Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Measuring inflammation in paediatric severe asthma: biomarkers in clinical practice

Amelia Licari, Sara Manti, Riccardo Castagnoli, Salvatore Leonardi, Gian Luigi Marseglia
Breathe 2020 16: 190301; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0301-2019
Amelia Licari
1Pediatric Clinic, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
3These authors contributed equally
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: amelia.licari@unipv.it
Sara Manti
2Dept of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
3These authors contributed equally
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Riccardo Castagnoli
1Pediatric Clinic, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Salvatore Leonardi
2Dept of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gian Luigi Marseglia
1Pediatric Clinic, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Severe asthma in children is a highly heterogeneous disorder, encompassing different clinical characteristics (phenotypes) and immunopathological pathways (endotypes). Research is focusing on the identification of noninvasive biomarkers able to predict treatment response and assist in designing personalised therapies for severe asthma. Blood and sputum eosinophils, serum IgE and exhaled nitric oxide fraction mostly reflect type 2 airway inflammation in children. However, in the absence of available point-of-care biomarkers, the diagnosis of non-type 2 asthma is still reached by exclusion. In this review, we present the most recent evidence on biomarkers for severe asthma and discuss their implementation in clinical practice. We address the methods for guiding treatment decisions and patient identification, focusing on the paediatric age group.

Key points

  • Severe asthma in children is a highly heterogeneous disorder, encompassing different clinical characteristics (phenotypes) and immunopathological pathways (endotypes).

  • Research is focusing on the identification of noninvasive biomarkers able to predict treatment response and assist in designing personalised therapies for severe asthma.

  • Blood and sputum eosinophils, serum IgE and exhaled nitric oxide fraction mostly reflect type 2 airway inflammation in children. However, knowledge regarding non-type 2 inflammation and related biomarkers is still lacking.

Educational aims

  • To summarise the most recent evidence on biomarkers for severe asthma in children.

  • To discuss their implementation in clinical practice through guiding patient identification and treatment decisions.

Abstract

Noninvasive biomarkers should be integrated with clinical findings to assist in diagnosing and guiding personalised therapies for severe asthma in children http://bit.ly/2JPvKFV

Introduction

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in childhood, with increasing incidence and prevalence [1]. Despite the recent advances in diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, asthma still poses a substantial health and socioeconomic burden, in particular in its uncontrolled and severe forms[2–5]. Severe asthma in children is characterised by sustained symptoms despite treatment with high doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or oral corticosteroids [6], and represents approximately 2–5% of childhood asthma cases[1]. Severe asthma is a heterogeneous disease encompassing different phenotypes, which can be defined in terms of both clinical and molecular characteristics [7]. Asthma phenotypes depend on age and may differ in triggers, clinical presentation, associated comorbidities, natural history and response to treatment [1, 8–11]. The clinical diversity reflects different inflammatory pathways: type 2 and non-type 2 endotypes, which differ according to the presence or absence of eosinophilic airway inflammation, respectively (table 1) [7, 12]. The understanding of different endotypes of severe asthma has now led to the development of targeted immunomodulators and other biological therapies to more effectively treat the diverse patients encountered in clinical practice [13, 14].

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Major endotypes of severe asthma in children

In recent years, research has focused on the identification of biomarkers able to differentiate distinct endotypes and accurately predict response to treatment in patients with severe asthma. In this review, we present the most recent evidence on biomarkers for severe asthma and discuss their implementation in clinical practice in terms of guiding patient identification and treatment decisions, focusing on the paediatric age group.

Biomarkers inasthma: definition and sampling methods

Biomarkers are defined as quantitative measurements that allow clinicians to diagnose, assess the disease stage, predict clinical outcomes and monitor the treatment effects [15]. Biomarkers for asthma can be measured in different biological specimens, including exhaled breath, sputum, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), bronchial biopsy, peripheral blood and urine [7]. Each biomarker is specific to a particular sampling site, so different biomarkers do not provide comparable information on the pathways underlying inflammation in severe asthma. The strengths and limitations of each biomarker are discussed in table 2.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Summary of available biomarkers of childhood severe asthma

Sputum induction and BAL are used to detect airway inflammation at different sites of thebronchial tree. Conversely to biomarkers outside the respiratory tract, these tests provide a differential count of local inflammatory cells, including eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, lymphocytes and epithelial cells, with a reproducibility and validity that has been widely demonstrated [16]. While bronchoscopies with BAL are restricted to specialised centres due to the technical complexity, invasiveness and potential complications, sputum analysis offers a less invasive alternative for assessing airway inflammation. However, it requires complex protocols, especially in patients with severe asthma and/or concomitant disorders. Measurement of biomarkers in exhaled breath (i.e. exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FENO)) and exhaled breath condensate (EBC) (i.e. volatile organic compounds (VOCs)) are noninvasive and safe in children, given the necessity of repeatable measurements to monitor treatment efficacy and asthma progression [7]. Even these procedures are not bias-free, since several factors may hamper the interpretation of their results: factors relating to the collection procedure, as well as constitutive elements relating to the subject, may influence exhaled biomarker levels. Alternatively, peripheral blood may be easily obtained even in younger children, and blood eosinophils and neutrophils represent the most studied inflammatory cells linked to molecular pathways of asthma [7]. However, they have some limitations: blood eosinophilia is not as specific as sputum eosinophils, and confounding factors, including parasitic infections, allergen exposure and corticosteroid therapy, potentially affect blood eosinophil count; also, peripheral blood neutrophilia is considered not as accurate as sputum neutrophils to predict asthma severity[7]. Finally, novel sampling methods are exploring biomarkers obtained from saliva and nasal swabs, to increase the availability of noninvasive techniques in children [7].

Biomarkers of the type2 asthma endotype

Most of the current established biomarkers available in clinical practice are related to type 2 asthma, since it is the best-characterised endotype in patients with asthma. The common biomarkers used in clinical practice are eosinophils, serum immunoglobulin (Ig)E, serum periostin and FENO [7].

Eosinophils

Eosinophils are central drivers of type 2 asthma, both in allergic and nonallergic forms, and represent the predominant inflammatory cell types in the airways of children with severe asthma [17]. Upon activation, eosinophils contribute to airway damage and chronic inflammation and promote remodelling, subepithelial membrane thickening and goblet cell metaplasia [17].

So far, sputum eosinophilia is the best-characterised and most useful biomarker. The normal range for sputum eosinophilia is defined as 1–2%, with female sex and atopic status associated with higher sputum eosinophil levels [18]. Some recent longitudinal studies have reported controversial results on temporal variability in sputum eosinophil counts in adult patients with severe asthma: while some authors have shown that 70% of patients with eosinophilic asthma (sputum eosinophils ≥2%) retained their sputum phenotype over 5 years [19], others revealed that 60% of the patients changed their phenotype from eosinophilic (sputum eosinophils ≥2%) to non-eosinophilic and vice versa [20]. A similar variability in sputum inflammatory cells over time was observed in 61% of children (including those with severe asthma) followed over 1 year in a longitudinal study by Fleming et al. [21]. Specifically, they classified sputum samples into eosinophilic (>2.5% eosinophils), neutrophilic (>54% neutrophils), mixed granulocytic (>2.5% eosinophils, >54% neutrophils) or paucigranulocytic (≤2.5% eosinophils, ≤54% neutrophils). Raised levels of inflammatory cells (up to 78%) were reported in at least one sputum sample of these children, regardless of asthma severity; also, the lack of temporal phenotype stability was not related to changes in asthma control or ICS therapy [21].

Sputum eosinophil count is increased in symptomatic patients with asthma, in patients with asthma during exacerbations, and in corticosteroid-naïve patients [22–24]. Increased eosinophil number in sputum has also been associated with airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and obstruction, and inversely correlated with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) [25].

In asthma, corticosteroids are effective at suppressing eosinophilic inflammation [26]. In general, sputum eosinophilia is associated with steroid responsiveness [26]; however, the persistence of elevated sputum eosinophilia may suggest either non-adherence or inadequate corticosteroid dosing [21]. In such cases, titrating ICS doses based on sputum eosinophilia may reduce the likelihood of asthma exacerbations [25]. Adjusting treatment based on sputum eosinophilia has been performed with various sputum eosinophil cut-offs, ranging from 2% to 8%; however, the most commonly used cut-off is sputum eosinophilia ≥3% [18]. Unfortunately, there are insufficient data available to extend the clinical application of induced sputum eosinophilia in tailoring asthma medication in children [23].

The clinical utility of peripheral blood eosinophilia in the assessment of children with severe asthmahas long been explored. Although there is no standardised cut-off, a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells·μL−1 has commonly been usedasathreshold to indicate eosinophilic inflammation [27].

Despite being influenced by some confounding factors (allergen exposure, parasitic infections and systemic corticosteroid treatment), blood eosinophils have shown the highest accuracy in the identification of sputum eosinophilia, compared with other biomarkers such as FENO and serum periostin [28]. Nevertheless, peripheral blood eosinophilia does not always reflect pulmonary (airway or mucosal) eosinophilia in children with severe asthma [29].

The correlation between blood eosinophil count, asthma severity and AHR has been demonstrated in several studies conducted in children [30, 31]. Analysing the 12-month longitudinal dataset of a cohort of children and adolescents with severe asthma exacerbations, Shah et al. [32] recently found that elevated blood eosinophils were associated with acute asthma exacerbations and hospitalisations, but optimal cut-off points for blood eosinophils differed by age (≥150 versus ≥300 cells·μL−1 for children versus adolescents, respectively). However, the addition of a second biomarker of type 2 inflammation, such as serum IgE and/or FENO, was useful in predicting asthma exacerbations only in adolescents [32].

In the Individualized Therapy for Asthma in Toddlers (INFANT) trial, the presence of blood eosinophilia (≥300 cells·µL−1), in combination with aeroallergen sensitisation, has been identified as a significant predictor of response to ICS in children with asthma [33]. Thus, blood eosinophil count could be useful to identify patients for ICS prescription and patients at high risk of exacerbations. Instead, higher eosinophil count has been assessed to be a sensitive and practical predictive biomarker for biological therapies targeting allergic and/or eosinophilic pathways in patients with severe asthma [7]. A high blood eosinophil count (>300 cells·μL−1) has been reported as a potential biomarker to predict successful omalizumab treatment effects in children with severe allergic asthma [34]. In combination with FENO and periostin, blood eosinophils were shown to identify patient subgroups that may achieve more significant benefit from omalizumab therapy [34]. Blood eosinophil count has also evolved as a predictive biomarker for the efficacy of treatment with anti-interleukin (IL)-5 (mainly mepolizumab) in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma [35]; in particular, a baseline blood eosinophil threshold of ≥150 cells·μL−1 or a historical blood eosinophil threshold of ≥300 cells·μL−1 allow selection of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma who are most likely to achieve clinically significant reductions in the rate of exacerbations with mepolizumab treatment [36].

Sputum eosinophilia also adequately predicts response to biological drugs. Patients with refractory asthma are more likely to respond to anti-IL-5 or anti-IL-4/IL-13 treatment if they have sputum eosinophils of >3%. A significant decrease in exacerbation rates, an improved quality of life and corticosteroid-sparing effects have been observed in adults treated with mepolizumab [35]. Hence, the newest Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) document suggests assessment of sputum eosinophil count in adults with moderate or severe asthma who are managed in experienced centres [37]. No similar recommendations are available for children.

Serum IgE

IgE plays a critical pathophysiological role in allergy and asthma, influencing the functioning of several immune and structural cells of the bronchial wall [38–40]. By binding to its high- and low-affinity receptors, IgE exerts several biological functions: degranulation and mediator release by mast cells/basophils; promotion of mast cell maturation, survival and cytokine production; increase in allergen presentation by dendritic cells and B-cells; activation of eosinophils and T-helper type 2 (Th2) cells; activation, proliferation and cytokine release by smooth muscle cells; inhibition of type I interferon production by dendritic cells; and other indirect effects on innate immune cells. As a result, IgE is primarily responsible for both the acute and chronic phases of inflammation characteristic of allergic asthma [41].

