Jerry A Krishnan1, Stephen C Lazarus2, Kathryn V Blake3, Christine A Sorkness4, Ronina Covar5, Anne-Marie Dyer6, Jason E Lang7, Njira L Lugogo8, David T Mauger6, Michael E Wechsler5, Sally E Wenzel9, Juan Carlos Cardet10, Mario Castro11, Elliot Israel12, Wanda Phipatanakul13, Tonya S King6. 1. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 2. University of California, San Francisco, California. 3. Nemours Children's Health, Jacksonville, Florida. 4. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 5. National Jewish Health, Denver, Colorado. 6. Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 7. Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. 8. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 9. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 10. University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. 11. University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, Kansas. 12. Harvard Medical School Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; and. 13. Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
Rationale: Whether biomarkers can be used to predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in mild persistent asthma is unclear. Objectives: In a prespecified exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial of 295 participants 12 years of age or older with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma, we sought to identify biomarkers of treatment response after 12 weeks of ICS (mometasone, 200 μg or 220 μg twice/d), LAMA (tiotropium, 5 μg/d), or placebo in adults (⩾18 yr) and adolescents (12-17 yr) separately. Methods: The primary outcome was a composite outcome of asthma control (treatment failure, asthma control days, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]). Analyses examined type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiologic biomarkers. We assessed the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for response to ICS and LAMA (each versus placebo). An AUC of 0.5 suggests no discrimination, 0.7-0.8 is considered acceptable, more than 0.8-0.9 is considered excellent, and more than 0.9 is considered outstanding. Results: In 237 adults, sputum and blood eosinophil levels and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-0.69], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.56-0.72], and 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70], respectively; all P < 0.01); the AUC for blood eosinophil levels and FeNO together was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.74; P < 0.001). In 58 adolescents, the number of positive aeroallergens and total serum immunoglobulin E each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.85] and 0.73 [95% CI, 0.58-0.87], respectively; both P < 0.03); the AUC for both together was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.87; P = 0.003). After ipratropium bromide, FEV1 reversibility predicted LAMA response in adults (AUC: 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.69], P = 0.007) but not in adolescents. Conclusions: The AUCs of the type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiological biomarkers we examined may not be high enough to confidently identify individuals with asthma who respond to ICS and LAMA. However, our findings indicate that the biomarkers that predict response to ICS or LAMA may differ in adults versus adolescents with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma. Prospective, biomarker-stratified clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and to identify first-line controllers tailored for each population.
Rationale: Whether biomarkers can be used to predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in mild persistent asthma is unclear. Objectives: In a prespecified exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial of 295 participants 12 years of age or older with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma, we sought to identify biomarkers of treatment response after 12 weeks of ICS (mometasone, 200 μg or 220 μg twice/d), LAMA (tiotropium, 5 μg/d), or placebo in adults (⩾18 yr) and adolescents (12-17 yr) separately. Methods: The primary outcome was a composite outcome of asthma control (treatment failure, asthma control days, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]). Analyses examined type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiologic biomarkers. We assessed the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for response to ICS and LAMA (each versus placebo). An AUC of 0.5 suggests no discrimination, 0.7-0.8 is considered acceptable, more than 0.8-0.9 is considered excellent, and more than 0.9 is considered outstanding. Results: In 237 adults, sputum and blood eosinophil levels and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-0.69], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.56-0.72], and 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70], respectively; all P < 0.01); the AUC for blood eosinophil levels and FeNO together was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.74; P < 0.001). In 58 adolescents, the number of positive aeroallergens and total serum immunoglobulin E each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.85] and 0.73 [95% CI, 0.58-0.87], respectively; both P < 0.03); the AUC for both together was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.87; P = 0.003). After ipratropium bromide, FEV1 reversibility predicted LAMA response in adults (AUC: 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.69], P = 0.007) but not in adolescents. Conclusions: The AUCs of the type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiological biomarkers we examined may not be high enough to confidently identify individuals with asthma who respond to ICS and LAMA. However, our findings indicate that the biomarkers that predict response to ICS or LAMA may differ in adults versus adolescents with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma. Prospective, biomarker-stratified clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and to identify first-line controllers tailored for each population.
Authors: Steven Pascoe; Nicholas Locantore; Mark T Dransfield; Neil C Barnes; Ian D Pavord Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2015-04-12 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Prescott G Woodruff; Barmak Modrek; David F Choy; Guiquan Jia; Alexander R Abbas; Almut Ellwanger; Laura L Koth; Joseph R Arron; John V Fahy Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2009-05-29 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Joe K Gerald; Lynn B Gerald; Monica M Vasquez; Wayne J Morgan; Susan J Boehmer; Robert F Lemanske; David T Mauger; Robert C Strunk; Stanley J Szefler; Robert S Zeiger; Leonard B Bacharier; Elizabeth Bade; Ronina A Covar; Theresa W Guilbert; Hengameh Heidarian-Raissy; H William Kelly; Jonathan Malka-Rais; Christine A Sorkness; Lynn M Taussig; Vernon M Chinchilli; Fernando D Martinez Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2015-03-14
Authors: Stanley J Szefler; Brenda R Phillips; Fernando D Martinez; Vernon M Chinchilli; Robert F Lemanske; Robert C Strunk; Robert S Zeiger; Gary Larsen; Joseph D Spahn; Leonard B Bacharier; Gordon R Bloomberg; Theresa W Guilbert; Gregory Heldt; Wayne J Morgan; Mark H Moss; Christine A Sorkness; Lynn M Taussig Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Paul M O'Byrne; J Mark FitzGerald; Eric D Bateman; Peter J Barnes; Nanshan Zhong; Christina Keen; Carin Jorup; Rosa Lamarca; Stefan Ivanov; Helen K Reddel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Alberto Papi; Giorgio W Canonica; Piero Maestrelli; Pierluigi Paggiaro; Dario Olivieri; Ernesto Pozzi; Nunzio Crimi; Antonio M Vignola; Paolo Morelli; Gabriele Nicolini; Leonardo M Fabbri Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-05-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christine A Sorkness; Tonya S King; Anne-Marie Dyer; Vernon M Chinchilli; David T Mauger; Jerry A Krishnan; Kathryn Blake; Mario Castro; Ronina Covar; Elliot Israel; Monica Kraft; Jason E Lang; Njira Lugogo; Stephen P Peters; Michael E Wechsler; Sally E Wenzel; Stephen C Lazarus Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-12-27 Impact factor: 2.226