Covid-19 pandemic and asthma: What did we learn?

Outpatient utilization trend of bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory agents in the pandemic and beyond

As COVID-19 primarily affects the respiratory system, it may have impacted utilization patterns of drugs used in obstructive airway diseases (DOADs). We examined nationwide DOAD utilization trends before, during, and after pandemic measures. We collected data on DOADs (ATC-Code: R03) between 01.01.2017-28.02.2023 from IQVIA-Turkey. National outpatient sales and prescription projections were converted into consumption data, expressed as defined daily dose per 1,000 inhabitants (DID). We compared mean monthly consumption, costs, and quarterly DOADs use across "before restrictions" (BfR), "during restrictions" (DuR), and "after restrictions" (AfR) periods. We identified 433.5 million DOAD units consumed, costing €3.3 billion; inhaled-DOADs accounted for 73.1%. Mean monthly DOAD consumption remained stable (BfR: 67.8 ± 3.1 DID; DuR: 74.2 ± 12.5 DID; AfR: 74.2 ± 14.6 DID; p > 0.05). Inhaled-DOADs exhibited a similar pattern, except the anticholinergics with a significant increase in the DuR (19.4 ± 3.3 DID) compared to the BfR (16.1 ± 2.3 DID, p < 0.001). Also inhaled-corticosteroid monotherapy rose significantly between BfR (4.1 ± 0.9 DID) and AfR (5.3 ± 1.3 DID, p < 0.05). Montelukast, constituting 76.6% of systemic-DOADs, had higher consumption in AfR (15.0 ± 2.8 DID) than in BfR (11.7 ± 2.2 DID, p < 0.001) and DuR (12.9 ± 2.4 DID, p < 0.05). Overall DOAD prescriptions declined in DuR and trended upward in AfR but didn't reach pre-pandemic levels, except for new users of montelukast and long-acting beta agonists. Our study showed increased use of inhaled anticholinergics, glucocorticoid monotherapy, and montelukast within a generally stable overall DOAD utilization. This may reflect varied responses to bronchodilation and anti-inflammatory treatment needs during the pandemic and beyond.

Eosinophils and COVID-19: Insights into immune complexity and vaccine safety

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 exhibits a variety of symptoms and may lead to multi-organ failure and death. This clinical complexity is exacerbated by significant immune dysregulation affecting nearly all cells of the innate and adaptive immune system. Granulocytes, including eosinophils, are affected by SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES

Eosinophil responses remain poorly understood despite early recognition of eosinopenia as a hallmark feature of COVID-19 severity.

RESULTS

The heterogeneous nature of eosinophil responses categorizes them as dual-function cells with contradictory effects. Eosinophil activation can suppress virus-induced inflammation by releasing type 2 cytokines like IL-13 and granular proteins with antiviral action such as eosinophil-derived neurotoxins and eosinophil cationic protein, and also by acting as antigen-presenting cells. In contrast, eosinophil accumulation in the lungs can induce tissue damage triggered by cytokines or hormones like IFN-γ and leptin. Additionally, they can affect adaptive immune functions by interacting with T cells through direct formation of membrane complexes or soluble mediator action. Individuals with allergic disorders who have elevated levels of eosinophils in tissues and blood, such as asthma, do not appear to be at an increased risk of developing severe COVID-19 following SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine appears to be associated with complications and eosinophilic infiltrate-induced immunopathogenicity, which can be mitigated by corticosteroid, anti-histamines and anti-IL-5 therapy and avoided by modifying adjuvants or excipients.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the importance of eosinophils in COVID-19 and contributes to a better understanding of their role during natural infection and vaccination.

Benralizumab Outcomes in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma Treated in Real-Life Settings: Results of the BREEZE Study in 5 Countries From Central Eastern Europe and Baltics

Purpose

To describe real-world clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) patients initiated on benralizumab after treatment authorization in Central Eastern Europe and Baltic Area.

Patients and Methods

BREEZE was a retrospective, medical chart review with a pre-post design conducted in 42 clinical centers from Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania and Romania. Eligibility included diagnosis of SEA and at least one dose of benralizumab administered in real-life settings. Descriptive statistics were used in the full analysis set and key subgroups stratified by blood eosinophils (bEOS) number, maintenance oral corticosteroids (mOCS) use and prior biologics exposure and included calculation of the annualized exacerbation rate (AER) at baseline, and weeks (W) 16 and 48.

Results

Of 381 patients included, 66% were female with overall mean age 56 ±12 years at benralizumab start. At baseline: median bEOS 580 cells/μL (74% bEOS>400), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) 1660 mL, mOCS use in 25% of patients (10 mg/day prednisone equivalent, 68% >5 mg/day), AER 3.05 (95% CI 2.9-3.2), and poorly controlled asthma (Asthma Control Test [ACT] <16) in 63% of patients. Median duration of exposure to benralizumab was 11.5 (95% CI 7.7-12.3) months, and discontinuation rate was 1.3% (95% CI 0.4%-3.0%). Median bEOS decreased to 0 at W16 and maintained thereafter; FEV1 increases of +240 mL at W16 and +335 mL at W48 were reported (p <0.001 for both). Overall relative reduction in AER at W16 and W48 was 92% and 93%, respectively, and 82-94% across key subgroups. mOCS dose reduction was 50%, and proportion of patients requiring >5 mg/day decreased constantly (25% at W16, 28% at W48). ACT scores increased from W16 to W56 (p <0.001 for all).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate clinically meaningful benefits of benralizumab across multiple geographies and various subgroups of patients with SEA.

Evaluation of the case fatality rate in 2 031 309 hospitalised Brazilian patients due to COVID-19: An observational study of the first 3 years of the pandemic in Brazil

Introduction

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Brazil, there has been a high rate of deaths, mainly among those who were hospitalised due to the disease and those who needed intensive care units (ICUs) and mechanical ventilation support.

Methods

The study evaluated the hospitalised patients with COVID-19 as well as subgroups considering those hospitalised patients who needed ICU treatment and those who received invasive mechanical ventilation in an ICU. The risk of death was compared in these three groups with adjustments for gender, age, race and comorbidities. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify the main predictors of death. A hospitalised patient was considered COVID-19 positive if they had a positive real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or serological test, followed by a notification form completed by a health professional, usually a medical doctor. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the institution (Certificate of Presentation of Ethical Appreciation n° 67241323.0.0000.5514; Study Approval Technical Opinion n° 5.908.611).

Results

The study evaluated 2 031 309 hospitalised individuals with COVID-19. The case fatality rate was 33.2% (673 527/2 031 309). The case fatality rate was even higher among those patients who required ICU (372 031/665 621; 55.9%) treatment with the need for invasive ventilation support (240 704/303 505; 79.3%). In the multivariable analysis, the male sex (OR=1.14; 95% CI=1.13-1.15), older age [61 to 72 years old (OR=2.43; 95% CI=2.41-2.46), 83 to 85 years old (OR=4.10; 95% CI=4.06-4.14) and+85 years (OR=6.98; 95% CI=6.88-7.07)], race [mixed individuals (Pardos) (OR=1.33; 95% CI=1.32-1.34), Black people (OR=1.57; 95% CI=1.55-1.60) and Indigenous peoples (OR=1.82, 95% CI=1.69-1.97)] and the presence of comorbidities [mainly, hepatic disorder (OR=1.80; 95% CI=1.73-1.87), immunosuppressive disorder (OR=1.80; 95% CI=1.76-1.84) and kidney disorder (OR=1.67; 95% CI=1.64-1.70)] were associated with an increased chance of death, except asthma (OR=0.77; 95% CI=0.75-0.79). In addition, among all admitted patients with COVID-19, the need for an ICU (OR=2.08; 95% CI=2.06-2.13) and invasive ventilatory support (OR=14.86; 95% CI=14.66-15.05) had an impact on death as an outcome.

Conclusion

Although the number of daily deaths from the coronavirus dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, our retrospective analysis showed a higher case fatality rate in patients requiring ICU, mainly when using invasive ventilation, compared with the rest of the world.

Key Characteristics of Asthma Patients with COVID-19 Vary Substantially by Age

Introduction

Assessing COVID-19 risk in asthma patients is challenging due to disease heterogeneity and complexity. We hypothesized that potential risk factors for COVID-19 may differ among asthma age groups, hindering important insights when studied together.

Methods

We included a population-based cohort of asthma patients from the Swedish National Airway Register (SNAR) and linked to data from several national health registers. COVID-19 outcomes included infection, hospitalization, and death from Jan 2020 until Feb 2021. Asthma patients were grouped by ages 12-17, 18-39, 40-64, and ≥65 years. Characteristics of asthma patients with different COVID-19 outcomes were compared with those in their age-corresponding respective source population.

Results

Among 201,140 asthma patients studied, 11.2% were aged 12-17 years, 26.4% 18-39, 37.6% 40-64, and 24.9% ≥65 years. We observed 18,048 (9.0%) COVID-19 infections, 2172 (1.1%) hospitalizations, and 336 (0.2%) COVID-19 deaths. Deaths occurred only among patients aged ≥40. When comparing COVID-19 cases to source asthma populations by age, large differences in potential risk factors emerged, mostly for COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths. For ages 12-17, these included education, employment, autoimmune, psychiatric, and depressive conditions, and use of short-acting β-agonists (SABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). In the 18-39 age group, largest differences were for age, marital status, respiratory failure, anxiety, and body mass index. Ages 40-64 displayed notable differences for sex, birth region, cancer, oral corticosteroids, antihistamines, and smoking. For those aged ≥65, largest differences were observed for cardiovascular comorbidities, type 1 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, allergic conditions, and specific asthma treatments (ICS-SABA, ICS-long-acting bronchodilators (LABA)). Asthma control and lung function were important across all age groups.

Conclusion

We identify distinct differences in COVID-19-related risk factors among asthma patients of different ages. This information is essential for assessing COVID-19 risk in asthma patients and for tailoring patient care and public health strategies accordingly.

Association Between ACE2 and Lung Diseases

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is an important regulator of the Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS). Additionally, it has been identified as a functional receptor for the Coronavirus. Research indicates that ACE2 plays a role in the regulation of cardiovascular systems by modulating blood pressure and electrolyte balance. Its role in pulmonary diseases has also garnered significant attention due to the widespread prevalence of Coronavirus. There is solid evidence linking ACE2 to other pulmonary diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute respiratory distress syndrome, allergic asthma, among others. However, the exact pathological and physiological mechanisms of ACE2 in these diseases remain elusive. Our research aims to review and explore the latest advancements in ACE2-related studies in pulmonary diseases. These findings have the potential to open new avenues for utilizing ACE2 as a potential biomarker for early diagnosis and monitoring of pulmonary diseases.