Home-based treatment of biologics for asthma: who, what, where, when and why.

INTRODUCTION: The advent of biologic therapies for severe asthma has profoundly changed the management of this pathology. The introduction of home administration is therefore an important innovation to optimize the patients' management, even if there are many aspects that need to be clarified and pointed out. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the path that led to the possibility of self-administration of biologics, and what the pandemic has changed in the management of these patients. EXPERT OPINION: The growing understanding of asthma phenotypes and endotypes is enabling the careful selection of patients suitable for biologics. In this context, the availability of reliable and simple self-injection devices is important in implementing self-administration. The transition to self-injection is also possible thanks to the high safety profile of biologics. With attention, most patients may potentially be suitable for self-administration. The transition process from hospital to home administration can therefore be carried out correctly by clinicians with adequate expertise in the field of severe asthma and biologic therapies, with the support of other health professionals, pharmacists, and general practitioners. Home administration is probably the best way to guarantee high adherence and high-level satisfaction of patients, even in the long term.

Noninvasive respiratory support outside the intensive care unit for acute respiratory failure related to coronavirus-19 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been diffusely employed outside the intensive care unit (ICU) to face the high request of ventilatory support due to the massive influx of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) caused by coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19). We sought to summarize the evidence on clinically relevant outcomes in COVID-19 patients supported by NIV outside the ICU. METHODS: We searched PUBMED®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register, along with medRxiv and bioRxiv repositories for pre-prints, for observational studies and randomized controlled trials, from inception to the end of February 2021. Two authors independently selected the investigations according to the following criteria: (1) observational study or randomized clinical trials enrolling ≥ 50 hospitalized patients undergoing NIRS outside the ICU, (2) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, and (3) at least the intra-hospital mortality reported. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were followed. Data extraction was independently performed by two authors to assess: investigation features, demographics and clinical characteristics, treatments employed, NIRS regulations, and clinical outcomes. Methodological index for nonrandomized studies tool was applied to determine the quality of the enrolled studies. The primary outcome was to assess the overall intra-hospital mortality of patients under NIRS outside the ICU. The secondary outcomes included the proportions intra-hospital mortalities of patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation following NIRS failure and of those with 'do-not-intubate' (DNI) orders. RESULTS: Seventeen investigations (14 peer-reviewed and 3 pre-prints) were included with a low risk of bias and a high heterogeneity, for a total of 3377 patients. The overall intra-hospital mortality of patients receiving NIRS outside the ICU was 36% [30-41%]. 26% [21-30%] of the patients failed NIRS and required intubation, with an intra-hospital mortality rising to 45% [36-54%]. 23% [15-32%] of the patients received DNI orders with an intra-hospital mortality of 72% [65-78%]. Oxygenation on admission was the main source of between-study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: During COVID-19 outbreak, delivering NIRS outside the ICU revealed as a feasible strategy to cope with the massive demand of ventilatory assistance. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , CRD42020224788, December 11, 2020.

Immunological Aspects Related to Viral Infections in Severe Asthma and the Role of Omalizumab.

Viral respiratory infections are recognized risk factors for the loss of control of allergic asthma and the induction of exacerbations, both in adults and children. Severe asthma is more susceptible to virus-induced asthma exacerbations, especially in the presence of high IgE levels. In the course of immune responses to viruses, an initial activation of innate immunity typically occurs and the production of type I and III interferons is essential in the control of viral spread. However, the Th2 inflammatory environment still appears to be protective against viral infections in general and in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections as well. As for now, literature data, although extremely limited and preliminary, show that severe asthma patients treated with biologics don't have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or progression to severe forms compared to the non-asthmatic population. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, exerts a profound cellular effect, which can stabilize the effector cells, and is becoming much more efficient from the point of view of innate immunity in contrasting respiratory viral infections. In addition to the antiviral effect, clinical efficacy and safety of this biological allow a great improvement in the management of asthma.

Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19 related-acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: During this long COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID-19 ARDS. MATHERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. RESULTS: NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. CONCLUSION: Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID-19 ARDS-related treatment.

