help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Published ahead of print on August 23, 2007, doi:10.1164/rccm.200704-588OC
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Online Supplement
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
200704-588OCv1
176/10/988    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Singh, D.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Singh, D.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, B. J.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Vol 176. pp. 988-993, (2007)
© 2007 American Thoracic Society
doi: 10.1164/rccm.200704-588OC

Original Article

Selective Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase Inhibition Has No Effect on Allergen Challenge in Asthma

Dave Singh1, Duncan Richards2, Richard G. Knowles2, Sheila Schwartz2, Ashley Woodcock1, Steve Langley1,{dagger} and Brian J. O'Connor3

1 Medicines Evaluation Unit, South Manchester University Hospitals Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; 2 GlaxoSmithKline, Stevenage, United Kingdom; and 3 Department of Asthma, Allergy, and Respiratory Science, Guy's, King's and St. Thomas' School of Medicine, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Dave Singh, M.D., Medicines Evaluation Unit, South Manchester University Hospitals Trust, University of Manchester, Southmoor Road, Manchester M23 9LT, UK. E-mail: dsingh{at}meu.org.uk


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Rationale: Exhaled breath nitric oxide (FENO) is increased in asthma. NO is produced predominantly by inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS).

Objectives: We evaluated the selective and potent iNOS inhibitor GW274150 in asthma.

Methods: Twenty-eight steroid-naive patients with asthma participated in a double-blind, randomized, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, three-period cross-over study. Subjects received GW274150 (90 mg), montelukast (10 mg), or placebo once daily for 14 days. FENO was assessed predose on Days 1, 7, 10, and 14. Adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) challenge was performed on Day 10, allergen challenge on Day 14 followed by methacholine challenge (MCh) 24 hours later, and then bronchoscopy.

Measurements and Main Results: GW274150 reduced predose FENO by 73, 75, and 71% on Days 7, 10, and 14, respectively, compared with placebo. Montelukast did not reduce FENO. GW274150 did not inhibit AMP reactivity whereas for montelukast there was a trend toward inhibition: the mean doubling dose difference versus placebo was 0.64 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0 to 1.28). GW274150 did not inhibit early (EAR) and late (LAR) asthmatic responses to allergen, or MCh reactivity, despite reduced FENO levels. Montelukast inhibited EAR and LAR FEV1; the mean difference versus placebo for minimal FEV1 was 0.37 L (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.55) and 0.18 L (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.32), respectively. MCh reactivity was inhibited by montelukast (mean doubling dose difference vs. placebo, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.01). GW271540 also had no effect on inflammatory cell numbers in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid after allergen challenge.

Conclusions: Selective iNOS inhibition effectively reduces FENO but does not affect airway hyperreactivity or airway inflammatory cell numbers after allergen challenge in subjects with asthma.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00273013).

Key Words: nitric oxide • bronchial hyperreactivity



   AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Scientific Knowledge on the Subject
Exhaled nitric oxide (NO) is produced by inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), and levels are high in asthma. iNOS is therefore a potential therapeutic target in asthma.

What This Study Adds to the Field
Administration of a selective iNOS inhibitor to patients with asthma reduced NO levels, but had no effect on allergen responsiveness. Targeting NO may not be an effective intervention in asthma.

 
Levels of nitric oxide in exhaled air (FENO) are significantly elevated in patients with asthma compared with healthy volunteers (1–3). Nitric oxide (NO) is formed from L-arginine, O2, and NADPH by the catalytic activity of nitric oxide synthase (NOS) enzymes (4, 5). Neuronal NOS (nNOS or NOSI, NOS1) and endothelial NOS (eNOS or NOSIII, NOS3) are constitutive enzyme isoforms. Inducible NOS (iNOS or NOSII, NOS2) expression is increased in airway epithelial and inflammatory cells from subjects with asthma compared with healthy control subjects, suggesting a key role for this enzyme in NO overproduction in patients with asthma (6–8).

There is much debate as to whether NO is a harmful or beneficial molecule in the airways (9–11). The effects of NO are cell type and concentration specific, and highly dependent on the presence of other factors, such as reactive oxygen species, in the local microenvironment. The harmful effects of NO include increased nitrosative stress through the production of harmful reactive nitrogen species such as peroxynitrite, which can modify tyrosine in proteins to form 3-nitrotyrosine (3-NT) (6, 7, 10, 11). In contrast, NO and related NO species may also act as bronchodilators and have antiinflammatory effects (11–13).

Inhibitors of the constitutive NOS isoforms produce a range of undesirable effects including hypertension (14). In addition, the nonselective NOS inhibitor NG-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) did not inhibit responses to allergen challenge in patients with asthma (15). A rise in adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) and histamine reactivity with L-NAME has also been observed, perhaps because of inhibition of bronchoprotective NO produced by constitutive NOS (16). GW274150 [(S)-2-amino-7-acetamidino-5-thioheptanoic acid] is a long-acting inhibitor of iNOS that has a high degree of selectivity for iNOS versus both constitutive NOS isoforms, eNOS (more than 100-fold) and nNOS (more than 80-fold) (17, 18). In animal models of pulmonary inflammation, GW274150 protects against the late airway response to an acute allergen challenge (19, 20). GW274150 has also shown protective effects in a range of rodent models of inflammation outside the lung (21–23). GW274150 (24) and the selective iNOS inhibitor SC-51 [the prodrug of L-NIL, N6-(1-iminoethyl)- L-lysine 5-tetrazole amide] (25) substantially reduce FENO levels in patients with mild asthma. We hypothesized that GW274150 would also effectively treat pulmonary inflammation in patients with asthma.

The main aim of this study was to investigate whether therapeutic benefit could be achieved by highly selective inhibition of iNOS with GW274150 in the experimental allergen challenge model of allergic asthma. We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way cross-over study in steroid-naive patients with asthma to compare the effects of GW274150, montelukast, and placebo on FENO levels, airway hyperreactivity, and inflammatory cells. Some of the results of this study have already been presented in abstract form (26).


   METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
 METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Subjects
Twenty-eight steroid-naive patients with physician-diagnosed asthma for at least 6 months were recruited. Subjects were required to be aged 18 to 55 years and nonsmokers for at least 6 months with less than a 10–pack-year history. At screening patients were required to have an FEV1 greater than 65% predicted, have a positive skin test to either house dust mite, grass pollen, or cat allergen, and demonstrate both an early and late asthmatic reaction to one of these allergens when inhaled. They were also required to have AMP and methacholine PC20 (provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1) less than 100 and 8 mg/ml (or PD20 < 3.2 mg), respectively. See the online supplement for a list of the exclusion criteria. All patients provided written, informed consent. The study was approved by the local research ethics committee.

Study Design
This was a two-center, double-blind, randomized, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, three-period cross-over study. Figure 1 shows the study design. Eligible subjects received GW274150 (90 mg), montelukast (Singulair, 10 mg; Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ), and placebo once daily for 14 days in random order. During each treatment period subjects were instructed to take the study medication at the same time of day. The washout period was 14–28 days between treatment periods to allow sufficient time between allergen challenges and flexibility of study visit scheduling. Subjects were required to fast for 8 hours before observed dosing on Days 1, 7, 10, and 14 and to refrain from short-acting beta-agonist use for 8 hours before each clinic visit. Heart rate, blood pressure, ECG, and FEV1 were measured on Days 1, 7, 10, and 14. FENO was performed immediately predose on Day 1 (referred to as "baseline measurements") and on Days 7, 10, and 14. On Day 10, subjects underwent an AMP challenge within 6 hours of dosing. On Day 14, an inhaled allergen challenge was performed 1 hour postdose and FENO was measured 2, 6, 9, and 24 hours postdose. A methacholine challenge was then performed on Day 15, 23 hours after allergen challenge (24 hours postdose). A bronchoscopy (see the online supplement for details) to obtain bronchial biopsies and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) was performed after recovery from the methacholine challenge on Day 15. All subjects underwent a bronchoscopy during the placebo treatment period and were randomized to undergo bronchoscopy after treatment with either GW274150 or montelukast. Adverse events and beta-agonist use were monitored throughout the study with the aid of diary cards.


Figure 1
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 1. Study design flow chart. Bronchial challenges and bronchoscopy days are shown for treatment period 1, and were identical for periods 2 and 3. Methacholine challenge was performed before bronchoscopy on Day 15. Exhaled breath nitric oxide (FENO) and FEV1 were measured predose on Days 1, 7, 10, and 14 in each treatment period. FENO and FEV1 were measured after allergen challenge as described in METHODS. AMP = adenosine 5'-monophosphate; D = day.

 
Allergen, AMP, and Methacholine Challenges
See the online supplement for a description of the bronchial challenges performed.

FENO
FENO was measured with a CLD 88 analyzer (ECO MEDICS, Duernten, Switzerland) at a flow of 50 ml/second as described in the online supplement.

