Asthma

Single maintenance and relief therapy (SMART) is underutilized in asthmatic children treated in primary care, a survey-based clinician study in Pediatrics found.

SMART uses a single inhaler combining an inhaled corticosteroid and formoterol, a rapid-acting bronchodilator. Patients use it for daily maintenance and as needed for symptom relief, which reduces flare-ups and simplifies treatment. Despite high awareness and acceptance of SMART’s efficacy and the American Academy of Pediatrics endorsement, primary care survey respondents reported that implementation of these single inhalers faces multiple roadblocks.

These barriers include insurance coverage, workflow constraints, lack of specific action plans, and resistance to switching from separate short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) therapy, according to investigators led by Allison A. King, MD, MPH, PhD, professor and Fred M. Saigh Distinguished Chair in Pediatric Research at WashU Medicine in St. Louis and director of the WashU Medicine Pediatric and Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium (WU PAARC).

“When I took on leadership of WU PAARC about 2 years ago, one of the first things we did was ask the community pediatricians in our network what they most needed to improve care in their own practices. SMART for asthma rose to the top of their list,” King told Medscape Medical News.

The clinical backdrop made it compelling since SMART reduces severe asthma exacerbations by about a third and is now recommended in US and international guidelines for children as young as 4 or 5, she said. “Yet most children with asthma are cared for in primary care, and we knew very little about whether and how SMART was actually being used there. We set out to understand the gap between strong evidence and everyday practice.”

The Study

Conducted during August and September 2025 among pediatric clinicians affiliated with the practice-based WU PAARC, the study invited 189 clinicians to participate. Of these, 52 responded (79% suburban practitioners), and 24 participated in semi-structured follow-up interviews.

“Our respondents skewed suburban and cared for relatively few Medicaid-insured children, so the findings may underrepresent clinicians in higher-Medicaid settings, where coverage and prior-authorization issues can play out differently,” said King. “That’s something we want to address directly in future work.”

While nearly all respondents reported routinely managing the core aspects of asthma treatment, including action plans, only 63% reported providing SMART-tailored action plans, which emerged as a key barrier across different care settings.

Two findings in particular caught the investigators’ attention: the relative absence of SMART-specific asthma action plans and the real difficulty of helping families let go of trusted SABA rescue inhalers, King said. “The pediatric context, where care is shared across parents, schools, and other caregivers, added a layer that adult studies simply do not capture.”

Offering her perspective on the study but involved in it, Santina J. Wheat, MD, MPH, physician in the Division of Family Medicine at Northwestern Medicine Delnor Hospital in Geneva, noted that while SMART is easier to use for families because there are fewer medications to worry about, the biggest barrier remains insurance approval.

“When SMART is used correctly, families run out of the medication more quickly than insurance will pay for it,” she told Medscape Medical News. Even when insurance does cover it, there are often prior authorizations associated with the medications that delay families in being able to get the medications, she said.

Standard coverage authorizations for the SMART inhalers would be helpful, said Wheat. “Additionally, we need the support of schools — training and education may be needed for the school nurses to support the children with these treatment plans.”

Single fixes will not do it, King agreed. “It takes a coordinated bundle.” On the clinician side, practical, hands-on support like practice facilitation, feedback, and brief educational outreach will help move people from belief into routine use.

On the system side, building SMART-specific asthma action plans directly into the electronic health records removes a recurring point of friction. “And because pediatric asthma care is distributed across families and schools, caregiver-facing education and clear school communication tools are essential to help everyone move away from automatic albuterol use.”

Fortunately, the appetite for change is already there. “Clinicians are not skeptical of the evidence,” King said. “This is an implementation challenge, not a debate about whether SMART works, and that is a hopeful place to start, because implementation problems are solvable with the right tools and support.”

Partnerships with professional societies are essential to moving this into national practice, King added. “SMART sits at the intersection of primary care, allergy, and pulmonology, so collaboration across those communities matters.”

This research was supported by the American Lung Association, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the Children’s Discovery Institute, a collaboration between the St. Louis Children’s Hospital, its foundation, and WashU Medicine.

King reported receiving funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), consulting for Evernorth, and royalties from UpToDate. Coauthor James G. Krings disclosed funding from the NIH, the American Lung Association, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and consulting fees or honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, including, among others, AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi-Regeneron (manufacturers of SMART inhalers), Aerogen, and Genentech/Roche. Aimes S. James reported receiving funding from the NIH and the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation. All other authors reported having no relevant financial disclosures. Wheat reported having no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Single maintenance and relief therapy (SMART) is underutilized in asthmatic children treated in primary care, a survey-based clinician study in Pediatrics found.

SMART uses a single inhaler combining an inhaled corticosteroid and formoterol, a rapid-acting bronchodilator. Patients use it for daily maintenance and as needed for symptom relief, which reduces flare-ups and simplifies treatment. Despite high awareness and acceptance of SMART’s efficacy and the American Academy of Pediatrics endorsement, primary care survey respondents reported that implementation of these single inhalers faces multiple roadblocks.

These barriers include insurance coverage, workflow constraints, lack of specific action plans, and resistance to switching from separate short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) therapy, according to investigators led by Allison A. King, MD, MPH, PhD, professor and Fred M. Saigh Distinguished Chair in Pediatric Research at WashU Medicine in St. Louis and director of the WashU Medicine Pediatric and Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium (WU PAARC).

“When I took on leadership of WU PAARC about 2 years ago, one of the first things we did was ask the community pediatricians in our network what they most needed to improve care in their own practices. SMART for asthma rose to the top of their list,” King told Medscape Medical News.

The clinical backdrop made it compelling since SMART reduces severe asthma exacerbations by about a third and is now recommended in US and international guidelines for children as young as 4 or 5, she said. “Yet most children with asthma are cared for in primary care, and we knew very little about whether and how SMART was actually being used there. We set out to understand the gap between strong evidence and everyday practice.”

The Study

Conducted during August and September 2025 among pediatric clinicians affiliated with the practice-based WU PAARC, the study invited 189 clinicians to participate. Of these, 52 responded (79% suburban practitioners), and 24 participated in semi-structured follow-up interviews.

“Our respondents skewed suburban and cared for relatively few Medicaid-insured children, so the findings may underrepresent clinicians in higher-Medicaid settings, where coverage and prior-authorization issues can play out differently,” said King. “That’s something we want to address directly in future work.”

While nearly all respondents reported routinely managing the core aspects of asthma treatment, including action plans, only 63% reported providing SMART-tailored action plans, which emerged as a key barrier across different care settings.

Two findings in particular caught the investigators’ attention: the relative absence of SMART-specific asthma action plans and the real difficulty of helping families let go of trusted SABA rescue inhalers, King said. “The pediatric context, where care is shared across parents, schools, and other caregivers, added a layer that adult studies simply do not capture.”

Offering her perspective on the study but involved in it, Santina J. Wheat, MD, MPH, physician in the Division of Family Medicine at Northwestern Medicine Delnor Hospital in Geneva, noted that while SMART is easier to use for families because there are fewer medications to worry about, the biggest barrier remains insurance approval.

“When SMART is used correctly, families run out of the medication more quickly than insurance will pay for it,” she told Medscape Medical News. Even when insurance does cover it, there are often prior authorizations associated with the medications that delay families in being able to get the medications, she said.

Standard coverage authorizations for the SMART inhalers would be helpful, said Wheat. “Additionally, we need the support of schools — training and education may be needed for the school nurses to support the children with these treatment plans.”

Single fixes will not do it, King agreed. “It takes a coordinated bundle.” On the clinician side, practical, hands-on support like practice facilitation, feedback, and brief educational outreach will help move people from belief into routine use.

On the system side, building SMART-specific asthma action plans directly into the electronic health records removes a recurring point of friction. “And because pediatric asthma care is distributed across families and schools, caregiver-facing education and clear school communication tools are essential to help everyone move away from automatic albuterol use.”

Fortunately, the appetite for change is already there. “Clinicians are not skeptical of the evidence,” King said. “This is an implementation challenge, not a debate about whether SMART works, and that is a hopeful place to start, because implementation problems are solvable with the right tools and support.”

Partnerships with professional societies are essential to moving this into national practice, King added. “SMART sits at the intersection of primary care, allergy, and pulmonology, so collaboration across those communities matters.”

This research was supported by the American Lung Association, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the Children’s Discovery Institute, a collaboration between the St. Louis Children’s Hospital, its foundation, and WashU Medicine.

King reported receiving funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), consulting for Evernorth, and royalties from UpToDate. Coauthor James G. Krings disclosed funding from the NIH, the American Lung Association, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and consulting fees or honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, including, among others, AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi-Regeneron (manufacturers of SMART inhalers), Aerogen, and Genentech/Roche. Aimes S. James reported receiving funding from the NIH and the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation. All other authors reported having no relevant financial disclosures. Wheat reported having no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Single maintenance and relief therapy (SMART) is underutilized in asthmatic children treated in primary care, a survey-based clinician study in Pediatrics found.

SMART uses a single inhaler combining an inhaled corticosteroid and formoterol, a rapid-acting bronchodilator. Patients use it for daily maintenance and as needed for symptom relief, which reduces flare-ups and simplifies treatment. Despite high awareness and acceptance of SMART’s efficacy and the American Academy of Pediatrics endorsement, primary care survey respondents reported that implementation of these single inhalers faces multiple roadblocks.

These barriers include insurance coverage, workflow constraints, lack of specific action plans, and resistance to switching from separate short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) therapy, according to investigators led by Allison A. King, MD, MPH, PhD, professor and Fred M. Saigh Distinguished Chair in Pediatric Research at WashU Medicine in St. Louis and director of the WashU Medicine Pediatric and Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium (WU PAARC).

“When I took on leadership of WU PAARC about 2 years ago, one of the first things we did was ask the community pediatricians in our network what they most needed to improve care in their own practices. SMART for asthma rose to the top of their list,” King told Medscape Medical News.

The clinical backdrop made it compelling since SMART reduces severe asthma exacerbations by about a third and is now recommended in US and international guidelines for children as young as 4 or 5, she said. “Yet most children with asthma are cared for in primary care, and we knew very little about whether and how SMART was actually being used there. We set out to understand the gap between strong evidence and everyday practice.”

The Study

Conducted during August and September 2025 among pediatric clinicians affiliated with the practice-based WU PAARC, the study invited 189 clinicians to participate. Of these, 52 responded (79% suburban practitioners), and 24 participated in semi-structured follow-up interviews.

“Our respondents skewed suburban and cared for relatively few Medicaid-insured children, so the findings may underrepresent clinicians in higher-Medicaid settings, where coverage and prior-authorization issues can play out differently,” said King. “That’s something we want to address directly in future work.”

While nearly all respondents reported routinely managing the core aspects of asthma treatment, including action plans, only 63% reported providing SMART-tailored action plans, which emerged as a key barrier across different care settings.

Two findings in particular caught the investigators’ attention: the relative absence of SMART-specific asthma action plans and the real difficulty of helping families let go of trusted SABA rescue inhalers, King said. “The pediatric context, where care is shared across parents, schools, and other caregivers, added a layer that adult studies simply do not capture.”

Offering her perspective on the study but involved in it, Santina J. Wheat, MD, MPH, physician in the Division of Family Medicine at Northwestern Medicine Delnor Hospital in Geneva, noted that while SMART is easier to use for families because there are fewer medications to worry about, the biggest barrier remains insurance approval.

“When SMART is used correctly, families run out of the medication more quickly than insurance will pay for it,” she told Medscape Medical News. Even when insurance does cover it, there are often prior authorizations associated with the medications that delay families in being able to get the medications, she said.

Standard coverage authorizations for the SMART inhalers would be helpful, said Wheat. “Additionally, we need the support of schools — training and education may be needed for the school nurses to support the children with these treatment plans.”

Single fixes will not do it, King agreed. “It takes a coordinated bundle.” On the clinician side, practical, hands-on support like practice facilitation, feedback, and brief educational outreach will help move people from belief into routine use.

On the system side, building SMART-specific asthma action plans directly into the electronic health records removes a recurring point of friction. “And because pediatric asthma care is distributed across families and schools, caregiver-facing education and clear school communication tools are essential to help everyone move away from automatic albuterol use.”

Fortunately, the appetite for change is already there. “Clinicians are not skeptical of the evidence,” King said. “This is an implementation challenge, not a debate about whether SMART works, and that is a hopeful place to start, because implementation problems are solvable with the right tools and support.”

Partnerships with professional societies are essential to moving this into national practice, King added. “SMART sits at the intersection of primary care, allergy, and pulmonology, so collaboration across those communities matters.”

This research was supported by the American Lung Association, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the Children’s Discovery Institute, a collaboration between the St. Louis Children’s Hospital, its foundation, and WashU Medicine.

King reported receiving funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), consulting for Evernorth, and royalties from UpToDate. Coauthor James G. Krings disclosed funding from the NIH, the American Lung Association, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and consulting fees or honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, including, among others, AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi-Regeneron (manufacturers of SMART inhalers), Aerogen, and Genentech/Roche. Aimes S. James reported receiving funding from the NIH and the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation. All other authors reported having no relevant financial disclosures. Wheat reported having no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A novel wearable wrist device was feasible and effective for identifying exposure to respiratory viruses in children with asthma, based on new data presented at the American Thoracic Society 2026 International Conference.

Upper respiratory infections are the main trigger of asthma exacerbations in children, and documented racial and ethnic disparities in upper respiratory infections likely contribute to similar disparities in asthma exacerbations, noted Darlene Bhavnani, PhD, MPH, of The University of Texas at Austin, et al in their abstract.

“Understanding differences in personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses in children with asthma may help to inform these differences in the risk of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

The researchers hypothesized that the use of a wearable passive air sampler could monitor respiratory virus exposure as a way to identify children at increased risk for asthma exacerbations.

Wrist devices to measure respiratory virus exposure are an emerging technology and have not been tested in children, the researchers noted. In their study, the researchers identified 25 children aged 6 to 17 years with persistent asthma who were enrolled in the TexHALE study. Participants were given a Fresh Air Clip to station in their homes and were asked to wear a wristband with a Fresh Air Clip for about 5 consecutive days. The median age of the participants was 12 years, and 64% were male.

At the end of the study period, families reported the number of days the wristband was worn, and the researchers used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction tests to quantify exposure to rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A, and influenza B.

A total of 24 clips and 24 wristbands were distributed; 23 clips and all 24 wristbands were recovered for analysis. A total of 22 participants (92%) wore the wristband over a median of 6 days. Overall, approximately one-third of the wristbands (33%) tested positive for any respiratory virus, defined as > 6 copies of viral RNA, with 5 positive tests for rhinovirus, 5 for influenza B, 2 for RSV, and none for influenza A. None of the stationary home-based clips tested positive for any respiratory virus.

The researchers were not sure what to expect from the study, as personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses has not been well studied in children, said Bhavnani.

“One third of the children in our pilot study were exposed to one or more upper respiratory viruses in their personal environments, which is a substantial portion of the population studied,” she noted. “Given that viral exposure is the first step in the pathway leading to a viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations, understanding differences in viral exposure could help us to learn more about how to prevent viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations in children with asthma,” she said.

The study was limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed. However, the finding the one-third of wristbands and zero stationary clips tested positive for upper respiratory viruses suggests that clips stationed in homes may not be optimal to detect household exposures, or and that exposure outside the home may be more important for monitoring exposure to respiratory viruses in this population, and the results support the feasibility of the devices, the researchers wrote.

“Fresh Air Clips in the form of wearables can be used to understand differences in personal viral exposure and to target interventions that ultimately, would reduce the burden of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

New Role for New Technology

“New technology now allows us to quantitate exposure to specific respiratory viruses on wearable and stationary devices,” said Tim Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

The current study findings suggest that the majority of the exposure to respiratory viruses occurs outside the home, said Joos, who was not involved in the study. Consequently, technology that can detect community exposure could be useful, although the role it may play in public health and clinical practice is yet to be determined, Joos said.

The wristbands and clips were easy to deploy and recover, which supports their value, and potential applications include testing the effectiveness of infection control strategies such as social distancing, masking, and isolation in lowering viral exposures, Joos noted.

The study received no outside funding but was supported by core funds from the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A novel wearable wrist device was feasible and effective for identifying exposure to respiratory viruses in children with asthma, based on new data presented at the American Thoracic Society 2026 International Conference.

Upper respiratory infections are the main trigger of asthma exacerbations in children, and documented racial and ethnic disparities in upper respiratory infections likely contribute to similar disparities in asthma exacerbations, noted Darlene Bhavnani, PhD, MPH, of The University of Texas at Austin, et al in their abstract.

“Understanding differences in personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses in children with asthma may help to inform these differences in the risk of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

The researchers hypothesized that the use of a wearable passive air sampler could monitor respiratory virus exposure as a way to identify children at increased risk for asthma exacerbations.

Wrist devices to measure respiratory virus exposure are an emerging technology and have not been tested in children, the researchers noted. In their study, the researchers identified 25 children aged 6 to 17 years with persistent asthma who were enrolled in the TexHALE study. Participants were given a Fresh Air Clip to station in their homes and were asked to wear a wristband with a Fresh Air Clip for about 5 consecutive days. The median age of the participants was 12 years, and 64% were male.

At the end of the study period, families reported the number of days the wristband was worn, and the researchers used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction tests to quantify exposure to rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A, and influenza B.

A total of 24 clips and 24 wristbands were distributed; 23 clips and all 24 wristbands were recovered for analysis. A total of 22 participants (92%) wore the wristband over a median of 6 days. Overall, approximately one-third of the wristbands (33%) tested positive for any respiratory virus, defined as > 6 copies of viral RNA, with 5 positive tests for rhinovirus, 5 for influenza B, 2 for RSV, and none for influenza A. None of the stationary home-based clips tested positive for any respiratory virus.

The researchers were not sure what to expect from the study, as personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses has not been well studied in children, said Bhavnani.

“One third of the children in our pilot study were exposed to one or more upper respiratory viruses in their personal environments, which is a substantial portion of the population studied,” she noted. “Given that viral exposure is the first step in the pathway leading to a viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations, understanding differences in viral exposure could help us to learn more about how to prevent viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations in children with asthma,” she said.

The study was limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed. However, the finding the one-third of wristbands and zero stationary clips tested positive for upper respiratory viruses suggests that clips stationed in homes may not be optimal to detect household exposures, or and that exposure outside the home may be more important for monitoring exposure to respiratory viruses in this population, and the results support the feasibility of the devices, the researchers wrote.

“Fresh Air Clips in the form of wearables can be used to understand differences in personal viral exposure and to target interventions that ultimately, would reduce the burden of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

New Role for New Technology

“New technology now allows us to quantitate exposure to specific respiratory viruses on wearable and stationary devices,” said Tim Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

The current study findings suggest that the majority of the exposure to respiratory viruses occurs outside the home, said Joos, who was not involved in the study. Consequently, technology that can detect community exposure could be useful, although the role it may play in public health and clinical practice is yet to be determined, Joos said.

The wristbands and clips were easy to deploy and recover, which supports their value, and potential applications include testing the effectiveness of infection control strategies such as social distancing, masking, and isolation in lowering viral exposures, Joos noted.

The study received no outside funding but was supported by core funds from the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A novel wearable wrist device was feasible and effective for identifying exposure to respiratory viruses in children with asthma, based on new data presented at the American Thoracic Society 2026 International Conference.

Upper respiratory infections are the main trigger of asthma exacerbations in children, and documented racial and ethnic disparities in upper respiratory infections likely contribute to similar disparities in asthma exacerbations, noted Darlene Bhavnani, PhD, MPH, of The University of Texas at Austin, et al in their abstract.

“Understanding differences in personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses in children with asthma may help to inform these differences in the risk of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

The researchers hypothesized that the use of a wearable passive air sampler could monitor respiratory virus exposure as a way to identify children at increased risk for asthma exacerbations.

Wrist devices to measure respiratory virus exposure are an emerging technology and have not been tested in children, the researchers noted. In their study, the researchers identified 25 children aged 6 to 17 years with persistent asthma who were enrolled in the TexHALE study. Participants were given a Fresh Air Clip to station in their homes and were asked to wear a wristband with a Fresh Air Clip for about 5 consecutive days. The median age of the participants was 12 years, and 64% were male.

At the end of the study period, families reported the number of days the wristband was worn, and the researchers used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction tests to quantify exposure to rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A, and influenza B.

A total of 24 clips and 24 wristbands were distributed; 23 clips and all 24 wristbands were recovered for analysis. A total of 22 participants (92%) wore the wristband over a median of 6 days. Overall, approximately one-third of the wristbands (33%) tested positive for any respiratory virus, defined as > 6 copies of viral RNA, with 5 positive tests for rhinovirus, 5 for influenza B, 2 for RSV, and none for influenza A. None of the stationary home-based clips tested positive for any respiratory virus.

The researchers were not sure what to expect from the study, as personal exposure to upper respiratory viruses has not been well studied in children, said Bhavnani.

“One third of the children in our pilot study were exposed to one or more upper respiratory viruses in their personal environments, which is a substantial portion of the population studied,” she noted. “Given that viral exposure is the first step in the pathway leading to a viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations, understanding differences in viral exposure could help us to learn more about how to prevent viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations in children with asthma,” she said.

The study was limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed. However, the finding the one-third of wristbands and zero stationary clips tested positive for upper respiratory viruses suggests that clips stationed in homes may not be optimal to detect household exposures, or and that exposure outside the home may be more important for monitoring exposure to respiratory viruses in this population, and the results support the feasibility of the devices, the researchers wrote.

“Fresh Air Clips in the form of wearables can be used to understand differences in personal viral exposure and to target interventions that ultimately, would reduce the burden of viral infection and viral-associated asthma exacerbations,” Bhavnani said.

New Role for New Technology

“New technology now allows us to quantitate exposure to specific respiratory viruses on wearable and stationary devices,” said Tim Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

The current study findings suggest that the majority of the exposure to respiratory viruses occurs outside the home, said Joos, who was not involved in the study. Consequently, technology that can detect community exposure could be useful, although the role it may play in public health and clinical practice is yet to be determined, Joos said.

The wristbands and clips were easy to deploy and recover, which supports their value, and potential applications include testing the effectiveness of infection control strategies such as social distancing, masking, and isolation in lowering viral exposures, Joos noted.

The study received no outside funding but was supported by core funds from the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Asthma biologics significantly improved lung function in children with asthma using race-based reference points, based on new data from 115 individuals.

Data on the effect of biologics on lung function in pediatric asthma are limited, and the main previous study of this relationship, the VOYAGE trial, was limited by its reliance on older, race-specific spirometry equations, according to Ken Wu, medical student at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

Newer, race-neutral reference equations prevent the systematic underestimation of asthma severity in Black patients and consequently provide a more accurate assessment of therapeutic benefits, said Wu. “Our study offers a novel contribution to the literature as the first known to utilize race-neutral equations to evaluate lung function following biologic therapy in a pediatric asthma population,” he said.

In a new study, presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference, the researchers conducted a real-world analysis with race-neutral reference equations developed by the Global Lung Function Initiative to assess the effect of biologics on lung function. They reviewed data from 115 pediatric patients with asthma who started biologics for the first time between 2015 and 2025. Their analysis included height, weight, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC ratios. The mean age of the patients was 11.4 years, 52% were male, and 62% were Black. A majority (97 patients) received dupilumab; 13 received omalizumab, and 5 received mepolizumab.

The analysis included an average of three spirometry measures 1 year before starting biologics and an average of four measures during the year after starting biologics.

Treatment with dupilumab was associated with a significant improvement in lung function, with an increase in the average FEV₁ from 86.4 percent-predicted prior to biologics to 91.7 after biologics (mean difference, 5.31; P = .044). No significant differences appeared among omalizumab or mepolizumab patients, likely because of the small numbers, the researchers noted.

Overall, in a linear mixed model adjusting for biologic type, FEV₁ remained significantly higher after use of biologics than in the period prior to use (97.9 vs. 92.5), with a mean difference of 5.37 (P = .039).

The primary finding that dupilumab improved the percent-predicted FEV₁ by 5.31 is considered a modest effect size and mainly aligns with previous research, said Wu. “We are currently in the process of conducting additional analysis of whether there is a difference in lung function when we use the older race-specific equations versus our current findings with the newer race-neutral equations,” he said.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small study population and inclusion of only 3 types of biologics, with samples of omalizumab and mepolizumab that were underpowered to detect differences in lung function, said Wu. Additional studies with larger sample sizes, more biologics (including benralizumab and tezepelumab), and longer follow-up periods are needed to compare benefits across agents, he said.

Promising Implications for Practice

The ATS has recommended abandoning the previous race-adjusted pulmonary function test norms, said Timothy Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

These norms assigned smaller lung volumes to Black and Asian individuals and tended to underestimate lung disease in these populations, said Joos, who was not involved in the new study.

The current study, though small, showed with race-neutral reference equations that biologic agents significantly improved FEV1 values in children with severe asthma, said Joos. The association was especially strong with dupilumab, used by 85% of the patients, he noted. However, additional studies are needed with larger patient populations and other biologic agents to confirm the results, he said.

The study was supported by the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute. The previous VOYAGE trial received funding from Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos reported having no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Asthma biologics significantly improved lung function in children with asthma using race-based reference points, based on new data from 115 individuals.

Data on the effect of biologics on lung function in pediatric asthma are limited, and the main previous study of this relationship, the VOYAGE trial, was limited by its reliance on older, race-specific spirometry equations, according to Ken Wu, medical student at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

Newer, race-neutral reference equations prevent the systematic underestimation of asthma severity in Black patients and consequently provide a more accurate assessment of therapeutic benefits, said Wu. “Our study offers a novel contribution to the literature as the first known to utilize race-neutral equations to evaluate lung function following biologic therapy in a pediatric asthma population,” he said.

In a new study, presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference, the researchers conducted a real-world analysis with race-neutral reference equations developed by the Global Lung Function Initiative to assess the effect of biologics on lung function. They reviewed data from 115 pediatric patients with asthma who started biologics for the first time between 2015 and 2025. Their analysis included height, weight, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC ratios. The mean age of the patients was 11.4 years, 52% were male, and 62% were Black. A majority (97 patients) received dupilumab; 13 received omalizumab, and 5 received mepolizumab.

The analysis included an average of three spirometry measures 1 year before starting biologics and an average of four measures during the year after starting biologics.

Treatment with dupilumab was associated with a significant improvement in lung function, with an increase in the average FEV₁ from 86.4 percent-predicted prior to biologics to 91.7 after biologics (mean difference, 5.31; P = .044). No significant differences appeared among omalizumab or mepolizumab patients, likely because of the small numbers, the researchers noted.

Overall, in a linear mixed model adjusting for biologic type, FEV₁ remained significantly higher after use of biologics than in the period prior to use (97.9 vs. 92.5), with a mean difference of 5.37 (P = .039).

The primary finding that dupilumab improved the percent-predicted FEV₁ by 5.31 is considered a modest effect size and mainly aligns with previous research, said Wu. “We are currently in the process of conducting additional analysis of whether there is a difference in lung function when we use the older race-specific equations versus our current findings with the newer race-neutral equations,” he said.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small study population and inclusion of only 3 types of biologics, with samples of omalizumab and mepolizumab that were underpowered to detect differences in lung function, said Wu. Additional studies with larger sample sizes, more biologics (including benralizumab and tezepelumab), and longer follow-up periods are needed to compare benefits across agents, he said.

Promising Implications for Practice

The ATS has recommended abandoning the previous race-adjusted pulmonary function test norms, said Timothy Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

These norms assigned smaller lung volumes to Black and Asian individuals and tended to underestimate lung disease in these populations, said Joos, who was not involved in the new study.

The current study, though small, showed with race-neutral reference equations that biologic agents significantly improved FEV1 values in children with severe asthma, said Joos. The association was especially strong with dupilumab, used by 85% of the patients, he noted. However, additional studies are needed with larger patient populations and other biologic agents to confirm the results, he said.

The study was supported by the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute. The previous VOYAGE trial received funding from Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos reported having no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Asthma biologics significantly improved lung function in children with asthma using race-based reference points, based on new data from 115 individuals.

Data on the effect of biologics on lung function in pediatric asthma are limited, and the main previous study of this relationship, the VOYAGE trial, was limited by its reliance on older, race-specific spirometry equations, according to Ken Wu, medical student at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis.

Newer, race-neutral reference equations prevent the systematic underestimation of asthma severity in Black patients and consequently provide a more accurate assessment of therapeutic benefits, said Wu. “Our study offers a novel contribution to the literature as the first known to utilize race-neutral equations to evaluate lung function following biologic therapy in a pediatric asthma population,” he said.

In a new study, presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference, the researchers conducted a real-world analysis with race-neutral reference equations developed by the Global Lung Function Initiative to assess the effect of biologics on lung function. They reviewed data from 115 pediatric patients with asthma who started biologics for the first time between 2015 and 2025. Their analysis included height, weight, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC ratios. The mean age of the patients was 11.4 years, 52% were male, and 62% were Black. A majority (97 patients) received dupilumab; 13 received omalizumab, and 5 received mepolizumab.

The analysis included an average of three spirometry measures 1 year before starting biologics and an average of four measures during the year after starting biologics.

Treatment with dupilumab was associated with a significant improvement in lung function, with an increase in the average FEV₁ from 86.4 percent-predicted prior to biologics to 91.7 after biologics (mean difference, 5.31; P = .044). No significant differences appeared among omalizumab or mepolizumab patients, likely because of the small numbers, the researchers noted.

Overall, in a linear mixed model adjusting for biologic type, FEV₁ remained significantly higher after use of biologics than in the period prior to use (97.9 vs. 92.5), with a mean difference of 5.37 (P = .039).

The primary finding that dupilumab improved the percent-predicted FEV₁ by 5.31 is considered a modest effect size and mainly aligns with previous research, said Wu. “We are currently in the process of conducting additional analysis of whether there is a difference in lung function when we use the older race-specific equations versus our current findings with the newer race-neutral equations,” he said.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small study population and inclusion of only 3 types of biologics, with samples of omalizumab and mepolizumab that were underpowered to detect differences in lung function, said Wu. Additional studies with larger sample sizes, more biologics (including benralizumab and tezepelumab), and longer follow-up periods are needed to compare benefits across agents, he said.

Promising Implications for Practice

The ATS has recommended abandoning the previous race-adjusted pulmonary function test norms, said Timothy Joos, MD, who practices internal medicine and pediatrics at a community health center in Seattle.

These norms assigned smaller lung volumes to Black and Asian individuals and tended to underestimate lung disease in these populations, said Joos, who was not involved in the new study.

The current study, though small, showed with race-neutral reference equations that biologic agents significantly improved FEV1 values in children with severe asthma, said Joos. The association was especially strong with dupilumab, used by 85% of the patients, he noted. However, additional studies are needed with larger patient populations and other biologic agents to confirm the results, he said.

The study was supported by the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute. The previous VOYAGE trial received funding from Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no financial conflicts to disclose. Joos reported having no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Higher baseline counts of blood eosinophils (EOS) were associated with an increased risk for exacerbations in patients with asthma over 1 year, and higher baseline levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only oral corticosteroids (OCS) in asthma and asthma plus chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but linked to a decreased risk for all exacerbations in COPD.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data from the multinational NOVELTY study to assess whether blood EOS counts and FeNO levels, alone and together, predict the risk for future exacerbations in patients with asthma, COPD, or both.
• Overall, 4319 patients were included in the EOS analysis (2138 with asthma, 1541 with COPD, and 640 with asthma plus COPD), and 7770 patients were included in the FeNO analysis (4166 with asthma, 2588 with COPD, and 1016 with asthma plus COPD).
• Baseline data included demographics, treatments, exacerbations, and lung function (spirometry and FeNO levels).
• Outcomes were assessed over the first year of follow‑up, and patients received usual care from their treating physicians.
• Exacerbation subtypes were categorized as all exacerbations, exacerbations treated with only antibiotics, and exacerbations treated with only OCS.

TAKEAWAY:

• Higher EOS counts at baseline were associated with an increased risk for all exacerbations in asthma (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; P = .033), meaning each doubling of the count corresponded to a 9% higher exacerbation rate; a similar trend of higher risk was seen in COPD that did not reach statistical significance.
• Higher FeNO levels at baseline were associated with a lower risk for all exacerbations in COPD (IRR, 0.91; P = .025). In asthma, FeNO levels showed no association with an overall risk for exacerbations; in asthma plus COPD, neither biomarker predicted the overall risk.
• In asthma, higher FeNO levels at baseline were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.16) but decreased odds of exacerbations treated with only antibiotics (OR, 0.75); in asthma plus COPD, higher FeNO levels were also linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (OR, 1.55; P < .05 for all).
• In an analysis including both biomarkers, higher EOS counts at baseline independently predicted all exacerbations in asthma; however, both higher EOS counts and lower FeNO levels were independently associated with a higher risk for all exacerbations in COPD (P < .05 for all).

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] finding is of importance for future studies and daily clinical practice as it indicates that assessment of exacerbation subtype might improve personalized treatment management,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Susan Muiser, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands. It was published online on April 21, 2026, in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

Diagnoses were assigned by treating physicians without standardized diagnostic criteria. Physicians had access to type 2 inflammation biomarker results, which may have influenced treatment decisions. Exacerbation subtypes were categorized using medical records and patient-reported information, introducing a potential recall bias.

DISCLOSURES:

The NOVELTY study was funded by AstraZeneca. Four authors reported being employees of AstraZeneca, with 2 of them also being shareholders. Several authors disclosed receiving travel grants, research grants, consulting fees, honoraria, and support to attend meetings; serving on advisory boards; and holding stock or stock options with multiple pharmaceutical companies and organizations, including AstraZeneca and WebMD Global.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Higher baseline counts of blood eosinophils (EOS) were associated with an increased risk for exacerbations in patients with asthma over 1 year, and higher baseline levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only oral corticosteroids (OCS) in asthma and asthma plus chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but linked to a decreased risk for all exacerbations in COPD.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data from the multinational NOVELTY study to assess whether blood EOS counts and FeNO levels, alone and together, predict the risk for future exacerbations in patients with asthma, COPD, or both.
• Overall, 4319 patients were included in the EOS analysis (2138 with asthma, 1541 with COPD, and 640 with asthma plus COPD), and 7770 patients were included in the FeNO analysis (4166 with asthma, 2588 with COPD, and 1016 with asthma plus COPD).
• Baseline data included demographics, treatments, exacerbations, and lung function (spirometry and FeNO levels).
• Outcomes were assessed over the first year of follow‑up, and patients received usual care from their treating physicians.
• Exacerbation subtypes were categorized as all exacerbations, exacerbations treated with only antibiotics, and exacerbations treated with only OCS.

TAKEAWAY:

• Higher EOS counts at baseline were associated with an increased risk for all exacerbations in asthma (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; P = .033), meaning each doubling of the count corresponded to a 9% higher exacerbation rate; a similar trend of higher risk was seen in COPD that did not reach statistical significance.
• Higher FeNO levels at baseline were associated with a lower risk for all exacerbations in COPD (IRR, 0.91; P = .025). In asthma, FeNO levels showed no association with an overall risk for exacerbations; in asthma plus COPD, neither biomarker predicted the overall risk.
• In asthma, higher FeNO levels at baseline were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.16) but decreased odds of exacerbations treated with only antibiotics (OR, 0.75); in asthma plus COPD, higher FeNO levels were also linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (OR, 1.55; P < .05 for all).
• In an analysis including both biomarkers, higher EOS counts at baseline independently predicted all exacerbations in asthma; however, both higher EOS counts and lower FeNO levels were independently associated with a higher risk for all exacerbations in COPD (P < .05 for all).

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] finding is of importance for future studies and daily clinical practice as it indicates that assessment of exacerbation subtype might improve personalized treatment management,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Susan Muiser, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands. It was published online on April 21, 2026, in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

Diagnoses were assigned by treating physicians without standardized diagnostic criteria. Physicians had access to type 2 inflammation biomarker results, which may have influenced treatment decisions. Exacerbation subtypes were categorized using medical records and patient-reported information, introducing a potential recall bias.

DISCLOSURES:

The NOVELTY study was funded by AstraZeneca. Four authors reported being employees of AstraZeneca, with 2 of them also being shareholders. Several authors disclosed receiving travel grants, research grants, consulting fees, honoraria, and support to attend meetings; serving on advisory boards; and holding stock or stock options with multiple pharmaceutical companies and organizations, including AstraZeneca and WebMD Global.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Higher baseline counts of blood eosinophils (EOS) were associated with an increased risk for exacerbations in patients with asthma over 1 year, and higher baseline levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only oral corticosteroids (OCS) in asthma and asthma plus chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but linked to a decreased risk for all exacerbations in COPD.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data from the multinational NOVELTY study to assess whether blood EOS counts and FeNO levels, alone and together, predict the risk for future exacerbations in patients with asthma, COPD, or both.
• Overall, 4319 patients were included in the EOS analysis (2138 with asthma, 1541 with COPD, and 640 with asthma plus COPD), and 7770 patients were included in the FeNO analysis (4166 with asthma, 2588 with COPD, and 1016 with asthma plus COPD).
• Baseline data included demographics, treatments, exacerbations, and lung function (spirometry and FeNO levels).
• Outcomes were assessed over the first year of follow‑up, and patients received usual care from their treating physicians.
• Exacerbation subtypes were categorized as all exacerbations, exacerbations treated with only antibiotics, and exacerbations treated with only OCS.

TAKEAWAY:

• Higher EOS counts at baseline were associated with an increased risk for all exacerbations in asthma (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.09; P = .033), meaning each doubling of the count corresponded to a 9% higher exacerbation rate; a similar trend of higher risk was seen in COPD that did not reach statistical significance.
• Higher FeNO levels at baseline were associated with a lower risk for all exacerbations in COPD (IRR, 0.91; P = .025). In asthma, FeNO levels showed no association with an overall risk for exacerbations; in asthma plus COPD, neither biomarker predicted the overall risk.
• In asthma, higher FeNO levels at baseline were linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.16) but decreased odds of exacerbations treated with only antibiotics (OR, 0.75); in asthma plus COPD, higher FeNO levels were also linked to increased odds of exacerbations treated with only OCS (OR, 1.55; P < .05 for all).
• In an analysis including both biomarkers, higher EOS counts at baseline independently predicted all exacerbations in asthma; however, both higher EOS counts and lower FeNO levels were independently associated with a higher risk for all exacerbations in COPD (P < .05 for all).

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] finding is of importance for future studies and daily clinical practice as it indicates that assessment of exacerbation subtype might improve personalized treatment management,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Susan Muiser, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands. It was published online on April 21, 2026, in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

Diagnoses were assigned by treating physicians without standardized diagnostic criteria. Physicians had access to type 2 inflammation biomarker results, which may have influenced treatment decisions. Exacerbation subtypes were categorized using medical records and patient-reported information, introducing a potential recall bias.

DISCLOSURES:

The NOVELTY study was funded by AstraZeneca. Four authors reported being employees of AstraZeneca, with 2 of them also being shareholders. Several authors disclosed receiving travel grants, research grants, consulting fees, honoraria, and support to attend meetings; serving on advisory boards; and holding stock or stock options with multiple pharmaceutical companies and organizations, including AstraZeneca and WebMD Global.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Mild asthma is not benign. Underdiagnosis in children exposes them to preventable morbidity — including impaired lung growth that can lead to fixed airway obstruction and a higher lifetime risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as well as severe exacerbations and increased need for systemic corticosteroids. Experts at the 21st Francophone Allergy Congress 2026 said preserving respiratory function depends on early diagnosis and disease control.

Mild asthma is retrospectively defined as the level of treatment required to achieve and maintain disease control. It corresponds to asthma controlled with a low dose of inhaled corticosteroids or with a combination of inhaled corticosteroids and formoterol as needed (Global Initiative for Asthma(GINA)/French Society of Pediatric Pulmonology and Allergology, steps 1-2).

