Pre-clinical data demonstrate a pivotal role for interleukin (IL)-13 in the development and maintenance of asthma. This study assessed the effects of tralokinumab, an investigational human IL-13-neutralising immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody, in adults with moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma despite controller therapies. 194 subjects were randomised to receive tralokinumab (150, 300 or 600 mg) or placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks. Primary end-point was change from baseline in mean Asthma Control Questionnaire score (ACQ-6; ACQ mean of six individual item scores) at week 13 comparing placebo and combined tralokinumab dose groups. Secondary end-points included pre-bronchodilator lung function, rescue β(2)-agonist use and safety. Numerical end-points are reported as mean±sd. At week 13, change from baseline in ACQ-6 was -0.76±1.04 for tralokinumab versus -0.61±0.90 for placebo (p=0.375). Increases from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) were 0.21±0.38 L versus 0.06±0.48 L (p=0.072), with a dose-response observed across the tralokinumab doses tested. β(2)-agonist use (puffs per day) was decreased for tralokinumab -0.68±1.45 versus placebo -0.10±1.49 (p=0.020). The increase in FEV(1) following tralokinumab treatment remained evident 12 weeks after the final dose. Safety profile was acceptable with no serious adverse events related to tralokinumab. No improvement in ACQ-6 was observed, although tralokinumab treatment was associated with improved lung function.
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>The use of inhaled glucocorticoids for persistent asthma causes a temporary reduction in growth velocity in prepubertal children. The resulting decrease in attained height 1 to 4 years after the initiation of inhaled glucocorticoids is thought not to decrease attained adult height.<b>METHODS: </b>We measured adult height in 943 of 1041 participants (90.6%) in the Childhood Asthma Management Program; adult height was determined at a mean (±SD) age of 24.9±2.7 years. Starting at the age of 5 to 13 years, the participants had been randomly assigned to receive 400 μg of budesonide, 16 mg of nedocromil, or placebo daily for 4 to 6 years. We calculated differences in adult height for each active treatment group, as compared with placebo, using multiple linear regression with adjustment for demographic characteristics, asthma features, and height at trial entry.<b>RESULTS: </b>Mean adult height was 1.2 cm lower (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.9 to -0.5) in the budesonide group than in the placebo group (P=0.001) and was 0.2 cm lower (95% CI, -0.9 to 0.5) in the nedocromil group than in the placebo group (P=0.61). A larger daily dose of inhaled glucocorticoid in the first 2 years was associated with a lower adult height (-0.1 cm for each microgram per kilogram of body weight) (P=0.007). The reduction in adult height in the budesonide group as compared with the placebo group was similar to that seen after 2 years of treatment (-1.3 cm; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.9). During the first 2 years, decreased growth velocity in the budesonide group occurred primarily in prepubertal participants.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>The initial decrease in attained height associated with the use of inhaled glucocorticoids in prepubertal children persisted as a reduction in adult height, although the decrease was not progressive or cumulative. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Center for Research Resources; CAMP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000575.).
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>Previous studies in adults with asthma incorporating the control of sputum eosinophils into management strategies have shown significant reductions in exacerbations. A study was undertaken to investigate whether this strategy would be successful in children with severe asthma.<b>METHODS: </b>55 children (7-17 years) with severe asthma were randomised to either a conventional symptom-based management strategy or to an inflammation-based strategy (principally sputum eosinophils). Children were seen 3-monthly over a 1-year period.<b>RESULTS: </b>The annual rate of total and major exacerbations (courses of oral corticosteroids) was non-significantly lower in the inflammatory management group compared with the symptom management group (3.6 vs. 4.8, incident rate ratio (IRR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.04, p=0.082; and 1.9 vs. 2.7 IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.28, p=0.274 for total and major exacerbations, respectively). Significantly fewer subjects in the inflammatory management group experienced an exacerbation within 28 days of a study visit. There were small non-significant differences in measures of asthma control (symptom-free days and short-acting β agonist use) favouring the inflammatory management group. There was no significant difference in the inhaled corticosteroid dose prescribed over the course of the study.<b>CONCLUSION: </b>Incorporating the control of sputum eosinophils into the management algorithm did not significantly reduce overall exacerbations or improve asthma control. Exacerbations were reduced in the short term, suggesting that more frequent measurements would be needed for a clinically useful effect and that controlling inflammation may have a role to play in subgroups of children with severe asthma.
