Effects of selective COX-2 inhibition on allergen-induced bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation in asthma.

BACKGROUND: Prostaglandins that constrict and relax airways are synthesized in reactions catalyzed by either COX-1 or COX-2. It is not known whether selective inhibition of COX-2 makes asthmatic responses better or worse. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of the selective COX-2 inhibitor, etoricoxib, on allergen-induced bronchoconstriction in asthmatic subjects. METHODS: Sixteen subjects with mild atopic asthma underwent rising dose inhalation challenges with allergen or methacholine to determine PD20 FEV1 during a control study period or after 10 to 13 days of treatment with etoricoxib (90 mg once daily). The order of study periods was randomized with at least 2-week washout periods. Induced sputum cells and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels were used to assess airway inflammation and blood assays for COX-1 and COX-2 activity to assess enzyme inhibition. Urinary excretion of lipids was used to assess prostaglandin biosynthesis. RESULTS: Etoricoxib did not change baseline lung function, nor airway responsiveness to allergen or to methacholine. Neither were the allergen-induced increase in sputum eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels affected by treatment. The biochemical effectiveness of the treatment was established both in the blood assays and by the distinct inhibitory effect of etoricoxib on urinary excretion of tetranor-prostaglandin E2 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This first study of COX-2 inhibition in provoked asthma found no negative effects of etoricoxib on allergen-induced airflow obstruction and sputum eosinophils, basal lung function, or methacholine responsiveness. The study suggests that short-term use of COX-2 inhibitors is safe in subjects with asthma.

Challenge of isolated sputum cells supports in vivo origin of intolerance reaction to aspirin/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in asthma.

BACKGROUND: There is no in vitro test to diagnose aspirin-intolerant asthma (AIA). The aim of this study was to test if challenge with aspirin of sputum cells from subjects with AIA triggers the release of cysteinyl leukotrienes (CysLTs), known to be mediators of bronchoconstriction in AIA. METHODS: Sputum induction was performed at baseline and at another visit 2 h after a lysine-aspirin bronchoprovocation in 10 subjects with AIA and 9 subjects with aspirin-tolerant asthma (ATA). The isolated sputum cells were incubated for ex vivo challenge. RESULTS: Release of CysLTs by sputum cells from patients with AIA was not induced by lysine-aspirin ex vivo, neither when cells were collected at baseline nor in sputum cells recovered after lysine-aspirin-induced bronchoconstriction, whereas release of CysLTs from sputum cells was triggered by an ionophore on both occasions. However, the CysLT levels elicited by the ionophore were higher in the AIA group both at baseline (AIA vs. ATA: 3.3 vs. 1.6 ng/million cells; p < 0.05) and after the lysine-aspirin bronchoprovocation (3.9 vs. 1.7 ng/million cells; p < 0.05). This difference in the amount of CysLTs released between the groups appeared to be related to the number of eosinophils. CONCLUSIONS: Intolerance to aspirin could not be triggered in sputum cells isolated from subjects with AIA. Together with the previous inability to demonstrate intolerance to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in isolated blood cells, these results support the requirement of tissue-resident cells in the adverse reaction. However, ex vivo stimulation of sputum cells may be developed into a new test of capacity for LT release in inflammatory cells recovered from airways.