Literature DB >> 17262857

Does sputum eosinophilia predict the response to systemic corticosteroids in children with difficult asthma?

Christiane Lex1, Gavin Jenkins, Nicola M Wilson, Angela Zacharasiewicz, Ed Erin, Trevor T Hansel, Andrew Bush, Donald N R Payne.   

Abstract

Little evidence exists to guide the management of children with difficult asthma. The aim of this study was to determine whether children with difficult asthma, associated with sputum eosinophilia, are more likely to benefit from further treatment with high-dose systemic corticosteroids, compared to those without sputum eosinophilia. Induced sputum was obtained from 20 children aged between 8 and 15 years with difficult asthma before and after a systemic corticosteroid trial (prednisolone 40 mg/day for 14 days or a single 80 mg dose of intramuscular triamcinolone). Subjects were defined as "eosinophilic" if the baseline sputum eosinophil percentage was > or = 2.5% or "non-eosinophilic" if < 2.5%. Clinical response to the corticosteroid trial was assessed using spirometry and clinical data and defined by an increase in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) > 9% predicted and/or an overall subjective improvement. Seventeen children had evidence of satisfactory adherence to the systemic corticosteroid treatment; eight of these were "eosinophilic" and nine were "non-eosinophilic" subjects. Following the trial there was a similar clinical improvement in both groups, with FEV1 increasing in both the "eosinophilic" and "non-eosinophilic" groups (median change in FEV1 16 [range 5-54]% vs. 12.5 [1-29]% predicted). Sputum eosinophils fell in the "eosinophilic" group (median 17.5 [range 3-37]% vs. 0 [0-23]%, P = 0.054), with no change in the "non-eosinophilic" group (0 [0-2]% vs. 0 [0-1]%, P = 0.12). Sputum neutrophils did not change in either the "eosinophilic" (22.5 [5-50]% vs. 25 [0-91]%) or the "non-eosinophilic" group (27.5 [0-96] vs. 44 [9-96]%). In conclusion children with difficult asthma may benefit clinically from high-dose systemic corticosteroids even in the absence of sputum eosinophilia. 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17262857     DOI: 10.1002/ppul.20570

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Pulmonol        ISSN: 1099-0496


  5 in total

Review 1.  Tools in Asthma Evaluation and Management: When and How to Use Them?

Authors:  Anna Mulholland; Alana Ainsworth; Naveen Pillarisetti
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 1.967

2.  Eosinophil protein in airway macrophages: a novel biomarker of eosinophilic inflammation in patients with asthma.

Authors:  Neeta S Kulkarni; Fay Hollins; Christopher E Brightling; Amanda Sutcliffe; Ruth Saunders; Sachil Shah; Salman Siddiqui; Sumit Gupta; Pranab Haldar; Ruth Green; Ian Pavord; Andrew Wardlaw
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 10.793

3.  Asthma morbidity among inner-city adolescents receiving guidelines-based therapy: role of predictors in the setting of high adherence.

Authors:  Rebecca S Gruchalla; Hugh A Sampson; Elizabeth Matsui; Gloria David; Peter J Gergen; Agustin Calatroni; Mark Brown; Andrew H Liu; Gordon R Bloomberg; James F Chmiel; Rajesh Kumar; Carin Lamm; Ernestine Smartt; Christine A Sorkness; Suzanne F Steinbach; Kelly D Stone; Stanley J Szefler; William W Busse
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2009-07-16       Impact factor: 10.793

Review 4.  Clinical utility of asthma biomarkers: from bench to bedside.

Authors:  Susanne Jh Vijverberg; Bart Hilvering; Jan Am Raaijmakers; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Anke-Hilse Maitland-van der Zee; Leo Koenderman
Journal:  Biologics       Date:  2013-08-29

Review 5.  Assessment of adherence to corticosteroids in asthma by drug monitoring or fractional exhaled nitric oxide: A literature review.

Authors:  Fahad Alahmadi; Adam Peel; Brian Keevil; Rob Niven; Stephen J Fowler
Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 5.018

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.