease., Objective: To identify a panel of clinical and biological markers to detect which severe asthmatic patient might be considered in a prodromal phase of EGPA and crafting a strategy for diagnostic decision-making., Methods: A total of 30 patients with EGPA and 49 with SEA were enrolled. A complete pulmonary, ear, nose, and throat, and rheumatologic assessment were made. Blood (eosinophil count, eosinophilic cationic protein, IL-5, IL-4, total-IgE, IgG 4 , and antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody), sputum (eosinophils count, periostin, IL-8, and granulocyte-monocyte colony-stimulating factor [GM-CSF]), and nasal smear (eosinophilia) biomarkers were assessed. Asthma Control Test, Short Form-36, SinoNasalOutcome Test-22, and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire were also used., Results: Patients with SEA had poorer asthma control (P < .001) and a higher level of sputum eosinophils (P < .002), whereas patients with EGPA reported higher levels of blood eosinophils in the past. Sputum GM-CSF was the only biomarker significantly increased in patients with EGPA compared with those with SEA (P < .0001). Among patients with SEA, those with some suggestive but not diagnostic criteria of EGPA, particularly tissue eosinophilic infiltrates, presented higher levels of sputum GM-CSF (P < .0005), blood, and sputum eosinophils (P < .0006 and P < .011) than the other patients., Conclusion: Sputum GM-CSF and eosinophils might be useful biomarkers to support early diagnosis and treatment choices in patients with SEA, suspected of having EGPA., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Patients' perceptions of asthma symptoms, and attitudes regarding diagnosis and management, can affect their ability to reach good asthma control. The aim of the study was to explore patients' perceptions of asthma management, with focus on treatment with oral corticosteroids (OCS)., Methods: A DOXAPHARMA survey was conducted. A questionnaire with 46 multiple choice questions was completed by 50 patients with severe uncontrolled asthma, and 258 with mild-moderate controlled or partly controlled asthma. Participants were representative of Italian asthmatic patients-with medium age, long asthma duration, delayed diagnosis, poor asthma control, and frequent exacerbations., Results: Many asthmatics reported inadequate pharmacologic treatment. The majority but not all patients regularly used ICS/LABA. Oral treatment was common, mainly with OCS, particularly in severe asthmatics. One-fourth of patients did not regularly use inhaled therapy, and adherence was poor, resulting in frequent OCS use to treat exacerbations, which were common in mild-moderate cases. Patients were fairly satisfied with asthma therapies, but many had concerns about long-term corticosteroid use. Patients complained about poor management of comorbidities associated with asthma and OCS use, but were generally satisfied with their patient/doctor relationships. Many patients failed to achieve optimal health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mainly those with severe asthma who used OCS treatment and emphasized how OCS therapy impacted QoL., Conclusions: The survey results confirmed many problems related to mild-moderate and severe asthma management in Italy and highlighted the overuse of OCS rather than more effective and safe treatments, which had strong negative effects on HRQoL.

In the field of severe asthma, the concept of disease control has recently been integrated by the one of clinical remission. With this new concept, we move on to analyze the efficacy of therapy on multiple parameters simultaneously, starting with the mandatory discontinuation of the systemic glucocorticoids, to which is added the effect on exacerbations, respiratory function, and symptoms control. The Italian severe asthma registry SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy) drafted criteria for the definition of disease remission, allowing patients to be classified into two groups, partial and complete remission. The greater dynamism of the definition, provided by SANI, allows us to hypothesize its practical use, concerning therapy management of severe asthma patients, starting from the level of remission, with the aim to facilitate the clinical decision on replacement, continuation or modulation of patients' therapy.

Objective: Initiated by the Severe Asthma Network Italy (SANI), this study aims to explore asthma patients' perceptions of disease severity, differentiating between mild and severe asthma. The objective is to identify factors influencing tailored treatment strategies for varying disease severities and to provide insights into asthma care in Italy., Methods: Conducted between November 2020 and January 2021, a survey using Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) collected data from 308 Italian adults, representing the population. A 25 item multiple choice questionnaire covered asthma diagnosis, symptoms, treatment approaches, associated conditions, and quality of life., Results: Among participants, 83.8% reported having mild asthma, while 16.2% had severe asthma. Severe asthma patients had longer disease durations, more severe symptoms, frequent exacerbations, and higher hospital/ER visits. Although treatment adherence and symptom profiles generally aligned with international guidelines for self reported severe asthma, 22% of self identified mild asthmatics experienced severe respiratory symptoms. Oral corticosteroid (OCS) use was observed in 50% of severe cases and 22% of mild cases. Adherence was higher in severe asthma patients (76%) versus mild asthma patients (28%). Both groups experienced comorbidities, with 96% of severe asthmatics and 72% of mild asthmatics reporting impaired quality of life., Conclusion: This study highlights the disparity between clinical categorization and patient perceptions of asthma severity. The prevalence of self reported severe asthma exceeds literature data. The burden of mild asthma remains significant, with treatment approaches not fully aligned, particularly regarding disproportionate OCS use. Addressing this gap requires enhancing patient education, improving diagnostic practices, and promoting adherence., Competing Interests: FB received financial grants from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A and Insmed Inc.; he worked as a paid consultant for Menarini and Zambon; and received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., GlaxoSmithKline, Guidotti, Grifols, Insmed Inc., Menarini, Novartis AG, SanofiGenzyme, Viatris Inc., Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Zambo; CM received grants from AZ, GSK, Sanofi; GWC reports having received research grants as well as being lecturer or having received advisory board fees from: A. Menarini, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Faes, Firma, GuidottiMalesci, Glaxo Smith Kline, Hal Allergy, Innovacaremd, Novartis, OmPharma, RedMaple, SanofiAventis, SanofiGenzyme, StallergenesGreer, Uriach Pharma, ThermoFisher, Valeas; EH received a research grant from GlaxoSmith&Kline, and fees for lectures from Sanofi, Regeneron, GlaxoSmith&Kline, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chiesi, StallergenesGreer; and declares fees for advisory boards participation from Sanofi, Regeneron, Glaxo Smith Kline, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chiesi, Almirall, Celltrion Healthcare, Bosch; PP received advisory board fees from Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxo Smith Kline, and Sanofi, and fees for educational activities from: AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti and Sanofi; GS received grants from AZ, GSK, Sanofi, Novartis. The authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest for the present manuscript., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.)

Background: Aging implies changes in terms of lung function, immune system, and respiratory and extra-respiratory comorbidities. Few studies have specifically addressed the relevance of age on severe asthma burden and control. We aimed to evaluate whether age acts as an independent determinant of asthma severity, in terms of clinical, functional, and inflammatory profile, and to explore potential cofactors that contribute to a more difficult disease control in different age groups., Methods: Patients from Severe Asthma Network Italy (SANI) registry were retrospectively divided in subgroups according to their age. Cutoffs for age were established according to quartiles in order to obtain a comparable number of patients for each group, and then rounded for the sake of simplicity., Results: Overall, 1805 severe asthma patients were analyzed. Lung function represented the most important age-related variable. On the opposite the level of asthma control was not differently distributed among age ranges. In young people the presence of atopy-related comorbidities (allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis) predominated, whilst systemic-metabolic and degenerative comorbidities such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, anxious-depressive syndrome, and osteoporosis prevailed in elderly. Bronchiectasis and sleep disturbances were significantly associated with age., Conclusions: Despite that it cannot be considered a treatable trait, our study suggests that age should be evaluated within a personalized approach to severe asthma patients, in order to provide a better clinical profiling and a more tailored treatment strategy., Competing Interests: FB received financial grants from AstraZeneca Financial, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A and Insmed Inc.; he worked as a paid consultant for Menarini and Zambon; and received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., GlaxoSmithKline, Guidotti, Grifols, Insmed Inc., Menarini, Novartis AG, Sanofi-Genzyme, Viatris Inc., Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Zambon. MC received financial grants from AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi. GWC reports having received research grants as well as being lecturer or having received advisory board fees from: A. Menarini, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Faes, Firma, Guidotti-Malesci, Glaxo Smith Kline, Hal Allergy, Innovacaremd, Novartis, OmPharma, RedMaple, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stallergenes-Greer, Uriach Pharma, ThermoFisher, Valeas. EH received a research grant from GlaxoSmith&Kline, and fees for lectures from Sanofi, Regeneron, GlaxoSmith&Kline, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Chiesi, Stallergenes-Greer; and declares fees for advisory boards participation from Sanofi, Regeneron, Glaxo Smith Kline, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Chiesi, Almirall, Celltrion Healthcare, Bosch. PP received advisory board fees from Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxo Smith Kline, and Sanofi, and fees for educational activities from: AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti and Sanofi. GS received financial grants from AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi. AM, AV, GA, GG, JM, MM, PM and RV declared no relevant conflicts of interest. All authors reported no financial interests or potential conflicts of interest related to this study., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: Benralizumab has been shown to restore good control of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). Robust data on benralizumab effectiveness over periods longer than 2 years are scarce. Methods: This retrospective multicentric study was conducted on 108 Italian SEA patients treated with benralizumab for up to 36 months. Partial and complete clinical remission (CR) were assessed. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics or using linear, logistic, and negative binomial mixed-effect regression models. Results: At 36 months, benralizumab reduced the exacerbation rate by 89% and increased the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) (+440 mL at 36 months, p < 0.0001). Benralizumab improved asthma control as well as sinonasal symptoms in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). Up to 93.33% of patients either reduced or discontinued OCS; benralizumab also decreased ICS use and other asthma medications. Overall, 84.31% of patients achieved partial or complete CR. Conclusions: Benralizumab improved asthma and sinonasal outcomes up to 36 months. These findings support the potential of benralizumab to induce CR, emphasizing its role as a disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drug for the management of SEA. Further research is warranted to expand these findings by minimizing data loss and assessing benralizumab's long-term safety.

