Can we predict sputum eosinophilia from clinical assessment in patients referred to an adult asthma clinic?

BACKGROUND: There is overwhelming evidence that asthma guidelines aimed at reducing airway inflammation are superior to those based on clinical symptoms alone. This involves targeting eosinophilic inflammation with inhaled corticosteroids.

AIM: Because induced sputum is not readily available, our study set out to investigate whether the collective or singular use of routine asthma investigations can predict sputum eosinophilia.

METHODS: Eighty patients underwent skin prick testing, blood tests (IgE, full blood count), spirometry, exhaled fraction nitric oxide (FeNO), PD15 to hypertonic saline, and induced sputum testing at first assessment. A predictive model for sputum eosinophilia (defined as ≥3% eosinophils) was sought using routinely available tests.

RESULTS: Fifty-four subjects underwent both induced sputum and FeNO testing. Seventeen (30%) revealed eosinophilic inflammation, nine (16%) neutrophilic, four (7%) mixed granulocytic and 26 (46%) paucigranulocytic. Positive predictors for sputum eosinophilia included low forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1))% predicted, raised serum eosinophil, positive smoking history, Polynesian ethnicity and negative asthma family history. There was a non-statistically significant trend for FeNO predicting sputum eosinophilia. The best combination of predictors was low FEV(1)% predicted, raised serum eosinophil, positive smoking history and negative family history of asthma.

CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the serum eosinophil count and FEV(1) combined with aspects of a clinical history may provide a simple and practical alternative to assessment of airway (sputum) eosinophilia in the clinical setting. A full blood count can be performed at a substantially lesser cost and with greater accessibility than induced sputum. We feel the time has come for the clinical utility of the serum eosinophil count to be revisited.