Explore the vast range of titles available.

The lung is a key target of the cytokine storm that can be triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for the widespread clinical syndrome known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Indeed, in some patients, SARS-CoV-2 promotes a dysfunctional immune response that dysregulates the cytokine secretory pattern. Hypercytokinemia underlies the hyperinflammatory state leading to injury of alveolar epithelial cells and vascular endothelial cells, as well as to lung infiltration sustained by neutrophils and macrophages. Within such a pathogenic context, interleukin-6 (IL-6) and other cytokines/chemokines play a pivotal pro-inflammatory role. Therefore, cytokines and their receptors, as well as cytokine-dependent intracellular signalling pathways can be targeted by potential therapies aimed to relieve the heavy burden of cytokine storm. In particular, the anti-IL-6-receptor monoclonal antibody tocilizumab is emerging as one of the most promising pharmacologic treatments. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airway disease, driven by either allergic or non-allergic stimuli, which usually manifests as wheezing, reversible airflow limitation, and bronchial hyperresponsiveness [...]

Asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory disease characterized by usually reversible bronchial obstruction, which is clinically expressed by different phenotypes driven by complex pathobiological mechanisms (endotypes). Within this context, during the last years several molecular effectors and signalling pathways have emerged as suitable targets for biological therapies of severe asthma, refractory to standard treatments. Indeed, various therapeutic antibodies currently allow to intercept at different levels the chain of pathogenic events leading to type 2 (T2) airway inflammation. In addition to pro-allergic immunoglobulin E (IgE), that chronologically represents the first molecule against which an anti-asthma monoclonal antibody (omalizumab) was developed, today other targets are successfully exploited by biological treatments of severe asthma. In particular, pro-eosinophilic interleukin 5 (IL-5) can be targeted by mepolizumab or reslizumab, whereas benralizumab is a selective blocker of IL-5 receptor. Moreover, dupilumab behaves as a dual receptor antagonist of pleiotropic interleukins 4 (IL-4) and 13 (IL-13). Besides these drugs that are already available in medical practice, other biologics are under clinical development such as those targeting innate cytokines, also including the alarmin thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), which plays a key role in the pathogenesis of type 2 asthma. Therefore, ongoing and future biological therapies are significantly changing the global scenario of severe asthma management. These new therapeutic options make it possible to implement phenotype/endotype-specific treatments, that are delineating personalized approaches precisely addressing the individual traits of asthma pathobiology. Such tailored strategies are thus allowing to successfully target the immune-inflammatory responses underlying uncontrolled T2-high asthma.

Interleukins (IL)-4 and -13 play a pivotal role in the pathobiology of type-2 asthma. Indeed, IL-4 is crucially involved in Th2 cell differentiation, immunoglobulin (Ig) class switching and eosinophil trafficking. IL-13 cooperates with IL-4 in promoting IgE synthesis, and also induces nitric oxide (NO) production, goblet cell metaplasia and fibroblast proliferation, as well as elicits contractile responses and hyperplasia of airway smooth muscle cells. IL-4 and IL-13 share common signaling pathways, activated by the binding of both cytokines to receptor complexes including the α-subunit of the IL-4 receptor (IL-4Rα). Therefore, the subsequent receptor dimerization is responsible for the pathophysiologic effects of IL-4 and IL-13. By selectively blocking IL-4Rα, the fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody dupilumab behaves as a dual receptor antagonist of both IL-4 and IL-13. Through this mechanism of action, dupilumab exerts effective therapeutic actions in type-2 inflammation, thus decreasing asthma exacerbations, FeNO (fractional exhaled NO) levels, and the intake of oral corticosteroids (OCS). In addition to being approved for the add-on biological therapy of severe asthma, dupilumab has also been licensed for the treatment of nasal polyposis and atopic dermatitis.

Omalizumab was the first, and for a long time the only available monoclonal antibody for the add-on treatment of severe allergic asthma. In particular, omalizumab selectively targets human immunoglobulin (Ig)E, forming small-size immune complexes that inhibit IgE binding to its high- and low-affinity receptors. Therefore, omalizumab effectively blunts the immune response in atopic asthmatic patients, thus significantly improving the control of asthma symptoms and successfully preventing disease exacerbations. These very positive effects of omalizumab make it possible to drastically decrease both referrals to the emergency room and hospitalizations for asthma exacerbations. Such important therapeutic actions of omalizumab have been documented by several randomized clinical trials, and especially by more than 10 years of real-life experience in daily clinical practice. Omalizumab can also interfere with airway remodelling by inhibiting the activation of IgE receptors located on structural cells such as bronchial epithelial cells and airway smooth muscle cells. Moreover, omalizumab is characterized by a very good safety and tolerability profile. Hence, omalizumab represents a valuable therapeutic option for the add-on biological treatment of severe allergic asthma.

Add-on biological therapy has proven to be effective in many patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. In this observational multicenter retrospective study, we report the results obtained with mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe asthmatics treated for 12 months in a real-life setting. In these patients, peripheral eosinophil levels, pulmonary function trends, exacerbation rates, systemic corticosteroid use, and symptom control were evaluated during the observation period, to understand which patients met all the criteria in order to be considered in disease remission. The percentage of remittent patients was 30.12% in the mepolizumab-treated subgroup, while in the benralizumab-treated subgroup, patients in complete disease remission were 40%, after 12 months. The results of this study confirm the efficacy of anti-IL-5 biologic drugs in the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-life setting.

Asthma is a very frequent chronic airway disease that includes many different clinical phenotypes and inflammatory patterns. In particular, eosinophilic bronchial inflammation is often associated with allergic as well as nonallergic asthma. The most important cytokine involved in the induction, maintenance, and amplification of airway eosinophilia in asthma is interleukin-5 (IL-5), released by both T helper 2 (Th2) lymphocytes and group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2). Hence, IL-5 and its receptor are suitable targets for selective biologic drugs which can play a key role in add-on treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma refractory to corticosteroids. Within such a context, the anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies mepolizumab and reslizumab have been developed and approved for biological therapy of uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma. In this regard, on the basis of several successful randomized controlled trials, the anti-IL-5 receptor benralizumab has also recently obtained the approval from US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

During flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) the arterial partial pressure of oxygen can drop, increasing the risk for respiratory failure. To avoid desaturation episodes during the procedure several oxygenation strategies have been proposed, including conventional oxygen therapy (COT), high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). By a review of the current literature, we merely describe the clinical practice of oxygen therapies during FOB. We also conducted a pooled data analysis with respect to oxygenation outcomes, comparing HFNC with COT and NIV, separately. COT showed its benefits in patients undergoing FOB for broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) or brushing for cytology, in those with peripheral arterial oxyhemoglobin saturation < 93% prior to the procedure or affected by obstructive disorder. HFNC is preferable over COT in patients with mild to moderate acute respiratory failure (ARF) undergoing FOB, by improving oxygen saturation and decreasing the episodes of desaturation. On the opposite, CPAP and NIV guarantee improved oxygenation outcomes as compared to HFNC, and they should be preferred in patients with more severe hypoxemic ARF during FOB.

Severe asthma is burdened by frequent exacerbations and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS), which worsen patients’ health and increase healthcare spending. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of switching from omalizumab (OMA) to mepolizumab (MEP) in patients eligible for both biologics, but not optimally controlled by omalizumab. We retrospectively enrolled uncontrolled severe asthmatic patients who switched from OMA to MEP during the last two years. Information included blood eosinophil count, asthma control test (ACT), spirometry, serum IgE, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), OCS intake, drugs, exacerbations/hospitalizations, visits and diagnostic exams. Within the perspective of Italian National Health System, a pre- and post-MEP 12-month standardized total cost per patient was calculated. 33 patients were enrolled: five males, mean age 57 years, disease onset 24 years. At OMA discontinuation, 88% were OCS-dependent with annual mean rate of 4.0 clinically significant exacerbations, 0.30 exacerbations needing emergency room visits or hospitalization; absenteeism due to disease was 10.4 days per patient. Switch to MEP improved all clinical outcomes, reducing total exacerbation rate (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.03–0.14), OCS-dependent patients (OR = 0.02, 95% CI 0.005–0.08), and number of lost working days (Δ = − 7.9, 95% CI − 11.2 to − 4.6). Pulmonary function improved, serum IgE, FeNO and eosinophils decreased. Mean annual costs were €12,239 for OMA and €12,639 for MEP (Δ = €400, 95% CI − 1588–2389); the increment due to drug therapy (+ €1,581) was almost offset by savings regarding all other cost items (− €1,181). Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not controlled by OMA, experienced comprehensive benefits by switching to MEP with only slight increases in economic costs.

Background: Current availability of several biologic treatments for severe asthma makes it possible to choose the most appropriate for each patient. Sometimes a good percentage of patients with severe asthma may be eligible for biologics that target either the allergic phenotype or the eosinophilic one, but not all respond to that selected as first choice. The aim of our real-life study was to assess whether, for patients with severe eosinophilic allergic asthma, not previously controlled by the anti-IgE omalizumab, the shift to another biologic targeting interleukin-5, such as mepolizumab, may represent a good therapeutic choice. Methods: A total of 41 consecutive patients with severe, persistent allergic, eosinophilic asthma, uncontrolled despite treatment with omalizumab, were enrolled in seven certified Clinical Respiratory Units of Southern Italy (Catania, Catanzaro, Foggia, Bari, Palermo, and two University Respiratory Units of Naples) and shifted to mepolizumab without a wash-out period. Data at baseline, after at least 12 months of therapy with omalizumab, and after at least 12 months of treatment with mepolizumab were collected. Results: After at least 12 months of therapy with mepolizumab, patients experienced a significant decrease in the number of exacerbations/year (5.8 ± 1.8 versus 0.7 ± 0.9, p < 0.0001), an increment of asthma control test score (12 ± 2.7 versus 21.9 ± 2.7, p < 0.0001), an increase in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (1.56 ± 0.45 l versus 1.86 ± 0.52 l, p < 0.0001), and a reduction of blood eosinophils (584 ± 196 cells/µl versus 82 ± 56 cells/µl, p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients who were dependent on corticosteroids significantly decreased from 46% at baseline to 5% during treatment with mepolizumab. Conclusion: Results of our real-life multicentric experience confirms that the shift to mepolizumab could be a good therapeutic strategy in severe eosinophilic allergic asthma not previously controlled by omalizumab. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.