Correspondence
The Asthma Predictive Index: Not a useful tool in clinical practice

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2010.10.012Get rights and content

References (7)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (23)

  • Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases in children

    2015, Jornal de Pediatria
    Citation Excerpt :

    Some authors have mentioned methodological and practical limitations of APIs, suggesting that they have low capacity and poor sensitivity to predict asthma at school age,45,46 and that although they are simple and easy-to-apply tools, they have not been sufficiently validated. According to these authors, predicting asthma using simple clinical models is virtually impossible.45,46 Although most of the scientific community is favorable to the use of APIs,47,48 the search for clinical and/or laboratory markers for the diagnosis of asthma in RWI and children younger than 5 years remains a rich area for future studies.

  • Predicting asthma outcomes

    2015, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
    Citation Excerpt :

    The “loose” index required less than 3 episodes per year, again combined with one of the major criteria or 2 of the minor criteria (Table I). The usefulness of the API has been challenged on several grounds.2 It predicts the outcome of asthma ever and not recurrent wheeze, which is more clinically relevant and of greater concern to physicians and families.

  • Diagnosis of Asthma in Infants and Children

    2014, Middleton's Allergy: Principles and Practice: Eighth Edition
  • Diagnosis, management, and prognosis of preschool wheeze

    2014, The Lancet
    Citation Excerpt :

    Subsequently, other predictive indices were derived from other birth cohorts (eg, the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children [ALSPAC] and the Dutch Prevention and Incidence of Asthma and Mite Allergy [PIAMA])30 and aimed to predict whether the child will meet the definition of asthma aged 6–10 years.45,46 Although these so-called asthma predictive scores have substantially shaped the classification of wheezing phenotypes and improved understanding of the epidemiology of preschool wheezing, they have five main limitations regarding the therapeutic approach of wheeze in preschool children: their positive predictive values and sensitivities were quite low, particularly in children with repeated wheeze;47,48 independent validation of these indices in different populations from those in which they were derived has not been published;47,49 although often used to stratify or select patients in therapeutic trials, there is controversial evidence as to whether children with positive and negative asthma predictive scores respond differently to therapeutic approaches;50,51 although not necessarily promoted as such, children perceived at low risk of ongoing asthma by school age are often believed to deserve less preventive therapy, whereas those at higher risk are recommended more intensive therapy, an assumption that has not been verified; and importantly, there is accumulating evidence suggesting that the disappearance of symptoms might not correlate with the absence of sequelae.52 In summary, several classifications of wheeze phenotypes have been proposed so far, each with its limitations.

  • Predicting persistence of asthma in preschool wheezers: Crystal balls or muddy waters?

    2013, Paediatric Respiratory Reviews
    Citation Excerpt :

    The Asthma Predictive Index25 (API) has become by far the most popular among these predictive tools; it has been introduced in international guidelines30,31 and position papers,17,32–34 and it has been used to select high-risk children for clinical trials,35–37 or as the “gold standard” to compare other predictive rules in population-based studies.29,38 However, its usefulness in clinical practice has recently been questioned.39,40 The present article reviews the existing asthma predictive models focusing particularly on their validity and performance characteristics, and investigates their ability to predict the long-term prognosis of preschool wheeze.

  • New insights into the natural history of asthma: Primary prevention on the horizon

    2011, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
    Citation Excerpt :

    These indices are useful, albeit imperfect,15 to assess prognosis and have been used for studies of secondary prevention of asthma.16 They have been criticized as inappropriate if the purpose is to identify children who could be responsive to different asthma therapies, and alternatives based on the main triggers of wheezing episodes have been proposed.17,18 Whether these alternatives are better suited to identify children at high risk for asthma given the variable and often unpredictable clinical expression of the disease is unknown.19-21

View all citing articles on Scopus

Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: The author has declared that he has no conflict of interest.

Editor’s note: There is no accompanying reply to this correspondence.

View full text