Immunohistochemistry
The immunohistochemical methods used to stain bronchial biopsies for iNOS and 3-NT expression are described in the online supplement, as is the methodology for BAL centrifuged cell preparation (Shandon Cytospin; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) and differential cell counting. iNOS and 3-NT expression in the epithelium and subepithelium were expressed as the mean intensity of positive staining, and positive staining was expressed as a percentage of the total tissue area.

Statistical Analysis
Bronchial challenge end points were analyzed using mixed effect models with treatment and period fitted as fixed effects and subject fitted as a random effect. Confidence intervals (CIs) where quoted are 95% CIs. See the online supplement for further statistical details.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
 METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Twenty-eight subjects (see Table 1 for demography) were randomized, of whom 25 completed the study (26 received GW274150, 25 montelukast, and 28 placebo). The three withdrawals were due to worsening asthma (during treatment with placebo), a vasovagal episode during intravenous cannulation, and for personal reasons. The numbers of patients screened, excluded, randomized, and withdrawn are summarized in Figure 2.


Figure 2
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 2. Flow of patients through study, showing number screened, randomized, withdrawn, and completed. Excluded patients did not fulfill the inclusion criteria.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 1. SUBJECT DEMOGRAPHY

 
Study medications were well tolerated. The most frequently reported adverse events were headache (reported by 7 subjects [27%] taking GW274150, 6 [24%] taking montelukast, and 8 [29%] taking placebo) and pharyngolaryngeal pain (reported by 3 [12%] subjects taking GW274150, 3 [12%] taking montelukast, and 3 [11%] taking placebo). No treatment-related trends were observed in safety laboratory parameters, blood pressure, ECG parameters, beta-agonist reliever use, and predose FEV1 values (Table 2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 2. MEAN FEV1 PREDOSE VALUES ON DAYS 1, 7, 10, AND 14

 
Exhaled NO
Geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals for predose FENO concentrations on Days 1, 7, 10, and 14, and postdose concentrations on Day 14, are summarized in Figure 3 (and see Table E1 in the online supplement). GW274150 reduced predose FENO measurements by 73% (95% CI, 64 to 79%), 75% (95% CI, 67 to 80%), and 71% (95% CI, 64 to 78%) on Days 7, 10, and 14, respectively, at the trough of the effect, compared with placebo. In contrast, there was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in FENO measurements during treatment with montelukast compared with placebo.


Figure 3
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 3. Profile of exhaled NO levels at predose from Days 1 to 14 and then 2, 6, and 9 hours postdose (in italics) on Day 14 after allergen challenge, and then on Day 15.

 
Allergen Challenge
Early asthmatic response.
The early asthmatic response (EAR) FEV1 change on Day 14 was similar during treatment with GW274150 and placebo (Figure 4). There was no significant difference for either the minimal FEV1 or weighted mean FEV1 (see Table 3). In contrast, montelukast inhibited the EAR compared with placebo, with on average a 42 and 62% attenuation of the minimal FEV1 and weighted mean FEV1, respectively.


Figure 4
View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 4. Early and late asthmatic response to inhaled allergen challenge after 14 days of treatment with either GW274150, montelukast, or placebo. Means and 95% confidence intervals of change in FEV1 compared with post-saline value are shown.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 3. EARLY AND LATE ASTHMATIC FEV1 RESPONSES: TREATMENT DIFFERENCES COMPARED WITH PLACEBO

 
Late asthmatic response.
The LAR change from postsaline FEV1 from 4 to 10 hours postallergen on Day 14 was similar during treatment with GW274150 and placebo (Figure 2). There was no significant difference for either the minimal FEV1 or weighted mean FEV1 (see Table 3). In contrast, montelukast inhibited the LAR compared with placebo, with 17 and 26% attenuation of the minimal FEV1 and weighted mean FEV1, respectively.

FENO post–allergen challenge.
FENO concentrations compared with baseline (predose on Day 1) were significantly reduced by GW274150 compared with placebo post–allergen challenge; at 2 hours postdose (1 h after allergen challenge) the reduction was on average 89% (95% CI, 86 to 92%) (see Figure 1; and see the online supplement for a full listing of FENO data). At 23 hours post–allergen challenge, FENO levels were increased in all groups compared with the Day 14 predose levels (Figure 1, and see the online supplement for a full listing of FENO data). The increase was similar in the placebo and montelukast groups: an approximately 1.6-fold increase. There was a 1.8-fold increase in the GW274150 group. However, the absolute FENO concentrations in the GW274150 group were still considerably lower compared with the placebo and montelukast groups.

Methacholine challenge.
Adjusted geometric mean methacholine PC20 (mg/ml) values, determined 23 hours after the allergen challenge, were 0.32 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.48), 0.28 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.42), and 0.46 (95% CI, 0.31 to 0.69) after treatment with placebo, GW274150, and montelukast, respectively. There was no difference between the methacholine reactivity during dosing with GW274150 (90 mg) and placebo (mean doubling dose difference, –0.19; 95% CI, –0.69 to 0.30). In contrast, methacholine reactivity was inhibited by montelukast compared with placebo (mean doubling dose difference, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.01).

Bronchoscopy samples.
The epithelial intensity of the expression of iNOS and 3-NT 24 hours after allergen challenge was not different between placebo and active treatment groups (see Table 4). The percentage area of epithelium expressing iNOS and 3-NT was not reduced by the active treatments compared with placebo, and a high degree of variability in the data was observed. See the online supplement for examples of iNOS and 3-NT staining. The BAL cell counts were similar in the three treatment arms (see Table 5); neither GW274150 nor montelukast decreased inflammatory cell numbers.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 4. INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE AND 3-NITROTYROSINE EXPRESSION IN MUCOSAL BIOPSIES

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		TABLE 5. INFLAMMATORY CELL COUNTS FROM BRONCHOALVEOLAR LAVAGE POST–ALLERGEN CHALLENGE

 
AMP Challenge
The adjusted geometric mean AMP PC20 (mg/ml) at 6 hours postdose on Day 10 were 5.2 (95% CI, 2.5 to 11.1), 6.4 (95% CI, 3.0 to 13.6), and 8.2 (95% CI, 3.8 to 17.4) after treatment with placebo, GW274150, and montelukast, respectively. There was no difference between AMP reactivity during dosing with GW274150 and placebo (mean doubling dose difference, 0.29; 95% CI, –0.32 to 0.91). There was a trend to inhibition of AMP reactivity during treatment with montelukast compared with placebo (mean doubling dose difference, 0.64; 95% CI, 0 to 1.28).


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
GW274150, a highly selective inhibitor of iNOS, substantially reduced FENO levels in steroid-naive patients with asthma. This reduction in FENO levels was not associated with any change in the early or late responses to allergen challenge, or with measurements of bronchial hyperreactivity (AMP reactivity, or methacholine reactivity post–allergen challenge). We have therefore shown that GW274150 was pharmacologically active in the lungs of patients with asthma, but that it was not associated with any beneficial or detrimental effects on a range of airway reactivity measurements over a 14-day dosing period, or on the numbers of inflammatory cells present in BAL.

Selective iNOS inhibitors reduce inflammation in animal models of asthma (19, 27–29). In particular, GW274150 substantially inhibited the allergen-provoked LAR in guinea pigs, whereas in strong contrast the nonselective inhibitor L-NAME exacerbated the response to allergen challenge in these studies (19). Moreover, L-NAME has been shown to exacerbate vascular leakage in response to endotoxin, an effect opposite to that with highly selective iNOS inhibitors in a range of tissues including the lung (30, 31). These observations supported our hypothesis that highly selective iNOS inhibition would be an effective therapeutic strategy in patients with asthma.

GW274150 reduced the levels of FENO by up to approximately 90%, to levels well below those observed in patients with stable asthma and similar to or lower than those in healthy subjects (32). nNOS and eNOS also contribute to FENO levels, and the relative contribution of the NOS isoforms is likely to be determined by a variety of factors including genetics, airway inflammation, and environmental stimuli. Nevertheless, our data suggest that iNOS is the major contributing enzyme. The reduction in FENO in patients with asthma after a single dose of the iNOS inhibitor SC-51 was greater than that observed in the current study, to levels below 2 ppb (25). However, SC-51 is likely to have been inhibiting nNOS at this high dose, because of its modest selectivity for iNOS over nNOS. Caution should be applied in directly comparing FENO levels in different studies, as these are dependent on the flow rate and analyzer used, which were different in these two studies (32). It is possible that GW274150 did not completely abolish iNOS activity, although the substantial reduction of FENO to levels similar to those in healthy subjects (32) suggests that clinically relevant levels of inhibition were achieved. It is also possible that the duration of treatment for 14 days was inadequate to completely inhibit iNOS activity, although the magnitude of the reduction in FENO levels and the fact that this reached steady state indicate that substantial inhibition of iNOS function was achieved.

