What drives inhaler prescription for asthma patients? Results from a real-life retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The choice of inhaler device for asthma patients depends upon multiple attributes. We investigated factors that may drive general practitioners (GPs) and respiratory specialists in the prescription of inhaler devices for asthma patients who initiated inhalation therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed prescriptions by GPs and respiratory specialists to asthma patients commencing inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist combination therapy available as both pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Patient characteristics were compared by device and multivariate analysis was used to model the likelihood of receiving a pMDI as opposed to a DPI in order to identify drivers for prescription. A sample of the respiratory specialists completed an ad-hoc survey of their perceived success in achieving asthma control in their patients and barriers to attaining full control. RESULTS: Prescription of a particular inhaler device was unrelated to the characteristics of the patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that the main driver for the choice of inhaler device was the medication (Odds Ratio and 95% Confidence Interval, respectively for GPs and specialists: 0.19 [0.16-0.23]; 0.17 [0.08-0.37]). Specialists perceived asthma as being inadequately controlled in 41% of their patients, and considered patients' difficulties in using DPIs and pMDIs as instrumental in this, citing a need for a novel, more effective inhaler technology. CONCLUSION: Physicians choose inhaler devices according to the prescribed drugs and not to the characteristics of the individual patient. This may reflect a lack of confidence in existing inhaler devices and underlines the need for technologies, which are more reliable and easier to use by patients.

Should omalizumab be used in severe asthma/COPD overlap?

A large number of patients suffering from asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can show overlapping features of both diseases. Several subjects affected by asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) may be at a severe stage, poorly responsive to triple therapy including inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting ß2 agonists and muscarinic antagonists. This review tries to explore whether omalizumab can be used in poorly controlled severe ACO patients. According to the few studies available, omalizumab may improve asthma outcomes in ACO, although the magnitude of improvements may be lower in comparison to those obtained in subjects affected only by severe asthma. Omalizumab, by acting on IgE, might improve the eosinophilic pattern which is characteristic of the ACO asthma inflammation component. It can be hypothesized that a prevalence of Th1/Th17 airway inflammation pathways can modulate a lower response to anti-IgE while a Th2 pattern can lead to a higher effectiveness to omalizumab in ACO. High levels of IgE, FeNO and blood eosinophil count may be markers of a better response to omalizumab. In conclusion, on the basis of the few studies available, omalizumab could be effective in poorly-controlled severe ACO, although to a reduced extent in comparison to patients affected only by asthma.

Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and laryngeal involvement: review of the literature and a cross-sectional prospective experience.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and granulomatosis with polyangiitis show variable otorhinolaryngological involvement. Up to 14 per cent of granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients have subglottis involvement; little is known about the laryngeal involvement in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. METHOD: A literature review was conducted, together with a prospective cross-sectional analysis of 43 eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients. All patients underwent fibre-optic laryngoscopy with narrow-band imaging, and completed health-related questionnaires. RESULTS: The literature review showed only two cases of laryngeal involvement in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis; in our cohort, no cases of subglottis stenosis were found, but local signs of laryngeal inflammation were present in 72 per cent of cases. Of the patients, 16.2 per cent had a pathological Reflux Finding Score (of 7 or higher). CONCLUSION: Laryngeal inflammation in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis is frequent. It is possibly due more to local factors than to eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis itself. However, ENT evaluation is needed to rule out possible subglottis inflammation. These findings are in line with current literature and worthy of confirmation in larger cohorts.

Factors reducing omalizumab response in severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Despite adding Omalizumab to conventional therapy, several severe asthmatics still show poor disease control. We investigated the factors that may affect a reduced Omalizumab response in a large population of severe asthmatics. METHODS: 340 patients were retrospectively evaluated. FEV1%, FVC%, Asthma Control Test (ACT), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO), possible step-downs/step-ups of concomitant therapies, exacerbations, disease control levels, ICS doses and SABA use, observed at the end of treatment, were considered as a response to Omalizumab. RESULTS: Age was an independent risk factor for a reduced response concerning FEV1%, FVC%, ACT and for a lower asthma control. Obesity (vs normal weight) was a determinant condition for exacerbations (OR:3.114[1.509-6.424], p = 0.002), for a disease partial/no control (OR:2.665[1.064-6.680], p = 0.036), for excessive SABA use (OR:4.448[1.837-10.768], p = 0.002) and for an unchanged/increased level of concomitant asthma medications. Furthermore, obesity also reduced the response in FEV1 (ß = -6.981,p = 0.04), FVC (ß = -11.689,p = 0.014) and ACT (ß = -2.585, p = 0.027) and was associated with a higher FENO level (ß = 49.045,p = 0.040). Having at least one comorbidity was a risk factor for exacerbations (OR:1.383[1.128-1.697], p = 0.008) and for an ACT <20 (OR:2.410[1.071-3.690], p = 0.008). Specifically, chronic heart disease was associated with both a lower ACT and FVC% whereas gastroesophageal reflux with a partial/no asthma control. Nasal polyps were a predisposing factor leading both to exacerbations and to the use of higher inhaled corticosteroids doses. Moreover, smoking habits, pollen or dog/cat dander co-sensitizations may negatively influence Omalizumab response. CONCLUSION: Age, obesity, comorbidities, smoking habits, nasal polyps, allergic poly-sensitization might reduce Omalizumab effectiveness independently to other asthma-influencing factors.

RItA: The Italian severe/uncontrolled asthma registry.

BACKGROUND: The Italian severe/uncontrolled asthma (SUA) web-based registry encompasses demographic, clinical, functional, and inflammatory data; it aims to raise SUA awareness, identifying specific phenotypes and promoting optimal care. METHODS: Four hundred and ninety three adult patients from 27 Italian centers (recruited in 2011-2014) were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean age was 53.8 years. SUA patients were more frequently female (60.6%), with allergic asthma (83.1%). About 30% showed late onset of asthma diagnosis/symptoms (>40 years); the mean age for asthma symptoms onset was 30.2 years and for asthma diagnosis 34.4 years. 97.1% used ICS (dose 2000 BDP), 93.6% LABA in association with ICS, 53.3% LTRAs, 64.1% anti-IgE, 10.7% theophylline, and 16.0% oral corticosteroids. Mean FEV1 % pred of 75.1%, median values of 300/mm3 of blood eosinophil count, 323 kU/L of serum total IgE, and 24 ppb of FENO were shown. Most common comorbidities were allergic rhinitis (62.4%), gastroesophageal reflux (42.1%), sinusitis (37.9%), nasal polyposis (30.2%), and allergic conjunctivitis (30.2%). 55.7% of SUA patients had exacerbations in the last 12 months, 9.7% emergency department visits, and 7.3% hospitalizations. Factors associated with exacerbation risk were obesity (OR, 95% CI 2.46, 1.11-5.41), psychic disorders (2.87, 0.89-9.30-borderline), nasal polyps (1.86, 0.88-3.89-borderline), partial/poor asthma treatment adherence (2.54, 0.97-6.67-borderline), and anti-IgE use in a protective way (0.26, 0.12-0.53). Comparisons to severe asthma multicenter studies and available registries showed data consistency across European and American populations. CONCLUSIONS: An international effort in the implementation of SUA patients' registries could help to better understand the clinical features and to manage severe asthma, representing a non-negligible socioeconomic burden for health services.

SANI-Severe Asthma Network in Italy: a way forward to monitor severe asthma.

Even if severe asthma (SA) accounts for 5-10% of all cases of the disease, it is currently a crucial unmet need, owing its difficult clinical management and its high social costs. For this reason several networks, focused on SA have been organized in some countries, in order to select these patients, to recognize their clinical features, to evaluate their adherence, to classify their biological/clinical phenotypes, to identify their eligibility to the new biologic therapies and to quantify the costs of the disease. Aim of the present paper is to describe the ongoing Italian Severe Asthma Network (SANI). Up today 49 centres have been selected, widespread on the national territory. Sharing the same diagnostic protocol, data regarding patients with SA will be collected and processed in a web platform. After their recruitment, SA patients will be followed in the long term in order to investigate the natural history of the disease. Besides clinical data, the cost/benefit evaluation of the new biologics will be verified as well as the search of peculiar biomarker(s) of the disease.

Effects of omalizumab in severe asthmatics across ages: A real life Italian experience.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study aimed at evaluating long-term effects of Omalizumab in elderly asthmatics in a real-life setting. METHODS: 105 consecutive severe asthmatics (GINA step 4-5; mean FEV1% predicted:66 ± 15.7) treated with Omalizumab for at least 1 year (treatment mean duration 35.1 ± 21.7 months) were divided into 3 groups according to their age at Omalizumab treatment onset: 18-39, 40-64 and ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: Comorbidities, number of overweight/obese subjects and patients with late-onset asthma were more frequent among older people. A similar reduction of inhaled corticosteroids dosage and SABA on-demand therapy was observed in all groups during Omalizumab treatment; a similar FEV1 increased was also observed. Asthma Control Test (ACT) improved significantly (p < 0.001) in the three groups, increasing from 15 [IQR:12-18] to 24 [IQR:22-25] in younger subjects, from 14 [IQR:10-16] to 21 [IQR:20-23] in the 40-64-year-group and from 15 [IQR:12-16] to 20 [IQR:18-22] in elderly patients where improvement was lower (p = 0.039) compared to younger people. Asthma exacerbations decreased significantly after Omalizumab but the percentage of exacerbation-free patients was higher in younger people (76.9%) compared to middle aged patients (49.2%) and the elderly (29%) (p = 0.049). After Omalizumab treatment, the risk for exacerbations was lower in subjects aged 40-64 (OR = 0.284 [CI95% = 0.098-0.826], p = 0.021) and 18-39 (OR = 0.133 [CI95% = 0.026-0.678], p = 0.015), compared to elderly asthmatics. Also, a significantly reduced ACT improvement (ß = -1.070; p = 0.046) passing from each age class was observed. CONCLUSION: Omalizumab improves all asthma outcomes independently of age, although the magnitude of the effects observed in the elderly seems to be lower than in the other age groups.

A valid option for asthma control: Clinical evidence on efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate/formoterol combination in a single inhaler.

A good level of asthma control improves the quality of life of asthmatic patients and may prevent future risk in term of exacerbations and decline of pulmonary function. However, in a real-life setting, several factors contribute to generally low compliance to the treatment. A rapid-onset, long-lasting medication with few adverse effects may contribute to improve adherence to therapy, along with an effective patient education and a good physician-patient communication. Many clinical studies demonstrated the comparable efficacy of the new fluticasone propionate/formoterol (FP/F) combination in a single inhaler to other combinations of inhaled corticosteroids and ß2agonists and the superiority of FP/F as compared to its individual components. Also the safety profile of this combination was encouraging in all studies, even at higher doses. By effectively and safely targeting both airway inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction, the two pathological facets of asthma, and allowing the patient to adapt dose strength, FP/F combination in a single device represents a valid option to improve asthma control in patients with different levels of asthma severity.

Why use long acting bronchodilators in chronic obstructive lung diseases? An extensive review on formoterol and salmeterol.

Long-acting ß2-adrenoceptor agonists, formoterol and salmeterol, represent a milestone in the treatments of chronic obstructive lung diseases. Although no specific indications concerning the choice of one molecule rather than another are provided by asthma and COPD guidelines, they present different pharmacological properties resulting in distinct clinical employment possibilities. In particular, salmeterol has a low intrinsic efficacy working as a partial receptor agonist, while formoterol is a full agonist with high intrinsic efficacy. From a clinical perspective, in the presence of low ß2-adrenoceptors availability, like in inflamed airways, a full agonist can maintain its bronchodilatory and non-smooth muscle activities while a partial agonist may be less effective. Furthermore, formoterol presents a faster onset of action than salmeterol. This phenomenon, combined with the molecule safety profile, leads to a prompt amelioration of the symptoms, and allows using this drug in asthma as an "as needed" treatment in patients already on regular treatment. The fast onset of action and the full agonism of formoterol need to be considered in order to select the best pharmacological treatment of asthma and COPD.

Differences in the efficacy and safety among inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) combinations in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): Role of ICS.

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are frequently recommended for the treatment of asthma and COPD, often in combination with long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA), depending on the severity of the disease and/or on the specific phenotype. Several ICS/LABA combinations are currently available that differ in their pharmacokinetic characteristics and dose of both components. Thus, this review assesses differences in the efficacy and the safety profiles of the ICS components in the two more frequently used ICS/LABA combinations (budesonide/formoterol and fluticasone/salmeterol) for the management of COPD. Whereas the basic mechanism of action is similar for all ICS (binding with the intracellular glucocorticoid receptor, which mediates both genomic and non genomic effects), the pharmacokinetic and characteristics of ICS are quite different in terms of receptor affinity, bioavailability, lipophilicity and drug persistence in the airways. Fluticasone persists longer in airway mucus and requires more time to dissolve in the lining fluid and then enter the airway wall, whereas budesonide is cleared more quickly from the airways. Comparative efficacy of the two major ICS/LABA combinations recommended for the treatment of COPD show similar efficacy in terms of reduction of exacerbations, improvement in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and quality of life. One retrospective cohort study suggested a greater efficacy for the budesonide/formoterol combination on hospital or emergency department admissions, oral corticosteroid courses, and addition of tiotropium, and an observational real-life study reported a greater reduction of COPD exacerbations with budesonide/formoterol than with fluticasom/salmeterol combination. Among the potential side effects of chronic ICS treatment in patients with COPD, recently the use of fluticasone or fluticasone/salmeterol combination has been associated with a higher prevalence of pneumonia in the major long-term studies. On the other hand, no similar increased risk of pneumonia has been reported in patients with COPD treated with the budesonide/formoterol combination. A recent population-based cohort study from the Quebec database showed that the adjusted odds ratio for having severe pneumonia was higher for fluticasone (2.1) than for budesonide (1.17) or other ICS (1.41). Of the ICS studied, only fluticasone demonstrated a dose-related increase in risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD. This difference between fluticasone and budesonide may be explained by the longer retention of fluticasone in the airways, with potentially greater inhibition of type-1 innate immunity. Therefore, the risk:benefit ratio should be evaluated thoroughly when choosing an ICS/LABA combination for patients with COPD.

Fluticasone propionate/formoterol: a fixed-combination therapy with flexible dosage.

International guidelines describe asthma control as the main outcome of asthma management. Prevention of symptoms, improved quality of life, and reduction of exacerbations are the main components, consequently decreasing health care costs. However, many of these objectives remain unmet in real life: several surveys show that a large proportion of asthmatic patients are not well controlled despite the efficacy of current available treatment. Several randomized controlled clinical trials indicate that combining inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonists, by means of a single inhaler, greatly improves the management of the disease. The results of 9 multicenter phase III clinical studies demonstrate that the fixed combination of fluticasone propionate/formoterol in a single inhaler is effective in terms of lung function and symptom control. These studies highlight the dose flexibility, safety and tolerability of this new inhaled combination. These characteristics meet the recommendations of international guidelines, and the preferences of respiratory physicians who identified these aspects as critical components of a successful asthma therapy. Combination of fluticasone propionate/formoterol in a single inhaler provides potent anti-inflammatory activity of fluticasone propionate and rapid onset of action of the ß2-agonist formoterol making this association a viable treatment option both in terms of effectiveness and compliance.

Extrafine beclomethasone/formoterol in severe COPD patients with history of exacerbations.

The FORWARD study is a randomised, double-blind trial that compares the efficacy and safety of 48 weeks treatment with extrafine beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate (BDP/FOR), 100/6 µg pMDI, 2 inhalations BID, vs. FOR 12 µg pMDI, 1 inhalation BID, in severe COPD patients with a history of exacerbations. Co-primary endpoints were exacerbation rate over 48 weeks and pre-dose morning FEV(1) at 12 weeks. The ITT population included 1186 patients (69% males, mean age 64 years) with severe airflow limitation (mean post-bronchodilator FEV(1) 42% predicted). Salbutamol as rescue therapy, theophylline and tiotropium (if stable regimen prior to screening) were allowed. Compared to FOR, BDP/FOR: (1) reduced the exacerbation rate (rate ratio: 0.72 [95% confidence interval 0.62-0.84], p < 0.001); (2) improved pre-dose morning FEV(1) (mean difference: 0.069 L [0.043-0.095] p < 0.001); (3) prolonged the time to first exacerbation; (4) improved the SGRQ total score. The percentage of patients with adverse events was similar (52.1% with BDP/FOR and 49.2% with FOR). Pneumonia incidence was low, slightly higher with BDP/FOR (3.8%) than with FOR (1.8%). No difference for laboratory values, ECG or vital signs. Extrafine BDP/FOR significantly reduces the exacerbation rate and improves lung function of patients with severe COPD and history of exacerbations as compared to FOR alone.

Determinants of the prognosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

OBJECTIVE: Fibrotic idiopathic interstitial pneumonias are chronic and progressive lung diseases with different prognosis, with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) having the worst prognosis. Many patients need a surgical lung biopsy for the definite diagnosis of IPF but age and the clinical context often contraindicate this procedure. The aim of this study is to identify predictors of survival, apart from lung biopsy, in patients with definite and possible IPF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 42 patients with HRCT pattern of definite or possible IPF, by assessing the mortality in relationship with baseline HRCT and functional findings. HRCT was assessed both as prevalent pattern (definite vs possible UIP) and as score of the different abnormalities (in particular, honeycombing (HC) and total fibrotic score). Pulmonary function was assessed as baseline FVC, TLC and DLCO values, as well as change over 6 months of follow-up. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed in order to detect predictors of mortality. RESULTS: During follow-up, 10 out of 42 patients died. Mortality rate was not different according to the qualitative pattern of fibrosis at HRCT. Among the different HRCT scores, a cut-off of 15% in the HC score differentiated patients with higher mortality rate. A lower baseline FVC, and a greater decrease in pulmonary function after 6 months, were both associated with higher mortality. In a logistic analysis taking in consideration clinical, radiological and functional findings, only baseline FVC and FVC change after 6 months resulted significant predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Functional evaluation at the baseline and during follow-up is more relevant than HC score for the prognosis of patients with definite and possible IPF.

Asthma management among different specialists: results from a national Italian survey.

In Europe more than 50% of asthmatic treated patients have a not well-controlled asthma. The present survey aims at investigating how different specialists approach asthmatic patients. A web anonymous questionnaire was randomly administered to 604 General Practitioners (GPs), 241 Pneumologists and 131 Allergists. It concerned: epidemiology, diagnostic workup, follow-up and risk factors, treatment and future risk. A general agreement emerges about asthma diagnostic work-up. All categories are aware of the impact of comorbidities on asthma. LABA/inhaled steroids combination is considered the first choice treatment. Surprisingly, depot steroids and long-acting beta2 agonists (LABA) alone are still prescribed by GPs. Concerning monitoring tools, Allergists rely on inflammation biomarkers, whereas reduction of rescue medication is more relevant for GPs. Asthma Control Test (ACT) is considered time consuming by more than 50% of all physicians and is not known by most of GPs. Adherence is considered a crucial problem in asthma management. All categories seem to have a good knowledge about asthma. The cultural background may account for mild differences in asthma control tools and treatment options. GPs have a pivotal role in discriminating patients who need specific assessment by specialists. It is thus important that GPs and specialists share common tools for recognizing and managing those patients.

Randomized Controlled Trials and real life studies. Approaches and methodologies: a clinical point of view.

