Tolerance to the bronchoprotective effect of salmeterol in adolescents with exercise-induced asthma using concurrent inhaled glucocorticoid treatment

Work Group Report: Perspectives in Diagnosis and Management of Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction in Athletes

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, otherwise known as exercise-induced bronchoconstriction with asthma or without asthma, is an acute airway narrowing that occurs as a result of exercise and can occur in patients with asthma. A panel of members from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Sports, Exercise, & Fitness Committee reviewed the diagnosis and management of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in athletes of all skill levels including recreational athletes, high school and college athletes, and professional athletes. A special emphasis was placed on the recommendations and regulations set forth by professional athletic organizations after a detailed review of their collective bargaining agreements, substance abuse policies, antidoping program manuals, and the World Anti-Doping Agency antidoping code. The recommendations in this review are based on currently available evidence in addition to providing guidance for athletes of all skill levels as well as their treating physicians to better understand which pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical management options are appropriate as well as which medications are permitted or prohibited, and the proper documentation required to remain compliant.

A comparison of tiotropium, long-acting β2-agonists and leukotriene receptor antagonists on lung function and exacerbations in paediatric patients with asthma

Diagnosing and treating asthma in paediatric patients remains challenging, with many children and adolescents remaining uncontrolled despite treatment. Selecting the most appropriate pharmacological treatment to add onto inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in children and adolescents with asthma who remain symptomatic despite ICS can be difficult. This literature review compares the efficacy and safety of long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs), leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) as add-on treatment to ICS in children and adolescents aged 4-17 years.A literature search identified a total of 29 studies that met the inclusion criteria, including 21 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of LABAs versus placebo, two RCTs of LAMAs (tiotropium) versus placebo, and four RCTs of LTRA (montelukast), all as add-on to ICS. In these studies, tiotropium and LABAs provided greater improvements in lung function than LTRAs, when compared with placebo as add-on to ICS. Although exacerbation data were difficult to interpret, tiotropium reduced the risk of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids when added to ICS, with or without additional controllers. LABAs and LTRAs had a comparable risk of asthma exacerbations with placebo when added to ICS. When adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs were analysed, LABAs, montelukast and tiotropium had a comparable safety profile with placebo.In conclusion, this literature review provides an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of LABAs, LTRAs and LAMAs as add-on to ICS in children and adolescents with asthma. Overall, tiotropium and LABAs have similar efficacy, and provide greater improvements in lung function than montelukast as add-on to ICS. All three controller options have comparable safety profiles.

Many continuous variables should be analyzed using the relative scale: a case study of β2-agonists for preventing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction

BACKGROUND

The relative scale adjusts for baseline variability and therefore may lead to findings that can be generalized more widely. It is routinely used for the analysis of binary outcomes but only rarely for continuous outcomes. Our objective was to compare relative vs absolute scale pooled outcomes using data from a recently published Cochrane systematic review that reported only absolute effects of inhaled β₂-agonists on exercise-induced decline in forced-expiratory volumes in 1 s (FEV₁).

METHODS

From the Cochrane review, we selected placebo-controlled cross-over studies that reported individual participant data (IPD). Reversal in FEV₁ decline after exercise was modeled as a mean uniform percentage point (pp) change (absolute effect) or average percent change (relative effect) using either intercept-only or slope-only, respectively, linear mixed-effect models. We also calculated the pooled relative effect estimates using standard random-effects, inverse-variance-weighting meta-analysis using study-level mean effects.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with 187 participants were identified for the IPD analysis. On the absolute scale, β₂-agonists decreased the exercise-induced FEV₁ decline by 28 pp., and on the relative scale, they decreased the FEV₁ decline by 90%. The fit of the statistical model was significantly better with the relative 90% estimate compared with the absolute 28 pp. estimate. Furthermore, the median residuals (5.8 vs. 10.8 pp) were substantially smaller in the relative effect model than in the absolute effect model. Using standard study-level meta-analysis of the same 14 studies, β₂-agonists reduced exercise-induced FEV₁ decline on the relative scale by a similar amount: 83% or 90%, depending on the method of calculating the relative effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the absolute scale, the relative scale captures more effectively the variation in the effects of β₂-agonists on exercise-induced FEV₁-declines. The absolute scale has been used in the analysis of FEV₁ changes and may have led to sub-optimal statistical analysis in some cases. The choice between the absolute and relative scale should be determined based on biological reasoning and empirical testing to identify the scale that leads to lower heterogeneity.

Pharmacologic Strategies for Exercise-Induced Bronchospasm with a Focus on Athletes

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is the transient narrowing of the airways during and after exercise that occurs in response to increased ventilation in susceptible individuals. It occurs across the age spectrum in patients with underlying asthma and can occur in athletes without baseline asthma. The inflammatory mechanisms underlying EIB in patients without asthma may be distinct from those underlying EIB in patients with asthma. This review summarizes mechanistic and clinical data that can guide the choice of chronic and acute pharmacologic therapies targeting control of EIB. Relevant regulations from the World Anti-Doping Agency are also discussed.

Pharmacogenetics of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists in asthma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) are recommended in asthma therapy; however, not all asthma patients respond well to LABA. We performed a systematic review on genetic variants associated with LABA response in patients with asthma.

METHODS

Articles published until April 2017 were searched by two authors using PubMed and EMBASE. Pharmacogenetic studies in patients with asthma and LABA response as an outcome were included.

RESULTS

In total, 33 studies were included in this systematic review; eight focused on children (n = 6051). Nineteen studies were clinical trials, while 14 were observational studies. Studies used different outcomes to define LABA response, for example, lung function measurements (FEV₁ , PEF, MMEF, FVC), exacerbations, quality of life, and asthma symptoms. Most studies (n = 30) focused on the ADRB2 gene, encoding the beta2-adrenergic receptor. Thirty studies (n = 14 874) addressed ADRB2 rs1042713, 7 ADRB2 rs1042714 (n = 1629), and 3 ADRB2 rs1800888 (n = 1892). The association of ADRB2 rs1042713 and rs1800888 with LABA response heterogeneity was successfully replicated. Other variants were only studied in three studies but not replicated. One study focused on the ADCY9 gene. Five studies and a meta-analysis found an increased risk of exacerbations in pediatrics using LABA carrying one or two A alleles (OR 1.52 [1.17; 1.99]). These results were not confirmed in adults.

CONCLUSIONS

ADRB2 rs1042713 variant is most consistently associated with response to LABA in children but not adults. To assess the clinical value of ADRB2 rs1042713 in children with asthma using LABA, a randomized clinical trial with well-defined outcomes is needed.

Repurposing drugs as inhaled therapies in asthma

For the first 40 years of the 20th century treatment for asthma occurred in response to an asthma attack. The treatments were given by injection or orally and included the adrenergic agonists adrenalin/epinephrine and ephedrine and a phosphodiesterase inhibitor theophylline. Epinephrine became available as an aerosol in 1930. After 1945, isoprenaline, a non-selective beta agonist, became available for oral use but it was most widely used by inhalation. Isoprenaline was short-acting with unwanted cardiac effects. More selective beta agonists, with a longer duration of action and fewer side-effects became available, including orciprenaline in 1967, salbutamol in 1969 and terbutaline in 1970. The inhaled steroid beclomethasone was available by 1972 and budesonide by 1982. Spirometry alone and in response to exercise was used to assess efficacy and duration of action of these drugs for the acute benefits of beta₂ agonists and the chronic benefits of corticosteroids. Early studies comparing oral and aerosol beta₂ agonists found equivalence in bronchodilator effect but the aerosol treatment was superior in preventing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Inhaled drugs are now widely used including the long-acting beta₂ agonists, salmeterol and formoterol, and the corticosteroids, fluticasone, ciclesonide, mometasone and triamcinolone, that act locally and have low systemic bio-availability. Repurposing drugs as inhaled therapies permitted direct delivery of low doses of drug to the site of action reducing the incidence of unwanted side-effects and permitting the prophylactic treatment of asthma.

