Circulating periostin level in asthmatic pregnancy

Sex in Respiratory and Skin Allergies

A bulk of literature demonstrated that respiratory allergy, and especially asthma, is prevalent in males during childhood, while it becomes more frequent in females from adolescence, i.e., after menarche, to adulthood. The mechanisms underlying the difference between females and males are the effects on the immune response of female hormones and in particular the modulation of inflammatory response by estrogens, as well as the result of the activity of various cells, such as dendritic cells, innate lymphoid cells, Th1, Th2, T regulatory (Treg) and B regulatory (Bregs) cells, and a number of proteins and cytokines, which include interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13. As far as sexual dimorphism is concerned, a gender difference in the expression profiles of histamine receptors and of mast cells was demonstrated in experimental studies. A critical phase of hormone production is the menstrual cycle, which often is associated with asthma deterioration, as assessed by worsening of clinical symptoms and increase of bronchial hyperresponsiveness. In asthmatic woman, there is a high risk to develop more severe asthma during menstruation. The higher prevalence of asthma in females is confirmed also in the post-menopause age, but the underlying mechanisms are not yet understood. In pregnancy, asthma may worsen but may also improve or remain unchanged, with no significant difference in frequency of these three outcomes. For allergic rhinitis, the available studies indicate, likewise asthma, a male predominance in prevalence in childhood that shifts to a female predominance in adolescence and adulthood, but further investigation is needed.

Inhaled corticosteroid use during pregnancy among women with asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies demonstrate the prescription rate for inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) decreases in early pregnancy, possibly increasing exacerbation risk. This could be related to non-adherence to prescribed asthma medication or medication cessation by the patient or doctor. ICS use during pregnancy has not previously been summarized in a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the use of ICS during pregnancy among asthmatic women, specifically: (1) the prevalence of use, (2) changes of use during pregnancy compared with pre-pregnancy and (3) medication adherence among ICS users.

METHODS

We systematically searched literature in Embase, MEDLINE, CINAL and Cochrane, using terms related to asthma, pregnancy and medication use. All English articles reporting ICS among pregnant women with asthma were included. Prevalence, changes in ICS use during pregnancy and ICS adherence were pooled using STATA (version 15.0, StataCorp USA).

RESULTS

A total of 4237 references were retrieved in the initial search. Screening and review led to the inclusion of 52 articles for one or more aims (Aim 1: N = 45; Aim 2, N = 13; and Aim 3, N = 5). The pooled prevalence of ICS use during pregnancy was 41% (95%CI 36%-45%); 49% (95%CI 44%-55%) in Europe, 39% (95%CI 32%-47%) in Australia and 34% (95%CI 27%-41%) in North America. In eight prescription databases, ICS prescription rates lowered in the first trimester of pregnancy, compared with pre-pregnancy, increased in the second trimester and decreased in the third trimester. Five studies reported ICS adherence among pregnant women, using four measures of self-reported non-adherence. In two comparable studies, pooled ICS non-adherence was 40% (95%CI 36%-44%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of ICS use among pregnant women with asthma is 41% and varies widely between countries and continents, and prescription rates for ICS change throughout pregnancy. More studies are needed to investigate ICS adherence during pregnancy in women with asthma.

Looking for Airways Periostin in Severe Asthma: Could It Be Useful for Clustering Type 2 Endotype?

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma is heterogeneous clinically and biologically and is often difficult to control. In particular, the type 2 (T2) immunity endotype of severe asthma is gaining increasing interest because it is susceptible to newly developed biologic treatments that can transform the quality of life of these patients. The aim of this study was to analyze periostin concentrations in the airways of patients with severe asthma, evaluating its role in clustering the T2 endotype.

METHODS

We enrolled 40 consecutive patients with severe asthma (T2 endotype: n = 25; non-T2 endotype: n = 15), 21 patients with mild to moderate asthma, and 15 healthy control subjects. All subjects enrolled underwent exhaled breath condensate (EBC) and sputum collection, eosinophil count in blood, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and IgE measurement. Periostin was assessed by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit on EBC and induced sputum (IS) supernatant.

RESULTS

We were able to detect higher periostin levels in the EBC (0.75 ± 0.46 vs 0.70 ± 0.19 vs 0.11 ± 0.05 ng/mL, P < .05 and P < .01) and in IS (0.55 ± 0.23 vs 0.31 ± 0.13 vs 0.16 ± 0.120 ng/mL, P < .05 and P < .01) of patients with severe asthma compared with patients with mild to moderate asthma and healthy control subjects, respectively. We further found an increase of periostin levels in both samples in T2 endotype compared with non-T2 endotype (EBC: 0.88 ± 0.46 vs 0.52 ± 0.46 ng/mL; IS: 0.69 ± 0.19 vs 0.39 ± 0.16 ng/mL; P < .05) and a correlation between periostin levels in EBC and sputum.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that periostin is measurable in the airways and increased in patients with severe asthma, especially in those from the T2 endotype. Unlike serum periostin, which may be derived from several sources outside the lung, airways periostin is a useful marker of severe eosinophilic asthma and may help to phenotype patients that will respond to the biologic agents.