4.6 Article

Diagnosing eosinophilic asthma using a multivariate prediction model based on blood granulocyte responsiveness

Journal

ALLERGY
Volume 72, Issue 8, Pages 1202-1211

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/all.13117

Keywords

eosinophil; FeNO; nasal polyps; sputum; aspirin sensitivity

Funding

  1. European Respiratory Society (ERS)
  2. European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The identification of inflammatory asthma phenotypes, using sputum analysis, has proven its value in diagnosis and disease monitoring. However due to technical limitations of sputum analysis, there is a strong need for fast and noninvasive diagnostics. This study included the activation state of eosinophils and neutrophils in peripheral blood to phenotype and monitor asthma. Objectives: To (i) construct a multivariable model using the activation state of blood granulocytes, (ii) compare its diagnostic value with sputum eosinophilia as gold standard and (iii) validate the model in an independent patient cohort. Methods: Clinical parameters, activation of blood granulocytes and sputum characteristics were assessed in 115 adult patients with asthma (training cohort/Utrecht) and 34 patients (validation cohort/Oxford). Results: The combination of blood eosinophil count, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, Asthma Control Questionnaire, medication use, nasal polyposis, aspirin sensitivity and neutrophil/eosinophil responsiveness upon stimulation with formyl-methionyl-leucyl phenylalanine was found to identify sputum eosinophilia with 90.5% sensitivity and 91.5% specificity in the training cohort and with 77% sensitivity and 71% specificity in the validation cohort (relatively high percentage on oral corticosteroids [OCS]). Conclusions: The proposed prediction model identifies eosinophilic asthma without the need for sputum induction. The model forms a noninvasive and externally validated test to assess eosinophilic asthma in patients not on OCS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available