4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Physical Activity as a New Tool to Evaluate the Response to Omalizumab and Mepolizumab in Severe Asthmatic Patients: A Pilot Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airway disease, representing one of the most severe pathologies in developed countries. Based on a report of the World Health Organization (WHO), it affects about 300 million people worldwide. Few studies have analyzed the effects of daily life physical activity (PA) levels in patients with asthma: moreover, little research has been carried out on PA levels in patients suffering from severe asthma (SA). This study aimed to investigate the PA levels in two groups of patients suffering from SA; in particular, this study analyzed the changes that occur in patients treated with biologic therapy (BT group) and patients who underwent traditional treatment (TT group) over 6 months. Moreover, this study represents a pilot study because, to the best of our knowledge, it is the first investigation that analyzed if the kind of biologic drug (omalizumab or mepolizumab) can produce differences in the PA levels of SA patients. Fifty SA patients were enrolled and PA parameters were monitored for 6 months. Subjects were divided into two treatment groups: TT (20 patients) and BT (30 patients), the BT group was further subdivided according to the drugs used (15, omalizumab; 15, mepolizumab). During drug treatment, all subjects improved their PA levels: indeed, considering the intragroup variation, the PA levels were significantly higher comparing the T6 levels to baseline (T0, p < 0.01). Considering the intragroup variation, it is very interesting to note that biologic therapy improved PA levels compared to the effects of traditional therapy; while at T0 there were no significant differences in the steps per day (SPD) values between the two groups (T0, p = 0.85), the differences become statistically significant at T1, T3, and T6 (T1, p = 0.019; T3, p = 3.48x10 −6; T6, p = 4.78x10 −10). As expected, the same differences were reported analyzing the energy expenditure data. In conclusion, this pilot study reports a positive relationship between biologic drug therapy and PA patterns, even if further studies are needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma (DREAM): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

          Some patients with severe asthma have recurrent asthma exacerbations associated with eosinophilic airway inflammation. Early studies suggest that inhibition of eosinophilic airway inflammation with mepolizumab-a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 5-is associated with a reduced risk of exacerbations. We aimed to establish efficacy, safety, and patient characteristics associated with the response to mepolizumab. We undertook a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 81 centres in 13 countries between Nov 9, 2009, and Dec 5, 2011. Eligible patients were aged 12-74 years, had a history of recurrent severe asthma exacerbations, and had signs of eosinophilic inflammation. They were randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1:1 ratio) to receive one of three doses of intravenous mepolizumab (75 mg, 250 mg, or 750 mg) or matched placebo (100 mL 0·9% NaCl) with a central telephone-based system and computer-generated randomly permuted block schedule stratified by whether treatment with oral corticosteroids was required. Patients received 13 infusions at 4-week intervals. The primary outcome was the rate of clinically significant asthma exacerbations, which were defined as validated episodes of acute asthma requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids, admission, or a visit to an emergency department. Patients, clinicians, and data analysts were masked to treatment assignment. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01000506. 621 patients were randomised: 159 were assigned to placebo, 154 to 75 mg mepolizumab, 152 to 250 mg mepolizumab, and 156 to 750 mg mepolizumab. 776 exacerbations were deemed to be clinically significant. The rate of clinically significant exacerbations was 2·40 per patient per year in the placebo group, 1·24 in the 75 mg mepolizumab group (48% reduction, 95% CI 31-61%; p<0·0001), 1·46 in the 250 mg mepolizumab group (39% reduction, 19-54%; p=0·0005), and 1·15 in the 750 mg mepolizumab group (52% reduction, 36-64%; p<0·0001). Three patients died during the study, but the deaths were not deemed to be related to treatment. Mepolizumab is an effective and well tolerated treatment that reduces the risk of asthma exacerbations in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. GlaxoSmithKline. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy of mepolizumab add-on therapy on health-related quality of life and markers of asthma control in severe eosinophilic asthma (MUSCA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3b trial.

            Mepolizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody approved as add-on therapy to standard of care for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, has been shown in previous studies to reduce exacerbations and dependency on oral corticosteroids compared with placebo. We aimed to further assess mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma by examining its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluation of a portable device to measure daily energy expenditure in free-living adults.

              Increasing daily energy expenditure (EE) plays an important role in the prevention or treatment of several lifestyle-related diseases; however, its measurement remains problematic. The objective was to evaluate a portable armband device for measuring daily and physical activity EE compared with doubly labeled water (DLW) in free-living individuals. Daily EE and physical activity EE were measured in 45 subjects over a 10-d period simultaneously with 2 techniques: a portable armband and DLW. Resting metabolic rate was measured by indirect calorimetry, and the thermic effect of a meal was estimated (10% of daily EE). Physical activity EE was obtained by subtracting the values for resting metabolic rate and thermic effect of a meal measured with DLW from those measured with the armband. Body composition was measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Concordance between measures was evaluated by intraclass correlation, SEE, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. Mean estimated daily EE measured with the armband was 117 kcal/d lower (2375 +/- 366 kcal/d) than that measured with DLW (2492 +/- 444 kcal/d; P < 0.01). Despite this group difference, individual comparisons between the armband and DLW were close, as evidenced by an intraclass correlation of 0.81 (P < 0.01). The portable armband shows reasonable concordance with DLW for measuring daily EE in free-living adults. The armband may therefore be useful to estimate daily EE.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Pharmacol
                Front Pharmacol
                Front. Pharmacol.
                Frontiers in Pharmacology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1663-9812
                24 January 2020
                2019
                : 10
                : 1630
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Institute of Respiratory Diseases, University of Foggia , Foggia, Italy
                [2] 2 Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia , Foggia, Italy
                [3] 3 Department of Neurosciences, University of Bari , Bari, Italy
                Author notes

                Edited by: Roberto Paganelli, Università degli Studi G. d’Annunzio Chieti e Pescara, Italy

                Reviewed by: Francesco Menzella, Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia, Italy; Enrico Heffler, Humanitas University, Italy

                *Correspondence: Giulia Scioscia, giuliascioscia84@ 123456gmail.com

                †These authors share first authorship.

                This article was submitted to Translational Pharmacology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology

                Article
                10.3389/fphar.2019.01630
                6992710
                32038267
                6751362e-b388-40f4-9468-e59550ea2668
                Copyright © 2020 Carpagnano, Sessa, Scioscia, Lacedonia, Foschino, Venuti, Triggiani, Valenzano, Resta, Cibelli and Messina

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 12 August 2019
                : 13 December 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 44, Pages: 9, Words: 4418
                Categories
                Pharmacology
                Original Research

                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine
                mepolizumab,omalizumab,physical activity,severe asthma,quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article