Mélisande Bourgoin-Heck, MD, PhD, Department of Pediatric Allergology, Armand Trousseau University Hospital, Sorbonne University, AP-HP, Paris, France, emphasized a fundamental distinction: “While control is based on symptoms, exacerbations, activity limitations, and quality of life, severity corresponds to the level of treatment required to achieve this control. The term mild therefore depends on the treatment required and not solely on the frequency or intensity of symptoms.”

How to Identify It?

Clinically, asthma most often presents with wheezing, cough, shortness of breath, and chest tightness, with symptoms that fluctuate in frequency and severity. Nighttime symptoms are common. Symptoms often start or worsen with viral infections, physical exertion (including after exercise), laughter, or exposure to allergens or cold air. “Symptoms are often dismissed as minor and intermittent,” the pediatrician said, “which leads to delayed diagnosis.”

That’s why recognizing risk factors is important because they help guide diagnosis: male sex, a first-degree family history of asthma, exposure to secondhand smoke, prematurity, maternal obesity, living in group settings or having school-aged siblings which raise the risk for early infections, a history of severe bronchiolitis, and an atopic tendency, demonstrated by atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, or sensitization to food and respiratory allergens.

How Much Should We Trust Predictive Scores?

Several clinical scores for predicting asthma exist, notably the Asthma Predictive Index, the modified Asthma Predictive Index, and the Pediatric Asthma Risk Score; the latter demonstrates better overall discrimination, making it useful for children at low-to-moderate risk.

“These scores place significant emphasis on the atopic predisposition,” noted Bourgoin-Heck, “including allergic sensitivities, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. Their performance varies by age and clinical phenotype. They are highly specific for the diagnosis of allergic asthma, with a positive score associated with a high risk of asthma. However, their sensitivity is not up to par: A negative score does not rule out the diagnosis, leading to a risk of overlooking nonallergic forms.”

A chest x-ray is used to rule out differential diagnoses. It may be normal or reveal chest distension or bronchial signs. During follow-up, it is only recommended in cases of fever or severe illness to look for complications such as bronchopulmonary superinfection, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and ventilation disorders/atelectasis.

Normal Spirometry: Could Asthma Really be Ruled Out?

Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) may be normal and do not rule out asthma. Spirometry can be performed around age 6 years and is often normal. “The reversibility test is a diagnostic indicator but may be negative in cases of normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁),” warned the specialist.

Provocation tests are useful in cases of doubt.

In children unable to perform a forced exhalation, spirometry is impossible or unreliable, which justifies the use of respiratory resistance measurements (starting at age 3). Several methods are then used: flow-interruption resistance (FIR) identifies bronchial obstruction with an expiratory FIR > 2 Z scores (how many SDs a result is from the predicted value for a child’s age/height/sex). Oscillometry, suitable for young children, is considered pathologic for values exceeding 150% of the predicted value. Plethysmography indicates obstruction with a Raw value > 150% of the predicted value or an sRaw value > 180%.

Interpretation is based on standards adapted to the technique and the study population, with thresholds varying by method (threshold values for PFTs, page e4).

When in Doubt, How Useful Are Biomarkers?

As a biomarker of atopy, a blood eosinophil count of at least 150/mm³ is associated with asthma symptoms and exacerbations. Specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE) indicates allergic sensitization associated with asthma. Finally, elevated fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (> 20-25 parts per billion depending on age) is associated with wheezing, corticosteroid use, and persistent asthma. The combination of atopy markers — including maternal allergy, eczema, wheezing, positive specific IgE levels, and eosinophilia — significantly increases the likelihood of asthma.

“However, when diagnostic uncertainty persists in a child younger than 5 years (absence of atopy; normal PFTs — which is common), a trial of treatment based on initial symptoms may be recommended according to GINA 2025 (Box 10-2),” explained Bourgoin-Heck.

In the presence of mild and intermittent symptoms, a short-acting bronchodilator challenge test on demand is indicated for a maximum duration of 2-3 months. This strategy applies to infrequent wheezing episodes, without the need for emergency care and therefore without any severe exacerbations, with symptoms occurring twice or less per week. Treatment consists of administering two puffs when symptoms occur (to be repeated as needed), with an assessment of improvement within 20-60 minutes. In cases of a history of a severe wheezing episode within the past year (systemic corticosteroids, emergency department visit, and hospitalization) or symptoms more than twice a week, the therapeutic trial involves long-term inhaled corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone 100 µg/d to 250 µg/d) combined with a short-acting bronchodilator as needed for 2-3 months. If the response is favorable, treatment is adjusted to the minimum effective dose.

Monitoring of clinical progress relies on asthma control scores such as the Asthma Control Test, considering both parental perception and the child’s self-assessment. Because the goal in mild asthma is indeed to achieve complete control.

Mild Asthma: Behind the Triviality, Real Risks

Mild childhood asthma is the most common form of asthma. It is by no means benign and carries a risk for exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids and potential long-term consequences.

Asthma is often missed — an estimated 20% of children age ≥ 6 years to 70% by age 1 year are not identified — and therefore go untreated, leading to a lower quality of life from attacks and persistent symptoms between episodes that could limit activity and disrupt sleep.

Even seemingly mild asthma is associated with a risk for severe exacerbation, including in patients with infrequent and mild symptoms.

There is also impaired lung growth, with a decrease in peak lung function and the potential for progression to fixed bronchial obstruction, which can lead to COPD. However, it has been shown that early treatment reduces chronic inflammation, limits bronchial remodeling, and prevents the decline in lung function.

In a Danish neonatal cohort 9125 infants, were followed at 1, 3, and 6 years of age and analyzed at 50 years of age via the Danish COPD patient registry, early asthma symptoms were associated with a decrease in FEV1 (-3.36%) and the FEV1/ Forced Vital Capacity ratio (-1.28), as well as an increased risk for a COPD diagnosis in adulthood (odds ratio [OR], 1.96).

Epidemiologic data confirm this: A history of asthma increases the risk of developing COPD by 10-30 times, and a reduced peak FEV1 in early adulthood is associated with an increased risk for early‑onset COPD and greater severity.

“Asthma is associated with a decline in lung function that can begin as early as infancy,” noted the pediatrician, “or even during the prenatal period, persists throughout childhood, continues into adulthood, and predisposes individuals to established bronchial obstruction.”

Early Inhaled Corticosteroids Reduced Exacerbations

In the inhaled steroid treatment as regular therapy in early asthma trial, which enrolled about 7000 adults and children and included a subgroup of 1900 children aged < 11 years with recent-onset mild asthma, inhaled budesonide was compared with placebo. Over 3 years of follow-up, the placebo group showed poorer lung function, whereas those treated with budesonide had improved FEV1 and about a 40% reduction in severe exacerbations. A partial functional “catch-up” was observed when treatment was initiated in the third year.

However, the study does not allow for conclusions regarding the very long-term prevention of functional decline, due to the lack of sufficient follow-up time.

Delayed Treatment Increases Risks

Furthermore, delayed treatment is associated with an increased use of short-acting bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroids, carrying a risk for complications. The specialist warned: “Adverse effects appear after just a few courses of oral corticosteroids, notably an increased risk of fractures (odds ratio, 2.15 for low doses of prednisolone < 70 mg; OR, 3.09 for higher doses > 70 mg). These risks are real and emerge quickly.”

Another study confirms the adverse effects of oral corticosteroid therapy: A cumulative dose of 500 mg to 1000 mg (approximately four to five courses of systemic corticosteroids over a lifetime) already increases the risk. Complications include osteoporosis, diabetes, cataracts, heart failure, and pneumonia. “Cumulative exposure, even intermittent, is associated with increased morbidity, which can be prevented through appropriate management of mild asthma,” she added. “Yet it has been clearly demonstrated that inhaled therapy reduces the need for oral corticosteroids.”

This story was translated from Medscape’s French edition.

A version of this story first appeared on Medscape.com.

Mild asthma is not benign. Underdiagnosis in children exposes them to preventable morbidity — including impaired lung growth that can lead to fixed airway obstruction and a higher lifetime risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as well as severe exacerbations and increased need for systemic corticosteroids. Experts at the 21st Francophone Allergy Congress 2026 said preserving respiratory function depends on early diagnosis and disease control.

Mild asthma is retrospectively defined as the level of treatment required to achieve and maintain disease control. It corresponds to asthma controlled with a low dose of inhaled corticosteroids or with a combination of inhaled corticosteroids and formoterol as needed (Global Initiative for Asthma(GINA)/French Society of Pediatric Pulmonology and Allergology, steps 1-2).

Mélisande Bourgoin-Heck, MD, PhD, Department of Pediatric Allergology, Armand Trousseau University Hospital, Sorbonne University, AP-HP, Paris, France, emphasized a fundamental distinction: “While control is based on symptoms, exacerbations, activity limitations, and quality of life, severity corresponds to the level of treatment required to achieve this control. The term mild therefore depends on the treatment required and not solely on the frequency or intensity of symptoms.”

How to Identify It?

Clinically, asthma most often presents with wheezing, cough, shortness of breath, and chest tightness, with symptoms that fluctuate in frequency and severity. Nighttime symptoms are common. Symptoms often start or worsen with viral infections, physical exertion (including after exercise), laughter, or exposure to allergens or cold air. “Symptoms are often dismissed as minor and intermittent,” the pediatrician said, “which leads to delayed diagnosis.”

That’s why recognizing risk factors is important because they help guide diagnosis: male sex, a first-degree family history of asthma, exposure to secondhand smoke, prematurity, maternal obesity, living in group settings or having school-aged siblings which raise the risk for early infections, a history of severe bronchiolitis, and an atopic tendency, demonstrated by atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, or sensitization to food and respiratory allergens.

How Much Should We Trust Predictive Scores?

Several clinical scores for predicting asthma exist, notably the Asthma Predictive Index, the modified Asthma Predictive Index, and the Pediatric Asthma Risk Score; the latter demonstrates better overall discrimination, making it useful for children at low-to-moderate risk.

“These scores place significant emphasis on the atopic predisposition,” noted Bourgoin-Heck, “including allergic sensitivities, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. Their performance varies by age and clinical phenotype. They are highly specific for the diagnosis of allergic asthma, with a positive score associated with a high risk of asthma. However, their sensitivity is not up to par: A negative score does not rule out the diagnosis, leading to a risk of overlooking nonallergic forms.”

A chest x-ray is used to rule out differential diagnoses. It may be normal or reveal chest distension or bronchial signs. During follow-up, it is only recommended in cases of fever or severe illness to look for complications such as bronchopulmonary superinfection, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and ventilation disorders/atelectasis.

Normal Spirometry: Could Asthma Really be Ruled Out?

Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) may be normal and do not rule out asthma. Spirometry can be performed around age 6 years and is often normal. “The reversibility test is a diagnostic indicator but may be negative in cases of normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁),” warned the specialist.

Provocation tests are useful in cases of doubt.

In children unable to perform a forced exhalation, spirometry is impossible or unreliable, which justifies the use of respiratory resistance measurements (starting at age 3). Several methods are then used: flow-interruption resistance (FIR) identifies bronchial obstruction with an expiratory FIR > 2 Z scores (how many SDs a result is from the predicted value for a child’s age/height/sex). Oscillometry, suitable for young children, is considered pathologic for values exceeding 150% of the predicted value. Plethysmography indicates obstruction with a Raw value > 150% of the predicted value or an sRaw value > 180%.

Interpretation is based on standards adapted to the technique and the study population, with thresholds varying by method (threshold values for PFTs, page e4).

When in Doubt, How Useful Are Biomarkers?

As a biomarker of atopy, a blood eosinophil count of at least 150/mm³ is associated with asthma symptoms and exacerbations. Specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE) indicates allergic sensitization associated with asthma. Finally, elevated fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (> 20-25 parts per billion depending on age) is associated with wheezing, corticosteroid use, and persistent asthma. The combination of atopy markers — including maternal allergy, eczema, wheezing, positive specific IgE levels, and eosinophilia — significantly increases the likelihood of asthma.

“However, when diagnostic uncertainty persists in a child younger than 5 years (absence of atopy; normal PFTs — which is common), a trial of treatment based on initial symptoms may be recommended according to GINA 2025 (Box 10-2),” explained Bourgoin-Heck.

In the presence of mild and intermittent symptoms, a short-acting bronchodilator challenge test on demand is indicated for a maximum duration of 2-3 months. This strategy applies to infrequent wheezing episodes, without the need for emergency care and therefore without any severe exacerbations, with symptoms occurring twice or less per week. Treatment consists of administering two puffs when symptoms occur (to be repeated as needed), with an assessment of improvement within 20-60 minutes. In cases of a history of a severe wheezing episode within the past year (systemic corticosteroids, emergency department visit, and hospitalization) or symptoms more than twice a week, the therapeutic trial involves long-term inhaled corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone 100 µg/d to 250 µg/d) combined with a short-acting bronchodilator as needed for 2-3 months. If the response is favorable, treatment is adjusted to the minimum effective dose.

Monitoring of clinical progress relies on asthma control scores such as the Asthma Control Test, considering both parental perception and the child’s self-assessment. Because the goal in mild asthma is indeed to achieve complete control.

Mild Asthma: Behind the Triviality, Real Risks

Mild childhood asthma is the most common form of asthma. It is by no means benign and carries a risk for exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids and potential long-term consequences.

Asthma is often missed — an estimated 20% of children age ≥ 6 years to 70% by age 1 year are not identified — and therefore go untreated, leading to a lower quality of life from attacks and persistent symptoms between episodes that could limit activity and disrupt sleep.

Even seemingly mild asthma is associated with a risk for severe exacerbation, including in patients with infrequent and mild symptoms.

There is also impaired lung growth, with a decrease in peak lung function and the potential for progression to fixed bronchial obstruction, which can lead to COPD. However, it has been shown that early treatment reduces chronic inflammation, limits bronchial remodeling, and prevents the decline in lung function.

In a Danish neonatal cohort 9125 infants, were followed at 1, 3, and 6 years of age and analyzed at 50 years of age via the Danish COPD patient registry, early asthma symptoms were associated with a decrease in FEV1 (-3.36%) and the FEV1/ Forced Vital Capacity ratio (-1.28), as well as an increased risk for a COPD diagnosis in adulthood (odds ratio [OR], 1.96).

Epidemiologic data confirm this: A history of asthma increases the risk of developing COPD by 10-30 times, and a reduced peak FEV1 in early adulthood is associated with an increased risk for early‑onset COPD and greater severity.

“Asthma is associated with a decline in lung function that can begin as early as infancy,” noted the pediatrician, “or even during the prenatal period, persists throughout childhood, continues into adulthood, and predisposes individuals to established bronchial obstruction.”

Early Inhaled Corticosteroids Reduced Exacerbations

In the inhaled steroid treatment as regular therapy in early asthma trial, which enrolled about 7000 adults and children and included a subgroup of 1900 children aged < 11 years with recent-onset mild asthma, inhaled budesonide was compared with placebo. Over 3 years of follow-up, the placebo group showed poorer lung function, whereas those treated with budesonide had improved FEV1 and about a 40% reduction in severe exacerbations. A partial functional “catch-up” was observed when treatment was initiated in the third year.

However, the study does not allow for conclusions regarding the very long-term prevention of functional decline, due to the lack of sufficient follow-up time.

Delayed Treatment Increases Risks

Furthermore, delayed treatment is associated with an increased use of short-acting bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroids, carrying a risk for complications. The specialist warned: “Adverse effects appear after just a few courses of oral corticosteroids, notably an increased risk of fractures (odds ratio, 2.15 for low doses of prednisolone < 70 mg; OR, 3.09 for higher doses > 70 mg). These risks are real and emerge quickly.”

Another study confirms the adverse effects of oral corticosteroid therapy: A cumulative dose of 500 mg to 1000 mg (approximately four to five courses of systemic corticosteroids over a lifetime) already increases the risk. Complications include osteoporosis, diabetes, cataracts, heart failure, and pneumonia. “Cumulative exposure, even intermittent, is associated with increased morbidity, which can be prevented through appropriate management of mild asthma,” she added. “Yet it has been clearly demonstrated that inhaled therapy reduces the need for oral corticosteroids.”

This story was translated from Medscape’s French edition.

A version of this story first appeared on Medscape.com.

Mild asthma is not benign. Underdiagnosis in children exposes them to preventable morbidity — including impaired lung growth that can lead to fixed airway obstruction and a higher lifetime risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as well as severe exacerbations and increased need for systemic corticosteroids. Experts at the 21st Francophone Allergy Congress 2026 said preserving respiratory function depends on early diagnosis and disease control.

Mild asthma is retrospectively defined as the level of treatment required to achieve and maintain disease control. It corresponds to asthma controlled with a low dose of inhaled corticosteroids or with a combination of inhaled corticosteroids and formoterol as needed (Global Initiative for Asthma(GINA)/French Society of Pediatric Pulmonology and Allergology, steps 1-2).

Mélisande Bourgoin-Heck, MD, PhD, Department of Pediatric Allergology, Armand Trousseau University Hospital, Sorbonne University, AP-HP, Paris, France, emphasized a fundamental distinction: “While control is based on symptoms, exacerbations, activity limitations, and quality of life, severity corresponds to the level of treatment required to achieve this control. The term mild therefore depends on the treatment required and not solely on the frequency or intensity of symptoms.”

How to Identify It?

Clinically, asthma most often presents with wheezing, cough, shortness of breath, and chest tightness, with symptoms that fluctuate in frequency and severity. Nighttime symptoms are common. Symptoms often start or worsen with viral infections, physical exertion (including after exercise), laughter, or exposure to allergens or cold air. “Symptoms are often dismissed as minor and intermittent,” the pediatrician said, “which leads to delayed diagnosis.”

That’s why recognizing risk factors is important because they help guide diagnosis: male sex, a first-degree family history of asthma, exposure to secondhand smoke, prematurity, maternal obesity, living in group settings or having school-aged siblings which raise the risk for early infections, a history of severe bronchiolitis, and an atopic tendency, demonstrated by atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, or sensitization to food and respiratory allergens.

How Much Should We Trust Predictive Scores?

Several clinical scores for predicting asthma exist, notably the Asthma Predictive Index, the modified Asthma Predictive Index, and the Pediatric Asthma Risk Score; the latter demonstrates better overall discrimination, making it useful for children at low-to-moderate risk.

“These scores place significant emphasis on the atopic predisposition,” noted Bourgoin-Heck, “including allergic sensitivities, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. Their performance varies by age and clinical phenotype. They are highly specific for the diagnosis of allergic asthma, with a positive score associated with a high risk of asthma. However, their sensitivity is not up to par: A negative score does not rule out the diagnosis, leading to a risk of overlooking nonallergic forms.”

A chest x-ray is used to rule out differential diagnoses. It may be normal or reveal chest distension or bronchial signs. During follow-up, it is only recommended in cases of fever or severe illness to look for complications such as bronchopulmonary superinfection, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and ventilation disorders/atelectasis.

Normal Spirometry: Could Asthma Really be Ruled Out?

Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) may be normal and do not rule out asthma. Spirometry can be performed around age 6 years and is often normal. “The reversibility test is a diagnostic indicator but may be negative in cases of normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁),” warned the specialist.

Provocation tests are useful in cases of doubt.

In children unable to perform a forced exhalation, spirometry is impossible or unreliable, which justifies the use of respiratory resistance measurements (starting at age 3). Several methods are then used: flow-interruption resistance (FIR) identifies bronchial obstruction with an expiratory FIR > 2 Z scores (how many SDs a result is from the predicted value for a child’s age/height/sex). Oscillometry, suitable for young children, is considered pathologic for values exceeding 150% of the predicted value. Plethysmography indicates obstruction with a Raw value > 150% of the predicted value or an sRaw value > 180%.

Interpretation is based on standards adapted to the technique and the study population, with thresholds varying by method (threshold values for PFTs, page e4).

When in Doubt, How Useful Are Biomarkers?

As a biomarker of atopy, a blood eosinophil count of at least 150/mm³ is associated with asthma symptoms and exacerbations. Specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE) indicates allergic sensitization associated with asthma. Finally, elevated fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (> 20-25 parts per billion depending on age) is associated with wheezing, corticosteroid use, and persistent asthma. The combination of atopy markers — including maternal allergy, eczema, wheezing, positive specific IgE levels, and eosinophilia — significantly increases the likelihood of asthma.

“However, when diagnostic uncertainty persists in a child younger than 5 years (absence of atopy; normal PFTs — which is common), a trial of treatment based on initial symptoms may be recommended according to GINA 2025 (Box 10-2),” explained Bourgoin-Heck.

In the presence of mild and intermittent symptoms, a short-acting bronchodilator challenge test on demand is indicated for a maximum duration of 2-3 months. This strategy applies to infrequent wheezing episodes, without the need for emergency care and therefore without any severe exacerbations, with symptoms occurring twice or less per week. Treatment consists of administering two puffs when symptoms occur (to be repeated as needed), with an assessment of improvement within 20-60 minutes. In cases of a history of a severe wheezing episode within the past year (systemic corticosteroids, emergency department visit, and hospitalization) or symptoms more than twice a week, the therapeutic trial involves long-term inhaled corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone 100 µg/d to 250 µg/d) combined with a short-acting bronchodilator as needed for 2-3 months. If the response is favorable, treatment is adjusted to the minimum effective dose.

Monitoring of clinical progress relies on asthma control scores such as the Asthma Control Test, considering both parental perception and the child’s self-assessment. Because the goal in mild asthma is indeed to achieve complete control.

Mild Asthma: Behind the Triviality, Real Risks

Mild childhood asthma is the most common form of asthma. It is by no means benign and carries a risk for exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids and potential long-term consequences.

Asthma is often missed — an estimated 20% of children age ≥ 6 years to 70% by age 1 year are not identified — and therefore go untreated, leading to a lower quality of life from attacks and persistent symptoms between episodes that could limit activity and disrupt sleep.

Even seemingly mild asthma is associated with a risk for severe exacerbation, including in patients with infrequent and mild symptoms.

There is also impaired lung growth, with a decrease in peak lung function and the potential for progression to fixed bronchial obstruction, which can lead to COPD. However, it has been shown that early treatment reduces chronic inflammation, limits bronchial remodeling, and prevents the decline in lung function.

In a Danish neonatal cohort 9125 infants, were followed at 1, 3, and 6 years of age and analyzed at 50 years of age via the Danish COPD patient registry, early asthma symptoms were associated with a decrease in FEV1 (-3.36%) and the FEV1/ Forced Vital Capacity ratio (-1.28), as well as an increased risk for a COPD diagnosis in adulthood (odds ratio [OR], 1.96).

Epidemiologic data confirm this: A history of asthma increases the risk of developing COPD by 10-30 times, and a reduced peak FEV1 in early adulthood is associated with an increased risk for early‑onset COPD and greater severity.

“Asthma is associated with a decline in lung function that can begin as early as infancy,” noted the pediatrician, “or even during the prenatal period, persists throughout childhood, continues into adulthood, and predisposes individuals to established bronchial obstruction.”

Early Inhaled Corticosteroids Reduced Exacerbations

In the inhaled steroid treatment as regular therapy in early asthma trial, which enrolled about 7000 adults and children and included a subgroup of 1900 children aged < 11 years with recent-onset mild asthma, inhaled budesonide was compared with placebo. Over 3 years of follow-up, the placebo group showed poorer lung function, whereas those treated with budesonide had improved FEV1 and about a 40% reduction in severe exacerbations. A partial functional “catch-up” was observed when treatment was initiated in the third year.

However, the study does not allow for conclusions regarding the very long-term prevention of functional decline, due to the lack of sufficient follow-up time.

Delayed Treatment Increases Risks

Furthermore, delayed treatment is associated with an increased use of short-acting bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroids, carrying a risk for complications. The specialist warned: “Adverse effects appear after just a few courses of oral corticosteroids, notably an increased risk of fractures (odds ratio, 2.15 for low doses of prednisolone < 70 mg; OR, 3.09 for higher doses > 70 mg). These risks are real and emerge quickly.”

Another study confirms the adverse effects of oral corticosteroid therapy: A cumulative dose of 500 mg to 1000 mg (approximately four to five courses of systemic corticosteroids over a lifetime) already increases the risk. Complications include osteoporosis, diabetes, cataracts, heart failure, and pneumonia. “Cumulative exposure, even intermittent, is associated with increased morbidity, which can be prevented through appropriate management of mild asthma,” she added. “Yet it has been clearly demonstrated that inhaled therapy reduces the need for oral corticosteroids.”

This story was translated from Medscape’s French edition.

A version of this story first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients treated for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or pneumonia experienced worse outcomes when treated at hospitals acquired by private equity firms, based on data from a new study presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference.

“Previous studies have linked private equity acquisition of hospitals to worse patient experiences and higher rates of hospital-acquired adverse events, such as falls, although findings for specific medical conditions have been more variable,” according to lead author Stephen Mein, MD, a pulmonologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.

“We wanted to understand whether private equity acquisitions impacted outcomes for patients hospitalized with COPD and pneumonia because these conditions are among the most common reasons for hospitalization and they are widely included in measures of hospital care quality,” he said.

Mein and colleagues reviewed data from Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 41 private equity hospitals and 192 matched control hospitals between 2010 and 2019, including 146,904 COPD visits and 194,993 pneumonia visits.

The study population was Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who had at least one hospital encounter (defined as observation stay or inpatient admission) for asthma, COPD, or pneumonia. The clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 30-day hospital revisit rates. The researchers compared changes in outcomes across 3 years before and after acquisition in a linear regression analysis. Models adjusted for patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, clinical risk score, and dual eligibility status.

Overall, no changes in patient age, sex, clinical risk scores or dual-eligibility status across all conditions at private equity hospitals were noted compared with control hospitals. However, 30-day hospital revisits among patients with asthma increased significantly at private equity hospitals compared to control hospitals (difference-in-differences, + 8.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.0-12.7). No significant changes were noted for in-hospital mortality or 30-day mortality.

Similarly, 30-day hospital revisits were significantly higher for patients with COPD at private equity hospitals than at control hospitals (+ 0.9 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1-1.6). Patients with pneumonia had an increased in-hospital mortality at private equity hospitals compared with control hospitals (+ 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.2-1.2), with no differences in 30-day mortality or revisits.

The findings that patients treated for COPD at private equity-acquired hospitals more often returned to the hospital within 30 days after hospital discharge and that patients with pneumonia were more likely to die during their hospital stay were surprising, Mein noted. “The 1-percentage-point increase in deaths among patients with pneumonia is especially concerning as the baseline in-hospital mortality rate for this condition was only 3%-4%,” he said.

“Our findings add to growing concerns around the potential negative effects of private equity ownership in healthcare and highlight the need for stronger oversight of these acquisitions to help protect our patients, and the results have implications for many patients as private equity acquisitions of US hospitals are becoming more common,” Mein said.

