Comparison of physician-, biomarker-, and symptom-based strategies for adjustment of inhaled corticosteroid therapy in adults with asthma: the BASALT randomized controlled trial

Changes in fractional exhaled nitric oxide, forced expiratory volume in one second, and forced oscillation technique parameters over three years in adults with bronchial asthma managed under Yokohama Seibu Hospital's coordinated care system

BACKGROUND

In western Yokohama, our hospital and primary care clinics manage adults with asthma via a coordinated care system. We investigated the changes in the fractional expired nitric oxide (FeNO), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and forced oscillation technique (FOT) parameters over 3 years in a cohort of patients in our collaborative system.

METHODS

From 288 adults with well controlled asthma managed under the Yokohama Seibu Hospital coordinated care system between January 2009 and May 2018, we selected 99 subjects to undergo spirometry, FeNO and FOT testing over 3 years and analyzed the changes in these parameters.

RESULTS

Of the 99 patients enrolled, 17 (17.2%) experienced at least one exacerbation (insufficiently controlled (IC)), whereas, 82 (82.8%) remained in well controlled during the 3-year study period. Of well-controlled patients, 54 patients (54.5%) met the criteria for clinical remission under treatment (CR); the remaining 28 patients did not meet the CR criteria (WC). There were no differences in FeNO, FEV1, or FOT parameters at baseline among the IC, WC, and CR groups. The levels of FEV1 decreased gradually, whereas the levels of FeNO decreased significantly over 3 years. The levels of percent predicted FEV1 (%FEV1) significantly increased. We also observed significant improvement in FOT parameters; reactance at 5 Hz (R5), resonant frequency (Fres), and integral of reactance up to the resonant frequency (AX). The CR group demonstrated significant relationships between the change in FeNO and the change in FEV1 and between the change in FEV1 and the change in FOT parameters. No significant correlations emerged in the IC or WC group.

CONCLUSION

The decrease in FeNO and increase in %FEV1, we observed in all study participants suggest that the coordinated care system model benefits patients with asthma. Although it is difficult to predict at baseline which patients will experience an exacerbation, monitoring changes in FeNO and FEV1 is useful in managing patients with asthma. Furthermore, monitoring changes in R5, Fres, and AX via forced oscillation technique testing is useful for detecting airflow limitation.

European Respiratory Society short guidelines for the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol in mild asthma

Recent clinical trials of as-needed fixed-dose combination of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol have provided new evidence that may warrant a reconsideration of current practice. A Task Force was set up by the European Respiratory Society to provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol as treatment for mild asthma. The Task Force defined two questions that were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. The Task Force utilised the outcomes to develop recommendations for a pragmatic guideline for everyday clinical practice. The Task Force suggests that adults with mild asthma use as-needed ICS/formoterol instead of regular ICS maintenance treatment plus as-needed short-acting β2-antagonist (SABA) and that adolescents with mild asthma use either as-needed ICS/formoterol or ICS maintenance treatment plus as-needed SABA (conditional recommendation; low certainty of evidence). The recommendation for adults places a relatively higher value on the reduction of systemic corticosteroid use and the outcomes related to exacerbations, and a relatively lower value on the small differences in asthma control. Either treatment option is suggested for adolescent patients as the balance is very close and data more limited. The Task Force recommends that adult and adolescent patients with mild asthma use as-needed ICS/formoterol instead of as-needed SABA (strong recommendation; low certainty of evidence). This recommendation is based on the benefit of as-needed ICS/formoterol in mild asthma on several outcomes and the risks related to as-needed SABA in the absence of anti-inflammatory treatment. The implementation of this recommendation is hampered in countries (including European Union countries) where as-needed ICS/formoterol is not approved for mild asthma.

Effectiveness of FeNO-guided treatment in adult asthma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Asthma control is generally monitored by assessing symptoms and lung function. However, optimal treatment is also dependent on the type and extent of airway inflammation. Fraction of exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) is a noninvasive biomarker of type 2 airway inflammation, but its effectiveness in guiding asthma treatment remains disputed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to obtain summary estimates of the effectiveness of FeNO-guided asthma treatment.

DESIGN

We updated a Cochrane systematic review from 2016. Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Subgroup analyses were performed based on asthma severity, asthma control, allergy/atopy, pregnancy and obesity.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register was searched on 9 May 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of a FeNO-guided treatment versus usual (symptom-guided) treatment in adult asthma patients.

RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (2,116 patients), all showing high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Five RCTs reported support from a FeNO manufacturer. FeNO-guided treatment probably reduces the number of patients having ≥1 exacerbation (OR = 0.61; 95%CI 0.44 to 0.83; six RCTs; GRADE moderate certainty) and exacerbation rate (RR = 0.67; 95%CI 0.54 to 0.82; six RCTs; moderate certainty), and may slightly improve Asthma Control Questionnaire score (MD = -0.10; 95%CI -0.18 to -0.02, six RCTs; low certainty), however, this change is unlikely to be clinically important. An effect on severe exacerbations, quality of life, FEV1, treatment dosage and FeNO values could not be demonstrated. There were no indications that effectiveness is different in subgroups of patients, although evidence for subgroup analysis was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

FeNO-guided asthma treatment probably results in fewer exacerbations but may not have clinically important effects on other asthma outcomes.

Evaluating as-needed inhaled corticosteroid strategies in asthma: expanding the benefits to mild asthma

INTRODUCTION

Adherence to regular anti-inflammatory treatment is commonly low, and short-acting β2 agonist (SABA) overuse is common in patients with asthma, leading to an increased risk of asthma-related adverse events.

AREAS COVERED

Given the pivotal role of inflammation in asthma, multiple as-needed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies have been developed, leading to a reduction in asthma exacerbations and improvement in symptom control. Currently, as-needed ICS/formoterol is one of the most commonly available formulations; however, other combinations such as ICS/SABA have been shown to be superior to as-needed SABA alone. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive review of the available scientific literature to enhance the advantages and disadvantages of each combination in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

The future direction we foresee in asthma management consists in abandoning as-needed short-acting bronchodilators in favor of as-needed ICS-containing therapies. Each patient is unique and differs from others; consequently, a single option will not fit everyone. Patients' and physicians' awareness of this perspective can be reached through the development of multiple therapeutic options suitable for each condition that can be found in 'real life'.

Mild asthma: Lessons learned and remaining questions

Patients living with mild disease represent the largest proportion of asthma patients. There are significant challenges in proposing a definition that would best describe these patients, while also accurately identifying at-risk individuals. Current literature suggests considerable inflammatory and clinical heterogeneity within this group. Research has shown that these patients are at risk of poor control, exacerbations, lung function decline, and death. Despite conflicting data on its prevalence, eosinophilic inflammation appears to be a predictor of poorer outcomes in mild asthma. There is an immediate need to better understand phenotypic clusters in mild asthma. It is also important to understand factors that influence disease progression and remission, as it is evident that both vary in mild asthma. Guided by robust literature that supports inhaled corticosteroid-based strategies over short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) reliant regimens, the management of these patients has evolved considerably. Unfortunately, SABA use remains high in clinical practice despite strong advocacy from the Global Initiative for Asthma. Future mild asthma research should explore the role of biomarkers, develop prediction tools based on composite risk scores, and explore targeted therapies at least for at-risk individuals.

Questions in Mild Asthma: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Patients with mild asthma are believed to represent the majority of patients with asthma. Disease-associated risks such as exacerbations, lung function decline, and death have been understudied in this patient population. There have been no prior efforts from major societies to describe research needs in mild asthma. Methods: A multidisciplinary, diverse group of 24 international experts reviewed the literature, identified knowledge gaps, and provided research recommendations relating to mild asthma definition, pathophysiology, and management across all age groups. Research needs were also investigated from a patient perspective, generated in conjunction with patients with asthma, caregivers, and stakeholders. Of note, this project is not a systematic review of the evidence and is not a clinical practice guideline. Results: There are multiple unmet needs in research on mild asthma driven by large knowledge gaps in all areas. Specifically, there is an immediate need for a robust mild asthma definition and an improved understanding of its pathophysiology and management strategies across all age groups. Future research must factor in patient perspectives. Conclusions: Despite significant advances in severe asthma, there remain innumerable research areas requiring urgent attention in mild asthma. An important first step is to determine a better definition that will accurately reflect the heterogeneity and risks noted in this group. This research statement highlights the topics of research that are of the highest priority. Furthermore, it firmly advocates the need for engagement with patient groups and for more support for research in this field.

"As-Needed" Inhaled Corticosteroids for Patients With Asthma

Prevention of severe asthma exacerbations is a primary management goal for asthma across the severity spectrum. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) decrease the risk of asthma exacerbations, but patient adherence to ICS-containing medications as a daily maintenance therapy is poor, and many patients overuse short-acting beta2-agonist relievers; both are associated with increased risk of severe exacerbations and death. Airway inflammation also varies over time, influenced by exposures such as viral infections and allergen. As-needed ICS strategies, in which patients receive ICSs (or additional ICSs, if already taking controller therapy) whenever they take their reliever inhaler, empower patients to adjust their ICS intake in response to symptom fluctuation. These strategies can improve asthma morbidity outcomes, particularly by reducing severe exacerbations and reducing the risk of adverse effects of oral corticosteroids. In this review, the evidence for combination ICS-formoterol in a single inhaler, ICS and short-acting beta2-agonists in separate inhalers, and combination ICS-albuterol in a single inhaler is presented, along with practical considerations, evidence gaps, and implications for clinical practice for each strategy, presented by level of asthma severity and age group. Improving access to such strategies on a global scale is imperative to improve asthma outcomes and achieve equity across populations.

The ICS/Formoterol Reliever Therapy Regimen in Asthma: A Review

The Global Initiative for Asthma recommends that low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol be preferred to short-acting beta₂-agonists as reliever therapy in adolescents and adults with asthma, across the range of asthma severity. This recommendation represents the most fundamental change in asthma management for many decades. In this commentary, we review the rationale for combination ICS/formoterol therapy, the evidence on which this recommendation has been made, the limitations in the evidence, the practical issues relevant to the implementation of ICS/formoterol reliever-based regimens in clinical practice, and the emerging evidence for the efficacy and safety of combination ICS/salbutamol reliever therapy regimens.

Understanding the Updates in the Asthma Guidelines

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory lung disease that affects millions of Americans, with variable symptoms of bronchospasm and obstruction among individuals over time. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) published the 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines based on the latest research since the 2007 Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3). The following article reviews the 21 new recommendations on the six core topics in asthma: use of intermittent inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy, use of the fractional exhaled nitric oxide test in asthma diagnosis and monitoring, indoor allergen mitigation, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate recommendations as strong or conditional based on the evidence. The recommendations were based on systematic reviews of the literature and focused on patient-centered critical outcomes of asthma exacerbations, asthma control, and asthma-related quality of life. Understanding the recommendations with consideration of individual values through shared decision-making may improve asthma outcomes.

Expert Opinion on Practice Patterns in Mild Asthma After the GINA 2019 Updates: A Major Shift in Treatment Paradigms from a Long-Standing SABA-Only Approach to a Risk Reduction-Based Strategy with the Use of Symptom-Driven (As-Needed) Low-Dose ICS/LABA

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This expert opinion, prepared by a panel of chest disease specialists, aims to review the current knowledge on practice patterns in real-life management of mild asthma and to address the relevant updates in asthma treatment by The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) to guide clinicians for the best clinical practice in applying these new treatment paradigms.