Comparable reductions in hyperpnoea-induced bronchoconstriction and markers of airway inflammation after supplementation with 6·2 and 3·1 g/d of long-chain n-3 PUFA in adults with asthma

Although high dose n-3 PUFA supplementation reduces exercise- and hyperpnoea-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB/HIB), there are concurrent issues with cost, compliance and gastrointestinal discomfort. It is thus pertinent to establish the efficacy of lower n-3 PUFA doses. Eight male adults with asthma and HIB and eight controls without asthma were randomly supplemented with two n-3 PUFA doses (6·2 g/d (3·7 g EPA and 2·5 g DHA) and 3·1 g/d (1·8 g EPA and 1·3 g DHA)) and a placebo, each for 21 d followed by 14 d washout. A eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea (EVH) challenge was performed before and after treatments. Outcome measures remained unchanged in the control group. In the HIB group, the peak fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) after EVH at day 0 (-1005 (sd 520) ml, -30 (sd 18) %) was unchanged after placebo. The peak fall in FEV1 was similarly reduced from day 0 to day 21 of 6·2 g/d n-3 PUFA (-1000 (sd 460) ml, -29 (sd 17) % v. -690 (sd 460) ml, -20 (sd 15) %) and 3·1 g/d n-3 PUFA (-970 (sd 480) ml, -28 (sd 18) % v. -700 (sd 420) ml, -21 (sd 15) %) (P<0·001). Baseline fraction of exhaled nitric oxide was reduced by 24 % (P=0·020) and 31 % (P=0·018) after 6·2 and 3·1 g/d n-3 PUFA, respectively. Peak increases in 9α, 11β PGF2 after EVH were reduced by 65 % (P=0·009) and 56 % (P=0·041) after 6·2 and 3·1 g/d n-3 PUFA, respectively. In conclusion, 3·1 g/d n-3 PUFA supplementation attenuated HIB and markers of airway inflammation to a similar extent as a higher dose. Lower doses of n-3 PUFA thus represent a potentially beneficial adjunct treatment for adults with asthma and EIB.

A phase III randomized controlled trial of tiotropium add-on therapy in children with severe symptomatic asthma

BACKGROUND

Studies in adults and adolescents have demonstrated that tiotropium is efficacious as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with or without other maintenance therapies in patients with moderate or severe symptomatic asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium Respimat add-on therapy to high-dose ICS with 1 or more controller medications, or medium-dose ICS with 2 or more controller medications, in the first phase III trial of tiotropium in children with severe symptomatic asthma.

METHODS

In this 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 401 participants aged 6 to 11 years were randomized to receive once-daily tiotropium 5 μg (2 puffs of 2.5 μg) or 2.5 μg (2 puffs of 1.25 μg), or placebo (2 puffs), administered through the Respimat device as add-on to background therapy.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, tiotropium 5 μg, but not 2.5 μg, add-on therapy improved the primary end point, peak FEV₁ within 3 hours after dosing (5 μg, 139 mL [95% CI, 75-203; P < .001]; 2.5 μg, 35 mL [95% CI, -28 to 99; P = .27]), and the key secondary end point, trough FEV₁ (5 μg, 87 mL [95% CI, 19-154; P = .01]; 2.5 μg, 18 mL [95% CI, -48 to 85; P = .59]). The safety and tolerability of tiotropium were comparable with those of placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily tiotropium Respimat 5 μg improved lung function and was well tolerated as add-on therapy to ICS with other maintenance therapies in children with severe symptomatic asthma.

β2-adrenoreceptor Inverse Agonist Down-regulates Muscarine Cholinergic Subtype-3 Receptor and Its Downstream Signal Pathways in Airway Smooth Muscle Cells in vitro

Mechanisms underlying β₂-adrenoreceptor (β₂AR) inverse agonist mediated bronchoprotectiveness remain unknown. We incubated ICI118,551, formoterol, budesonide, and formoterol plus budesonide, as well as ICI118,551 or pindolol plus formoterol, ICI118,551 plus forskolin, SQ22,536 or H89 plus formoterol in ASMCs to detect expressions of M₃R, PLCβ₁ and IP₃. The level of M₃R in the presence of 10⁻⁵ mmol/L ICI118,551 were significantly decreased at 12 h, 24 h and 48 h (P < 0.05), and at 24 h were significantly reduced in ICI118,551 with concentration of 10⁻⁵mmol/L, 10⁻⁶mmol/L, 10⁻⁷mmol/L, and 10⁻⁸mmol/L (P < 0.05). The level of IP₃ in 10⁻⁵mmol/L ICI118,551 was significantly diminished at 24 h (P < 0.01), except for that at 1 h, neither was in the level of PLCβ₁. A concentration of 10⁻⁵mmol/L ICI118,551 at 24 h showed a significant reduction of M₃R level compared to formoterol (P < 0.01), budesonide (P < 0.01), and formoterol + budesonide (P < 0.05), but significant reduction of PLCβ₁ and IP₃ was only found between 10⁻⁵mmol/L ICI118,551 and formoterol at 24 h, but not in the comparison of budesonide or formoterol + budesonide. Pindolol and H89 could not inhibit the formoterol-induced expression of M₃R (P > 0.05), but SQ22,536 significantly antagonized the formoterol-induced M₃R expression (P < 0.05). In conclusions, β₂AR inverse agonist, ICI118,551, exerts similar bronchoprotective effects to corticosteroids via decreasing the expression of M₃R and inhibiting the production of IP₃.

Concerns with beta2-agonists in pediatric asthma - a clinical perspective

Beta2-adrenoreceptor agonists (β2-agonists) are extensively used in the treatment of childhood asthma. However, there have been concerns regarding their adverse effects and safety. In 2005, the FDA commissioned a "Black Box Warning" communicating the potential for an increased risk for serious asthma exacerbations or asthma related deaths, with the regular use of LABAs. In a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials, the incidence of severe adverse events appeared to be highest in the 4-11 year age group. Several mechanisms have been proposed regarding the risk of regular use of β2-agonists, such as masking patients' perception of worsening asthma, desensitization and downregulation of the β2-adrenoreceptor, pro-inflammatory effects of β2-agonists, pharmacogenetic effects of β2-adrenoreceptor polymorphisms and age related differences in pathophysiology of asthma. In this paper, we review β2-receptor pharmacology, discuss the concerns regarding treatment with β2-agonists in childhood asthma, and provide suggestions for clinical pediatric practice in the light of current literature.

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction update-2016

The first practice parameter on exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) was published in 2010. This updated practice parameter was prepared 5 years later. In the ensuing years, there has been increased understanding of the pathogenesis of EIB and improved diagnosis of this disorder by using objective testing. At the time of this publication, observations included the following: dry powder mannitol for inhalation as a bronchial provocation test is FDA approved however not currently available in the United States; if baseline pulmonary function test results are normal to near normal (before and after bronchodilator) in a person with suspected EIB, then further testing should be performed by using standardized exercise challenge or eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH); and the efficacy of nonpharmaceutical interventions (omega-3 fatty acids) has been challenged. The workgroup preparing this practice parameter updated contemporary practice guidelines based on a current systematic literature review. The group obtained supplementary literature and consensus expert opinions when the published literature was insufficient. A search of the medical literature on PubMed was conducted, and search terms included pathogenesis, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and therapy (both pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical) of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction or exercise-induced asthma (which is no longer a preferred term); asthma; and exercise and asthma. References assessed as relevant to the topic were evaluated to search for additional relevant references. Published clinical studies were appraised by category of evidence and used to document the strength of the recommendation. The parameter was then evaluated by Joint Task Force reviewers and then by reviewers assigned by the parent organizations, as well as the general membership. Based on this process, the parameter can be characterized as an evidence- and consensus-based document.

Asthma phenotypes: the intriguing selective intervention with Montelukast

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, usually characterized by chronic airway inflammation and a variable course associated with various underlying mechanisms that can differ between individuals. Patients with asthma can therefore exhibit different phenotypes, a term used to define the observable characteristics of an organism resulting from the interaction between its genetic makeup and the environment. The heterogeneity of asthma has received a large amount of attention in the last few years in order to better tailor treatment according to the different clinical and biological phenotypes of the disease. Specific asthma phenotypes may require an approach to treatment sometimes different from that recommended by current guidelines, so a personalized approach to asthma pharmacotherapy is recommended. Growing evidence suggests that leukotrienes play an important role in the pathogenesis of bronchial asthma. The mechanisms of action of leukotriene-receptor antagonists theoretically predict a good response in some asthma “phenotypes”.In this article we have performed an analysis of the recent literature (controlled clinical trials and real-life studies) about a possible selective intervention with Montelukast in specific asthma phenotypes.

Tiotropium add-on therapy in adolescents with moderate asthma: A 1-year randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Results from phase III clinical trials in adults and phase II clinical trials in children and adolescents demonstrate that tiotropium is an effective treatment when added to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance therapy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium Respimat added to ICSs with or without a leukotriene receptor antagonist in a phase III trial in adolescent patients with moderate symptomatic asthma.

METHODS

In this 48-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, 398 patients aged 12 to 17 years were randomized to receive 5 μg (2 puffs of 2.5 μg) or 2.5 μg (2 puffs of 1.25 μg) of once-daily tiotropium or placebo (2 puffs) administered through the Respimat device every evening, each as add-on treatment to ICS background therapy, with or without a leukotriene receptor antagonist; long-acting β2-agonist therapy was not permitted during the study.

RESULTS

Improvement in peak FEV1 within 3 hours after dosing at 24 weeks (primary end point) was statistically significant with both tiotropium doses compared with placebo: 5 μg of tiotropium, 174 mL (95% CI, 76-272 mL); 2.5 μg of tiotropium, 134 mL (95% CI, 34-234 mL). Significant improvements in trough FEV1 at week 24 (a secondary end point) were observed with the 5-μg dose only. Trends for improvement in asthma control and health-related quality of life over the 48-week treatment period were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily tiotropium significantly improved lung function and was safe and well tolerated when added to at least ICS maintenance therapy in adolescent patients with moderate symptomatic asthma. Larger responses were observed with the 5-μg tiotropium dose.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are increasingly prescribed for children with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of adding a LABA to an ICS in children and adolescents with asthma. To determine whether the benefit of LABA was influenced by baseline severity of airway obstruction, the dose of ICS to which it was added or with which it was compared, the type of LABA used, the number of devices used to deliver combination therapy and trial duration.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Trials Register until January 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials testing the combination of LABA and ICS versus the same, or an increased, dose of ICS for at least four weeks in children and adolescents with asthma. The main outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring rescue oral steroids. Secondary outcomes included markers of exacerbation, pulmonary function, symptoms, quality of life, adverse events and withdrawals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies independently for methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from trialists when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review a total of 33 trials representing 39 control-intervention comparisons and randomly assigning 6381 children. Most participants were inadequately controlled on their current ICS dose. We assessed the addition of LABA to ICS (1) versus the same dose of ICS, and (2) versus an increased dose of ICS.LABA added to ICS was compared with the same dose of ICS in 28 studies. Mean age of participants was 11 years, and males accounted for 59% of the study population. Mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at baseline was ≥ 80% of predicted in 18 studies, 61% to 79% of predicted in six studies and unreported in the remaining studies. Participants were inadequately controlled before randomisation in all but four studies.There was no significant group difference in exacerbations requiring oral steroids (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.28, 12 studies, 1669 children; moderate-quality evidence) with addition of LABA to ICS compared with ICS alone. There was no statistically significant group difference in hospital admissions (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.36, seven studies, 1292 children; moderate-quality evidence)nor in serious adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.85, 17 studies, N = 4021; moderate-quality evidence). Withdrawals occurred significantly less frequently with the addition of LABA (23 studies, 471 children, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94; low-quality evidence). Compared with ICS alone, addition of LABA led to significantly greater improvement in FEV1 (nine studies, 1942 children, inverse variance (IV) 0.08 L, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.10; mean difference (MD) 2.99%, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.11, seven studies, 534 children; low-quality evidence), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (16 studies, 3934 children, IV 10.20 L/min, 95% CI 8.14 to 12.26), reduction in use of daytime rescue inhalations (MD -0.07 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.02, seven studies; 1798 children) and reduction in use of nighttime rescue inhalations (MD -0.08 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.03, three studies, 672 children). No significant group difference was noted in exercise-induced % fall in FEV1, symptom-free days, asthma symptom score, quality of life, use of reliever medication and adverse events.A total of 11 studies assessed the addition of LABA to ICS therapy versus an increased dose of ICS with random assignment of 1628 children. Mean age of participants was 10 years, and 64% were male. Baseline mean FEV1 was ≥ 80% of predicted. All trials enrolled participants who were inadequately controlled on a baseline inhaled steroid dose equivalent to 400 µg/d of beclomethasone equivalent or less.There was no significant group differences in risk of exacerbation requiring oral steroids with the combination of LABA and ICS versus a double dose of ICS (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.32, three studies, 581 children; moderate-quality evidence) nor in risk of hospital admission (RR 1.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 5.54, four studies, 1008 children; moderate-quality evidence).No statistical significant group difference was noted in serious adverse events (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.94, seven studies, N = 1343; moderate-quality evidence) and no statistically significant differences in overall risk of all-cause withdrawals (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.37, eight studies, 1491 children; moderate-quality evidence). Compared with double the dose of ICS, use of LABA was associated with significantly greater improvement in morning PEF (MD 8.73 L/min, 95% CI 5.15 to 12.31, five studies, 1283 children; moderate-quality evidence), but data were insufficient to aggregate on other markers of asthma symptoms, rescue medication use and nighttime awakening. There was no group difference in risk of overall adverse effects, A significant group difference was observed in linear growth over 12 months, clearly indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group (two studies: MD 1.21 cm/y, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.70).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children with persistent asthma, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, but it was superior for improving lung function compared with the same or higher doses of ICS. No differences in adverse effects were apparent, with the exception of greater growth with the use of ICS and LABA compared with a higher ICS dose. The trend towards increased risk of hospital admission with LABA, irrespective of the dose of ICS, is a matter of concern and requires further monitoring.

Combination of budesonide/formoterol on demand improves asthma control by reducing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction

Background

In mild asthma exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is usually treated with inhaled short-acting β₂ agonists (SABAs) on demand.

Objective

The hypothesis was that a combination of budesonide and formoterol on demand diminishes EIB equally to regular inhalation of budesonide and is more effective than terbutaline inhaled on demand.

Methods

Sixty-six patients with asthma (>12 years of age) with verified EIB were randomised to terbutaline (0.5 mg) on demand, regular budesonide (400 μg) and terbutaline (0.5 mg) on demand, or a combination of budesonide (200 μg)  + formoterol (6 μg) on demand in a 6-week, double-blind, parallel-group study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989833). The patients were instructed to perform three to four working sessions per week. The main outcome was EIB 24 h after the last dosing of study medication.

Results

After 6 weeks of treatment with regular budesonide or budesonide+formoterol on demand the maximum post-exercise forced expiratory volume in 1 s fall, 24 h after the last medication, was 6.6% (mean; 95% CI −10.3 to −3.0) and 5.4% (−8.9 to −1.8) smaller, respectively. This effect was superior to inhalation of terbutaline on demand (+1.5%; −2.1 to +5.1). The total budesonide dose was approximately 2.5 times lower in the budesonide+formoterol group than in the regular budesonide group. The need for extra medication was similar in the three groups.

Conclusions

The combination of budesonide and formoterol on demand improves asthma control by reducing EIB in the same order of magnitude as regular budesonide treatment despite a substantially lower total steroid dose. Both these treatments were superior to terbutaline on demand, which did not alter the bronchial response to exercise. The results question the recommendation of prescribing SABAs as the only treatment for EIB in mild asthma.

Beta₂-agonists for exercise-induced asthma

BACKGROUND

It is well known that physical exercise can trigger asthma symptoms and can induce bronchial obstruction in people without clinical asthma. International guidelines on asthma management recommend the use of beta2-agonists at any stage of the disease. At present, however, no consensus has been reached about the efficacy and safety of beta2-agonists in the pretreatment of exercise-induced asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. For the purpose of the present review, both of these conditions are referred to by the acronymous EIA, independently from the presence of an underlying chronic clinical disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of inhaled short- and long-acting beta2-agonists, compared with placebo, in the pretreatment of children and adults with exercise-induced asthma (or exercise-induced bronchoconstriction).

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were identified by electronic searching of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials and by handsearching of respiratory journals and meetings. Searches are current as of August 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of any study design, published in full text, that assessed the effects of inhaled beta2-agonists on EIA in adults and children. We excluded studies that did not clearly state diagnostic criteria for EIA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 53 trials consisting of 1139 participants. Forty-eight studies used a cross-over design, and five were performed in accordance with a parallel-group design. Forty-five studies addressed the effect of a single beta2-agonist administration, and eight focused on long-term treatment. We addressed these two different intervention regimens as different comparisons.Among primary outcomes for short-term administration, data on maximum fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) showed a significant protective effect for both short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) compared with placebo, with a mean difference of -17.67% (95% confidence interval (CI) -19.51% to -15.84%, P = 0.00001, 799 participants from 72 studies). The subgroup analysis of studies performed in adults compared with those performed in children showed high heterogeneity confined to children, despite the comparable mean bronchoprotective effect.Secondary outcomes on other pulmonary function parameters confirmed a more positive and protective effect of beta2-agonists on EIA compared with placebo. Occurrence of side effects was not significantly different between beta2-agonists and placebo.Overall evaluation of the included long-term studies suggests a beta2-agonist bronchoprotective effect for the first dose of treatment. However, long-term use of both SABA and LABA induced the onset of tolerance and decreased the duration of drug effect, even after a short treatment period.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of low to moderate quality shows that beta2-agonists, both SABA and LABA, when administered in a single dose, are effective and safe in preventing EIA.Long-term regular administration of inhaled beta2-agonists induces tolerance and lacks sufficient safety data. This finding appears to be of particular clinical relevance in view of the potential for prolonged regular use of beta2-agonists as monotherapy in the pretreatment of EIA, despite the warnings of drug agencies (FDA, EMA) regarding LABA.

Treatment of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) describes the transient narrowing of the airways during, and particularly after exercise and occurs commonly in asthmatic individuals. Limitation of exercise capacity is a frequent complaint in all age groups, and severity of EIB ranges from mild impairment of performance to severe bronchospasm and a large reduction in FEV1. Treatment of EIB varies from daily to less frequent therapy, depending on the level of activity. In this article, the authors evaluate the treatment possibilities before, during, and after exercise. They also review medications currently used to treat EIB.

Refractoriness to exercise challenge: a review of the mechanisms old and new

This article discusses the available literature on refractoriness in exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, namely, a decrease in airway responsiveness with repeated exercise challenges. The mechanisms of this naturally occurring protective feature is unknown. Reviewing previous studies together with findings in more recent studies, the authors propose desensitization of the G protein-coupled cysteinyl leukotriene receptor1 as the mechanism of refractoriness and that this desensitization occurs as a result of interplay between leukotrienes and prostaglandins.

Pharmacotherapy for exercise-induced asthma: allowing normal levels of activity and sport

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is experienced by the majority of an estimated 300 million individuals who have asthma, a condition that affects all ages and is increasing globally. Respiratory water loss with dehydration of the airways causing mediator release and airway narrowing is considered the cause of EIB, the severity of which will be increased if the inhaled air is cold or polluted. Adequate control of asthma is essential to minimize or prevent EIB and permit normal levels of physical activity and sport. This is important because exercise is a necessary component of daily living, assists in obtaining and maintaining a healthy body and has been demonstrated to benefit asthmatics. Inhaled glucocorticosteroids and inhaled β(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (IβA) are the pharmacological agents of choice to manage asthma and minimize EIB, assisted when necessary, by other drugs including leukotriene receptor antagonists and chromones. Tolerance from daily use of IβA is of concern and more flexible drug therapy needs to be considered. Optimal use of inhalers to deliver drugs effectively requires closer attention. Pharmacogenetics may hold the key to future drug therapy.

Cardiorespiratory screening in elite endurance sports athletes: the Quebec study

BACKGROUND

Cardiorespiratory disorders are common in athletes. However, these conditions are often underdiagnosed, which potentially results in impaired performance and increased health risks. The aim of this study was to evaluate, in a research setting, the prevalence of cardiorespiratory disorders in athletes in order to determine the potential value of a screening program.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-three athletes were studied. Each subject underwent a physical examination. A eucapnic voluntary hyperventilation (EVH) test and a methacholine inhalation test were performed to confirm the diagnosis of asthma. A cardiovascular evaluation was also performed, including maximal exercise test with electrocardiogram, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, 24-hour Holter monitoring, and blood sampling.

RESULTS

Seventy-four (56%) athletes had airway hyperresponsiveness to EVH or the methacholine inhalation test. Among those with airway hyperresponsiveness, 45 (61%) athletes were only hyperresponsive to EVH, and 10 (14%) were only hyperresponsive to the methacholine inhalation test (using the criteria of a PC20 ≤ 4 mg/mL). Thirty-two (24%) athletes had a known diagnosis of asthma, while 34 (26%) athletes received a new asthma diagnosis. Ninety-seven (73%) athletes were sensitized to common airborne allergens. Forty-seven (35%) athletes completed the cardiovascular evaluation. Three (6%) and 7 (15%) athletes had a previous or new diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, respectively. Resting systemic hypertension was documented in 2 (4%) athletes and exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise was found in 12 (26%) athletes.

CONCLUSION

This cardiorespiratory screening data set in athletes showed a high prevalence of exercise-induced asthma and exercise hypertension, which in many cases were not previously diagnosed.

Asthma medication is increasingly prescribed for finnish olympic athletes--for a reason?

BACKGROUND

Use of asthma medication is common among athletes. In 2009, the World Anti-Doping Committee (WADA) and the International Olympic Committee removed the need to document asthma by lung function tests before the use of inhaled β2-agonists.

METHODS

We assessed the changes in asthma medication use in Finnish Olympic athletes 8 years apart in 2002 (N = 446) and 2009 (N = 372). The athletes filled out a questionnaire on asthma symptoms, diagnosis, and medication.

RESULTS

The use of asthma medication increased from 9.4% in 2002 to 12.6% in 2009 (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-2.69). Fixed combinations of inhaled long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) were used three times more in 2009 vs. 2002 (OR = 3.38, 95% CI 1.26-9.12). At the same time, no significant changes were observed in the occurrences of physician-diagnosed asthma (13.9% vs. 15.9%) or wheezing (10.3% vs. 10.2%). In 2002, all athletes on asthma medication also had a physician-diagnosed disease, but in 2009, 11.8% of the athletes on medication were lacking it.

CONCLUSIONS

Especially, the use of combination therapy of LABAs and ICSs is increasing among Finnish Olympic athletes. This trend is worrying as it is not based on increasing occurrence of symptoms, asthma diagnoses, or objective lung function measurements. More data, also from other countries, are needed to change recommendations or WADA rules.

Combined fluticasone furoate/vilanterol reduces decline in lung function following inhaled allergen 23 h after dosing in adult asthma: a randomised, controlled trial

Background

There is a need for preventative asthma maintenance therapy that provides lasting bronchoprotection against allergen provocation. Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a novel inhaled once-daily corticosteroid, being investigated as monotherapy for asthma and in combination with vilanterol (VI), a novel inhaled once-daily long-acting beta-agonist, for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Methods

In a crossover study of 52 subjects with mild asthma, FF/VI 100/25mcg and FF 100 dosed once-daily in the evening for 28 days were compared with placebo to evaluate their capacity to provide bronchoprotection against the early asthmatic response (EAR) stimulated by an inhaled allergen challenge. Bronchoprotection was assessed by change from post-saline baseline in weighted mean (wm) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) for the first 2 h post-allergen challenge, which was on Day 29 (22–23 h post final dose on Day 28). The EAR was also assessed using maximum percent decrease from post-saline baseline and minimum absolute FEV₁; the incidence of adverse events was a secondary endpoint.

Results

FF/VI 100/25 and FF 100 both provided significant bronchoprotection against the EAR for all endpoints assessed. For wmFEV₁ over the first 2 h post-allergen challenge, a 162 mL (95% CI, 87 to 237 mL) difference was observed between placebo and FF 100, while a 145 mL (95% CI, 69 to 222 mL) difference was observed between placebo and FF/VI 100/25 treatment. No difference between active treatments was observed (−17 mL; 95% CI, –91 to 57 mL). Both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusions

FF 100 alone and in combination with VI 25 provides significant bronchoprotection against the EAR in subjects with mild asthma. That this protection is provided at the trough of dosing, i.e. 23 h post last dose, supports the utility of FF 100 and FF/VI 100/25 as viable once-daily therapies.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01128569, GSK Study number: HZA113090

Mechanisms and management of exercise-induced asthma in elite athletes

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

Asthma is often reported by elite athletes, especially endurance athletes. The aim of this article is to review current knowledge of mechanisms and management of exercise-induced asthma (EIA) in adult elite athletes.

RESULTS

The mechanisms underlying EIA is incompletely understood, but the two prevailing hypotheses are the hyper-osmolarity and the thermal hypothesis. Both hypotheses consider inflammation and activation of mast cells as being crucial for the development of EIA, although the assumed mechanisms triggering the inflammatory response differ. Objective testing is of utmost importance in the diagnosis of EIA in elite athletes. Management of EIA can be divided into pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment. The basic principles for the treatment of EIA in elite athletes should be as for any asthmatic individual, including use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), β(2)-agonists, and leukotriene antagonists. However, evidence suggests that daily use of β(2)-agonists might lead to the development of tolerance. ICS therapy is, due to its anti-inflammatory effects, the recommended primary therapy for EIA also in elite athletes. All doctors treating individuals with asthma, especially elite athletes, should remain updated on doping aspects of asthma therapy. Non-pharmacologic management of EIA in elite athletes includes physical warm-up, which takes advantage of the refractory period following an attack of EIA, whereas high intake of antioxidants may reduce airway inflammation. Wearing heat masks, specially designed for outdoor winter athletes, might protect against bronchoconstriction triggered by inhalation of cold and dry air.

CONCLUSION

EIA in elite athletes should be managed as in any individual with asthma, but the risk of developing tolerance to bronchodilators as well as doping aspects should always be taken into account.

The effect of stepping down combination therapy on airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol

RATIONALE

Controversy exists about the safety of long acting beta2-agonist (LABA) treatment, in particular in children. Combination therapy with a LABA and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) is prescribed to children with moderate asthma and can be stepped down by withdrawal of the LABA when asthma is well controlled.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of stepping down from LABA/ICS combination therapy to monotherapy with the same dose of ICS on the airway response to mannitol in asthmatic children.

METHODS

17 children, aged 12-17 years, with clinically stable asthma, receiving combination therapy, were analyzed in this observational prospective open-label study. Children performed a mannitol challenge at baseline and 30±4 days after their medication was stepped down to ICS monotherapy. The changes in the provoking dose of mannitol to cause a 15% fall in FEV(1) (PD(15)), response-dose ratio and recovery time following a short acting beta2-agonist to ≥95% of baseline FEV(1) were assessed.

RESULTS

Mannitol PD(15) and response-dose ratio did not significantly change after stepping down. The recovery time following a short acting beta2-agonist to ≥95% of baseline FEV(1) was significantly shorter (p=0.01) after the withdrawal of the LABA.

CONCLUSIONS

In short-term follow-up, stepping down clinically stable asthmatic children from combination therapy to monotherapy with an ICS does not change airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) to mannitol but does shorten recovery time to baseline lung function following a rescue short acting beta2-agonist.

Treatment options for the management of exercise-induced asthma and bronchoconstriction

Treatment for exercise-induced bronchospasm and exercise-induced asthma includes both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options. Pharmacologic agents that have been proven to be effective for treating these conditions include short- and long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists, mast cell-stabilizing agents, anticholinergics, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). When selecting the most appropriate medication, factors to consider include the effectiveness of each, the duration of action, frequency of administration, potential side effects, and tolerance level. Long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists should not be used without ICS. Nonpharmacologic treatments include physical conditioning, incorporating a warm-up before and a cool-down period after exercise, performing nasal breathing, avoiding cold weather or environmental allergens, using a face mask or other aid to warm and humidify inhaled air, and modifying dietary intake. The data to support nonpharmacologic treatments are limited; however, they are routinely recommended because of the low risk associated with their use. This article highlights the advantages and limitations of each treatment option.

Asthma control in adolescents: role of leukotriene inhibitors

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways and is a big burden worldwide. It affects both children and adults, but it is insufficiently studied in adolescents, although this age group has important peculiarities and is challenging to treat, due to, but not exclusively because of, lack of adherence to treatment instructions. Evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of asthma targeting specifically adolescents are lacking, due to the fact that most studies are conducted either on children or in adults. Exercise-induced asthma occurs commonly in adolescents, leading to impaired physical activity. This review describes current treatment options for asthma in adolescents, focusing on leukotriene receptor antagonists, both as a monotherapy and as an add-on therapy for optimal asthma control.

FDA's recommendations on the use of long-acting {beta}2 agonists in the management of asthma

The revised labeling for long-acting β(2) agonists (LABAs) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is controversial and in part is inconsistent with the 2007 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program asthma guidelines. Two large randomized controlled studies, the Serevent Nationwide Surveillance (SNS) study and the Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial (SMART), and a 2008 meta-analysis conducted by the FDA were the main sources of information used to determine the label changes. A paucity of large, well-designed, controlled, prospective studies evaluating the asthma-related risks associated with LABAs makes it difficult to reach a consensus regarding how best to use LABAs in patients with asthma.

Pilot study: The effect of reducing treatment on exercise induced bronchoconstriction

SUMMARY RATIONALE: Asthma therapy should be stepped up or stepped down in response to changes in asthma control. However, there is little evidence available on the optimal timing, sequence, and degree of medication reductions. In this study we analyzed clinically stable asthmatic children who underwent a medication reduction from a combination preparation consisting of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long acting beta2-agonist (LABA) to monotherapy with the same dose of the ICS. We hypothesized that the extent of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) would not increase after the cessation of the LABA.

METHODS

Nineteen children, aged 8-16 years, with clinically stable asthma, receiving LABA/ICS combination therapy, were analyzed in this open-label pilot study. Children performed an exercise challenge at baseline and 3 weeks after the medication reduction. Best values of spirometric measurements of the forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV(1)) were used for statistical calculations.

RESULTS

Maximum percent fall in FEV(1) was significantly lower after 3 weeks of ICS monotherapy (P = 0.03). Eight of 19 children had a >or=15% fall in FEV(1) after exercise at the initial exercise challenge. In this subgroup, maximum percent fall in FEV(1) after the medication reduction was significantly lower (P < 0.01), and in six children it decreased to <15%, indicating they no longer had EIB.

CONCLUSION

In clinically stable asthmatic children on LABA/ICS combination therapy, the cessation of the LABA can reduce and in most cases abolish EIB.

Effect of montelukast or salmeterol added to inhaled fluticasone on exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in children

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of montelukast, 5 mg, or inhaled salmeterol, 50 microg, added to inhaled fluticasone in reducing the maximum percentage decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) after a standardized exercise challenge and response to rescue bronchodilation with albuterol in children aged 6 to 14 years with persistent asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB).

METHODS

Randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, 2-period, 4-week, crossover study conducted between December 22, 2005 and November 14, 2008 at 30 centers in Europe, Asia, Mexico, and South America. Patients with asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids demonstrated an FEV1 of 70% or higher of the predicted value and EIB (defined as a decrease in FEV1 > or = 15% compared with preexercise baseline FEV1 on 2 occasions before randomization). Standardized exercise challenges were performed at baseline (prerandomization) and at the end of each active treatment period.

RESULTS

Of 154 patients randomized, 145 completed the study. Montelukast, compared with salmeterol, significantly reduced the mean maximum percentage decrease in FEV1 (10.6% vs 13.8%; P = .009), mean area under the curve for the first 20 minutes after exercise (116.0% x min vs 168.8% x min; P = .006), and median time to recovery (6.0 vs 11.1 minutes; P = .04). Response to albuterol rescue after exercise challenge was significantly greater (P < .001) with montelukast. Montelukast and salmeterol were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Attenuation and response of EIB to albuterol rescue after exercise challenge were significantly better with montelukast than with salmeterol after 4 weeks of treatment.

Exercise-induced asthma in children

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction affects 40-90% of people with asthma, compared with 3-15% of the general population. Exercise-induced asthma (EIA) is diagnosed on the basis of subjective symptoms of airflow obstruction during and after exercise, objective measures of airflow obstruction and the exclusion of alternative diagnoses. Although the pathogenesis of EIA has not been fully elucidated, two major theories have been proposed: the airway rewarming theory and the hyperosmolarity theory. Increasing evidence suggests that airway inflammation plays a major role in the pathogenesis of EIA. In this article, we review the prevalence, pathogenesis, methods for diagnosis and treatment of EIA, as well as the responsiveness of children and adolescents to EIA therapies.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids versus same dose inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting inhaled ss(2)-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) are recommended as 'add-on' medication to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the maintenance therapy of asthmatic adults and children aged two years and above.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify in asthmatic patients the safety and efficacy of the addition of LABAs to ICS in patients insufficiently controlled on ICS alone.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs and correspondence with manufacturers until May 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs if they compared the addition of inhaled LABAs versus placebo to the same dose of ICS in children aged two years and above and in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was the relative risk (RR) of asthma exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function tests (PFTs), rescue beta2-agonist use, symptoms, withdrawals and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-seven studies met the entry criteria and randomised 21,248 participants (4625 children and 16,623 adults). Participants were generally symptomatic at baseline with moderate airway obstruction despite their current ICS regimen. Formoterol or salmeterol were most frequently added to low-dose ICS (200 to 400 microg/day of beclomethasone (BDP) or equivalent) in 49% of the studies. The addition of a daily LABA to ICS reduced the risk of exacerbations requiring oral steroids by 23% from 15% to 11% (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87, 28 studies, 6808 participants). The number needed to treat with the addition of LABA to prevent one use of rescue oral corticosteroids is 41 (29, 72), although the event rates in the ICS groups varied between 0% and 38%. Studies recruiting adults dominated the analysis (6203 adult participants versus 605 children). The subgroup estimate for paediatric studies was not statistically significant (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.39) and includes the possibility of the superiority of ICS alone in children.Higher than usual dose of LABA was associated with significantly less benefit. The difference in the relative risk of serious adverse events with LABA was not statistically significant from that of ICS alone (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.30). The addition of LABA led to a significantly greater improvement in FEV(1) (0.11 litres, 95% 0.09 to 0.13) and in the proportion of symptom-free days (11.88%, 95% CI 8.25 to 15.50) compared to ICS monotherapy. It was also associated with a reduction in the use of rescue short-acting ss(2)-agonists (-0.58 puffs/day, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.35), fewer withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61), and fewer withdrawals due to any reason (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.87). There was no statistically significant group difference in the risk of overall adverse effects (RR 1.00, 95% 0.97 to 1.04), withdrawals due to adverse health events (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26) or any of the specific adverse health events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults who are symptomatic on low to high doses of ICS monotherapy, the addition of a LABA at licensed doses reduces the rate of exacerbations requiring oral steroids, improves lung function and symptoms and modestly decreases use of rescue short-acting ss(2)-agonists. In children, the effects of this treatment option are much more uncertain. The absence of group difference in serious adverse health events and withdrawal rates in both groups provides some indirect evidence of the safety of LABAs at usual doses as add-on therapy to ICS in adults, although the width of the confidence interval precludes total reassurance.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled steroids versus higher dose inhaled steroids in adults and children with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

In asthmatic patients inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids and/or those with moderate persistent asthma, two main options are recommended: the combination of a long-acting inhaled ss2 agonist (LABA) with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or use of a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of the combination of long-acting ss(2) agonists and inhaled corticosteroids compared to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids on the risk of asthma exacerbations, pulmonary function and on other measures of asthma control, and to look for characteristics associated with greater benefit for either treatment option.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through electronic database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL), bibliographies of RCTs, clinical trial registries and correspondence with manufacturers until May 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared the combination of inhaled LABA and ICS to a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids, in children and adults with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was the number of patients experiencing one or more asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 48 studies (15,155 participants including 1155 children and 14,000 adults). Participants were inadequately controlled on their current ICS regimen, experiencing ongoing symptoms and with generally moderate (FEV1 60% to 79% of predicted) airway obstruction. The studies tested the combination of salmeterol or formoterol with a median dose of 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or equivalent (BDP-eq) compared to a median of 1000 mcg/day of BDP-eq, usually for 24 weeks or less. There was a statistically significantly lower risk of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids in patients treated with LABA and ICS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.98, 27 studies, N = 10,578) from 11.45% to 10%, with a number needed to treat of 73 (median study duration: 12 weeks). The study results were dominated by adult studies; trial data from three paediatric studies showed a trend towards increased risk of rescue oral steroids (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.66) and hospital admission (RR 2.21, 95% CI 0.74 to 6.64) associated with combination therapy. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk ratios for either hospital admission (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.56) or serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.37). The combination of LABA and ICS resulted in significantly greater but modest improvement from baseline in lung function, symptoms and rescue medication use than with higher ICS dose. Despite no significant group difference in the risk of overall adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03), there was an increase in the risk of tremor (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.82) and a lower risk of oral thrush (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.86)) in the LABA and ICS compared to the higher ICS group. There was no significant difference in hoarseness or headache between the treatment groups. The rate of withdrawals due to poor asthma control favoured the combination of LABA and ICS (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adolescents and adults with sub-optimal control on low dose ICS monotherapy, the combination of LABA and ICS is modestly more effective in reducing the risk of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids than a higher dose of ICS. Combination therapy also led to modestly greater improvement in lung function, symptoms and use of rescue ss(2) agonists and to fewer withdrawals due to poor asthma control than with a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids. Apart from an increased rate of tremor and less oral candidiasis with combination therapy, the two options appear relatively safe in adults although adverse effects associated with long-term ICS treatment were seldom monitored. In children, combination therapy did not lead to a significant reduction, but rather a trend towards an increased risk, of oral steroid-treated exacerbations and hospital admissions. These trends raised concern about the safety of combination therapy in view of modest improvement in children under the age of 12 years.

Section 2. Exercise-Induced Bronchospasm: Albuterol versus Montelukast: Highlights of the Asthma Summit 2009: Beyond the Guidelines

Exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB) involves airway obstruction with an onset shortly after exercising. It can occur in individuals without a diagnosis of asthma, but is most common in asthmatic patients (and in this scenario may be referred to as exercise-induced asthma, EIA), correlating with the patient's degree of airway hyperreactivity. While albuterol is the most commonly used rescue and prophylactic medication for EIB, the leukotriene antagonist, monetlukast, may be an appropriate choice for some patients. Clinical data have shown that once-daily treatment with montelukast (5 or 10 mg tablet) can offer protection against EIB within 3 days for some patients. Such an approach might be preferred for patients who have difficulty with inhaled medications and for children who cannot access their inhalers during the school day. Montelukast also may be an option to reduce side effects associated with albuterol for individuals who exercise regularly.

Prolonged bronchoprotection against inhaled methacholine by inhaled BI 1744, a long-acting beta(2)-agonist, in patients with mild asthma

BACKGROUND

Long-acting ss(2)-agonists are an established controller medication in asthma. BI 1744 is a novel L\long-acting ss(2)-agonist with a preclinical profile that suggests 24-hour bronchodilation and bronchoprotection may be achieved.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the bronchoprotective effects of single doses of BI 1744 against methacholine provocation in subjects with mild asthma.

METHODS

Thirty-one subjects with mild asthma were randomized to receive single doses of BI 1744 (2, 5, 10, 20 microg) or placebo on separate days according to a double-blind, 5-way crossover design. Methacholine challenges were performed at 30 minutes and at 4, 8, 24, and 32 hours after each single dose of medication, and the results were expressed as PC(20) FEV(1).

RESULTS

All doses of BI 1744 produced statistically significant increases in the methacholine PC(20) compared with placebo as long as 32 hours. The mean (geometric SEM) methacholine PC(20) 24 hours after dosing with placebo was 1.73 (1.13) mg/mL, which increased after 2 microg to 3.86 (1.14) mg/mL, after 5 microg to 5.67 (1.14) mg/mL, after 10 microg to 9.42 (1.13) mg/mL, and after 20 microg to 13.71 (1.14) mg/mL (all P < .0001). After 32 hours, the methacholine PC(20) value remained significantly increased for all doses. No safety or tolerability concerns were identified.

CONCLUSION

BI 1744 provides significant bronchoprotection against inhaled methacholine for up to 32 hours after single-dose administration.

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in asthmatic children: a comparative systematic review of the available treatment options

The aim of this article is to critically review the efficacy and safety data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), long- or short-acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs, SABAs), parasympatholytics and oral leukotriene receptor antagonists in the management of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) in children with persistent asthma (EIA). The studies with sufficient information on patient characteristics and outcomes were chosen using a MEDLINE search. Results from the individual searches were combined and repeated. Studies were also found by reviewing the reference lists of the articles not included in this review. Studies focusing solely on individuals with asthma and other allergic co-morbidities (i.e. a degree of bronchial reversibility) were considered in this review. To make the paper evidence-based, the design and the quality of different studies were assessed employing the Sign criteria (evidence level [EL] and grades of recommendation [GR]). No additional statistical analyses were performed. Most of studies included paediatric patients with underlying EIA. We need to distinguish children with recurrent asthma symptoms in whom EIB is also present (patients with EIA) from asthmatic subjects whose symptoms appear only as a result of exercise (patients with EIB). Further controller treatment is indicated in patients with EIA and further reliever treatment in patients with EIB. ICSs are the first-choice controller drugs for EIA in children with persistent asthma (Sign grade of recommendation [GR]:A). In children with EIA without complete control with ICSs, SABAs (GR:A), leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) [GR:A] or LABAs (GR:A) may be added to gain control. Treatment with relievers such as SABAs (GR:A), parasympatholytics (GR:B) or, eventually, LABAs (GR:A), administered 10-15 minutes before exercise is the most preferable method of preventing EIB symptoms in children; however, not as monotherapy in children with EIA. The disadvantages and controversy relating to inhaled beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist use lie in the development of tolerance to their effect when they are used on a regular basis, and the possibility of a resulting underuse of ICSs in patients with EIA. Researchers and guidelines recommend that if any patient requires treatment with a beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist more than twice weekly, a low dose of ICSs should be administered. Inhaled parasympatholytics may be effective as preventive relievers in some children with EIB or EIA, especially among those with increased vagal activity. LTRAs have a well balanced efficacy-safety profile in preventing the occurrence of EIB symptoms in children. Compared with LABAs, LTRAs produce persistent attenuation of EIB and possess an additional effect with rescue SABA therapy in persistent asthmatic patients with EIA. A disadvantage of LTRAs is a non-response phenomenon. There are still insufficient data on the efficacy-safety profiles of ICS/LABA combination drugs in the treatment of EIA in children to recommend this treatment without caution. Safety profiles of inhaled SABAs, anticholinergics and montelukast in approved dosages seem sufficient enough to recommend use of these drugs in the prevention of EIB symptoms in children. Many researchers agree that treatment of EIA in children should always be individualized.

Addition of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled steroids as first line therapy for persistent asthma in steroid-naive adults and children

BACKGROUND

Consensus statements recommend the addition of long-acting inhaled ss2-agonists (LABA) only in asthmatic patients who are inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). It is not uncommon for some patients to be commenced on ICS and LABA together as initial therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of combining inhaled corticosteroids with long-acting ss2-agonists (ICS+LABA) with inhaled corticosteroids alone (ICS alone) in steroid-naive children and adults with persistent asthma. We assessed two protocols: (1) LABA + ICS versus a similar dose of ICS (comparison 1) and (2) LABA + ICS versus a higher dose of ICS (comparison 2).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials through electronic database searches (May 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing ICS + LABA with ICS alone in children and adults with asthma who had no inhaled corticosteroids in the preceding 28 days prior to enrolment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each author assessed studies independently for risk of bias and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from the trialists when possible. The primary endpoint was rate of patients with one or more asthma exacerbations requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids. Results are expressed as relative risks (RR) for dichotomous data and as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight study comparisons drawn from 27 trials (22 adult; five paediatric) met the review entry criteria (8050 participants). Baseline data from the studies indicated that trial populations had moderate or mild airway obstruction (FEV1>/=65% predicted), and that they were symptomatic prior to randomisation. In comparison 1, the combination of ICS and LABA was not associated with a significantly lower risk of patients with exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (RR 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.47) or requiring hospital admissions (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.09 to 1.65) compared to a similar dose of ICS alone. The combination of LABA and ICS led to a significantly greater improvement from baseline in FEV1 (0.12 L/sec; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.17), in symptoms (SMD -0.26; 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14) and in rescue ss2-agonist use (-0.41 puffs/day; 95% CI -0.73 to -0.09) compared with a similar dose of ICS alone. There was no significant group difference in the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.64 to 2.09), any adverse events (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09), study withdrawals (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.11), or withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.41).In comparison 2, the combination of LABA and ICS was associated with a higher risk of patients requiring oral corticosteroids (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1 to 1.53) and study withdrawal (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.59) than a higher dose of ICS alone. For every 100 patients treated over 43 weeks, nine patients using a higher dose ICS compared to 11 (95% CI 9 to 14) on LABA and ICS suffered one or more exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids. There was a high level of statistical heterogeneity for FEV1 and morning peak flow. There was no statistically significant group difference in the risk of serious adverse events. Due to insufficient data we could not aggregate results for hospital admission, symptoms and other outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In steroid-naive patients with mild to moderate airway obstruction, the combination of ICS and LABA does not significantly reduce the risk of patients with exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids over that achieved with a similar dose of ICS alone. However, it significantly improves lung function, reduces symptoms and marginally decreases rescue ss2-agonist use. Initiation of a higher dose of ICS is more effective at reducing the risk of exacerbations requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids, and of withdrawals, than combination therapy. Although children appeared to respond similarly to adults, no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding combination therapy in steroid-naive children, given the small number of children contributing data.

Addition of long-acting beta-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting ss(2)- agonists (LABA) in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are increasingly prescribed in asthmatic children.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and benefit of adding LABA to ICS with the same or an increased dose of ICS in children with persistent asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Trials Register (May 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials testing the combination of LABA and ICS versus the same or an increased dose of ICS for minimum of at least 28 days in children and adolescents with asthma. The main outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring rescue oral steroids. Secondary outcomes included pulmonary function, symptoms, adverse events, and withdrawals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed independently by two review authors for methodological quality and data extraction. Confirmation was obtained from the trialists when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 25 trials representing 31 control-intervention comparisons were included in the review randomising 5572 children. Most of the participants were inadequately controlled on current ICS dose. We assessed the addition of LABA to the same dose of ICS and to an increased dose of ICS:(1) The addition of LABA to ICS was compared to same dose ICS, namely 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or less in 16 of the 24 studies. The mean age of participants was 10 years and males accounted for 64% of the study populations. The mean FEV(1) at baseline was 80% of predicted or above in 10 studies; FEV(1) 61% to 79% of predicted in eight studies; and unreported in the remaining study. Participants were inadequately controlled before randomisation in all but seven studies. Compared to ICS alone, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in exacerbations requiring oral steroids (seven studies, RR 0.92 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40). Compared to ICS alone, there was a significantly greater improvement in FEV1 with the addition of LABA (nine studies; 0.08 Litres, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.11) but no statistically significant group differences in symptom-free days, hospital admission, quality of life, use of reliever medication, and adverse events. Withdrawals occurred significantly less frequently with the addition of LABA.(2) A total of seven studies assessed the addition of LABA to ICS therapy compared with an increased dose of ICS randomising 1021 children. The mean age of participants was 8 years with 67% of males. The baseline mean FEV(1) was 80% of predicted or above in 2 of the 3 studies reporting this characteristic. All trials enrolled participants who were inadequately controlled on a baseline dose equivalent to 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or less. There was no group significant difference in the risk of an exacerbation requiring oral steroids with the combination of LABA and ICS compared to a double dose of ICS (two studies, RR 1.5 95% CI 0.65 to 3.48). The increased risk of hospital admission with combination therapy was also not statistically significant (RR 2.21 95% CI 0.74 to 6.64). Compared to double dose ICS, use of LABA was associated with a significantly greater improvement in morning PEF (four studies; MD 7.55 L/min 95% CI: 3.57 to 11.53) and evening PEF L/min (three studies, MD 5.5 L/min; 95% CI 1.21 to 9.79), but there were insufficient data to aggregate data on FEV(1), symptoms, rescue reliever use, and quality of life. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall risk of all cause withdrawals (five studies; RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.20. There was no group difference in the risk of overall adverse effects detected. Short term growth was significantly greater in children treated with combination therapy compared to double dose ICS (two studies: MD 1.2 cm/year; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.7).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children with persistent asthma, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, but was superior for improving lung function compared to the same dose of ICS. Similarly, compared to a double dose ICS, the combination of LABA and ICS did not significantly increase the risk of exacerbations requiring oral steroids, but was associated with a significantly greater improvement in PEF and growth. The possibility of an increased risk of rescue oral steroids and hospital admission with LABA therapy needs to be further examined.

Pharmaceutical treatment strategies for childhood asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although great improvement has been obtained in quality of life and mastering of illness by asthmatic children over recent decades, controversies still exist related to asthma treatment. The objective of the present article is to discuss such controversies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Results from recent publications related to childhood asthma treatment question existing dogmas. Important for prescribing correct treatment to children is correct diagnosis. Phenotypes of childhood asthma related to treatment decisions are discussed. Early use of inhaled steroids in young children is still debated as well as the preference of inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists versus leukotriene receptor antagonists as add on to inhaled steroids. When present, both allergic rhinitis and asthma should be treated to obtain improved control. Also as regards the treatment of exercise-induced asthma in children, new results concerning use of leukotriene receptor antagonists is discussed as well as the acute treatment in infants with bronchial obstruction.

SUMMARY

There are still several controversies regarding treatment of the asthmatic child. New studies designed specifically for children are needed to solve these questions. One cannot rely on studies performed in adults for treatment in children. New studies designed for childhood asthma are needed to solve these controversies.

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction: The effects of montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is very common in both patients with asthma and those who are otherwise thought to be normal. The intensity of exercise as well as the type of exercise is important in producing symptoms. This may make some types of exercise such as swimming more suitable and extended running more difficult for patients with this condition. A better understanding of EIB will allow the physician to direct the patient towards a type of exercise and medications that can result in a more active lifestyle without the same concern for resulting symptoms. This is especially important for schoolchildren who are usually enrolled in physical education classes and elite athletes who may desire to participate in competitive sports. Fortunately several medications (short- and long-acting beta(2)-agonists, cromolyn, nedocromil, inhaled corticosteroids, and more recently leukotriene modifiers) have been shown to be effective in preventing or attenuating the effects of exercise in many patients. In addition, inhaled beta(2)-agonists have been shown to quickly reverse the airway obstruction that develops in patients and continue to be the reliever medications of choice. Inhaled corticosteroids are increasingly being recommended as regular therapy now that the role of inflammation and airway injury has been identified in EIB. With the discovery that there is a release of mediators such as histamine and leukotrienes from cells in the airway following exercise with resulting airway obstruction in susceptible individuals, interest has turned to attenuating their effects with mediator antagonists especially those that block the effects of leukotrienes. Studies with an oral leukotriene antagonist, montelukast, have shown beneficial effects in adults and children aged as young as 6 years with EIB. These effects can be demonstrated as soon as two hours and as long as 24 hours after administration without a demonstrated loss of a protective effect after months of treatment. The studies leading up to and resulting in an approval of montelukast for EIB for patients aged 15 years and older are reviewed in this paper.

Asthma and the elite athlete: summary of the International Olympic Committee's consensus conference, Lausanne, Switzerland, January 22-24, 2008

Respiratory symptoms cannot be relied on to make a diagnosis of asthma and/or airways hyperresponsiveness (AHR) in elite athletes. For this reason, the diagnosis should be confirmed with bronchial provocation tests. Asthma management in elite athletes should follow established treatment guidelines (eg, Global Initiative for Asthma) and should include education, an individually tailored treatment plan, minimization of aggravating environmental factors, and appropriate drug therapy that must meet the requirements of the World Anti-Doping Agency. Asthma control can usually be achieved with inhaled corticosteroids and inhaled beta(2)-agonists to minimize exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and to treat intermittent symptoms. The rapid development of tachyphylaxis to beta(2)-agonists after regular daily use poses a dilemma for athletes. Long-term intense endurance training, particularly in unfavorable environmental conditions, appears to be associated with an increased risk of developing asthma and AHR in elite athletes. Globally, the prevalence of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, and AHR in Olympic athletes reflects the known prevalence of asthma symptoms in each country. The policy of requiring Olympic athletes to demonstrate the presence of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, or AHR to be approved to inhale beta(2)-agonists will continue.

Pretreatment with albuterol versus montelukast for exercise-induced bronchospasm in children

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare pretreatment with albuterol versus montelukast added to the current asthma regimen for protection against exercise-induced bronchospasm in children with mild-to-moderate asthma, and to determine whether cysteinyl leukotriene (Cys-LT) concentrations measured in the exhaled breath condensate correlated with response to montelukast.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover study.

SETTING

Asthma clinic at a university-affiliated medical center.

PATIENTS

Eleven children aged 7-17 years with physician-diagnosed mild-to-moderate asthma for at least 6 months and with self-reported exercise-induced bronchospasm (defined as > or = 15% decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec [FEV(1)] at screening and baseline visit).

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned to receive 3-7 days of oral montelukast 5-10 mg/day or 2 puffs of an albuterol metered-dose inhaler just before an exercise challenge and then were crossed over to the alternate therapy for the last visit.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Serial spirometry was performed before and at 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes after the exercise challenge at each visit. Measurement of exhaled breath condensate was performed at the screening visit and study visits 1 and 2. The primary outcome was the maximum change in FEV(1) after exercise. Secondary outcomes were the area under the curve for FEV(1) (expressed as percentage decrease from baseline) during the first 60 minutes (AUC(0-60)) after exercise and the proportion of patients in whom exercise-induced bronchospasm was prevented (defined as < 15% decrease in FEV(1) after exercise challenge). The mean +/- SD maximum decrease in FEV(1) was 27.5 +/- 7.9% at baseline. Patients receiving montelukast had an 18.3 +/- 13.7% decrease in FEV(1) compared with 0.7 +/- 1.6% in patients receiving albuterol (p=0.002, paired t test). Exercise-induced bronchospasm was prevented in 100% of the patients receiving albuterol compared with 55% receiving montelukast (p<0.05, McNemar's test). The AUC(0-60) was significantly smaller with albuterol compared with montelukast (p<0.001, Wilcoxon signed rank test). No correlations were found between Cys-LT concentration and the severity of exercise-induced bronchospasm or the response to montelukast.

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment with albuterol is more effective than montelukast for prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm in children with asthma.

Treatment of exercise-induced asthma, respiratory and allergic disorders in sports and the relationship to doping: Part II of the report from the Joint Task Force of European Respiratory Society (ERS) and European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) in cooperation with GA(2)LEN

AIM

The aims of part II is to review the current recommended treatment of exercise-induced asthma (EIA), respiratory and allergic disorders in sports, to review the evidence on possible improvement of performance in sports by asthma drugs and to make recommendations for their treatment.

METHODS

The literature cited with respect to the treatment of exercise induced asthma in athletes (and in asthma patients) is mainly based upon the systematic review given by Larsson et al. (Larsson K, Carlsen KH, Bonini S. Anti-asthmatic drugs: treatment of athletes and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. In: Carlsen KH, Delgado L, Del Giacco S, editors. Diagnosis, prevention and treatment of exercise-related asthma, respiratory and allergic disorders in sports. Sheffield, UK: European Respiratory Journals Ltd, 2005:73-88) during the work of the Task Force. To assess the evidence of the literature regarding use of beta(2)-agonists related to athletic performance, the Task Force searched Medline for relevant papers up to November 2006 using the present search words: asthma, bronchial responsiveness, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, athletes, sports, performance and beta(2)-agonists. Evidence level and grades of recommendation were assessed according to Sign criteria.

RESULTS

Treatment recommendations for EIA and bronchial hyper-responsiveness in athletes are set forth with special reference to controller and reliever medications. Evidence for lack of improvement of exercise performance by inhaled beta(2)-agonists in healthy athletes serves as a basis for permitting their use. There is a lack of evidence of treatment effects of asthma drugs on EIA and bronchial hyper-responsiveness in athletes whereas extensive documentation exists in treatment of EIA in patients with asthma. The documentation on lack of improvement on performance by common asthma drugs as inhaled beta(2)-agonists with relationship to sports in healthy individuals is of high evidence, level (1+).

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise induced asthma should be treated in athletes along same principles as in ordinary asthma patients with relevance to controller and reliever treatment after careful diagnosis. There is very high level of evidence for the lack of improvement in athletic performance by inhaled beta2-agonists.

Provocative challenges to help diagnose and monitor asthma: exercise, methacholine, adenosine, and mannitol

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review bronchial provocations tests used in the measurement of bronchial hyperresponsiveness to help in the diagnosis of asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

The bronchial provocations tests reviewed include exercise, methacholine, AMP and mannitol, with reference to methodology and monitoring of treatment.

SUMMARY

Methacholine is used for identifying bronchial hyperresponsiveness and to guide treatment. Exercise is used as a bronchial provocation test because demonstrating prevention of exercise-induced asthma is an indication for use of a drug. Both of these tests are being used to study tolerance to beta2 agonists. There is increasing use of eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea as a surrogate bronchial provocation test for exercise to identify exercise-induced asthma, particularly in athletes. For methacholine and AMP there is concern about the different breathing patterns used to inhale these aerosols and the impact they have on the cutoff point for identifying bronchial hyperresponsiveness. A new test that uses a kit containing prepacked capsules of different doses of mannitol and a delivery device is discussed. There is increasing interest in using tests that act indirectly by release of mediators because the bronchial hyperresponsiveness itself is an indicator of the presence of inflammation. Since treatment of inflammation leads to loss of bronchial hyperresponsiveness to indirect stimuli, these tests are well suited to identify success of treatment.