Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children

Background Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are increasingly prescribed for children with asthma. Objectives To assess the safety and efficacy of adding a LABA to an ICS in children and adolescents with asthma. To determine whether the benefit of LABA was influenced by baseline severity of airway obstruction, the dose of ICS to which it was added or with which it was compared, the type of LABA used, the number of devices used to deliver combination therapy and trial duration. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Trials Register until January 2015. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials testing the combination of LABA and ICS versus the same, or an increased, dose of ICS for at least four weeks in children and adolescents with asthma. The main outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring rescue oral steroids. Secondary outcomes included markers of exacerbation, pulmonary function, symptoms, quality of life, adverse events and withdrawals. Data collection and analysis Two review authors assessed studies independently for methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from trialists when possible. Main results We included in this review a total of 33 trials representing 39 control-intervention comparisons and randomly assigning 6381 children. Most participants were inadequately controlled on their current ICS dose. We assessed the addition of LABA to ICS (1) versus the same dose of ICS, and (2) versus an increased dose of ICS. LABA added to ICS was compared with the same dose of ICS in 28 studies. Mean age of participants was 11 years, and males accounted for 59% of the study population. Mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at baseline was ≥ 80% of predicted in 18 studies, 61% to 79% of predicted in six studies and unreported in the remaining studies. Participants were inadequately controlled before randomisation in all but four studies. There was no significant group difference in exacerbations requiring oral steroids (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.28, 12 studies, 1669 children; moderate-quality evidence) with addition of LABA to ICS compared with ICS alone. There was no statistically significant group difference in hospital admissions (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.36, seven studies, 1292 children; moderate-quality evidence)nor in serious adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.85, 17 studies, N = 4021; moderate-quality evidence). Withdrawals occurred significantly less frequently with the addition of LABA (23 studies, 471 children, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94; low-quality evidence). Compared with ICS alone, addition of LABA led to significantly greater improvement in FEV1 (nine studies, 1942 children, inverse variance (IV) 0.08 L, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.10; mean difference (MD) 2.99%, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.11, seven studies, 534 children; low-quality evidence), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (16 studies, 3934 children, IV 10.20 L/min, 95% CI 8.14 to 12.26), reduction in use of daytime rescue inhalations (MD -0.07 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.02, seven studies; 1798 children) and reduction in use of nighttime rescue inhalations (MD -0.08 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.03, three studies, 672 children). No significant group difference was noted in exercise-induced % fall in FEV1, symptom-free days, asthma symptom score, quality of life, use of reliever medication and adverse events. A total of 11 studies assessed the addition of LABA to ICS therapy versus an increased dose of ICS with random assignment of 1628 children. Mean age of participants was 10 years, and 64% were male. Baseline mean FEV1 was ≥ 80% of predicted. All trials enrolled participants who were inadequately controlled on a baseline inhaled steroid dose equivalent to 400 µg/d of beclomethasone equivalent or less. There was no significant group differences in risk of exacerbation requiring oral steroids with the combination of LABA and ICS versus a double dose of ICS (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.32, three studies, 581 children; moderate-quality evidence) nor in risk of hospital admission (RR 1.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 5.54, four studies, 1008 children; moderate-quality evidence). No statistical significant group difference was noted in serious adverse events (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.94, seven studies, N = 1343; moderate-quality evidence) and no statistically significant differences in overall risk of all-cause withdrawals (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.37, eight studies, 1491 children; moderate-quality evidence). Compared with double the dose of ICS, use of LABA was associated with significantly greater improvement in morning PEF (MD 8.73 L/min, 95% CI 5.15 to 12.31, five studies, 1283 children; moderate-quality evidence), but data were insufficient to aggregate on other markers of asthma symptoms, rescue medication use and nighttime awakening. There was no group difference in risk of overall adverse effects, A significant group difference was observed in linear growth over 12 months, clearly indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group (two studies: MD 1.21 cm/y, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.70). Authors' conclusions In children with persistent asthma, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, but it was superior for improving lung function compared with the same or higher doses of ICS. No differences in adverse effects were apparent, with the exception of greater growth with the use of ICS and LABA compared with a higher ICS dose. The trend towards increased risk of hospital admission with LABA, irrespective of the dose of ICS, is a matter of concern and requires further monitoring

Determinants of Oral Corticosteroid Responsiveness in Wheezing Asthmatic Youth (DOORWAY): Protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study of children with acute moderate-to-severe asthma exacerbations

Introduction: Oral corticosteroids are the cornerstone of acute asthma management in the emergency department. Recent evidence has raised doubts about the efficacy of this treatment in preschool-aged children with viral-induced wheezing and in smoking adults. The aims of the study were to: (1) document the magnitude of response to oral corticosteroids in children presenting to the emergency department with moderate or severe asthma; (2) quantify potential determinants of response to corticosteroids and (3) explore the role of gene polymorphisms associated with the responsiveness to corticosteroids. Methods and analysis: The design is a prospective cohort study of 1008 children aged 1-17 years meeting a strict definition of asthma and presenting with a clinical score of ≥4 on the validated Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure. All children will receive standardised severity-specific treatment with prednisone/prednisolone and cointerventions (salbutamol with/without ipratropium bromide). Determinants, namely viral aetiology, environmental tobacco smoke and single nucleotide polymorphism, will be objectively documented. The primary efficacy endpoint is the failure of emergency department (ED) management within 72 h of the ED visit. Secondary endpoints include other measures of asthma severity and time to recovery within 7 days of the index visit. The study has 80% power for detecting a risk difference of 7.5% associated with each determinant from a baseline risk of 21%, at an α of 0.05. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from all participating institutions. An impaired response to systemic steroids in certain subgroups will challenge the current standard of practice and call for the immediate search for better approaches. A potential host-environment interaction will broaden our understanding of corticosteroid responsiveness in children. Documentation of similar effectiveness of corticosteroids across determinants will provide the needed reassurance regarding current treatment recommendations. Results: Results will be disseminated at international conferences and manuscripts targeted at emergency physicians, paediatricians, geneticists and respirologists. Trial registration number: This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02013076)

Inhaled sodium cromoglycate for asthma in children

Background Sodium cromoglycate has been recommended as maintenance treatment for childhood asthma for many years. Its use has decreased since 1990, when inhaled corticosteroids became popular, but it is still used in many countries. Objectives To determine the efficacy of sodium cromoglycate compared to placebo in the prophylactic treatment of children with asthma. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register (October 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2007), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2007), EMBASE (January 1985 to November 2007) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted the pharmaceutical company manufacturing sodium cromoglycate. In 2007 we updated the review. Selection criteria All double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials, which addressed the effectiveness of inhaled sodium cromoglycate as maintenance therapy, studying children aged 0 up to 18 years with asthma. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We pooled study results. Main results Of 3500 titles retrieved from the literature, 24 papers reporting on 23 studies could be included in the review. The studies were published between 1970 and 1997 and together included 1026 participants. Most were cross-over studies. Few studies provided sufficient information to judge the concealment of allocation. Four studies provided results for the percentage of symptom-free days. Pooling the results did not reveal a statistically significant difference between sodium cromoglycate and placebo. For the other pooled outcomes, most of the symptom-related outcomes and bronchodilator use showed statistically significant results, but treatment effects were small. Considering the confidence intervals of the outcome measures, a clinically relevant effect of sodium cromoglycate cannot be excluded. The funnel plot showed an under-representation of small studies with negative results, suggesting publication bias. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence to be sure about the efficacy of sodium cromoglycate over placebo. Publication bias is likely to have overestimated the beneficial effects of sodium cromoglycate as maintenance therapy in childhood asthma

Vitamin D in the prevention of exacerbations of asthma in preschoolers (DIVA): Protocol for a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled triple-blind trial