Severe asthma affects about 10% of the population with asthma and is characterized by low lung function and a high count of blood leukocytes, mainly eosinophils. Various definitions are used in clinical practice and in the literature to identify asthma remission: clinical remission, inflammatory remission, and complete remission. This work highlights a consensus for asthma remission using a Delphi method. In the context of the Severe Asthma Network Italy, which accounts for 57 severe asthma centers and more than 2,200 patients, a board of six experts drafted a list of candidate statements in a questionnaire, which has been revised to minimize redundancies and ensure clear and consistent wording for the first round (R1) of the analysis. Thirty-two statements were included in the R1 questionnaire and then submitted to a panel of 80 experts, which used a 5-point Likert scale to measure agreement regarding each statement. Then, an interim analysis of R1 data was performed, and items were discussed and considered to produce a consistent questionnaire for round 2 (R2) of the analysis. Then, the board set the R2 questionnaire, which included only important topics. Panelists were asked to vote on the statements in the R2 questionnaire afterward. During R2, the criteria of complete clinical remission (the absence of the need for oral corticosteroids, symptoms, exacerbations or attacks, and pulmonary function stability) and those of partial clinical remission (the absence of the need for oral corticosteroids, and two of three criteria: the absence of symptoms, exacerbations or attacks, and pulmonary stability) were confirmed. This Severe Asthma Network Italy Delphi analysis defined a valuable and independent tool that is easy to use, to test the efficacy of different treatments in patients with severe asthma enrolled into the SANI registry., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Patients with severe asthma perceive beneficial effects of biologics and good self-reported adherence to treatment, even when self-administered at home https://bit.ly/48vP70w., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: C. Crimi reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; honoraria received for lectures from AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi, Novartis, ResMed and F&P, outside the submitted work; and patent pending number 102023000013077 not discussed in the present study. Conflict of interest: C. Calabrese reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; honoraria received for lectures from AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi and Novartis, outside the submitted work; and support for attending meetings and/or travel received from AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi and Novartis, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: M. D'Amato reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi. Conflict of interest: F. Blasi reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; financial grants from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A and Insmed Inc. outside the submitted work; consulting fees from Menarini and Zambon outside the submitted work; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A, GSK, Guidotti, Grifols, Insmed Inc., Menarini, Novartis AG, Sanofi-Genzyme, Viatris Inc., Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Zambon outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: G.W. Canonica reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; research grants from A. Menarini, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Faes, Firma, GSK, Guidotti-Malesci, Hal Allergy, Innovacaremd, Novartis, OmPharma, RedMaple, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stallergenes-Greer, Uriach Pharma, ThermoFisher and Valeas outside the submitted work; honoraria for lectures from A. Menarini, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Faes, Firma, GSK, Guidotti-Malesci, Hal Allergy, Innovacaremd, Novartis, OmPharma, RedMaple, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stallergenes-Greer, Uriach Pharma, ThermoFisher and Valeas outside the submitted work; and advisory board fees from A. Menarini, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Faes, Firma, GSK, Guidotti-Malesci, Hal Allergy, Innovacaremd, Novartis, OmPharma, RedMaple, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stallergenes-Greer, Uriach Pharma, ThermoFisher and Valeas outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: G. Guida reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi; and a speaker fee from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: E. Heffler reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; a research grant from GSK outside the submitted work; fees for lectures from Sanofi, Regeneron, GSK, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chiesi and Stallergenes-Greer outside the submitted work; and fees for advisory boards participation from Sanofi, Regeneron, GSK, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chiesi and Stallergenes-Greer outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: P. Paggiaro reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; grants for educational events from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, GSK, Guidotti and Sanofi outside the submitted work; and grants for participation to Advisory Board from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, GSK, Guidotti and Sanofi outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: G.E. Carpagnano reports support for the present manuscript from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Sanofi; and honoraria received for lectures from AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi and Chiesi, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

The efficacy mepolizumab in severe asthmatic patients is proven in the literature. Primarily to study the effect of mepolizumab on exacerbations, steroid dependence, and the continuation of efficacy in the long term. Secondarily to evaluate the effect of the drug on nasal polyps. Analyzing data from SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy) clinics, we observed severe asthmatic patients treated with mepolizumab 100 mg/4 weeks, for a period of 3 years. 157 patients were observed. Exacerbations were reduced from the first year (-84.6%) and progressively to 90 and 95% in the second and third ones. Steroid-dependent patients decreased from 54% to 21% and subsequently to 11% in the second year and 6% in the third year. Patients with concomitant nasal polyps, assessed by SNOT-22, showed a 49% reduction in value from baseline to the third year. The study demonstrated the long-term efficacy of mepolizumab in a real-life setting.

The article traces the concept of asthma control within GINA guidelines over the past 25 years. In the first 15 years after 1995, the main objective of asthma management was to obtain the control of all clinical and functional characteristics of asthma. A landmark study (GOAL) showed for the first time that a good control of asthma is a reasonable outcome that can be achieved in a large proportion of asthmatics with a regular appropriate treatment. In the following years, more emphasis was placed on the role of exacerbations as critical manifestations of poor asthma control, whose frequency is associated with excessive FEV1 decline and increased risk of death. Accordingly, the 2014 GINA report makes a clear distinction between the control of the day-by-day symptoms and the reduction in the risk of severe exacerbations, stating that both conditions should be obtained. The 2019 update included a significant change in the management of mild asthma, prioritizing the prevention of exacerbations to that of mild symptoms. This view was repeated in the 2021 update, where the prevention of exacerbations, together with an acceptable symptom control with a minimal use of rescue medication, appeared to be the real main goal of asthma management. While a discrepancy between current symptoms and exacerbations may be present in mild asthma, a significant relationship between these two features is observed in moderate-severe asthma: a persistent poor symptom control is a major risk factor for exacerbations, whereas achieving symptom control through regular treatment is associated with a reduction in exacerbation rate. Thus, the opinion that frequent symptoms are not important in the absence of acute exacerbations should be discouraged, whereas education of patients to a good symptom perception and to improve adherence to regular treatment should be implemented. Furthermore, the persistence of risk factors, such as increased airway inflammation, even in a patient with minor daily symptoms, should be considered for optimizing treatment.

Smoking habit is still fairly common among asthmatics. So far, the impact of smoke on severe asthma burden has not been specifically investigated. We aimed to estimate the frequency of smoking habit among severe asthma patients, their clinical features, and the impact of smoke on asthma outcomes. The Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry was analyzed. Demographic, clinical, and functional features of smokers, never and former smokers were compared. Data from 1194 patients were explored. Smokers were younger, with a lower asthma onset age. Atopy, BMI and respiratory/systemic comorbidities were equally distributed. In former smokers pre- and post-FEV1/FVC was significantly lower; no other significant differences were detected. Similar findings were confirmed when stratifying the former smokers by pack-years and length of smoking cessation. Among former smokers, lymphocytes and neutrophils were higher in the <15 years of smoking cessation group. Blood eosinophils were comparable in never and former smokers. When clustering the population by blood eosinophils, no significant differences in pulmonary function and exacerbations were observed. Our data suggest that a personal smoking history has a relatively low impact on disease burden. It remarks the importance of smoking cessation as a main intervention, particularly in severe asthma.