Total IgE and allergen-specific IgE have been strongly associated with asthma in >80% of children [42]. In infants with viral-induced wheezing, a raised level of total IgE is considered a risk factor for asthma development [43], while high levels of allergen-specific IgE correlate well with asthma severity, mainly in children [42, 44]. Consequently, IgE measurements should be routinely performed in patients with asthma, and total IgE should be checked in every child diagnosed with severe asthma, for the consideration of add-on therapies such as omalizumab [42].

Periostin

Periostin is an extracellular matrix protein secreted by airway epithelial cells, endothelial and smooth muscle cells, and lung fibroblasts, in response to IL-4 and IL-13. Following its release, periostin acts on keratinocytes, promoting the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) and IL-24 and regulating epithelial–mesenchymal interactions. In this context, periostin actively participates in airway remodelling, eosinophil recruitment and mucus production from goblet cells [45, 46]. Thus, it has been associated with the type 2 asthma endotype.

Serum periostin levels ≥10 ng·mL−1 identify an inflammatory status. However, age-dependent changes in periostin values commonly occur, probably due to bone turnover and growth, especially in children. Moreover, the presence of comorbidities, including rhinitis, rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyposis, and atopic dermatitis, can affect its baseline values [47]. High levels of periostin have also been found in sputum or EBC, reflecting severe airway inflammation [47].

A meta-analysis reported high serum periostin levels in patients with asthma compared with healthy controls, despite a wide heterogeneity in periostin values among patients with asthma [47]. Particularly high serum periostin levels were found in those with corticosteroid-resistant asthma [48]. There appears to be a moderate or weak correlation between periostin and eosinophil count, FENO and serum total IgE [47]. Clinically, serum periostin levels have been inversely correlated with predicted FEV1, probably reflecting the periostin-mediated fibrogenic effects [47]. In adults with severe asthma, periostin seems to be able to predict clinical response to monoclonal antibody therapies, including omalizumab and lebrikizumab [47].

In contrast to adult asthma, the usefulness of periostin in childhood asthma is still debated and controversial. Some studies on periostin have shown significantly higher values in children with asthma compared with healthy controls, a significant correlation between higher levels of serum periostin and induced AHR, and a moderate relationship between blood eosinophils and IgE in children with asthma [49, 50]. In contrast, Konradsen et al. [51] and Inoue et al. [52] did not detect correlation of serum periostin with blood eosinophils or FENO in childhood asthma patients. In a real-world setting, we recently demonstrated that serum periostin does not reflect asthma control grade in children with asthma [53]. It remains unclear if periostin has a predictive value for identifying severe asthma in children. Finally, serum periostin measurements cannot be readily assessed in most clinical laboratories.

Exhaled biomarkers

Exhaled nitric oxide fraction

As result of airway epithelium inflammation, inducible nitric oxide synthase increases the production of nitric oxide, which can be measured in exhaled breath and thus provide information about the inflammatory state of the airways [54, 55].

Measuring FENO has the advantages of being a noninvasive technique and being easy to perform with a minimal patient effort. However, several confounding factors, such as age, height, type of analyser, ethnicity, smoking, atopy, diet and corticosteroid treatment, may affect its reliability [54, 56]. FENO is a widely accepted biomarker for type-2-driven airway inflammation, displaying a specificity of 70% in asthma diagnosis [54]. In children, a FENO value <20 ppb is considered as normal, while levels >35 ppb are indicative of eosinophilic inflammation and associated with AHR, asthma symptoms, decline of lung function, asthma attacks and asthma-related emergency department visits [54]. In preschool children, it also correlates significantly with blood eosinophils and serum IgE levels. FENO values between 20 and 35 ppb should be interpreted cautiously and with reference to the clinical context [54].

Although FENO-guided management does not appear superior to clinically based management, elevated FENO levels predict response to ICS [57], mepolizumab [35] or benralizumab [58], while a FENO level ≥19.5 ppb is correlated with a response to omalizumab treatment [59]. A reduction in the FENO level during treatment with dupilumab is associated with an improvement in lung function [60].

Although the current guidelines do not recommend FENO in the routine management of children with severe asthma, it could be helpful in the stratification of patients in accordance with eosinophilic inflammation, and as a possible guide for a targeted therapeutic approach [6, 35].

Exhaled breath condensate

By saturating exhaled breath with water vapour and collecting the condensed material, EBC offers a noninvasive method of sample collection for volatile and nonvolatile compounds, such as nitric oxide products, hydrogen peroxide, leukotrienes and cytokines, as well as for investigating microRNA profiles and measuring pH and temperature [61].

Concentrations of exhaled hydrogen ions, nitric oxide products, hydrogen peroxide, leukotriene B4 and 8-isoprostanes are increased in both adults and children with severe asthma; furthermore, they have been related to decreased lung function [62, 63]. Recent studies have shown that EBC pH ≤7.20 is indicative of poorly controlled asthma, although the performance of this biomarker is inferior to clinical evaluation of asthma control [62, 64].

The lack of a standardised collection technique or established cut-off values, the absence of a correlation between EBC values and samples obtained by BAL, and the expensive costs of assays are the main disadvantages of EBC [65]. The EBC method is currently used only in research studies, and it requires further validation before being implemented in clinical practice [65].

Volatile organic compounds

The chronic inflammation processes and the oxidative stress generally associated with asthma result in reactive oxygen species synthesis. These reactive oxygen species promote the degradation of polyunsaturated fatty acids present in the bronchial epithelium cell membrane and induce the formation of VOCs. The latter enter the bloodstream and, subsequently, are excreted in the exhaled breath [66].

Gas chromatography and the electronic nose (e-Nose) are two different techniques able to measure exhaled VOCs [66]. The e-Nose is an artificial sensor system that provides a qualitative and/or quantitative analysis of VOCs. Based on chemical sensors, the e-Nose binds volatile substances, then generates and analyses specific pattern signals for detection of VOC mixtures [67].

VOCs may represent a safe, noninvasive, inexpensive and easy-to-sample tool for diagnosing and monitoring asthma; however, the lack of standardised methods for VOC collection and analysis still represent crucial issues. VOCs originate from 1) exogenous sources (the environment) and enter the human body via inhalation, ingestion or contact, 2) the metabolism of resident bacteria, and 3) endogenous metabolic processes of the patient. All these are excreted in exhaled breath, and it is not easy to discriminate each component according to the origin [66].

A systematic review and meta-analysis showed that VOCs have sensitivity and specificity values of 87% and 86%, respectively, for diagnosing asthma. Also, individuals with asthma have a risk six times higher than healthy controls of being diagnosed through exhaled VOC profiles [68]. Rufo et al. [68] reported that VOC levels are correlated to blood eosinophil and neutrophil counts and with eosinophils in BAL; therefore, VOCs can be used to differentiate asthma phenotypes based on sputum inflammatory profile. Lastly, VOCs may predict asthma control [69], disease course and oral corticosteroid treatment response [70]. With particular reference to the e-Nose, VOC analysis demonstrated greater accuracy in predicting corticosteroid responsiveness than sputum eosinophil counts or FENO in a small group of patients with mild/moderate asthma [70].

Urine metabolites

Urine metabolites, such as bromotyrosine and leukotriene E4, could potentially represent new clinical biomarkers to diagnose asthma. Some studies have found increased urinary bromotyrosine and leukotriene E4 levels in patients with airflow limitation and inadequately controlled asthma. Moreover, both these urine metabolites could predict risk of asthma exacerbations and response to treatments including ICS, leukotriene receptor antagonists and long-acting β-agonists [71–73].

Recently, the eosinophil granule-derived proteins, such as eosinophil protein X (EPX) (also known as eosinophil-derived neurotoxin), have been investigated in the urine samples of patients with asthma. Reflecting the eosinophil activation, these proteins have proved to be reliable for assessing airway inflammation. Over 70% of included studies in a recent meta-analysis reported higher EPX levels in children with asthma compared to controls [74]. Nevertheless, due to the variability of metabolic pathways associated with paediatric asthma and their weak correlation with other biomarkers, such as sputum cell count and FENO level, the utility of urine metabolites needs to be further investigated [75].

Biomarkers of the non-type 2 asthma endotype

Neutrophils

Despite neutrophils being the most commonly detected cell type in induced sputum samples, they do not yet represent established markers to define the non-type 2 asthma endotype [76]. The cut-off values used to define sputum neutrophilia are different between cohorts of patients with asthma, ranging from 40% to 76%. In healthy subjects, the detected median neutrophil percentage is about 37% (10th and 90th percentiles of 11% and 64%). Tobacco smoke, pollution exposure and acute/chronic infections can also contribute to increased sputum neutrophil counts. Generally, a sputum neutrophil count ≥61% allows the diagnosis of neutrophilic asthma [77]. A cut-off of 5% in BAL neutrophils has been adopted to classify as “neutrophil-high” or “neutrophil-low” children with severe asthma who underwent bronchoscopy [78]. Currently, none of the proposed cut-offs have been approved [77].

Clinically, Shaw et al. [79] reported evidence that severity of asthma, as well as severe exacerbations, could be objectively assessed by the sputum neutrophil count. However, the prevalence of neutrophilia in severe asthma remains somewhat uncertain, especially in childhood asthma, in which neutrophilic airway inflammation has been recently associated with better lung function [80].

Conversely, Teague et al. [81] reported that children with pauci-granulocytic asthma (with no evidence of increased numbers of eosinophils or neutrophils in sputum or blood and in whom anti-inflammatory therapies are ineffective at controlling symptoms) experienced a lower post-bronchodilator airflow limitation, less blood eosinophilia, fewer doses of prednisone, and fewer infectious species than children with mixed granulocytic BAL [81]. Moreover, a strong relationship between sputum and blood neutrophils, as well as with asthma severity, was also reported, suggesting neutrophilic lung inflammation as a risk factor for poorly controlled asthma [82, 83].

Sputum neutrophil count can also reflect response to treatment. Cluster analyses from the Severe Asthma Research Program (SARP) found that the highest sputum neutrophil count was correlated with the worst lung function despite maximal bronchodilator and ICS treatment [84].

Given the limited accuracy and ability of available blood biomarkers to reflect sputum neutrophilia, as well as the unavailability of targeted therapy for neutrophilic asthma, sputum neutrophilia currently lacks a clinical application [85].

Other cells

Natural killer T (NKT) cells, a heterogeneous T-cell population, are involved in both the autoimmunity and adaptive immune responses [86]. Recently, their functional role has been investigated in asthma. By using flow cytometric analysis, Hamzaoui et al.[87] reported a significant increase in the number of NKT cells in the sputum of patients with severe asthma compared with mild asthmatic and healthy control groups (p<0.05). The invariant natural killer T (iNKT) cells, which feature the expression of T-cell receptors recognising lipid antigens, do not seem to differ significantly between children and adults with asthma compared to healthy subjects[88]. The mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells, which recognise microbial-derived vitamin B2 (riboflavin) metabolites, are significantly lower in the peripheral blood and sputum of patients with moderate to severe asthma, thus negatively correlate with clinical severity [89]. Mast cells can be detected in both eosinophilic and non-eosinophilic asthma. However, recently, Bergamo de Araujo-Paulino et al. [90] provided evidence that mast cell subtypes and their related gene expression profiles are associated exclusively with airway eosinophilia and could predict clinical asthma outcomes as well as corticosteroid response.

Further investigations on the number and functional properties of lung iNKT, MAIT and mast cells will hopefully provide more information on asthma pathogenesis. To date, their clinical utility is still under debate.

Conclusion

The need for a more personalised and targeted therapy for severe asthma is pushing research to identify biomarkers for monitoring and/or prediction of treatment response in asthma through minimally invasive or noninvasive sampling methods. In daily clinical practice, few biomarkers are readily available and reliable to define severe asthma endotypes. Blood and sputum eosinophils, serum IgE and FENO are mostly reflective of type 2 airway inflammation in children. Conversely, knowledge regarding non-type2 inflammation and related biomarkers is still lacking.

