Quality of Life Improvements with Biologic Initiation Among Subspecialist-Treated US Patients with Severe Asthma

Purpose

Patients living with severe asthma (SA) experience multiple health-related quality of life (HRQoL) impairments. This study examined HRQoL changes after biologic treatment initiation among a large, real-world cohort of patients with SA.

Patients and methods

CHRONICLE is an ongoing observational study of subspecialist-treated adults with SA who receive biologics or maintenance systemic corticosteroids or are uncontrolled on high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. Patients enrolled February 2018-February 2023 were asked to complete the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) every 6 months (total score range of 0-100 [0=best possible health], meaningful change threshold is a 4-unit reduction in the total score). Changes in SGRQ responses from 6 months before initiation to 12 to 18 months after initiation were summarized.

Results

A total of 76 patients completed the SGRQ 0 to 6 months before and 12 to 18 months after biologic initiation. The mean (SD) SGRQ total score decreased from 52.2 (20.6) to 41.9 (23.8), with improvement across the symptoms (-14.5), activity (-11.0), and impacts (-8.3) components. For specific impairments reported by ≥50% of patients before biologic initiation, fewer reported each impairment after biologic initiation; the largest reductions were for "Questions about what activities usually make you feel short of breath these days [Walking outside on level ground]" (67% to 43%), "Questions about other effects that your respiratory problems may have on you these days [I feel that I am not in control of my respiratory problems]" (55% to 34%), and "Questions about your cough and shortness of breath these days [My coughing or breathing disturbs my sleep]" (63% to 45%).

Conclusion

In this real-world cohort of adults with SA, biologic initiation was associated with meaningful improvements in asthma-related HRQoL. These data provide further insight into the burden SA places on patients and the benefits of biologic treatment.

Impact of Clinical Characteristics and Biomarkers on Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire Exacerbation Prediction Ability

BACKGROUND

Complex models combining impairment-based control assessments with clinical characteristics and biomarkers have been developed to predict asthma exacerbations. The composite Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) with adjustments for demographics (age, sex, race, and body mass index) predicts 12-month exacerbation occurrence similarly to these more complex models.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether AIRQ exacerbation prediction is enhanced when models are adjusted for a wider range of clinical characteristics and biomarkers.

METHODS

Patients aged 12 years and older completed monthly online surveys regarding exacerbation-related oral corticosteroid use, emergency department or urgent care visits, and hospitalizations. Univariate logistic regressions to predict exacerbations were performed with sociodemographics, comorbidities, exacerbation history, lung function, blood eosinophils, IgE, and FeNO. Significant (P ≤ .05) variables were included in multivariable logistic regressions with and without AIRQ control categories to predict 12-month exacerbations (log odds ratio [95% Wald confidence interval]). Model performances were compared.

RESULTS

Over 12 months, 1,070 patients (70% female; mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.4] years; 22% non-White; body mass index [SD], 30.6 [8.7]) completed one or more survey (mean [SD], 10.5 [2.8] surveys). In the multivariable analysis, AIRQ control category adjusted for significant clinical characteristics and biomarkers was predictive of one or more exacerbations: odds ratio (95% CI) not well-controlled versus well-controlled: 1.93 (1.41-2.62), very poorly controlled versus well-controlled: 3.81 (2.65-5.47). Receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) for this more complex model of exacerbation prediction (AUC = 0.72) did not differ from AIRQ (AUC = 0.70). Models with AIRQ performed better than those without AIRQ (AUC = 0.67; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Costly and time-consuming complex modeling with clinical characteristics and biomarkers does not enhance the strong exacerbation prediction ability of AIRQ.

The Use of Albuterol/Budesonide as Reliever Therapy to Reduce Asthma Exacerbations

Prevention of asthma exacerbations and reduction of systemic corticosteroid burden remain unmet needs in asthma. US asthma guidelines recommend concomitant short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) as an alternative reliever at step 2. The Food and Drug Administration approved a pressurized metered-dose inhaler containing albuterol and budesonide for as-needed treatment or prevention of bronchoconstriction and for reducing exacerbation risk in patients with asthma aged ≥18 years. This combination is approved for use as a reliever with or without maintenance therapy, but it is not indicated for maintenance therapy (or for single maintenance and reliever therapy). Intervening with as-needed SABA-ICS during the window of opportunity to reduce inflammation during loss of asthma control can reduce exacerbation risk, by exerting both genomic and nongenomic anti-inflammatory effects. We propose that the use of albuterol-budesonide rather than albuterol as a reliever to manage episodic symptoms driven by acute bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation can improve outcomes. This combination approach, shown to decrease asthma exacerbations and oral corticosteroid burden in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, represents a paradigm shift for asthma treatment in the United States. Further safety and efficacy studies should provide evidence that this type of reliever should be standard of care.

Advancing assessment of asthma control with a composite tool: The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

National and international asthma guidelines and reports do not include control tools that combine impairment assessment with exacerbation history in one instrument.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the performance of the composite Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) in assessing both domains of control and predicting exacerbation risk compared with the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 4-question symptom control tool (GINA SCT), Asthma Control Test (ACT), and physician expert opinion (EO) informed by GINA SCT responses and appraisal of GINA-identified risk factors for poor asthma outcomes.

METHODS

Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated AIRQ and GINA SCT as predictors of ACT. McNemar's test compared the proportion of patients categorized at baseline as completely or well-controlled by each assessment but with current impairment or previous-year and subsequent-year exacerbations.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1064 patients aged 12 years or older; mean (SD) age 43.8 years (19.3); 70% female; 79% White; and 6% Hispanic or Latino. AIRQ and GINA SCT were highly predictive of ACT well-controlled vs not well-controlled and very poorly controlled (receiver operator characteristic area under curve AIRQ = 0.90, GINA SCT = 0.86, P = .03 AIRQ vs GINA SCT) and ACT very poorly controlled vs well-controlled and not well-controlled asthma (receiver operator characteristic area under curve AIRQ = 0.91, GINA SCT = 0.87, P = .01 AIRQ vs GINA SCT). AIRQ rated fewer patients as having completely or well-controlled asthma who had current impairment (P < .01) or with previous-year and subsequent-year exacerbations (P < .001) than did GINA SCT, ACT, and EO.

CONCLUSION

AIRQ performs better in assessing both domains of current control and predicting exacerbation risk than do control tools and EO informed by GINA SCT and risk factors for poor asthma outcomes.

Relationships between symptoms and lung function in asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a real-life setting: the NOVEL observational longiTudinal studY

BACKGROUND

The relationships between spirometric assessment of lung function and symptoms (including exacerbations) in patients with asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a real-life setting are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relationships between baseline post-bronchodilator (post-BD) spirometry measures of lung function and symptoms and exacerbations in patients with a physician-assigned diagnosis of asthma and/or COPD.

DESIGN

The NOVEL observational longiTudinal studY (NOVELTY) is a global, prospective, 3-year observational study.

METHODS

Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate relationships. Spirometry measures were assessed as percent predicted (%pred). Symptoms were assessed at baseline, and exacerbations were assessed at baseline and Year 1.

RESULTS

A total of 11,181 patients in NOVELTY had spirometry data (asthma, n = 5903; COPD, n = 3881; asthma + COPD, n = 1397). A 10% lower post-BD %pred forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) - adjusted for age and sex - were significantly associated with dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ⩾ grade 2), frequent breathlessness [St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)], frequent wheeze attacks (SGRQ), nocturnal awakening (Respiratory Symptoms Questionnaire; ⩾1 night/week), and frequent productive cough (SGRQ). Lower post-BD %pred FEV1 and, to a lesser extent, lower post-BD %pred FVC were significantly associated with ⩾1 physician-reported exacerbation at baseline or Year 1. This association was stronger in patients with COPD than in those with asthma.

