Effect of inhaled prostaglandin E2 on bronchial reactivity to sodium metabisulphite and methacholine in patients with asthma.

Inhaled frusemide protects against the bronchoconstrictor response to a wide range of stimuli that cause bronchoconstriction by indirect mechanisms. One possible explanation for this protection relates to the known ability of frusemide to enhance synthesis of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). Studies in vitro suggest that PGE2 might protect against indirectly acting bronchoconstrictor challenges rather than those that act directly on airway smooth muscle, though little is known about the effects of PGE2 in vivo. The effect of inhaled PGE2 on the bronchoconstrictor response to inhaled sodium metabisulphite (a stimulus with an indirect action) and methacholine (which acts directly on airway smooth muscle) was studied in nine patients with asthma. Subjects were studied on four days, inhaling PGE2 (100 micrograms) or placebo in a double blind fashion followed immediately by a cumulative dose challenge with sodium metabisulphite or methacholine. The response to the constrictor stimuli was measured as the provocative dose causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20). There was no significant change in FEV1 after inhaled PGE2 compared with placebo, nor any significant change in the response to methacholine; the geometric mean methacholine PD20 was 0.9 mumol after PGE2 and 0.56 mumol after placebo (mean difference 0.7 (95% confidence limits--0.1, 1.5) doubling doses). PGE2, however, protected against sodium metabisulphite, the geometric mean sodium metabisulphite PD20 being 11.8 mumol after PGE2 and 1.8 mumol after placebo (mean difference 2.5 (95% CL 1.9, 3.1) doubling doses). PGE2 conferred significantly greater protection against sodium metabisulphite than methacholine (mean difference 1.8 (95% CL 0.8, 2.8) doubling doses). This suggests that PGE2, like frusemide, has an inhibitory effect on pathways relevant to the bronchoconstriction induced by sodium metabisulphite, with little or no effect on those relevant to methacholine.     

Inhibition of sodium metabisulphite induced bronchoconstriction by frusemide in asthma: role of cyclooxygenase products.

BACKGROUND--Inhaled frusemide inhibits airway responses to sodium metabisulphite and other indirect bronchial challenges in asthma by undetermined mechanisms which may relate to its ability to stimulate prostaglandin release. Inhalation of sodium metabisulphite provokes indirect bronchoconstriction, possibly by activating sensory nerves. To investigate the role of cyclooxygenase products in the airway actions of frusemide and sodium metabisulphite, the effects of a potent cyclooxygenase inhibitor, flurbiprofen, alone and in combination with frusemide were investigated against airway responsiveness to sodium metabisulphite. METHODS--In a double blind double placebo controlled study, 12 mild asthmatic subjects attended on four occasions to undergo three inhalation challenges with sodium metabisulphite. A baseline challenge was performed one hour before oral intake of flurbiprofen 200 mg or matched placebo, and two hours before inhalation of frusemide 40 mg or matched placebo. A second challenge was performed immediately after inhalation of frusemide (two hours after flurbiprofen) with a further challenge three hours later. The log concentration provoking a 20% fall in FEV1 (log PC20) was used to assess airway responsiveness to sodium metabisulphite. RESULTS--Frusemide caused an immediate 1.9 doubling dose protection and a lesser 0.7 doubling dose protection at three hours. This protection was enhanced by flurbiprofen at both time points to 2.7 (early) and 1.9 (late) doubling doses. In addition, flurbiprofen alone significantly reduced airway responsiveness to sodium metabisulphite by 1.1 doubling doses at both two and five hours. CONCLUSIONS--The generation of bronchoprotective prostaglandins is unlikely to underlie the inhibitory action of frusemide against airway responsiveness to sodium metabisulphite. Endogenous contractile prostaglandins within the airways may be involved in the bronchoconstrictor response to sodium metabisulphite.     

Comparative bronchial responses to hyperosmolar saline and methacholine in asthma.

Airway responsiveness to inhaled methacholine and to ultrasonically nebulised hyperosmolar saline was compared in 20 asthmatic subjects. Each subject had two hyperosmolar inhalation tests and a methacholine challenge in random order at least 48 hours apart over a period of two weeks. Hyperosmolar challenge, carried out with doubling concentrations of saline from 0.9% to 14.4% to obtain a dose-response curve, was well tolerated by all subjects. The response to hyperosmolar saline--expressed as the PO20, the osmolarity inducing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was obtained in 16 of the 20 subjects and in each was repeatable to within one doubling concentration of saline. The peak bronchoconstrictor effect of hyperosmolar saline inhalation occurred at 3 minutes and its mean total duration (FEV1 less than 90% of baseline) was 50 minutes. There was no significant correlation between the PO20 and the PC20 methacholine (the concentration inducing a 20% fall in FEV1). Thus by using a new method to obtain a quantitative airway response to inhaled hyperosmolar saline we found that the airway response to hyperosmolar inhalation differs from the airway response to methacholine.     

Cross refractoriness between sodium metabisulphite and exercise induced asthma.

BACKGROUND--Exercise and inhaled sodium metabisulphite are thought to cause bronchoconstriction in asthma through different mechanisms. The response to both stimuli becomes refractory with repeat challenge. The mechanism of refractoriness is unclear, although depletion of mast cell derived mediators or neurotransmitters has been suggested. Recent studies suggest a common mechanism involving release of inhibitory prostaglandins. If this is true, exercise and sodium metabisulphite induced bronchoconstriction should show cross refractoriness. METHODS--Thirteen subjects with mild asthma and previously established exercise and sodium metabisulphite induced bronchoconstriction performed two sodium metabisulphite challenges (giving a single dose previously shown to cause a 20% fall in FEV1) on one study day, and two exercise tests on another. The second challenge proceeded after recovery (FEV1 > 95% baseline) from the first. Subjects then attended on two further occasions when an exercise test was performed after sodium metabisulphite and a sodium metabisulphite challenge after exercise. RESULTS--When expressed as the percentage reduction in the area under the change in percentage FEV1 curve over 20 minutes (AUC) the response to exercise was reduced by a mean 62.3% (95% CI 46.5% to 78.1%) following a first exercise challenge, and by 50.7% (95% CI 27.8% to 73.6%) following a sodium metabisulphite challenge. The response to a sodium metabisulphite challenge was reduced by a mean of 80.2% (95% CI 68.9% to 91.5%) when it followed a sodium metabisulphite challenge, and by 37.3% (95% CI 15.1% to 59.5%) following an exercise challenge. CONCLUSION--This study shows some cross refractoriness between exercise and sodium metabisulphite induced bronchoconstriction, in keeping with a partially shared mechanism of refractoriness.     

Attenuation of propranolol-induced bronchoconstriction by frusemide

BACKGROUND: Inhaled propranolol causes bronchoconstriction in asthmatic subjects by an indirect mechanism which remains unclear. Inhaled frusemide has been shown to attenuate a number of indirectly acting bronchoconstrictor challenges. The aim of this study was to investigate whether frusemide could protect against propranolol-induced bronchoconstriction in patients with stable mild asthma. METHODS: Twelve asthmatic subjects were studied on three separate days. At the first visit subjects inhaled increasing doubling concentrations of propranolol (0.25-32 mg/ml), breathing tidally from a jet nebuliser. The provocative concentration of propranolol causing a 20% reduction in FEV1 (PC20FEV1 propranolol) was determined from the log concentration- response curve for each subject. At the following visits nebulised frusemide (4 ml x 10 mg/ml) or placebo (isotonic saline) was administered in a randomised, double blind, crossover fashion. FEV1 was measured immediately before and five minutes after drug administration. Individual PC20FEV1 propranolol was then administered and FEV1 was recorded at five minute intervals for 15 minutes. Residual bronchoconstriction was reversed with nebulised salbutamol. RESULTS: Frusemide had no acute bronchodilator effect but significantly reduced the maximum fall in FEV1 due to propranolol: mean fall 18.2% after placebo and 11.8% after frusemide. The median difference in maximum % fall in FEV1 within individuals between study days was 3.6% (95% CI 1.2 to 11.7). CONCLUSIONS: Frusemide attenuates propranolol-induced bronchoconstriction, a property shared with sodium cromoglycate. Both drugs block other indirect challenges and the present study lends further support to the suggestion that frusemide and cromoglycate share a similar mechanism of action in the airways.


     

Effect of prior bronchoconstriction on the airway response to histamine in normal subjects.

We have examined the effect of prior bronchoconstriction on the bronchial responsiveness to inhaled histamine in nine normal subjects. The airway response to increasing concentrations of histamine aerosol was assessed by measurement of specific airways conductance (sGaw) in a body plethysmograph. The threshold provocative dose of histamine needed to cause a 35% fall in starting sGaw (PD35) and the steepest slope of the response were measured from cumulative log dose response curves. Histamine challenges were performed in duplicate after premedication with 0.9% sodium chloride (control) or methacholine aerosol on separate days. The mean starting sGaw did not change significantly after inhalation of 0.9% sodium chloride but methacholine caused a mean reduction in sGaw of 42%. Mean control PD35 values did not differ significantly from mean PD35 values after methacholine. The mean steepest slope of the response after methacoline was 47% lower than the mean control value. There was a significant linear relationship between starting sGaw and the steepest slope for the control and for the methacholine premedicated challenges. The reduction in slope after methacholine was accounted for by the fall in starting sGaw. Because histamine PD35 was not altered by prior bronchoconstriction, it is concluded that the bronchial hyperresponsiveness of asthmatic subjects to non-specific bronchoconstrictor stimuli is unlikely to be a direct consequence of their low starting airway calibre.     

Comparison of sulphur dioxide and metabisulphite airway reactivity in subjects with asthma.

BACKGROUND--In asthmatic subjects bronchoconstriction is induced by inhalation of the common food preservatives sulphur dioxide (SO2) and metabisulphite (MBS). SO2 and MBS challenges share many similarities, but it is not known whether they are equivalent. In this study of subjects with mild clinical asthma equivalence was assessed by comparing SO2 and MBS reactivity by estimating the total dose of SO2 inhaled during SO2 and MBS challenges, and by calculating SO2 uptake during both challenges. In addition, as the MBS solutions inhaled were acidic and hyperosmolar, the effect of these factors on MBS responsiveness was investigated. METHODS--Fifteen subjects were challenged on separate days with doubling (0.5 to 8.0 ppm) concentrations of SO2 gas inhaled during three minute periods of isocapnic hyperventilation and MBS administered in doses ranging from 0.1 to 12.8 mumol using the Wright protocol. On two other days SO2 and MBS challenges were preceded by a challenge with phosphate buffered saline (PBS) solutions of pH and osmolarity similar to MBS solutions. Response was measured as the dose or concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20 or PC20). RESULTS--All subjects reacted to MBS and 14 responded to SO2. Geometric mean histamine PD20 was 1.61 mumol (95% confidence interval 0.72 to 3.60). MBS and SO2 airway responsiveness were not significantly related. Estimates of the mean concentration of SO2 inhaled during SO2 and MBS challenges differed, as did estimates of the mean SO2 uptake during both challenges. MBS and SO2 reactivity were not affected by prior challenge with PBS solutions. CONCLUSIONS--SO2 and MBS challenges are not comparable. MBS reactivity was not affected by the hyperosmolar, acidic nature of its solutions.     

Comparison of three inhaled non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the airway response to sodium metabisulphite and adenosine 5'-monophosphate challenge in asthma.

BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to assess the role of prostaglandins in asthma but their effects on bronchoconstrictor challenges have been inconsistent. The effects of three nebulised nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the airway response to inhaled sodium metabisulphite (MBS) and adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) were compared in the same asthmatic subjects to see whether contractile prostaglandins were involved in MBS or AMP induced bronchoconstriction. A possible protective effect of the osmolarity or pH of the inhaled solutions was also assessed. METHODS: Two double blind placebo controlled studies were carried out. In study 1, 15 non-aspirin sensitive patients with mild asthma attended on four occasions and inhaled 5 ml of lysine aspirin (L-aspirin) 900 mg, indomethacin 50 mg, sodium salicylate 800 mg, or saline 20 minutes before an inhaled MBS challenge. On four further occasions 14 of the patients inhaled the same solutions followed by an inhaled AMP challenge. In study 2, 10 of the patients attended on four additional occasions and inhaled 5 ml of 0.9%, 3%, 10%, or 9.5% saline with indomethacin 50 mg 20 minutes before an inhaled MBS challenge. RESULTS: In study 1 inhaled lysine aspirin had a similar effect on MBS and AMP induced bronchoconstriction, increasing the provocative dose causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20) by 1.29 (95% CI 0.54 to 2.03) and 1.23 (95% CI 0.53 to 1.93) doubling doses, respectively. Indomethacin increased the MBS PD20 and AMP PD20 by 0.64 (95% CI -0.1 to 1.38) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.29 to 1.69) doubling doses, respectively. Sodium salicylate had no significant effect on either challenge. The two solutions causing most inhibition were the most acidic and the most alkaline. In study 2 inhaled 9.5% saline with indomethacin (osmolarity 3005 mOsm/kg) increased the MBS PD20 by 1.1 doubling doses (95% CI 0.2 to 2.0) compared with only 0.09 (95% CI -0.83 to 1.0) and 0.04 (95% CI -0.88 to 0.95) doubling doses with 3% saline (918 mOsm/kg) and 10% saline (2994 mOsm/ kg), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled L-aspirin and indomethacin have broadly similar protective effects against MBS and AMP induced bronchoconstriction in the doses given, although the effect of indomethacin on MBS was not quite statistically significant. The osmolarity and pH of the solutions did not appear to be important determinants of the response. The effect of L-aspirin and indomethacin is likely to be the result of cyclooxygenase inhibition reducing the production of contractile prostaglandins during MBS and AMP challenge.     

The effect of inhaled frusemide on airway sensitivity to inhaled 4.5% sodium chloride aerosol in asthmatic subjects.

BACKGROUND: Frusemide inhaled by asthmatic subjects before a variety of indirect bronchial challenges inhibits the airway response to these challenges. Since inhalation of hyperosmolar saline is an indirect bronchial challenge, the effect of inhaled frusemide and its vehicle on airway sensitivity to a 4.5% sodium chloride (NaCl) aerosol challenge was investigated. METHODS: Eleven asthmatic subjects (five females, six males) who had a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second after 4.5% NaCl challenge were enrolled in this double blind controlled crossover trial. Sensitivity was measured as the dose of aerosol required to provoke a 20% fall in FEV1. Frusemide (33.2 mg) or its vehicle was delivered through a Fisoneb ultrasonic nebuliser and inhaled 10 minutes before challenge with 4.5% NaCl. A Mistogen ultrasonic nebuliser was used to generate the 4.5% NaCl aerosol and FEV1 was measured before and one minute after each challenge period of 0.5, one, two, four, eight, eight and eight minutes. The doubling dose difference for PD20 was calculated. RESULTS: Frusemide or vehicle had no effect on baseline lung function. The geometric mean PD20 after vehicle was 1.3 ml with a 95% confidence interval of 0.7-2.3 and after frusemide was 8.2 ml with a 95% confidence interval of 4.7-14.1. This represented a 2.6 doubling dose increase in PD20 after frusemide inhalation. In five of the 11 subjects an increase from baseline FEV1 occurred after exposure to 4.5% NaCl challenge in the presence of frusemide. This transient bronchodilatation may be caused by the release of prostaglandin E2. CONCLUSION: Inhalation of frusemide is very effective in delaying airway narrowing induced by an aerosol of 4.5% NaCl in asthmatic subjects.     

Comparison of histamine and methacholine for use in bronchial challenge tests in community studies.

Measurement of bronchial reactivity is widely used in epidemiological surveys. Histamine has been compared with methacholine inhalation challenge in two samples of adults from a small town to determine which is the better agent for use in community studies. Increasing doses of histamine and methacholine were given, up to a maximum of 4 and 12 mumol respectively, according to the method of Yan et al, the provocative dose of agonist causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20) being measured. More subjects had a measurable PD20 with methacholine than with histamine, both in a random sample of 108 subjects (25 v 11 subjects, p less than 0.01) and in an additional 95 subjects selected because of wheeze in the last 12 months (67 v 48 subjects, p less than 0.01). Side effects were mild with both agents but histamine caused voice change in more subjects (21% v 11%). Repeatability was assessed in a further group of subjects with wheeze in the last year. The 95% range for a single estimation of PD20 in subjects with a measured PD20 on at least one occasion was +/- 2.5 doubling doses for histamine (n = 25) and +/- 2.1 doubling doses for methacholine (n = 33). Thus methacholine has advantages over histamine for community studies of bronchial reactivity as it is possible to use doses that produce more PD20 measurements with fewer side effects.     

