Search

Christopher B Cooper,1 Robert Paine,2 Jeffrey L Curtis,3,4 Richard E Kanner,2 Carlos H Martinez,3 Catherine A Meldrum,3 Russell Bowler,5 Wanda O’Neal,6 Eric A Hoffman,7 David Couper,6 Miguel Quibrera,6 Gerald Criner,8 Mark T Dransfield,9 MeiLan K Han,3 Nadia N Hansel,10 Jerry A Krishnan,11 Stephen C Lazarus,12 Stephen P Peters,13 R Graham Barr,14 Fernando J Martinez,15 Prescott G Woodruff12 On behalf of the SPIROMICS investigators1Departments of Medicine and Physiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 3Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Division, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 4Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 5National Jewish Health, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO, USA; 6University of North Carolina Marisco Lung Institute, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 7Department of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA; 8Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 9Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; 10Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; 11Department of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; 12Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; 13Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 14Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 15Joan and Sanford I Weill Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Christopher B CooperDepartments of Medicine and Physiology,David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, 37-131 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USAEmail ccooper@mednet.ucla.eduRationale: Some COPD patients develop extreme breathlessness, decreased exercise capacity and poor health status yet respiratory disability is poorly characterized as a distinct phenotype.Objective: To define respiratory disability in COPD based on available functional measures and to determine associations with risk for exacerbations and death.Methods: We analyzed baseline data from a multi-center observational study (SPIROMICS). This analysis includes 2332 participants (472 with severe COPD, 991 with mild/moderate COPD, 726 smokers without airflow obstruction and 143 non-smoking controls).Measurements: We defined respiratory disability by ≥ 4 of 7 criteria: mMRC dyspnea scale ≥ 3; Veterans Specific Activity Questionnaire < 5; 6-minute walking distance < 250 m; St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire activity domain > 60; COPD Assessment Test > 20; fatigue (FACIT-F Trial Outcome Index) < 50; SF-12 < 20.Results: Using these criteria, respiratory disability was identified in 315 (13.5%) participants (52.1% female). Frequencies were severe COPD 34.5%; mild-moderate COPD 11.2%; smokers without obstruction 5.2% and never-smokers 2.1%. Compared with others, participants with disability had more emphysema (13.2 vs. 6.6%) and air-trapping (37.0 vs. 21.6%) on HRCT (P< 0.0001). Using principal components analysis to derive a disability score, two factors explained 71% of variance, and a cut point − 1.0 reliably identified disability. This disability score independently predicted future exacerbations (ß=0.34; CI 0.12, 0.64; P=0.003) and death (HR 2.97; CI 1.54, 5.75; P=0.001). Thus, participants with disability by this criterion had almost three times greater mortality compared to those without disability.Conclusion: Our novel SPIROMICS respiratory disability score in COPD was associated with worse airflow obstruction as well as airway wall thickening, lung parenchymal destruction and certain inflammatory biomarkers. The disability score also proved to be an independent predictor of future exacerbations and death. These findings validate disability as an important phenotype in the spectrum of COPD.Keywords: disability, frailty, exacerbation rate, mortality, SPIROMICS

Asthma is a chronic lung disease that has a high prevalence. The therapeutic intervention of this disease can be made more effective if genetic variability in patients' response to medications is implemented. However, a clear picture of the genetic architecture of asthma intervention response remains elusive. We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) to identify drug response-associated genes for asthma, in which 909 622 SNPs were genotyped for 120 randomized participants who inhaled multiple doses of glucocorticoids. By integrating pharmacodynamic properties of drug reactions, we implemented a mechanistic model to analyze the GWAS data, enhancing the scope of inference about the genetic architecture of asthma intervention. Our pharmacodynamic model observed associations of genome-wide significance between dose-dependent response to inhaled glucocorticoids (measured as %FEV1) and five loci (P=5.315 × 10(-7) to 3.924 × 10(-9)), many of which map to metabolic genes related to lung function and asthma risk. All significant SNPs detected indicate a recessive effect, at which the homozygotes for the mutant alleles drive variability in %FEV1. Significant associations were well replicated in three additional independent GWAS studies. Pooled together over these three trials, two SNPs, chr6 rs6924808 and chr11 rs1353649, display an increased significance level (P=6.661 × 10(-16) and 5.670 × 10(-11)). Our study reveals a general picture of pharmacogenomic control for asthma intervention. The results obtained help to tailor an optimal dose for individual patients to treat asthma based on their genetic makeup.

Background: Mannose-binding lectin is a collectin involved in host defense against infection. Whether mannose-binding lectin deficiency is associated with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is debated. Methods: Participants in a s

BackgroundRegular use of inhaled beta-adrenergic agonists may have adverse effects in some asthma patients. Polymorphisms of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor (beta(2)-AR) can affect its regulation; however, results of smaller studies of the effects of such polymorphisms on response to beta-agonist therapy have been inconsistent.MethodsWe examined the possible effects of polymorphisms at codons 16 (beta(2)-AR-16) and 27 (beta(2)-AR-27) on response to albuterol by genotyping 190 asthmatics who had participated in a trial of regular versus as-needed albuterol use.ResultsDuring the 16-week treatment period, patients homozygous for arginine (Arg/Arg) at beta(2)-AR-16 who used albuterol regularly had a small decline in morning peak expiratory flow (AM PEF). This effect was magnified during a 4-week run-out period, when all patients returned to as-needed albuterol only. By the end of the study, Arg/Arg subjects who had used albuterol regularly had an AM PEF 30.5 +/- 12.1 liters/min lower (p = 0.012) than Arg/Arg patients who had used albuterol as needed only. Subjects homozygous for glycine at beta(2)-AR-16 showed no such decline. Evening PEF also declined in the Arg/Arg regular but not in as-need albuterol users. No significant differences between regular and as-needed treatment were associated with polymorphisms at beta(2)-AR-27.ConclusionsPolymorphisms of the beta(2)-AR may influence airway responses to regular inhaled beta-agonist treatment.

Inhaled beta-adrenergic agonists are the most commonly used medications for the treatment of asthma although there is evidence that regular use may produce adverse effects in some patients. Polymorphisms of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor (beta(2)-AR) can affect regulation of the receptor. Smaller studies examining the effects of such polymorphisms on the response to beta-agonist therapy have produced inconsistent results. We examined whether polymorphisms at codon 16 (beta(2)-AR-16) and codon 27 (beta(2)-AR-27) of the beta(2)-AR might affect the response to regular versus as-needed use of albuterol by genotyping the 190 asthmatics who had participated in a trial examining the effects of regular versus as needed albuterol use. During the 16-wk treatment period there was a small decline in morning peak expiratory flow in patients homozygous for arginine at B(2)-AR-16 (Arg/Arg) who used albuterol regularly. This effect was magnified during a 4-wk run out period, during which all patients returned to using as-needed albuterol, so that by the end of the study Arg Arg patients who had regularly used albuterol had a morning peak expiratory flow 30. 5 +/- 12.1 L/min lower (p = 0.012) than Arg/Arg patients who had used albuterol on an as needed basis. There was no decline in peak flow with regular use of albuterol in patients who were homozygous for glycine at beta(2)-AR-16. Evening peak expiratory flow also declined in the Arg/Arg patients who used albuterol regularly but not in those who used albuterol on an as-needed basis. No significant differences in outcomes between regular and as-needed treatment were associated with polymorphisms at position 27 of the beta(2)-AR. No other differences in asthma outcomes that we investigated occurred in relation to these beta(2)-AR polymorphisms. Polymorphisms of the beta(2)-AR may influence airway responses to regular inhaled beta-agonist treatment.

Richard K Albert,1 John Connett,2 Jeffrey L Curtis,3,4 Fernando J Martinez,3 MeiLan K Han,3 Stephen C Lazarus,5 Prescott G Woodruff51Medicine Service, Denver Health and Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, 2Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 3Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 4Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, VA Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, 5Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, and Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USABackground: Mannose-binding lectin is a collectin involved in host defense against infection. Whether mannose-binding lectin deficiency is associated with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is debated.Methods: Participants in a study designed to determine if azithromycin taken daily for one year decreased acute exacerbations had serum mannose-binding lectin concentrations measured at the time of enrollment.Results: Samples were obtained from 1037 subjects (91%) in the trial. The prevalence of mannose-binding lectin deficiency ranged from 0.5% to 52.2%, depending on how deficiency was defined. No differences in the prevalence of deficiency were observed with respect to any demographic variable assessed, and no differences were observed in time to first exacerbation, rate of exacerbations, or percentage of subjects requiring hospitalization for exacerbations in those with deficiency versus those without, regardless of how deficiency was defined.Conclusion: In a large sample of subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease selected for having an increased risk of experiencing an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, only 1.9% had mannose-binding lectin concentrations below the normal range and we found no association between mannose-binding lectin concentrations and time to first acute exacerbation or frequency of acute exacerbations during one year of prospective follow-up.Keywords: COPD, acute exacerbations, mannose-binding lectin