CONCLUSION

In a real-life setting, reduced lung function is consistently associated with symptoms in patients with asthma, COPD, or asthma + COPD. The relationship with exacerbations is stronger in COPD only than in asthma.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02760329 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Albuterol-budesonide fixed-dose combination rescue inhaler for asthma: a plain language summary of the MANDALA study

What is this summary about?This summary describes the results of a clinical study called MANDALA that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2022. In the MANDALA study, researchers looked at a new asthma rescue inhaler that contains both albuterol and budesonide in a single inhaler (known as albuterol-budesonide, AIRSUPRA™). This summary describes the results for people aged 18 yearsand older who took part in the study.

Albuterol-Budesonide Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Asthma: Results of the DENALI Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 MANDALA trial, as-needed albuterol-budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler significantly reduced severe exacerbation risk vs as-needed albuterol in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroid-containing maintenance therapy. This study (DENALI) was conducted to address the US Food and Drug Administration combination rule, which requires a combination product to demonstrate that each component contributes to its efficacy.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do both albuterol and budesonide contribute to the efficacy of the albuterol-budesonide combination pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This phase 3 double-blind trial randomized patients aged ≥ 12 years with mild-to-moderate asthma 1:1:1:1:1 to four-times-daily albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg or 180/80 μg, albuterol 180 μg, budesonide 160 μg, or placebo for 12 weeks. Dual-primary efficacy end points included change from baseline in FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 6 h (FEV1 AUC0-6h) over 12 weeks (assessing albuterol effect) and trough FEV1 at week 12 (assessing budesonide effect).

RESULTS

Of 1,001 patients randomized, 989 were ≥ 12 years old and evaluable for efficacy. Change from baseline in FEV1 AUC0-6h over 12 weeks was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg vs budesonide 160 μg (least-squares mean [LSM] difference, 80.7 [95% CI, 28.4-132.9] mL; P = .003). Change in trough FEV1 at week 12 was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 and 180/80 μg vs albuterol 180 μg (LSM difference, 132.8 [95% CI, 63.6-201.9] mL and 120.8 [95% CI, 51.5-190.1] mL, respectively; both P < .001). Day 1 time to onset and duration of bronchodilation with albuterol-budesonide were similar to those with albuterol. The albuterol-budesonide adverse event profile was similar to that of the monocomponents.

INTERPRETATION

Both monocomponents contributed to albuterol-budesonide lung function efficacy. Albuterol-budesonide was well tolerated, even at regular, relatively high daily doses for 12 weeks, with no new safety findings, supporting its use as a novel rescue therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03847896; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Real-world effectiveness of benralizumab in US subspecialist-treated adults with severe asthma: Findings from CHRONICLE

BACKGROUND

Patients with eosinophilic severe asthma (SA) have an increased risk of asthma exacerbations. Benralizumab is approved for eosinophilic SA, and there is great value in understanding real-world effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to examine the effectiveness of benralizumab in a real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated US patients with eosinophilic SA.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For this analysis, eligible patients enrolled from February 2018 to February 2021, had received ≥1 dose of benralizumab, and had study data for ≥3 months before and after benralizumab initiation. The primary analysis included patients with prior exacerbations reported and 12 months of outcomes data before and after initiation. Patient outcomes occurring 6-12 months before and after initiation were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patients had ≥3 months of follow-up before and after first benralizumab dose. For patients with 12 months (n = 107) and 6-12 months (n = 166) of data, significant reductions were observed in annualized rates of exacerbations (62%; P < 0.001 and 65%; P < 0.001, respectively), with similar reductions in the rates of hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Benralizumab recipients with blood eosinophil counts (BEC) of ≥300/μL and <300/μL at baseline and 12 months of data also had significant reductions in exacerbations (68%; P < 0.001, 61%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This real-world, noninterventional analysis reinforces the clinical value of benralizumab in the management of patients with eosinophilic SA.

