Michael E. Wechsler

Rationale: Recent studies suggest that people with asthma of different racial backgrounds may respond differently to various therapies. Objectives: To use data from well-characterized participants in prior Asthma Clinical Research Network (ACRN) trials to determine whether racial differences affected asthma treatment failures. Methods: We analyzed baseline phenotypes and treatment failure rates (worsening asthma resulting in systemic corticosteroid use, hospitalization, emergency department visit, prolonged decrease in peak expiratory flow, increase in albuterol use, or safety concerns) in subjects participating in 10 ACRN trials (1993–2003). Self-declared race was reported in each trial and treatment failure rates were stratified by race. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 1,200 unique subjects (whites = 795 [66%]; African Americans = 233 [19%]; others = 172 [14%]; mean age = 32) were included in the analyses. At baseline, African Americans had fewer asthma symptoms (P < 0.001) and less average daily rescue inhaler use (P = 0.007) than whites. There were no differences in baseline FEV₁ (% predicted); asthma quality of life; bronchial hyperreactivity; or exhaled nitric oxide concentrations. A total of 147 treatment failures were observed; a significantly higher proportion of African Americans (19.7%; n = 46) experienced a treatment failure compared with whites (12.7%; n = 101) (odds ratio = 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–2.5; P = 0.007). When stratified by treatment, African Americans receiving long-acting β-agonists were twice as likely as whites to experience a treatment failure (odds ratio = 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.3–3.6; P = 0.004), even when used with other controller therapies. Conclusions: Despite having fewer asthma symptoms and less rescue β-agonist use, African-Americans with asthma have more treatment failures compared with whites, especially when taking long-acting β-agonists.

In prospective experimental studies in patients with asthma, it is difficult to determine whether responses to placebo differ from the natural course of physiological changes that occur without any intervention. We compared the effects of a bronchodilator, two placebo interventions, and no intervention on outcomes in patients with asthma. In a double-blind, crossover pilot study, we randomly assigned 46 patients with asthma to active treatment with an albuterol inhaler, a placebo inhaler, sham acupuncture, or no intervention. Using a block design, we administered one each of these four interventions in random order during four sequential visits (3 to 7 days apart); this procedure was repeated in two more blocks of visits (for a total of 12 visits by each patient). At each visit, spirometry was performed repeatedly over a period of 2 hours. Maximum forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) was measured, and patients' self-reported improvement ratings were recorded. Among the 39 patients who completed the study, albuterol resulted in a 20% increase in FEV₁, as compared with approximately 7% with each of the other three interventions (P1 in these patients with asthma, albuterol provided no incremental benefit with respect to the self-reported outcomes. Placebo effects can be clinically meaningful and can rival the effects of active medication in patients with asthma. However, from a clinical-management and research-design perspective, patient self-reports can be unreliable. An assessment of untreated responses in asthma may be essential in evaluating patient-reported outcomes. (Funded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01143688.)

Many patients with asthma are treated in the primary care setting. The primary care physician is therefore in a key position to recognize poorly controlled asthma and to improve asthma management for these patients. However, current evidence continues to show that, for a substantial number of patients, asthma control is inadequate for a wide variety of reasons, both physician-related and patient-related. The most recently updated treatment guidelines from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program were designed to help clinicians, including primary care physicians, manage asthma more effectively with an increased focus on achieving and maintaining good asthma control over time. The current review is intended to assist primary care physicians in improving asthma control among their patients; this review clarifies the new guidelines and provides a specialist's perspective on diagnosis, appropriate therapy, disease control surveillance, and appropriate referral when necessary. This discussion is based primarily on the new guidelines and the references cited therein, supplemented by the author's own clinical experience.

Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is a novel experimental procedure involving the application of controlled heat from a radiofrequency source to the airway wall as a means to reduce airway smooth muscle in the airway wall. After BT was shown to reduce airway smooth muscle in preclinical studies in dogs, clinical studies in humans revealed that BT resulted in a significant improvement in asthma outcomes including mild asthma exacerbations, asthma symptom–free days, asthma rescue medication use, and airway hyperresponsiveness as measured by methacholine PC₂₀. A second trial in humans revealed that BT was safe and effective in patients with severe asthma refractory to the current standard of care. While current trials are ongoing, BT holds promise as an exciting novel therapy in the management of patients with asthma.

Pediatric Annals | During the past few decades, there has been a significant increase in the prevalence of asthma in the United States. More than 18 million Americans are affected by this disease, which continues to cause morbidity and mortality across all age groups and socioeconomic strata. This surge in asthma prevalence, however, has been accompanied by tremendous advances in the treatment of asthma. Based on