Rationale: The function of the P2X(7) nucleotide receptor protects against exacerbation in people with mild-intermittent asthma during viral illnesses, but the impact of disease severity and maintenance therapy has not been studied.Objectives: To evaluate the association between P2X(7), asthma exacerbations, and incomplete symptom control in a more diverse population.Methods: A matched P2RX7 genetic case-control was performed with samples from Asthma Clinical Research Network trial participants enrolled before July 2006, and P2X(7) pore activity was determined in whole blood samples as an ancillary study to two trials completed subsequently.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 187 exacerbations were studied in 742 subjects, and the change in asthma symptom burden was studied in an additional 110 subjects during a trial of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose optimization. African American carriers of the minor G allele of the rs2230911 loss-of-function single nucleotide polymorphism were more likely to have a history of prednisone use in the previous 12 months, with adjustment for ICS and long-acting β(2)-agonists use (odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.2; P = 0.018). Despite medium-dose ICS, attenuated pore function predicted earlier exacerbations in incompletely controlled patients with moderate asthma (hazard ratio, 3.2; confidence interval, 1.1-9.3; P = 0.033). After establishing control with low-dose ICS in patients with mild asthma, those with attenuated pore function had more asthma symptoms, rescue albuterol use, and FEV(1) reversal (P < 0.001, 0.03, and 0.03, respectively) during the ICS adjustment phase.Conclusions: P2X(7) pore function protects against exacerbations of asthma and loss of control, independent of baseline severity and the maintenance therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: No consensus exists for adjusting inhaled corticosteroid therapy in patients with asthma. Approaches include adjustment at outpatient visits guided by physician assessment of asthma control (symptoms, rescue therapy, pulmonary function), based on exhaled nitric oxide, or on a day-to-day basis guided by symptoms.Objective: To determine if adjustment of inhaled corticosteroid therapy based on exhaled nitric oxide or day-to-day symptoms is superior to guideline-informed, physician assessment-based adjustment in preventing treatment failure in adults with mild to moderate asthma.Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, parallel, 3-group, placebo-controlled, multiply-blinded trial of 342 adults with mild to moderate asthma controlled by low-dose inhaled corticosteroid therapy (n = 114 assigned to physician assessment-based adjustment [101 completed], n = 115 to biomarker-based [exhaled nitric oxide] adjustment [92 completed], and n = 113 to symptom-based adjustment [97 completed]), the Best Adjustment Strategy for Asthma in the Long Term (BASALT) trial was conducted by the Asthma Clinical Research Network at 10 academic medical centers in the United States for 9 months between June 2007 and July 2010.Interventions: For physician assessment-based adjustment and biomarker-based (exhaled nitric oxide) adjustment, the dose of inhaled corticosteroids was adjusted every 6 weeks; for symptom-based adjustment, inhaled corticosteroids were taken with each albuterol rescue use.Main Outcome Measure: The primary outcome was time to treatment failure.Results: There were no significant differences in time to treatment failure. The 9-month Kaplan-Meier failure rates were 22% (97.5% CI, 14%-33%; 24 events) for physician assessment-based adjustment, 20% (97.5% CI, 13%-30%; 21 events) for biomarker-based adjustment, and 15% (97.5% CI, 9%-25%; 16 events) for symptom-based adjustment. The hazard ratio for physician assessment-based adjustment vs biomarker-based adjustment was 1.2 (97.5% CI, 0.6-2.3). The hazard ratio for physician assessment-based adjustment vs symptom-based adjustment was 1.6 (97.5% CI, 0.8-3.3).Conclusion: Among adults with mild to moderate persistent asthma controlled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroid therapy, the use of either biomarker-based or symptom-based adjustment of inhaled corticosteroids was not superior to physician assessment-based adjustment of inhaled corticosteroids in time to treatment failure.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00495157. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The goals of asthma care are reductions in risk and impairment, but achieving these goals requires collaborative work between patients and their clinicians. The purpose of this study was to improve inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence and asthma control by cueing therapeutic communication between patients with asthma and their primary care clinicians.Methods: We conducted a prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled effectiveness trial to assess the effect of providing visually standardized, interpreted peak flow graphs (CUE intervention) to patients and their clinicians on ICS adherence and asthma control. Asthma control outcomes were analyzed by season to account for seasonal variations in exacerbation frequency.Results: Although mean log-transformed ICS adherence was not significantly different between the two groups, there was a trend toward preserved adherence in the intervention group over time (P = .16). Intervention patients required fewer courses of oral steroids during winter (9% vs 23%, P < .001) and spring (3% and 17%, P < .001) compared with control subjects. Intervention patients also had fewer periods of worsening symptoms (65% vs 89%, P < .001) and fewer urgent care visits (10% vs 23%, P < .001) during winter compared with control subjects. Post hoc analysis showed significant improvement in the intervention group with respect to ICS adherence during winter months (P < .05), the likely explanation for the reduction in prednisone use and symptoms. Day-to-day peak flow variability in the intervention group fell consistently throughout the study from an average of 32% at baseline to 23% at final measurement (P < .001), indicating less airway reactivity over time.Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence of the value of peak flow monitoring for patients with asthma during seasons of greatest vulnerability, the cold/flu season. The peak flow information apparently led to improvements in ICS adherence resulting in less need for prednisone rescue and fewer episodes of worsening symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids administered together appear to be complementary in terms of effects on asthma control. The elements of asthma control achieved by LABAs (improved lung function) and leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs; protection against exacerbations) may be complementary as well.Objective: We sought to determine whether the combination of the LTRA montelukast and the LABA salmeterol could provide an effective therapeutic strategy for asthma.Methods and Measurements: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study of 192 subjects with moderate asthma, we compared the clinical efficacy of regular treatment over 14 weeks with the combination of montelukast and salmeterol to that with the combination of beclomethasone and salmeterol in moderate asthma. The primary efficacy outcome was time to treatment failure.Main Results: Three months after the randomization of the last subject, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board determined that the primary research question had been answered and terminated the trial. The combination of montelukast and salmeterol was inferior to the combination of beclomethasone and salmeterol as judged by protection against asthma treatment failures (p = 0.0008), lung function (26 L/min difference in a.m. peak expiratory flow rate, p = 0.011), asthma control score (0.22 difference in Asthma Control Questionnaire score, p = 0.038), and markers of inflammation and airway reactivity.Conclusions: Patients with moderate asthma similar to those we studied should not substitute the combination of an LTRA and an LABA for the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and an LABA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Several studies suggest that patients with asthma who are homozygous for arginine at the 16th position of the beta2-adrenergic receptor may not benefit from short-acting beta-agonists.Objectives: We investigated whether such genotype-specific effects occur when patients are treated with long-acting beta-agonists and whether such effects are modified by concurrent inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use.Methods: We compared salmeterol response in patients with asthma homozygous for arginine at B16 (B16Arg/Arg) with those homozygous for glycine at B16 (B16Gly/Gly) in two separate cohorts. In the first, subjects were randomized to regular therapy with salmeterol while simultaneously discontinuing ICS therapy. In the second, subjects were randomized to regular therapy with salmeterol while continuing concomitant ICS.Results: In both trials, B16Arg/Arg subjects did not benefit compared with B16Gly/Gly subjects after salmeterol was initiated. In the first cohort, compared with placebo, the addition of salmeterol was associated with a 51.4 L/min lower A.M. peak expiratory flow (PEF; p = 0.005) in B16Arg/Arg subjects(salmeterol, n = 12; placebo, n = 5) as compared with B16Gly/Gly subjects (salmeterol, n = 13; placebo, n = 13). In the second cohort, B16Arg/Arg subjects treated with salmeterol and ICS concurrently (n = 8) had a lower A.M. PEF (36.8 L/min difference, p = 0.048) than B16Gly/Gly subjects (n = 22) treated with the same regimen. In addition, B16 Arg/Arg subjects in the second cohort had lower FEV1 (0.42 L, p = 0.003), increased symptom scores (0.2 units, p = 0.034), and increased albuterol rescue use (0.95 puffs/d, p = 0.004) compared with B16Gly/Gly subjects.Conclusions: Relative to B16Gly/Gly patients with asthma, B16Arg/Arg patients with asthma may have an impaired therapeutic response to salmeterol in either the absence or presence of concurrent ICS use. Investigation of alternate treatment strategies may benefit this group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objectives: To determine if persistent airway tissue mast cells are associated with treatment failure when patients discontinue inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).Design: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Setting: Multicenter, tertiary referral centers.Patients or Participants: Forty-five subjects with asthma recruited from six medical centers in the United States.Interventions: The Asthma Clinical Research Network undertook a 28-week, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 164 subjects with clinically stable, persistent asthma. A subset of subjects (n = 45) underwent bronchoscopy with endobronchial biopsy and BAL at the end of a 6-week run-in period, during which all subjects received triamcinolone acetonide (TAA), 400 microg bid. Airway tissue mast cells, eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, and T cells were quantified morphometrically along with determination of BAL tryptase. At the end of the run-in period, subjects were then randomized to receive salmeterol (42 micro g bid), placebo, or continue TAA for 16 weeks followed by a second bronchoscopy.Measurements and Results: Outcome variables included airway tissue mast cells, eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, and T cells that were quantified morphometrically and BAL tryptase. Thirty-five subjects completed the treatment phase; an additional 10 subjects, who were randomized to either salmeterol or placebo after the run-in, had treatment failure. When the bronchoscopy results performed at the end of the run-in, prior to randomization, were analyzed, the treatment failure group demonstrated significantly more tissue mast cells as compared to the nontreatment failure group despite 6 weeks of therapy with TAA (p = 0.04). BAL tryptase was also significantly higher in the treatment failure group (p < 0.0001). Of those subjects who completed the study, tissue mast cells and BAL tryptase did not change significantly within any of the treatment groups during the treatment phase (p > 0.05).Conclusions: Persistent elevations in airway tissue mast cells and BAL tryptase after treatment with TAA predict treatment failure in patients for whom discontinuation of ICS is being considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Long-acting beta(2)-agonists are prescribed for patients with persistent asthma and are sometimes used without inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). No evidence exists, however, to support their use as monotherapy in adults with persistent asthma.Objective: To examine the effectiveness of salmeterol xinafoate, a long-acting beta(2)-agonist, as replacement therapy in patients whose asthma is well controlled by low-dose triamcinolone acetonide, an ICS.Design and Setting: A 28-week, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial conducted at 6 National Institutes of Health-sponsored, university-based ambulatory care centers from February 1997 to January 1999.Participants: One hundred sixty-four patients aged 12 through 65 years with persistent asthma that was well controlled during a 6-week run-in period of treatment with inhaled triamcinolone (400 microg twice per day).Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to continue triamcinolone therapy (400 microg twice per day; n = 54) or switch to salmeterol (42 microg twice per day; n = 54) or to placebo (n = 56) for 16 weeks, after which all patients received placebo for an additional 6-week run-out period.Main Outcome Measures: Change in morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)), self-assessed asthma symptom scores, rescue albuterol use, asthma-specific quality-of-life scores, treatment failure, asthma exacerbation, bronchial reactivity, and markers of airway inflammation, compared among the 3 treatment groups.Results: During the 16-week randomized treatment period, no significant differences between the salmeterol and triamcinolone groups were observed for conventional outcomes of clinical studies of asthma therapy-morning PEF, evening PEF, asthma symptom scores, rescue albuterol sulfate use, or quality of life. Both active treatments were superior to placebo. However, the salmeterol group had more treatment failures than the triamcinolone group (13/54 [24%] vs 3/54 [6%]; P =.004), as well as more asthma exacerbations (11/54 [20%] vs 4/54 [7%]; P =.04), greater increases in median (interquartile range) sputum eosinophils (2.4% [0.0% to 10.6%] vs -0.1% [-0.7% to 0.3%]; P<.001), eosinophil cationic protein (71 [-2 to 430] U/L vs -4 [-31 to 56] U/L; P =.005), and tryptase (3.1 [2.1 to 7.6] ng/mL vs 0.0 [0.0 to 0.7] ng/mL; P<.001). The duration of benefit when patients were switched from active treatment to placebo after 22 weeks of randomized treatment was not significantly longer in the triamcinolone group than in the salmeterol group.Conclusions: Patients with persistent asthma well controlled by low doses of triamcinolone cannot be switched to salmeterol monotherapy without risk of clinically significant loss of asthma control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Inhaled long-acting beta(2)-agonists improve asthma control when added to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy.Objective: To determine whether ICS therapy can be reduced or eliminated in patients with persistent asthma after adding a long-acting beta(2)-agonist to their treatment regimen.Design and Setting: A 24-week randomized, controlled, blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group trial conducted at 6 National Institutes of Health-sponsored, university-based ambulatory care centers from February 1997 through January 1999.Participants: One hundred seventy-five patients aged 12 through 65 years with persistent asthma that was suboptimally controlled during a 6-week run-in period of treatment with inhaled triamcinolone acetonide (400 microg twice per day).Intervention: Patients continued triamcinolone therapy and were randomly assigned to receive add-on therapy with either placebo (placebo-minus group, n = 21) or salmeterol xinafoate, 42 microg twice per day (n = 154) for 2 weeks. The entire placebo-minus group was assigned and half of the salmeterol group (salmeterol-minus group) was randomly assigned to reduce by 50% (for 8 weeks) then eliminate (for 8 weeks) triamcinolone treatment. The other half of the salmeterol group (salmeterol-plus group) was randomly assigned to continue both salmeterol and triamcinolone for the remaining 16 weeks (active control group).Main Outcome Measure: Time to asthma treatment failure in patients receiving salmeterol.Results: Treatment failure occurred in 8.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-15%) of the salmeterol-minus group 8 weeks after triamcinolone treatment was reduced compared with 2.8% (95% CI, 0%-7%) of the salmeterol-plus group during the same period. Treatment failure occurred in 46.3% (95% CI, 34%-59%) of the salmeterol-minus group 8 weeks after triamcinolone therapy was eliminated compared with 13.7% (95% CI, 5%-22%) of the salmeterol-plus group. The relative risk (95% CI) of treatment failure at the end of the triamcinolone elimination phase in the salmeterol-minus group was 4.3 (2.0-9.2) compared with the salmeterol-plus group (P<.001).Conclusions: Our results indicate that in patients with persistent asthma suboptimally controlled by triamcinolone therapy alone but whose asthma symptoms improve after addition of salmeterol, a substantial reduction (50%) in triamcinolone dose can occur without a significant loss of asthma control. However, total elimination of triamcinolone therapy results in a significant deterioration in asthma control and, therefore, cannot be recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objectives: Several methods of utilizing peak expiratory flow (PEF) and other markers of disease activity have been suggested as useful in the management of asthma. It remains unclear, however, as to which surrogate markers of disease status are discriminative indicators of treatment failure, suitable for use in clinical trials.Design: We analyzed the operating characteristics of 66 surrogate markers of treatment failure using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.Participants: Information regarding FEV(1), symptoms, beta(2)-agonist use, and PEF was available from 313 subjects previously enrolled in two Asthma Clinical Research Network trials, in which 71 treatment failures occurred (defined by a 20% fall in FEV(1) from baseline).Interventions: None.Measurements and Results: None of the measures had an acceptable ability to discriminate subjects with a > or % fall in FEV(1) from those without, regardless of the duration of the period of analysis or the criteria for test positivity employed. Areas under the ROC curves generated ranged from 0.51 to 0.79, but none were statistically superior. Sensitivity and specificity combinations were generally poor at all cutoff values; true-positive rates could not be raised without unacceptably elevating false-positive rates concurrently.Conclusions: Studies that seek to detect treatment failure defined by a significant fall in FEV(1) should not use such individual surrogate measures to estimate disease severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Some studies suggest that patients with asthma who are homozygous for arginine at the 16th amino acid position of the beta2-adrenergic receptor (B16 Arg/Arg) benefit less from treatment with longacting beta2 agonists and inhaled corticosteroids than do those homozygous for glycine (B16 Gly/Gly). We investigated whether there is a genotype-specific response to treatment with a longacting beta2 agonist in combination with inhaled corticosteroid.Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients with moderate asthma were enrolled in pairs matched for forced expiratory volume in 1 s and ethnic origin, according to whether they had the B16 Arg/Arg (n=42) or B16 Gly/Gly (n=45) genotype. Individuals in a matched pair were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive inhaled longacting beta2 agonist (salmeterol 50 microg twice a day) or placebo given in a double-blind, crossover design for two 18-week periods. Open-label inhaled corticosteroid (hydrofluoroalkane beclometasone 240 microg twice a day) was given to all participants during the treatment periods. The primary endpoint was morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00200967.Findings: After 18 weeks of treatment, mean morning PEF in Arg/Arg participants was 21.4 L/min (95% CI 11.8-31.1) higher when participants were assigned to receive salmeterol than when assigned to receive placebo (p<0.0001). In Gly/Gly participants, morning PEF was 21.5 L/min (11.0-32.1) higher when participants were assigned to receive salmeterol than when assigned to receive placebo (p<0.0001). The improvement in PEF did not differ between genotypes (difference [Arg/Arg-Gly/Gly] -0.1, -14.4 to 14.2; p=0.99). In Gly/Gly participants, methacholine PC20 (20% reduction in forced expiratory volume in 1 s; a prespecified secondary outcome) was 2.4 times higher when participants were assigned to salmeterol than when assigned to placebo (p<0.0001). Responsiveness to methacholine did not differ between salmeterol and placebo in Arg/Arg participants (p=0.87). The 2.5 times higher genotype-specific difference in responsiveness to methacholine was significant (1.32 doubling dose difference between genotypes, 0.43-2.21, p=0.0038). Seven Arg/Arg participants (placebo, n=5; salmeterol, n=2) and six Gly/Gly participants (placebo, n=3; salmeterol, n=3) had an asthma exacerbation. Five serious adverse events were reported, one each during the pre-match and run-in phases on open-label inhaled corticosteroid, two during double-blind treatment with salmeterol/inhaled corticosteroid, and one during double-blind treatment with placebo/inhaled corticosteroid. None of the serious events was asthma-related or related to study drugs or procedures.Interpretation: In asthma patients with B16 Arg/Arg and B16 Gly/Gly genotypes, combination treatment with salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroid improved airway function when compared with inhaled corticosteroid therapy alone. These findings suggest that patients should continue to be treated with longacting beta2 agonists plus moderate-dose inhaled corticosteroids irrespective of B16 genotype. Further investigation is needed to establish the importance of the genotype-specific difference in responsiveness to methacholine.Funding: National Institutes of Health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although guidelines recommend daily therapy for patients with mild persistent asthma, prescription patterns suggest that most such patients use these so-called controller therapies intermittently. In patients with mild persistent asthma, we evaluated the efficacy of intermittent short-course corticosteroid treatment guided by a symptom-based action plan alone or in addition to daily treatment with either inhaled budesonide or oral zafirlukast over a one-year period.Methods: In a double-blind trial, 225 adults underwent randomization. The primary outcome was morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Other outcomes included the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) before and after bronchodilator treatment, the frequency of exacerbations, the degree of asthma control, the number of symptom-free days, and the quality of life.Results: The three treatments produced similar increases in morning PEF (7.1 to 8.3 percent; approximately 32 liters per minute; P=0.90) and similar rates of asthma exacerbations (P=0.24), even though the intermittent-treatment group took budesonide, on average, for only 0.5 week of the year. As compared with intermittent therapy or daily zafirlukast therapy, daily budesonide therapy produced greater improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 (P=0.005), bronchial reactivity (P<0.001), the percentage of eosinophils in sputum (P=0.007), exhaled nitric oxide levels (P=0.006), scores for asthma control (P<0.001), and the number of symptom-free days (P=0.03), but not in post-bronchodilator FEV1 (P=0.29) or in the quality of life (P=0.18). Daily zafirlukast therapy did not differ significantly from intermittent treatment in any outcome measured.Conclusions: It may be possible to treat mild persistent asthma with short, intermittent courses of inhaled or oral corticosteroids taken when symptoms worsen. Further studies are required to determine whether this novel approach to treatment should be recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: While β-blockers are associated with decreased mortality in cardiovascular disease (CVD), exacerbation-prone patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who received metoprolol in the Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (BLOCK-COPD) trial experienced increased risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization. However, the study excluded individuals with established indications for the drug, raising questions about the overall risk and benefit in patients with COPD following acute myocardial infarction (AMI)., Objective: To investigate whether β-blocker prescription at hospital discharge is associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study with 6 months of follow-up enrolled patients aged 35 years or older with COPD who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI at 18 BLOCK-COPD network hospitals in the US from June 2020 through May 2022., Exposure: Prescription for any β-blocker at hospital discharge., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to the composite outcome of death or all-cause hospitalization or revascularization. Secondary outcomes included death, hospitalization, or revascularization for CVD events, death or hospitalization for COPD or respiratory events, and treatment for COPD exacerbations., Results: Among 3531 patients who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI, prevalence of COPD was 17.1% (95% CI, 15.8%-18.4%). Of 579 total patients with COPD and AMI, 502 (86.7%) were prescribed a β-blocker at discharge. Among the 562 patients with COPD included in the final analysis, median age was 70.0 years (range, 38.0-94.0 years) and 329 (58.5%) were male; 553 of the 579 patients (95.5%) had follow-up information. Among those discharged with β-blockers, there was no increased risk of the primary end point of all-cause mortality, revascularization, or hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66-1.54; P = .96) or of cardiovascular events (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.65-1.92; P = .69), COPD-related or respiratory events (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.66; P = .48), or treatment for COPD exacerbations (rate ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.53-1.91; P = .98)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, β-blocker prescription at hospital discharge was not associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI. These findings support use of β-blockers in patients with COPD and recent AMI.

Background: A multicenter clinical trial in patients with mild persistent asthma indicated that response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is limited to those with sputum eosinophilia. However, testing for sputum eosinophilia is impractical in most clinical settings., Objective: We examined associations between sputum eosinophilia and type 2 inflammatory biomarkers in untreated mild persistent asthma., Methods: Induced sputum, blood eosinophil count (BEC), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and serum periostin were obtained twice during the 6-week run-in period in a clinical trial that enrolled patients 12 years and older with symptomatic, mild persistent asthma without controller therapy. The optimal threshold for each biomarker was based on achieving 80% or greater sensitivity. Performance of biomarkers (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC], range 0.0-1.0) in predicting sputum eosinophilia 2% or greater was determined; AUCs of 0.8 to 0.9 and more than 0.9 define excellent and outstanding discrimination, respectively., Results: Of 564 participants, 27% were sputum eosinophilic, 83% were atopic, 70% had BEC of 200/uL or higher or FeNO of 25 ppb or greater; 64% of participants without sputum eosinophilia had elevated BEC or FeNO. The AUCs for BEC, FeNO, and both together in predicting sputum eosinophilia were all below the threshold for excellent discrimination (AUC 0.75, 0.78, and 0.79, respectively). Periostin (in adults) had poor discrimination (AUC 0.59; P = .02)., Conclusions: In untreated mild persistent asthma, there is substantial discordance between sputum eosinophilia, BEC, and FeNO. Until prospective trials test the ability of alternative biomarkers to predict ICS response, BEC or FeNO phenotyping may be an option to consider ICS through a shared decision-making process with consideration of other clinical features., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Importance: People who smoked cigarettes may experience respiratory symptoms without spirometric airflow obstruction. These individuals are typically excluded from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials and lack evidence-based therapies., Objective: To define the natural history of persons with tobacco exposure and preserved spirometry (TEPS) and symptoms (symptomatic TEPS)., Design, Setting, and Participants: SPIROMICS II was an extension of SPIROMICS I, a multicenter study of persons aged 40 to 80 years who smoked cigarettes (>20 pack-years) with or without COPD and controls without tobacco exposure or airflow obstruction. Participants were enrolled in SPIROMICS I and II from November 10, 2010, through July 31, 2015, and followed up through July 31, 2021., Exposures: Participants in SPIROMICS I underwent spirometry, 6-minute walk distance testing, assessment of respiratory symptoms, and computed tomography of the chest at yearly visits for 3 to 4 years. Participants in SPIROMICS II had 1 additional in-person visit 5 to 7 years after enrollment in SPIROMICS I. Respiratory symptoms were assessed with the COPD Assessment Test (range, 0 to 40; higher scores indicate more severe symptoms). Participants with symptomatic TEPS had normal spirometry (postbronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1] to forced vital capacity >0.70) and COPD Assessment Test scores of 10 or greater. Participants with asymptomatic TEPS had normal spirometry and COPD Assessment Test scores of less than 10. Patient-reported respiratory symptoms and exacerbations were assessed every 4 months via phone calls., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was assessment for accelerated decline in lung function (FEV1) in participants with symptomatic TEPS vs asymptomatic TEPS. Secondary outcomes included development of COPD defined by spirometry, respiratory symptoms, rates of respiratory exacerbations, and progression of computed tomographic-defined airway wall thickening or emphysema., Results: Of 1397 study participants, 226 had symptomatic TEPS (mean age, 60.1 [SD, 9.8] years; 134 were women [59%]) and 269 had asymptomatic TEPS (mean age, 63.1 [SD, 9.1] years; 134 were women [50%]). At a median follow-up of 5.76 years, the decline in FEV1 was -31.3 mL/y for participants with symptomatic TEPS vs -38.8 mL/y for those with asymptomatic TEPS (between-group difference, -7.5 mL/y [95% CI, -16.6 to 1.6 mL/y]). The cumulative incidence of COPD was 33.0% among participants with symptomatic TEPS vs 31.6% among those with asymptomatic TEPS (hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.46]). Participants with symptomatic TEPS had significantly more respiratory exacerbations than those with asymptomatic TEPS (0.23 vs 0.08 exacerbations per person-year, respectively; rate ratio, 2.38 [95% CI, 1.71 to 3.31], P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Participants with symptomatic TEPS did not have accelerated rates of decline in FEV1 or increased incidence of COPD vs those with asymptomatic TEPS, but participants with symptomatic TEPS did experience significantly more respiratory exacerbations over a median follow-up of 5.8 years.

Background: Patients with mild asthma are believed to represent the majority of patients with asthma. Disease-associated risks such as exacerbations, lung function decline, and death have been understudied in this patient population. There have been no prior efforts from major societies to describe research needs in mild asthma. Methods: A multidisciplinary, diverse group of 24 international experts reviewed the literature, identified knowledge gaps, and provided research recommendations relating to mild asthma definition, pathophysiology, and management across all age groups. Research needs were also investigated from a patient perspective, generated in conjunction with patients with asthma, caregivers, and stakeholders. Of note, this project is not a systematic review of the evidence and is not a clinical practice guideline. Results: There are multiple unmet needs in research on mild asthma driven by large knowledge gaps in all areas. Specifically, there is an immediate need for a robust mild asthma definition and an improved understanding of its pathophysiology and management strategies across all age groups. Future research must factor in patient perspectives. Conclusions: Despite significant advances in severe asthma, there remain innumerable research areas requiring urgent attention in mild asthma. An important first step is to determine a better definition that will accurately reflect the heterogeneity and risks noted in this group. This research statement highlights the topics of research that are of the highest priority. Furthermore, it firmly advocates the need for engagement with patient groups and for more support for research in this field.

Rationale: There are no pharmacologic agents that modify emphysema progression in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of losartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, to reduce emphysema progression. Methods: The trial was a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted between May 2017 and January 2021. Eligible participants were aged ⩾40 years, had moderate to severe airflow obstruction, ⩾10 pack-years of smoking, mild-moderate emphysema on high-resolution computed tomography, and no medical indication for or intolerance of angiotensin receptor blockers. Treatment with losartan 100 mg daily or matching placebo (1:1) was randomly assigned. The primary outcome was emphysema progression on high-resolution computed tomography over 48 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, the COPD Assessment Test, and the Physical Function-Short Form 20a. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 220 participants were enrolled; 58% were men, 19% were African American, and 24% were current smokers. The medians (interquartile ranges) for age were 65 (61-73) years and 48 (36-59) for percent predicted FEV 1 after bronchodilator use. The mean (95% confidence interval) percentage emphysema progression was 1.35% (0.67-2.03) in the losartan group versus 0.66% (0.09-1.23) in the placebo group ( P  = NS). Conclusions: Losartan did not prevent emphysema progression in people with COPD with mild-moderate emphysema. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02696564).

Rationale: The BLOCK COPD (β-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) study found that metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of severe exacerbation. Objectives: To determine the mechanism underlying these results, we compared changes in lung function over the course of the study between treatment groups and evaluated whether baseline bronchodilator response or early reduction in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) or forced vital capacity (FVC) was associated with exacerbation risk. Methods: We compared changes in lung function (FEV 1 and FVC) over the treatment period between treatment groups using linear mixed-effect models. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between baseline bronchodilator responsiveness (FEV 1 , FVC, and combined FEV 1 and FVC), early post-randomization (14 d) change in lung function, and the interaction between treatment assignment and these measures with risk of any or severe or very severe exacerbations. Negative binomial models were used to evaluate the relationship between bronchodilator responsiveness, the interaction between bronchodilator responsiveness and treatment assignment, and exacerbation rate. Results: Over the 336-day treatment period, individuals in the metoprolol group had a significantly greater decrease in logarithmic FEV 1 from baseline to visit on Day 28 than individuals in the placebo group. Individuals in the metoprolol group had a significantly greater decrease in FVC from baseline to visits on Days 14 and 28, and also a significantly greater decrease in logarithmic FVC from baseline to visits on Days 42 and 112 than individuals in the placebo group. There were no associations between early lung function reduction or interactions between lung function reduction and treatment assignment and time to any or severe or very severe exacerbations. There were no interactions between treatment arm and baseline bronchodilator responsiveness measures on risk or rate of exacerbations. However, those with baseline FVC bronchodilator responsiveness had a higher rate of severe or very severe exacerbations (adjusted rate ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.48). Conclusions: Metoprolol was associated with reduced lung function during the early part of the treatment period, but these effects were modest and did not persist. Early lung function reduction and baseline bronchodilator responsiveness did not interact with the treatment arm to predict exacerbations; however, baseline FVC bronchodilator responsiveness was associated with a 60% higher rate of severe or very severe exacerbations. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02587351).

Background: Many persons with a history of smoking tobacco have clinically significant respiratory symptoms despite an absence of airflow obstruction as assessed by spirometry. They are often treated with medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but supporting evidence for this treatment is lacking., Methods: We randomly assigned persons who had a tobacco-smoking history of at least 10 pack-years, respiratory symptoms as defined by a COPD Assessment Test score of at least 10 (scores range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms), and preserved lung function on spirometry (ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV 1 ] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ≥0.70 and FVC ≥70% of the predicted value after bronchodilator use) to receive either indacaterol (27.5 μg) plus glycopyrrolate (15.6 μg) or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was at least a 4-point decrease (i.e., improvement) in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse health status) after 12 weeks without treatment failure (defined as an increase in lower respiratory symptoms treated with a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator, glucocorticoid, or antibiotic agent)., Results: A total of 535 participants underwent randomization. In the modified intention-to-treat population (471 participants), 128 of 227 participants (56.4%) in the treatment group and 144 of 244 (59.0%) in the placebo group had at least a 4-point decrease in the SGRQ score (difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -11.6 to 6.3; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.37; P = 0.65). The mean change in the percent of predicted FEV 1 was 2.48 percentage points (95% CI, 1.49 to 3.47) in the treatment group and -0.09 percentage points (95% CI, -1.06 to 0.89) in the placebo group, and the mean change in the inspiratory capacity was 0.12 liters (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18) in the treatment group and 0.02 liters (95% CI, -0.03 to 0.08) in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events occurred in the treatment group, and 11 occurred in the placebo group; none were deemed potentially related to the treatment or placebo., Conclusions: Inhaled dual bronchodilator therapy did not decrease respiratory symptoms in symptomatic, tobacco-exposed persons with preserved lung function as assessed by spirometry. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; RETHINC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867761.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Rationale: Whether biomarkers can be used to predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in mild persistent asthma is unclear. Objectives: In a prespecified exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial of 295 participants 12 years of age or older with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma, we sought to identify biomarkers of treatment response after 12 weeks of ICS (mometasone, 200 μg or 220 μg twice/d), LAMA (tiotropium, 5 μg/d), or placebo in adults (⩾18 yr) and adolescents (12-17 yr) separately. Methods: The primary outcome was a composite outcome of asthma control (treatment failure, asthma control days, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV 1 ]). Analyses examined type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiologic biomarkers. We assessed the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for response to ICS and LAMA (each versus placebo). An AUC of 0.5 suggests no discrimination, 0.7-0.8 is considered acceptable, more than 0.8-0.9 is considered excellent, and more than 0.9 is considered outstanding. Results: In 237 adults, sputum and blood eosinophil levels and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (Fe NO ) each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-0.69], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.56-0.72], and 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70], respectively; all P  < 0.01); the AUC for blood eosinophil levels and Fe NO together was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.74; P  < 0.001). In 58 adolescents, the number of positive aeroallergens and total serum immunoglobulin E each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.85] and 0.73 [95% CI, 0.58-0.87], respectively; both P  < 0.03); the AUC for both together was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.87; P  = 0.003). After ipratropium bromide, FEV 1 reversibility predicted LAMA response in adults (AUC: 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.69], P  = 0.007) but not in adolescents. Conclusions: The AUCs of the type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiological biomarkers we examined may not be high enough to confidently identify individuals with asthma who respond to ICS and LAMA. However, our findings indicate that the biomarkers that predict response to ICS or LAMA may differ in adults versus adolescents with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma. Prospective, biomarker-stratified clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and to identify first-line controllers tailored for each population.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an age-related condition that has been associated with early telomere attrition; the clinical implications of telomere shortening in COPD are not well known. In this study we aimed to determine the relationship of the epigenetic regulation of telomeric length in peripheral blood with the risk of exacerbations and hospitalization in patients with COPD., Methods: Blood DNA methylation profiles were obtained from 292 patients with COPD enrolled in the placebo arm of the Macrolide Azithromycin to Prevent Rapid Worsening of Symptoms Associated with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (MACRO) Study and who were followed for 1-year. We calculated telomere length based on DNA methylation markers (DNAmTL) and related this biomarker to the risk of exacerbation and hospitalization and health status (St. George Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]) score over time using a Cox proportional hazards model. We also used linear models to investigate the associations of DNAmTL with the rates of exacerbation and hospitalization (adjusted for chronological age, lung function, race, sex, smoking, body mass index and cell composition)., Results: Participants with short DNAmTL demonstrated increased risk of exacerbation (P = 0.02) and hospitalization (P = 0.03) compared to those with longer DNAmTL. DNAmTL age acceleration was associated with higher rates of exacerbation (P = 1.35 × 10 -04 ) and hospitalization (P = 5.21 × 10 -03 ) and poor health status (lower SGRQ scores) independent of chronological age (P = 0.03)., Conclusion: Telomeric age based on blood DNA methylation is associated with COPD exacerbation and hospitalization and thus a promising biomarker for poor outcomes in COPD., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Pharmacogenetic studies in asthma cohorts, primarily made up of White people of European descent, have identified loci associated with response to inhaled beta agonists and corticosteroids (ICSs). Differences exist in how individuals from different ancestral backgrounds respond to long-acting beta agonist (LABA) and ICSs. Therefore, we sought to understand the pharmacogenetic mechanisms regulating therapeutic responsiveness in individuals of African descent., Methods: We did ancestry-based pharmacogenetic studies of children (aged 5-11 years) and adolescents and adults (aged 12-69 years) from the Best African Response to Drug (BARD) trials, in which participants with asthma uncontrolled with low-dose ICS (fluticasone propionate 50 μg in children, 100 μg in adolescents and adults) received different step-up combination therapies. The hierarchal composite outcome of pairwise superior responsiveness in BARD was based on asthma exacerbations, a 31-day difference in annualised asthma-control days, or a 5% difference in percentage predicted FEV 1 . We did whole-genome admixture mapping of 15 159 ancestral segments within 312 independent regions, stratified by the two age groups. The two co-primary outcome comparisons were the step up from low-dose ICS to the quintuple dose of ICS (5 × ICS: 250 μg twice daily in children and 500 μg twice daily in adolescents and adults) versus double dose (2-2·5 × ICS: 100 μg twice daily in children, 250 μg twice daily in adolescents and adults), and 5 × ICS versus 100 μg fluticasone plus a LABA (salmeterol 50 μg twice daily). We used a genome-wide significance threshold of p<1·6 × 10 -4 , and tested for replication using independent cohorts of individuals of African descent with asthma., Findings: We included 249 unrelated children and 267 unrelated adolescents and adults in the BARD pharmacogenetic analysis. In children, we identified a significant admixture mapping peak for superior responsiveness to 5 × ICS versus 100 μg fluticasone plus salmeterol on chromosome 12 (odds ratio [OR local African ] 3·95, 95% CI 2·02-7·72, p=6·1 × 10 -5 ) fine mapped to a locus adjacent to RNFT2 and NOS1 (rs73399224, OR allele dose 0·17, 95% CI 0·07-0·42, p=8·4 × 10 -5 ). In adolescents and adults, we identified a peak for superior responsiveness to 5 × ICS versus 2·5 × ICS on chromosome 22 (OR local African 3·35, 1·98-5·67, p=6·8 × 10 -6 ) containing a locus adjacent to TPST2 (rs5752429, OR allele dose 0·21, 0·09-0·52, p=5·7 × 10 -4 ). We replicated rs5752429 and nominally replicated rs73399224 in independent African American cohorts., Interpretation: BARD is the first genome-wide pharmacogenetic study of LABA and ICS response in clinical trials of individuals of African descent to detect and replicate genome-wide significant loci. Admixture mapping of the composite BARD trial outcome enabled the identification of novel pharmacogenetic variation accounting for differential therapeutic responses in people of African descent with asthma., Funding: National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests VEO reports consulting fees from Sanofi and fees for serving on independent data monitoring committees for Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. SJS reports receiving consulting fees, paid to his institution, from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Moderna, Propeller Health, Regeneron, and Sanofi, as well as a research grant from Propeller Health. ERB reports receiving consulting fees and donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, donated drugs from Merck and Teva Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees from AstraZeneca, MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Sanofi–Regeneron, and participating in trials as an employee of Wake Forest School of Medicine and the University of Arizona for AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cephalon–Teva Pharmaceuticals, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), Novartis, and Sanofi–Regeneron. VMC reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. WP reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. DM reports receiving grant support and donated drugs from GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Vifor Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support from Sanofi and AstraZeneca, fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Novartis, and donated drugs from Merck. FDM reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support from Johnson & Johnson, and consulting fees from Copeval and Commence. EH-L reports a fellowship from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities. MP-Y reports grants from the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Competitiveness, the State Research Agency and the European Regional Development Funds from the European Union (MICIU/AEI/FEDER, UE), and grant support from GlaxoSmithKline, Spain. SJK reports receiving donated drugs from Merck–Organon, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, and Regeneron and owning stock in Merck. LBB reports receiving consulting fees and lecture fees from Aerocrine, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech–Novartis, and AstraZeneca, advisory board fees and donated drugs from Merck, fees for serving on a data safety monitoring board from DBV Technologies, consulting fees, lecture fees, and donated drugs from Teva Pharmaceuticals and Boehringer Ingelheim, honoraria from WebMD–Medscape, advisory board fees and lecture fees from Sanofi–Regeneron, advisory board fees and consulting fees from Vectura, and advisory board fees from Circassia. MDC reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, and consulting fees from Genentech and Novartis. JCC reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. MC reports receiving grant support, lecture fees, and donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, donated drugs from Merck, consulting fees, lecture fees, and donated drugs from Teva Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees and lecture fees from Boston Scientific and Genentech, consulting fees from Nuvaira, Aviragen, 4D Pharma, VIDA Diagnostics, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Theravance, Therabron, and Vectura, grant support, consulting fees, and lecture fees from Sanofi-Aventis, grant support and lecture fees from AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline, grant support from Chiesi and Novartis, and lecture fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. LCD reports receiving grant support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, and consulting fees from Sanofi–Regeneron. FH reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. DJJ reports grant support from GlaxoSmithKline, consulting fees from Novartis, Sanofi, Regeneron, Vifor Pharma, and AstraZeneca, and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Pfizer. NJ reports receiving honorarium for consulting from GlaxoSmithKline pharmaceuticals and Pulmocide. MK reports receiving grant support from Chiesi and Sanofi. JAK reports personal fees for independent data monitoring committee participation from Sanofi and research funding from the American Lung Association—Airway Clinical Research Centers Network. SCL reports grant funding from the American Lung Association—Airway Clinical Research Centers Network. RFL reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, and lecture fees from Thermo Fisher Scientific. JJL reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. NL reports receiving grant support, advisory board fees, and donated drugs from GlaxoSmithKline, grant support, consulting fees, and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, consulting fees, advisory board fees, and donated drugs from Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support from Genentech, grant support and advisory board fees from Sanofi–Regeneron, and donated drugs from Merck and Boehringer Ingelheim. WCM reports receiving grant support and donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, donated drugs from Merck and Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, and Sanofi–Regeneron, and grant support from Novartis, Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, and Gossamer Bio. SPP reports receiving advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi–Regeneron, and Theravance, fees for serving as clinical trial adjudicator from Quintiles, fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Genentech, fees for serving as chair of a data and safety monitoring board from Novartis, and honoraria from PRIME. JAP reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline. LJS reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim and Teva Pharmaceuticals, and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board and donated drugs from Merck. JS reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, advisory board fees from PulmOne Advanced Medical Devices, advisory board fees, honoraria, and travel support from Regeneron–Sanofi–Genzyme, holding patents #6 090 618, #6 114 311, #6 284 743, #6 291 211, #6 297 221, #6 331 527, and #7 169 764 on a smooth-muscle gene promoter (SM22 alpha), holding pending patent PCT/US2014/032186 on a method for determining respiratory physiological parameters, holding pending patent 62/872,980 on remodilins for airway remodelling and organ fibrosis, and holding pending patent 62/828,122 on remodilins to prevent or treat cancer metastasis, glaucoma, and hypoxia. CAS reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. SW reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Sanofi, and consulting fees from Pieris Pharmaceuticals. DAM reports receiving donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. EI reports receiving grant support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Genentech, consulting fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Bird Rock Bio, Nuvelution Pharmaceuticals, Vitaeris, Sanofi Genzyme, Entrinsic Health Solutions, Pneuma Respiratory, 4D Pharma, Sienna Biopharmaceuticals, and Equillium, grant support, consulting fees, and donated drugs from Merck, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, and GlaxoSmithKline, serving as a consultant for Vorso, receiving grant support and donated drugs from Vifor Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Teva Pharmaceuticals, grant support from Sanofi and AstraZeneca, and donated drugs from Circassia. MEW reports receiving grant support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, and GlaxoSmithKline, consulting fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Mylan, Genentech, Restorbio, Equillium, Boston Scientific, Genzyme, Gala Therapeutics, and Pulmatrix, fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Sentien Biotechnologies, grant support, consulting fees, advisory board fees, and donated drugs from Teva Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees and donated drugs from Boehringer Ingelheim and Merck. MD, GAH, EJA CC, CE, AMF, DH, AM, ETN, SPS, MAS, SRW, EGB, and KB declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Age and vitamin D levels may affect symptom burden in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We used the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) to determine independent associations between vitamin D levels and COPD symptoms in different age strata., Methods: Serum 25-hydroxy (OH)-vitamin D levels were modeled continuously and categorically (<20 ng/ml versus ≥20 ng/ml). Stratifying by age group (middle-age: 40-64 years old and older: >65 years old), multivariable modeling was performed to identify relationships between 25-OH-vitamin D levels and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), the modified Medical Research Council score (mMRC), the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total and subdomain scores, the Veterans' Specific Activity Questionnaire, and the 6-minute walk test distance., Results: InIn the middle-aged group, each 5 ng/ml higher 25-OH-vitamin D level was independently associated with more favorable CAT score (-0.35 [-0.67 to -0.03], P =0.03), total SGRQ (-0.91 [-1.65 to -0.17]; P =0.02), and the SGRQ subdomains (Symptoms:-1.07 [-1.96 to -0.18], P =0.02; Impact: -0.77 [-1.53 to -0.003], P =0.049; Activity: -1.07 [-1.96 to -0.18], P =0.02). These associations persisted after the addition of comorbidity score, reported vitamin D supplementation, outdoor time, or season of blood draw to models. No associations were observed between 25-OH-vitamin D levels and symptom scores in the older age group., Discussion: When controlled for clinically relevant covariates, higher 25-OH-vitamin D levels are associated with more favorable respiratory-specific symptoms and quality-of-life assessments in middle-age but not older COPD individuals. Study of the role of vitamin D supplementation in the symptom burden of younger COPD patients is needed., (JCOPDF © 2021.)

Rationale: The relative roles of mucus plugs and emphysema in mechanisms of airflow limitation and hypoxemia in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are uncertain. Objectives: To relate image-based measures of mucus plugs and emphysema to measures of airflow obstruction and oxygenation in patients with COPD. Methods: We analyzed computed tomographic (CT) lung images and lung function in participants in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study. Radiologists scored mucus plugs on CT lung images, and imaging software automatically quantified emphysema percentage. Unadjusted and adjusted relationships between mucus plug score, emphysema percentage, and lung function were determined using regression. Measurements and Main Results: Among 400 smokers, 229 (57%) had mucus plugs and 207 (52%) had emphysema, and subgroups could be identified with mucus-dominant and emphysema-dominant disease. Only 33% of smokers with high mucus plug scores had mucus symptoms. Mucus plug score and emphysema percentage were independently associated with lower values for FEV 1 and peripheral oxygen saturation ( P  < 0.001). The relationships between mucus plug score and lung function outcomes were strongest in smokers with limited emphysema ( P  < 0.001). Compared with smokers with low mucus plug scores, those with high scores had worse COPD Assessment Test scores (17.4 ± 7.7 vs. 14.4 ± 13.3), more frequent annual exacerbations (0.75 ± 1.1 vs. 0.43 ± 0.85), and shorter 6-minute-walk distance (329 ± 115 vs. 392 ± 117 m) ( P  < 0.001). Conclusions: Symptomatically silent mucus plugs are highly prevalent in smokers and independently associate with lung function outcomes. These data provide rationale for targeting patients with mucus-high/emphysema-low COPD in clinical trials of mucoactive treatments.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01969344).

Background: Hypogammaglobulinemia (serum IgG levels < 7.0 g/L) has been associated with increased risk of COPD exacerbations but has not yet been shown to predict hospitalizations., Research Question: To determine the relationship between hypogammaglobulinemia and the risk of hospitalization in patients with COPD., Study Design and Methods: Serum IgG levels were measured on baseline samples from four COPD cohorts (n = 2,259): Azithromycin for Prevention of AECOPD (MACRO, n = 976); Simvastatin in the Prevention of AECOPD (STATCOPE, n = 653), Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial (LOTT, n = 354), and COPD Activity: Serotonin Transporter, Cytokines and Depression (CASCADE, n = 276). IgG levels were determined by immunonephelometry (MACRO; STATCOPE) or mass spectrometry (LOTT; CASCADE). The effect of hypogammaglobulinemia on COPD hospitalization risk was evaluated using cumulative incidence functions for this outcome and deaths (competing risk). Fine-Gray models were performed to obtain adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) related to IgG levels for each study and then combined using a meta-analysis. Rates of COPD hospitalizations per person-year were compared according to IgG status., Results: The overall frequency of hypogammaglobulinemia was 28.4%. Higher incidence estimates of COPD hospitalizations were observed among participants with low IgG levels compared with those with normal levels (Gray's test, P < .001); pooled SHR (meta-analysis) was 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.56, P = .01). Among patients with prior COPD admissions (n = 757), the pooled SHR increased to 1.58 (95% CI, 1.20-2.07, P < .01). The risk of COPD admissions, however, was similar between IgG groups in patients with no prior hospitalizations: pooled SHR = 1.15 (95% CI, 0.86-1.52, P =.34). The hypogammaglobulinemia group also showed significantly higher rates of COPD hospitalizations per person-year: 0.48 ± 2.01 vs 0.29 ± 0.83, P < .001., Interpretation: Hypogammaglobulinemia is associated with a higher risk of COPD hospital admissions., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Observational studies suggest that beta-blockers may reduce the risk of exacerbations and death in patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but these findings have not been confirmed in randomized trials., Methods: In this prospective, randomized trial, we assigned patients between the ages of 40 and 85 years who had COPD to receive either a beta-blocker (extended-release metoprolol) or placebo. All the patients had a clinical history of COPD, along with moderate airflow limitation and an increased risk of exacerbations, as evidenced by a history of exacerbations during the previous year or the prescribed use of supplemental oxygen. We excluded patients who were already taking a beta-blocker or who had an established indication for the use of such drugs. The primary end point was the time until the first exacerbation of COPD during the treatment period, which ranged from 336 to 350 days, depending on the adjusted dose of metoprolol., Results: A total of 532 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 65.0±7.8 years; the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) was 41.1±16.3% of the predicted value. The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safety concerns. There was no significant between-group difference in the median time until the first exacerbation, which was 202 days in the metoprolol group and 222 days in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metoprolol vs. placebo, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; P = 0.66). Metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of exacerbation leading to hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.83). The frequency of side effects that were possibly related to metoprolol was similar in the two groups, as was the overall rate of nonrespiratory serious adverse events. During the treatment period, there were 11 deaths in the metoprolol group and 5 in the placebo group., Conclusions: Among patients with moderate or severe COPD who did not have an established indication for beta-blocker use, the time until the first COPD exacerbation was similar in the metoprolol group and the placebo group. Hospitalization for exacerbation was more common among the patients treated with metoprolol. (Funded by the Department of Defense; BLOCK COPD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02587351.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Minority groups of African descent experience disproportionately greater asthma morbidity compared with other racial groups, suggesting that genetic variation from a common ancestry could influence exacerbation risk., Objective: We evaluated clinical trial measures in the context of self-reported race and genetic ancestry to identify risk factors for asthma exacerbations., Methods: One thousand eight hundred forty multiethnic subjects from 12 Asthma Clinical Research Network and AsthmaNet trials were analyzed for incident asthma exacerbations with Poisson regression models that included clinical measures, self-reported race (black, non-Hispanic white, and other), and estimates of global genetic African ancestry in a subgroup (n = 760)., Results: Twenty-four percent of 1840 subjects self-identified as black. Black and white subjects had common risk factors for exacerbations, including a history of 2 or more exacerbations in the previous year and FEV 1 percent predicted values, whereas chronic sinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and gastroesophageal reflux disease were only associated with increased exacerbation risk in black subjects. In the combined multiethnic cohort, neither race (P = .30) nor percentage of genetic African ancestry as a continuous variable associated with exacerbation risk (adjusted rate ratio [RR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.94-1.70; P = .13]; RR per 1-SD change [32% ancestry], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.78-1.19; P = .74]). However, in 161 black subjects with genetic data, those with African ancestry greater than the median (≥82%) had a significantly greater risk of exacerbation (RR, 3.06 [95% CI, 1.09-8.6; P = .03])., Conclusion: Black subjects have unique risk factors for asthma exacerbations, of which global African genetic ancestry had the strongest effect., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Morbidity from asthma is disproportionately higher among black patients than among white patients, and black patients constitute the minority of participants in trials informing treatment. Data indicate that patients with inadequately controlled asthma benefit more from addition of a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) than from increased glucocorticoids; however, these data may not be informative for treatment in black patients., Methods: We conducted two prospective, randomized, double-blind trials: one involving children and the other involving adolescents and adults. In both trials, the patients had at least one grandparent who identified as black and had asthma that was inadequately controlled with low-dose inhaled glucocorticoids. We compared combinations of therapy, which included the addition of a LABA (salmeterol) to an inhaled glucocorticoid (fluticasone propionate), a step-up to double to quintuple the dose of fluticasone, or both. The treatments were compared with the use of a composite measure that evaluated asthma exacerbations, asthma-control days, and lung function; data were stratified according to genotypic African ancestry., Results: When quintupling the dose of fluticasone (to 250 μg twice a day) was compared with adding salmeterol (50 μg twice a day) and doubling the fluticasone (to 100 μg twice a day), a superior response occurred in 46% of the children with quintupling the fluticasone and in 46% of the children with doubling the fluticasone and adding salmeterol (P = 0.99). In contrast, more adolescents and adults had a superior response to added salmeterol than to an increase in fluticasone (salmeterol-low-dose fluticasone vs. medium-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 28% [P = 0.003]; salmeterol-medium-dose fluticasone vs. high-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 31% [P = 0.02]). Neither the degree of African ancestry nor baseline biomarkers predicted a superior response to specific treatments. The increased dose of inhaled glucocorticoids was associated with a decrease in the ratio of urinary cortisol to creatinine in children younger than 8 years of age., Conclusions: In contrast to black adolescents and adults, almost half the black children with poorly controlled asthma had a superior response to an increase in the dose of an inhaled glucocorticoid and almost half had a superior response to the addition of a LABA. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BARD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01967173.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: In many patients with mild, persistent asthma, the percentage of eosinophils in sputum is less than 2% (low eosinophil level). The appropriate treatment for these patients is unknown., Methods: In this 42-week, double-blind, crossover trial, we assigned 295 patients who were at least 12 years of age and who had mild, persistent asthma to receive mometasone (an inhaled glucocorticoid), tiotropium (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist), or placebo. The patients were categorized according to the sputum eosinophil level (<2% or ≥2%). The primary outcome was the response to mometasone as compared with placebo and to tiotropium as compared with placebo among patients with a low sputum eosinophil level who had a prespecified differential response to one of the trial agents. The response was determined according to a hierarchical composite outcome that incorporated treatment failure, asthma control days, and the forced expiratory volume in 1 second; a two-sided P value of less than 0.025 denoted statistical significance. A secondary outcome was a comparison of results in patients with a high sputum eosinophil level and those with a low level., Results: A total of 73% of the patients had a low eosinophil level; of these patients, 59% had a differential response to a trial agent. However, there was no significant difference in the response to mometasone or tiotropium, as compared with placebo. Among the patients with a low eosinophil level who had a differential treatment response, 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48 to 66) had a better response to mometasone, and 43% (95% CI, 34 to 52) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.14). In contrast 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) had a better response to tiotropium, whereas 40% (95% CI, 32 to 49) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.029). Among patients with a high eosinophil level, the response to mometasone was significantly better than the response to placebo (74% vs. 26%) but the response to tiotropium was not (57% vs. 43%)., Conclusions: The majority of patients with mild, persistent asthma had a low sputum eosinophil level and had no significant difference in their response to either mometasone or tiotropium as compared with placebo. These data provide equipoise for a clinically directive trial to compare an inhaled glucocorticoid with other treatments in patients with a low eosinophil level. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; SIENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02066298.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Rationale: Despite awareness of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment recommendations, uptake is poor. The Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) spans 2010-2016, providing an opportunity to assess integration of 2011 Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) treatment strategies over time in a large observational cohort study., Objectives: To evaluate how COPD treatment aligns with 2011 GOLD strategies and determine factors associated with failure to align with recommendations., Methods: Information on inhaled medication use collected via questionnaire annually for 4 years was compiled into therapeutic classes (long-acting antimuscarinic agent, long-acting β-agonist, inhaled corticosteroids [ICS], and combinations thereof). Medications were not modified by SPIROMICS investigators. 2011 GOLD COPD categories A, B, C, and D were assigned. Alignment of inhaler regimen with first-/second-line GOLD recommendations was determined, stratifying into recommendation aligned or nonaligned. Recommendation-nonaligned participants were further stratified into overuse and underuse categories., Results: Of 1,721 participants with COPD, at baseline, 52% of regimens aligned with GOLD recommendations. Among participants with nonaligned regimens, 46% reported underuse, predominately owing to lack of long-acting inhalers in GOLD category D. Of the 54% reporting overuse, 95% were treated with nonindicated ICS-containing regimens. Among 431 participants with 4 years of follow-up data, recommendation alignment did not change over time. When we compared 2011 and 2017 recommendations, we found that 47% did not align with either set of recommendations, whereas 35% were in alignment with both recommendations., Conclusions: Among SPIROMICS participants with COPD, nearly 50% reported inhaler regimens that did not align with GOLD recommendations. Nonalignment was driven largely by overuse of ICS regimens in milder disease and lack of long-acting inhalers in severe disease.

Precision medicine is expected to impact the care of people with asthma, given its high disease prevalence, heterogeneity of pathophysiologic mechanisms, and consequent clinical phenotypes. A novel phenotype-stratified clinical trial conducted by the NHLBI AsthmaNet Consortium, titled Steroids in Eosinophil Negative Asthma (SIENA), was a randomized, multicenter, clinical trial that prospectively stratified individuals according to their baseline level of sputum inflammation during a screening period. Two phenotypic strata were assigned based on an a priori defined extent of sputum eosinophilia (Eos Low versus Eos High). This article describes: the scientific premise for the trial design, including assumptions used for power calculations; modifications to the analysis plan implemented after the trial started due to a higher than expected prevalence of one phenotypic stratum which impacted the ability to accrue sufficient subjects within the planned budget and study period; investigator alternatives to address the strata imbalance weighing scientific impact and study feasibility; and the final modified SIENA study design and analysis plan. SIENA was successfully completed in a manner that maintained meaningful outcomes. We conclude with recommendations for incorporation of pre-specified contingency plans into phenotype-directed protocols, to address the potential for differences in observed compared to estimated prevalence of different phenotypes in a study population. These approaches can be applied to precision medicine trials for the future., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: COPD is an age-related disease. The role of cellular senescence in COPD has not been fully elucidated. This study examined the relationship between telomere length of peripheral blood leukocytes and clinical outcomes, including health status, rate of exacerbations, and risk of mortality in individuals with COPD., Methods: Using quantitative polymerase chain reaction, we measured the absolute telomere length (aTL) of DNA extracted from blood samples of 576 participants with moderate-to-severe COPD treated with either azithromycin or placebo for 12 months in the Macrolide Azithromycin for Prevention of Exacerbations of COPD (MACRO) study. All participants were followed for approximately 13 months, during which time health status and exacerbations were carefully ascertained, and an additional 29 months for mortality. The rates of exacerbation and mortality were determined by dividing the aTL into two groups using the median value as the cutoff., Results: Participants with shorter telomere length had worse health status defined by higher St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores (β = -0.09, P = .034). In the placebo arm of the study, the rate of exacerbation (rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.16-1.95; P = .002) and the risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 9.45; 95% CI, 2.85-31.36; P = .015) were significantly higher in the shorter telomere group than in the longer telomere group; these differences were not observed in the azithromycin arm (interaction P = .008 for exacerbation and interaction P = .017 for mortality) CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that replicative senescence may help to predict poor outcomes in COPD. Shorter leukocyte telomere lengths may represent a clinically translatable biomarker for identifying individuals at increased risk of poor clinical outcomes in COPD., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Perturbations to the composition and function of bronchial bacterial communities appear to contribute to the pathophysiology of asthma. Unraveling the nature and mechanisms of these complex associations will require large longitudinal studies, for which bronchoscopy is poorly suited. Studies of samples obtained by sputum induction and nasopharyngeal brushing or lavage have also reported asthma-associated microbiota characteristics. It remains unknown, however, whether the microbiota detected in these less-invasive sample types reflect the composition of bronchial microbiota in asthma., Results: Bacterial microbiota in paired protected bronchial brushings (BB; n = 45), induced sputum (IS; n = 45), oral wash (OW; n = 45), and nasal brushings (NB; n = 27) from adults with mild atopic asthma (AA), atopy without asthma (ANA), and healthy controls (HC) were profiled using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Though microbiota composition varied with sample type (p < 0.001), compositional similarity was greatest for BB-IS, particularly in AAs and ANAs. The abundance of genera detected in BB correlated with those detected in IS and OW (r median [IQR] 0.869 [0.748-0.942] and 0.822 [0.687-0.909] respectively), but not with those in NB (r = 0.004 [- 0.003-0.011]). The number of taxa shared between IS-BB and NB-BB was greater in AAs than in HCs (p < 0.05) and included taxa previously associated with asthma. Of the genera abundant in NB, only Moraxella correlated positively with abundance in BB; specific members of this genus were shared between the two compartments only in AAs. Relative abundance of Moraxella in NB of AAs correlated negatively with that of Corynebacterium but positively with markers of eosinophilic inflammation in the blood and BAL fluid. The genus, Corynebacterium, trended to dominate all NB samples of HCs but only half of AAs (p = 0.07), in whom abundance of this genus was negatively associated with markers of eosinophilic inflammation., Conclusions: Induced sputum is superior to nasal brush or oral wash for assessing bronchial microbiota composition in asthmatic adults. Although compositionally similar to the bronchial microbiota, the microbiota in induced sputum are distinct, reflecting enrichment of oral bacteria. Specific bacterial genera are shared between the nasal and the bronchial mucosa which are associated with markers of systemic and bronchial inflammation.

Importance: Combined use of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) as the controller and the quick relief therapy termed single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) is a potential therapeutic regimen for the management of persistent asthma., Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of SMART in patients with persistent asthma., Data Sources and Study Selection: The databases of MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from database inception through August 2016 and updated through November 28, 2017. Two reviewers selected randomized clinical trials or observational studies evaluating SMART vs inhaled corticosteroids with or without a LABA used as the controller therapy and short-acting β-agonists as the relief therapy for patients aged 5 years or older with persistent asthma and reporting on an outcome of interest., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs), risk differences (RDs), and mean differences with corresponding 95% CIs. Citation screening, data abstraction, risk assessment, and strength of evidence grading were completed by 2 independent reviewers., Main Outcomes and Measures: Asthma exacerbations., Results: The analyses included 16 randomized clinical trials (N = 22 748 patients), 15 of which evaluated SMART as a combination therapy with budesonide and formoterol in a dry-powder inhaler. Among patients aged 12 years or older (n = 22 524; mean age, 42 years; 14 634 [65%] were female), SMART was associated with a reduced risk of asthma exacerbations compared with the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.80]; RD, -6.4% [95% CI, -10.2% to -2.6%]) and a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.98]; RD, -2.8% [95% CI, -5.2% to -0.3%]). Similar results were seen when SMART was compared with inhaled corticosteroids alone as the controller therapy. Among patients aged 4 to 11 years (n = 341; median age, 8 [range, 4-11] years; 69 [31%] were female), SMART was associated with a reduced risk of asthma exacerbations compared with a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids as the controller therapy (RR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94]; RD, -12.0% [95% CI, -22.5% to -1.5%]) or the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.23 to 0.63]; RD, -23.2% [95% CI, -33.6% to -12.1%])., Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis of patients with persistent asthma, the use of single maintenance and reliever therapy compared with inhaled corticosteroids as the controller therapy (with or without a long-acting β-agonist) and short-acting β-agonists as the relief therapy was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations. Evidence for patients aged 4 to 11 years was limited.

Importance: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a potential adjunct therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of persistent asthma., Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects associated with LAMA vs placebo or vs other controllers as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids and the use of a LAMA as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs; hereafter referred to as triple therapy) vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA in patients with uncontrolled, persistent asthma., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and clinical trial registries (earliest date through November 28, 2017)., Study Selection: Two reviewers selected randomized clinical trials or observational studies evaluating a LAMA vs placebo or vs another controller as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids or triple therapy vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA in patients with uncontrolled, persistent asthma reporting on an outcome of interest., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses using a random-effects model was conducted to calculate risk ratios (RRs), risk differences (RDs), and mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% CIs. Citation screening, data abstraction, risk assessment, and strength-of-evidence grading were completed by 2 independent reviewers., Main Outcomes and Measures: Asthma exacerbations., Results: Of 1326 records identified, 15 randomized clinical trials (N = 7122 patients) were included. Most trials assessed adding LAMA vs placebo or LAMA vs LABA to inhaled corticosteroids. Adding LAMA vs placebo to inhaled corticosteroids was associated with a significantly reduced risk of exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.92]; RD, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.00]). Compared with adding LABA, adding LAMA to inhaled corticosteroids was not associated with significant improvements in exacerbation risk (RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.53 to 1.42]; RD, 0.00 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.02]), or any other outcomes of interest. Triple therapy was not significantly associated with improved exacerbation risk vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.57 to 1.22]; RD, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.08 to 0.07])., Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the use of LAMA compared with placebo as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations; however, the association of LAMA with benefit may not be greater than that with LABA. Triple therapy was not associated with a lower risk of exacerbations.