RECENT FINDINGS

On the basis of the emerging body of evidence suggesting the non-safety of short-acting β2-agonists (SABA)-only therapy and comparable efficacy of the as-needed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-formoterol combinations with maintenance ICS regimens, GINA recently released their updated Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention Guide (2019). The new GINA 2019 recommendations no longer support the SABA-only therapy in mild asthma but instead includes new off-label recommendations such as symptom-driven (as-needed) low-dose ICS-formoterol and "low dose ICS taken whenever SABA is taken." The GINA 2019 asthma treatment recommendations include a major shift from long-standing approach of clinical practice regarding the use of symptom-driven SABA treatment alone in the management of mild asthma. This expert opinion supports the transition from a long-standing SABA-only approach to a risk reduction-based strategy, with the use of symptom-driven (as-needed) low-dose ICS/LABA in mild asthma patients, particularly in those with poor adherence to controller medications. The thoughtful and comprehensive approach of clinicians to these strategies is important, given that the exact far-reaching impact of this major change in management of mild asthma in the real-world settings will only be clarified over time.

Reliever-Triggered Inhaled Glucocorticoid in Black and Latinx Adults with Asthma

BACKGROUND

Black and Latinx patients bear a disproportionate burden of asthma. Efforts to reduce the disproportionate morbidity have been mostly unsuccessful, and guideline recommendations have not been based on studies in these populations.

METHODS

In this pragmatic, open-label trial, we randomly assigned Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma to use a patient-activated, reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid strategy (beclomethasone dipropionate, 80 μg) plus usual care (intervention) or to continue usual care. Participants had one instructional visit followed by 15 monthly questionnaires. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included monthly asthma control as measured with the Asthma Control Test (ACT; range, 5 [poor] to 25 [complete control]), quality of life as measured with the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI; range, 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater impairment), and participant-reported missed days of work, school, or usual activities. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1201 adults (603 Black and 598 Latinx), 600 were assigned to the intervention group and 601 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.78) in the intervention group and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.999; P = 0.048). ACT scores increased by 3.4 points (95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) in the intervention group and by 2.5 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 2.8) in the usual-care group (difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.2); ASUI scores increased by 0.12 points (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.13) and 0.08 points (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09), respectively (difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.05). The annualized rate of missed days was 13.4 in the intervention group and 16.8 in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). Serious adverse events occurred in 12.2% of the participants, with an even distribution between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, provision of an inhaled glucocorticoid and one-time instruction on its use, added to usual care, led to a lower rate of severe asthma exacerbations. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02995733.).

Biomarkers to Predict Response to Inhaled Corticosteroids and Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists in Adolescents and Adults with Mild Persistent Asthma

Rationale: Whether biomarkers can be used to predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in mild persistent asthma is unclear. Objectives: In a prespecified exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial of 295 participants 12 years of age or older with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma, we sought to identify biomarkers of treatment response after 12 weeks of ICS (mometasone, 200 μg or 220 μg twice/d), LAMA (tiotropium, 5 μg/d), or placebo in adults (⩾18 yr) and adolescents (12-17 yr) separately. Methods: The primary outcome was a composite outcome of asthma control (treatment failure, asthma control days, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁]). Analyses examined type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiologic biomarkers. We assessed the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for response to ICS and LAMA (each versus placebo). An AUC of 0.5 suggests no discrimination, 0.7-0.8 is considered acceptable, more than 0.8-0.9 is considered excellent, and more than 0.9 is considered outstanding. Results: In 237 adults, sputum and blood eosinophil levels and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (Fe_NO) each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-0.69], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.56-0.72], and 0.62 [95% CI, 0.54-0.70], respectively; all P < 0.01); the AUC for blood eosinophil levels and Fe_NO together was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.74; P < 0.001). In 58 adolescents, the number of positive aeroallergens and total serum immunoglobulin E each predicted ICS response (AUCs: 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.85] and 0.73 [95% CI, 0.58-0.87], respectively; both P < 0.03); the AUC for both together was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.87; P = 0.003). After ipratropium bromide, FEV₁ reversibility predicted LAMA response in adults (AUC: 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.69], P = 0.007) but not in adolescents. Conclusions: The AUCs of the type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and physiological biomarkers we examined may not be high enough to confidently identify individuals with asthma who respond to ICS and LAMA. However, our findings indicate that the biomarkers that predict response to ICS or LAMA may differ in adults versus adolescents with uncontrolled mild persistent asthma. Prospective, biomarker-stratified clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings and to identify first-line controllers tailored for each population.

Asthma management in low- and middle-income countries: case for change

Asthma is the most common non-communicable disease in children, and among the most common in adults. The great majority of people with asthma live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where they suffer disproportionately high asthma-related morbidity and mortality. Essential inhaled medications, particularly those containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), are often unavailable or unaffordable, and this explains much of the global burden of preventable asthma morbidity and mortality.Guidelines developed for LMICs are generally based on the outdated assumption that patients with asthma symptoms <1-3 times/week do not need (or benefit from) ICS. Even when ICS is prescribed, many patients manage their asthma with oral or inhaled short-acting beta₂ agonist (SABA) alone, due to issues of availability and affordability. A single ICS-formoterol inhaler-based approach to asthma management for all severities of asthma, from mild to severe, starting at diagnosis, might overcome SABA overuse/over-reliance and reduce the burden of symptoms and severe exacerbations. However, ICS-formoterol inhalers are currently very poorly available or unaffordable in LMICs. There is a pressing need for pragmatic clinical trial evidence of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of this and other strategies to improve asthma care in these countries.The global health inequality in asthma care that deprives so many children, adolescents and adults of healthy lives and puts them at increased risk of death - despite the availability of highly effective therapeutic approaches - is unacceptable. A World Health Assembly Resolution on universal access to affordable effective asthma care is needed to focus attention and investment on addressing this need.

NHLBI ASTHMA NETWORKS: IMPROVING PATIENT CARE, MOVING TOWARD PERSONALIZED MEDICINE

The first NHLBI Clinical Trials Research Network was the Asthma Clinical Research Network (ACRN 1), which was born in 1993 to perform multiple controlled clinical trials for asthma: "… dispassionately examine new & existing therapies for asthma" and "… rapidly communicate findings to medical community," and therefore, to perform clinical trials drug companies could not or would not do. Among the many areas studied by the ACRN and its successor networks, through 2019, was how to effectively and safely use long-acting beta-agonists and to find novel alternatives for them. In its Tiotropium Add-On Trial (TALC) trial, the ACRN demonstrated that tiotropium as add on-therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) was effective and non-inferior to long-acting beta-agonist add on-therapy. During the lifetime of the clinical trial networks (1993-2020), 71 manuscripts including 25 major clinical trials were published, many which have laid the groundwork for precision approaches for asthma therapy and the now ongoing PrecISE Asthma Network.

Use of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide to Guide the Treatment of Asthma: An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Background: The fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FE_NO) test is a point-of-care test that is used in the assessment of asthma.

Objective: To provide evidence-based clinical guidance on whether FE_NO testing is indicated to optimize asthma treatment in patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered.

Methods: An international, multidisciplinary panel of experts was convened to form a consensus document regarding a single question relevant to the use of FE_NO. The question was selected from three potential questions based on the greatest perceived impact on clinical practice and the unmet need for evidence-based answers related to this question. The panel performed systematic reviews of published randomized controlled trials between 2004 and 2019 and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision framework to develop recommendations. All panel members evaluated and approved the recommendations.

Main Results: After considering the overall low quality of the evidence, the panel made a conditional recommendation for FE_NO-based care. In patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered, we suggest that FE_NO is beneficial and should be used in addition to usual care. This judgment is based on a balance of effects that probably favors the intervention; the moderate costs and availability of resources, which probably favors the intervention; and the perceived acceptability and feasibility of the intervention in daily practice.