Background: Transient increases in blood eosinophil counts have been observed in dupilumab clinical trials., Objective: To assess eosinophil counts and eosinophilia-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) across 11 dupilumab clinical trials, comparing adult and adolescent patients with asthma and adult patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), atopic dermatitis, and eosinophilic esophagitis., Methods: Eosinophil counts, rates of eosinophilia-related TEAEs or treatment-emergent eosinophilia (>1,500 cells/μL), discontinuations, clinical symptoms, and efficacy in patients with asthma or CRSwNP with treatment-emergent eosinophilia are presented., Results: Transient increases in mean eosinophil counts were observed in dupilumab-treated patients with asthma (mean range across studies at baseline: 349-370 cells/μL; week 4: 515-578 cells/μL), CRSwNP (baseline: 440-448 cells/μL; week 16: 595 cells/μL), and atopic dermatitis (baseline: 434-600 cells/μL; week 4: 410-710 cells/μL), followed by a decline starting by week 24 to baseline or lower. No increases were seen in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (baseline: 310 cells/μL; week 4: 230 cells/μL). In dupilumab-treated patients across all studies, rates of eosinophilia TEAEs were 0% to 13.6%. Clinical symptoms associated with increased eosinophils were rare (seven of 4,666 dupilumab-treated patients, including six cases of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis) and occurred only in patients with asthma or CRSwNP. Eosinophilia was not associated with reduced dupilumab efficacy., Conclusions: Transient increases in eosinophil counts with dupilumab treatment did not affect efficacy and were rarely of clinical consequence. It remains important for physicians to base judgment on individual patient history and baseline eosinophil counts and to be alert to hypereosinophilic symptoms., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The prevalence of asthma in Italy is estimated to be around 4%; it affects approximately 2,000,000 citizens, and up to 80-90% of patients have mild-to-moderate asthma. Despite the clinical relevance of mild-to-moderate asthma, longitudinal observational data are very limited, including data on disease progression (worsening vs. improvement), the response to treatment, and prognosis. Studies are needed to develop long-term, observational, real-life research in large cohorts. The primary outcomes of this study will be based on prospective observation and the epidemiological evolution of mild and moderate asthma. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported outcomes, treatments over time, disease-related functional and inflammatory patterns, and environmental and life-style influences., Methods: This study, called the Mild/Moderate Asthma Network of Italy (MANI), is a research initiative launched by the Italian Respiratory Society and the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma and Clinical Immunology. MANI is a cluster-based, real world, cross-sectional, prospective, observational cohort study that includes 20,000 patients with mild-to-moderate asthma. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04796844)., Results and Conclusion: Despite advances in asthma care, several research gaps remain to be addressed through clinical research. This study will add important new knowledge about long-term disease history, the transferability of clinical research results to daily practice, the efficacy of currently recommended strategies, and their impact on the burden and evolution of the disease., Abbreviations: MANI:Mild/Moderate Asthma Network of ItalySANI:Severe Asthma Network ItalyGINA:Global Initiative for AsthmaSABA:short acting β2-agonistsICS:inhaled corticosteroidsCRF:Case Report Form.

Introduction: Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that targets both IL-4 and IL-13 signaling. It is currently indicated for the treatment of asthma, moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Eosinophilia has been reported as a potential adverse event in treated patients., Areas Covered: A selective search on PubMed and Medline up to January 2022 was performed, by focusing on dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia described in clinical trials, real-life studies, and case reports. The possible mechanisms underlying dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia and the eosinophil-related morbidity have also been explored., Expert Opinion: Dealing with dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia represents a clinical challenge for clinicians managing patients on dupilumab therapy. An algorithm for the practical management of dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia has been proposed, in order to properly investigate potential eosinophil-related morbidity and avoid unnecessary drug discontinuation.

Rationale: It is difficult to predict the effects of long-acting bronchodilators (LABD) on lung function, exercise capacity and physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Therefore, the multidimensional response to LABD was profiled in COPD patients participating in the ACTIVATE study and randomized to LABD., Methods: In the ACTIVATE study, patients were randomized to aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) or placebo for four weeks. The primary outcomes included (1) lung function as measured by functional residual capacity (FRC), residual volume (RV), and spirometric outcomes; (2) exercise performance as measured by a constant work rate cycle ergometry test (CWRT); and (3) physical activity (PA) using an activity monitor. Self-organizing maps (SOMs) were used to create an ordered representation of the patients who were randomly assigned to four weeks of AB/FF and cluster them into different outcome groups., Results: A total of 250 patients were randomized to AB/FF (n = 126) or placebo (n = 124). Patients in the AB/FF group (39.6% women) had moderate-to-severe COPD, static hyperinflation (FRC: 151.4 (27.7)% predicted) and preserved exercise capacity. Six clusters with differential outcomes were identified. Patients in clusters 1 and 2 had significant improvements in lung function compared to the remaining AB/FF-treated patients. Patients in clusters 1 and 3 had significant improvements in CWRT time, and patients in clusters 2, 3 and 6 had significant improvements in PA compared to the remaining AB/FF-treated patients., Conclusion: Individual responses to 4 weeks of AB/FF-treatment in COPD are differential and the degree of change differs across domains of lung function, exercise capacity and PA. These results indicate that clinical response to LABD therapy is difficult to predict and is non-linear, and show doctors that it is important to look at multiple outcomes simultaneously when evaluating the clinical response to LABD therapy., Clinical Trial Registration: The original ACTIVATE study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT02424344., Competing Interests: Maud Koopman reports no real or perceived conflict of interest. Frits M.E. Franssen reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Novartis; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, and TEVA, outside the submitted work. Swetlana Gaffron works at Viscovery. Viscovery provides analysis services to Ciro+. Henrik Watz reports personal fees from AZ, during the conduct of the study; grants and/or personal fees from AZ, GSK, Chiesi, Boehringer Ingelheim Novartis, and Menarini, outside the submitted work. Thierry Troosters reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. Judith Garcia-Aymerich reports consulting and lecture fees from AstraZeneca (outside the submitted work) and lecture fees from Esteve and Chiesi (outside the submitted work). Pierluigi Paggiaro reports grants and/or personal fees from ALK, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, Guidotti, Menarini, and Mundipharma, outside the submitted work. Eduard Molins, Miguel Moya, Lindy van Burk, and Esther Garcia Gil are AstraZeneca employees. Dieter Maier works at Biomax. Biomax provides data management and analysis services to CIRO+. Emiel F.M. Wouters reports no real or perceived conflict of interest. Lowie E.G.W. Vanfleteren reports grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, GSK, Chiesi, Menarini, Pulmonx, Fisher&Paykel, and Boehringer, outside the submitted work. Martijn A. Spruit reports grants from the Netherlands Lung Foundation, Stichting Astma Bestrijding, GSK, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, TEVA, and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2022 Koopman et al.)

Introduction: Biologic drugs have dramatically improved severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) outcomes. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of biological therapy in SEA in a real-life setting and to identify the predictors for switching to another biological drug in patients with poor asthma control. The outcomes for efficacy were decreased annual exacerbations (AE) and improved asthma control test (ACT)., Methods: In 90 SEA patients being treated with a biological drug, clinical examination, ACT, blood eosinophils count and spirometry were assessed before (T0) and after 6 (T1), 12 (T2), 24 (T3) and 36 (T4) months from the start of biological therapy. Patients were considered responders (R) or non-responders (NR) to biologics depending on whether or not they had less than two AE and a 20% increase in the ACT after 12 months of treatment., Results: 75% of the patients were R, 25% NR. In R patients, biological therapy add-on was followed by significant improvement in AE and ACT throughout the whole follow-up period. The percentage of patients on oral corticosteroids (OCS) dropped from 40% to 12%. By contrast, the NR patients were shifted to another biological drug after 12 months of therapy, as they still had high AE and nearly unchanged ACT; 40% of them still needed OCS treatment. The predictors of switching to another biological drug were three or more AE, ACT below 17, nasal polyposis and former smoking ( p < 0.05). In NR, the shift to another biological drug was followed by a significant decrease in AE and an increase in the ACT., Discussion: This real-life study confirms the long-term efficacy of biologics in most SEA patients and indicates that even in non-responders to a first biological drug, it is worth trying a second one. It is hoped that the availability of additional biologics with different targets will help improve the personalization of SEA therapy.

