Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • 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
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

From the Author

S. Buist
European Respiratory Journal 2003 22: 189; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.03.00022603
S. Buist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

From the author:

I appreciate the comments made by S. Mukherjee and S. Basaki about my article on similarities and differences between asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) 1. As they rightly point out, an increase in eosinophils is not necessarily characteristic of severe asthma or of an exacerbation of asthma. They stress the importance of trying to differentiate between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma.

My article was dealing with the major characteristics that help to differentiate between asthma and COPD and how these affect the response to pharmacological agents. The teaching point here was that the different responses to inhaled anti-inflammatories seen in asthma and COPD may have their basis in differences in the cell populations in the two diseases. I emphasised that COPD is not one disease but rather a spectrum of diseases. The same can be said for asthma, which is remarkably heterogeneous.

Clearly, we need more information about the heterogeneity of the inflammatory response in asthma. The prevalence of noneosinophilic asthma varies from study to study, and the reason for this variability has been attributed to patient or disease characteristics, such as severity or control of asthma, smoking, age, medication use, stage of exacerbation and recent exposure to allergens or environmental pollutants 2. Understanding the pathology better will require much more information based on biopsies obtained in these different circumstances.

The practical clinical question is whether we can differentiate between eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma (or between those who respond to anti-inflammatories and those who do not) using clinical criteria or simple clinical tests. Although not yet a simple clinical test, analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid or induced sputum has received a lot of scrutiny recently in the hope that this can be used to distinguish responders from nonresponders. To date, the answer is not clear. One recent study that supports the use of sputum eosinophils to adjust treatment was reported by Green et al. 3. These investigators followed 74 asthmatic patients for 12 months to see if the number of exacerbations was higher in patients randomised to a treatment algorithm based on normalising the sputum eosinophil count versus those randomised to management by British Thoracic Society Guidelines. They reported that treatment directed at normalising the induced sputum eosinophil count reduced the frequency of exacerbations without the need for additional anti-inflammatory therapy. In another study, Godon et al. 4 measured sputum eosinophilia before and after treatment with inhaled corticosteroids in 51 mild, uncontrolled, steroid-naïve asthmatics. Of these, 29% had an eosinophil count ≤1%. Baseline characteristics of this group and the group that had an eosinophil count of >1% were not different and neither was the response to 1 month of inhaled corticosteroid treatment, as judged by symptoms, quality of life, forced expiratory volume in one second and methacholine responsiveness. Studies like these are helping to answer the important question of whether sputum eosinophils can be used as a clinical tool to predict the response to treatment or titrate treatment.

The important point is that we recognise the heterogeneity of asthma (and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and continue to look for simple clinical tools that can help to differentiate groups that respond to different pharmacological agents. This will require well-designed and adequately powered clinical trials.

    • © ERS Journals Ltd

    References

    1. ↵
      Buist AS. Similarities and differences between asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: treatment and early outcomes. Eur Respir J 2003;1:Suppl. 39. 30s–35s.
    2. ↵
      Pizzichini MMM. Is sputum eosinophilia a good or poor predictor of benefit from inhaled corticosteroid therapy in asthma?. Eur Respir J 2002;20:1359–1361.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    3. ↵
      Green RH, Brightling CE, MacKenna S, Parker D, Wardlaw AJ, Pavord ID. Reduced asthma exacerbations with a management strategy directed at normalizing the sputum eosinophil count. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:A320.
      OpenUrl
    4. ↵
      Godon P, Boulet L-P, Malo J-L, Cartier A, Lemière C. Assessment and evaluation of symptomatic steroid-naïve asthmatics without sputum eosinophila and their response to inhaled corticosteroids. Eur Respir J 2002;20:1364–1369.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    View this article with LENS
    Vol 22 Issue 1 Table of Contents
    • 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.
    From the Author
    (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
    From the Author
    S. Buist
    European Respiratory Journal Jul 2003, 22 (1) 189; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.03.00022603

    Citation Manager Formats

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

    Share
    From the Author
    S. Buist
    European Respiratory Journal Jul 2003, 22 (1) 189; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.03.00022603
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Full Text (PDF)

    Jump To

    • Article
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    More in this TOC Section

    • Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
    • Optimised surveillance of bronchial dysplasia in risky population
    • Reply: Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
    Show more Correspondence

    Related Articles

    Navigate

    • Home
    • Current issue
    • Archive

    About the ERJ

    • Journal information
    • Editorial board
    • Reviewers
    • 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

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

    For readers

    • Alerts
    • Subjects
    • Podcasts
    • 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:  0903-1936
    Online ISSN: 1399-3003

    Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society