The findings were limited by the focus on older adults with Medicare insurance, and may not be generalizable to other patient populations, said Mein. “In addition, we were unable to account for differences in private equity firm practices or identify potential heterogeneity in outcomes across hospitals acquired by different private equity firms,” he said. More research is needed to understand the factors contributing to worse outcomes at private equity-acquired hospitals in the current study and other published work, Mein added.

Vigilance is Needed to Optimize Outcomes

“Given the rapid increase in acquisitions of US hospitals by private equity firms, it is important to evaluate how these acquisitions affect patient health outcomes,” said Arianne K. Baldomero, MD, MS, a pulmonologist, critical care physician, and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

“The worse outcomes observed among patients hospitalized in privately acquired hospitals were not entirely unexpected,” said Baldomero, who was not involved in the study. “Although not explicitly stated in the abstract, these acquisitions may involve cost-containment strategies, such as potential reductions in staffing. particularly nursing and support staff, changes in supply chain management, or the scaling back of less profitable services, which likely contribute to worse patient outcomes,” she said.

More research is needed to identify the potential etiologies driving these differences in outcomes, which would help inform strategies for improvement, said Baldomero. However, the results of the new study suggest that clinicians managing patients discharged from acquired hospitals should be vigilant about discharge planning, transitions, and follow-up to mitigate poor health outcomes, she said.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Baldomero had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients treated for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or pneumonia experienced worse outcomes when treated at hospitals acquired by private equity firms, based on data from a new study presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference.

“Previous studies have linked private equity acquisition of hospitals to worse patient experiences and higher rates of hospital-acquired adverse events, such as falls, although findings for specific medical conditions have been more variable,” according to lead author Stephen Mein, MD, a pulmonologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.

“We wanted to understand whether private equity acquisitions impacted outcomes for patients hospitalized with COPD and pneumonia because these conditions are among the most common reasons for hospitalization and they are widely included in measures of hospital care quality,” he said.

Mein and colleagues reviewed data from Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 41 private equity hospitals and 192 matched control hospitals between 2010 and 2019, including 146,904 COPD visits and 194,993 pneumonia visits.

The study population was Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who had at least one hospital encounter (defined as observation stay or inpatient admission) for asthma, COPD, or pneumonia. The clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 30-day hospital revisit rates. The researchers compared changes in outcomes across 3 years before and after acquisition in a linear regression analysis. Models adjusted for patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, clinical risk score, and dual eligibility status.

Overall, no changes in patient age, sex, clinical risk scores or dual-eligibility status across all conditions at private equity hospitals were noted compared with control hospitals. However, 30-day hospital revisits among patients with asthma increased significantly at private equity hospitals compared to control hospitals (difference-in-differences, + 8.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.0-12.7). No significant changes were noted for in-hospital mortality or 30-day mortality.

Similarly, 30-day hospital revisits were significantly higher for patients with COPD at private equity hospitals than at control hospitals (+ 0.9 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1-1.6). Patients with pneumonia had an increased in-hospital mortality at private equity hospitals compared with control hospitals (+ 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.2-1.2), with no differences in 30-day mortality or revisits.

The findings that patients treated for COPD at private equity-acquired hospitals more often returned to the hospital within 30 days after hospital discharge and that patients with pneumonia were more likely to die during their hospital stay were surprising, Mein noted. “The 1-percentage-point increase in deaths among patients with pneumonia is especially concerning as the baseline in-hospital mortality rate for this condition was only 3%-4%,” he said.

“Our findings add to growing concerns around the potential negative effects of private equity ownership in healthcare and highlight the need for stronger oversight of these acquisitions to help protect our patients, and the results have implications for many patients as private equity acquisitions of US hospitals are becoming more common,” Mein said.

The findings were limited by the focus on older adults with Medicare insurance, and may not be generalizable to other patient populations, said Mein. “In addition, we were unable to account for differences in private equity firm practices or identify potential heterogeneity in outcomes across hospitals acquired by different private equity firms,” he said. More research is needed to understand the factors contributing to worse outcomes at private equity-acquired hospitals in the current study and other published work, Mein added.

Vigilance is Needed to Optimize Outcomes

“Given the rapid increase in acquisitions of US hospitals by private equity firms, it is important to evaluate how these acquisitions affect patient health outcomes,” said Arianne K. Baldomero, MD, MS, a pulmonologist, critical care physician, and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

“The worse outcomes observed among patients hospitalized in privately acquired hospitals were not entirely unexpected,” said Baldomero, who was not involved in the study. “Although not explicitly stated in the abstract, these acquisitions may involve cost-containment strategies, such as potential reductions in staffing. particularly nursing and support staff, changes in supply chain management, or the scaling back of less profitable services, which likely contribute to worse patient outcomes,” she said.

More research is needed to identify the potential etiologies driving these differences in outcomes, which would help inform strategies for improvement, said Baldomero. However, the results of the new study suggest that clinicians managing patients discharged from acquired hospitals should be vigilant about discharge planning, transitions, and follow-up to mitigate poor health outcomes, she said.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Baldomero had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients treated for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or pneumonia experienced worse outcomes when treated at hospitals acquired by private equity firms, based on data from a new study presented at the American Thoracic Society (ATS) 2026 International Conference.

“Previous studies have linked private equity acquisition of hospitals to worse patient experiences and higher rates of hospital-acquired adverse events, such as falls, although findings for specific medical conditions have been more variable,” according to lead author Stephen Mein, MD, a pulmonologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.

“We wanted to understand whether private equity acquisitions impacted outcomes for patients hospitalized with COPD and pneumonia because these conditions are among the most common reasons for hospitalization and they are widely included in measures of hospital care quality,” he said.

Mein and colleagues reviewed data from Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 41 private equity hospitals and 192 matched control hospitals between 2010 and 2019, including 146,904 COPD visits and 194,993 pneumonia visits.

The study population was Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who had at least one hospital encounter (defined as observation stay or inpatient admission) for asthma, COPD, or pneumonia. The clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 30-day hospital revisit rates. The researchers compared changes in outcomes across 3 years before and after acquisition in a linear regression analysis. Models adjusted for patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, clinical risk score, and dual eligibility status.

Overall, no changes in patient age, sex, clinical risk scores or dual-eligibility status across all conditions at private equity hospitals were noted compared with control hospitals. However, 30-day hospital revisits among patients with asthma increased significantly at private equity hospitals compared to control hospitals (difference-in-differences, + 8.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.0-12.7). No significant changes were noted for in-hospital mortality or 30-day mortality.

Similarly, 30-day hospital revisits were significantly higher for patients with COPD at private equity hospitals than at control hospitals (+ 0.9 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1-1.6). Patients with pneumonia had an increased in-hospital mortality at private equity hospitals compared with control hospitals (+ 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.2-1.2), with no differences in 30-day mortality or revisits.

The findings that patients treated for COPD at private equity-acquired hospitals more often returned to the hospital within 30 days after hospital discharge and that patients with pneumonia were more likely to die during their hospital stay were surprising, Mein noted. “The 1-percentage-point increase in deaths among patients with pneumonia is especially concerning as the baseline in-hospital mortality rate for this condition was only 3%-4%,” he said.

“Our findings add to growing concerns around the potential negative effects of private equity ownership in healthcare and highlight the need for stronger oversight of these acquisitions to help protect our patients, and the results have implications for many patients as private equity acquisitions of US hospitals are becoming more common,” Mein said.

The findings were limited by the focus on older adults with Medicare insurance, and may not be generalizable to other patient populations, said Mein. “In addition, we were unable to account for differences in private equity firm practices or identify potential heterogeneity in outcomes across hospitals acquired by different private equity firms,” he said. More research is needed to understand the factors contributing to worse outcomes at private equity-acquired hospitals in the current study and other published work, Mein added.

Vigilance is Needed to Optimize Outcomes

“Given the rapid increase in acquisitions of US hospitals by private equity firms, it is important to evaluate how these acquisitions affect patient health outcomes,” said Arianne K. Baldomero, MD, MS, a pulmonologist, critical care physician, and assistant professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

“The worse outcomes observed among patients hospitalized in privately acquired hospitals were not entirely unexpected,” said Baldomero, who was not involved in the study. “Although not explicitly stated in the abstract, these acquisitions may involve cost-containment strategies, such as potential reductions in staffing. particularly nursing and support staff, changes in supply chain management, or the scaling back of less profitable services, which likely contribute to worse patient outcomes,” she said.

More research is needed to identify the potential etiologies driving these differences in outcomes, which would help inform strategies for improvement, said Baldomero. However, the results of the new study suggest that clinicians managing patients discharged from acquired hospitals should be vigilant about discharge planning, transitions, and follow-up to mitigate poor health outcomes, she said.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers and Baldomero had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Among pediatric beneficiaries in the Military Health System (MHS), racial and ethnic disparities in asthma care persisted, with Black children having the highest odds of an asthma diagnosis and emergency department (ED) visit among all racial and ethnic groups.

METHODOLOGY:

• This cross-sectional study examined racial and ethnic differences in asthma prevalence and related outcomes among pediatric beneficiaries in the MHS.
• They included 950,896 dependents aged 2-17 years (50.9% boys) who had ≥ 1 inpatient or outpatient encounter during fiscal year 2023.
• Race and ethnicity were self-reported by the beneficiary and derived from the sponsor’s demographic records.
• An asthma diagnosis required at least one inpatient claim or two outpatient claims with an asthma diagnostic code recorded in the primary or secondary diagnosis field.
• Asthma-related outcomes assessed were potentially avoidable hospitalizations, ED visits, specialist visits, and asthma-related prescriptions.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 3.3% of children had an asthma diagnosis; the prevalence was higher among children aged 5-10 or 11-17 years, boys, and those with 1 or 2 siblings.
• The odds of an asthma diagnosis were significantly higher in all racial and ethnic groups than in White children, and were highest in Black children, who had 85% higher odds across all ages (P < .001).
• Similarly, Black children were 39% more likely than White children to have an asthma-related ED visit; Hispanic children were 36% more likely and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander children were 25% more likely (P < .05 for all comparisons).
• Black children also had slightly higher odds of an asthma-related specialist visit than White children, and both Black and Hispanic children were more likely to receive any asthma prescription.

IN PRACTICE:

These results highlighted how access to low-cost or no-cost care, consistent insurance coverage, and effective prescription practices within the MHS may have helped to improve asthma outcomes. Still, the persistence of racial and ethnic disparities pointed to the need for further action. Efforts to close these gaps should include expanding access to culturally responsive care, increasing availability of specialists, and continuing to assess and improve how care is delivered across the system,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Felicia Yeboah Denteh, DrPH, MHA, Center for Health Services Research, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland. It was published online on January 26, 2026, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

This study used the sponsor’s race and ethnicity as proxies for children’s race and ethnicity, which could have misclassified multiracial children, adopted children, and wards. It also relied on coding in secondary data and did not include factors such as BMI, pollution, and family history.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was funded by the Department of War, Defense Health Agency. The authors did not report any conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Among pediatric beneficiaries in the Military Health System (MHS), racial and ethnic disparities in asthma care persisted, with Black children having the highest odds of an asthma diagnosis and emergency department (ED) visit among all racial and ethnic groups.

METHODOLOGY:

• This cross-sectional study examined racial and ethnic differences in asthma prevalence and related outcomes among pediatric beneficiaries in the MHS.
• They included 950,896 dependents aged 2-17 years (50.9% boys) who had ≥ 1 inpatient or outpatient encounter during fiscal year 2023.
• Race and ethnicity were self-reported by the beneficiary and derived from the sponsor’s demographic records.
• An asthma diagnosis required at least one inpatient claim or two outpatient claims with an asthma diagnostic code recorded in the primary or secondary diagnosis field.
• Asthma-related outcomes assessed were potentially avoidable hospitalizations, ED visits, specialist visits, and asthma-related prescriptions.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 3.3% of children had an asthma diagnosis; the prevalence was higher among children aged 5-10 or 11-17 years, boys, and those with 1 or 2 siblings.
• The odds of an asthma diagnosis were significantly higher in all racial and ethnic groups than in White children, and were highest in Black children, who had 85% higher odds across all ages (P < .001).
• Similarly, Black children were 39% more likely than White children to have an asthma-related ED visit; Hispanic children were 36% more likely and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander children were 25% more likely (P < .05 for all comparisons).
• Black children also had slightly higher odds of an asthma-related specialist visit than White children, and both Black and Hispanic children were more likely to receive any asthma prescription.

IN PRACTICE:

These results highlighted how access to low-cost or no-cost care, consistent insurance coverage, and effective prescription practices within the MHS may have helped to improve asthma outcomes. Still, the persistence of racial and ethnic disparities pointed to the need for further action. Efforts to close these gaps should include expanding access to culturally responsive care, increasing availability of specialists, and continuing to assess and improve how care is delivered across the system,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Felicia Yeboah Denteh, DrPH, MHA, Center for Health Services Research, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland. It was published online on January 26, 2026, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

This study used the sponsor’s race and ethnicity as proxies for children’s race and ethnicity, which could have misclassified multiracial children, adopted children, and wards. It also relied on coding in secondary data and did not include factors such as BMI, pollution, and family history.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was funded by the Department of War, Defense Health Agency. The authors did not report any conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Among pediatric beneficiaries in the Military Health System (MHS), racial and ethnic disparities in asthma care persisted, with Black children having the highest odds of an asthma diagnosis and emergency department (ED) visit among all racial and ethnic groups.