Sputum eosinophilia in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients seems to be associated with a better response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). To verify if this feature could identify a specific subpopulation of COPD patients, we retrospectively compared functional and inflammatory parameters of 110 COPD patients according to the presence of sputum eosinophilia (>2%). Patient with eosinophilia were characterized by lower dyspnea score, lower functional impairment and lower ICS use, suggesting that airway eosinophilia may be associated to a lower COPD severity and some functional "asthma-like" characteristics, therefore explaining the better response to ICS in this subgroup of patients., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: There is, so far, no universal definition of severe asthma. This definition usually relies on: number of exacerbations, inhaled therapy, need for oral corticosteroids, and respiratory function. The use of such parameters varies in the different definitions used. Thus, according to the parameters chosen, each patient may result in having severe asthma or not. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the choice of a specific definition of severe asthma can change the allocation of patients., Methods: Data collected from the Severe Asthma Network Italy (SANI) registry were analyzed. All the patients included were then reclassified according to the definitions of U-BIOPRED, NICE, WHO, ATS/ERS, GINA, ENFUMOSA, and TENOR., Results: 540 patients, were extracted from the SANI database. We observed that 462 (86%) met the ATS/ERS criteria as well as the GINA criteria, 259 (48%) the U-Biopred, 222 (41%) the NICE, 125 (23%) the WHO, 313 (58%) the Enfumosa, and 251 (46%) the TENOR criteria. The mean eosinophil value were similar in the ATS/ERS, U-Biopred, and Enfumosa (528, 532 and 516 cells/mcl), higher in WHO and Tenor (567 and 570 cells/mcl) and much higher in the NICE classification (624 cells/mcl). Lung function tests resulted similarly in all groups, with WHO (67%) and ATS/ERS-GINA (73%), respectively, showing the lower and upper mean FEV1 values., Conclusions: The present observations clearly evidence the heterogeneity in the distribution of patients when different definitions of severe asthma are used. However, the recent definition of severe asthma, provided by the GINA document, is similar to that indicated in 2014 by ATS/ERS, allowing mirror reclassification of the patients examined. This lack of homogeneity could complicate the access to biological therapies. The definition provided by the GINA document, which reflects what suggested by ATS/ERS, could partially overcome the problem., Competing Interests: None to declare., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a complex condition in which systemic inflammation plays a role in extrapulmonary manifestations, including cardiovascular diseases: interleukin (IL)-6 has a role in both COPD and atherogenesis. The 2011 GOLD document classified patients according to FEV1, symptoms, and exacerbations history, creating four groups, from A (less symptoms/low risk) to D (more symptoms/high risk). Extracellular vesicles (EV) represent potential markers in COPD: nevertheless, no studies have explored their value in association to both disease severity and inflammation. We conducted a pilot study to analyze circulating endothelial-(E) and monocyte-derived (M) EV levels in 35 COPD patients, who were grouped according to the 2011 GOLD document; the relationship between EV and plasmatic markers of inflammation was analyzed. We found a statistically significant trend for increasing EEV, MEV, IL-6, from group A to D, and a significant correlation between EEV and IL-6. The associations between both EEV and MEV and disease severity, and between EEV and IL-6, suggest a significant interplay between pulmonary disease and inflammation, with non-respiratory cells (endothelial cells and monocytes) involvement, along with the progression of the disease. Thus, EV might help identify a high-risk population for extrapulmonary events, especially in the most severe patients.

Background: A pre-specified meta-analysis of individual patient data from the 52-week METREX and METREO trials, which investigated mepolizumab for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL (screening) or ≥300 cells/µL (prior year) and frequent exacerbations, enables more robust characterization of mepolizumab efficacy in COPD and exploration of the relationship between blood eosinophil count and treatment responses., Methods: In METREX (117106/NCT02105948) and METREO (117113/NCT02105961), randomized patients received mepolizumab or placebo added to existing inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-based triple maintenance therapy. The annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (primary endpoint) was compared between subcutaneous (SC) mepolizumab 100 mg versus placebo (primary comparison of interest) and all doses (100 mg and 300 mg SC) versus placebo in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL at screening or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year. Secondary/other endpoints included time to first moderate/severe exacerbation, exacerbations leading to emergency department visit/hospitalization and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A predictive model of the relationship between screening blood eosinophil counts and exacerbation rates included data from all randomized patients., Results: In total, 1510 patients were randomized in METREX and METREO and 1136 patients were included in the pre-specified meta-analysis. From the meta-analysis, mepolizumab 100 mg SC significantly reduced annual moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus placebo by 18% (rate ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.71, 0.95; p=0.006) and delayed time to first moderate/severe exacerbation (hazard ratio: 0.80 [0.68, 0.94]; p=0.006). Mepolizumab 100 mg SC versus placebo numerically reduced exacerbations leading to ED visits/hospitalization and improved HRQoL. A modelling approach demonstrated increasing efficacy for moderate/severe exacerbations with increasing screening blood eosinophil count; this relationship was more pronounced for exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (post hoc). The all-doses comparison had similar results., Conclusion: Mepolizumab reduces exacerbations in patients with eosinophil-associated COPD. Results suggest that blood eosinophil counts (≥150 cells/µL at screening or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year) allow for identification of patients with COPD who experience exacerbations while treated with maximal ICS-based triple maintenance therapy who are likely to benefit from mepolizumab., Competing Interests: MB has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK and Novartis and has received independent/institutional grant support from Pfizer and AstraZeneca. KRC reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Grifols, Sanofi, Genentech, Kamada, Mereo Biopharma, Regeneron, Roche and Novartis; grants from Baxter, GSK, Vertex, and Amgen; and personal fees from Merck, Takeda. He also holds a Canadian Institute of Health Research-GSK research chair in Respiratory Health Care Delivery at the University Health Network. In the last 5 years, IDP received funding from the NIHR as a Senior Investigator; he has received speaker’s honoraria for speaking at sponsored meetings from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Aerocrine, Almirall, Menarini, Novartis, Teva, Chiesi and GSK and payments for organizing educational events from AstraZeneca and Teva. He has received honoraria for attending advisory panels with Genentech, Regeneron, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Teva, Merck, Sanofi, Circassia, Chiesi and Knopp. He has received sponsorships to attend international scientific meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, AstraZeneca, Teva and Chiesi. He has also received a grant from Chiesi to support a Phase II clinical trial in Oxford. In addition, IDP has a patent Leicester Cough Questionnaire with royalties paid. FCS received grants from the National Institutes of Health, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the COPD Foundation, the US Department of Defense, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Phillips Respironics, PulmonX, PneumRx and Spiration; and personal fees from Circassia, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK and PneumRx. ESB was an employee of GSK and holds GSK stock/shares during the conduct of the study, his current affiliation is Aeglea BioTherapeutics, Austin, Texas. SWY is an employee of GSK and hold GSK stock/shares. DBR was an employee of GSK and holds GSK stocks/shares during the conduct of the study, his current affiliation is DBR Consulting LLC, Raleigh NC. SSH was an employee of GSK and holds GSK stocks/shares during the conduct of the study. All authors received non-financial support from GSK in the form of editorial support. PP reports personal fees from GlaxoSmith Kline, during the conduct of the study; grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Novartis, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 Pavord et al.)

Background: Asthma is a chronic disease characterized by airway hyperresponsiveness, inflammation and mucus production. In Type 2 asthma, two phenotypic components are often co-expressed (eosinophilic and allergic). Elevated biomarker levels, such as eosinophils (EOS), fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and immunoglobulin E (IgE), are key clinical indicators of Type 2 inflammation. Dupilumab has been recently approved for the treatment of uncontrolled severe Type 2 asthma. Type 2 asthma includes allergic and/or eosinophilic phenotypes. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the dupilumab-eligible population in Italy and characterize it by expected biomarker status., Methods: A 4-step approach was carried out to calculate dupilumab-eligible population. The approach consisted in: (1) estimating the total number of asthma patients in Italy (using 2016-2017 Italian-adapted Global Initiative for Asthma -GINA- guidelines); (2) estimating the number of severe asthma patients with poorly controlled or uncontrolled disease (using the findings of two recent administrative claim analyses conducted in Italy); (3) stratifying the severe uncontrolled population by biomarker levels (EOS, FeNO and IgE) according to the outcomes of the QUEST trial (a clinical study assessing the efficacy of dupilumab in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma; NCT02414854); (4) identifying the sub-populations of severe uncontrolled asthma patients characterised by raised blood EOS and/or FeNO level (thus indicated to receive dupilumab)., Results: According to these estimates, about 3.3 million asthmatic patients live in Italy (6.10% of the population). Of them, almost 20 thousand (N = 19,960) have uncontrolled severe asthma. Dupilumab-eligible patients would be N = 15,988, corresponding to 80.1% of the total uncontrolled severe population. Most of these patients (89.3%; N = 14,271) have at least an increase of EOS level, while slightly more than half (51.9%; N = 8,303) have raised levels of both biomarkers. Increased FeNO levels without increased EOS are observed less frequently (N = 1,717; 10.7% of the eligible population)., Conclusions: There is a strong rationale for testing all asthma biomarkers during diagnosis and disease follow-up. Given the large availability and the limited costs, these tests are cost-effective tools to detect severe Type 2 asthma, stratify patients by phenotype, and drive appropriate treatment decisions.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has a 3-year mortality rate up to 37%, 2-6 times higher than the general population. We present evidence supporting pharmacological therapies to improve patient life expectancy, focusing on inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) combined with long-acting bronchodilators (LABDs). A reduction in 3-year all-cause mortality (ACM) has been shown in patients with severe COPD treated with fluticasone propionate (an ICS) and salmeterol [long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)], compared with placebo. An observational study of elderly patients with severe COPD and multiple comorbidities suggested ICS+LABD reduce ACM compared with LABD monotherapy. Patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations saw a mortality benefit with the ICS/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA combinations fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) or budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol (BUD/GLY/FOR) versus UMEC/VI or GLY/FOR (LAMA/LABA combinations) in the IMPACT and ETHOS trials, respectively. Reduced risk of mortality may be due to modulation of airway inflammation, thereby reducing activation of proinflammatory mediators in the peripheral circulation. Importantly, estimated annual risk reduction for ACM with ICS/LAMA/LABA combinations in patients with COPD is of the same order of magnitude as for statins (patients with coronary disease) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (patients with vascular disease). Based on the current data, the pharmacological treatment of COPD appears not only able to improve symptoms and reduce the frequency of exacerbations but is also very promising in improving patient prognosis in the long term., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: RP was employed in the role of Global Medical Expert and now acts as a consultant for GlaxoSmithKline Italy; PP received institutional and personal grants for education and research from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, and Sanofi; AC received institutional and personal grants for education and research from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, and Chiesi., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Introduction: People with severe asthma (SA) often have poor disease control and quality of life, and are at high risk of exacerbations, lung function decline and asthma-related death. The present expert opinion article aimed to identify unmet needs in the management of SA in Italy, and propose possible solutions to address these needs., Methods: At five multidisciplinary events in Italy, attendees identified factors that interfered with the effective management of SA and suggested how these barriers could be overcome. A core group of 12 Italian experts (pulmonologists, general practitioners, allergists, payers and patients) identified the main issues and proposed possible solutions based on the results from the meetings and relevant articles from the literature., Results and Conclusions: We reviewed the gap between real-world practice and guidelines, oral corticosteroid overuse, SA-related mortality, and barriers to effective SA treatment. Common themes were lack of awareness about SA among both patients and clinicians, and lack of networking/information exchange between those involved in the treatment of SA. Participants agreed on the need to implement patient education and create multidisciplinary groups of specialists to improve SA management through multidisciplinary educational initiatives, meetings with local experts, development of a flow chart for referral/connection with local experts and specialized centers. Clinical instruments that might help specialists improve SA management included referral networks, integrated care pathways, phenotyping and treatment algorithms, exacerbation tracking, and examination of electronic medical records for patients with uncontrolled asthma. The following actions need to be implemented in Italy: i) maximize the use of advanced therapies, eg, biologics; ii) increase/improve education for physicians and patients; iii) improve multidisciplinary communication and care coordination; iv) introduce regional and local protocols for SA diagnosis and treatment; and v) change the structure of healthcare services to reduce specialist waiting times and facilitate access to biologic therapies., Competing Interests: Dr. Paggiaro has received institutional and personal grants for research and education from ALK-Abellò, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, and Sanofi. Dr. Trama reports grants from Fisioair Srl, grants from K. Link srl, grants from Mediacom Srl, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Beneventi srl, outside the submitted work. Dr. Croce has received personal grants for research and education from AbbVie, Allergan, Astellas, Bayer, Becton Dickinson, Dompè, General Electric Healthcare, Gilead Science, Glaxo Smith Kline, Italfarmaco, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi, Shire, Takeda, and ViiV Healthcare. Dr. Canonica has received research grants, been a speaker, or received advisory board fees from Menarini, Alk-Abellò, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Genentech, Guidotti-Malesci, Glaxo Smith Kline, Hal Allergy, Mylan, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dome, Mundipharma, Novartis, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stallergenes-Greer, UCB Pharma, Uriach Pharma, Valeas, and Vibor-Pharma. Dr. Barbaglia has no conflicts of interest to declare. Dr. Centanni has received institutional grants for research and education from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Valeas and Boehringer Ingelheim and personal fees from Glaxo Smith Kline, Novartis, Chiesi, Menarini, AstraZeneca, Valeas, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guidotti Malesci. Dr. Desideri has no conflicts of interest to declare. Dr. Giustini has no conflicts of interest to declare. Dr. Micheletto has been a speaker, or received advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Glaxo Smith Kline, Sanofi, Novartis, Menarini, Guidotti, Chiesi, Zambon, Berlin Chemie. Dr. Musarra has received advisory board fees from Glaxo Smith Kline, AstraZeneca, Sanofi Genzyme and Mylan. Dr. Scichilone has no conflicts of interest to declare. Dr. Zedda has received institutional and personal grants for research and education from AstraZeneca, Guidotti, Menarini. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 Paggiaro et al.)

Purpose: After adolescence, asthma is more frequent in females than in males due to different hormonal, immunologic, and occupational/environmental factors. The higher prevalence and severity of the disease in females have already been reported in international registries. The aim of this study was to explore the difference in terms of clinical, functional, and biological characteristics between male and female patients with severe asthma in a real-life, registry-based setting., Methods: Baseline data from the Severe Asthma Network in Italy registry were analyzed in 1,123 patients with severe asthma, according to sex., Results: Almost 2/3 of severe asthmatics were female. Late-onset asthma, obesity and gastro-esophageal reflux were more frequent in females than in males, while previous smoking habits and nasal polyposis were more frequent in males. Females had poor asthma control and a higher number of severe exacerbations leading to hospitalization, in comparison to males. Biomarkers of type 2 inflammation (blood eosinophil, exhaled nitric oxide, and serum immunoglobulin E levels) were significantly higher in males than in females. The type 2 profile (defined by a combination of these 3 biomarkers) was significantly more frequent in males than in females. In multivariate analysis, late-onset asthma and a normal body mass index were only independent variables associated with the type 2 profile, while male sex and age showed only a trend toward the association with the type 2 profile., Conclusions: Significant differences may be observed between male and female patients with severe asthma, influencing the asthma pheno-endotyping in both sexes., Competing Interests: There are no financial or other issues that might lead to conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology · The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease.)

Background: Several severe asthma comorbidities have been identified: an emerging one is bronchiectasis. We evaluated the frequency of bronchiectasis on severe asthma in a real-life setting, through the 'Severe Asthma Network Italy' (SANI) registry., Methods: SANI registry encompasses demographic, clinical, functional and inflammatory data of Italian severe asthmatics. Data obtained by the enrolled patients were analyzed, focusing the attention on those patients with concomitant clinically relevant bronchiectasis., Results: About 15.5% patients have bronchiectasis. Bronchiectasis diagnosis was associated with a higher prevalence of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (54.6% vs. 38%, p = 0.001) and higher serum IgE levels (673.4 vs. 412.1 kUI/L, p = 0.013). Patients with bronchiectasis had worse asthma control (ACT: 16.7 vs 18.2, p = 0.013), worse quality of life (AQLQ: 4.08 vs. 4.60, p = 0.02) and lower lung function (FEV 1 % predicted 67.3 vs. 75.0, p = 0.002). A higher rate of severe asthma exacerbations in the previous 12 months (85.2% vs. 61.5%, p < 0.001) was found in patients with bronchiectasis., Conclusion: severe asthma associated with bronchiectasis represents a particularly severe asthma variant, possibly driven by an eosinophilic endotype. We, therefore, suggest that bronchiectasis should necessarily be assessed in severe asthmatic patients.

Objective: This study analysed whether the persistence of both reversible airway obstruction (RAO) and elevated BE counts was associated to reduced asthma control and accelerated lung function decline in treated severe asthmatics., Methods: About 202 severe asthmatics were studied after 12-120 months of step-5 treatment associated to anti-IgE therapy. Following treatments, reversibility tests, after inhaling 400 mcg of Salbutamol, were performed. FEV 1  > 12% or ≤12% changes differentiated RAO+ from RAO- subjects. Blood eosinophil (BE) counts after treatment were considered., Results: Pre-/post-treatment bronchodilator FEV 1 % and ACT were lower (61% [50-71], 74.4% [62.5-83.7] and 20[18-22]), whereas BE were higher (380 cells/µl [170-590]) in RAO+ compared to RAO- subjects (77% [64-88], p = 0.0001, 81.8% [66.1-94.3], p = 0.0001, 21[18-23], p = 0.045 and 230 cells/µl [80-360], p = 0.003). A negative relationship between SABA-induced FEV 1 % changes and pre-bronchodilator FEV 1 % (β = -0.551%; p = 0.0001) and ACT (β = -0.059; p = 0.038) was found. Conversely, post-treatment BE levels were positively related (β = 145.565 cells/µl; p = 0.003) to FEV 1  > 12% increases. A rising trend of pre-/post-bronchodilator FEV 1 % in time was observed in RAO- subjects with BE < 300 cells/µl. Conversely, we highlighted significant declining tendencies of pre/post-bronchodilator FEV 1 % in RAO+ patients with BE > 300 cells/µl reaching lower values after more than 36 months of step-5 treatment (59.6% [39.9-72.1] vs 74[66.5-89.2] of RAO+ individuals with BE < 300 cells/µl [p = 0.026] and 81.6% [66.1-91.8] of RAO-subjects with BE > 300 cells/µl [p = 0.009])., Conclusion: Persistent SABA-induced FEV 1  > 12%, especially when associated to BE > 300 cells/ml, may be a marker of accelerated lung function decline in severe asthmatics despite maximal step-5 treatment. The highest bronchodilation associated to the lowest BE levels should be the main goal of asthma treatment to prevent such decline., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Aims: Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) which worsen patients' health and increase healthcare spending. Aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic effect of adding mepolizumab (MEP) for the treatment of these patients., Methods: Patients >18 years old, referred to 8 asthma clinics, starting MEP between May 2017 and December 2018, were enrolled and followed-up for 12 months. Information in the 12 months before mepolizumab were collected retrospectively. The evaluation parameters included: OCS use, number of exacerbations/hospitalizations, concomitant therapies, comorbidity, and annual number of working days lost due to the disease. The primary objective was to compare the annual total cost per patient pre- and post-MEP. Secondary outcomes included rates of exacerbations and number of OCS-dependent patients., Results: 106 patients were enrolled in the study: 46 male, median age 58 years. Mean annual cost pre- and post-MEP (cost of biologic excluded) was €3996 and €1,527, respectively. Total savings due to MEP resulted in €2469 (95%CI 1945-2993), 62% due to exacerbations reduction and 33% due to productivity increase. Such savings could fund about 22% of the total cost of MEP for one year. The introduction of MEP induced a clinical benefit by reducing both OCS-dependent patients (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.06-0.23) and exacerbation rate (RR = 0.19, 95%CI 0.15-0.24)., Conclusions: Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experienced a clinical benefit in asthma control adding MEP to standard therapy. Biologic therapy can be, partially, funded by the savings produced by patients' improvement., (© 2021 The Authors.)

