Childhood asthma outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the PeARL multi-national cohort

Background

The interplay between COVID‐19 pandemic and asthma in children is still unclear. We evaluated the impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on childhood asthma outcomes.

Methods

The PeARL multinational cohort included 1,054 children with asthma and 505 non‐asthmatic children aged between 4 and 18 years from 25 pediatric departments, from 15 countries globally. We compared the frequency of acute respiratory and febrile presentations during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic between groups and with data available from the previous year. In children with asthma, we also compared current and historical disease control.

Results

During the pandemic, children with asthma experienced fewer upper respiratory tract infections, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, hospital admissions, asthma attacks, and hospitalizations due to asthma, in comparison with the preceding year. Sixty‐six percent of asthmatic children had improved asthma control while in 33% the improvement exceeded the minimal clinically important difference. Pre‐bronchodilatation FEV₁ and peak expiratory flow rate were improved during the pandemic. When compared to non‐asthmatic controls, children with asthma were not at increased risk of LRTIs, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, or hospitalizations during the pandemic. However, an increased risk of URTIs emerged.

Conclusion

Childhood asthma outcomes, including control, were improved during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, probably because of reduced exposure to asthma triggers and increased treatment adherence. The decreased frequency of acute episodes does not support the notion that childhood asthma may be a risk factor for COVID‐19. Furthermore, the potential for improving childhood asthma outcomes through environmental control becomes apparent.

Asthma and COVID-19 in children: A systematic review and call for data

RATIONALE

Whether asthma constitutes a risk factor for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Here, we aimed to assess whether asthma, the most common chronic disease in children, is associated with higher COVID-19 risk or severity in pediatric populations.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in three stages: first, we reviewed PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL for systematic reviews of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19 in pediatric populations, and reviewed their primary articles; second, we searched PubMed for studies on COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 and asthma/wheeze, and evaluated whether the resulting studies included pediatric populations; third, we repeated the second search in BioRxiv.org and MedRxiv.org to find pre-prints that may have information on pediatric asthma.

RESULTS

In the first search, eight systematic reviews were found, of which five were done in pediatric populations; none of the 67 primary studies included data on pediatric asthma as a comorbidity for COVID-19. In the second search, we found 34 results in PubMed, of which five reported asthma in adults, but none included data on children. In the third search, 25 pre-prints in MedRxiv included data on asthma, but none on children. We found one report by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stating that 40/345 (~11.5%) children with data on chronic conditions had "chronic lung diseases including asthma," and one from a tertiary hospital in New York that reported asthma in 11/46 (~23.9%) children hospitalized for COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

There is scarcely any data on whether childhood asthma (or other pediatric respiratory diseases) constitute risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 severity. Studies are needed that go beyond counting the number of cases in the pediatric age range.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists as maintenance and intermittent therapy for episodic viral wheeze in children

BACKGROUND

Episodic viral wheeze (EVW) associated with viral respiratory tract infections is a common reason for pre-school children to utilise health care resources and for carers to take time away from employment. About a third of children experience a wheezing episode before the age of five years. EVW therefore represents a significant public health problem. Many pre-school children only wheeze in association with viral infections and in such cases EVW appears to be a separate entity from atopic asthma. Some trials have explored the effectiveness of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as regular (maintenance) or episodic (intermittent) treatment in this context.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence for the efficacy and safety of maintenance and intermittent LTRAs in the management of EVW in children aged one to six years.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with pre-specified terms. We performed additional searches by consulting the authors of identified trials, online trial registries of manufacturers' web sites, and reference lists of identified primary papers and reviews. Search results are current to June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel-group or cross-over (for intermittent LTRA only) design. Maintenance was considered as treatment for more than two months and intermittent as less than 14 days. EVW was defined as a history of at least one previous episode of wheezing in association with a viral respiratory tract infection in the absence of symptoms between episodes. As far as possible, relevant specific data were obtained from authors of studies that included children of a wider age group or phenotype.  

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was number of children with one or more viral-induced episodes requiring one or more treatments with rescue oral corticosteroids. We analysed combined continuous data outcomes with the mean difference and dichotomous data outcomes with an odds ratio (OR).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five studies eligible for inclusion in the review (one investigated maintenance treatment, three intermittent therapy and one had both maintenance and intermittent treatment arms) these included 3741 participants. Each study involved oral montelukast and was of good methodological quality, but differed in choice of outcome measures thus limiting our ability to aggregate data across studies. Only primary outcome and adverse event data are reported in this abstract.For maintenance treatment, specific data obtained from a single study, pertaining to children with only an EVW phenotype, showed no statistically significant group reduction in the number of episodes requiring rescue oral corticosteroids associated with daily montelukast versus placebo (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.06, moderate quality evidence).For intermittent LTRA, pooled data showed no statistically significant reduction in the number of episodes requiring rescue oral steroids in children treated with LTRA versus placebo (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.25, moderate quality evidence). Specific data for children with an EVW phenotype obtained from a single study of intermittent montelukast treatment showed a small, but statistically significant reduction in unscheduled medical attendances due to wheeze (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98).For maintenance compared to intermittent LTRA treatment no data relating to the primary outcome of the review were identified.There were no other significant group differences identified in other secondary efficacy outcomes for maintenance or intermittent LTRA treatment versus placebo, or maintenance versus intermittent LTRA treatment. We collected descriptive data on adverse events as reported by four of the five included studies, and rates were similar between treatment and placebo groups.Potential heterogeneity in the phenotype of participants within and across trials is a limitation of the evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In pre-school children with EVW, there is no evidence of benefit associated with maintenance or intermittent LTRA treatment, compared to placebo, for reducing the number of children with one or more viral-induced episodes requiring rescue oral corticosteroids, and little evidence of significant clinical benefit for other secondary outcomes. Therefore until further data are available, LTRA should be used with caution in individual children. When used, we suggest a therapeutic trial is undertaken, during which efficacy should be carefully monitored. It is likely that children with an apparent EVW phenotype are not a homogeneous group and that subgroups may respond to LTRA treatment depending on the exact patho-physiological mechanisms involved.