The beneficial effects of high-altitude treatment in asthma have been attributed to allergen avoidance. Recent evidence shows that this treatment also improves airway inflammation in nonallergic patients. We hypothesised that high-altitude treatment is clinically equally effective in patients with severe refractory asthma, with or without allergic sensitisation. In a prospective observational cohort study, 137 adults with severe refractory asthma (92 with allergic sensitisation), referred for high-altitude (1,600 m) treatment in Davos, Switzerland, were consecutively included. We measured asthma control (Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)), asthma-related quality of life (Asthma-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ)), sino-nasal symptoms (Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20)), medication requirement, postbronchodilator (post-BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), 6-min walking distance (6MWD), total immunoglobulin (Ig)E, blood eosinophils and exhaled nitric oxide fraction (F(eNO)) at admission and after 12 weeks. Sensitised and nonsensitised patients showed similar improvements in ACQ (-1.4 and -1.5, respectively; p = 0.79), AQLQ (1.6 and 1.5, respectively; p = 0.94), SNOT-20 (-0.7 and -0.5, respectively; p = 0.18), post-BD FEV(1) (6.1% and 5.8% pred, respectively; p = 0.87), 6MWD (+125 m and +147 m, respectively; p = 0.43) and oral steroids (40% versus 44%, respectively; p = 0.51). Sensitised patients showed a larger decrease in total IgE, blood eosinophils and F(eNO). High-altitude treatment improves clinical and functional parameters, and decreases oral corticosteroid requirement in patients with severe refractory asthma, irrespective of allergic sensitisation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rijssenbeek‐Nouwens et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: