Lack of tachyphylaxis to methacholine at 24 h

OBJECTIVE: To examine for tachyphylaxis to methacholine at 24 h and to use these data to assess the repeatability of the provocative concentration of a substance causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) for methacholine and to obtain statistical power calculations. DESIGN: Retrospective review of four double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with two methacholine PC20 values measured at 24-h intervals. SETTING: Tertiary university hospital bronchoprovocation laboratory. PATIENTS: Thirty-two subjects with mild-to-moderate well-controlled asthma. INTERVENTIONS: The placebo arms of the four studies were examined. MEASUREMENTS: Methacholine PC20 (using 2-min tidal breathing method) initial determination and repeat testing at 24 h. RESULTS: The geometric mean PC20 values were 1.57 mg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 2.4 mg/mL) and 1.62 mg/mL (95% CI, 1.0 to 2.6 mg/mL NSD; p = 0.64). The mean absolute difference between the two measurements was < 0.4 doubling concentrations, and 31 of 32 measurements had both values within one doubling concentration. These data provide a statistical power of 92% for 10 subjects to show a one-half concentration deltaPC20 and a mean power of 99 +/- 1% to show a one-concentration deltaPC20. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for methacholine tachyphylaxis at 24 h in subjects with asthma. At 24 h, the average repeatability was well within a one-half concentration change, and individually 31 of 32 measurements (97%) were within one doubling concentration.     

Methacholine challenge: comparison of two methods

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the 2-min tidal-breathing and the five-breath dosimeter methods for methacholine challenge have recently been published by the American Thoracic Society (ATS). Although subjects are exposed to twice as much aerosol at any given concentration during the tidal-breathing method compared to the dosimeter method, they were thought to give equivalent results. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 2-min tidal-breathing and the five-breath dosimeter methacholine challenges. SETTING: Tertiary care university-based bronchoprovocation laboratory. PATIENTS: Forty subjects with currently symptomatic asthma. INTERVENTIONS: The two methacholine tests were done in random order on separate days at the same time of day at 1- to 7-day intervals. RESULTS: The dosimeter provocation concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) was almost twice that of the tidal-breathing PC(20): 2.4 mg/mL vs 1.3 mg/mL (paired t test, p < 0.00005). The difference was greater in those with mild airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) [PC(20) > 1.0 mg/mL; 3.2-fold] compared to those with moderate AHR (PC(20) < 1.0 mg/mL; 1.6-fold) [p = 0.04]. Three subjects with mild asthma and mild AHR (tidal-breathing PC(20), 1.9 to 4.3 mg/mL) had a nonmeasurable PC(20) (> 32 mg/mL) with the dosimeter. CONCLUSIONS: The tidal-breathing method, which exposes the subject to twice as much aerosol at each concentration, produced approximately twice the response. The total lung capacity maneuvers with breathhold during the dosimeter method may inhibit the response in some patients with asthma.     

A new role for histamine H2-receptors in asthmatic airways

Histamine tachyphylaxis develops with repeated inhalation of histamine in asthmatic subjects, and this appears to be due to the release of inhibitory prostaglandins. The purpose of this study was to determine whether histamine H2-receptors are also involved in the development of this protective effect in the airways. Seven subjects with mild asthma were studied on 2 days separated by at least 1 wk. On both days, three histamine inhalation tests were performed, separated by 1 h. The response was expressed as the provocative concentration of histamine causing a 20% decrease in FEV1 (histamine PC20). Before each study day subjects were pretreated with placebo or cimetidine (300 mg twice a day) for 3 days in a double-blind, randomized, crossover study. Cimetidine pretreatment had no effect on either baseline FEV1 or on baseline histamine PC20 (p = 0.461). After pretreatment with placebo, histamine tachyphylaxis occurred in all subjects; the mean PC20 increased from 3.01 mg/ml (%SD, 1.44) to 4.88 mg/ml (%SD, 1.68) and to 6.84 mg/ml (%SD, 1.68). Cimetidine pretreatment prevented histamine tachyphylaxis; the mean PC20 was 2.72 mg/ml (%SD, 1.77), 3.03 mg/ml (%SD, 1.73), and 3.56 mg/ml (%SD, 1.59) with repeated tests. These values differed significantly from placebo for both the second (p = 0.014) and third (p = 0.001) tests. This study demonstrated that cimetidine pretreatment prevents histamine tachyphylaxis and suggests that histamine tachyphylaxis occurs through stimulation of histamine H2-receptors in the airway.     