Introduction Preschoolers have the highest rate of emergency visits and hospitalisations for asthma exacerbations of all age groups, with most triggered by upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and occurring in the fall or winter. Vitamin D insufficiency is highly prevalent in Canadian preschoolers with recurrent asthma exacerbations, particularly in winter. It is associated with more URTIs and, in patients with asthma, more oral corticosteroid (OCS) use. Although evidence suggests that vitamin D supplements significantly decrease URTIs and asthma exacerbations requiring OCS, there is insufficient data in preschoolers. This study aims to determine the impact of vitamin D 3 supplementation on exacerbations requiring OCS, in preschoolers with recurrent URTI-induced asthma exacerbations. Methods and analysis This is a phase III, randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicentre trial of vitamin D 3 supplementation in children aged 1-5 years, with asthma triggered by URTIs and a recent history of frequent URTIs and OCS use. Children (n=865) will be recruited in the fall and early winter and followed for 7 months. They will be randomised to either the (1) intervention: two oral boluses of 100 000 international unit (IU) vitamin D 3 (3.5 months apart) with 400 IU vitamin D 3 daily; or (2) control: identical placebo boluses with daily placebo. The primary outcome is the number of exacerbations requiring OCS per child, documented by medical and pharmacy records. Secondary outcomes include number of laboratory-confirmed viral URTIs, exacerbation duration and severity, parent functional status, healthcare use, treatment deintensification, cost and safety. Ethics and dissemination This study has received ethical approval from all sites. Results will be disseminated via international conferences and manuscripts targeting paediatricians and respirologists, and to families of asthmatic children via our Quebec parents-partners outreach programme. If proven effective, findings may markedly influence the management of URTI-induced asthma in high-morbidity preschoolers and could be directly implemented into practice with an update to clinical guidelines. Trial registration number NCT03365687

Management of asthma in childhood: study protocol of a systematic evidence update by the Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank

IntroductionClinical recommendations for childhood asthma are often based on data extrapolated from studies conducted in adults, despite significant differences in mechanisms and response to treatments. The Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank aspires to develop recommendations based on the best available evidence from studies in children. An overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on paediatric asthma maintenance management and an SR of treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, requiring an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission will be conducted.Methods and analysisStandard methodology recommended by Cochrane will be followed. Maintenance pharmacotherapy of childhood asthma will be evaluated in an overview of SRs published after 2005 and including clinical trials or real-life studies. For evaluating pharmacotherapy of acute asthma attacks leading to an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission, we opted to conduct de novo synthesis in the absence of adequate up-to-date published SRs. For the SR of acute asthma pharmacotherapy, we will consider eligible SRs, clinical trials or real-life studies without time restrictions. Our evidence updates will be based on broad searches of Pubmed/Medline and the Cochrane Library. We will use A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, V.2, Cochrane risk of bias 2 and REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, controlled clinical trials and real-life studies, respectively. Next, we will further assess interventions for acute severe asthma attacks with positive clinical results in meta-analyses. We will include both controlled clinical trials and observational studies and will assess their quality using the previously mentioned tools. We will employ random effect models for conducting meta-analyses, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess certainty in the body of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for SRs. Our findings will be published in peer reviewed journals and will inform clinical recommendations being developed by the PeARL Think Tank.PROSPERO registration numbers CRD42020132990, CRD42020171624.</p

Prédiction d'une rechute suite à un traitement pour une crise d'asthme chez l'enfant

We prospectively followed 314 children with an acute asthmatic attack who presented and were discharged from the emergency room of the Montreal Children's Hospital, to identify risk factors for relapse, i.e. a second ER visit for asthma within the next 10 days.Ninety-six of the 314 children relapsed, most within 24 hours. Using multiple logistic regression, a predictive model for relapse was developed on 211 patients. The best model contained two variables: (1) the number of ER visits for acute asthma in the previous year and (2) the intake of a short-acting theophylline preparation during the course of the ER treatment. When applied to the subsequent "validation set" sensitivity was 73%, specificity 50% and PPV 41%, thus indicating the robustness of the model. Based on the total sample, the probability of relapse was 31%. Patients with $ge$4 ER visits for acute asthma in the past year (frequent visitors) had a probability of relapse of 45% vs 20% for nonfrequent visitors. The intake of short-acting theophylline during the ER visit reduced the probability of relapse from 50% to 34% among the frequent visitors, and from 30% to 11% among the nonfrequent visitors