Bronchial asthma (BA) is a chronic inflammatory disease with a marked heterogeneity in pathophysiology and etiology. The heterogeneity of BA may be related to the inducing mechanism(s) (allergic vs non-allergic), the histopathological background (eosinophilic vs non-eosinophilic), and the clinical manifestations, particularly in terms of severity and frequency of exacerbations. Asthma can be divided into at least two different endotypes based on the degree of Th2 inflammation (T2 ‘high’ and T2 ‘low’). For patients with severe uncontrolled asthma, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against immunoglobulin E (IgE) or interleukin (IL)-5 are now available as add-on treatments. Treatment decisions for individual patients should consider the biological background in terms of the “driving mechanisms” of inflammation as this should predict the patients’ likely responses to treatment. The question is not whether an anti-IgE or an anti-eosinophilic strategy is more effective, but rather what the mechanism is at the origin of the airway. While IgE is involved early in the inflammatory cascade and can be considered as a cause of allergic asthma, eosinophilia can be considered a consequence of the whole process. This article discusses the different roles of the IgE and IL-5/eosinophil pathways in the pathogenic mechanisms of airway inflammation occurring in allergic asthma, and the possible reasons to choose an anti-IgE mAb or anti-IL-5 treatment.

Omalizumab has been shown to be an effective add-on therapy for patients with uncontrolled severe persistent allergic asthma. There has been a steady accumulation of evidence on the long-term effectiveness of omalizumab; however, data on real-life outcomes beyond one year of treatment is limited. In this study, we report on long-term outcomes of omalizumab treatment. We collected data from our severe asthma registry on hospitalisations, exacerbations, corticosteroid sparing, asthma control, lung function, biomarkers and side effects, to determine if the benefit was sustained and treatment was safe on the long term. Forty-five patients [mean age 44.9 years (range 19-69), females 37/45 (82%), mean duration of omalizumab treatment = 60.7 ± 30.9 months (range 23-121) were included in the analysis. We observed a reduction in the annual acute asthma related hospital admissions for the total population from 207 at baseline to 40 on treatment (80.7% reduction), whilst the per patient annual hospitalisations were reduced from a mean of 4.8 to 0.89 post-omalizumab treatment (p < 0.00001). There was a 76.7% reduction in daily mean maintenance OCS dose (prednisolone equivalent) from 25.8 mg (n = 43) to 6.0 mg (p < 0.0001), associated with clinically significant improvement in asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) from mean score of 4.1 (range 3.7-4.7) to 2.27 (range 0.5-4.1) p < 0.0001. The mean % predicted FEV has improved from 59.2% at baseline to 75.7% on treatment (p = 0.001). There was a statistically non-significant reduction in median peripheral blood eosinophils (PBE) from 300 cells/μl (range 40-1050) at baseline to 175 cells/μl (range 0-1500) post-treatment (p = 0.068), and statistically significant reduction of median fraction exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) level from 37 parts per billion (range 12-178) to 24 ppb (range 7-50) (p = 0.0067). The work/school missed days were reduced in 17/19 patients who were at employment or school. The overall safety profile of the treatment seemed acceptable and was consistent with published experience. In conclusion, results from this real-life study demonstrate that improved outcomes in patients with severe allergic asthma are sustained with longer-term omalizumab therapy.

We conducted a large global survey, Still Fighting for Breath, in patients with severe persistent asthma, 10 years after the Fighting for Breath survey to assess the impact of disease on patients' lives and to determine if control and management have changed in recent years.Data were collected from 1333 adults (aged >18 years) and caregivers of children (aged 6–17 years) with severe persistent asthma from nine countries through an online survey conducted in 2016 by GfK.A decade after the first survey, our results showed that the impact of severe asthma has not changed significantly and a high proportion of patients with severe asthma remain inadequately controlled. A large discrepancy was observed between the proportion of patients who perceived their asthma to be well controlled (42%) and the proportion of patients who reported to be well controlled as per the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) assessment (6%). Although most patients perceived their asthma to be controlled, many experienced frequent symptoms that affected their daily lives.Thus, there is a need for improved management (support and strategies) of patients with severe persistent asthma and improved coordination of efforts that would enable these patients to achieve better disease control.

There is increasing interest in the association between psoriasis and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which is a prevalent liver disease characterized by excessive fat storage and inflammation that can progress to fibrosis and cancer. Patients with psoriasis have a two-fold higher risk to develop NAFLD and a higher risk to progress to more severe liver disease. Psoriasis and NAFLD share common risk factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption, and the presence of metabolic syndrome and its component disorders. In addition, both psoriasis and NAFLD hinge upon a systemic low-grade inflammation that can lead to a vicious cycle of progressive liver damage in NAFLD as well as worsening of the underlying psoriasis. Other important shared pathophysiological pathways include peripheral insulin resistance and oxidative stress. NAFLD should receive clinical awareness as important comorbidity in psoriasis. In this review, we assess the recent literature on the epidemiological and pathophysiological relationship of psoriasis and NAFLD, discuss the clinical implications of NAFLD in psoriasis patients, and summarize the hepatotoxic and hepatoprotective potential of systemic psoriasis therapies.

Omalizumab was efficacious in patients with CSU nonresponsive to H1-antihistamines. The UCT was a reliable tool for disease assessment and the scores correlated well with UAS7. This study does not support the usefulness of d-dimer to monitor long-term disease prognosis in adult urticaria; however, it may indicate patients who respond to omalizumab.