Even if a strong correlation between biomarkers and asthma endotype exists, uncertainty remains as asthma changes significantly over time among patients and with age. Given the pathophysiological complexity underlying severe asthma, it is desirable to adopt a combined strategy, in which biomarkers (alone or in combination) are used in conjunction with the clinical findings of each patient to identify the endotype and guide the clinician towards the most appropriate intervention.

Self-evaluation questions

  1. The proportion of patients with severe asthma is:

    • a) <2%

    • b) 2–5%

    • c) >5%

    • d) >10%

  2. The clinical heterogeneity of severe asthma may reflect differences in:

    • a) Triggers

    • b) Associated comorbidities

    • c) Response to therapy

    • d) All of the above

  3. Which of the following are significant drivers of bronchial inflammation in type 2 asthma?

    • a) Airway smooth muscle cells, oxidative stress

    • b) IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, IgE

    • c) IL-17, IL-21, IL-22

    • d) Neutrophils and Th17 lymphocytes

  4. Which of the following biomarkers are considered invasive and not feasible in routine clinical practice in the paediatric age group?

    • a) Bronchoscopy with bronchial biopsy

    • b) Exhaled breath

    • c) Induced sputum

    • d) Peripheral blood sample

Suggested answers

  1. b.

  2. d.

  3. b.

  4. a.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: A. Licari has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: S. Manti has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: R. Castagnoli has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: S. Leonardi has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: G.L. Marseglia has nothing to disclose.