Pharmacodynamic steady state inhibition of FENO by GW274150 was achieved in less than 7 days, which was maintained throughout the EAR (0–2 h) and LAR (4–10 h). Despite effective suppression of NO production, GW274150 did not inhibit allergen reactivity. The inhaled allergen challenge is the most commonly used clinical model for evaluating the effects of potential antiinflammatory therapies for asthma; all the antiinflammatory drugs currently used in clinical practice have beneficial effects in this model (33–36). We considered this model to be an appropriate and sensitive method for assessing the effect of selective iNOS inhibition. We also observed no effect of GW274150 on AMP reactivity, another commonly used and robust method for evaluating antiinflammatory effects, particularly of corticosteroids (37, 38). The lack of any benefit in the methacholine challenge results at 24 hours postallergen reflected the LAR results.

The reaction between NO and superoxide forms peroxynitrite, which has been proposed to mediate a range of biological effects relevant to asthma pathophysiology, such as promoting inflammation and cytotoxicity and increasing bronchial hyperreactivity (9–11) Furthermore, in humans with asthma the levels of airway epithelial iNOS and 3-NT (used as a biomarker for peroxynitrite levels) are increased compared with control subjects (6–8), and correlate with markers of disease severity, such as lung function and bronchial hyperreactivity (6). Inhaled steroids reduce 3-NT and epithelial iNOS expression (6). However, the current study showed that reducing NO levels by selective iNOS inhibition did not reduce 3-NT epithelial expression after allergen challenge. This is in direct contrast to a rat model in which GW274150 completely prevented nitrotyrosine staining in the lung tissue after carrageenan induced acute lung inflammation (20). The reason for selective iNOS inhibition having no effect on peroxynitrite bioactivity in asthma may be because a high degree of iNOS inhibition is required under circumstances in which superoxide production is not reduced; in support of this hypothesis, the reaction between NO and superoxide to form peroxynitrite is extremely fast and pH dependent, approaching the diffusion-controlled limit (39). Alternatively it could be because peroxynitrite can be formed by mechanisms other than iNOS (10, 11, 39), or that the allergen challenge itself may be responsible for failing to show a reduction in 3-NT; the allergen challenge may have increased both (1) iNOS activity, and the rise in exhaled NO levels at 24 hours postchallenge supports this theory, and (2) the level of reactive oxygen species, including superoxide, which contribute to 3-NT levels. Finally, it could be that 3-NT in the human lung is long-lived, such that 14 days is insufficient to observe changes. If this is correct, then it argues against the presence of significant denitration enzymes in human lung tissue.

An important group of biologically active nitrogen species produced by iNOS activity are S-nitrosothiols, for example, S-nitrosoglutathione (11–13); the formation of NO can lead to the production of species such as peroxynitrite, which are able to react with free thiols to form S-nitrosothiols. One study in S-nitrosothiol reductase knockout mice has provided evidence that these S-nitrosothiols act as endogenous bronchodilators, decreasing airway reactivity to methacholine (13). In principle, therefore, inhibition of iNOS by GW274150 could decrease the concentration of S-nitrosothiols in the airway and worsen airway hyperreactivity. However, the data in the current study show that airway hyperreactivity is unaffected by iNOS inhibition. Therefore, either S-nitrosothiols are not important bronchodilators in humans, or else alternative sources of these S-nitrosothiols other than iNOS, such as eNOS and nNOS, predominate in the human lung. In addition, the activity of S-nitrosothiol reductase in human airways may be of prime importance in determining S-nitrosothiol levels.

It is known that under some circumstances iNOS can promote prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production through a direct interaction between iNOS and cyclooxygenase 2 (40). Because PGE2 may be a bronchoprotective mediator in the lungs of patients with asthma, it is possible that any beneficial effects of iNOS inhibition in the airways were counterbalanced by a reduction in PGE2 levels. We were not able to measure PGE2 in this study, and therefore were not able to address this possible mechanism to explain the failure of GW274150 to improve the clinical asthma end points studied.

NO has diverse immunological functions in various cell models, ranging from cytotoxicity to immunosuppression (9–12). An immunosuppressive role for NO in asthma could be protective against the development of severe asthma or exacerbations. Coupled with the ability of NO to cause bronchodilation, it is theoretically possible that NO functions mainly as an endogenous protector against pulmonary inflammation and bronchoconstriction. However, if this were true, then in the current study we would have seen a deterioration in clinical asthma end points after treatment with GW274150. This phenomenon was not observed, suggesting that NO was not functioning as an endogenous protector.

The metabolism of NO in the airways can produce a range of different molecules with diverse effects, including nitrates, nitrites, 3-NT, and S-nitrosoglutathione (9–12). Measuring FENO alone does not provide a comprehensive assessment of the range of mediators that may be involved in nitrosative stress mechanisms in asthma. We have shown that reducing iNOS activity leads to a reduction in FENO levels with seemingly no effect on 3-NT expression, but did not address changes in other biologically relevant nitrogen species. However, we did evaluate BAL inflammatory cell counts, and found that a reduction in FENO levels was not associated with any modulation of inflammatory cell numbers.

Montelukast was used in this study as a "positive control," which was expected to attenuate the response to the allergen challenge (35, 36). Inhaled corticosteroids could have been used as a positive control (34, 35, 37), but the washout period required would have made a three-part cross-over design less practical. Montelukast did not reduce FENO levels in our study. The effects of montelukast on FENO in previous studies have been conflicting, with either a reduction in FENO observed (41) or no change (42). The variable effect of montelukast on FENO seems to be less than the effects of inhaled corticosteroids (42).

FENO monitoring may be used as a measure of asthma control, to guide the need for corticosteroid therapy (43, 44). The current study has shown that the reduction in FENO levels caused by the selective iNOS inhibitor GW274150 does not lead to any beneficial or detrimental effects on airway hyperreactivity. Although FENO has applications as a biomarker in asthma, our study provides evidence that selective iNOS inhibition is not an effective therapeutic strategy in asthma.


   Acknowledgments
 
The authors acknowledge the invaluable work of Emma Salmon for the statistical analysis, and Sandra Hirschberg for study management and scientific input.


   FOOTNOTES
 
Supported by GlaxoSmithKline (Stevenage, UK).

{dagger} Deceased. Back

This article has an online supplement, which is accessible from this issue's table of contents at www.atsjournals.org

Originally Published in Press as DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200704-588OC on August 23, 2007

Conflict of Interest Statement: D.S. received lecture fees, research grants, consultancy fees, and support for conference attendance from various pharmaceutical companies including AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roche, and received a $300,000 unrestricted research grant over the last 3 years from GlaxoSmithKline. D.R. is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline. R.G.K. is a full-time employee of GlaxoSmithKline. S.S. is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline. A.W. received consultancy and lecture fees and is the principal investigator on studies for GlaxoSmithKline. A.W. received consultancy fees and was a principal investigator on research studies for Chiesi, and consultancy fees for Novartis and Oriel Therapeutics. S.L. is deceased. B.J.O. had ad hoc consultancy arrangements with several pharmaceutical companies, including GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Altana, Aventis, Celgene, Pfizer, and Boehringer Ingelheim, receiving honorariums ranging from $600 to $1,200, not exceeding more than $3,000 in any one year from any company. B.J.O. directs a phase 2 clinical research unit, dedicated to the evaluation of new drugs for airway disease, and his university receives funding appropriate to the complexity of the study at normal commercial market rates. B.J.O. receives speaker's fees for AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Altana, with the honorariums never exceeding $1,000, and his total annual speaker's fees never exceed $10,000.

Received in original form April 17, 2007; accepted in final form August 13, 2007


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Alving K, Weitzberg E, Lundberg JM. Increased amount of nitric oxide in exhaled air of asthmatics. Eur Respir J 1993;6:1368–1370.[Abstract]
  2. Persson MG, Zetterstrom O, Agrenius V, Gustafsson LE. Single-breath nitric oxide measurements in asthmatic patients and smokers. Lancet 1994;343:146–147.[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Kharitonov SA, Yates D, Robbins RA, Logan-Sinclair R, Shinebourne EA, Barnes PJ. Increased nitric oxide in exhaled air of asthmatic patients. Lancet 1994;343:133–135.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Alderton WK, Cooper CE, Knowles RG. Nitric oxide synthases: structure, function and inhibition. Biochem J 2001;357:593–615.[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Knowles RG, Moncada S. Nitric oxide synthases in mammals. Biochem J 1994;298:249–258.[Medline]
  6. Saleh D, Ernst P, Lim S, Barnes PJ, Giaid A. Increased formation of the potent pro-oxidant peroxynitrite in the airways of asthmatic patients is associated with induction of inducible nitric oxide synthase: effect of inhaled glucocorticoid. FASEB J 1998;12:929–937.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Ichinose M, Sugiura H, Yamagata S, Koarai A, Shirato K. Increase in reactive nitrogen species production in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease airways. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:701–706.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Hamid Q, Springall DR, Riveros-Moreno V, Chanez P, Howarth P, Redington A, Bousquet J, Godard P, Holgate S, Polak JM. Induction of nitric oxide synthase in asthma. Lancet 1993;342:1510–1513.[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Folkerts G, Kloek J, Muijsers RBR, Nijcamp FP. Reactive nitrogen and oxygen species in airway inflammation. Eur J Pharmacol 2001;429:251–262.[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. van der Vliet A, Eiserich JP, Shigenaga MK, Cross CE. Reactive nitrogen species and tyrosine nitration in the respiratory tract: epiphenomena or a pathobiologic mechanism of disease? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;160:1–9.[Free Full Text]
  11. Ricciardolo FL, Di SA, Sabatini F, Folkerts G. Reactive nitrogen species in the respiratory tract. Eur J Pharmacol 2006;533:240–252.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Gaston B, Singel D, Doctor A, Stamler JS. S-Nitrosothiol signaling in respiratory biology. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;173:1186–1193.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Que LG, Liu L, Yan Y, Whitehead GS, Gavett SH, Schwartz DA, Stamler JS. Protection from experimental asthma by an endogenous bronchodilator. Science 2005;308:1618–1621.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Moncada S, Higgs EA. Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies related to nitric oxide. FASEB J 1995;9:1319–1330.[Abstract]
  15. Taylor DA, McGrath JL, O'Connor BJ, Barnes PJ. Allergen-induced early and late asthmatic responses are not affected by inhibition of endogenous nitric oxide. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;158:99–106.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Taylor DA, McGrath JL, Orr LM, Barnes PJ, O'Connor BJ. Effect of endogenous nitric oxide inhibition on airway responsiveness to histamine and adenosine-5'-monophosphate in asthma. Thorax 1998;53:483–489.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Alderton WK, Angell ADR, Craig C, Dawson J, Garvey E, Moncada S, Monkhouse J, Rees D, Russell LJ, Russell RJ, et al. GW274150 and GW273629 are potent and highly selective inhibitors of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) in vitro and in vivo. Br J Pharmacol 2005;145:301–312.[CrossRef][Medline]
  18. Young RJ, Beams RM, Carter K, Clark HA, Coe DM, Chambers CL, Davies PI, Dawson J, Drysdale MJ, Franzman KW, et al. Inhibition of inducible nitric oxide synthase by acetamidine derivatives of hetero-substituted lysine and homolysine. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2000;10:597–600.[CrossRef][Medline]
  19. Knowles RG, Salmon M, Kurusu O, Kilian D, Hurle M, Ozawa K, Liou S, Kushida H, Kinoshita M, Kikkawa H. Anti-inflammatory profile of the highly-selective iNOS inhibitor GW274150 in animal models of lung disease [abstract]. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2007;4:A487.
  20. Dugo L, Marzocco S, Mazzon E, Di Paola R, Genovese T, Caputi AP, Cuzzocrea S. Effects of GW274150, a novel and selective inhibitor of iNOS activity, in acute lung inflammation. Br J Pharmacol 2004;141:979–987.[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Cuzzocrea S, Chatterjee PK, Mazzon E, McDonald MC, Dugo L, Di Paola R, Serraino I, Britti D, Caputi AP, Thiemermann C. Beneficial effects of GW274150, a novel, potent and selective inhibitor of iNOS activity, in a rodent model of collagen-induced arthritis. Eur J Pharmacol 2002;453:119–129.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Chatterjee PK, Patel NS, Sivarajah A, Kvale EO, Dugo L, Cuzzocrea S, Brown PA, Stewart KN, Mota-Felipe H, Britti D, et al. GW274150, a potent and highly selective inhibitor of iNOS, reduces experimental renal ischemia/reperfusion injury. Kidney Int 2003;63:853–865.[CrossRef][Medline]
  23. De Alba J, Clayton NM, Collins SD, Colthup P, Chessell I, Knowles RG. GW274150, a novel and highly selective inhibitor of the inducible isoform of nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), shows analgesic effects in rat models of inflammatory and neuropathic pain. Pain 2006;120:170–181.[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Schwartz S, Hirschberg S, Salmon E, Chen C, Fuhr R, Richards D. The safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of repeat doses of oral GW274150 in mild asthmatic male volunteers. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2007;4(Abstracts Issue):A485.