Regular inhaled salbutamol : effect on airway responsiveness to methacholine and adenosine 5'-monophosphate and tolerance to bronchoprotection

OBJECTIVE: Regular treatment with inhaled beta(2)-agonists increases airway responsiveness consistently to indirect bronchoconstrictors (allergen, exercise, hypertonic saline solution, etc) and inconsistently to direct bronchoconstrictors (histamine, methacholine). Studies demonstrating tolerance to beta(2)-agonist bronchoprotection against the indirect bronchoconstrictor adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) have not examined changes in baseline AMP responsiveness. This study assessed the effect of regular salbutamol on AMP and methacholine responsiveness and on tolerance to bronchoprotection. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, crossover study. SETTING: University hospital bronchoprovocation laboratory. PATIENTS: Fourteen atopic asthmatic subjects with FEV(1) > 65% predicted, and methacholine provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) < 8 mg/mL. INTERVENTIONS: Salbutamol, 100 microg, and placebo inhalers, two puffs qid, each for 10 days. MEASUREMENTS: Methacholine PC(20) and AMP PC(20) measured 12 h after blinded inhaler after each treatment period. Methacholine PC(20) and AMP PC(20) repeated 10 min after salbutamol, 200 microg (eight subjects). RESULTS: There was no difference between placebo and salbutamol treatment in geometric mean methacholine PC(20) (0.85 mg/mL vs 0.82 mg/mL, p = 0.86) or AMP PC(20) (22 mg/mL vs 17.4 mg/mL, p = 0.21; n = 14). The acute bronchoprotective effect of salbutamol was greater vs. AMP than vs methacholine (5.1 doubling concentrations vs. 3.5 doubling concentrations, p = 0.06) and loss of protective effect of salbutamol (mean +/- SD) was greater vs AMP than vs. methacholine (2.4 +/- 0.33 doubling concentration loss vs 0.8 +/- 0.21 doubling concentration loss, p = 0.008; n = 8). CONCLUSION: Regular salbutamol (mean +/- SD) treatment did not enhance airway responsiveness to either the indirect bronchoconstrictor AMP or the direct bronchoconstrictor methacholine. Compared to its effect on methacholine, salbutamol had a greater acute protective effect vs AMP and produced greater loss of protection vs AMP when used regularly.     

Methacholine challenge testing: comparison of the two American Thoracic Society-recommended methods

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Recent American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend two different methods of methacholine challenge testing: the 2-min tidal breathing method with twofold increases in concentration, and the five-breath dosimeter method with fourfold increases. Since the tidal breathing method delivers more methacholine to the mouthpiece, we hypothesized that the provocative concentration of methacholine required to decrease FEV(1) by 20% (PC(20)) would be lower than with the dosimeter method. DESIGN: Twelve subjects 18 to 45 years old with stable asthma were selected on the basis of a screening PC(20) (by tidal breathing) of < 1 mg/mL, 1 to 4 mg/mL, or 4 to 16 mg/mL (4 subjects in each concentration range). On subsequent visits within a 7-day period, methacholine challenge testing with tidal breathing or dosimeter were performed on separate days, in a randomized crossover manner. RESULTS: The geometric mean PC(20) was 1.8 mg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7 to 4.3) after tidal breathing and 1.6 mg/mL (95% CI, 0.7 to 3.7) after dosimeter (p = 0.2). There was no significant difference between the screening PC(20) and the PC(20) obtained by either method on randomized study days. The maximum decrease in FEV(1) from diluent baseline after the last concentration was 27.8% (range, 20 to 50%) during tidal breathing and 27.9% (range, 16 to 47%) during the dosimeter method (p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Both methods give similar results. Fourfold increases in methacholine concentration with the dosimeter method are as safe as twofold increases with the tidal breathing method.     