Number of patient-reported asthma triggers predicts uncontrolled disease among specialist-treated patients with severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe asthma (SA) experience a high disease burden, often precipitated by exposure to disease triggers.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis examined the prevalence and effects of patient-reported triggers on asthma disease burden in a cohort of subspecialist-treated patients with SA in the United States.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an observational study of adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or whose disease is uncontrolled on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and additional controllers. Data were analyzed for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021. This analysis examined patient-reported triggers from a 17-category survey and associations with multiple measures of disease burden.

RESULTS

Among 2793 enrolled patients, 1434 (51%) completed the triggers questionnaire. The median trigger number per patient was 8 (IQR: 5, 10). The most frequent triggers were weather/air changes, viral infections, seasonal allergies, perennial allergies, and exercise. Patients reporting more triggers experienced more poorly controlled disease, worse quality of life, and reduced work productivity. The annualized rates of exacerbations and asthma hospitalizations increased by 7% and 17%, respectively, for each additional trigger (both P < .001). For all measures, trigger number was a stronger predictor of disease burden than blood eosinophil count.

CONCLUSION

Among United States specialist-treated patients with SA, asthma trigger number was positively and significantly associated with greater uncontrolled disease burden across multiple measures, which highlights the importance of understanding patient-reported triggers in SA.

Dupilumab Efficacy in Patients With Uncontrolled or Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Allergic and Nonallergic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Type 2 cytokines IL-4/IL-5/IL-13 play an important role in pathogenesis of type 2 conditions, including asthma. Dupilumab, a human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for IL-4/IL-13, inhibiting signaling. In phase 2b (P2B) (NCT01854047) and phase 3 VENTURE (NCT02528214), dupilumab reduced annualized severe exacerbation rates (AER), improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), and was generally well tolerated in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe, or oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE

The post hoc assessment of dupilumab efficacy versus placebo in P2B and VENTURE in patients stratified by allergic status.

METHODS

Allergic asthma was defined as total serum IgE ≥30 IU/mL and ≥1 perennial aeroallergen-specific IgE ≥0.35 kU/L at baseline. AER, prebronchodilator (BD) FEV₁, FEV₁/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio, asthma control (5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire), type 2 biomarkers, specific IgE, and OCS reduction (VENTURE only) were assessed.

RESULTS

In patients with allergic asthma, dupilumab (P2B: pooled 200/300 mg; VENTURE: 300 mg) every 2 weeks versus placebo reduced AER (P2B: -60%, P < .01; VENTURE: -72%, P < .001), and, in P2B, increased pre-BD FEV₁ (P < .01) and FEV₁/FVC (P < .05). In both studies, dupilumab significantly improved asthma control and HRQoL and reduced most type 2 biomarkers. Dupilumab significantly reduced OCS use in VENTURE. Similar benefits were observed in patients without evidence of allergic asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab significantly reduced AER and improved lung function, asthma control, and HRQoL in patients with or without evidence of allergic asthma.

Relationship Between Asthma Control as Measured by the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) and Patient Perception of Disease Status, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Treatment Adherence

Purpose

Critical asthma outcomes highlighted in clinical guidelines include asthma-related quality of life, asthma exacerbations, and asthma control. An easy-to-implement measure of asthma control that assesses both symptom impairment and exacerbation risk and reflects the impact of asthma on patients' lives is lacking. Hence, the objective of this study was to assess the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ^®) construct validity relative to patient self-perception of asthma status and validated disease-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.

Patients and methods

Baseline data were analyzed from patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with asthma participating in a 12-month observational study assessing the ability of AIRQ to predict exacerbations. At entry, patients completed a sociodemographic questionnaire, AIRQ, 3 questions addressing self-perceived asthma status, Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), and Adult Asthma Adherence Questionnaire (AAAQ). Descriptive statistics were calculated for demographic and clinical characteristics. AIRQ construct validity was evaluated by assessing correlations between total AIRQ score and patient self-assessments, SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ scores. Comparisons of SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ total and component/domain scores by AIRQ control category were performed using general linear models and Scheffe's post hoc adjustments for pairwise comparisons.

Results

A total of 1112 patients were enrolled: 70% female, 78% White, mean (standard deviation) age 43.9 (19.5) years. There were highly significant correlations between AIRQ score and patient self-perception of overall control (r = 0.69; p < 0.001), total SGRQ (r = 0.74, p < 0.001), and mini-AQLQ (r = -0.78, p < 0.001) scores. As AIRQ control category worsened, so did total and domain SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ impediment-to-inhaled-corticosteroid-adherence scores (all pairwise comparisons p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Findings demonstrate the construct validity of AIRQ relative to patient self-perception of asthma status, disease-specific PRO measures, and treatment adherence barriers. AIRQ can be a useful instrument to raise awareness of the unrecognized impacts of asthma on patients' lives.

Identifying Patients for Self-Administration of Omalizumab

Omalizumab, a recombinant anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody, is indicated for moderate to severe allergic asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, and nasal polyps, and is approved for self-administration. However, specific guidance on identifying candidates with characteristics suitable for this type of administration is lacking. To help address this issue, this article provides practical considerations for the health care provider treating patients with omalizumab. We encourage health care providers to consider self-administration of omalizumab as an option for all appropriate, but not all, patients, and we recommend an individualized approach when considering self-administration of omalizumab.

Long-Term Use of Maintenance Systemic Corticosteroids is Associated with Multiple Adverse Conditions in a Large, Real-World Cohort of US Adults with Severe Asthma

There is growing recognition of the adverse consequences of maintenance systemic corticosteroid (mSCS) therapy in severe asthma (SA). The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of potential adverse effects of long-term mSCS therapy in adults with specialist-confirmed SA in the United States (US). CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional, observational study of US adults with SA treated by allergists/immunologists and pulmonologists. Once enrolled, patients' duration of mSCS therapy was reported by sites based on medical record review. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021, the prevalence of SCS-associated conditions was evaluated among those with no reported history of mSCS use, or mSCS use with < 2 years or ≥ 2 years cumulative duration. Prevalence and incidence estimates were adjusted for age and smoking history. Of 2793 patients enrolled, 311 and 231 had mSCS use for < 2 and ≥ 2 years, respectively. In adjusted analyses, adrenal insufficiency, pneumonia, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis/osteopenia, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, hypertension, anxiety, and depression were statistically significantly associated with any mSCS use. By duration, mSCS use ≥ 2 years was associated with osteopenia/osteoporosis, coronary artery disease, adrenal insufficiency, and diabetes-related neuropathy; mSCS use < 2 years was associated with depression and osteopenia/osteoporosis, and diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and hypertension during the 12 months prior to enrollment. Overall, among patients with specialist-confirmed SA, mSCS use was associated with a high prevalence of multiple adverse conditions. Healthcare professionals should employ mSCS-sparing treatment strategies to avoid these negative consequences.

Albuterol-Budesonide Fixed-Dose Combination Rescue Inhaler for Asthma

BACKGROUND

As asthma symptoms worsen, patients typically rely on short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) rescue therapy, but SABAs do not address worsening inflammation, which leaves patients at risk for severe asthma exacerbations. The use of a fixed-dose combination of albuterol and budesonide, as compared with albuterol alone, as rescue medication might reduce the risk of severe asthma exacerbation.

