a b s t r a c tRandomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are the "gold standard" for evaluating treatment outcomes providing information on treatments "efficacy". They are designed to test a therapeutic hypothesis under optimal setting in the absence of confounding factors. For this reason they have high internal validity. The strict and controlled conditions in which they are conducted, leads to low generalizability because they are performed in conditions very different from real life usual care. Conversely, real life studies inform on the "effectiveness" of a treatment, that is, the measure of the extent to which an intervention does what is intended to do in routine circumstances. At variance to RCTs, real life trials have high generalizability, but low internal validity. Recently the number of real life studies has been rapidly growing in different areas of respiratory medicine, particularly in asthma and COPD. The role of such studies is becoming a hot topic in respiratory medicine, attracting research interest and debate.In the first part of this review we discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of different types of RCTs and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of real life trials, considering the recent examples of some studies conducted in COPD. We then discuss methodological approaches and options to overcome some of the limitations of real life studies.Comparing the conclusions of effectiveness and efficacy trials can provide important pieces of information. Indeed, these approaches can result complementary, and they can guide the interpretation of each other results.

Background: Whether blood eosinophil counts and exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) are associated with important outcomes in mild asthma is unclear. Methods: This question was explored in a pre-specified analysis of a 52week, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial in patients with mild asthma receiving only reliever inhalers, comparing salbutamol 200µg asneeded, maintenance budesonide 200µg twice-daily with salbutamol as needed, and budesonide/formoterol 200/6µg as-needed. Outcomes were compared between patients with blood eosinophils of <0.15, 0.15-<0.3 and ≥0.3x109/L; FeNO of <20, 20-50 and >50ppb; and a composite score based on both. Results: The proportion of patients randomised to as-needed salbutamol having a severe exacerbation increased progressively with increasing blood eosinophil sub-group (4.1%, 6.5% and 19.5%; p=0.014). There were no significant interactions between either biomarker and the effect of as-needed budesonide/formoterol compared with as-needed salbutamol for either exacerbations or severe exacerbations. However, there were significant interactions between blood eosinophil sub-groups and the effect of maintenance budesonide compared with as needed salbutamol for exacerbations (p<0.001) and severe exacerbations (p<0.001). Maintenance budesonide was more effective than as-needed salbutamol in patients with eosinophils ≥0.3x109/L for exacerbations (odds ratio 0.13; 95% CI 0.05-0.33) and severe exacerbations (0.11; 0.03-0.45). This was not the case for eosinophils <0.15x109/L (odds ratio for exacerbations 1.15; 0.51-1.28 and severe exacerbations 5.72; 0.97-33.6). There was no consistent interaction between treatment response and FeNO or the composite score. Conclusions: In patients with mild asthma the effects of as-needed budesonide/formoterol on exacerbations are independent of biomarker profile, whereas the benefits of maintenance inhaled budesonide are greater in patients with high blood eosinophil counts.

Background: Deficient interferon responses have been proposed as one of the relevant mechanisms prompting severe manifestations of COVID-19.Objective: To evaluate the interferon (IFN)-α levels in a cohort of COVID-19 patients in relation to severity, evolution of the clinical manifestations and immune/inflammatory profile.Methods: This is prospective study recruiting consecutive hospitalized patients with respiratory failure associated with SARS-COV-2 infection and matched controls. After enrollment, patients were assessed every 7 ± 2 days for additional 2 consecutive visits, for a total of 21 days. The severity of the clinical condition was ranked based on the level of respiratory support required. At each time-point blood samples were obtained to assess immune cells and mediators by multiplex immunoassay.Results: Fifty-four COVD-19 and 11 control patients matched for severity were enrolled. At recruitment, lower levels of blood IFN-α were found in COVID-19 patients compared to controls (3.8-fold difference, p &lt; 0.01). Improvements in COVID-19 severity were paralleled by a significant increase of blood IFN-α levels. A significant increase in blood IFN-α was found over the study period in survivors (70% of the study population). A similar trend was found for blood IFN-β with IFN-β levels below the threshold of detectability in a substantial proportion of subjects. Significantly higher values of blood lymphocytes and lower levels of IL-10 were found at each time point in patients who survived compared to patients who died. In patients who clinically improved and survived during the study, we found an inverse association between IL-10 and IFN-α levels.Conclusion: The study identifies a blood immune profile defined by deficient IFN-α levels associated with increased IL-10 expression in patients progressing to severe/life threatening COVID-19 conditions, suggesting the involvement of immunological pathways that could be target of pharmacological intervention.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04343053.

Asthma is a common chronic disease characterized by episodic or persistent respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation. Asthma treatment is based on a stepwise and control-based approach that involves an iterative cycle of assessment, adjustment of the treatment and review of the response aimed to minimize symptom burden and risk of exacerbations. Anti-inflammatory treatment is the mainstay of asthma management. In this review we will discuss the rationale and barriers to the treatment of asthma that may result in poor outcomes. The benefits of currently available treatments and the possible strategies to overcome the barriers that limit the achievement of asthma control in real-life conditions and how these led to the GINA 2019 guidelines for asthma treatment and prevention will also be discussed.