Bronchodilator Reversibility in the GAN Severe Asthma Cohort

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Positive bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) is a diagnostic criterion for asthma. However, patients with asthma may exhibit a negative BDR response. Aim: To describe the frequency of positive and Negative BDR response in patients with severe asthma and study associations with phenotypic characteristics.

METHODS

A positive BDR response was defined as an increase in FEV1 >200 mL and >12% upon testing with a short-acting ß-agonist.

RESULTS

BDR data were available for 793 of the 2013 patients included in the German Asthma Net (GAN) severe asthma registry. Of these, 250 (31.5%) had a positive BDR response and 543 (68.5%) a egative BDR response. Comorbidities significantly associated with a negative response were gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (28.0% vs 40.0%, P<.01) and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (0.4% vs 3.0%; P<.05), while smoking history (active: 2.8% vs 2.2%; ex: 40.0% vs 41.7%) and comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (5.2% vs 7.2%) were similar in both groups. Patients with a positive BDR response had worse asthma control (median Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 score, 3.4 vs 3.0, P<.05), more frequently reported dyspnea at rest (26.8% vs 16.4%, P<.001) and chest tightness (36.4% vs 26.2%, P<.001), and had more severe airway obstruction at baseline (FEV1% predicted, 56 vs 64, P<.001) and higher fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels (41 vs 33 ppb, P<0.05). There were no differences in diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, single breath (% pred, 70% vs 71%). Multivariate linear regression analysis identified an association between positive BDR response and lower baseline FEV1% (P<.001) and chest tightness (P<.05) and a negative association between BDR and GERD (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

In this real-life setting, most patients with severe asthma had a negative BDR response. Interestingly, this was not associated with smoking history or COPD, but with lower FeNO and presence of GERD.

The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) using FEV₁ is often utilised to separate COPD patients from asthmatics, although it can be present in some COPD patients. With the advent of treatments with distal airway deposition, BDR in the small airways (SA) may be of value in the management of COPD. We aimed to identify the prevalence of BDR in the SA, utilizing maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF) as a measure of SA. We further evaluated the prevalence of BDR in MMEF with and without BDR in FEV₁ and its association with baseline demographics, including conventional airflow obstruction severity and smoking history.

METHODS

Lung function data of ever-smoking COPD patients were retrospectively analysed. BDR was evaluated 20 min after administering 2.5 mg of salbutamol via jet nebulizer. Increase in percent change of ≥ 12% and absolute change of ≥ 200 ml was used to define a BDR in FEV₁, whereas an increase percent change of MMEF ≥ 30% was used to define a BDR in MMEF. Patients were classified as one of three groups according to BDR levels: group 1 (BDR in MMEF and FEV₁), group 2 (BDR in MMEF alone) and group 3 (no BDR in either measure).

RESULT

BDR in MMEF was present in 59.2% of the patients. Of note, BDR in MMEF was present in all patients with BDR in FEV₁ (group 1) but also in 37.9% of the patients without BDR in FEV₁ (group 2). Patients in group 1 were younger than in groups 2 and 3. BMI was higher in group 1 than in group 3. Baseline FEV₁% predicted and FVC % predicted were also higher in groups 1 and 2 than in group 3.

CONCLUSION

BDR in the SA (evaluated by MMEF) is common in COPD, and it is also feature seen in all patients with BDR in FEV₁. Even in the absence of BDR in FEV₁, BDR in MMEF is detected in some patients with COPD, potentially identifying a subgroup of patients who may benefit from different treatment strategies.

Overall Response to Anti-IL-5/Anti-IL5-Rα Treatment in Severe Asthma Does Not Depend on Initial Bronchodilator Responsiveness

BACKGROUND

Positive bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) (change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second [ΔFEV₁] ≥ +200 mL and ≥ +12%) after inhalation of a short-acting beta-2 agonist has been an inclusion criterion in licensing trials of anti-interleukin 5/anti-interleukin 5 receptor alpha (anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα) biologics in severe asthma. However, in clinical practice, patients with severe uncontrolled asthma frequently show a negative BDR.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the response to anti-IL5/anti-IL5Rα therapies differs between patients with positive and negative BDR at baseline.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter analysis of treatment outcomes in patients with severe asthma receiving anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα stratified for baseline BDR.

RESULTS

Of 133 patients included, 37 had a positive and 96 had a negative BDR at baseline. Following anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα treatment, FEV₁ improved significantly in both groups compared with baseline (P < .0001), with no significant difference between patients with positive and negative BDR (ΔFEV₁ +493 mL vs +306 mL; P = .06). Forced vital capacity (FVC) increased (ΔFVC: +85 mL vs +650 mL; P < .01) and residual volume (RV) decreased (ΔRV +113 mL vs -307 mL; P < .01) significantly in patients with negative BDR. Median annualized exacerbations (0 vs 0; P = .7), reduction of exacerbation rate (Δexacerbations 0 vs -2; P = .07), continuous oral corticosteroids (OCS) use (Δpatients on OCS -35% vs -39%; P = .99) and improvement of Asthma Control Test (ACT) score (ΔACT 6 vs 5; P = .7) were similar in both groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant correlations of positive versus negative BDR with response parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Both groups improved following treatment with similar responses concerning reduction of OCS therapy, exacerbations, and improvement of symptom control. Pulmonary function also improved in both groups during anti-IL-5/anti-IL-5Rα treatment, with differences in response patterns noted.