May 2020: Is It Always COVID-19 No Matter What?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is causing a massive outbreak throughout the world. In this period, diseases other than coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have not disappeared; however, it is hard for doctors to diagnose diseases that can mimic the clinical, radiological, and laboratory features of COVID-19, especially rare lung diseases such as acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP). We report the clinical case of a young patient who presented to the Emergency Department with respiratory failure and clinical symptoms, radiological aspects, and blood tests compatible with COVID-19; two swabs and a serology test for SARS-CoV-2 were performed, both resulted negative, but the respiratory failure worsened. Peripheral eosinophilia guided us to consider the possibility of a rare disease such as AEP, even if radiology findings were not pathognomonic. Therefore, we decided to perform a flexible bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) at the lingula, which showed the presence of eosinophilia greater than 40%. As a consequence, we treated the patient with high-dose corticosteroids that completely resolved the respiratory symptoms. This case report highlights the difficulty of making alternative diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for rare lung diseases such as AEP, which may have initial characteristics similar to COVID-19.

COVID-19: general overview, pharmacological options and ventilatory support strategies.

The novel coronavirus called "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak in December 2019, starting from the Chinese city of Wuhan, in the Hubei province, and rapidly spreading to the rest of the world. Consequently, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) can be characterized as a pandemic. During COVID-19 several immunological alterations have been observed: in plasma of severe patients, inflammatory cytokines are at a much higher concentration ("cytokine storm"). These aspects are associated with pulmonary inflammation and parenchymal infiltrates with an extensive lung tissue damage in COVID-19 patients. To date, clinical evidence and guidelines based on reliable data and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for the treatment of COVID-19 are lacking. In the absence of definitive management protocols, many treatments are currently being evaluated worldwide. Some of these options were soon abandoned due to ineffectiveness, while others showed promising results. As for ventilatory strategies, at the moment there are still no consistent data published about the different approaches and how they may influence disease progression. What will probably represent the real solution to this pandemic is the identification of a safe and effective vaccine, for which enormous efforts and investments are being put in place. This review will summarize the state-of-the-art of COVID-19 current treatment options and those potentially available in the future, as well as high flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive mechanical ventilation approaches.

Acute-phase reactants during tocilizumab therapy for severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of clinical improvement and intubation/death in tocilizumab-treated severe COVID19, focusing on IL6 and CRP longitudinal monitoring. METHODS: 173 consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia receiving tocilizumab in Reggio Emilia province Hospitals between 11 March and 3 June 2020 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Clinical improvement was defined as status improvement on a six-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. A composite outcome of intubation/death was also evaluated. CRP and IL-6 levels were determined before TCZ administration (T0) and after 3 (T3), and 7 (T7) days. RESULTS: At multivariate analysis T0 and T3 CRP levels were negatively associated with clinical improvement (OR 0.13, CI 0.03-0.55 and OR 0.11, CI 0.0-0.46) (p=0.006 and p=0.003) and positively associated with intubation/death (OR 17.66, CI 2.47-126.14 and OR 5.34, CI: 1.49-19.12) (p=0.01 and p=0.004). No significant associations with IL-6 values were observed. General linear model analyses for repeated measures showed significantly different trends for CRP from day 3 to day 7 between patients who improved and those who did not, and between patients who were intubated or died and those who were not (p<0.0001 for both). ROC analysis identified a baseline CRP level of 15.8 mg/dl as the best cut-off to predict intubation/death (AUC = 0.711, sensitivity = 0.67, specificity = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: CRP serial measurements in the first week of TCZ therapy are useful in identifying patients developing poor outcomes.

Asthma in a large COVID-19 cohort: Prevalence, features, and determinants of COVID-19 disease severity.

BACKGROUND: Asthma prevalence among COVID-19 patients seems to be surprisingly low. However the clinical profile of COVID-19 asthmatic patients and potential determinants of higher susceptibility/worse outcome have been scarcely investigated. We aimed to describe the prevalence and features of asthmatic patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to explore the association between their clinical asthma profile and COVID-19 severity. METHODS: Medical records of patients admitted to COVID-Units of six Italian cities major hospitals were reviewed. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed and compared according to the COVID-19 outcome (death/need for ventilation vs discharge at home without requiring invasive procedures). RESULTS: Within the COVID-Units population (n = 2000) asthma prevalence was 2.1%. Among the asthmatics the mean age was 61.1 years and 60% were females. Around half of patients were atopic, blood eosinophilia was normal in most of patients. An asthma exacerbation in the 6 months before the Covid-Unit admittance was reported by 18% of patients. 24% suffered from GINA step 4-5 asthma, and 5% were under biologic treatment. 31% of patients were not on regular treatment and a negligible use of oral steroid was recorded. Within the worse outcome group, a prevalence of males was detected (64 vs 29%, p = 0.026); they suffered from more severe asthma (43 vs 14%, p = 0.040) and were more frequently current or former smokers (62 vs 25%, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Our report, the first including a large COVID-19 hospitalized Italian population, confirms the low prevalence of asthma. On the other side patients with GINA 4/5 asthma, and those not adequately treated, should be considered at higher risk.