  25. Hansel TT, Kharitonov SA, Donnelly LE, Erin EM, Currie MG, Moore WM, Manning PT, Recker DP, Barnes PJ. A selective inhibitor of inducible oxide synthase inhibits exhaled breath nitric oxide in healthy volunteers and asthmatics. FASEB J 2003;17:1298–1300.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Singh SD, Richards DB, Knowles RG, Schwartz SI, Langley S, Woodcock AA, O'Connor BJ. Substantial and selective inhibition of iNOS has no effect on allergen challenge in patients with asthma. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2007;4(Abstracts Issue):A483.
  27. Koarai A, Ichinose M, Sugiura H, Yamagata S, Hattori T, Shirato K. Allergic airway hyperresponsiveness and eosinophil infiltration is reduced by a selective iNOS inhibitor, 1400W, in mice. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2000;13:267–275.[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Prado CM, Leick-Maldonado EA, Yano L, Leme AS, Capelozzi VL, Martins MA, Tiberio IF. Effects of nitric oxide synthases in chronic allergic airway inflammation and remodeling. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2006;35:457–465.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Muijsers RB, van Ark I, Folkerts G, Koster AS, van Oosterhout AJ, Postma DS, Nijkamp FP. Apocynin and 1400 W prevents airway hyperresponsiveness during allergic reactions in mice. Br J Pharmacol 2001;134:434–440.[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Garvey EP, Oplinger JA, Furfine ES, Kiff RJ, Laszlo F, Whittle BJ, Knowles RG. 1400W is a slow, tight binding, and highly selective inhibitor of inducible nitric-oxide synthase in vitro and in vivo. J Biol Chem 1997;272:4959–4963.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Laszlo F, Whittle BJ. Actions of isoform-selective and non-selective nitric oxide synthase inhibitors on endotoxin-induced vascular leakage in rat colon. Eur J Pharmacol 1997;334:99–102.[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Borrill Z, Clough D, Truman N, Morris J, Langley S, Singh D. A comparison of exhaled nitric oxide measurements performed using three different analysers. Respir Med 2006;100:1392–1396.[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Koopmans JG, Lutter R, Jansen HM, van der Zee JS. Adding salmeterol to an inhaled corticosteroid reduces allergen-induced serum IL-5 and peripheral blood eosinophils. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2005;116:1007–1013.[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Kidney JC, Boulet LP, Hargreave FE, Deschesnes F, Swystun VA, O'Byrne PM, Choudry N, Morris MM, Jennings B, Andersson N, et al. Evaluation of single-dose inhaled corticosteroid activity with an allergen challenge model. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;100:65–70.[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Palmqvist M, Bruce C, Sjostrand M, Arvidsson P, Lotvall J. Differential effects of fluticasone and montelukast on allergen-induced asthma. Allergy 2005;60:65–70.[CrossRef][Medline]
  36. Diamant Z, Grootendorst DC, Veselic-Charvat M, Timmers MC, De Smet M, Leff JA, Seidenberg BC, Zwinderman AH, Peszek I, Sterk PJ. The effect of montelukast (MK-0476), a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist, on allergen-induced airway responses and sputum cell counts in asthma. Clin Exp Allergy 1999;29:42–51.[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Holgate ST, Arshad H, Stryszak P, Harrison JE. Mometasone furoate antagonizes AMP-induced bronchoconstriction in patients with mild asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000;105:906–911.[CrossRef][Medline]
  38. Ketchell RI, Jensen MW, Lumley P, Wright AM, Allenby MI, O'Connor BJ. Rapid effect of inhaled fluticasone propionate on airway responsiveness to adenosine 5'-monophosphate in mild asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002;110:603–606.[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Beckman J, Koppenol W. Nitric oxide, superoxide, and peroynitrite: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Am J Physiol 1996;271:C1424–C1437.[Medline]
  40. Kim SF, Huri DA, Snyder SH. Inducible nitric oxide synthase binds, S-nitrosylates, and activates cyclooxygenase-2. Science 2005;310:1966–1970.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Sandrini A, Ferreira IM, Gutierrez C, Jardim JR, Zamel N, Chapman KR. Effect of montelukast on exhaled nitric oxide and nonvolatile markers of inflammation in mild asthma. Chest 2003;124:1334–1340.[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Kanniess F, Richter K, Böhme S, Jörres RA, Magnussen H. Montelukast versus fluticasone: effects on lung function, airway responsiveness and inflammation in moderate asthma. Eur Respir J 2002;20:853–858.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Kharitonov SA, Yates DH, Barnes PJ. Inhaled glucocorticoids decrease nitric oxide in exhaled air of asthmatic patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;153:454–457.[Abstract]
  44. Smith AD, Cowan JO, Brassett KP, Herbison GP, Taylor DR. Use of exhaled nitric oxide measurements to guide treatment in chronic asthma. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2163–2173.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Online Supplement
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
200704-588OCv1
176/10/988    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Singh, D.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Singh, D.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, B. J.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 2007 American Thoracic Society