No abstract

The sulfidopeptide leukotrienes C4, D4, and E4 are released from mast cells in response to allergen challenge and may be involved in the bronchoconstrictor response to inhaled allergen in asthma. Since mast cell activation may also be implicated in exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, we assessed the inhibitory effects of a potent orally active leukotriene D4 receptor antagonist, ICI 204219 (20 mg), on the bronchoconstrictor response to exercise in eight male asthmatic patients in a placebo-controlled, randomized crossover study. Exercise challenge respiring dry air was performed on a treadmill at constant speed and gradient 2 h after drug administration, and bronchoconstriction was assessed as change in FEV1 over 30 min postexercise. No significant effect on airway caliber, measured as FEV1, was noted 2 h after ICI 204219. The mean maximum percentage fall in FEV1 following exercise was 36.0% following placebo, and reduced to 21.6% after ICI 204219 (p less than 0.01). Analysis of the time course of bronchoconstriction showed that inhibition was most marked over the latter part of the period assessed. These data indicate that the release of sulfidopeptide leukotrienes makes a major contribution to exercise-induced bronchoconstriction.

We investigated the possible inhibitory effects of terfenadine, a histamine H1-receptor antagonist, and flurbiprofen, a cyclooxygenase inhibitor, on the bronchoconstrictor effect of inhaled 3.6% hypertonic saline in a randomized, double-blind study. Nine mildly asthmatic subjects with a history of exercise-induced asthma took part. This was conducted, first as a dose-response study and, second, as a time-course study. In the dose-response study, the provocative dose of saline-laden air causing a 25% fall in FEV1 was calculated (PD25). Terfenadine (180 mg) and the combination of terfenadine (180 mg) plus flurbiprofen (100 mg) both protected significantly against hypertonic saline challenge, achieving increases in PD25 values by factors of 7.24 and 6.30, respectively. Flurbiprofen (100 mg) also displaced the dose-response to the right, increasing the PD25 by a factor of 1.92, but this protection was significantly less than that afforded by terfenadine. In the time-course studies, a single inhalation of hypertonic saline previously shown to cause at least a 25% fall in FEV1 was administered, and FEV1, was followed for 30 min. Preadministration of terfenadine reduced the mean area under the curve of percentage fall in FEV1-time response by 68.5%, with similar results obtained with the combination of terfenadine and flurbiprofen. We conclude that the bronchoconstriction in asthma provoked by inhaled hypertonic saline is mediated predominantly through the hyperosmolar release of histamine from airway mast cells, with a minor contribution being made by prostanoids.

Background Research questions To compare the efficacy of nintedanib and pirfenidone in the treatment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis; and to compare the efficacy of anti-fibrotic therapy (grouping nintedanib and pirfenidone together) in patients with IPF versus patients with progressive lung fibrosis not classified as IPF. Study design and methods A search of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials of pirfenidone or nintedanib in adult patients with IPF or non-IPF patients, and with extractable data on mortality or decline in forced vital capacity (FVC). Random effects meta-analyses were performed on changes in FVC and where possible on mortality in the selected studies. Results 13 trials of antifibrotic therapy were pooled in a meta-analysis (with pirfenidone and nintedanib considered together as anti-fibrotic therapy). The change in FVC was expressed as a standardised difference to allow pooling of percentage and absolute changes. The mean effect size in the IPF studies was − 0.305 (SE 0.043) (p < 0.001) and in the non-IPF studies the figures were − 0.307 (SE 0.063) (p < 0.001). There was no evidence of any difference between the two groups for standardised rate of FVC decline (p = 0.979). Pooling IPF and non-IPF showed a significant reduction in mortality, with mean risk ratio of 07.01 in favour of antifibrotic therapy (p = 0.008). A separate analysis restricted to non-IPF did not show a significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio 0.908 (0.547 to 1.508), p = 0.71. Interpretation Anti-fibrotic therapy offers protection against the rate of decline in FVC in progressive lung fibrosis, with similar efficacy shown between the two anti-fibrotic agents currently in clinical use. There was no significant difference in efficacy of antifibrotic therapy whether the underlying condition was IPF or non-IPF with progressive fibrosis, supporting the hypothesis of a common pathogenesis. The data in this analysis was insufficient to be confident about a reduction in mortality in non-IPF with anti-fibrotic therapy. Trial Registration PROSPERO, registration number CRD42021266046.