  • Copyright ©ERS 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Breathe articles are open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Ramratnam SK,
    2. Bacharier LB,
    3. Guilbert TW
    . Severe asthma in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2017; 5: 889–898. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2017.04.031
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Brambilla I,
    3. Marseglia A, et al.
    Difficult vs severe asthma: definition and limits of asthma control in the pediatric population. Front Pediatr 2018; 6: 170. doi:10.3389/fped.2018.00170
    OpenUrl
    1. Stubbs MA,
    2. Clark VL,
    3. McDonald VM
    . Living well with severe asthma. Breathe 2019; 15: e40–e49. doi:10.1183/20734735.0165-2019
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Montella S,
    2. Baraldi E,
    3. Cazzato S, et al.
    Severe asthma features in children: a case-control online survey. Ital J Pediatr 2016; 42: 9. doi:10.1186/s13052-016-0217-z
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Ciprandi R,
    3. Marseglia G, et al.
    Anxiety and depression in adolescents with severe asthma and in their parents: preliminary results after 1 year of treatment. Behav Sci 2019; 9: E78. doi:10.3390/bs9070078
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Chung KF,
    2. Wenzel SE,
    3. Brozek JL, et al.
    International ERS/ATS guidelines on definition, evaluation and treatment of severe asthma. Eur Respir J 2014; 43: 343–373. doi:10.1183/09031936.00202013
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Castagnoli R,
    3. Brambilla I, et al.
    Asthma endotyping and biomarkers in childhood asthma. Pediatr Allergy Immunol Pulmonol 2018; 31: 44–55. doi:10.1089/ped.2018.0886
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Manca E,
    3. Rispoli GA, et al.
    Congenital vascular rings: a clinical challenge for the pediatrician. Pediatr Pulmonol 2015; 50: 511–524. doi:10.1002/ppul.23152
    OpenUrl
    1. Licari A,
    2. Castagnoli R,
    3. Denicolò CF, et al.
    The nose and the lung: united airway disease? Front Pediatr 2017; 5: 44. doi:10.3389/fped.2017.00044
    OpenUrl
    1. Licari A,
    2. Brambilla I,
    3. De Filippo M, et al.
    The role of upper airway pathology as a co-morbidity in severe asthma. Expert Rev Respir Med 2017; 11: 855–865. doi:10.1080/17476348.2017.1381564
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Caimmi S,
    3. Bosa L, et al.
    Rhinosinusitis and asthma: a very long engagement. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 2014; 27: 499–508. doi:10.1177/039463201402700405
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Manti S,
    2. Brown P,
    3. Perez MK, et al.
    The role of neurotrophins in inflammation and allergy. Vitam Horm 2017; 104: 313–341. doi:10.1016/bs.vh.2016.10.010
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Marseglia G,
    3. Castagnoli R, et al.
    The discovery and development of omalizumab for the treatment of asthma. Expert Opin Drug Discov 2015; 10: 1033–1042. doi:10.1517/17460441.2015.1048220
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Manti S,
    3. Castagnoli R, et al.
    Targeted therapy for severe asthma in children and adolescents: current and future perspectives. Paediatr Drugs 2019; 21: 215–237. doi:10.1007/s40272-019-00345-7
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group
    . Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 69: 89–95. doi:10.1067/mcp.2001.113989
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Djukanovic R,
    2. Sterk PJ,
    3. Fahy JV, et al.
    Standardised methodology of sputum induction and processing. Eur Respir J 2002; 20: Suppl. 37, 1s–2s. doi:10.1183/09031936.02.00000102
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Saglani S,
    2. Lloyd CM
    . Eosinophils in the pathogenesis of paediatric severe asthma. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2014; 14: 143–148. doi:10.1097/ACI.0000000000000045
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Lex C,
    2. Payne DNR,
    3. Zacharasiewicz A, et al.
    Sputum induction in children with difficult asthma: safety, feasibility, and inflammatory cell pattern. Pediatr Pulmonol 2005; 39: 318–324. doi:10.1002/ppul.20159
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. van Veen IH,
    2. Ten Brinke A,
    3. Gauw SA, et al.
    Consistency of sputum eosinophilia in difficult-to-treat asthma: a 5-year follow-up study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009; 124: 615–617. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2009.06.029
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Peters SP
    . Counterpoint: is measuring sputum eosinophils useful in the management of severe asthma? No, not for the vast majority of patients. Chest 2011; 139: 1273–1275. doi:10.1378/chest.11-0627
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Fleming L,
    2. Tsartsali L,
    3. Wilson N, et al.
    Sputum inflammatory phenotypes are not stable in children with asthma. Thorax 2012; 67: 675–681. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2011-201064
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Jatakanon A,
    2. Lim S,
    3. Barnes PJ
    . Changes in sputum eosinophils predict loss of asthma control. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 161: 64–72. doi:10.1164/ajrccm.161.1.9809100
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Fleming L,
    2. Wilson N,
    3. Regamey N, et al.
    Use of sputum eosinophil counts to guide management in children with severe asthma. Thorax 2012; 67: 193–198. doi:10.1136/thx.2010.156836
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    1. Eller MCN,
    2. Vergani KP,
    3. Saraiva-Romanholo BM, et al.
    Can inflammatory markers in induced sputum be used to detect phenotypes and endotypes of pediatric severe therapy-resistant asthma? Pediatr Pulmonol 2018; 53: 1208–1217. doi:10.1002/ppul.24075
    OpenUrl
  21. ↵
    1. Petsky HL,
    2. Li A,
    3. Chang AB
    . Tailored interventions based on sputum eosinophils versus clinical symptoms for asthma in children and adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 8: CD005603.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Cowan DC,
    2. Cowan JO,
    3. Palmay R, et al.
    Effects of steroid therapy on inflammatory cell subtypes in asthma. Thorax 2010; 65: 384–390. doi:10.1136/thx.2009.126722
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    1. Nair P
    . What is an “eosinophilic phenotype” of asthma? JAllergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132: 81–83. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2013.05.007
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    1. Wagener AH,
    2. de Nijs SB,
    3. Lutter R, et al.
    External validation of blood eosinophils, FENO and serum periostin as surrogates for sputum eosinophils in asthma. Thorax 2015; 70: 115–120. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-205634
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Ullmann N,
    2. Bossley CJ,
    3. Fleming L, et al.
    Blood eosinophil counts rarely reflect airway eosinophilia in children with severe asthma. Allergy 2013; 68: 402–406. doi:10.1111/all.12101
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Casciano J,
    2. Krishnan JA,
    3. Small MB, et al.
    Value of peripheral blood eosinophil markers to predict severity of asthma. BMC Pulm Med 2016; 16: 109. doi:10.1186/s12890-016-0271-8
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Akar HH,
    2. Tahan F,
    3. Gungor HE
    . The association of forced expiratory volume in one second and forced expiratory flow at 50% of the vital capacity, peak expiratory flow parameters, and blood eosinophil counts in exercise-induced bronchospasm in children with mild asthma. Asia Pac Allergy 2015; 5: 98–102. doi:10.5415/apallergy.2015.5.2.98
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Shah SP,
    2. Grunwell J,
    3. Shih J, et al.
    Exploring the utility of noninvasive type 2 inflammatory markers for prediction of severe asthma exacerbations in children and adolescents. JAllergy Clin Immunol Pract 2019; 7: 2624–2633.e2. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2019.04.043
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Fitzpatrick AM,
    2. Jackson DJ,
    3. Mauger DT, et al.
    Individualized therapy for persistent asthma in young children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2016; 138: 1608–1618.e12. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2016.09.028
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Busse W,
    2. Spector S,
    3. Rosén K, et al.
    High eosinophil count: a potential biomarker for assessing successful omalizumab treatment effects. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132: 485–486.e11. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2013.02.032
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Pavord ID,
    2. Korn S,
    3. Howarth P, et al.
    Mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma (DREAM): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2012; 380: 651–659. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60988-X
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. GlaxoSmithKline
    . Nucala (mepolizumab) prescribing information. www.gsksource.com/pharma/content/dam/GlaxoSmithKline/US/en/Prescribing_Information/Nucala/pdf/NUCALA-PI-PIL.PDF Date last updated: September 2019. Date last accessed: 14 December 2019.
  33. ↵
    1. Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA)
    . Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention. 2018. Available from: http://ginasthma.org/
  34. ↵
    1. De Amici M,
    2. Marseglia A,
    3. Licari A, et al.
    Serum immunoglobulin IgE in a pediatric population: a retrospective analysis. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 2015; 29: 64–69.
    OpenUrl
    1. De Amici M,
    2. Perotti F,
    3. Marseglia GL, et al.
    Cord and blood levels of newborn IgE: correlation, role and influence of maternal IgE. Immunobiology 2017; 222: 450–453. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2016.08.004
    OpenUrl
  35. ↵
    1. Burrows B,
    2. Martinez FD,
    3. Halonen M, et al.
    Association of asthma with serum IgE levels and skin-test reactivity to allergens. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 271–277. doi:10.1056/NEJM198902023200502
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Sears MR,
    2. Burrows B,
    3. Flannery EM, et al.
    Relation between airway responsiveness and serum IgE in children with asthma and in apparently normal children. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 1067–1071. doi:10.1056/NEJM199110103251504
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Haktanir Abul M,
    2. Phipatanakul W
    . Severe asthma in children: evaluation and management. Allergol Int 2019; 68: 150–157. doi:10.1016/j.alit.2018.11.007
    OpenUrl
  38. ↵
    1. Lemanske RF Jr.
    . The childhood origins of asthma (COAST) study. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2002; 13: 38–43. doi:10.1034/j.1399-3038.13.s.15.8.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Szefler SJ,
    2. Wenzel S,
    3. Brown R, et al.
    Asthma outcomes: biomarkers. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 129: Suppl. 3, S9–S23. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2011.12.979
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Jia G,
    2. Erickson RW,
    3. Choy DF, et al.
    Periostin is a systemic biomarker of eosinophilic airway inflammation in asthmatic patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 130: 647–654.e10. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.06.025
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Leonardi S,
    2. Vitaliti G,
    3. Marseglia GL, et al.
    Function of the airway epithelium in asthma. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 2012; 26: Suppl. 1, S41–S48.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Izuhara K,
    2. Nunomura S,
    3. Nanri Y, et al.
    Periostin: an emerging biomarker for allergic diseases. Allergy 2019; 74: 2116–2128. doi:10.1111/all.13814
    OpenUrl
  43. ↵
    1. Matsusaka M,
    2. Kabata H,
    3. Fukunaga K, et al.
    Phenotype of asthma related with high serum periostin levels. Allergol Int 2015; 64: 175–180. doi:10.1016/j.alit.2014.07.003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Song JS,
    2. You JS,
    3. Jeong SI, et al.
    Serum periostin levels correlate with airway hyper-responsiveness to methacholine and mannitol in children with asthma. Allergy 2015; 70: 674–681. doi:10.1111/all.12599
    OpenUrl
  45. ↵
    1. Inoue T,
    2. Akashi K,
    3. Watanabe M, et al.
    Periostin as a biomarker for the diagnosis of pediatric asthma. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2016; 27: 521–526. doi:10.1111/pai.12575
    OpenUrl
  46. ↵
    1. Konradsen JR,
    2. Skantz E,
    3. Nordlund B, et al.
    Predicting asthma morbidity in children using proposed markers of Th2-type inflammation. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2015; 26: 772–779. doi:10.1111/pai.12457
    OpenUrl
  47. ↵
    1. Inoue Y,
    2. Izuhara K,
    3. Ohta S, et al.
    No increase in the serum periostin level is detected in elementary school-age children with allergic diseases. Allergol Int 2015; 64: 289–290. doi:10.1016/j.alit.2015.04.001
    OpenUrl
  48. ↵
    1. Licari A,
    2. Brambilla I,
    3. Sacchi L, et al.
    Periostin, type 2 biomarker, is not associated with asthma control grade in asthmatic allergic children. Respir Med 2019; 151: 118–120. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2019.04.010
    OpenUrl
  49. ↵
    1. Dweik RA,
    2. Boggs PB,
    3. Erzurum SC, et al.
    An official ATS clinical practice guideline: interpretation of exhaled nitric oxide levels (FENO) for clinical applications. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011; 184: 602–615. doi:10.1164/rccm.9120-11ST
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Miraglia Del Giudice M,
    2. Marseglia GL,
    3. Leonardi S, et al.
    Fractional exhaled nitric oxide measurements in rhinitis and asthma in children. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 2011; 24: Suppl. 4, S29–S32. doi:10.1177/03946320110240S407
    OpenUrl
  51. ↵
    1. Leonardi S,
    2. Cuppari C,
    3. Lanzafame A, et al.
    Exhaled breath temperature in asthmatic children. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 2015; 29: Suppl. 1, S47–S54.
    OpenUrl
  52. ↵
    1. Petsky HL,
    2. Kew KM,
    3. Chang AB
    . Exhaled nitric oxide levels to guide treatment for children with asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 11: CD011439.
    OpenUrl
  53. ↵
    1. Castro M,
    2. Wenzel SE,
    3. Bleecker ER, et al.
    Benralizumab, an anti-interleukin 5 receptor α monoclonal antibody, versus placebo for uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma: a phase 2b randomised dose-ranging study. Lancet Respir Med 2014; 2: 879–890. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70201-2
    OpenUrl
  54. ↵
    1. Hanania NA,
    2. Wenzel S,
    3. Rosén K, et al.
    Exploring the effects of omalizumab in allergic asthma: an analysis of biomarkers in the EXTRA study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013; 187: 804–811. doi:10.1164/rccm.201208-1414OC
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    1. Wenzel S,
    2. Ford L,
    3. Pearlman D, et al.
    Dupilumab in persistent asthma with elevated eosinophil levels. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 2455–2466. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1304048
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. ↵
    1. Medrek SK,
    2. Parulekar AD,
    3. Hanania NA
    . Predictive biomarkers for asthma therapy. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2017; 17: 69. doi:10.1007/s11882-017-0739-5
    OpenUrl
  57. ↵
    1. Aldakheel FM,
    2. Thomas PS,
    3. Bourke JE, et al.
    Relationships between adult asthma and oxidative stress markers and pH in exhaled breath condensate: a systematic review. Allergy 2016; 71: 741–757. doi:10.1111/all.12865
    OpenUrl
  58. ↵
    1. Formanek W,
    2. Inci D,
    3. Lauener RP, et al.
    Elevated nitrite in breath condensates of children with respiratory disease. Eur Respir J 2002; 19: 487–491. doi:10.1183/09031936.02.00101202
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. ↵
    1. Kostikas K,
    2. Papaioannou AI,
    3. Tanou K, et al.
    Exhaled NO and exhaled breath condensate pH in the evaluation of asthma control. Respir Med 2011; 105: 526–532. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2010.10.015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Bannier MAGE,
    2. Rosias PPR,
    3. Jöbsis Q, et al.
    Exhaled breath condensate in childhood asthma: a review and current perspective. Front Pediatr 2019; 7: 15. doi:10.3389/fped.2019.00015
