Validation of the German version of the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ).

BACKGROUND: The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ), a 10-item, equally weighted, yes/no tool assessing symptom impairment and risk of exacerbations in patients with asthma aged ≥12 years, was developed and validated in a US patient population to evaluate varying levels of asthma control. This study aimed to validate the German language version of the AIRQ in patients aged ≥12 years with different levels of asthma control. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational, multi-centre study comprising a single visit was conducted in multiple specialised asthma centres and general practices in Germany. A total of 300 patients completed the following measures: 1) Patient Sociodemographic and Clinical Questionnaire, 2) AIRQ, 3) Asthma Control Test (ACT), and 4) Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6). Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the AIRQ score cut points with the greatest predictive validity in discriminating between different control levels relative to a standard of ACT plus prior-year exacerbations or ACQ-6 plus prior-year exacerbations. RESULTS: The German version of the AIRQ demonstrated a robust capability to correctly identify well-controlled versus not well- or very poorly controlled (AUC values of 0.90 or higher) and well- or not well-controlled versus very poorly controlled asthma (AUC values of 0.89 or higher). CONCLUSIONS: The German version of the AIRQ is a suitable tool to identify adults with varying levels of asthma control, which in turn can help to accurately identify patients with uncontrolled asthma in clinical practice.

Bronchodilator response in Post-COVID-19 patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infections can result in a broad spectrum of symptoms from mild to life-threatening. Long-term consequences on lung function are not well understood yet. METHODS: In our study, we have examined 134 post-COVID patients (aged 54.83±14.4 years) with dyspnea on exertion as a leading symptom 6 weeks to 24 months after a SARS-CoV-2 infection for bronchodilator responsiveness during their stay in our pulmonary rehabilitation clinic. RESULTS: Prior to bronchial dilation, six out of 134 patients (4.47%) presented an FEV1/FVC ratio below lower limit of normal (Z-score=-1.645) indicative of an obstructive airway disease. Following inhalation of a ß2-adrenergic agonist we measured a mean FEV1 increase of 181.5 mL in our cohort, which was significantly elevated compared to a historical control group (ΔFEV1 = 118 mL). 28.7% of the patients showed an increase greater than 200 mL and 12% displayed a significant bronchodilation response (>200 mL ΔFEV1 and >12% FEV1 increase). Interestingly, no significant difference in bronchial dilation effect was observed when comparing patients hospitalized and those non-hospitalized during the course of their SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSION: Our data provides evidence for increased prevalence of obstructive ventilatory defects and increased bronchodilator responsiveness in patients with persisting symptoms after COVID-19. Depending on the extent of this complication, post-COVID patients may benefit from an adapted ß2-inhalation therapy including subsequent reevaluation.

[Modern asthma management]. / Modernes Asthma-Management.

Symptom prevention and remission are the goals of asthma treatment. Precise phenotyping of the patients, including history, lung function, allergology and measurement of type 2 biomarkers, is the essential prerequisite for treatment success. Basic measures, treatment with DMAADs ("disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs": predominantly inhaled corticosteroids, biologics, and allergen immunotherapy) and treatment of comorbidities are the cornerstones of modern asthma management. The treatment of upper airway diseases such as allergic rhinitis (often associated with early-onset asthma) or chronic rhinosinusitis (often associated with adult-onset asthma, with 2 forms: either with nasal polyps, CRSwNP, or without nasal polyps, CRSsNP) is of major importance in this regard.

[Update on asthma 2024 - what the ENT specialist needs to know]. / Aktuelles zum Asthma 2024 ­ was der HNO-Arzt wissen muss.

The lifetime prevalence of 8.6% of asthma in Germany reflects the high medical and socioeconomic impact of the disease. Asthma treatment goals have changed during the last decades: from symptom control to symptom prevention, with highly effective, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs (DMAADs) aiming at asthma remission. In order to achieve this goal, phenotyping of patients (including an evaluation of allergies and type 2 biomarkers) is crucial for personalized treatment. The identification and effective treatment of concomitant diseases, such as allergic rhinitis or chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), plays a major role for successful treatment. This underlines the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration of otolaryngologists and respiratory physicians in the management of patients with asthma. This CME article informs the reader about current guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, focusing on clinically relevant recommendations for ENT physicians.

Remission in asthma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current concepts of remission in asthma. RECENT FINDINGS: Until 2023, asthma guidelines have been promoting the concept of disease control, recommending the step-wise addition of drugs until the best possible disease control is achieved. With the advent of highly effective, anti-inflammatory disease-modifying antiasthmatic drugs (DMAADs), treatment goals of asthma have changed. Several national guidelines have now announced remission as a general treatment goal in asthma. Currently, all guidelines agree that asthma remission is defined by the presence of at least three characteristics over a period of at least one 1 year: absence of exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use for the treatment of asthma and minimal asthma-related symptoms. In the future, a generally accepted, evidence-based and easy-to-use definition of remission will be needed for daily clinical practice. It is clear, however, that precise phenotyping (including measurement of biomarkers) is an essential prerequisite to achieve clinical remission in each individual patient. SUMMARY: Remission has been included as the treatment goal in asthma in several national guidelines, reflecting the paradigm shift in asthma, from short-term symptom control to long-term symptom prevention. An international consensus on the criteria for asthma remission is expected in the near future.

Flow Cytometry as an Alternative to Microscopy for the Differentiation of BAL Fluid Leukocytes.

BACKGROUND: Microscopy is currently the gold standard to differentiate BAL fluid (BALF) leukocytes. However, local expertise for microscopic BALF leukocyte differentiation is often unavailable in clinical practice. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can automated flow cytometry be used instead of microscopy to differentiate BALF leukocytes? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A new automated flow cytometric method for BALF leukocyte differentiation, using four antibodies (anti-CD45, anti-CD66b, anti-HLA-DR, anti-CD52) given to human BALF in one tube, was developed and prospectively validated in 745 unselected subsequent BALF samples from patients with interstitial lung diseases (455 patients), infectious diseases (196 patients), and other diseases (94 patients). Flow cytometry and traditional microscopy were performed by separate investigators in a double-anonymized fashion. Results were compared using Spearman correlation, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation between flow cytometric and microscopic results regarding macrophage/monocyte, lymphocyte, eosinophil, and neutrophil percentages in BALF (P < .001 for all leukocyte subpopulations). Bland-Altman analyses showed that the mean differences between the methods were ≤ 2% for all four cell types. Flow cytometric results differed less than 20% from microscopic results in more than 95% of all samples. Subgroup analyses confirmed that these results were independent from total leukocyte counts in BALF. INTERPRETATION: We report, to our knowledge, the first validated flow cytometric method for BALF leukocyte differentiation, which can be used in clinical settings where local expertise for microscopic analysis is unavailable and which can be combined easily with lymphocyte surface marker analysis.

[Precision medicine in the diagnosis and treatment of asthma]. / Präzisionsmedizin in der Diagnostik und Therapie von Asthma.

Due to the availability of disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs (DMAADs), especially inhaled steroids (alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators), biologics and modern allergen immunotherapy, the treatment of asthma has fundamentally changed. The aims of modern asthma precision medicine are prevention of symptoms and the induction and maintenance of asthma remission (long-term asthma control, freedom from exacerbations and stable lung function without the use of systemic steroids). A treat to target approach is used as for other chronic inflammatory diseases in internal medicine: the aim is to achieve remission by an individually tailored treatment with DMAADs; however, the prerequisite for modern asthma precision medicine is asthma phenotyping, including a detailed medical history, lung function testing, allergological diagnostics and measurement of type 2 markers (blood eosinophils and, if available, exhaled nitric oxide, FeNO).

Asthma therapy concepts through the ages.

The development and approval of DMAADs ("disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs"), in particular inhaled steroids (alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators), biologics and modern allergen immunotherapies, has fundamentally changed the asthma therapy concept from symptom control to symptom prevention. This concept is linked to the new asthma treatment goal of asthma remission: long-term absence of symptoms (good asthma control), absence of exacerbations, and stable lung function, without the use of systemic steroids for asthma therapy. Three types of asthma remission are distinguished: spontaneous remission (e.g., childhood asthma), remission "off treatment" (e.g., after successful allergen immunotherapy), and remission "on treatment" (e.g., during inhaled therapy or biologic therapy). A treat-to-target approach is used, as in rheumatoid arthritis or chronic inflammatory bowel disease: The goal is to achieve asthma remission, through individually tailored treatment with highly effective drugs with minimal side effects. However, this requires precise phenotyping of the patient, including detailed history taking, pulmonary function diagnostics, allergological diagnostics, and measurement of type 2 biomarkers.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic asthma.

Remission is the goal of modern asthma treatment. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an essential component in the armamentarium of personalized asthma therapy. Subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) or sublingual AIT (SLIT) offer the possibility to prevent asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis (reduction of the risk of developing asthma) and the possibility to achieve remission in patients with allergic asthma. Accordingly, AIT should always be considered in patients with asthma and a documented, clinically relevant allergy. However, precise phenotyping of the patient is an essential prerequisite for a success of AIT in asthma.

Real-World Characteristics of Patients with Severe Asthma prior to Starting Dupilumab: The ProVENT Study.

INTRODUCTION: Dupilumab is approved for the treatment of severe type 2 (T2) asthma; however, the characteristics of patients receiving dupilumab in routine clinical practice are incompletely understood. This study describes the characteristics of patients with severe asthma before dupilumab treatment in a real-world setting. METHODS: This interim analysis of an ongoing real-life study of dupilumab assessed baseline characteristics of the first patient cohort enrolled in the ProVENT study. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (59% females) were analyzed (17% received another biologic before dupilumab treatment and 15% were on maintenance oral corticosteroid treatment). Adult-onset asthma (>18 years) and an allergic phenotype were documented in 58% and 48% of patients, respectively. Median (interquartile range) age was 54 (40-61) years; the median number of exacerbations in the last 24 months was 1 (0-3); median fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) value was 38 (23-64) ppb; and median blood eosinophils (bEOS) count was 184 (8-505) cells/µL. According to the United Kingdom Severe Asthma Registry classification, 53% of patients had T2 intermediate asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL or FeNO ≥25 ppb), 17% had T2 high asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL and FeNO ≥25 ppb), and 4% had T2 low asthma (bEOS <150 cells/µL and FeNO <25 ppb). At least one GINA criterion for T2 airway inflammation was documented in 70% of patients. T2 comorbidities were observed in 64% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that patients eligible for dupilumab treatment display various clinical and biochemical characteristics rather than one clear-cut phenotype.

Tezepelumab in patients with allergic and eosinophilic asthma.

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease commonly driven by allergic and/or eosinophilic inflammation, both of which may be present in severe disease. Most approved biologics for severe asthma are indicated for specific phenotypes and target individual downstream type 2 components of the inflammatory cascade. Tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody (immunoglobulin G2λ), binds specifically to thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), an epithelial cytokine that initiates and sustains allergic and eosinophilic inflammation in asthma. By blocking TSLP, tezepelumab has demonstrated efficacy across known asthma phenotypes and acts upstream of all current clinically used biomarkers. In a pooled analysis of the phase 2b PATHWAY (NCT02054130) and phase 3 NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) studies, compared with placebo, tezepelumab reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate over 52 weeks by 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53, 70) in patients with perennial aeroallergen sensitization (allergic asthma); by 71% (95% CI: 62, 78) in patients with a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL; and by 71% (95% CI: 59, 79) in patients with allergic asthma and a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL. This review examines the efficacy and mode of action of tezepelumab in patients with allergic asthma, eosinophilic asthma and coexisting allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes.

Response to Various Biologics in Patients with Both Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Patients can have features of both chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. However, there is still no consensus how to precisely define this patient population. In addition, there are little data on the effectiveness of biologics in these patients. METHOD: Presence of COPD was defined by a smoking history of ≥10 pack years (PY), a postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio < lower limit of normal (LLN) and FEV1 < 80% predicted, a carbon monoxide diffusion capacity (DLCO) < LLN, and dyspnoea on exertion as a leading symptom. Presence of asthma was defined by high type 2 biomarkers (blood eosinophils ≥300 cells/µL and/or FeNO ≥50 ppb), typical clinical features of asthma (including nocturnal respiratory symptoms), and a documented history of a clinical benefit from inhaled and/or oral glucocorticoid treatment. We analysed data from 20 patients fulfilling the criteria for both COPD and asthma who were newly treated with a biologic due to recurrent exacerbations despite high-dose inhaled triple therapy. RESULTS: Median values before treatment with a biologic were as follows: 40 PY, FEV1 42% predicted, DLCO 45% predicted, 475 eosinophils/µL blood, FeNO 48 ppb. Median duration of biologic treatment (mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab, omalizumab, or tezepelumab) was 12 months. There were significant improvements in exacerbations (most prominent effect), asthma control, and lung function during biologic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Various types of biologics approved for severe asthma treatment can be effective in patients with both COPD and asthma. We propose an easy-to-use definition of these patients for routine clinical practice.

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.] / S2k-Leitlinie zur fachärztlichen Diagnostik und Therapie von Asthma 2023.

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

Response to Biologics and Clinical Remission in the Adult German Asthma Net Severe Asthma Registry Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Recently, criteria for evaluation of response to biologics have been proposed and the concept of clinical remission has gained attention as a possible goal even in severe asthma. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the response and remission in the German Asthma Net severe asthma registry cohort. METHODS: We included adults not using a biologic at baseline (V0) and compared patients treated between V0 and 1-year visit (V1) without using a biologic (group A) to patients starting with a biologic after V0 and continuing it up to V1 (group B). We applied the Biologics Asthma Response Score to quantify composite response in good, intermediate, or insufficient. We defined clinical remission (R) as absence of significant symptoms (Asthma Control Test score ≥ 20 at V1) in the absence of exacerbations and oral corticosteroid therapy. RESULTS: Group A included 233 and group B 210 patients, the latter receiving omalizumab (n = 33), mepolizumab (n = 40), benralizumab (n = 81), reslizumab (n = 1), or dupilumab (n = 56). At baseline, group B had less often an allergic phenotype (35.2% vs 41.6%), lower Asthma Control Test score (median, 12 vs 14), more exacerbations in the past year (median, 3 vs 2), and more often high-dose inhaled corticosteroid treatment (71.4% vs 51.5%) than group A. After 1 year of treatment, rates of response (good: 61.4% vs 34.8%; intermediate: 26.7% vs 42.9%; insufficient: 11.9% vs. 22.3%) and/or clinical remission (37.6% vs 17.2%) were higher in group B than in group A. CONCLUSIONS: Despite more severe asthma at baseline, patients treated with biologics had a markedly higher probability of achieving good clinical response and/or remission than patients treated without biologics.