METHODOLOGY:

• This cross-sectional study examined racial and ethnic differences in asthma prevalence and related outcomes among pediatric beneficiaries in the MHS.
• They included 950,896 dependents aged 2-17 years (50.9% boys) who had ≥ 1 inpatient or outpatient encounter during fiscal year 2023.
• Race and ethnicity were self-reported by the beneficiary and derived from the sponsor’s demographic records.
• An asthma diagnosis required at least one inpatient claim or two outpatient claims with an asthma diagnostic code recorded in the primary or secondary diagnosis field.
• Asthma-related outcomes assessed were potentially avoidable hospitalizations, ED visits, specialist visits, and asthma-related prescriptions.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 3.3% of children had an asthma diagnosis; the prevalence was higher among children aged 5-10 or 11-17 years, boys, and those with 1 or 2 siblings.
• The odds of an asthma diagnosis were significantly higher in all racial and ethnic groups than in White children, and were highest in Black children, who had 85% higher odds across all ages (P < .001).
• Similarly, Black children were 39% more likely than White children to have an asthma-related ED visit; Hispanic children were 36% more likely and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander children were 25% more likely (P < .05 for all comparisons).
• Black children also had slightly higher odds of an asthma-related specialist visit than White children, and both Black and Hispanic children were more likely to receive any asthma prescription.

IN PRACTICE:

These results highlighted how access to low-cost or no-cost care, consistent insurance coverage, and effective prescription practices within the MHS may have helped to improve asthma outcomes. Still, the persistence of racial and ethnic disparities pointed to the need for further action. Efforts to close these gaps should include expanding access to culturally responsive care, increasing availability of specialists, and continuing to assess and improve how care is delivered across the system,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Felicia Yeboah Denteh, DrPH, MHA, Center for Health Services Research, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland. It was published online on January 26, 2026, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

This study used the sponsor’s race and ethnicity as proxies for children’s race and ethnicity, which could have misclassified multiracial children, adopted children, and wards. It also relied on coding in secondary data and did not include factors such as BMI, pollution, and family history.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was funded by the Department of War, Defense Health Agency. The authors did not report any conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Individuals who served in Iraq or Afghanistan had significantly higher rates of new-onset respiratory diseases after deployment compared to non-deployed control peers, based on data from more than 48,000 veterans. The findings were presented at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) 2025 Annual Meeting.

“Veterans deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan were often exposed to airborne hazards such as burn pits and dust storms,” said Patrick Gleeson, MD, an allergist at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, in a press release. 

“We found that these exposures may have long-term health impacts, particularly for respiratory diseases that can affect quality of life for years after service,” said Gleeson, who presented the results at the meeting.

Gleeson and colleagues used data from the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify veterans with a single deployment as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom. Participants had at least one outpatient visit prior to deployment with no baseline history of asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis. The mean age of the participants at deployment was 26.7 years, 84% were male, 75% were White, and 11% were Hispanic or Latino. Each was matched with a similar non-deployed veteran control.

The primary outcome was outpatient diagnoses or problem list entries for asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis.

Compared to non-deployed peers, deployed veterans had a 55% increased risk of asthma, a 48% increased risk of nasal polyposis, a 41% increased risk of chronic rhinitis, and a 27% increased risk of chronic rhinosinusitis, based on Cox proportional hazards models (P < .0005 for all).

The findings were limited by the retrospective design. However, “Recognizing the link between deployment and respiratory disease can help guide medical support, policy, and preventive strategies for those affected,” Gleeson said in the press release. 

The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no financial conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Individuals who served in Iraq or Afghanistan had significantly higher rates of new-onset respiratory diseases after deployment compared to non-deployed control peers, based on data from more than 48,000 veterans. The findings were presented at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) 2025 Annual Meeting.

“Veterans deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan were often exposed to airborne hazards such as burn pits and dust storms,” said Patrick Gleeson, MD, an allergist at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, in a press release. 

“We found that these exposures may have long-term health impacts, particularly for respiratory diseases that can affect quality of life for years after service,” said Gleeson, who presented the results at the meeting.

Gleeson and colleagues used data from the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify veterans with a single deployment as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom. Participants had at least one outpatient visit prior to deployment with no baseline history of asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis. The mean age of the participants at deployment was 26.7 years, 84% were male, 75% were White, and 11% were Hispanic or Latino. Each was matched with a similar non-deployed veteran control.

The primary outcome was outpatient diagnoses or problem list entries for asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis.

Compared to non-deployed peers, deployed veterans had a 55% increased risk of asthma, a 48% increased risk of nasal polyposis, a 41% increased risk of chronic rhinitis, and a 27% increased risk of chronic rhinosinusitis, based on Cox proportional hazards models (P < .0005 for all).

The findings were limited by the retrospective design. However, “Recognizing the link between deployment and respiratory disease can help guide medical support, policy, and preventive strategies for those affected,” Gleeson said in the press release. 

The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no financial conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Individuals who served in Iraq or Afghanistan had significantly higher rates of new-onset respiratory diseases after deployment compared to non-deployed control peers, based on data from more than 48,000 veterans. The findings were presented at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) 2025 Annual Meeting.

“Veterans deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan were often exposed to airborne hazards such as burn pits and dust storms,” said Patrick Gleeson, MD, an allergist at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, in a press release. 

“We found that these exposures may have long-term health impacts, particularly for respiratory diseases that can affect quality of life for years after service,” said Gleeson, who presented the results at the meeting.

Gleeson and colleagues used data from the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify veterans with a single deployment as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom. Participants had at least one outpatient visit prior to deployment with no baseline history of asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis. The mean age of the participants at deployment was 26.7 years, 84% were male, 75% were White, and 11% were Hispanic or Latino. Each was matched with a similar non-deployed veteran control.

The primary outcome was outpatient diagnoses or problem list entries for asthma, chronic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, or nasal polyposis.

Compared to non-deployed peers, deployed veterans had a 55% increased risk of asthma, a 48% increased risk of nasal polyposis, a 41% increased risk of chronic rhinitis, and a 27% increased risk of chronic rhinosinusitis, based on Cox proportional hazards models (P < .0005 for all).

The findings were limited by the retrospective design. However, “Recognizing the link between deployment and respiratory disease can help guide medical support, policy, and preventive strategies for those affected,” Gleeson said in the press release. 

The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no financial conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Children with asthma scored significantly lower than those without asthma on measures of episodic memory, based on longitudinal data from nearly 500 individuals.

Animal models have shown associations between asthma and memory problems, but data for children are lacking, wrote Nicholas J. Christopher-Hayes, MA, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues.

“Asthma is very frequent among children, and there is mounting evidence from rodent models that asthma may result in neural injury in the hippocampus, which in turn may cause memory loss,” Christopher-Hayes said in an interview. “Although there is also a good amount of research with older adults, very little research has been done with children, the period that is most frequently linked to asthma onset,” he said. Therefore, the researchers leveraged a large national study on child development to examine development of memory as a function of asthma exposure.

In this study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers conducted both a longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, which began in 2015. Children were enrolled at ages 9-10 years with a follow-up assessment 1-2 years later.

The participants were categorized as early childhood-onset asthma (asthma at baseline and follow-up), later childhood-onset asthma (asthma at follow-up only), or no asthma history. The primary outcome of the longitudinal analysis was episodic memory. Approximately half of the participants were boys, and slightly more than half were White.

Among 474 children reviewed in the longitudinal analysis, 135 had early-onset asthma, 102 had later-onset asthma, and 237 had no asthma and served as control individuals. Overall, those with early-onset asthma showed significantly lower rates of longitudinal memory improvements at follow-up compared with the comparison group (P < .01).

Developmental memory improvement in children with later-onset asthma was not significantly different from the control individuals. 

Secondary outcomes included processing speed and inhibition, and attention. In a cross-sectional analysis with a larger sample of 2062 children from the same database (1031 with any asthma), those with asthma scored significantly lower on measures not only of episodic memory but also processing speed and inhibition/attention than children with no asthma, with P values of .04, .01, and .02, respectively.

The results were limited by several factors, including the reliance on parent reports for indicators of asthma and the lack of data on the potential effect of prescription corticosteroid use on neurocognitive development, the researchers noted.

The mechanism behind the association remains unclear; the inflammation associated with asthma may disrupt neural processing and manifest as cognitive dysfunction, as has been seen in rodent models of asthma, the researchers wrote. “It is possible that associations between asthma and developmental trajectories emerge earlier for memory, perhaps due to its sensitivity to subtle hippocampal injury,” they noted.

Longer follow-up studies are needed to fully understand how childhood asthma predicts memory declines or difficulties in childhood and beyond, said Christopher-Hayes. “We also need additional studies to understand why children who were diagnosed earlier and had asthma for longer seem to be particularly affected,” he said.

The results of this study were consistent with previous findings and therefore not surprising, senior author Simona Ghetti, PhD, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Davis, said in an interview. However, the finding that the extent of exposure to asthma was associated with slower memory improvement in childhood was striking, she said. That children with an earlier asthma onset who had disease indicators for a longer period showed a slower development of memory over time, suggests that asthma exposure may affect the developmental trajectory of memory, Ghetti noted. 

“Recommendations to clinicians are premature because we need a better understanding of the boundary conditions, such as the minimal level of asthma exposure that might generate memory difficulties,” said Ghetti.

“Nevertheless, our results underscore the importance of looking at asthma as a potential source of cognitive difficulty in children,” she said.

 

Asthma’s Extensive Effect

Evidence is mounting that a diagnosis of asthma may have implications outside the pulmonary system, Diego J. Maselli, MD, professor and chief of the Division of Pulmonary Diseases & Critical Care at UT Health, San Antonio, said in an interview. 

“Asthmatics may be at risk of nasal polyps, allergic rhinitis, and other allergic conditions, but there is emerging of evidence inflammation associated with asthma may affect other organ systems,” said Maselli, who was not involved in the study.

“For example, chronic inflammation in asthmatics may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease,” he said.

Although less is known about the effects of asthma on the nervous system, animal models suggest that inflammation associated with asthma may result in neuronal injury and potential effects on memory, said Maselli.

The findings of this study provide evidence of potential detrimental effects on the memory of children with asthma but should be interpreted with caution, Maselli said. “Children with chronic medical conditions may have an inherent disadvantage compared with their peers due to the burden of their disease, medication utilization and side effects, absenteeism from school, physical limitations, and other disease-specific circumstances,” he noted.

“Uncontrolled asthma, in particular, has strong links to low socioeconomic factors that are closely tied to access to adequate medical care, nutrition, educational institutions, and other relevant contributors to normal cognitive development,” Maselli said. Although the authors account for some of these socioeconomic factors by evaluating income and race, other variables may have influenced the results, he added.

Overall, this study’s findings suggested that the diagnosis of asthma in children may be associated with memory deficits and may influence neurodevelopment; however, more research is needed to determine whether the findings are replicated in other cohorts, said Maselli. “In particular, evaluating the effects of the severity of asthma and different asthma endotypes would be crucial to identify children with a higher risk of memory or cognitive deficits and confirm these associations,” he said.

This study was funded by the Memory and Plasticity Program at the University of California, Davis, and by a Learning, Memory, and Plasticity Training Program Fellowship grant from the National Institutes of Health. The researchers and Maselli had no financial conflicts to disclose. 

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Children with asthma scored significantly lower than those without asthma on measures of episodic memory, based on longitudinal data from nearly 500 individuals.

Animal models have shown associations between asthma and memory problems, but data for children are lacking, wrote Nicholas J. Christopher-Hayes, MA, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues.

“Asthma is very frequent among children, and there is mounting evidence from rodent models that asthma may result in neural injury in the hippocampus, which in turn may cause memory loss,” Christopher-Hayes said in an interview. “Although there is also a good amount of research with older adults, very little research has been done with children, the period that is most frequently linked to asthma onset,” he said. Therefore, the researchers leveraged a large national study on child development to examine development of memory as a function of asthma exposure.

In this study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers conducted both a longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, which began in 2015. Children were enrolled at ages 9-10 years with a follow-up assessment 1-2 years later.

The participants were categorized as early childhood-onset asthma (asthma at baseline and follow-up), later childhood-onset asthma (asthma at follow-up only), or no asthma history. The primary outcome of the longitudinal analysis was episodic memory. Approximately half of the participants were boys, and slightly more than half were White.

Among 474 children reviewed in the longitudinal analysis, 135 had early-onset asthma, 102 had later-onset asthma, and 237 had no asthma and served as control individuals. Overall, those with early-onset asthma showed significantly lower rates of longitudinal memory improvements at follow-up compared with the comparison group (P < .01).

Developmental memory improvement in children with later-onset asthma was not significantly different from the control individuals. 

Secondary outcomes included processing speed and inhibition, and attention. In a cross-sectional analysis with a larger sample of 2062 children from the same database (1031 with any asthma), those with asthma scored significantly lower on measures not only of episodic memory but also processing speed and inhibition/attention than children with no asthma, with P values of .04, .01, and .02, respectively.

The results were limited by several factors, including the reliance on parent reports for indicators of asthma and the lack of data on the potential effect of prescription corticosteroid use on neurocognitive development, the researchers noted.

The mechanism behind the association remains unclear; the inflammation associated with asthma may disrupt neural processing and manifest as cognitive dysfunction, as has been seen in rodent models of asthma, the researchers wrote. “It is possible that associations between asthma and developmental trajectories emerge earlier for memory, perhaps due to its sensitivity to subtle hippocampal injury,” they noted.

Longer follow-up studies are needed to fully understand how childhood asthma predicts memory declines or difficulties in childhood and beyond, said Christopher-Hayes. “We also need additional studies to understand why children who were diagnosed earlier and had asthma for longer seem to be particularly affected,” he said.

The results of this study were consistent with previous findings and therefore not surprising, senior author Simona Ghetti, PhD, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Davis, said in an interview. However, the finding that the extent of exposure to asthma was associated with slower memory improvement in childhood was striking, she said. That children with an earlier asthma onset who had disease indicators for a longer period showed a slower development of memory over time, suggests that asthma exposure may affect the developmental trajectory of memory, Ghetti noted. 

“Recommendations to clinicians are premature because we need a better understanding of the boundary conditions, such as the minimal level of asthma exposure that might generate memory difficulties,” said Ghetti.

“Nevertheless, our results underscore the importance of looking at asthma as a potential source of cognitive difficulty in children,” she said.

 

Asthma’s Extensive Effect

Evidence is mounting that a diagnosis of asthma may have implications outside the pulmonary system, Diego J. Maselli, MD, professor and chief of the Division of Pulmonary Diseases & Critical Care at UT Health, San Antonio, said in an interview. 

“Asthmatics may be at risk of nasal polyps, allergic rhinitis, and other allergic conditions, but there is emerging of evidence inflammation associated with asthma may affect other organ systems,” said Maselli, who was not involved in the study.

“For example, chronic inflammation in asthmatics may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease,” he said.

Although less is known about the effects of asthma on the nervous system, animal models suggest that inflammation associated with asthma may result in neuronal injury and potential effects on memory, said Maselli.

The findings of this study provide evidence of potential detrimental effects on the memory of children with asthma but should be interpreted with caution, Maselli said. “Children with chronic medical conditions may have an inherent disadvantage compared with their peers due to the burden of their disease, medication utilization and side effects, absenteeism from school, physical limitations, and other disease-specific circumstances,” he noted.

“Uncontrolled asthma, in particular, has strong links to low socioeconomic factors that are closely tied to access to adequate medical care, nutrition, educational institutions, and other relevant contributors to normal cognitive development,” Maselli said. Although the authors account for some of these socioeconomic factors by evaluating income and race, other variables may have influenced the results, he added.

Overall, this study’s findings suggested that the diagnosis of asthma in children may be associated with memory deficits and may influence neurodevelopment; however, more research is needed to determine whether the findings are replicated in other cohorts, said Maselli. “In particular, evaluating the effects of the severity of asthma and different asthma endotypes would be crucial to identify children with a higher risk of memory or cognitive deficits and confirm these associations,” he said.

This study was funded by the Memory and Plasticity Program at the University of California, Davis, and by a Learning, Memory, and Plasticity Training Program Fellowship grant from the National Institutes of Health. The researchers and Maselli had no financial conflicts to disclose. 

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Children with asthma scored significantly lower than those without asthma on measures of episodic memory, based on longitudinal data from nearly 500 individuals.

Animal models have shown associations between asthma and memory problems, but data for children are lacking, wrote Nicholas J. Christopher-Hayes, MA, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues.

“Asthma is very frequent among children, and there is mounting evidence from rodent models that asthma may result in neural injury in the hippocampus, which in turn may cause memory loss,” Christopher-Hayes said in an interview. “Although there is also a good amount of research with older adults, very little research has been done with children, the period that is most frequently linked to asthma onset,” he said. Therefore, the researchers leveraged a large national study on child development to examine development of memory as a function of asthma exposure.

In this study published in JAMA Network Open, the researchers conducted both a longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, which began in 2015. Children were enrolled at ages 9-10 years with a follow-up assessment 1-2 years later.

The participants were categorized as early childhood-onset asthma (asthma at baseline and follow-up), later childhood-onset asthma (asthma at follow-up only), or no asthma history. The primary outcome of the longitudinal analysis was episodic memory. Approximately half of the participants were boys, and slightly more than half were White.

Among 474 children reviewed in the longitudinal analysis, 135 had early-onset asthma, 102 had later-onset asthma, and 237 had no asthma and served as control individuals. Overall, those with early-onset asthma showed significantly lower rates of longitudinal memory improvements at follow-up compared with the comparison group (P < .01).

Developmental memory improvement in children with later-onset asthma was not significantly different from the control individuals. 

Secondary outcomes included processing speed and inhibition, and attention. In a cross-sectional analysis with a larger sample of 2062 children from the same database (1031 with any asthma), those with asthma scored significantly lower on measures not only of episodic memory but also processing speed and inhibition/attention than children with no asthma, with P values of .04, .01, and .02, respectively.

The results were limited by several factors, including the reliance on parent reports for indicators of asthma and the lack of data on the potential effect of prescription corticosteroid use on neurocognitive development, the researchers noted.

The mechanism behind the association remains unclear; the inflammation associated with asthma may disrupt neural processing and manifest as cognitive dysfunction, as has been seen in rodent models of asthma, the researchers wrote. “It is possible that associations between asthma and developmental trajectories emerge earlier for memory, perhaps due to its sensitivity to subtle hippocampal injury,” they noted.

Longer follow-up studies are needed to fully understand how childhood asthma predicts memory declines or difficulties in childhood and beyond, said Christopher-Hayes. “We also need additional studies to understand why children who were diagnosed earlier and had asthma for longer seem to be particularly affected,” he said.

The results of this study were consistent with previous findings and therefore not surprising, senior author Simona Ghetti, PhD, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Davis, said in an interview. However, the finding that the extent of exposure to asthma was associated with slower memory improvement in childhood was striking, she said. That children with an earlier asthma onset who had disease indicators for a longer period showed a slower development of memory over time, suggests that asthma exposure may affect the developmental trajectory of memory, Ghetti noted. 

“Recommendations to clinicians are premature because we need a better understanding of the boundary conditions, such as the minimal level of asthma exposure that might generate memory difficulties,” said Ghetti.

“Nevertheless, our results underscore the importance of looking at asthma as a potential source of cognitive difficulty in children,” she said.

 

Asthma’s Extensive Effect

Evidence is mounting that a diagnosis of asthma may have implications outside the pulmonary system, Diego J. Maselli, MD, professor and chief of the Division of Pulmonary Diseases & Critical Care at UT Health, San Antonio, said in an interview. 

“Asthmatics may be at risk of nasal polyps, allergic rhinitis, and other allergic conditions, but there is emerging of evidence inflammation associated with asthma may affect other organ systems,” said Maselli, who was not involved in the study.

“For example, chronic inflammation in asthmatics may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease,” he said.

Although less is known about the effects of asthma on the nervous system, animal models suggest that inflammation associated with asthma may result in neuronal injury and potential effects on memory, said Maselli.

The findings of this study provide evidence of potential detrimental effects on the memory of children with asthma but should be interpreted with caution, Maselli said. “Children with chronic medical conditions may have an inherent disadvantage compared with their peers due to the burden of their disease, medication utilization and side effects, absenteeism from school, physical limitations, and other disease-specific circumstances,” he noted.

“Uncontrolled asthma, in particular, has strong links to low socioeconomic factors that are closely tied to access to adequate medical care, nutrition, educational institutions, and other relevant contributors to normal cognitive development,” Maselli said. Although the authors account for some of these socioeconomic factors by evaluating income and race, other variables may have influenced the results, he added.

Overall, this study’s findings suggested that the diagnosis of asthma in children may be associated with memory deficits and may influence neurodevelopment; however, more research is needed to determine whether the findings are replicated in other cohorts, said Maselli. “In particular, evaluating the effects of the severity of asthma and different asthma endotypes would be crucial to identify children with a higher risk of memory or cognitive deficits and confirm these associations,” he said.

This study was funded by the Memory and Plasticity Program at the University of California, Davis, and by a Learning, Memory, and Plasticity Training Program Fellowship grant from the National Institutes of Health. The researchers and Maselli had no financial conflicts to disclose. 

 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Nearly one in six adults with asthma in the United States is nonadherent to medications due to costs, with younger patients, women, and those without insurance having an increased likelihood of being nonadherent.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers evaluated the prevalence and determinants of cost-related nonadherence (CRN) to medications among adults with asthma in the United States between 2011 and 2022. Data were obtained from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics.
• They used the data from the NHIS to include a total of 30,793 adults who had asthma, representing 8.1% of the US population.
• CRN was defined through three components: Skipping medication doses, taking less medication, or delaying medication refills to save money over the past 12 months.
• CRN prevalence, factors associated with CRN, and asthma-related adverse events were analyzed.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 17.8% of US adults with asthma reported CRN; 11.6% skipped medication, 12.4% took less medication, and 15.1% delayed refilling medications to save money.
• Patients aged > 60 years were the least likely to report CRN compared with those aged 18-40 years and 41-60 years; women were more likely to report CRN to medications than men (both P < .01).
• Patients who were current or former smokers or had two or more comorbidities, no health insurance coverage, or a family income below 400% of the federal poverty level had an increased likelihood of reporting CRN.
• Compared with patients without CRN, those who reported CRN had almost double the odds of experiencing asthma attacks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.78-2.13) and increased emergency room visits for asthma (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.44-1.84).

IN PRACTICE:

“The present study reinforces the recommendation that patients with asthma are best controlled when they are prescribed and take medications that are strongly recommended by clinical guidelines,” the authors wrote. “For healthcare providers, it is imperative to monitor patient’s adherence to medications to prevent asthma exacerbations, especially when treating patients with financial concerns,” they further added.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Chun-Tse Hung, School of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. It was published online in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

The reliance on self-reported data introduced potential recall bias, and the absence of medical records may have led to misclassification of disease status. The study could not evaluate the effect of asthma severity due to limited measures in the NHIS. Some important variables reflecting economic indicators, such as the consumer price index, could not be included due to limited measures in the NHIS.

DISCLOSURES:

No disclosures or conflicts of interest statements were provided in the study.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Nearly one in six adults with asthma in the United States is nonadherent to medications due to costs, with younger patients, women, and those without insurance having an increased likelihood of being nonadherent.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers evaluated the prevalence and determinants of cost-related nonadherence (CRN) to medications among adults with asthma in the United States between 2011 and 2022. Data were obtained from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics.
• They used the data from the NHIS to include a total of 30,793 adults who had asthma, representing 8.1% of the US population.
• CRN was defined through three components: Skipping medication doses, taking less medication, or delaying medication refills to save money over the past 12 months.
• CRN prevalence, factors associated with CRN, and asthma-related adverse events were analyzed.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 17.8% of US adults with asthma reported CRN; 11.6% skipped medication, 12.4% took less medication, and 15.1% delayed refilling medications to save money.
• Patients aged > 60 years were the least likely to report CRN compared with those aged 18-40 years and 41-60 years; women were more likely to report CRN to medications than men (both P < .01).
• Patients who were current or former smokers or had two or more comorbidities, no health insurance coverage, or a family income below 400% of the federal poverty level had an increased likelihood of reporting CRN.
• Compared with patients without CRN, those who reported CRN had almost double the odds of experiencing asthma attacks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.78-2.13) and increased emergency room visits for asthma (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.44-1.84).

IN PRACTICE:

“The present study reinforces the recommendation that patients with asthma are best controlled when they are prescribed and take medications that are strongly recommended by clinical guidelines,” the authors wrote. “For healthcare providers, it is imperative to monitor patient’s adherence to medications to prevent asthma exacerbations, especially when treating patients with financial concerns,” they further added.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Chun-Tse Hung, School of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. It was published online in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

The reliance on self-reported data introduced potential recall bias, and the absence of medical records may have led to misclassification of disease status. The study could not evaluate the effect of asthma severity due to limited measures in the NHIS. Some important variables reflecting economic indicators, such as the consumer price index, could not be included due to limited measures in the NHIS.

DISCLOSURES:

No disclosures or conflicts of interest statements were provided in the study.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Nearly one in six adults with asthma in the United States is nonadherent to medications due to costs, with younger patients, women, and those without insurance having an increased likelihood of being nonadherent.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers evaluated the prevalence and determinants of cost-related nonadherence (CRN) to medications among adults with asthma in the United States between 2011 and 2022. Data were obtained from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics.
• They used the data from the NHIS to include a total of 30,793 adults who had asthma, representing 8.1% of the US population.
• CRN was defined through three components: Skipping medication doses, taking less medication, or delaying medication refills to save money over the past 12 months.
• CRN prevalence, factors associated with CRN, and asthma-related adverse events were analyzed.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 17.8% of US adults with asthma reported CRN; 11.6% skipped medication, 12.4% took less medication, and 15.1% delayed refilling medications to save money.
• Patients aged > 60 years were the least likely to report CRN compared with those aged 18-40 years and 41-60 years; women were more likely to report CRN to medications than men (both P < .01).
• Patients who were current or former smokers or had two or more comorbidities, no health insurance coverage, or a family income below 400% of the federal poverty level had an increased likelihood of reporting CRN.
• Compared with patients without CRN, those who reported CRN had almost double the odds of experiencing asthma attacks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.78-2.13) and increased emergency room visits for asthma (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.44-1.84).

IN PRACTICE:

“The present study reinforces the recommendation that patients with asthma are best controlled when they are prescribed and take medications that are strongly recommended by clinical guidelines,” the authors wrote. “For healthcare providers, it is imperative to monitor patient’s adherence to medications to prevent asthma exacerbations, especially when treating patients with financial concerns,” they further added.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Chun-Tse Hung, School of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. It was published online in Thorax.

LIMITATIONS:

The reliance on self-reported data introduced potential recall bias, and the absence of medical records may have led to misclassification of disease status. The study could not evaluate the effect of asthma severity due to limited measures in the NHIS. Some important variables reflecting economic indicators, such as the consumer price index, could not be included due to limited measures in the NHIS.

DISCLOSURES:

No disclosures or conflicts of interest statements were provided in the study.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.