Comparison of allergen-induced changes in bronchial hyperresponsiveness and airway inflammation between mildly allergic asthma patients and allergic rhinitis patients

Bronchial eosinophilic inflammation and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) are the main features of allergic asthma (AA), but they have also been demonstrated in allergic rhinitis (AR), suggesting a continuity between both diseases. In spite of not fully reproducing natural allergenic exposure, the allergen bronchial provocation test (A-BPT) has provided important knowledge of the pathophysiology of AA. Our aim was to verify the existence of a behavior of AA and AR airways different from the allergen bronchial challenge-induced airway eosinophilic inflammation and BHR changes. We studied a group of 31 mild and short-evolution AA and 15 AR patients, sensitized to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. The A-BPT was performed with a partially biologically standardized D. pteronyssinus extract, and known quantities of Der p 1 were inhaled. Peripheral blood (eosinophils and ECP) and induced sputum (percentage cell counts, ECP, albumin, tryptase, and interleukin [IL]-5) were analyzed, before and 24 h after A-BPT. Methacholine BHR, assessed before and 32 h after the A-BPT, was defined by M-PD20 values and, when possible, by maximal response plateau (MRP). The A-BPT was well tolerated by all the patients. AA presented a lower Der p 1 PD20 and a higher occurrence of late-phase responses (LPR). M-PD20 values decreased in AA, but not in AR, patients. MRP values increased in both groups. Eosinophils numbers and ECP levels increased in blood and sputum from both AA and AR, but only the absolute increment of sputum ECP levels was higher in AA than AR patients (P = 0.025). The A-BPT induced no change in sputum albumin, tryptase, or IL-5 values. We conclude as follows: 1) In spite of presenting a lower degree of bronchial sensitivity to allergen, AR patients responded to allergen inhalation with an eosinophilic inflammation enhancement very similar to that observed among AA. 2) MRP levels increased in both AA and AR patients after allergen challenge; however, M-PD20 values significantly changed only in the AA group, suggesting that the components of the airway response to methacholine were controlled by different mechanisms. 3) It is possible that the differences between AR and AA lie only in the quantitative bronchial response to allergen inhalation.     

Comparison of biomarkers between allergic rhinitis only and allergic rhinitis with concomitant asthma

This post hoc analysis suggests distinct immunologic profiles in the allergic rhinitis (AR)‐only and the AR & AA phenotypes.     

Efficacy and safety of loratadine plus pseudoephedrine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and mild asthma

Background: Antihistamines have been shown to have a variety of therapeutic effects in asthma. Although nasal obstruction may play an important role in modulating lower airway function, no prior trial has used a decongestant in combination with an antihistamine in patients with allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma.Objective: We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of loratadine (5 mg) plus pseudoephedrine (120 mg) (L/P) twice daily in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and mild asthma.Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of L/P in 193 subjects during the fall allergy season. Nasal and chest symptoms, albuterol use, and peak expiratory flow rates were recorded daily for 6 weeks. Spirometry was measured at baseline and after 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks of therapy, and health-related quality of life was rated at the beginning and end of the study.Results: Total rhinitis and asthma symptom severity scores were significantly reduced in patients receiving active therapy compared with those receiving placebo throughout the 6-week study. Peak expiratory flow rates improved significantly in patients treated with L/P during weeks 2 through 6 (peak effect [mean ± SEM]: L/P, 26.23 ± 4.64 L/min vs placebo, 8.52 ± 3.53 L/min, p = 0.002) as did FEV₁ (peak effect [mean ± SEM]: L/P, 170 ± 53 ml vs placebo, 20 ± 40 ml, p = 0.01) at all clinic visits. In addition, select measures of asthma-specific quality of life improved significantly relative to placebo.Conclusions: L/P significantly improved nasal and asthma symptoms, pulmonary function, and quality of life in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant mild asthma. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;100:781-8)     

Effect of deep inspiration on airway conductance in subjects with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma

We measured specific airway conductance ($\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$) in a body plethysmograph before and after a deep inspiratory maneuver in 8 subjects with allergic rhinitis and 8 subjects with allergic asthma. In hay fever subjects deep inspiration had no effect on $\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$ if it was performed in the control state; however, when methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction was present, deep inspiration transiently increased $\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$. In asthmatic subjects deep inspiration was followed by a transient fall in baseline $\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$ in the control state; however, when bronchoconstriction was present, deep inspiration was followed by small and variable changes in $\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$ in 7 subjects and marked improvement in $\text{Gaw}\text{Vtg}$ in 1 subject. In asthmatic subjects the bronchoconstrictor response to deep inspiration performed in the control state is thought to be due to reflex changes in bronchomotor tone mediated by cholinergic (vagal) nerve pathways. Like asthmatic subjects, hay fever subjects also possess cholinergic-mediated airway hyperreactivity compared with normals. Our results indicate that, in spite of their increased airway reactivity, hay fever subjects respond more like normal subjects than like asthmatic subjects after a deep inspiratory maneuver.     

Effects of suplatast tosilate on allergic eosinophilic airway inflammation in patients with mild asthma

BACKGROUND: Bronchial asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized mainly by infiltration of the airway mucosa by various inflammatory cells, notably eosinophils. T(H)2-type cytokines are suggested to be deeply involved in the pathogenesis of asthma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the suppressive effects of suplatast tosilate, an inhibitor of T(H)2-type cytokines, on eosinophilic inflammation of the bronchial mucosa in patients with mild asthma. METHODS: Airway hyperresponsiveness tests, pulmonary function tests, eosinophil measurements in induced sputum, and bronchial mucosa biopsies were performed before and after treatment with suplatast tosilate for 6 weeks in 15 patients with mild asthma and in 13 control patients with mild asthma not receiving suplatast tosilate. This study was performed as a case-controlled open study. RESULTS: In the treatment group a significant improvement in the provocation concentration of histamine was observed (P <.05). Improvements in peak expiratory flow (P <.01) and in symptom score (P <.05) were also noted in the suplatast tosilate-treated group. Moreover, the average number of infiltrating eosinophils and EG2(+) cells significantly decreased (both P <.05), as did the ratios of eosinophils and EG2(+) cells in sputum (both P <.01). The average number of CD4(+) and CD25(+) T lymphocytes also decreased (both P <.05). CONCLUSION: Suplatast tosilate appears to inhibit allergic airway inflammation mediated by T(H)2-type cytokine and to improve clinical symptoms in patients with mild asthma.     

Characteristics of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis and asthma often co-exist and appear to produce a continuum of airway disease, but whether the clinical characteristics of asthma in patients with seasonal rhinitis differ from those of persistent asthma has not been examined. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to characterize the clinical features of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis with concomitant asthma and to compare them with those in patients with persistent asthma. METHODS: The patient populations for this study were derived from nine prospective, placebo-controlled planned clinical trials of similar design. Six studies (958 patients) enrolled patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma; three (607 patients) involved patients with persistent asthma. In all studies, patients were excluded from oral corticosteroid therapy in the preceding 3 months, and from inhaled corticosteroids in the preceding month. RESULTS: Patients with seasonal rhinitis and asthma had a significantly (P<0.001) higher total asthma symptom score than those with persistent asthma. In particular, cough was three times more severe. The need for beta(2)-agonist as a rescue medication and the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity (FVC) were similar in the two groups whereas forced expiratory fraction 25-75%/FVC was significantly (P<0.02) reduced in the persistent asthmatics. Asthma and nasal symptom severity scores were correlated in patients with seasonal rhinitis and asthma (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma appear to differ from those with persistent asthma. A prospective study should be designed to discover whether patients with seasonal rhinitis and asthma may represent a distinct nosological entity, 'allergic airway disease'.     

Cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy is the only potentially curative treatment in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. Health economic evaluations on this treatment, particularly in a German context, are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in addition to symptomatic treatment (ST) compared with ST alone in a German health care setting. METHODS: The analysis was performed as a health economic model calculation based on Markov models. In addition, we performed a concomitant expert board composed of allergy experts in pediatrics, dermatology, pneumology, and otolaryngology. The primary perspective of the study was societal. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed to prove our results for robustness. RESULTS: The SCIT and ST combination was associated with annual cost savings of Euro140 per patient. After 10 years of disease duration, SCIT and ST reach the breakeven point. The overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was Euro-19,787 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a range that depended on patient age (adults, Euro-22,196; adolescents, Euro-14,747; children, Euro-12,750). From a third-party payer's perspective, SCIT was associated with slightly additional costs. Thus, the resulting ICER was Euro8,308 per QALY for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Additional SCIT was associated with improved medical outcomes and cost savings compared with symptomatic treatment alone according to a societal perspective. Taking a European accepted ICER threshold of up to Euro50,000 per QALY into account, additional SCIT is considered clearly cost-effective compared with routine care in Germany. The degree of cost-effectiveness is strongly affected by costs related to SCIT and the target population receiving such treatment.     

Buckwheat pillow-induced asthma and allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated hypersensitivity is a mechanism suggested to explain adverse reactions to buckwheat. This is the first reported case in the United States of a person who developed asthma and worsening allergic rhinitis after exposure to a buckwheat pillow. OBJECTIVE: To describe a patient who developed asthma and worsening allergic rhinitis after exposure to a buckwheat pillow and to provide evidence that the adverse reaction was IgE-mediated. METHODS: The patient underwent skin prick and ImmunoCAP testing (Pharmacia Diagnostics, Kalamazoo, MI) to buckwheat as well as skin prick testing to several environmental allergens. RESULTS: The patient showed a 4+ skin prick test response to buckwheat. He also showed 4+ positive skin prick responses to multiple trees, grasses, and weeds, Alternaria, Helminthosporium, dog, and histamine control and was 3+ positive to house-dust mites, Penicillium, Aspergillus, cat, and feather mix. His negative control was negative. His ImmunoCAP test for buckwheat-specific IgE was class 4, or strongly positive. He had normal spirometry values. Performance of house-dust mite avoidance measures did not result in improvement of the patient's symptoms. Removal of the patient's two buckwheat pillows resulted in resolution of his asthma and improvement of rhinitis symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The positive skin prick and ImmunoCAP test to buckwheat along with the positive clinical response to buckwheat pillow elimination support an IgE-mediated mechanism in explaining our patient's buckwheat pillow-induced asthma and allergic rhinitis.     

Differences in mediator release between allergic rhinitis and asthma

To determine why patients with allergic rhinitis alone differ in their airway response to inhaled allergen compared to patients with allergic asthma, bronchial lavage was performed in 10 subjects with allergic asthma and in five subjects with allergic rhinitis, before and after inhalation challenge with antigen to produce an immediate asthmatic reaction. Before antigen challenge, the subjects with asthma had higher absolute neutrophil counts in the lavage fluid. After antigen challenge, the subjects with asthma released significant amounts of bronchoconstrictive mediators, such as histamine and thromboxane B2 into the lavage fluid, whereas subjects with rhinitis alone did not. There was also a significant increase in prostaglandin E2 in the subjects with asthma after antigen challenge. Nonimmunologic bronchoconstriction with methacholine inhalation challenge in six other subjects with asthma did not demonstrate an increase in any of the lavage fluid mediator levels that were measured. A positive correlation was found between methacholine provocative concentration causing a 20% drop in FEV1 and the concentration of prostaglandin E2 in the lavage fluid before challenge. The significance of this observation has yet to be determined. The results suggest that subjects with allergic asthma differ from subjects with rhinitis alone in their capacity to release more mediators into the airways on antigen challenge. It is not known whether this increase in mediators is due to increase in the number of mast cells in the airways or due to increase in mediator releasability from the mast cells of subjects with asthma.     

