BACKGROUND: Airway inflammation assessed by bronchial biopsies demonstrates distinct eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes in severe asthma, but their relationship to other biomarkers of disease (induced sputum and nitric oxide [NO]) is not clear. OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare airway inflammation using noninvasive (induced sputum, exhaled NO), and invasive (bronchial biopsies) methods in moderate and severe asthma and to assess whether induced sputum and exhaled NO would allow the identification of eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes in severe asthma. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 32 subjects with severe asthma and 35 subjects with moderate asthma, from whom we obtained bronchial biopsies, induced sputum, and exhaled NO measurements. RESULTS: Among subjects with severe asthma, we identified eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes using both bronchial biopsies and sputum cell counts. However, the vast majority of subjects with high sputum eosinophil counts did not have high mucosal eosinophil counts. Exhaled NO was increased in the eosinophilic phenotype as judged from bronchial biopsy findings, but not on the basis of induced sputum. Subjects with high sputum eosinophil counts experienced more asthma exacerbations than the subjects with low sputum eosinophil counts. In contrast, we did not find any differences in the clinical characteristics between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes that were identified by bronchial biopsies. CONCLUSION: The use of sputum cell counts allowed the identification of a subgroup of subjects with severe asthma who were at risk of more frequent asthma exacerbations. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Monitoring sputum eosinophil counts in subjects with severe asthma may allow identifying the subjects with the greatest disease activity.
BACKGROUND: Airway inflammation assessed by bronchial biopsies demonstrates distinct eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes in severe asthma, but their relationship to other biomarkers of disease (induced sputum and nitric oxide [NO]) is not clear. OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare airway inflammation using noninvasive (induced sputum, exhaled NO), and invasive (bronchial biopsies) methods in moderate and severe asthma and to assess whether induced sputum and exhaled NO would allow the identification of eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes in severe asthma. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 32 subjects with severe asthma and 35 subjects with moderate asthma, from whom we obtained bronchial biopsies, induced sputum, and exhaled NO measurements. RESULTS: Among subjects with severe asthma, we identified eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes using both bronchial biopsies and sputum cell counts. However, the vast majority of subjects with high sputum eosinophil counts did not have high mucosal eosinophil counts. Exhaled NO was increased in the eosinophilic phenotype as judged from bronchial biopsy findings, but not on the basis of induced sputum. Subjects with high sputum eosinophil counts experienced more asthma exacerbations than the subjects with low sputum eosinophil counts. In contrast, we did not find any differences in the clinical characteristics between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic phenotypes that were identified by bronchial biopsies. CONCLUSION: The use of sputum cell counts allowed the identification of a subgroup of subjects with severe asthma who were at risk of more frequent asthma exacerbations. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Monitoring sputum eosinophil counts in subjects with severe asthma may allow identifying the subjects with the greatest disease activity.
Authors: Allan R Brasier; Sundar Victor; Gary Boetticher; Hyunsu Ju; Chang Lee; Eugene R Bleecker; Mario Castro; William W Busse; William J Calhoun Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Louise Fleming; Lemonia Tsartsali; Nicola Wilson; Nicolas Regamey; Andrew Bush Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Njira Lugogo; Cynthia L Green; Noah Agada; Siyi Zhang; Susanne Meghdadpour; Run Zhou; Siyun Yang; Kevin J Anstrom; Elliot Israel; Richard Martin; Robert F Lemanske; Homer Boushey; Stephen C Lazarus; Stephen I Wasserman; Mario Castro; William Calhoun; Stephen P Peters; Emily DiMango; Vernon Chinchilli; Susan Kunselman; Tonya S King; Nikolina Icitovic; Monica Kraft Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Douglas C Cowan; D Robin Taylor; Laura E Peterson; Jan O Cowan; Rochelle Palmay; Avis Williamson; Jef Hammel; Serpil C Erzurum; Stanley L Hazen; Suzy A A Comhair Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Laura E Crotty Alexander; Kathryn Akong-Moore; Stephanie Feldstein; Per Johansson; Anh Nguyen; Elisa K McEachern; Shari Nicatia; Andrew S Cowburn; Joshua Olson; Jae Youn Cho; Hart Isaacs; Randall S Johnson; David H Broide; Victor Nizet Journal: J Mol Med (Berl) Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: Chun Kwok Wong; Shuiqing Hu; Karen Ming-Lam Leung; Jie Dong; Lan He; Yi Jun Chu; Ida Miu-Ting Chu; Huai-Na Qiu; Kelly Yan-Ping Liu; Christopher Wai-Kei Lam Journal: Cell Mol Immunol Date: 2013-03-25 Impact factor: 11.530