Effects of a cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor, flurbiprofen, and an H1 histamine receptor antagonist, terfenadine, alone and in combination on allergen induced immediate bronchoconstriction in man

The effect of flurbiprofen, a potent cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor, on histamine and methacholine reactivity was assessed in seven atopic subjects with asthma. Flurbiprofen 150 mg daily for three days displaced the histamine-FEV1 concentration-response curve to the right by 1.5 doubling doses, whereas no effect was observed on the response to methacholine. Subsequently the effects of flurbiprofen and terfenadine, a specific H1 histamine receptor antagonist, on allergen induced bronchoconstriction were studied in seven atopic but non-asthmatic subjects. The subjects inhaled the concentration of grass pollen allergen that had previously been shown to produce a 20% fall in FEV1 on separate occasions after prior treatment with placebo, flurbiprofen 150 mg daily for three days, terfenadine 180 mg three hours before challenge, and the combination of flurbiprofen and terfenadine. After placebo, allergen challenge caused a mean (SEM) maximum fall in FEV1 of 37.6% (2.6%) after 20 (3.7) minutes, followed by a gradual recovery to within 15% of baseline at 60 minutes. Terfenadine reduced the maximum allergen provoked fall in FEV1 to 21.5% (2.2%) and reduced the area under the time-response curve (AUC) by 50% (6%). Flurbiprofen alone reduced the mean maximum fall in FEV1 to 29.6% (3.2%) and reduced the AUC by 26%. The effect of the combination of flurbiprofen and terfenadine did not differ significantly from that of terfenadine alone. We conclude that histamine and prostaglandins contribute to immediate allergen induced bronchoconstriction and that a complex interaction occurs between the two classes of mediators.     

Differences in responsiveness to hyperventilation and methacholine in asthma and chronic bronchitis.

In a previous study on 27 patients with chronic bronchitis we found that only three developed bronchoconstriction in response to hyperventilation of cold, dry air despite an increased responsiveness to methacholine inhalation. We therefore investigated bronchial responsiveness to hyperventilation with cold, dry air and methacholine in 27 patients with stable asthma who had a similar range of baseline FEV1 values but who developed bronchoconstriction that could be reversed to give an FEV1 more than 70% of the predicted value. Baseline FEV1 was 0.88-3.98 l (37-114% predicted). All but one subject developed bronchoconstriction in response to hyperventilation. There was a linear relationship between baseline FEV1 and response to methacholine (r2 = 0.37, p less than 0.001) and the relationship was significantly different from that found in the bronchitic subjects (F2.50 = 24.94, p less than 0.001). In general, the response to methacholine was greater in the asthmatic than in the bronchitic subjects for any baseline FEV1. The results suggest that there are different mechanisms underlying the increased responsiveness to methacholine in asthma and chronic bronchitis.     

Effects of inhalation of N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine in the well elderly and in patients with chronic bronchitis.

BACKGROUND: Inhalation of the bacterial peptide N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine (FMLP) produces bronchoconstriction in normal subjects. FMLP thus has a putative role as a mediator of bronchoconstriction associated with bacterial bronchial infection. METHODS: The effects of FMLP inhalation were examined in ten subjects with a history of chronic bronchitis and ten age matched control subjects. Each subject inhaled FMLP doses from 0.025 to 0.8 mumol to determine the provocative dose of FMLP causing a 20% fall in FEV1(PD20FMLP). FEV1 was recorded every five minutes after the final FMLP inhalation until it had returned to 95% of baseline FEV1 or 60 minutes had elapsed. The time to return to 95% baseline FEV1 was recorded or extrapolated from the recovery curve as an index of rapidity of recovery. Total and differential white cell counts were performed on each subject at baseline and five and 15 minutes after the final FMLP inhalation. RESULTS: The geometric mean PD20 FMLP in the patients with chronic bronchitis was 0.06 mumol (95% confidence interval 0.015-0.26), which was significantly lower than that in the control subjects (0.21 mumol (0.02-1.9)). PD20 FMLP in the patients with chronic bronchitis but not age matched controls (p = 0.35) was lower than that found previously in young normal subjects (0.35 mumol (0.07-1.8). The return to 95% baseline FEV1 occurred after 86(10) minutes in subjects with chronic bronchitis and in 81(23) minutes in their age matched controls, in both cases being much slower than that seen in young subjects (29(9) minutes). CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic bronchitis may be especially susceptible to formyl peptides elaborated by bacteria during bacterial bronchial infection.     