Relationship between asthma and seasonal allergic rhinitis in schoolchildren

The relationship between sensitization to common allergens and the development of asthma and seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) was investigated in a total of 419 schoolchildren in a farming community where allergens of both Dermatophagoides farinae (Df) and orchard grass (OG) pollen predominate. Twelve subjects (2.9%) were found to have asthma and 35 subjects (8.4%) SAR. There was no significant association between occurrences of asthma and SAR. The incidence of asthma correlated with DF-specific IgE levels but not with OG-specific IgE levels, whereas that of SAR correlated with OG-specific IgE levels but not with Df-specific IgE levels. No significant correlation was detected between IgE antibody levels against Df and OG. These results suggest that asthma occurs independently of SAR.     

Comparison of responses to pollen extract in subjects with allergic asthma and nonasthmatic subjects with allergic rhinitis

We compared pulmonary responses with inhaled pollen-antigen extract in eight subjects with allergic asthma and eight nonasthmatic subjects with allergic rhinitis. Lower respiratory tract sensitivity to antigen was determined from dose-response curves using SGaw and FEV₁ measurements to quantitate responses. We found no difference in antigen sensitivity in terms of SGaw between the two groups (p > 0.05). Hay fever subjects required almost eight times more antigen to produce a 20% fall in FEV₁, although there was considerable overlap between the two groups. After antigen challenge there were significant increases in lung volumes in asthmatic subjects (RV, +78.6%; FRC, +33.6%; TLC, +12.6%) which were not significantly different from rhinitis subjects (RV, +98.3%; FRC, +39.1%; TLC, +10.3%). Six rhinitis and five asthmatic subjects were rechallenged after pretreatment with atropine (2.5 mg aerosol). Atropine caused an initial increase in SGaw and FEV₁ but failed to alter sensitivity or volume responses in both groups. The effects of a maximum inspiration on physiologic responses to antigen were different in the two groups. Deep inspiration transiently improved SGaw and FRC toward prechallenge values in rhinitis subjects but the same maneuver had little effect in asthma subjects. Although only asthma subjects experience lower respiratory tract symptoms during periods of environmental pollen exposure, these two groups of subjects were indistinguishable on the basis of their immediate responses to inhaled antigen. This suggests that asthmatic symptoms during the pollen season are unrelated to the immediate effects of allergic reactions to pollen. This also suggests that these bronchial challenge responses represent a localized anaphylactic reaction, whereas naturally occurring asthma during the pollen season may represent a syndrome of increased airways reactivity which is perhaps related to antigen exposure.     

Effect of salmeterol on allergen-induced airway inflammation in mild allergic asthma

A previous study suggested that the long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist salmeterol (SM) had inhibitory effects on bronchial mucosal inflammation 6 hours after allergen exposure. To further evaluate the influence of SM on allergen-induced airway inflammation. We studied, in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial, 16 mild asthmatic patients who had a dual asthmatic response to allergen inhalation. Subjects received 50 microg of SM or placebo (P), twice daily for 1 week each, separated by a 2-week wash-out period. At the end of each treatment period, after withholding SM for 24 h, they had a methacholine inhalation test (medication was resumed after the test), followed 24 h later by an AC with the concentration of allergen that had induced a LAR at baseline. Airway inflammation was assessed 24 h after the AC by bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) (n = 16) and bronchial biopsies (n = 13). As expected, SM improved baseline FEV1 and PC20 (P < or = 0.009) and decreased the allergen-induced early bronchoconstrictive response. There were no significant differences in BAL cell counts after the two treatments. On bronchial biopsies, numbers (median, mm2) of submucosal CD45 (P: 43 +/- 23; SM: 161 +/- 43, P = 0.031), CD45Ro (P: 37 +/- 19; SM: 126 +/- 41, P = 0.047) and AA1 positive cells (P: 38 +/- 6, SM: 65 +/- 17, P = 0.006) were significantly higher after SM than P treatment. The numbers of CD4 (P: 11 +/- 10; SM: 32 +/- 7, P = 0.085), HLA-DR (P: 65 +/- 30; SM: 116 +/- 36, P = 0.079) and EG2 positive cells (P: 25 +/- 15; SM: 38 +/- 26, P = 0.09) tended to increase with SM treatment. In summary, compared to placebo, 1 week of regular use of SM is associated with an increase in bronchial inflammatory cells 24 h after AC. This is in keeping with the recommendation that salmeterol should only be used with an anti-inflammatory agent, particularly in the context of significant allergen exposure.     

Airway inflammation in asthma and perennial allergic rhinitis. Relationship with nonspecific bronchial responsiveness and maximal airway narrowing

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic airway inflammation is the hallmark of asthma, but it has also been reported in other conditions such as allergic rhinitis. We have tested whether the analysis of cells and chemicals in sputum can distinguish between patients with mild allergic asthma, those with allergic rhinitis, and healthy controls. The relationship between inflammation markers in sputum and nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine (BHR) (PD20 and maximal response plateau [MRP] values) was also evaluated. METHODS: We selected 31 mild asthmatics and 15 rhinitis patients sensitized to house-dust mite. As a control group, we studied 10 healthy subjects. Every subject underwent the methacholine bronchial provocation test (M-BPT) and sputum induction. Blood eosinophils and serum ECP levels were measured. Sputum cell differentials were assessed, and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), tryptase, albumin, and interleukin (IL)-5 levels were measured in the entire sputum supernatant. RESULTS: Blood eosinophils and serum ECP levels were higher in asthma patients and rhinitis than in healthy controls, but no difference between asthma patients and rhinitis patients was found. Asthmatics had higher eosinophil counts and higher ECP and tryptase levels in sputum than rhinitis patients or control subjects. Sputum albumin levels were higher in asthmatics than in controls. Rhinitis patients exhibited higher sputum eosinophils than healthy controls. An association between sputum eosinophil numbers and MPR values (r= -0.57) was detected, and a trend toward correlation between sputum ECP levels and PD20 values (r= -0.47) was found in the rhinitis group, but not in asthmatics. No correlation between blood eosinophilic inflammation and lung functional indices was found. CONCLUSIONS: Induced sputum is an accurate method to study bronchial inflammation, allowing one to distinguish between rhinitis patients and mildly asthmatic patients. The fact that no relationship was detected between sputum inflammation and BHR suggests that other factors, such as airway remodeling, may be at least partly responsible for BHR in asthma.     

The importance of maximal airway response to methacholine in the prediction of asthma development in patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is a known predictor and correlate of asthma incidence. However, it is not clear which patients with allergic rhinitis are at greater risk of the development of asthma. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether airway hypersensitivity and/or increased maximal response on the dose-response curve to methacholine would predict the development of asthma in subjects with allergic rhinitis. METHODS: One hundred and forty-one children with allergic rhinitis were prospectively studied for 7 years. At the initiation of the study, bronchial provocation test with methacholine using a stepwise increasing concentration technique was performed to measure PC(20) (provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV(1)) and maximal response. Each subject was evaluated at least every 6 months and details of asthmatic symptoms or signs experienced during the intervening period were taken. RESULTS: Twenty of 122 subjects available for the follow-up developed asthma. Nine (19.6%) of 46 hypersensitive (PC(20) < 18 mg/mL) subjects developed asthma, compared with 11 (14.5%) of 76 normosensitive subjects (P = 0.462). Eight (32%) of 25 subjects without maximal response plateau developed asthma, compared with 12 (12.4%) of 97 subjects with maximal response plateau (P = 0.018). Score test for trend revealed a significant association between the level of maximal response (P = 0.007), but not the degree of methacholine PC(20) (P = 0.123), and the future development of asthma. CONCLUSION: An increased maximal airway response to methacholine is shown to be a better predictor for the future development of asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis, than airway hypersensitivity to methacholine.