COVID-19 in Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) patients: Clinical features, impact of comorbidities and treatments.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Heffler E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7436509 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
COVID-19 in Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) patients: Clinical features, impact of comorbidities and treatments.
Heffler Enrico E Detoraki Aikaterini A Contoli Marco M Papi Alberto A Paoletti Giovanni G Malipiero Giacomo G Brussino Luisa L Crimi Claudia C Morrone Daniela D Padovani Marianna M Guida Giuseppe G Gerli Alberto Giovanni AG Centanni Stefano S Senna Gianenrico G Paggiaro Pierluigi P Blasi Francesco F Canonica Giorgio Walter GW
Allergy 20200820 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAccording to ATS/ERS document on severe asthma (SA), the management of these patients requires the identification and proper treatment of comorbidities, which can influence the control of asthma.MethodsThe aim of this study was to assess the independent effect of different comorbidities on clinical, functional and biologic features of SA. Seventy-two patients with SA according to GINA guidelines were examined. We collected demographic data, smoking habit, asthma history, and assessment of comorbidities. Pulmonary function, inflammatory biomarkers, upper airway disease evaluation, asthma control and quality of life were carefully assessed.ResultsThe mean age of patients was 59.1 years (65.3% female, 5.6% current smokers). Comorbidities with higher prevalence were: chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps (CRSwNP or CRSsNP), obesity and gastro-esophageal reflux (GERD), with some overlapping among them. In an univariate analysis comparing patients with single comorbidities with the other ones, asthmatics with CRSwNP had lower lung function and higher sputum eosinophilia; obese asthmatics had worse asthma control and quality of life, and tended to have lower sputum eosinophils; asthmatics with GERD showed worse quality of life. In multivariate analysis, obesity was the only independent factor associated with poor asthma control (OR 4.9), while CRSwNP was the only independent factor associated with airway eosinophilia (OR 16.2). Lower lung function was associated with the male gender and longer duration of asthma (OR 3.9 and 5.1, respectively) and showed a trend for the association with nasal polyps (OR 2.9, p = 0.06).ConclusionOur study suggests that coexisting comorbidities are associated with different features of SA.
| S-EPMC6276160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Biologic drugs have dramatically improved severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) outcomes. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of biological therapy in SEA in a real-life setting and to identify the predictors for switching to another biological drug in patients with poor asthma control. The outcomes for efficacy were decreased annual exacerbations (AE) and improved asthma control test (ACT). In 90 SEA patients being treated with a biological drug, clinical examination, ACT, blood eosinophils count and spirometry were assessed before (T0) and after 6 (T1), 12 (T2), 24 (T3) and 36 (T4) months from the start of biological therapy. Patients were considered responders (R) or non-responders (NR) to biologics depending on whether or not they had less than two AE and a 20% increase in the ACT after 12 months of treatment. 75% of the patients were R, 25% NR. In R patients, biological therapy add-on was followed by significant improvement in AE and ACT throughout the whole follow-up period. The percentage of patients on oral corticosteroids (OCS) dropped from 40% to 12%. By contrast, the NR patients were shifted to another biological drug after 12 months of therapy, as they still had high AE and nearly unchanged ACT; 40% of them still needed OCS treatment. The predictors of switching to another biological drug were three or more AE, ACT below 17, nasal polyposis and former smoking (p < 0.05). In NR, the shift to another biological drug was followed by a significant decrease in AE and an increase in the ACT. This real-life study confirms the long-term efficacy of biologics in most SEA patients and indicates that even in non-responders to a first biological drug, it is worth trying a second one. It is hoped that the availability of additional biologics with different targets will help improve the personalization of SEA therapy.
| S-EPMC8869384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Difficult-to-treat and severe asthma are challenging clinical entities. In the face of suboptimal asthma control, the temptation for clinicians is to reflexively escalate asthma-directed therapy, including increasing exposure to corticosteroids and commencement of costly but potent biologic therapies. However, asthma control is objectively and subjectively assessed based on measurable parameters (such as exacerbations or variability in pulmonary physiology), symptoms and patient histories. Crucially, these features can be confounded by common untreated comorbidities, affecting clinicians' assessment of asthma treatment efficacy.
| S-EPMC10644109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers' specialty and experience.MethodsWe conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared.ResultsTwo hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05).ConclusionsUncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice.
| S-EPMC7396819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Childhood asthma is one condition within a family of allergic diseases, which includes allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, and food allergy, among others. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE antibody therapy that was approved in Japan for children with asthma and added to the Japanese pediatric asthma guidelines in 2017. This review highlights the Japanese clinical perspectives in pediatric allergic asthma, and consideration for allergic comorbidities, and reflects on omalizumab clinical trials in progress to present comprehensive future opportunities.
| S-EPMC6365659 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7969857 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 has been a global health problem since 2020. There are different spectrums of manifestation of this disease, ranging from asymptomatic to extremely severe forms requiring admission to intensive care units and life-support therapies, mainly due to severe pneumonia. The progressive understanding of this disease has allowed researchers and clinicians to implement different therapeutic alternatives, depending on both the severity of clinical involvement and the causative molecular mechanism that has been progressively explored. In this review, we analysed the main therapeutic options available to date based on modulating the host inflammatory response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with severe and critical illness. Although current guidelines are moving toward a personalised treatment approach titrated on the timing of presentation, disease severity, and laboratory parameters, future research is needed to identify additional biomarkers that can anticipate the disease course and guide targeted interventions on an individual basis.
| S-EPMC10136924 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is unclear whether asthma and its allergic phenotype are risk factors for hospitalization or severe disease from SARS-CoV-2.MethodsAll patients over 28 days old testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1 and September 30, 2020, were retrospectively identified and characterized through electronic analysis at Stanford. A sub-cohort was followed prospectively to evaluate long-term COVID-19 symptoms.Results168,190 patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing, and 6,976 (4.15%) tested positive. In a multivariate analysis, asthma was not an independent risk factor for hospitalization (OR 1.12 [95% CI 0.86, 1.45], p = .40). Among SARS-CoV-2-positive asthmatics, allergic asthma lowered the risk of hospitalization and had a protective effect compared with non-allergic asthma (OR 0.52 [0.28, 0.91], p = .026); there was no association between baseline medication use as characterized by GINA and hospitalization risk. Patients with severe COVID-19 disease had lower eosinophil levels during hospitalization compared with patients with mild or asymptomatic disease, independent of asthma status (p = .0014). In a patient sub-cohort followed longitudinally, asthmatics and non-asthmatics had similar time to resolution of COVID-19 symptoms, particularly lower respiratory symptoms.ConclusionsAsthma is not a risk factor for more severe COVID-19 disease. Allergic asthmatics were half as likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with non-allergic asthmatics. Lower levels of eosinophil counts (allergic biomarkers) were associated with a more severe COVID-19 disease trajectory. Recovery was similar among asthmatics and non-asthmatics with over 50% of patients reporting ongoing lower respiratory symptoms 3 months post-infection.
| S-EPMC8222896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The standard for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 virus is reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, but chest CT may play a complimentary role in the early detection of COVID-19 pneumonia. Purpose To investigate CT features of patients with COVID-19 in Rome, Italy, and to compare the accuracy of CT with RT-PCR. Methods In this prospective study from March 4, 2020, until March 19, 2020, consecutive patients with suspected COVID-19 infection and respiratory symptoms were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were: chest CT with contrast medium performed for vascular indications, patients who refused chest CT or hospitalization, and severe CT motion artifact. All patients underwent RT-PCR and chest CT. Diagnostic performance of CT was calculated using RT-PCR as reference. Chest CT features were calculated in a subgroup of RT-PCR-positive and CT-positive patients. CT features of hospitalized patients and patient in home isolation were compared by using Pearson chi squared test. Results Our study population comprised 158 consecutive study participants (83 male and 75 female, mean age 57 y ±17). Fever was observed in 97/158 (61%), cough in 88/158 (56%), dyspnea in 52/158 (33%), lymphocytopenia in 95/158 (60%), increased C-reactive protein level in 139/158 (88%), and elevated lactate dehydrogenase in 128/158 (81%) study participants. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 97% (60/62)[95% IC, 88-99%], 56% (54/96)[95% IC,45-66%] and 72% (114/158)[95% IC 64-78%], respectively. In the subgroup of RT-PCR-positive and CT-positive patients, ground-glass opacities (GGO) were present in 58/58 (100%), multilobe and posterior involvement were both present in 54/58 (93%), bilateral pneumonia in 53/58 (91%), and subsegmental vessel enlargement (> 3 mm) in 52/58 (89%) of study participants. Conclusion The typical pattern of COVID-19 pneumonia in Rome, Italy, was peripherally ground-glass opacities with multilobe and posterior involvement, bilateral distribution, and subsegmental vessel enlargement (> 3 mm). Chest CT sensitivity was high (97%) but with lower specificity (56%).
| S-EPMC7194020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundData on mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (EA) and comorbidities are needed to assess whether randomized controlled trial results are applicable in the real world.ObjectiveTo evaluate real-life effectiveness and the presence/absence of predictors of treatment response in patients with one or more comorbidities (nasal polyps, allergic rhinitis, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome, obesity, bronchiectasis) who received mepolizumab (MEPO) for the treatment of severe EA.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective study in patients with severe asthma and presence of comorbidities treated with mepolizumab at the respiratory outpatient clinic, Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy. Health records of 31 severe asthmatic patients were retrieved and analyzed. Asthma control test (ACT) score, blood eosinophil count, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), FEV1% of predicted and FEV1/FVC (Forced Vital Capacity) ratio, oral corticosteroid (OCS) dosage, and exacerbations were recorded at baseline (T0), after 3 (T1), 6 (T3), 9 (T6), and 12 months (T12). Clinical response was defined when 3 of these 4 criteria were fulfilled: i) 30% exacerbation decrease; ii) 80% blood eosinophilia reduction; iii) 3 point ACT increase; iv) FEV1 increase ≥200 mL.Results83.87% of patients were classified as responsive to MEPO treatment. Substantial depletion of the blood eosinophils (>80%) was found in 87.1% of patients, FEV1 > 200 mL was seen in 54.84% of patients, a 3-point ACT improvement from baseline was recorded in 80.65% 25 of patients and a 30% reduction of exacerbations rates was seen in 96.77% of patients. Moreover, the majority 38.71% of patients met 3/4 parameters after 12 months. Neither the comorbidities nor other characteristics (sex, BMI, age, smoking) influenced treatment response.ConclusionsMEPO in patients with severe EA is effective regardless of the presence of comorbidities.
| S-EPMC7508691 | biostudies-literature