The risks of overusing short-acting β 2 -agonists (SABA), including an increase in asthma-related deaths, are many and well known. The Global Initiative on Asthma (GINA) 2019 and 2020 updates recommend as-needed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol as the preferred rescue medication in mild asthma as monotherapy and also in moderate to severe asthma when the maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) strategy is used. Using SABA for symptom relief, however, was the standard of treatment for many years, and consequently this practice persists, particularly in patients not taking ICS regularly. Here, we examine the rationale for this shift from a long-standing recommendation for as-needed SABA treatment to the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol and consider clinical evidence on strategies for asthma treatment and patient management.

Purpose: Patients with uncontrolled asthma despite high doses of inhaled corticosteroid therapy plus another controller are defined as severe asthmatics. Tiotropium bromide respimat (TBR) is the only long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) approved for severe asthma. The aim of this study was to explore the frequency of severe asthmatics treated with TBR and characterize their clinical features in a real-life, registry-based setting., Materials and Methods: Baseline data from the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry have been analyzed to determine the use of TBR and other LAMA, and to compare clinical, functional and inflammatory features associated with the use of LAMA., Results: Among a total of 698 enrolled patients, 35.9% were treated with LAMA (23.3% TBR, 4.5% tiotropium bromide handihaler, 4.5% aclidinium, 3.4% glycopyrronium bromide 0.3% umeclidinium bromide). Age of asthma onset was higher in patients taking LAMA, whom, compared to others were more frequently former smokers. They also had a higher annual exacerbation rate, experienced worst asthma control, worst disease-related quality of life and poorer lung function. Bronchiectasis was more frequently found in LAMA users (25.9% vs 13.1%)., Conclusion: TBR is still underused in severe asthma in a real-life setting, while a relevant proportion of patients are treated with other LAMA that are not approved for severe asthma treatment. Patients taking LAMA have features characteristic of even more severe asthma., Competing Interests: Prof. Dr. Francesco Blasi reports grants, personal fees from AstraZeneca and Insmed; received lecture-advisory board fees from Chiesi, GSK, Guidotti, Grifols, Menarini, Novartis, Pfizer, Vertex, and Zambon, outside the submitted work. Prof Pierluigi Paggiaro reports institutional support and personal grants for advisory boards and lectures from ALK-Abellò, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Guidotti, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, and Sanofi. Prof. Giorgio Walter Canonica reports grants, personal fees from Menarini, Alk-Abellò, Anallergo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Circassia, Genentech, Guidotti Malesci, GSK, Meda, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dome, Novartis, Recordati-InnuvaPharma, Roche, Sanofi, Stallergenes, UCB Pharma, Teva, AstraZeneca, ThermoFischer, Valeas, Vibor Pharma. Dr. Enrico Heffler reports grants, personal fees and/or grants from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Novartis, GSK, Circassia, and Nestlè Purina, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2020 Puggioni et al.)

According to the data derived from several national and international registries, including SANI (Severe Asthma Network Italy), and considering the strong impact that frequent or regular use of oral corticosteroid has on quality of life (QoL) of severe asthmatics, as well as on the costs for managing corticosteroid-related diseases, oral corticosteroid sparing up to withdrawal should be considered a primary outcome in the management of severe asthma. New biologics have clearly demonstrated that this effect is possible, with concomitant reduction in the rate of exacerbations and in symptom control. Then, there is no reason for using so frequently oral corticosteroid before having explored all alternatives currently available for a large part of severe asthmatics., Competing Interests: GW Canonica received in the last three years research grants as well as lecture or advisory board fees from: A. Menarini, Alk-Abello, Allergy Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Genentech, Guidotti-Malesci, Glaxo Smith Kline, Hal Allergy, Mylan, Merck, Mundipharma, Novartis, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, StallergenesGreer, UCB pharma, Uriach Pharma, Valeas, ViborPharma. F Blasi received grants and/or personal fees from: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Chiesi, Guidotti, Glaxo Smith Kline, Grifols, Insmed, Menarini, Mundifarma, Novartis, Pfizer, Zambon. PL Paggiaro received grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Guidotti, Mundipharma, Novartis, Sanofi. S Aliberti received grants and/or personal fees from Actavis UK Ltd, Aradigm Corporation, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer Healthcare, Chiesi, Grifols, Horizon, INSMED, Novartis, Raptor, Zambon. L Cosmi received personal fees from Glaxo Smith Kline and Novartis. S Centanni received grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boheringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti, Menarini, Novartis, Valeas. ME Conte received personal fees from Glaxo Smith Kline. S D’Alò received fees for clinical trials from Glaxo Smith Kline. S Del Giacco received grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Menarini. Novartis. F Puggioni received personal fees from Allergy therapeutics, Almirall, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Sanofi, Valeas. FLM Ricciardolo received grants, personal fees and/or other supports from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Guidotti, Lusofarmaco, Menarini, Neopharmed, Novartis, Sanofi, Teva. L Richeldi received personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, FibroGen, Promedior, RespiVant, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis. P Santus received grants and/or personal fees from ALK Abellò, AstraZeneca, Berlin Chemie, Boheringer Ingheleim, Menarini International, Novartis, Sanofi, Valeas, Zambon. E Heffler received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boheringer Ingheleim, Circassia, Glaxo Smith Kline, Nestlè Purina, Novartis, Sanofi, Teva, Valeas. GE Senna, G Passalacqua, A Spanevello, D Bagnasco, M Bonavia, M Bonini, L Brussino, C Bucca, MF Caiaffa, C Calabresi, G Camiciottoli, M Caminati, GE Carpagnano, C Caruso, AG Corsico, MT Costantino, N Crimi, M D'Amato, A Farsi, E Favero, MP Foschino Barbato, G Guarneri, G Guida, M Latorre, S Lo Cicero, C Lombardi, L Macchia, F Mazza, F Menzella, M Milanese, M Montagni, P Montuschi, E Nucera, R Parente, V Patella, G Pelaia, L Pini, L Ricciardi, E Ridolo, G Rolla, N Scichilone, G Spadaro, A Vianello, V Viviano, MR Yacoub, MC Zappa have nothing to disclose., (© 2020 The Authors.)

Severe asthma is an important topic in respiratory diseases, due to its high impact on morbidity and mortality as well as on health-care resources. The many challenges that still exist in the management of the most difficult-to-treat forms of the disease, and the acknowledgement of the existence of unexplored areas in the pathophysiological mechanisms and the therapeutic targets represent an opportunity to gather experts in the field with the immediate goals to summarize current understanding about the natural history of severe asthma and to identify gaps in knowledge and research opportunities, with the aim to contribute to improved medical care and health outcomes. This article is a consensus document from the "International Course on Severe Asthma" that took place in Palermo, Italy, on May 10-11, 2019. Emerging topics in severe asthma were addressed and discussed among experts, with special focus on patient's needs and research opportunities, with the aim to highlight the unanswered questions in the diagnostic process and therapeutic approach.

Background: The clinical and laboratory features of patients enrolled in the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry, a web-based observatory collecting demographic, clinical, functional and inflammatory data of patients with severe asthma were evaluated, with a special emphasis to chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP)., Methods: For each eligible patients the following information has been collected: demographic data, clinical features, asthma control in the previous month according to the GINA (Global INitiative for Asthma) Guidelines and standardized questionnaires, concomitant regular and on demand treatments and inflammatory markers., Results: 695 patients with severe asthma enrolled in 66 SANI centers were analyzed. The prevalence of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis was 40.6%. Atopic dermatitis and bronchiectasis was significantly more frequent in patients with CRSwNP than in subjects without nasal polyposis; similarly, FeNO values are significantly higher in subject with CRSwNP than in patients without nasal polyposis. Finally, patients with CRSwNP had a significantly higher number of asthma exacerbations per year, more days on oral corticosteroids and were more likely to be OCS long term users., Conclusion: OCS sparing is needed in patients with severe asthma, mainly in subjects with CRSwNP, adopting adequate strategies such as a better adherence to the treatment with inhaled therapy according to the GINA recommendations, the use of biologic agents and a multidisciplinary approach of the patient., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mepolizumab (MEP) has been recently introduced to treat severe eosinophilic asthma. Trials have demonstrated a significant effectiveness in this asthma phenotype. We evaluated MEP efficacy on lung function, symptoms, asthma exacerbations, biologic markers, steroid dependence and controller treatment level in real-life., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 134 severe asthmatics (61 males; mean age 58.3 ± 11; mean FEV 1 %:72 ± 21), treated with MEP for at least 6 months (mean duration:10.9 ± 3.7 months)., Results: FEV 1 % improved significantly after MEP. Mean FEF 25-75 also increased from 37.4 ± 25.4% to 47.2 ± 27.2% (p < 0.0001). Mean baseline blood eosinophil level was 712 ± 731/μL (8.4 ± 5.2%) decreasing to 151 ± 384/μL (1.6 ± 1.6%) (p < 0.0001), FENO levels decreased likewise. MEP treatment also led to a significant ACT improvement (mean pre:14.2 ± 4.4; mean post:20.5 ± 28) and exacerbations significantly fell from 3.8 ± 1.9 to 0.8 ± 1.1 (p < 0.0001). 74% of patients were steroid-dependent before MEP. 45.4% and 46.4% of them showed a suspension and dose reduction respectively (p < 0.0001). A significant number reduced also ICS doses. Only 67% of subjects used SABA as needed before MEP, falling to 20% after MEP. About 40% of patients highlighted a maintenance therapy step-down. Subjects showing an omalizumab treatment failure before MEP had a similar positive response when compared with omalizumab untreated patients., Conclusion: In real-life, MEP improved significantly all outcomes even small airway obstruction, suggesting its possible role also in distal lung region treatment. Furthermore, it demonstrated its high effectiveness in OC/ICS-sparing, in reducing SABA as needed and in stepping-down maintenance therapy. MEP is a valid alternative for patients with previous omalizumab treatment failure., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Severe asthma may require the prescription of one of the biologic drugs currently available, using surrogate markers of airway inflammation (serum IgE levels and allergic sensitization for anti-IgE, or blood eosinophils for anti-IL5/IL5R). Our objective: to assess upper and lower airway inflammation in severe asthmatics divided according to the eligibility criteria for one of the target biologic treatments., Methods: We selected 91 severe asthmatics, uncontrolled despite high-dose ICS-LABA, and followed for >6 months with optimization of asthma treatment. Patients underwent clinical, functional and biological assessment, including induced sputum and nasal cytology. They were then clustered according to the eligibility criteria for omalizumab or mepolizumab/benralizumab., Results: Four clusters were selected: A (eligible for omalizumab, n  = 23), AB (both omalizumab and mepolizumab, n  = 26), B (mepolizumab, n  = 22) and C (non-eligible for both omalizumab and mepolizumab, n  = 20). There was no difference among clusters for asthma control (Asthma Control Test and Asthma Control Questionnaire 7), pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s, serum IgE and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels. Sputum eosinophils were numerically higher in clusters AB and B, in agreement with the higher levels of blood eosinophils. Allergic rhinitis was more frequent in clusters A and AB, while chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps prevalence increased progressively from A to C. Eosinophils in nasal cytology were higher in clusters AB, B and C., Conclusion: Eosinophilic upper and lower airway inflammation is present in the large majority of severe asthmatics, independently from the prescription criteria for the currently available biologics, and might suggest the use of anti-IL5/IL5R or anti IL4/13 also in patients without blood eosinophilia. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section .

Background: Both inflammatory and remodelling processes are associated with irreversible airway obstruction observed in severe asthma. Our aim was to characterize a group of severe asthmatic patients with or without persistent airway obstruction in relation to specific sputum inflammatory and remodelling biomarkers., Methods: Forty-five patients under regular high-dose inhaled corticosteroid/ß-2agonist treatment were studied, after a follow-up period of at least 2 years, with a minimum of 4 visits. Periostin, TGF-ß, RANTES, IL-8, GM-CSF, FGF-2, and cell counts were measured in induced sputum. Serum periostin was also measured., Results: Sputum induction was successfully performed in all but 5 patients. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical data between patients with non-persistent obstruction (NO: FEV 1 /VC>88%pred.) and those with persistent obstruction (O: a not completely reversible obstruction with FEV 1 /VC<88%pred. at each visit before the study visit). Patients with persistent obstruction had significantly higher sputum periostin and TGF-ß concentrations than NO patients and a trend of higher serum periostin levels. GM-CSF and FGF-2 were significantly increased in NO compared to O patients. No differences between groups were found for RANTES, IL-8 and differential cell counts. Sputum periostin inversely correlated with functional parameters (prebronch. FEV 1 : rho = -0.36, p < 0.05; postbronch. FEV 1 : rho = -0.33, p = 0.05). Patients with high sputum periostin concentration (>103.3 pg/ml: median value) showed an absolute number of sputum eosinophils significantly higher than patients with low sputum periostin; this behavior was unobserved when serum periostin was considered., Conclusions: Only periostin and TGF-ß identified a subgroup of severe asthmatic patients with persistent airway obstruction. Sputum periostin was also inversely associated with FEV 1 and proved to be a more sensitive biomarker than serum periostin to identify severe asthmatics with higher sputum eosinophilia., (© 2019 The Authors.)