METHODS

We conducted a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, randomized, event-driven trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of albuterol-budesonide, as compared with albuterol alone, as rescue medication in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma who were receiving inhaled glucocorticoid-containing maintenance therapies, which were continued throughout the trial. Adults and adolescents (≥12 years of age) were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three trial groups: a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 160 μg of budesonide (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg and 80 μg, respectively [the higher-dose combination group]), a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 80 μg of budesonide (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg and 40 μg, respectively [the lower-dose combination group]), or 180 μg of albuterol (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg [the albuterol-alone group]). Children 4 to 11 years of age were randomly assigned to only the lower-dose combination group or the albuterol-alone group. The primary efficacy end point was the first event of severe asthma exacerbation in a time-to-event analysis, which was performed in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

A total of 3132 patients underwent randomization, among whom 97% were 12 years of age or older. The risk of severe asthma exacerbation was significantly lower, by 26%, in the higher-dose combination group than in the albuterol-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.89; P = 0.001). The hazard ratio in the lower-dose combination group, as compared with the albuterol-alone group, was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.00; P = 0.052). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the three trial groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of severe asthma exacerbation was significantly lower with as-needed use of a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 160 μg of budesonide than with as-needed use of albuterol alone among patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma who were receiving a wide range of inhaled glucocorticoid-containing maintenance therapies. (Funded by Avillion; MANDALA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03769090.).

Evaluating construct validity of the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire using a 3-month exacerbation recall

BACKGROUND

Recurrent assessment of asthma control is essential to evaluating disease stability and intervention impacts. An assessment that can be administered between annual clinic visits is needed. The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) is a cross-sectionally validated, 10-item, yes or no, composite control tool evaluating previous 2-week symptoms and previous 12-month exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the construct validity of the AIRQ using a 3-month recall period for exacerbation-based risk questions and retaining the 2-week recall for symptom-based impairment items.

METHODS

At baseline, patients completed the AIRQ with 12-month recall exacerbation items, Asthma Control Test (ACT), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and global self-assessments of asthma risk, control, and symptom severity. Patient-reported exacerbations were captured monthly. The AIRQ with 3-month recall exacerbation items, ACT, and global self-assessments was administered at months 3, 6, and 9, and SGRQ at month 6.

RESULTS

A total of 1112 patients aged 12 years or older were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.5] years). The AIRQ and each administration of the AIRQ with 3-month recall exacerbation items classified asthma control similarly to an ACT plus exacerbation validation standard. For both AIRQ versions, SGRQ scores were higher with worsening asthma control (P < .001). At months 3, 6, and 9, worse AIRQ control levels were associated with higher proportions of patients with 1 or more and 2 or more exacerbations in the previous 3 months and patient global self-assessments indicating greater asthma morbidity (all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The AIRQ using exacerbation risk items with a 3-month recall period exhibits construct validity for classifying current asthma control and can be administered between annual AIRQ assessments.

Severe asthma exacerbation rates are increased among female, Black, Hispanic, and younger adult patients: results from the US CHRONICLE study

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical outcomes in patients with severe asthma (SA) by common sociodemographic determinants of health: sex, race, ethnicity, and age.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an observational study of subspecialist-treated, United States adults with SA receiving biologic therapy, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2020, clinical characteristics and asthma outcomes were assessed by sex, race, ethnicity, age at enrollment, and age at diagnosis. Treating subspecialists reported exacerbations, exacerbation-related emergency department visits, and asthma hospitalizations from 12 months before enrollment through the latest data collection. Patients completed the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Test at enrollment.

RESULTS

Among 1884 enrolled patients, the majority were female (69%), reported White race (75%), non-Hispanic ethnicity (69%), and were diagnosed with asthma as adults (60%). Female, Black, Hispanic, and younger patients experienced higher annualized rates of exacerbations that were statistically significant compared with male, White, non-Hispanic, and older patients, respectively. Black, Hispanic, and younger patients also experienced higher rates of asthma hospitalizations. Female and Black patients exhibited poorer symptom control and poorer health-related quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary, real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated adults with SA, female sex, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and younger age were important determinants of health, potentially attributable to physiologic and social factors. Knowledge of these disparities in SA disease burden among subspecialist-treated patients may help optimize care for all patients.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .