Background:The excessive retention of sputum in the airways, leading to pulmonary infections, is a common consequence of bronchiectasis. Although inhalation of 7% hypertonic saline (HS) has proven an effective method to help remove the mucus, many patients are intolerant of this treatment. The addition of 0.1% hyaluronic acid to HS (HS+HA) could increase tolerance to HS in these patients. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the tolerability of HS+HA in bronchiectasis patients who are intolerant to HS.Methods:This prospective, observational, open-label study analysed the outcomes of two groups of bronchiectasis patients previously scheduled to start HS therapy. Patients were assessed for tolerance to HS by a questionnaire, spirometry and clinical evaluation. Patients who were intolerant were evaluated for tolerance to HS+HA approximately one week later. All patients were evaluated for their tolerance to HS or HS+HA 4 weeks after the start of their treatment. Patients were also assessed with quality-of-life and adherence questionnaires, and all adverse events were registered.Results:A total of 137 bronchiectasis patients were enrolled in the study (age = 63.0 ± 14.7 years; 63.5% women). Of these, 92 patients (67.1%) were tolerant and 45 patients (32.9%) were intolerant to HS. Of the 45 patients intolerant to HS, 31 patients (68.9%) were tolerant and 14 patients (31.1%) intolerant to HS+HA. Of these 31 tolerant patients, 26 (83.9%) could complete the 4-week treatment with HS+HA.Conclusions:Two-thirds of bronchiectasis patients that presented intolerance to inhaled HS alone are tolerant to inhaled HS+HA, suggesting that HA improves tolerance to HS therapy.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is used as treatment for several autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, but its specific mechanisms are not fully understood. Herein, we aimed to evaluate, using systems biology and artificial intelligence techniques, the differences in the pathophysiological pathways of autoimmune and inflammatory conditions that show diverse responses to IVIg treatment. We also intended to determine the targets of IVIg involved in the best treatment response of the evaluated diseases. Our selection and classification of diseases was based on a previously published systematic review, and we performed the disease characterization through manual curation of the literature. Furthermore, we undertook the mechanistic evaluation with artificial neural networks and pathway enrichment analyses. A set of 26 diseases was selected, classified, and compared. Our results indicated that diseases clearly benefiting from IVIg treatment were mainly characterized by deregulated processes in B cells and the complement system. Indeed, our results show that proteins related to B-cell and complement system pathways, which are targeted by IVIg, are involved in the clinical response. In addition, targets related to other immune processes may also play an important role in the IVIg response, supporting its wide range of actions through several mechanisms. Although B-cell responses and complement system have a key role in diseases benefiting from IVIg, protein targets involved in such processes are not necessarily the same in those diseases. Therefore, IVIg appeared to have a pleiotropic effect that may involve the collaborative participation of several proteins. This broad spectrum of targets and ‘non-specificity’ of IVIg could be key to its efficacy in very different diseases.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract