Comparison of two devices and two breathing patterns for exhaled breath condensate sampling.

Analysis of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a noninvasive method to access the epithelial lining fluid of the lungs. Due to standardization problems the method has not entered clinical practice. The aim of the study was to assess the comparability for two commercially available devices in healthy controls. In addition, we assessed different breathing patterns in healthy controls with protein markers to analyze the source of the EBC. EBC was collected from ten subjects using the RTube and ECoScreen Turbo in a randomized crossover design, twice with every device--once in tidal breathing and once in hyperventilation. EBC conductivity, pH, surfactant protein A, Clara cell secretory protein and total protein were assessed. Bland-Altman plots were constructed to display the influence of different devices or breathing patterns and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. The volatile organic compound profile was measured using the electronic nose Cyranose 320. For the analysis of these data, the linear discriminant analysis, the Mahalanobis distances and the cross-validation values (CVV) were calculated. Neither the device nor the breathing pattern significantly altered EBC pH or conductivity. ICCs ranged from 0.61 to 0.92 demonstrating moderate to very good agreement. Protein measurements were greatly influenced by breathing pattern, the device used, and the way in which the results were reported. The electronic nose could distinguish between different breathing patterns and devices, resulting in Mahalanobis distances greater than 2 and CVVs ranging from 64% to 87%. EBC pH and (to a lesser extent) EBC conductivity are stable parameters that are not influenced by either the device or the breathing patterns. Protein measurements remain uncertain due to problems of standardization. We conclude that the influence of the breathing maneuver translates into the necessity to keep the volume of ventilated air constant in further studies

Novel protein biomarkers for pneumonia and acute exacerbations in COPD: a pilot study

IntroductionCommunity-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) result in high morbidity, mortality, and socio-economic burden. The usage of easily accessible biomarkers informing on disease entity, severity, prognosis, and pathophysiological endotypes is limited in clinical practice. Here, we have analyzed selected plasma markers for their value in differential diagnosis and severity grading in a clinical cohort.MethodsA pilot cohort of hospitalized patients suffering from CAP (n = 27), AECOPD (n = 10), and healthy subjects (n = 22) were characterized clinically. Clinical scores (PSI, CURB, CRB65, GOLD I-IV, and GOLD ABCD) were obtained, and interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-2-receptor (IL-2R), lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP), resistin, thrombospondin-1 (TSP-1), lactotransferrin (LTF), neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), neutrophil-elastase-2 (ELA2), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), soluble Fas (sFas), as well as TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) were measured in plasma.ResultsIn CAP patients and healthy volunteers, we found significantly different levels of ELA2, HGF, IL-2R, IL-6, IL-8, LBP, resistin, LTF, and TRAIL. The panel of LBP, sFas, and TRAIL could discriminate between uncomplicated and severe CAP. AECOPD patients showed significantly different levels of LTF and TRAIL compared to healthy subjects. Ensemble feature selection revealed that CAP and AECOPD can be discriminated by IL-6, resistin, together with IL-2R. These factors even allow the differentiation between COPD patients suffering from an exacerbation or pneumonia.DiscussionTaken together, we identified immune mediators in patient plasma that provide information on differential diagnosis and disease severity and can therefore serve as biomarkers. Further studies are required for validation in bigger cohorts

Cabbage and fermented vegetables : From death rate heterogeneity in countries to candidates for mitigation strategies of severe COVID-19

Large differences in COVID-19 death rates exist between countries and between regions of the same country. Some very low death rate countries such as Eastern Asia, Central Europe, or the Balkans have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented foods. Although biases exist when examining ecological studies, fermented vegetables or cabbage have been associated with low death rates in European countries. SARS-CoV-2 binds to its receptor, the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). As a result of SARS-CoV-2 binding, ACE2 downregulation enhances the angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT(1)R) axis associated with oxidative stress. This leads to insulin resistance as well as lung and endothelial damage, two severe outcomes of COVID-19. The nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2 (Nrf2) is the most potent antioxidant in humans and can block in particular the AT(1)R axis. Cabbage contains precursors of sulforaphane, the most active natural activator of Nrf2. Fermented vegetables contain many lactobacilli, which are also potent Nrf2 activators. Three examples are: kimchi in Korea, westernized foods, and the slum paradox. It is proposed that fermented cabbage is a proof-of-concept of dietary manipulations that may enhance Nrf2-associated antioxidant effects, helpful in mitigating COVID-19 severity.Peer reviewe

Nrf2-interacting nutrients and COVID-19 : time for research to develop adaptation strategies

There are large between- and within-country variations in COVID-19 death rates. Some very low death rate settings such as Eastern Asia, Central Europe, the Balkans and Africa have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented foods whose intake is associated with the activation of the Nrf2 (Nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2) anti-oxidant transcription factor. There are many Nrf2-interacting nutrients (berberine, curcumin, epigallocatechin gallate, genistein, quercetin, resveratrol, sulforaphane) that all act similarly to reduce insulin resistance, endothelial damage, lung injury and cytokine storm. They also act on the same mechanisms (mTOR: Mammalian target of rapamycin, PPAR gamma:Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, NF kappa B: Nuclear factor kappa B, ERK: Extracellular signal-regulated kinases and eIF2 alpha:Elongation initiation factor 2 alpha). They may as a result be important in mitigating the severity of COVID-19, acting through the endoplasmic reticulum stress or ACE-Angiotensin-II-AT(1)R axis (AT(1)R) pathway. Many Nrf2-interacting nutrients are also interacting with TRPA1 and/or TRPV1. Interestingly, geographical areas with very low COVID-19 mortality are those with the lowest prevalence of obesity (Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia). It is tempting to propose that Nrf2-interacting foods and nutrients can re-balance insulin resistance and have a significant effect on COVID-19 severity. It is therefore possible that the intake of these foods may restore an optimal natural balance for the Nrf2 pathway and may be of interest in the mitigation of COVID-19 severity

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium/ formoterol versus salmeterol/fluticasone: A phase 3 COPD study

The efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate was compared with that of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate in patients with stable, moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). AFFIRM COPD (Aclidinium and Formoterol Findings in Respiratory Medicine COPD) was a 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled study. Patients were randomised (1:1) to aclidinium/ formoterol 400/12 μg twice-daily via Genuair/Pressair or salmeterol/fluticasone 50/500 μg twice-daily via Accuhaler. The primary end-point was peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at week 24. Other endpoints included Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score at week 24, TDI and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) responders, COPD Assessment Test and SGRQ scores, assessment of COPD symptoms and exacerbations, use of reliever medication, and device preference. Adverse events were monitored throughout. In total, 933 patients were eligible (mean age 63.4 years, 65.1% male). Aclidinium/formoterol was superior to salmeterol/fluticasone in peak FEV1 and noninferior in TDI. Health status and reduction in exacerbation risk were similar in both groups. While both treatments were well tolerated, pneumonia occurred less frequently with aclidinium/formoterol than salmeterol/fluticasone. In stable COPD, aclidinium/formoterol significantly improved bronchodilation versus salmeterol/ fluticasone, with equivalent benefits in symptom control and reduction in exacerbation risk. Both treatments were well tolerated and treatment-related adverse events were less common with aclidinium/formoterol