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β(2)-agonists (LABAs) are recommended in patients with asthma that is not well-controlled; however, many patients continue to have inadequately controlled asthma despite this therapy.<b>OBJECTIVE: </b>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with inadequately controlled severe asthma who are receiving high-dose ICS and LABAs, with or without additional controller therapy.<b>DESIGN: </b>Prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00314575).<b>SETTING: </b>193 investigational sites in the United States and 4 sites in Canada.<b>PATIENTS: </b>850 patients aged 12 to 75 years who had inadequately controlled asthma despite treatment with high-dose ICS plus LABAs, with or without other controllers.<b>Intervention: </b>Omalizumab (n = 427) or placebo (n = 423) was added to existing medication regimens for 48 weeks.<b>Measurements: </b>The primary end point was the rate of protocol-defined exacerbations over the study period. Secondary efficacy end points included the change from baseline to week 48 in mean daily number of puffs of albuterol, mean total asthma symptom score, and mean overall score on the standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ[S]). Safety end points included the frequency and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events.<b>RESULTS: </b>During 48 weeks, the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations was significantly reduced for omalizumab compared with placebo (0.66 vs. 0.88 per patient; P = 0.006), representing a 25% relative reduction (incidence rate ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.92]). Omalizumab improved mean AQLQ(S) scores (0.29 point [CI, 0.15 to 0.43]), reduced mean daily albuterol puffs (-0.27 puff/d [CI, -0.49 to -0.04 puff/d]), and decreased mean asthma symptom score (-0.26 [CI, -0.42 to -0.10]) compared with placebo during the 48-week study period. The incidence of adverse events (80.4% vs. 79.5%) and serious adverse events (9.3% vs. 10.5%) were similar in the omalizumab and placebo groups, respectively.<b>Limitations: </b>The results are limited by early patient discontinuation (20.8%). The study was not powered to detect rare safety events or the treatment effect in the oral corticosteroid subgroup.<b>CONCLUSION: </b>In this study, omalizumab provided additional clinical benefit for patients with severe allergic asthma that is inadequately controlled with high-dose ICS and LABA therapy.<b>Primary Funding Source: </b>Genentech and Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
BACKGROUND: The physician's global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE) at 16 weeks has been shown to be the most effective assessment of response to omalizumab (XOLAIR®). This randomized, open-label, parallel-group study evaluated the persistency of treatment responder classification in patients receiving omalizumab added to optimized asthma therapy (OAT).
METHODS: Patients (12-75 years, n = 400) with severe allergic asthma, uncontrolled despite Global Initiative for Asthma 2004 Step 4 therapy, received OAT and omalizumab (n = 272) or OAT (n = 128) for 32 weeks. Response or nonresponse was evaluated at Weeks 16 and 32. Response was defined as an investigator's (physician's) GETE rating of excellent or good; nonresponse was defined as a rating of moderate, poor or worsening.
RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-nine patients had GETE ratings available at Weeks 16 and 32 (omalizumab n = 258, OAT n = 91). Omalizumab responders of about 171/187 (91.4%)and 44/71 (62.0%) omalizumab nonresponders at Week 16 persisted as responders or nonresponders at Week 32. The investigator's GETE at Week 16 predicted persistency of response or nonresponse to omalizumab at Week 32 for 83.3% (215/258) of patients. OAT patients showed a lower persistency of response (18/28 [64.3%]) and a higher persistency of nonresponse (57/63 [90.5%]) than omalizumab patients. Excellent and good GETE ratings in omalizumab-treated patients were reflected by improvements in exacerbation rates (P < 0.001), severe exacerbation rates (P = 0.023), hospitalizations (P = 0.003), total emergency visits (P = 0.026) and Asthma Control Questionnaire overall score (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Response to omalizumab, as assessed by a physician's GETE at 16 weeks, is an effective predictor of continuing persistent response to omalizumab for the majority of patients.