Background: To date, no studies have assessed the efficacy of single-inhaler triple therapy in asthma. Here we report on two studies that compared the single-inhaler extrafine combination of beclometasone dipropionate (BDP; inhaled corticosteroid), formoterol fumarate (FF; long-acting β 2 agonist), and glycopyrronium (G; long-acting muscarinic antagonist) with the combination of BDP with FF., Methods: Two parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trials (Triple in Asthma With Uncontrolled Patients on Medium Strength of ICS + LABA [TRIMARAN] and Triple in Asthma High Strength Versus ICS/LABA HS and Tiotropium [TRIGGER]) recruited patients from 171 sites across 16 countries (TRIMARAN), and from 221 sites across 17 countries (TRIGGER). The sites were a mixture of secondary and tertiary care centres and specialised investigation units. Eligible patients were adults (aged 18-75 years) with uncontrolled asthma, a history of one or more exacerbations in the previous year, and previously treated with inhaled corticosteroid (TRIMARAN: medium dose; TRIGGER: high dose) plus a long-acting β 2 agonist. Enrolled patients were initially treated with BDP/FF (TRIMARAN: 100 μg BDP and 6 μg FF; TRIGGER: 200 μg BDP and 6 μg FF) for 2 weeks, then randomly assigned to treatment using an interactive response technology system with a balanced block randomisation scheme stratified by country. Patients, investigators, site staff, and sponsor staff were masked to BDP/FF/G and BDP/FF assignment. In TRIMARAN, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to 52 weeks of BDP/FF/G (100 μg BDP, 6 μg FF, and 10 μg G) or BDP/FF (100 μg BDP and 6 μg FF), two inhalations twice daily. In TRIGGER, patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to 52 weeks of BDP/FF/G (200 μg BDP, 6 μg FF, and 10 μg G) or BDP/FF (200 BDP and 6 μg FF), both two inhalations twice daily, or open-label BDP/FF (200 μg BDP and 6 μg FF) two inhalations twice daily plus tiotropium 2·5 μg two inhalations once daily. Coprimary endpoints for both trials (BDP/FF/G vs BDP/FF) were pre-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) at week 26 and rate of moderate and severe exacerbations over 52 weeks. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. These trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02676076 (TRIMARAN), NCT02676089 (TRIGGER)., Findings: Between Feb 17, 2016, and May 17, 2018, 1155 patients in TRIMARAN were given BDP/FF/G (n=579) or BDP/FF (n=576). Between April 6, 2016, and May 28, 2018, 1437 patients in TRIGGER were given BDP/FF/G (n=573), BDP/FF (n=576), or BDP/FF plus tiotropium (n=288). Compared with the BDP/FF group, week 26 predose FEV 1 improved in the BDP/FF/G group by 57 mL (95% CI 15-99; p=0·0080) in TRIMARAN and by 73 mL (26-120; p=0·0025) in TRIGGER, with reductions in the rate of moderate and severe exacerbations of 15% (rate ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-0·99; p=0·033) in TRIMARAN and 12% (0·88, 0·75-1·03; p=0·11) in TRIGGER. Four patients had treatment-related serious adverse events, one in TRIMARAN in the BDP/FF/G group and three in TRIGGER-one in the BDP/FF/G and two in the BDP/FF group. Three patients in the BDP/FF/G group in TRIMARAN and two patients in TRIGGER-one in the BDP/FF/G group and one in the BDP/FF group-had adverse events leading to death. None of the deaths were considered as related to treatment., Interpretation: In uncontrolled asthma, addition of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist to inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting β 2 -agonist therapy improves lung function and reduces exacerbations., Funding: Chiesi Farmaceutici., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) generally have a high symptom burden and poor health-related quality of life, often requiring recurring systemic corticosteroid use and repeated sinus surgery. Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits signalling of interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, key drivers of type 2 inflammation, and has been approved for use in atopic dermatitis and asthma. In these two studies, we aimed to assess efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with CRSwNP despite previous treatment with systemic corticosteroids, surgery, or both., Methods: LIBERTY NP SINUS-24 and LIBERTY NP SINUS-52 were two multinational, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies assessing dupilumab added to standard of care in adults with severe CRSwNP. SINUS-24 was done in 67 centres in 13 countries, and SINUS-52 was done in 117 centres in 14 countries. Eligible patients were 18 years or older with bilateral CRSwNP and symptoms despite intranasal corticosteroid use, receiving systemic corticosteroids in the preceding 2 years, or having had sinonasal surgery. Patients in SINUS-24 were randomly assigned (1:1) to subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg or placebo every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. Patients in SINUS-52 were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks for 52 weeks, dupilumab every 2 weeks for 24 weeks and then every 4 weeks for the remaining 28 weeks, or placebo every 2 weeks for 52 weeks. All patients were randomly assigned centrally with a permuted block randomisation schedule. Randomisation was stratified by asthma or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease status at screening, previous surgery at screening, and country. Patients with or without comorbid asthma were included. Coprimary endpoints were changes from baseline to week 24 in nasal polyp score (NPS), nasal congestion or obstruction, and sinus Lund-Mackay CT scores (a coprimary endpoint in Japan), done in an intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in a pooled population of both dupilumab groups in SINUS-52 up to week 24 and the dupilumab group in SINUS-24 and the placebo groups in both studies until week 24. The trials are complete and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02912468 and NCT02898454., Findings: Between Dec 5, 2016, and Aug 3, 2017, 276 patients were enrolled in SINUS-24, with 143 in the dupilumab group and 133 in the placebo group receiving at least one study drug dose. Between Nov 28, 2016, and Aug 28, 2017, 448 patients were enrolled in SINUS-52, with 150 receiving at least one dose of dupilumab every 2 weeks, 145 receiving at least one dose of dupilumab every 2 weeks for 24 weeks and every 4 weeks until week 52, and 153 receiving at least one dose of placebo. Dupilumab significantly improved the coprimary endpoints in both studies. At 24 weeks, least squares mean difference in NPS of dupilumab treatment versus placebo was -2·06 (95% CI -2·43 to -1·69; p<0·0001) in SINUS-24 and -1·80 (-2·10 to -1·51; p<0·0001) in SINUS-52; difference in nasal congestion or obstruction score was -0·89 (-1·07 to -0·71; p<0·0001) in SINUS-24 and -0·87 (-1·03 to -0·71; p<0·0001) in SINUS-52; and difference in Lund-Mackay CT scores was -7·44 (-8·35 to -6·53; p<0·0001) in SINUS-24 and -5·13 (-5·80 to -4·46; p<0·0001) in SINUS-52. The most common adverse events (nasopharyngitis, worsening of nasal polyps and asthma, headache, epistaxis, and injection-site erythema) were more frequent with placebo., Interpretation: In adult patients with severe CRSwNP, dupilumab reduced polyp size, sinus opacification, and severity of symptoms and was well tolerated. These results support the benefits of adding dupilumab to daily standard of care for patients with severe CRSwNP who otherwise have few therapeutic options., Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We investigated the potential role of extracellular vesicles as biomarkers in interstitial lung diseases. Endothelial derived extracellular vesicles were enumerated in 14 consecutive patients with usual interstitial pneumonia or possible usual interstitial pneumonia, and 18 normal controls by flow cytometry. The number of endothelial derived extracellular vesicles was significantly greater in patients compared to controls [160 (73) vs. 85 (31) events/min respectively; median (interquartile range); p <0.001]. A receiving operating characteristic curve shows that an arbitrary cut-off of 104 events/min corresponded to a sensitivity of 93%, and a specificity of 83%. Endothelial cell derived extracellular vesicles are potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases., (© 2019 by the Association of Clinical Scientists, Inc.)

Tiotropium is a muscarinic antagonist that reduces the risk of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, possibly through an as yet incompletely characterized anti-inflammatory activity. We hypothesized that muscarinic activation of bronchial epithelial cells and endothelial cells causes the release of proinflammatory microparticles and that tiotropium inhibits the phenomenon. Microparticle generation was assessed by a functional assay, by flow cytometry and by NanoSight technology. Immortalized bronchial epithelial cells (16HBE) and umbilical vein endothelial cells were treated with acetylcholine in the presence of varying concentrations of tiotropium. Intracellular calcium concentration, extracellular regulated kinase phosphorylation and chemokine content in the conditioned media were assessed by commercial kits. Acetylcholine causes microparticle generation that is completely inhibited by tiotropium (50 pM). Microparticles generated by acetylcholine-stimulated cells increase the synthesis of proinflammatory mediators in an autocrine fashion. Acetylcholine-induced upregulation of microparticle generation is inhibited by an inhibitor of extracellular regulated kinase phosphorylation and by a phospholipase C inhibitor. Tiotropium blocks both extracellular regulated kinase phosphorylation and calcium mobilization, consistent with the hypothesis that the drug prevents microparticle generation through inhibition of these critical pathways. These results might contribute to explain the effect of tiotropium in reducing acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Background: Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) is a registry of patients recruited by accredited centers on severe asthma., Objective: To analyze epidemiological, clinical, inflammatory, functional, and treatment characteristics of severe asthmatics from the SANI registry., Methods: All consecutive patients with severe asthma were included into the registry, without exclusion criteria to have real-life data on demographics, asthma control, treatments (including biologics), inflammatory biomarkers, and comorbidities., Results: A total of 437 patients (mean age: 54.1 years, 57.2% females, 70.7% atopics, 94.5% in Global Initiative for Asthma severity step V) were enrolled into the study. The mean annual exacerbation rate was 3.75. The mean blood eosinophil level was 536.7 cells/mcL, and the average serum total IgE was 470.3 kU/L. Approximately 64% of patients were on regular oral corticosteroid treatment, 57% with omalizumab and 11.2% with mepolizumab. Most common comorbidities were rhinitis, nasal polyposis, and bronchiectasis. Patients with nasal polyposis had higher age of disease onset, higher blood eosinophil count, and lower frequency of atopy and atopic eczema. Bronchiectasis was associated with more frequent severe exacerbations, higher blood eosinophils, and total IgE. Stratifying patients, those with late-onset asthma were less frequently atopic (with less frequent allergic rhinitis and food allergy), and more frequently with nasal polyposis and higher serum total IgE levels., Conclusions: This study revealed a high frequency of relevant comorbidities and that a substantial proportion of patients have late-onset asthma; all these features define specific different disease phenotypes. Severe asthma complexity and comorbidities require multidisciplinary approaches, led by specifically trained pulmonologists and allergists., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Asthma is one of the most common non-communicable respiratory diseases, affecting about 6% of the general population. Severe asthma, even if afflicts a minority of asthmatics, drives the majority of costs of the disease. The aim of this study is to create a pharmacoeconomic model to predict the costs of corticosteroid-related adverse events in severe asthmatics and applying it to the first published epidemiologic data from the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry., Methods: The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Italian National Healthcare System (INHS). Model inputs, derived from literature, included: asthma epidemiology data, frequency of adverse events, percentage of severe asthma treated with OCS and adverse event cost (Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) national tariffs). We estimated costs per different patient groups: non-asthma controls, mild/moderate and severe asthmatics. Final results report estimated direct cost per patient and total direct cost for overall target population, showing economic impact related to corticosteroid complication., Results: Based on epidemiological data input, in Italy, asthmatic subjects resulted about 3,999,600, of which 199,980 with severe asthma. The number of patients with severe asthma OCS-treated was estimated at 123,988. Compared to the non-asthma control cohort and to that with moderate asthma annual cost per severe asthmatic patient resulted respectively about €892 and €606 higher, showing a corticosteroids shadow cost ranging from 45% to 30%.Applying the cost per patient to the target population identified for Italy, the budget impact model estimated a total annual cost related to OCS-related adverse events of €242.7 million for severe asthmatics. In respect with non-asthmatic and moderate population, an incremental expenditure of about € 110.6 million and €75.2, respectively, were shown., Conclusions: Our study provides the first estimates of additional healthcare costs related to corticosteroid induced adverse events in severe asthma patient. Budget impact model results highlighted the relevant economic impact of OCS-related adverse events in severe asthma patients. The future extrapolation of additional data from SANI registry will support the development of a model to investigate the role of corticosteroids sparing drugs.