Aldridge Ruth E, Hancox Robert J, Cowant Jan O, Frampton Chris M, Town G Ian, Taylor D Robin
Canterbury Respiratory Research Unit, Christchurch School of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2002 Nov;89(5):492-7. doi: 10.1016/s1081-1206(10)62087-x.
There is a need for easily measurable markers of airway inflammation to guide the use of anti-inflammatory treatment in asthma. Eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) levels in sputum and blood correlate with clinical severity, and serial measurements of ECP have been proposed as a suitable candidate.
Our aim was to confirm that sputum and serum ECP measurements would provide a more sensitive indicator of responses to asthma treatment than eosinophil counts per se, in a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study of terbutaline, budesonide, and their combination in patients with chronic persistent asthma. We compared the changes in eosinophil counts and ECP in induced sputum and blood during each treatment period.
Budesonide and combined treatment caused a significant reduction in sputum eosinophils (-2.7% and -2.3%, respectively, P < 0.05). Sputum eosinophils increased with terbutaline (+3.9%, P = 0.049). In contrast, the changes for sputum ECP were not significant. There was a similar treatment effect on blood eosinophils, but not for serum ECP. Correlations between sputum and blood eosinophils were significant with and without budesonide, but were nonsignificant between sputum and blood ECP during the active treatments. Correlations between sputum eosinophils and ECP, and between blood eosinophils and serum ECP were greatest during treatment with placebo or terbutaline alone: budesonide weakened or abolished these relationships.
Compared with eosinophil counts, ECP measurements in either induced sputum or serum failed to reflect treatment-related changes in chronic asthma. We conclude that ECP is not a sensitive or reliable means of evaluating airway inflammation, and can not be recommended for assessing responses to anti-inflammatory therapy.
需要易于测量的气道炎症标志物来指导哮喘抗炎治疗的应用。痰液和血液中的嗜酸性阳离子蛋白(ECP)水平与临床严重程度相关,并且有人提出对ECP进行连续测量是一个合适的指标。
在一项关于特布他林、布地奈德及其联合用药治疗慢性持续性哮喘患者的随机、安慰剂对照、交叉研究中,我们的目的是确认痰液和血清ECP测量比嗜酸性粒细胞计数本身能更敏感地反映哮喘治疗反应。我们比较了每个治疗期间诱导痰液和血液中嗜酸性粒细胞计数和ECP的变化。
布地奈德和联合治疗使痰液嗜酸性粒细胞显著减少(分别为-2.7%和-2.3%,P<0.05)。特布他林使痰液嗜酸性粒细胞增加(+3.9%,P=0.049)。相比之下,痰液ECP的变化不显著。对血液嗜酸性粒细胞有类似的治疗效果,但对血清ECP没有。在使用和不使用布地奈德的情况下,痰液和血液嗜酸性粒细胞之间的相关性均显著,但在积极治疗期间,痰液和血液ECP之间的相关性不显著。痰液嗜酸性粒细胞与ECP之间以及血液嗜酸性粒细胞与血清ECP之间的相关性在单独使用安慰剂或特布他林治疗期间最大:布地奈德削弱或消除了这些关系。
与嗜酸性粒细胞计数相比,诱导痰液或血清中的ECP测量未能反映慢性哮喘中与治疗相关的变化。我们得出结论,ECP不是评估气道炎症的敏感或可靠方法,不能推荐用于评估抗炎治疗的反应。