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>Research has underscored the effects of exposure and sensitization to allergens on the severity of asthma in inner-city children. It has also revealed the limitations of environmental remediation and guidelines-based therapy in achieving greater disease control.<b>METHODS: </b>We enrolled inner-city children, adolescents, and young adults with persistent asthma in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial at multiple centers to assess the effectiveness of omalizumab, as compared with placebo, when added to guidelines-based therapy. The trial was conducted for 60 weeks, and the primary outcome was symptoms of asthma.<b>RESULTS: </b>Among 419 participants who underwent randomization (at which point 73% had moderate or severe disease), omalizumab as compared with placebo significantly reduced the number of days with asthma symptoms, from 1.96 to 1.48 days per 2-week interval, a 24.5% decrease (P<0.001). Similarly, omalizumab significantly reduced the proportion of participants who had one or more exacerbations from 48.8 to 30.3% (P<0.001). Improvements occurred with omalizumab despite reductions in the use of inhaled glucocorticoids and long-acting beta-agonists.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>When added to a regimen of guidelines-based therapy for inner-city children, adolescents, and young adults, omalizumab further improved asthma control, nearly eliminated seasonal peaks in exacerbations, and reduced the need for other medications to control asthma. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Novartis; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00377572.).
BACKGROUND: Asthma in obese subjects is poorly understood, and these patients are often refractory to standard therapy.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to gain insights into the pathogenesis and treatment of asthma in obese subjects by determining how obesity and bariatric surgery affect asthma control, airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR), and markers of asthmatic inflammation.
METHODS: We performed a prospective study of (1) asthmatic and nonasthmatic patients undergoing bariatric surgery compared at baseline and (2) asthmatic patients followed for 12 months after bariatric surgery.
RESULTS: We studied 23 asthmatic and 21 nonasthmatic patients undergoing bariatric surgery. At baseline, asthmatic patients had lower FEV(1) and forced vital capacity and lower numbers of lymphocytes in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. After surgery, asthmatic participants experienced significant improvements in asthma control (asthma control score, 1.55 to 0.74; P < .0001) and asthma quality of life (4.87 to 5.87, P < .0001). Airways responsiveness to methacholine improved significantly (methacholine PC(20), 3.9 to 7.28, P = .03). There was a statistically significant interaction between IgE status and change in airways responsiveness (P for interaction = .01). The proportion of lymphocytes in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and the production of cytokines from activated peripheral blood CD4(+) T cells increased significantly.
CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery improves AHR in obese asthmatic patients with normal serum IgE levels. Weight loss has dichotomous effects on airway physiology and T-cell function typically involved in the pathogenesis of asthma, suggesting that obesity produces a unique phenotype of asthma that will require a distinct therapeutic approach.
Pre-clinical data demonstrate a pivotal role for interleukin (IL)-13 in the development and maintenance of asthma. This study assessed the effects of tralokinumab, an investigational human IL-13-neutralising immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody, in adults with moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma despite controller therapies. 194 subjects were randomised to receive tralokinumab (150, 300 or 600 mg) or placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks. Primary end-point was change from baseline in mean Asthma Control Questionnaire score (ACQ-6; ACQ mean of six individual item scores) at week 13 comparing placebo and combined tralokinumab dose groups. Secondary end-points included pre-bronchodilator lung function, rescue β(2)-agonist use and safety. Numerical end-points are reported as mean±sd. At week 13, change from baseline in ACQ-6 was -0.76±1.04 for tralokinumab versus -0.61±0.90 for placebo (p=0.375). Increases from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) were 0.21±0.38 L versus 0.06±0.48 L (p=0.072), with a dose-response observed across the tralokinumab doses tested. β(2)-agonist use (puffs per day) was decreased for tralokinumab -0.68±1.45 versus placebo -0.10±1.49 (p=0.020). The increase in FEV(1) following tralokinumab treatment remained evident 12 weeks after the final dose. Safety profile was acceptable with no serious adverse events related to tralokinumab. No improvement in ACQ-6 was observed, although tralokinumab treatment was associated with improved lung function.
