Use of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma and coronavirus disease 2019: Keep calm and carry on

Adherence to application technique of inhaled corticosteroid in patients with asthma and COVID-19 improves outcomes

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids have been widely reported as a preventive measure against the development of severe forms of COVID-19 not only in patients with asthma.

METHODS

In 654 Czech and Slovak patients with asthma who developed COVID-19, we investigated whether the correct use of inhaler containing corticosteroids was associated with a less severe course of COVID-19 and whether this had an impact on the need for hospitalisation, measurable lung functions and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

Of the studied cohort 51.4% had moderate persistent, 29.9% mild persistent and 7.2% severe persistent asthma. We found a significant adverse effect of poor inhaler adherence on COVID-19 severity (p=0.049). We also observed a lower hospitalisation rate in patients adequately taking the inhaler with OR of 0.83. Vital capacity and forced expiratory lung volume deterioration caused by COVID-19 were significantly reversed, by approximately twofold to threefold, in individuals who inhaled correctly.

CONCLUSION

Higher quality of inhalation technique of corticosteroids measured by adherence to an inhaled medication application technique (A-AppIT) score had a significant positive effect on reversal of the vital capacity and forced expiratory lung volume in 1 s worsening (p=0.027 and p<0.0001, respectively) due to COVID-19. Scoring higher in the A-AppIT was also associated with significantly improved QoL. All measured variables concordantly and without exception showed a positive improvement in response to better adherence. We suggest that corticosteroids provide protection against the worsening of lungs in patients with COVID-19 and that correct and easily assessable adherence to corticosteroids with appropriate inhalation technique play an important role in preventing severe form of COVID-19.

Expression of circulating angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in children with asthma and the effects of inhaled corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

The global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a significant disease burden, yet asthma patients do not have the expected high morbidity and mortality rates in the pandemics of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To find the difference of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in asthma and nonasthma children and evaluate the effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on its expression.

METHODS

The ACE2, immunoglobulin E (IgE), and eosinophils were tested in different children.

RESULTS

A total of 157 children aged 3-16 years were enrolled. The expression of ACE2 in asthma children were lower than nonasthma children (T = -2.512, p = .013). Allergic nonasthma children had a significant higher ACE2 expression than children with allergic asthma (p = .013) and nonallergic asthma (p = .029). The expression of ACE2 had no significant difference between first-diagnosed asthma children and that had been treated with ICS for ≥6 months (F = 0.028, p = .598). The allergic asthma children showed a significantly higher eosinophils cells (EC) count than the allergic nonasthma (W = 200, p < .001) and nonallergic nonasthma children (W = 1089, p < .001). Nonallergic asthma children also had a significant higher EC count than the allergic non-asthma (W = 182.5, p < .001) and nonallergic non-asthma (W = 200.5, p < .001) children. There was no significant difference in IgE levels between asthmatic children and non-asthmatic children (W = 2792.5, p = .18).

CONCLUSION

Circulating ACE2 levels in asthmatic children were lower than those in non-asthmatic children and ICS treatment for ≥6 months did not affect the expression of ACE2 in peripheral blood in the asthma children.

Asthma and coronavirus disease 2019-related outcomes in hospitalized patients: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Several chronic conditions have been associated with a higher risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including asthma. However, there are conflicting conclusions regarding risk of severe disease in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the impact of asthma on COVID-19 outcomes in a cohort of hospitalized patients and whether there is any association between asthma severity and worse outcomes.

METHODS

We identified hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with confirmatory polymerase chain reaction testing with (n = 183) and without asthma (n = 1319) using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes between March 1 and December 30, 2020. We determined asthma maintenance medications, pulmonary function tests, highest historical absolute eosinophil count, and immunoglobulin E. Primary outcomes included death, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Analysis was adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, and timing of illness in the pandemic.

RESULTS

In unadjusted analyses, we found no difference in our primary outcomes between patients with asthma and patients without asthma. However, in adjusted analyses, patients with asthma were more likely to have mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-2.44; P = .04), ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.09-2.29; P = .02), longer hospital length of stay (risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.09-1.55; P < .003), and higher mortality (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.33; P = .04) compared with the non-asthma cohort. Inhaled corticosteroid use and eosinophilic phenotype were not associated with considerabledifferences. Interestingly, patients with moderate asthma had worse outcomes whereas patients with severe asthma did not.

CONCLUSION

Asthma was associated with severe COVID-19 after controlling for other factors.

Epidemiology, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Mortality of Asthma and COPD in COVID-19: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analyses

Purpose

There has been concern that asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] increase the risk of developing and exacerbating COVID-19. The effect of medications such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and biologics on COVID-19 is unclear. This systematic literature review analyzed the published evidence on epidemiology and the burden of illness of asthma and COPD, and the use of baseline medicines among COVID-19 populations.

Patients and Methods

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, Embase®, MEDLINE® and Cochrane were searched (January 2019–August 2021). The prevalence of asthma or COPD among COVID-19 populations was compared to the country-specific populations. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated to compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) rates, and meta-analyses of outcomes were estimated from age-adjusted ORs (aORs) or hazard ratios (aHRs). Meta-analyses of COVID-19 outcomes were conducted using random effects models for binary outcomes.

Results

Given the number and heterogeneity of studies, only 183 high-quality studies were analyzed, which reported hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, ventilation/intubation, or mortality. Asthma patients were not at increased risk for COVID-19–related hospitalization (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.20), ICU admission (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.1.48), ventilation/intubation (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.62), or mortality (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.96). Accounting for confounding variables, COPD patients were at higher risk of hospitalization (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.30 to 1.61), ICU admission (aOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.51), and mortality (aOR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.65). Sixty-five studies reported outcomes associated with ICS or biologic use. There was limited evidence that ICS or biologics significantly impacted the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, HCRU, or mortality in asthma or COPD patients.

Conclusion

In high-quality studies included, patients with asthma were not at significantly higher odds for adverse COVID-19–related outcomes, while patients with COPD were at higher odds. There was no clear evidence that baseline medication affected outcomes.

Registration

PROSPERO (CRD42021233963).

Asthma and COVID-19: an update

As the world faces the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, concerns have been raised that asthma patients could be at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity. However, it appears that asthma is not an independent risk factor for both. Furthermore, asthma is not over-represented in hospitalised patients with severe pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection and there was no increased risk of asthma exacerbations triggered by SARS-CoV-2. There is accumulating evidence that asthma phenotypes and comorbidities are important factors in evaluating the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity, as findings suggest that Th2-high inflammation may reduce the risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and disease severity in contrast to increased risk in patients with Th2-low asthma. The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is safe in asthma patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Furthermore, it has been proposed that ICS may confer some degree of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and the development of severe disease by reducing the expression of angiotensin converting enzyme-2 and transmembrane protease serine in the lung. In contrast, chronic or recurrent use of systemic corticosteroids before SARS-CoV-2 infection is a major risk factor of poor outcomes and worst survival in asthma patients. Conversely, biological therapy for severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma does not increase the risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 or having worse COVID-19 severity. In the present review we will summarise the current literature regarding asthma and COVID-19.

Swiss Recommendations for the Follow-Up and Treatment of Pulmonary Long COVID

INTRODUCTION

Emerging evidence suggests that long-term pulmonary symptoms and functional impairment occurs in a proportion of individuals following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although the proportion of affected patients remains to be determined, physicians are increasingly being confronted with patients reporting respiratory symptoms and impairment beyond the acute phase of COVID-19. In face of limited evidence, the Swiss Society for Pulmonology established a working group to address this area of unmet need and formulated diagnostic and treatment recommendations for the care of patients with pulmonary long COVID (LC).

METHOD

The Swiss COVID Lung Study group and Swiss Society for Pulmonology (SSP) formulated 13 questions addressing the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary LC. A survey within the SSP special interest groups involved in care of LC patients was conducted in Switzerland. A CORE process/Delphi-like process was used to formulate recommendations. Forty experienced pulmonologists replied to the first survey and 22 completed the second follow-up survey. Agreement of ≥70% consensus led to formulation of a recommendation.

RESULTS

The participants in the survey reached consensus and formulated a strong recommendation for regarding the following points. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 should have a pulmonary assessment including pulmonary function tests. Symptomatic subjects affected by COVID-19, including those with mild disease, should benefit from a pulmonary follow-up. Persistent respiratory symptoms after COVID-19 should be investigated by a pulmonary follow-up including plethysmography, diffusion capacity measurement, and blood gases analysis. Individuals having suffered from COVID-19 and who present with persistent respiratory symptoms should be offered a rehabilitation. Additional questions were given moderateor weak recommendations for. The panel did not reach sufficient consensus for pharmacological therapy (e.g., therapy specifically targeting lung fibrosis) to formulate recommendations for LC drug treatment.

CONCLUSION

The formulated recommendations should serve as an interim guidance to facilitate diagnosis and treatment of patients with pulmonary LC. As new evidence emerges, these recommendations may need to be adapted.

Evaluating the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on asthma morbidity: A comprehensive analysis of potential influencing factors

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period is experiencing better asthma control, fewer exacerbations, and health care utilization, with limited data on factors that could explain this phenomenon.

OBJECTIVE

To confirm these improved asthma outcomes during COVID-19 and evaluate potential contributing factors.

METHODS

In 18,912 pediatric patients with asthma treated in the Children's Hospital of Orange County network from 2017 to 2020, monthly asthma-related encounters and medication summaries were extracted from electronic health records, particulate matter 2.5 (PM_2.5) air pollution from the California Air Resources Board, and influenza-like illness from Illness Surveillance Network for the first 6 months of each year. Changes in outcomes between January to March and April to June (post-COVID-19 shutdown in 2020) were compared with historical data using generalized estimating equations analyses for patient outcomes and generalized linear models for pollution exceedance, influenza-positive, and telehealth visit rates.

RESULTS

During COVID-19, we found 78%, 90%, 68% reductions in hospitalization, emergency department visits, and exacerbations, respectively, compared with pre-COVID-19 2020, with significantly greater changes than the same time period of 2017 to 2019 and significant reductions in albuterol and inhaled corticosteroid use (P < .05). Emergency department visit reduction was not seen for African Americans. The PM_2.5 and influenza rates were also significantly reduced during COVID-19 (P < .05). Increased rates in telehealth visits were greater in the publicly insured group when compared with commercially insured.

CONCLUSION

Our data confirm reduced health care utilization and suggest better asthma control during COVID-19, except for African Americans. This was associated with a significant increase in telehealth visits and reductions in PM_2.5 and influenza infections, but not better asthma controller adherence.