Dataset Information

Large-scale provocation studies identify maladaptive responses to ubiquitous aeroallergens as a correlate of severe allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Allergic asthma (AA) and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) are common comorbid environmentally triggered diseases. We hypothesized that severe AA/ARC reflects a maladaptive or unrestrained response to ubiquitous aeroallergens.

Methods

We performed provocation studies wherein six separate cohorts of persons (total n = 217) with ARC, with or without AA, were challenged once or more with fixed concentrations of seasonal or perennial aeroallergens in an aeroallergen challenge chamber (ACC).

Results

Aeroallergen challenges elicited fully or partially restrained vs. unrestrained evoked symptom responsiveness, corresponding to the resilient and adaptive vs. maladaptive AA/ARC phenotypes, respectively. The maladaptive phenotype was evoked more commonly during challenge with a non-endemic versus endemic seasonal aeroallergen. In an AA cohort, symptom responses evoked after house dust mite (HDM) challenges vs. recorded in the natural environment were more accurate and precise predictors of asthma severity and control, lung function (FEV1), and mechanistic correlates of maladaptation. Correlates included elevated levels of peripheral blood CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells, eosinophils, and T-cell activation, as well as gene expression proxies for ineffectual epithelial injury/repair responses. Evoked symptom severity after HDM challenge appeared to be more closely related to levels of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells than eosinophils, neutrophils, or HDM-specific IgE.

Conclusions

Provocation studies support the concept that resilience, adaptation, and maladaptation to environmental disease triggers calibrate AA/ARC severity. Despite the ubiquity of aeroallergens, in response to these disease triggers in controlled settings (ie, ACC), most atopic persons manifest the resilient or adaptive phenotype. Thus, ARC/AA disease progression may reflect the failure to preserve the resilient or adaptive phenotype. The triangulation of CD8+ T-cell activation, airway epithelial injury/repair processes and maladaptation in mediating AA disease severity needs more investigation.

SUBMITTER: Smith AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9298287 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: This differential diagnosis of allergic vs non-allergic asthma is typically made on the basis of sensitization to allergens, such that absence of sensitization could result in a patient being managed as having non-allergic asthma. In Germany, the number of specific allergen tests is limited and non-standardized (across clinicians and laboratories), with the potential for false negative diagnoses. IDENTIFY aimed to gain data on sensitizations toward aeroallergens in patients with severe asthma who had tested negative to perennial aeroallergens in previous tests.Methods: This was a single visit, non-randomized, non-interventional study conducted in 87 centers across Germany. The only inclusion criteria were that patients had to be adults (at least 18 years of age) with a diagnosis of severe asthma (receiving at least Global Initiative for Asthma Step IV therapy), and who had previously tested negative to perennial aeroallergens. Patients were then tested for sensitization to a panel of 35 perennial aeroallergens, with positive sensitization indicated by CAP???0.35 kU/L.Results: Of 588 patients recruited, 454 had complete and valid data, and had previously tested negative to perennial aeroallergens. Overall, 43.6% of the analyzed patients tested positive for at least one of the included aeroallergens, with 18.7% testing positive for three or more, and 4.2% positive for more than ten. The five most common sensitizations were to Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin B, Aspergillus fumigatus, Candida albicans, Dermatophagoides farinae, and Rhizopus nigricans, each of which tested positive in at least 9.7% of the population.Conclusions: In this group of patients being managed as having non-allergic asthma (and who had all previously tested negative to perennial aeroallergens), a high proportion tested positive to a broad panel of aeroallergens. A diagnosis of allergic asthma therefore cannot be excluded purely on the basis of standard aeroallergen panels.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Asthma is a chronic airway disease affecting millions of people. Better methods to define asthma subgroups using clinical parameters and molecular biomarkers are crucial in the development of personalized medicine. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine if circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) may be used to distinguish well-defined asthma groups. METHODS:Blood serum from 116 well-defined subjects, including healthy controls and individuals with allergic or non-allergic asthma, from the West Sweden Asthma Study were included. Serum was analyzed for circulating miRNA expression of miR-126, -?145, -146a, -?155, -?223, and -374a and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP). Correlations between clinical characteristics and circulating miRNA expression as well as potential miRNA gene targets were investigated. RESULTS:A subset of miRNAs were differentially expressed between allergic and non-allergic asthmatic individuals. Alterations in expression of miR-155, -146a, -374a and?-?145 were observed in allergic asthmatics in response to inhaled corticosteroid usage. Additionally, miR-223 and miR-374a expression varied in non-allergic asthmatics based on blood eosinophil numbers. Numerous clinical parameters, including lung function measurements, correlated with subsets of miRNAs. Finally, pathway analysis revealed a potential role for inhaled corticosteroid induced miRNAs in leukocyte regulation, IL-6 signaling and glucocorticoid response. CONCLUSION:Circulating miRNA expression was altered in subjects with allergic and non-allergic asthma and correlated to clinical parameters including lung function and potential gene targets involved in immune processes. This combination of clinical and molecular data may be a basis for the further, more precise classification of asthma subgroups. Taken together, these findings would further asthma research and benefit future patients through the discovery of molecular mechanisms as well as identifying asthma subgroups contributing to the development of personalized medicine.

Project description:Ragweed (Ambrosia spp.) is an annually flowering plant whose pollen bears high allergenic potential. Ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has long been seen as a major immunologic condition in Northern America with high exposure and sensitization rates in the general population. The invasive occurrence of ragweed (A. artemisiifolia) poses an increasing challenge to public health in Europe and Asia as well. Possible explanations for its worldwide spread are climate change and urbanization, as well as pollen transport over long distances by globalized traffic and winds. Due to the increasing disease burden worldwide, and to the lack of a current and comprehensive overview, this study aims to review the current and emerging treatment options for ragweed-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. Sound clinical evidence is present for the symptomatic treatment of ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with oral third-generation H1-antihistamines and leukotriene antagonists. The topical application of glucocorticoids has also been efficient in randomized controlled clinical trials. Combined approaches employing multiple agents are common. The mainstay of causal treatment to date, especially in Northern America, is subcutaneous immunotherapy with the focus on the major allergen, Amb a 1. Beyond this, growing evidence from several geographical regions documents the benefit of sublingual immunotherapy. Future treatment options promise more specific symptomatic treatment and fewer side effects during causal therapy. Novel antihistamines for symptomatic treatment are aimed at the histamine H3-receptor. New adjuvants with toll-like receptor 4 activity or the application of the monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, omalizumab, are supposed to enhance conventional immunotherapy. An approach targeting toll-like receptor 9 by synthetic cytosine phosphate-guanosine oligodeoxynucleotides promises a new treatment paradigm that aims to modulate the immune response, but it has yet to be proven in clinical trials.

Project description:Omalizumab is licensed as add-on therapy for patients with severe allergic asthma. Response is in most studies scored by the physician's global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE). A good clinical and validated parameter for treatment response is currently missing. Also, there are no established criteria for identifying patients who will respond to omalizumab based on pre-treatment characteristics. The Dutch National Omalizumab in Asthma Registry was developed in 2011 to better evaluate inclusion criteria and measure treatment response after 4 months.This is a "real world" prospectively designed, observational data registry in which the outcomes of patients who received omalizumab between 2012 and 2015 were evaluated. Data were collected from all centers in the Netherlands comprising demographic features, criteria for starting treatment, GETE, FEV1, oral corticosteroid use and ACQ.65.5% of the 403 patients had a good or excellent response to omalizumab after 16 weeks according to the treating physician GETE. 64.5% fulfilled all the criteria for prescribing omalizumab at baseline. The mean ACQ improved from 2.96 at baseline to 1.83 at 16 weeks (p < 0.001). 75.3% of the responders showed more than 0.5 points improvement in the ACQ. The mean FEV1 increased from 71.58 to 79.06 (p < 0.001). There was no relationship between patients with a FEV1 <80 and ≥80% at baseline and response (p = 0.981). Most of the responders had a considerable improvement of FEV1 either/or ACQ or OCS use (88.3%). While 86.7% of the responders had an improvement of either ACQ or FEV1. 75.4% of the responders had an improvement of ACQ, while 50.4% had an improvement of FEV1. Finally 11.7% of the patients with no improvement of FEV1, ACQ or OCS use were considered to have a good response.This registry of 403 inadequately controlled severe allergic asthma patients in the Netherlands showed a good or excellent response of 65.5% to omalizumab after 16 weeks, in accordance with previous studies. The assumption that careful registration would lead to higher response rates could not be supported by the data from this registry. Improvement of ACQ appears to be a useful additional assessment tool to measure response in omalizumab treated patients.