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are the "gold standard" for evaluating treatment outcomes providing information on treatments "efficacy". They are designed to test a therapeutic hypothesis under optimal setting in the absence of confounding factors. For this reason they have high internal validity. The strict and controlled conditions in which they are conducted, leads to low generalizability because they are performed in conditions very different from real life usual care. Conversely, real life studies inform on the "effectiveness" of a treatment, that is, the measure of the extent to which an intervention does what is intended to do in routine circumstances. At variance to RCTs, real life trials have high generalizability, but low internal validity. Recently the number of real life studies has been rapidly growing in different areas of respiratory medicine, particularly in asthma and COPD. The role of such studies is becoming a hot topic in respiratory medicine, attracting research interest and debate. In the first part of this review we discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of different types of RCTs and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of real life trials, considering the recent examples of some studies conducted in COPD. We then discuss methodological approaches and options to overcome some of the limitations of real life studies. Comparing the conclusions of effectiveness and efficacy trials can provide important pieces of information. Indeed, these approaches can result complementary, and they can guide the interpretation of each other results.

Are sputum eosinophil cationic protein and eosinophils differently associated with clinical and functional findings of asthma?

BACKGROUND: Sputum eosinophil counts and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) levels are usually increased in asthmatic patients. The correlation between sputum eosinophils or ECP and clinical findings of asthma has been previously investigated but many of these studies have been performed on small samples of asthmatic patients, considering only few clinical indices and often including patients on oral or inhaled corticosteroids, which might be confounding when interpreting the relationship between disease activity and airway inflammation. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether sputum eosinophils and ECP were differently related to functional and clinical parameters of asthma in a large number of steroid-naïve asthmatic patients, taking into account several potential determinants of activity and chronicity of asthma. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-nine patients with mild-moderate asthma were studied. Sputum was induced by hypertonic saline inhalation and processed using the whole sample method. RESULTS: Sputum eosinophils and ECP significantly correlated with each other (r = 0.41, P < 0.001). When patients were grouped on the basis of high/low sputum eosinophils and high/low sputum ECP levels, significant differences were observed among groups, with patients with high sputum eosinophils and ECP showing the greatest asthma severity. In the overall sample, disease duration inversely correlated with sputum eosinophils, whereas FEV1 and peak expiratory flow (PEF) inversely correlated with sputum ECP. Rescue ß2 -agonist use and total symptom score positively correlated with both eosinophil counts and sputum ECP. Stepwise regression analysis showed that symptom score and disease duration accounted for 17.6% of sputum eosinophil variance, whereas symptom score and FEV1 accounted for 14.7% of sputum ECP variance. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both sputum eosinophils and ECP are weakly related to clinical markers of asthma severity. However, ECP was more closely related to lung function parameters than eosinophil counts.

Mild improvement in symptoms and pulmonary function in a long-term follow-up of patients with toluene diisocyanate-induced asthma.

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up of diisocyanate-induced occupational asthma has been occasionally reported. METHODS: We studied the outcome of toluene diisocyanate (TDI)-induced asthma in 46 patients at diagnosis and after a follow-up of 11 ± 3.6 years. Symptoms, anti-asthma therapy, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine were assessed. RESULTS: A significant improvement in FEV1 (% predicted) and PD20FEV1 methacholine was observed at follow-up in comparison with diagnosis. Anti-asthma treatment was performed by 42% of patients at diagnosis and by 70% at follow-up. At the time of follow-up, 32 subjects had been removed from exposure for 6.0 ± 6.9 years, whereas 14 subjects continued to work with reduced exposure to TDI. There was a significant reduction in the prevalence of attacks of shortness of breath and dyspnoea at follow-up, but only in unexposed patients. PD20FEV1 was significantly improved only in patients with a lower FEV1 at diagnosis and in those who have ceased work. Logistic regression analysis, using different models with some independent variables, showed that there were no significant determinants of improvement in FEV1 at follow-up, while a shorter duration of symptoms before diagnosis was a significant predictor of improvement in PD20FEV1 at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma-like symptoms, bronchial hyperresponsiveness and airway obstruction improved, but did not normalize, after a long-term follow-up with cessation or reduction in TDI exposure, mainly in subjects with an early diagnosis of occupational asthma and in patients with a lower baseline FEV1 no longer exposed to TDI.