    OpenUrl
  61. ↵
    1. Moschino L,
    2. Zanconato S,
    3. Bozzetto S, et al.
    Childhood asthma biomarkers: present knowledge and future steps. Paediatr Respir Rev 2015; 16: 205–212.
    OpenUrl
  62. ↵
    1. Bannier MAGE,
    2. van de Kant KDG,
    3. Jöbsis Q, et al.
    Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of an electronic nose in children with asthma and cystic fibrosis. J Breath Res 2019; 13: 036009. doi:10.1088/1752-7163/aae158
    OpenUrl
  63. ↵
    1. Rufo JC,
    2. Madureira J,
    3. Fernandes EO, et al.
    Volatile organic compounds in asthma diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Allergy 2016; 71: 175–188. doi:10.1111/all.12793
    OpenUrl
  64. ↵
    1. de Vries R,
    2. Dagelet YWF,
    3. Spoor P, et al.
    Clinical and inflammatory phenotyping by breathomics in chronic airway diseases irrespective of the diagnostic label. Eur Respir J 2018; 51: 1701817. doi:10.1183/13993003.01817-2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    1. van der Schee MP,
    2. Palmay R,
    3. Cowan JO, et al.
    Predicting steroid responsiveness in patients with asthma using exhaled breath profiling. Clin Exp Allergy 2013; 43: 1217–1225. doi:10.1111/cea.12147
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Wedes SH,
    2. Khatri SB,
    3. Zhang R, et al.
    Noninvasive markers of airway inflammation in asthma. Clin Transl Sci 2009; 2: 112–117. doi:10.1111/j.1752-8062.2009.00095.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Wedes SH,
    2. Wu W,
    3. Comhair SA, et al.
    Urinary bromotyrosine measures asthma control and predicts asthma exacerbations in children. J Pediatr 2011; 159: 248–255.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2011.01.029
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Rabinovitch N,
    2. Zhang L,
    3. Gelfand EW
    . Urine leukotriene E4 levels are associated with decreased pulmonary function in children with persistent airway obstruction. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006; 118: 635–640. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2006.05.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. ↵
    1. Klonoff-Cohen H,
    2. Polavarapu M
    . Eosinophil protein X and childhood asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Immun Inflamm Dis 2016; 4: 114–134. doi:10.1002/iid3.104
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Cowan DC,
    2. Taylor DR,
    3. Peterson LE, et al.
    Biomarker-based asthma phenotypes of corticosteroid response. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015; 135: 877–883.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2014.10.026
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. ↵
    1. Hastie AT,
    2. Moore WC,
    3. Li H, et al.
    Biomarker surrogates do not accurately predict sputum eosinophil and neutrophil percentages in asthmatic subjects. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132: 72–80. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2013.03.044
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  71. ↵
    1. Loza MJ,
    2. Djukanovic R,
    3. Chung KF, et al.
    Validated and longitudinally stable asthma phenotypes based on cluster analysis of the ADEPT study. Respir Res 2016; 17: 165. doi:10.1186/s12931-016-0482-9
    OpenUrl
  72. ↵
    1. Grunwell JR,
    2. Stephenson ST,
    3. Tirouvanziam R, et al.
    Children with neutrophil-predominant severe asthma have proinflammatory neutrophils with enhanced survival and impaired clearance. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2019; 7: 516–525.e6. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2018.08.024
    OpenUrl
  73. ↵
    1. Shaw DE,
    2. Berry MA,
    3. Hargadon B, et al.
    Association between neutrophilic airway inflammation and airflow limitation in adults with asthma. Chest 2007; 132: 1871–1875. doi:10.1378/chest.07-1047
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. ↵
    1. Andersson CK,
    2. Adams A,
    3. Nagakumar P, et al.
    Intraepithelial neutrophils in pediatric severe asthma are associated with better lung function. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2017; 139: 1819–1829.e11. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2016.09.022
    OpenUrl
  75. ↵
    1. Teague WG,
    2. Lawrence MG,
    3. Shirley DT, et al.
    Lung lavage granulocyte patterns and clinical phenotypes in children with severe, therapy-resistant asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2019; 7: 1803–1812.e10. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2018.12.027
    OpenUrl
  76. ↵
    1. Kim HY,
    2. Lee HJ,
    3. Chang YJ, et al.
    Interleukin-17-producing innate lymphoid cells and the NLRP3 inflammasome facilitate obesity-associated airway hyperreactivity. Nat Med 2014; 20: 54–61. doi:10.1038/nm.3423
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. ↵
    1. Manti S,
    2. Leonardi S,
    3. Panasiti I, et al.
    Serum IL-10, IL-17 and IL-23 levels as “bioumoral bridges” between dyslipidemia and atopy. Cytokine 2017; 99: 43–49. doi:10.1016/j.cyto.2017.07.002
    OpenUrl
  78. ↵
    1. Teague WG,
    2. Phillips BR,
    3. Fahy JV, et al.
    Baseline features of the Severe Asthma Research Program (SARP III) cohort: differences with age. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2018; 6: 545–554.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2017.05.032
    OpenUrl
  79. ↵
    1. Kim CK,
    2. Koh YY,
    3. Callaway Z
    . The validity of induced sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage in childhood asthma. J Asthma 2009; 46: 105–112. doi:10.1080/02770900802604111
    OpenUrlPubMed
  80. ↵
    1. Godfrey DI,
    2. Hammond KJ,
    3. Poulton LD, et al.
    NKT cells: facts, functions and fallacies. Immunol Today 2000; 21: 573–583. doi:10.1016/S0167-5699(00)01735-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. ↵
    1. Hamzaoui A,
    2. Cheik Rouhou S,
    3. Graïri H, et al.
    NKT cells in the induced sputum of severe asthmatics. Mediators Inflamm 2006; 2006: 71214. doi:10.1155/MI/2006/71214
    OpenUrlPubMed
  82. ↵
    1. Koh YI,
    2. Shim JU
    . Association between sputum natural killer T cells and eosinophilic airway inflammation in human asthma. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010; 153: 239–248. doi:10.1159/000314364
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. ↵
    1. Lezmi G,
    2. Abou Taam R,
    3. Dietrich C, et al.
    Circulating IL-17-producing mucosal-associated invariant T cells (MAIT) are associated with symptoms in children with asthma. Clin Immunol 2018; 188: 7–11. doi:10.1016/j.clim.2017.11.009
    OpenUrl
  84. ↵
    1. Bergamo de Araujo-Paulino B,
    2. Cardoso Neves Eller M,
    3. Pierantozzi Vergani K, et al.
    Mast cell subtypes in adults and children with severe asthma. Eur Respir J 2017; 50: Suppl. 61, PA1010.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 16 Issue 1 Table of Contents
Breathe: 16 (1)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Measuring inflammation in paediatric severe asthma: biomarkers in clinical practice
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Measuring inflammation in paediatric severe asthma: biomarkers in clinical practice
Amelia Licari, Sara Manti, Riccardo Castagnoli, Salvatore Leonardi, Gian Luigi Marseglia
Breathe Mar 2020, 16 (1) 190301; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0301-2019

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Measuring inflammation in paediatric severe asthma: biomarkers in clinical practice
Amelia Licari, Sara Manti, Riccardo Castagnoli, Salvatore Leonardi, Gian Luigi Marseglia
Breathe Mar 2020, 16 (1) 190301; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0301-2019
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Biomarkers inasthma: definition and sampling methods
    • Biomarkers of the type2 asthma endotype
    • Biomarkers of the non-type 2 asthma endotype
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Management of difficult-to-treat asthma in adolescence and young adults
  • Respiratory complications of obesity
  • Diagnosis and management of PH in infants with BPD
Show more Reviews

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About Breathe

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Intructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN: 1810-6838
Online ISSN: 2073-4735

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society