Inhaled frusemide and exercise induced asthma: evidence of a role for inhibitory prostanoids.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled frusemide protects subjects with asthma against a wide range of bronchoconstrictor challenges, including allergen, exercise and inhaled sodium metabisulphite. An investigation was designed to determine whether this protection is related to the production of inhibitory prostaglandins, such as prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), by studying the effect of the cyclooxygenase inhibitor indomethacin on the protection afforded by inhaled frusemide against exercise induced asthma. METHODS: In a double blind crossover study 10 subjects with mild asthma were pretreated with indomethacin (50 mg thrice daily) or placebo capsules for three days; they then inhaled frusemide (40 mg) or placebo 10 minutes before an exercise test previously shown to cause a 20-30% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). RESULTS: After inhalation of placebo exercise caused a similar maximum fall in FEV1 whether pretreatment was with placebo (26%) or indomethacin (25.2%). After inhalation of frusemide the maximum fall in FEV1 was reduced to 14.3% after placebo pretreatment and to 21.8% after indomethacin pretreatment; the difference between placebo and indomethacin pretreatment was significant (mean difference 7.5%, 95% limits 0.6%, 14.4%). The inhibitory effect of frusemide on the response to exercise, assessed as change in FEV1 over 30 minutes, was significantly greater with placebo (62%) than indomethacin (13%) pretreatment. CONCLUSION: These findings support a role for inhibitory prostanoids, such as PGE2, in the beneficial effects of frusemide as a protection against exercise induced asthma.     

Dose equivalence and bronchoprotective effects of salmeterol and salbutamol in asthma

BACKGROUND: Salbutamol is the most widely prescribed short acting beta 2 agonist and salmeterol is the first long acting inhaled beta 2 agonist. The dose equivalence of salmeterol and salbutamol is disputed. Estimates of weight-for-weight dose ratio have ranged from 1:2 to 1:16. A study was undertaken to clarify the true dose ratio. METHODS: The bronchoprotection afforded against repeated methacholine challenge by inhaled salmeterol 25 micrograms and 100 micrograms and salbutamol 100 micrograms and 400 micrograms was compared in a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover trial. Subjects were 16 stable asthmatics with a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of > or = 65% predicted, screening concentration provoking a fall in FEV1 of 20% (PC20FEV1) of < or = 8mg/ml, and a shift in PC20FEV1 of more than two doubling concentration steps following inhalation of salbutamol 400 micrograms. On five separate occasions subjects underwent methacholine challenge before and 30 and 120 minutes after drug administration. PD20FEV1 was calculated for each challenge. FEV1 at 90 minutes after drug administration was also recorded. RESULTS: Bronchoprotection afforded by salmeterol was increased at 120 minutes compared with 30 minutes and protection by salbutamol was decreased. Protection by both doses of salmeterol was similar to salbutamol 100 micrograms at 30 minutes but significantly greater at 120 minutes. FEV1 at 90 minutes was significantly greater after salmeterol 100 micrograms than after placebo, but there were no other significant differences between treatments. Maximal observed protection was equivalent for salmeterol 100 micrograms and salbutamol 400 micrograms. CONCLUSIONS: The data are compatible with a weight-for- weight dose ratio for salmeterol:salbutamol of < or = 1:4.




     

Effects of methacholine induced bronchoconstriction and procaterol induced bronchodilation on cough receptor sensitivity to inhaled capsaicin and tartaric acid.

BACKGROUND: The direct effect of bronchoconstriction on cough receptor sensitivity is unknown, and the antitussive effect of beta 2 adrenergic agonists in man has been controversial. This study was designed to throw light on these questions. METHODS: The threshold of the cough response to inhaled capsaicin, a stimulant acting on C fibre endings, and tartaric acid, a chemostimulant, was measured before and 10 minutes after inhalation of methacholine, which caused a nearly 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), in 14 normal subjects (study 1), and also before and 30 minutes after inhalation of procaterol (30 micrograms), placebo, and saline in eight normal subjects (study 2). Progressively increasing concentrations of capsaicin and tartaric acid solutions were inhaled for 15 seconds by mouth tidal breathing at one minute intervals and cough threshold was defined as the lowest concentration of capsaicin and tartaric acid that elicited five or more coughs. RESULTS: In study 1 the geometric mean values of the cough threshold of response to capsaicin and tartaric acid before methacholine callenge, 2.98 (GSE 1.30) micrograms/ml and 46.6 (1.22) mg/ml, were not significantly different from those of the response to methacholine inhalation, 3.45 (1.33) micrograms/ml and 32.9 (1.37) mg/ml. In study 2 the geometric mean value of the cough threshold of response to capsaicin before inhalation of procaterol (4.61 (GSE 1.84) micrograms/ml) was not different from that after inhalation of procaterol (4.61 (GSE 1.84) micrograms/ml), which had significant bronchodilator effects. The cough threshold was not altered by placebo or saline. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that muscarinic receptor stimulation, bronchoconstriction, beta 2 receptor stimulation, or bronchodilation might have no direct effect on the sensitivity of the cough receptors in normal subjects.     

Lidocaine exerts its effect on induced bronchospasm by mitigating reflexes, rather than by attenuation of smooth muscle contraction

BACKGROUND: Lidocaine inhalation attenuates histamine-induced bronchoconstriction, as well as bronchoconstriction elicited by mechanical irritation. This effect could be mediated by direct effects on smooth muscle or by reflex attenuation. Therefore, we evaluated whether lidocaine attenuated the bronchial response of direct smooth muscle stimulation with methacholine. METHODS: In 15 volunteers with bronchial hyperreactivity, a methacholine challenge was performed following the inhalation of lidocaine, dyclonine (which does not attenuate bronchial reactivity) or saline on three different days in a randomized, double-blind fashion. Lung function, response to methacholine, and lidocaine and dyclonine plasma concentrations were measured. RESULTS: The inhaled methacholine concentration (PC20) necessary for a 20% decrease in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) was 8.8 +/- 6.1 mg/ml at the screening evaluation. The sensitivity to methacholine challenge (PC20) remained unchanged regardless of which solution was inhaled (9.1 +/- 7.5 mg/ml for lidocaine, 10.2 +/- 9.0 mg/ml for dyclonine and 9.8 +/- 8.3 mg/ml for saline; P = 0.58, means +/- standard deviation). Furthermore, the inhalation of all three solutions caused a significant decrease in FEV1 from baseline (P = 0.0007), with a significantly larger effect for dyclonine than lidocaine (P = 0.0153). CONCLUSIONS: Although both inhaled and intravenous lidocaine attenuates histamine-evoked bronchoconstriction, it does not alter the response to methacholine. Therefore, the attenuation of bronchial reactivity by lidocaine appears to be related solely to neurally mediated reflex attenuation, rather than to the attenuation of direct constriction of airway smooth muscle.     

Effect of methacholine induced bronchoconstriction on the pulmonary distribution and plasma pharmacokinetics of inhaled sodium cromoglycate in subjects with normal and hyperreactive airways.

Inhalation treatment may be less effective in the presence of bronchoconstriction because of the reduced penetration of drugs into the airways. The effect of bronchoconstriction on the lung deposition and plasma pharmacokinetics of inhaled sodium cromoglycate was examined. Ten subjects attended the laboratory on three occasions. On the first occasion a bronchial provocation test was performed to determine the concentration of methacholine required to reduce the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) by 20% (PC20). On the two subsequent occasions subjects inhaled either saline or their PC20 methacholine, followed five minutes later by an aerosol containing sodium cromoglycate and stannous phytate labelled with technetium-99m. Twenty minutes later a gamma emission lung scan was performed to determine the intrathoracic deposition of the nebulised aerosol. The central:peripheral (C:P) ratio of lung deposition was then calculated. Measurements of FEV1 were made and blood samples taken for analysis of plasma sodium cromoglycate concentration at intervals for four hours. Methacholine led to a 23.4% (SEM 0.6%) lower FEV1 and a 2.8 times higher C:P ratio than those observed after saline. There was a direct correlation between log PC20 methacholine and the increase in the C:P ratio (r = 0.81). Despite these changes with methacholine, the plasma pharmacokinetics of inhaled sodium cromoglycate were not significantly different after methacholine and after saline, except that the maximum concentration achieved (Cmax) was increased. These observations suggest that the area of cromoglycate deposition and the anatomical site are less important in determining the plasma pharmacokinetics of cromoglycate than is the total dose delivered to the lung.     

Reduced subjective awareness of bronchoconstriction provoked by methacholine in elderly asthmatic and normal subjects as measured on a simple awareness scale.

BACKGROUND: Asthma death rates are rising, with the greatest rise and highest death rates in old age. A reduced cardiovascular response in the elderly may lead to the underestimation by physicians of the severity of acute asthma attacks. This would be compounded if elderly patients had reduced awareness of bronchoconstriction. METHODS: Methacholine provoked bronchoconstriction was compared in 34 elderly (17 asthmatic, 17 normal; age 60-83, mean 68 years) and 33 young subjects (16 asthmatic, 17 normal; 20-46, mean 30 years). None were smokers. All underwent inhaled methacholine challenge by the Newcastle dosimeter method, monitored by maximal expiratory flow-volume loops (MEFVL). The endpoints were a 35% fall in forced expiratory flow at 50% vital capacity or cumulative inhalation of 6.4 mg methacholine. The one second forced expiratory volume (FEV1) was derived from MEFVL. After challenge and before bronchodilatation subjects graded awareness of respiratory discomfort from 1 (no symptoms) to 4 (pronounced symptoms needing immediate treatment). RESULTS: Despite a greater fall in FEV1 in elderly asthmatic patients (mean (SE) 27.4% (2.2%)) than in young asthmatic patients (21.5% (1.7%)) elderly patients were less aware of bronchoconstriction (awareness score 2.00 (SE 0.15) than young patients (3.06 (0.11)). Similar differences in awareness score were seen between elderly normal subjects (1.53 (0.17)) and young normal subjects (2.76 (0.22)), despite no difference in degree of bronchoconstriction. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced awareness of moderate acute bronchoconstriction in old age may delay self referral in acute asthma and contribute to higher asthma mortality in the elderly.     

Effect of inhaled frusemide on the early response to antigen and subsequent change in airway reactivity in atopic patients.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether inhaled frusemide was able to inhibit the increase in nonspecific bronchial reactivity that occurs after the early response to allergen exposure in subjects with allergic rhinitis or asthma (or both). Ten symptom free patients initially underwent a challenge with methacholine, to determine the dose of methacholine that caused a 15% fall in FEV1 (PD15 FEV1 meth) and a challenge with a specific allergen, to determine the concentration of allergen that caused a fall in FEV1 of at least 15%. On two further occasions they inhaled allergen concentration that had caused the greater than or equal to 15% fall in FEV1 preceded by inhaled frusemide (40 mg frusemide in 4 ml buffered saline) or placebo (4 ml of diluent solution), according to a randomised, double blind, crossover design. All allergen studies were separated by at least seven days. A methacholine challenge was performed two hours after the allergen challenge, a time when the early response to allergen had completely resolved. Frusemide inhibited the early response to antigen, causing mean (95% confidence interval) protection of 87.6% (96-80%) for the maximum fall in FEV1. The increase in non-specific airway reactivity that occurred after antigen when this was preceded by placebo was reduced by frusemide. The mean (95% CI) difference in PD15 values between the placebo and the frusemide days was 1.73 (2.30-1.16) doubling doses of methacholine. These results confirm that frusemide is highly effective in preventing the early response to allergen, and show that it inhibits the increase in reactivity to methacholine that follows the early response.