A Dangerous Consequence of the Recent Pandemic: Early Lung Fibrosis Following COVID-19 Pneumonia - Case Reports.

The outbreak of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) started in China in December 2019. COVID-19 patients at presentation show a wide spectrum of clinical and pathological involvement. We report two cases of respiratory insufficiency due to COVID-19 pneumonia that occurred in adults without a history of respiratory diseases. Although these patients improved and were discharged from the acute ward, during the hospitalization they both progressed with a subsequent clinical and radiological worsening, pointing out one of the main concerns for these patients at discharge: the possibility of developing persistent lung abnormalities also in healthy people not having other risk factors. In conclusion, these cases represent two examples of early lung fibrosis in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with different severity disease evolution and highlight the need for long-term follow-up strategies. The etiology of this fibrosis is under discussion: we suppose that it could be due to either a possible outcome of natural history of lung damage produced by ARDS, or to the lung injury related to high oxygen level or to the lung damage directly induced by viral infection or finally to the autoimmune response. At this moment, it is not possible to predict how many people will have consequences due to COVID-19 pneumonia, and therefore we believe that careful follow-up should be mandatory.

Efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19 ARDS undergoing noninvasive ventilation.

BACKGROUND: The severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is extremely variable, ranging from asymptomatic patients to those who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). As for now, there are still no really effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Some evidences suggest that tocilizumab (TCZ) may avoid the progression of severe COVID-19. The aim of this retrospective case-control study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of TCZ in patients with COVID-19 ARDS undergoing noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV). METHODS: Seventy-nine consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and worsening acute respiratory failure (ARF) were admitted to the Pulmonology Unit of Azienda USL of Reggio Emilia-IRCCS. All patients were inflamed (elevated CRP and IL-6 levels) and received NIV at admission according to the presence of a pO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 200 mmHg. The possibility of being treated with TCZ depended on the drug availability. The primary outcome was the in-hospital mortality rate. A secondary composite outcome of worsening was represented by the patients who died in the pulmonology unit or were intubated. RESULTS: Out of 79 patients, 41 were treated with TCZ. Twenty-eight patients received intravenous (IV) TCZ and 13 patients received subcutaneous (SC) TCZ. In-hospital overall mortality rate was 38% (30/79 patients). The probabilities of dying and being intubated during the follow-up using Kaplan-Meier method were significantly lower in total patients treated with TCZ compared to those of patients not treated with TCZ (log-rank p value = 0.006 and 0.036, respectively). However, using Cox multivariate analyses adjusted for age and Charlson comorbidity index only the association with the reduced risk of being intubated or dying maintained the significance (HR 0.44, 95%CI 0.22-0.89, p = 0.022). Two patients treated with TCZ developed cavitating lung lesions during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that TCZ treatment may be effective in COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory impairment receiving NIV. More data on safety are required. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.

Pharmacologicaltreatment of COVID-19: lights and shadows.

At the end of December 2019, a novel coronavirus, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, caused an outbreak of pneumonia spreading from Wuhan, Hubei province, to the whole country of China and then the entire world, forcing the World Health Organization to make the assessment that the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) can be characterized as a pandemic, the first ever caused by a coronavirus. To date, clinical evidence and guidelines based on reliable data and randomized clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 are lacking. In the absence of definitive management protocols, many treatments for COVID-19 are currently being evaluated and tested worldwide. Some of these options were soon abandoned due to ineffectiveness, while others showed promising results. The basic treatments are mainly represented by antiviral drugs, even if the evidence is not satisfactory. Among the antivirals, the most promising appears to be remdesivir. Corticosteroids and tocilizumab seem to guarantee positive results in selected patients so far, although the timing of starting therapy and the most appropriate therapeutic schemes remain to be clarified. Efficacy of the other drugs is still uncertain, and they are currently used as a cocktail of treatments in the absence of definitive guidelines. What will represent the real solution to the enormous problem taking place worldwide is the identification of a safe and effective vaccine, for which enormous efforts and investments are underway.