The effect of challenge method on sensitivity and reactivity to adenosine 5'-monophosphate in subjects with suspected asthma

BACKGROUND: The following two methods of inhalation challenge have been used to determine the airway responsiveness: the tidal-breathing method; and the dosimeter method. The objective of the study was to determine the influence of the challenge method on the response to adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP). METHODS: This study measured airway responsiveness to AMP by dosimeter and tidal-breathing methods in 25 subjects with suspected asthma. The two AMP challenges were conducted in random order, on separate days, at the same time of day, at intervals of 1 to 5 days. Concentration-response curves were characterized by the provocative concentration of a substance causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) and slope. RESULTS: The dosimeter PC20 values were significantly higher than the tidal-breathing PC20 values, with geometric mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) values of 50.35 mg/mL (95% CI, 19.50 to 129.72 mg/mL) and 28.97 mg/mL (95% CI, 11.99 to 69.98 mg/mL; p = 0.02), respectively. The mean difference in the PC20 values obtained with each method was 0.80 doubling concentrations (95% CI, 0.16 to 1.44 doubling concentrations). The mean values for the slope were 17.0%/log mg/mL (95% CI, 12.5 to 21.5 mg/mL) with the tidal breathing method and 13.8%/log mg/mL (95% CI, 9.0 to 18.7 mg/mL; p = 0.03) with the dosimeter. CONCLUSIONS: The tidal-breathing method produces AMP PC20 values that are significantly lower than the dosimeter method and slope values that are significantly higher than the dosimeter method. These data suggest that the results obtained with each method of testing may not be comparable.     

Repeated provocation tests in asthmatic children for testing tachyphylaxis to histamine

Tachyphylaxis to histamine was investigated in 16 children, aged 7-15 years, with mild asthma. Three consecutive histamine challenges were performed at intervals of 24 hours and 1 hour, respectively. No significant differences in IVC, FEV1, and PC20-histamine values between the three measurements were observed. After a 24 hour interval there was no difference in percentage fall of FEV1, but there was a slight (not significant) decrease in fall of FEV1 after a 1 hour interval. The PC20-histamine values showed good reproducibility with a 24 hour as well as with a 1-hour period between the tests (geometric mean PC20, 2.04 mg/mL +/- 3.50 %SD, 1.96 mg/mL +/- 4.37 %SD, 2.17 mg/mL +/- 4.12 %SD; correlation coefficients for a 24 hour interval, r = 0.87 and for a one-hour interval, r = 0.94 (P less than 0.01]. We conclude that in children there is no strong evidence for tachyphylaxis to histamine. Our results differ from studies on tachyphylaxis in adult asthmatics. Possibly different mechanisms exist in children and in adults.     

Airway responsiveness to inhaled methacholine in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

We examined whether patients with irritable bowel syndrome have increased airway responsiveness by measuring forced expiratory volumes in 1 second (FEV1) after inhalation of increasing concentrations of methacholine. Responses obtained in 11 IBS patients were compared with those obtained in 11 normal subjects and in 11 subjects with organic disease of the gut or its related organs. All subjects were selected so that other factors that might contribute to increased airway responsiveness were excluded. The methacholine concentration that caused a 20% fall in the FEV1 (PC20), as well as the reduction in FEV1 induced by each methacholine concentration, were used to assess airway responsiveness. The geometric mean PC20 was 197.6 mg/mL (%SEM, 1.15) for normal subjects, 83.9 mg/mL (%SEM, 1.51) for subjects with organic bowel disease (P = 0.012), and only 12.8 mg/mL (%SEM, 1.74) for IBS patients (P less than 0.0001). The 22.5% +/- 2.5% decrease in FEV1 induced by 64 mg/mL of methacholine in IBS patients was significantly greater than that of 12.3% +/- 1.5% observed in healthy subjects (P = 0.003). In contrast, the 15.7% +/- 2.0% decrease in FEV1 observed in patients with organic disease was not different from that seen in normal subjects (P = 0.189). We conclude that IBS is associated with increased airway responsiveness following challenge with methacholine.     

Increased airway responsiveness to acetaldehyde in asthmatic subjects with alcohol-induced bronchoconstriction.

Bronchial responsiveness to acetaldehyde, a main factor in alcohol-induced bronchoconstriction, and methacholine were compared between 10 subjects with alcohol-induced bronchoconstriction and 16 asthmatic subjects without alcohol sensitivity. In the alcohol-sensitive group, the geometric mean (geometric SEM (GSEM)) of the provocative concentration of methacholine (PC20,meth) and acetaldehyde (PC20,acet) causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second were 0.947 mg x mL(-1) (GSEM 0.139) and 21.0 mg x mL(-1) (GSEM 0.112), respectively, which were not significantly different from those in the nonalcohol-sensitive group, which were 0.634 mg x mL(-1) (GSEM 0.115) and 31.7 mg x mL(-1) (GSEM 0.077), respectively. The ratio of airway responsiveness to acetaldehyde relative to methacholine (log PC20,acet/PC20,meth) was 1.345+/-0.093 (mean+/-SEM) in the alcohol-sensitive group, which was significantly different from the value of 1.699+/-0.059 in the nonalcohol-sensitive group (p=0.0025). A significant correlation was observed between PC20,meth and PC20,acet in both the alcohol-sensitive group (r=-0.742, p=0.0115) and nonsensitive group (r=0.882, p<0.0001). In conclusion, the airways of asthmatic subjects with alcohol-induced bronchoconstriction have a selective hyperresponsiveness to acetaldehyde.     

