Currently, and based on the development of relevant biologic therapies, T2-high is the most well-defined endotype of asthma. Although much progress has been made in elucidating T2-high inflammation pathways, no specific clinically applicable biomarkers for T2-low asthma have been identified. The therapeutic approach of T2-low asthma is a problem urgently needing resolution, firstly because these patients have poor response to steroids, and secondly because they are not candidates for the newer targeted biologic agents. Thus, there is an unmet need for the identification of biomarkers that can help the diagnosis and endotyping of T2-low asthma.Ongoing investigation is focusing on neutrophilic airway inflammation mediators as therapeutic targets, including interleukin (IL)-8, IL-17, IL-1, IL-6, IL-23 and tumour necrosis factor-α; molecules that target restoration of corticosteroid sensitivity, mainly mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitors; phosphodiesterase (PDE)3 inhibitors that act as bronchodilators and PDE4 inhibitors that have an anti-inflammatory effect; and airway smooth muscle mass attenuation therapies, mainly for patients with paucigranulocytic inflammation.This article aims to review the evidence for noneosinophilic inflammation being a target for therapy in asthma; discuss current and potential future therapeutic approaches, such as novel molecules and biologic agents; and assess clinical trials of licensed drugs in the treatment of T2-low asthma.

Background: Six biologic agents are now approved for patients with severe asthma. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of licensed biologic agents in patients with severe asthma, including the recently approved tezepelumab.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL to identify randomised controlled trials involving licensed biologics until 31 January 2023. We used random-effects meta-analysis models for efficacy, including subgroup analyses by individual agents and markers of T2-high inflammation (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide), and assessed safety.Results: 48 studies with 16 350 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Biologics were associated with a 44% reduction in the annualised rate of asthma exacerbations (rate ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.51–0.62) and 60% reduction of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.27–0.60), a mean increase in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 0.11 L (95% CI 0.09–0.14), a reduction in asthma control questionnaire by 0.34 points (95% CI −0.46–−0.23) and an increase in asthma quality of life questionnaire by 0.38 points (95% CI 0.26–0.49). There was heterogeneity between different classes of biologics in certain outcomes, with overall greater efficacy in patients with T2 inflammation. Overall, biologics exhibited a favourable safety profile.Conclusions: This comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrated that licensed asthma biologics reduce exacerbations and hospitalisations, improve lung function, asthma control and quality of life, and limit the use of systemic corticosteroids, with a favourable safety profile. These effects are more prominent in patients with evidence of T2 inflammation.

Hypoglycemia is common in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (T1D, T2D), treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, and has multiple short- and long-term clinical implications. Whether acute or recurrent, hypoglycemia significantly affects the cardiovascular system with the potential to cause cardiovascular dysfunction. Several pathophysiological mechanisms have been proposed linking hypoglycemia to increased cardiovascular risk, including hemodynamic changes, myocardial ischemia, abnormal cardiac repolarization, cardiac arrhythmias, prothrombotic and proinflammatory effects, and induction of oxidative stress. Hypoglycemia-induced changes can promote the development of endothelial dysfunction, which is an early marker of atherosclerosis. Although data from clinical trials and real-world studies suggest an association between hypoglycemia and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes, it remains uncertain whether this association is causal. New therapeutic agents for patients with T2D do not cause hypoglycemia and have cardioprotective benefits, whereas increasing the use of new technologies, such as continuous glucose monitoring devices and insulin pumps, has the potential to reduce hypoglycemia and its adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T1D.

Tocilizumab has been repurposed against the ‘cytokine storm’ in the setting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of tocilizumab in the management of hospitalized COVID‐19 patients. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL and medRxiv for studies of tocilizumab in hospitalized COVID‐19 patients. Primary objective was the effectiveness of tocilizumab on mortality. Secondary objectives included the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), composite endpoints of mortality or IMV and intensive care unit (ICU) admission or IMV, length of hospitalization and differences in mortality in subgroups (ICU and non‐ICU patients and patients receiving or not receiving concomitant corticosteroids). We included 52 studies (nine randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 43 observational) with a total of 27,004 patients. In both RCTs and observational studies, the use of tocilizumab was associated with a reduction in mortality; 11% in RCTs (risk ratio [RR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96) and 31% in observational studies (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.83). The need for IMV was reduced by 19% in RCTs (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.93), while no significant reduction was observed in observational studies. Both RCTs and observational studies showed a benefit from tocilizumab on the composite endpoint of mortality or IMV. Tocilizumab improved mortality both in ICU and non‐ICU patients. Reduction in mortality was evident in observational studies regardless of the use of systemic corticosteroids, while that was not the case in the RCTs. Tocilizumab was associated with lower mortality and other clinically relevant outcomes in hospitalized patients with moderate‐to‐critical COVID‐19.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a chronic inflammatory disease with multisystemic manifestations. Studies either held on stable disease patients or during exacerbations have demonstrated that COPD is strongly related to venous thromboembolism and cardiovascular events. The aim of the present review of the literature was to provide an in-depth overview regarding the alterations of coagulation factors and prothrombotic changes generated in patients with stable COPD and during COPD exacerbations.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a pandemic since 2020, and depending on the SARS-CoV-2 mutation, different pandemic waves have been observed. The aim of this study was to compare the baseline characteristics of patients in two phases of the pandemic and evaluate possible predictors of mortality. Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter observational study that included patients with COVID-19 in 4 different centers in Greece. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the period during which they were infected during the Delta and Omicron variant predominance. Results: A total of 979 patients (433 Delta, 546 Omicron) were included in the study (median age 67 years (54, 81); 452 [46.2%] female). Compared to the Omicron period, the patients during the Delta period were younger (median age [IQR] 65 [51, 77] vs. 70 [55, 83] years, p < 0.001) and required a longer duration of hospitalization (8 [6, 13] vs. 7 [5, 12] days, p = 0.001), had higher procalcitonin levels (ng/mL): 0.08 [0.05, 0.17] vs. 0.06 [0.02, 0.16], p = 0.005, ferritin levels (ng/mL): 301 [159, 644] vs. 239 [128, 473], p = 0.002, C- reactive protein levels (mg/L): 40.4 [16.7, 98.5] vs. 31.8 [11.9, 81.7], p = 0.003, and lactate dehydrogenase levels (U/L): 277 [221, 375] vs. 255 [205, 329], p < 0.001. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was lower (3 [0, 5] vs. 4 [1, 6], p < 0.001), and the extent of disease on computed tomography (CT) was greater during the Delta wave (p < 0.001). No evidence of a difference in risk of death or admission to the intensive care unit was found between the two groups. Age, cardiovascular events, acute kidney injury during hospitalization, extent of disease on chest CT, D-dimer, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio values were identified as independent predictors of mortality for patients in the Delta period. Cardiovascular events and acute liver injury during hospitalization and the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio on admission were identified as independent predictors of mortality for patients in the Omicron period. Conclusions: In the Omicron wave, patients were older with a higher number of comorbidities, but patients with the Delta variant had more severe disease and a longer duration of hospitalization.