Histamine bronchoconstriction reduces airway responsiveness in asthmatic subjects

Tachyphylaxis occurs to repeated challenges with inhaled histamine but not with inhaled acetylcholine in asthmatic subjects. This study was undertaken to determine whether prior histamine bronchoconstriction reduces airway responsiveness to inhaled acetylcholine in mild asthmatic subjects demonstrating histamine tachyphylaxis. All subjects developed histamine tachyphylaxis with repeated histamine challenge. The mean histamine PC20 increased from 3.74 to 5.92 mg/ml (p less than 0.005) when the histamine challenges were separated by 1 h. Prior acetylcholine bronchoconstriction did not reduce airway responsiveness to subsequent inhalation of either acetylcholine or histamine in these subjects. However, histamine inhalation did reduce airway responsiveness to acetylcholine in all subjects. The mean acetylcholine PC20 following acetylcholine inhalation was 3.37 mg/ml (%SD 2.17) and this increased to 7.76 mg/ml (%SD 1.80) after histamine inhalation (p less than 0.0005). Thus, this study demonstrates that prior histamine, but not acetylcholine, bronchoconstriction can partially protect against bronchoconstriction caused by both histamine and acetylcholine. Therefore, reduced airway responsiveness caused by histamine bronchoconstriction is specific for histamine and is not due to bronchoconstriction per se. However, the reduced airway responsiveness following histamine bronchoconstriction, is nonspecific.     

Modifications of airway responsiveness to adenosine 5'-monophosphate and exhaled nitric oxide concentrations after the pollen season in subjects with pollen-induced rhinitis

STUDY OBJECTIVE:s: To determine the effect of cessation of exposure to pollen on airway responsiveness to adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) in subjects with pollen-induced rhinitis, and to explore the relationship between changes in airway responsiveness and changes in exhaled nitric oxide (ENO) levels. STUDY DESIGN: Subjects were studied during the pollen season and out of season. SETTING: Specialist allergy unit in a university hospital. PATIENTS: Fourteen subjects without asthma with pollen-induced rhinitis who showed bronchoconstriction in response to methacholine and AMP during the pollen season and 10 healthy nonatopic control subjects. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: In subjects with pollen-induced rhinitis, ENO concentrations, provocative concentration of agonist causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) methacholine, and PC(20) AMP were determined during the pollen season and out of season. Healthy control subjects were studied during the pollen season. In subjects with allergic rhinitis, PC(20) AMP increased from a geometric mean of 79.4 mg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 31.6 to 199.5 mg/mL) during the pollen season to 316.2 mg/mL (95% CI, 158.5 to 400.0 mg/mL) out of season (p = 0.004). The ENO concentrations decreased from 63.1 parts per billion (ppb) [95% CI, 50.1 to 79.4 ppb] during the pollen season to 30.2 ppb (95% CI, 23.4 to 38.0 ppb) out of season (p < 0.001). The ENO concentrations out of pollen season were still significantly increased in subjects with pollen-induced rhinitis when compared with healthy control subjects. There was no relationship between individual changes in ENO levels and changes in either PC(20) methacholine or PC(20) AMP. CONCLUSIONS: In pollen-sensitive subjects with allergic rhinitis, the cessation of exposure to pollen is associated with a significant reduction of airway responsiveness to inhaled AMP. However, no association was found between allergen-induced changes in ENO values and in airway responsiveness to either direct or indirect bronchoconstrictors. These findings suggest that modifications in ENO and in airway responsiveness are the consequence of different alterations induced by allergen exposure on the lower airways.     

Effect of an inhaled thromboxane mimetic (U46619) on airway function in human subjects.

Thromboxane A2(TxA2) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of airway hyperresponsiveness. The effects of inhaled TxA2 on human airway function have not been studied because of its short half-life. U46619 is a chemical that mimics the effects of TxA2. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of inhaled U46619 on human airway function and methacholine airway responsiveness. Airway responsiveness to methacholine and U46619 was measured in 19 subjects (13 asthmatic and six normal) and expressed as the provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20). On one day, methacholine alone was inhaled. On a second day, U46619 was inhaled, then 1 h later methacholine was inhaled. On a third day, U46619 was inhaled, then repeated 1 h later. In six subjects, the effects of isotonic saline or a subthreshold concentration of histamine or U46619 were examined on methacholine airway responsiveness. U46619 was 178 times more potent as a bronchoconstrictor than was methacholine. Airway responsiveness to methacholine was correlated to airway responsiveness to U46619 (r = 0.87, p = 0.001). Subthreshold concentrations of U46619, but not of histamine, increased methacholine airway responsiveness. The mean maximal fall in FEV1 after inhaled methacholine was 13.2% (SEM, 3.4%) after saline, 12.4% (SEM, 2.4%) after histamine, and 25.7% (SEM, 2.0%) after U46619 (p = 0.0004). This effect lasted less than 1 h. There was no tachyphylaxis to repeated inhalations of U46619. These results indicate that in human subjects inhaled U46619 is a potent bronchoconstrictor that, when present in the airways, can cause airway hyperresponsiveness to inhaled methacholine in asthmatic subjects.     

Repeated methacholine challenge produces tolerance in normal but not in asthmatic subjects.

Repeated methacholine challenge in normal nonasthmatic subjects (who require higher doses of methacholine than do asthmatic subjects to produce a 20 percent decrease in FEV1) can produce progressively diminishing methacholine responsiveness (or tolerance) with serial challenges. To determine whether tolerance to methacholine occurs in asthmatic subjects as it does in nonasthmatic subjects, we studied eight young (mean age, 24 years) mild asthmatic patients (occasional but not regular use of bronchodilator medications, PC20 methacholine range 0.1 to 7.0 mg/ml) who underwent five sequential methacholine challenges at 1.5-h intervals. Serially increasing concentrations of methacholine were given until FEV1 fell by 20 percent. Results were compared with those in seven nonasthmatic control subjects who underwent an identical protocol. As seen in previous studies, the normal subjects demonstrated significant tolerance to methacholine when each of five challenges was compared to the first. By contrast, in the asthmatic group, the mean cumulative dose of methacholine producing a 20 percent fall in FEV1 in the fifth challenge was not significantly different from the dose required in the first challenge. These results indicate that marked tolerance to methacholine does not occur in mild asthmatic patients with multiple repeated challenges over 6 h. The lower cumulative dose of methacholine required by asthmatic patients may be insufficient to produce tolerance.     

Comparison of two standardized methods of methacholine inhalation challenge in young adults.

In the European Community Respiratory Health Study (ECRHS), airway responsiveness to methacholine was determined using the Mefar dosimeter protocol. Elsewhere, the 2-min tidal breathing method has become the preferred standardized method. The relationship between measurements of responsiveness by these two methods is not well established. This study measured airway responsiveness to methacholine by dosimeter and tidal breathing methods in 47 healthy asthmatic subjects aged 20-44 yrs. Tests were performed within 1 week and in random order. Baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) varied by <10% between tests in 42/47 subjects. There was a close association between responsiveness determined by the two methods. A provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) value of < or =8.0 mg x mL(-1) (tidal method) used to categorize airway hyperresponsiveness agreed most closely with a provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20) value of < or =0.5 mg (dosimeter method) (kappa statistic 0.78). Each doubling or halving of PC20 to define a level of hyperresponsiveness agreed closely with a doubling or halving of PD20. Assessment of airway responsiveness as provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second by the Mefar dosimeter protocol gave a close and predictable relationship with provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second assessed using the tidal breathing method. Airway hyperresponsiveness as determined by the accepted criterion of provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second < or =8 mg x mL(-1) was best correlated with provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second <0.5 mg by Mefar dosimeter.     

Reference values of the provocative concentrations of methacholine that cause 6% and 20% changes in forced expiratory volume in one second in a normal population

The provocative concentrations of inhaled methacholine that cause 6% (PC6) and 20% (PC20) falls in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) were assessed in a population of 100 nonsmoking persons, equally distributed for sex, who ranged uniformly from 20 to 60 yr of age. These subjects had no respiratory symptoms, rhinitis, atopic history, or familial history of asthma. Single twofold dilutions of methacholine from 2 to 128 mg/ml were used; 81 and 34 subjects, respectively, showed PC6 and PC20 values less than 128 mg/ml. Eight subjects had PC20 values less than 16 mg/ml. In these subjects, the test had a good reproducibility (r = 0.92) when we repeated it, and serial measurements of peak expiratory flow rates did not suggest asthma. The fact that PC6 was related, although loosely, to baseline FEV, FEV/FVC, and forced expiratory flow during the middle half of the FVC (FEF) and that 4 of the 8 subjects with PC20 values less than 16 mg/ml had lower values of FEF might suggest that responsiveness to methacholine is partially linked with baseline airway caliber.     

Development of a methacholine challenge method to minimize methacholine waste

BACKGROUND: The standard 2-min tidal breathing methacholine challenge utilizes 3 mL to produce an output of 0.26 mL per 2 min, resulting in a substantial amount of methacholine being discarded. OBJECTIVE: To develop a method with reduced methacholine waste and to compare it to the standard method. METHODS: Twelve subjects with mild, well-controlled asthma volunteered for this investigation. They underwent three methacholine challenges in random order. The first challenge was the conventional 2-min tidal breathing method using 3 mL of doubling concentrations inhaled for 2 min at 5-min intervals. The first modification utilized 1.5 mL of quadrupling concentrations inhaled for 1 min and then 2 min, keeping the time interval constant at 3 min between completion of one inhalation and commencement of the next inhalation. The second modification utilized 1.5 mL of eightfold concentration step-ups inhaled for 30 s, 60 s, and 120 s with a time interval of 3 min between completion of one inhalation and commencement of the next inhalation. For each method, the provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) was calculated based on a 2-min equivalent-dose inhalation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the geometric mean PC(20) (1.5 mg/mL, 1.6 mg/mL, and 1.6 mg/mL for the three methods, respectively; p = 0.47). The quadrupling concentration method was preferred because it was less subject to error than the other modification. CONCLUSION: The amount of methacholine discarded during a methacholine challenge can be reduced by two thirds by decreasing the volume from 3 to 1.5 mL, and by using quadrupling concentrations inhaled either with quadrupling-dose step-ups, or with doubling-dose step-ups by using sequential 1-min and 2-min inhalations.     

Effect of cigarette smoking on airway responsiveness to adenosine 5'-monophosphate in subjects with allergic rhinitis

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine differences in airway responsiveness to adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) between smokers and nonsmokers with allergic rhinitis. METHODS: A total of 41 adults with allergic rhinitis (16 smokers and 25 nonsmokers) were challenged with increasing concentrations of methacholine and AMP. Airflow was assessed after each concentration, and the response to each bronchoconstrictor agent was measured by the provocative concentration required to produce a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)). RESULTS: The geometric mean PC(20) AMP values were significantly lower in smokers than in nonsmokers: 72.4 mg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.9 to 154.9) vs 204.2 mg/mL (95% CI, 120.2 to 346.7) [p = 0.021]. The proportion of subjects with bronchoconstriction in response to AMP was higher in smokers (12 of 16 subjects) than in nonsmokers (7 of 25 subjects) [p = 0.005]. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that smokers with allergic rhinitis have a greater AMP sensitivity than nonsmokers.     

Relationship between airway responsiveness to neurokinin A and methacholine in asthma

Non-adrenergic non-cholinergic (NANC) nerves release bronchoactive tachykinins such as substance P (SP) and neurokinin A (NKA) that can induce features of asthma. The airway response to NKA in humans closely resembles that of methacholine (M). Hence, we investigated the relationship between airway responsiveness to NKA and M in subjects with asthma. To this end, we analyzed baseline data of 27 subjects with mild persistent asthma (20F/7M) 19-46 y; FEV1 81-136% pred.; PC20FEV1 (M)<80 micromol/mL) participating in a proof-of-concept study. All subjects were non-smokers and asthma was controlled by on demand short-acting beta2-agonists only. Dose-response curves to M (0.15-80 micromol/mL) and NKA (3.4 (10(-3))-0.88 micromol/mL) were performed on two separate days, and airway response was measured by FEV1 until a > or = 20% fall from baseline (PC20FEV1). Twenty-two subjects reached a PC20FEV1 on both occasions. The PC20FEV1 values of both agonists correlated significantly (Spearman's r=-0.721; p=0.0002), and the relationship was given by 10log(PC20FEV1(NKA))= -1.36 + (0.60 x 10log(PC20FEV1(M)). We have demonstrated a significant relationship between airway responsiveness to NKA and methacholine in asthma. This suggests that both agonists may share common final pathways in causing bronchoconstriction in patients with mild persistent asthma. Based on our data and previous studies in asthma, it can be hypothesized that this direct NKA-induced bronchoconstrictor response may be mediated by predominant stimulation of the tachykinin NK-2 receptors on airway smooth muscle cells.     

Different response to doubling and fourfold dose increases in methacholine provocation tests in healthy subjects

RATIONALE: In a modified methacholine provocation test that was used to study changes in airway responsiveness to occupational irritants or sensitizers in healthy subjects, two protocols were used: a long protocol (doubling methacholine concentrations between dose steps) or a short protocol (fourfold increases in concentration). This modified methacholine provocation allows measurements of the provocative dose causing 20% decrease in FEV(1) (PD(20)) in a high proportion of a normal population. METHODS: The distribution of PD(20) was investigated in healthy nonatopic men without history of allergy or asthma symptoms using the long protocol (n = 101) or the short protocol (n = 309). In addition, 30 healthy subjects underwent methacholine provocation tests using both protocols. RESULTS: PD(20) was defined in 79% of subjects with the long protocol and in 48% of subjects with the short protocol. The provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% decline in FEV(1) (PC(20)) and PD(20) were significantly lower using the long protocol: long-protocol PC(20) (median [25th to 75th percentile]), 19.9 mg/mL (3.9 to > 32 mg/mL) compared with short-protocol PC(20), > 32 mg/mL (8.7 to >32 mg/mL; p < 0.0001); long-protocol PD(20), 4.2 mg (1.6 to 20 mg) compared with short-protocol PD(20), > 13.7 (2.6 to > 13.7 mg; p = 0. 006). The differences in PD(20) using short and long protocols were confirmed in a randomized trial of 30 healthy subjects tested with both protocols. CONCLUSION: Using doubling concentrations, PC(20) and PD(20) could be defined in a higher proportion of healthy subjects than a protocol using fourfold dose increases. Furthermore, the doubling protocol results in a PD(20) estimate that is less than half the value obtained when using a protocol with fourfold concentrations between dose steps. The difference remains, whether the methacholine effect is regarded as cumulative or noncumulative. The explanation for the difference between the protocols is unclear.     

Bronchial hyperreactivity in patients with mitral stenosis before and after successful percutaneous mitral balloon valvulotomy

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify the bronchial response to inhaled methacholine in patients with mitral stenosis (MS) and to clarify whether or not the bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR) is reversible after percutaneous mitral balloon valvulotomy (PBMV). PATIENTS AND SETTING: Thirty patients with MS and 28 age-matched healthy control subjects were prospectively evaluated with pulmonary function tests and methacholine challenge. The productive concentration of methacholine causing 20% decrease in FEV(1) (PC(20)) was calculated and used as a parameter of bronchial responsiveness. BHR was defined as a PC(20) < 8 mg/mL. Mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) were recorded in all patients through a Swan-Ganz balloon-tipped catheter. Sixteen patients underwent PMBV, and a methacholine test was repeated after each procedure. RESULTS: Bronchial response to methacholine was significantly increased in patients with MS, so that 53% of them had BHR, whereas all control subjects were nonresponders. The PC(20) was closely correlated with the PAP (r = - 0.777; p < 0.001), PCWP (r = - 0.723; p < 0.001), and mitral valve area (MVA; r = 0.676; p < 0. 001). Balloon valvulotomy was successfully performed in all of the 16 patients, and the cardiac parameters (MVA, PAP, and PCWP) significantly improved after the procedure. In contrast, no significant changes were shown in pulmonary function test variables (total lung capacity, vital capacity [VC], FEV(1), and FEV(1)/VC). Although significant improvement was observed in the mean PC(20) values (from 4.97 +/- 5.24 to 7.47 +/- 6.96 mg/mL; p = 0.0006), BHR was completely eliminated in only one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows that BHR is fairly common among patients with MS, and severity of bronchial responsiveness is significantly correlated with the severity of MS. Moreover, PMBV leads to significant reduction in pulmonary congestion and a consequent improvement in BHR.