Conclusions: Clinicians should consider this recommendation to measure FE_NO in patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered based on current best available evidence.

2020 NAEPP Guidelines Update and GINA 2021-Asthma Care Differences, Overlap, and Challenges

The 2020 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group (NAEPP [2020 Focused Asthma Update]) guidelines and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 strategy report are compared in this Rostrum article. The methodologies of each publication are described. Subsequently, 4 different selected pharmacological recommendations are compared in the 2 documents: step 1 for children 0 to 4 years of age with viral-induced wheezing, step 2 in ages 12 years and older with the intermittent use of inhaled corticosteroid, steps 3 and 4 with single-inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy with inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol (SMART), and steps 3, 4, and 5 with add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy. Nonpharmacological recommendations are also considered and contrasted, including for exhaled nitric oxide, environmental control, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. Similarities and differences in these 2 documents are highlighted, and recommendations are made about harmonizing the approaches where possible.

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes.GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as- needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by >60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA.Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11  years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4.Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as- needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults/adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.

Revisiting Mild Asthma: Current Knowledge and Future Needs

Asthma is a common chronic airways disease with significant impact on patients, caregivers, and the health-care system. Although most research and novel interventions mainly have focused on patients with uncontrolled severe asthma, most patients with asthma have mild disease. Epidemiologic studies suggest that many patients with mild asthma report frequent exacerbations of the disease and uncontrolled symptoms. However, despite its impact, mild asthma does not have either a uniformly agreed on definition for or a consensus on its clinical and pathophysiologic progression. More recently, the approach to treatment of patients with mild asthma has undergone significant changes primarily based on emerging evidence that airway inflammation in this population is important. This led to clinical research studies that explored the efficacy of as-needed inhaled corticosteroids along with the rescue medications that traditionally have been the mainstay of treatment. Despite some advancement in the field in recent years, many controversies and unmet needs remain. In this review, we examine the current understanding of the pathophysiologic features and management of mild asthma. In addition, we outline unmet needs for future research. We conclude that mild asthma contributes significantly to the morbidity and mortality of asthma and should be the focus of future research.

Inhaled corticosteroids for the prevention of asthma exacerbations

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of the risk factors and mechanisms underlying asthma exacerbations and the role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in preventing exacerbations.

DATA SOURCES

Queries for asthma exacerbations and ICSs were conducted using PubMed, searching for primary articles and reviews.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies written in English, with a focus on well-designed randomized controlled clinical trials.

RESULTS

Asthma exacerbations remain a major source of morbidity, with future exacerbations most likely among patients with previous exacerbations and among those with peripheral blood eosinophilia. Exacerbations are often triggered by viral respiratory tract infections, but recent evidence supports nonviral triggers as well. In terms of exacerbation prevention, several approaches to ICS therapy have been found to be effective, including intermittent high-dose ICS without use of background controller in preschool children with recurrent episodic wheezing, intermittent high-dose ICS without use of background controller in adults with mild asthma, and as-needed ICS dosing whenever rescue treatment is needed among children, adolescents, and adults with mild asthma not receiving daily controller therapy.

CONCLUSION

ICSs are highly effective in preventing exacerbations of asthma. Multiple dosing strategies have been found to reduce exacerbation risk, allowing for a personalization of approaches based on individual patient phenotypes and preferences.

The management of mild asthma

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have been recommended as a maintenance treatment, either alone or together with long-acting inhaled β₂-agonists, for all asthma patients. Short-acting β₂-agonists (SABAs) are rapid-onset bronchodilators, which provide symptom relief, but have no anti-inflammatory properties, yet are the most widely used as-needed reliever treatment for asthma and often the only treatment prescribed. Asthma patients can find adhering to daily preventative medication with ICS difficult and will often revert to using as-needed SABA as their only treatment, increasing their risk of exacerbations. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy of reliever medications that contain ICS compared with SABA as reliever, or with maintenance ICS and SABA as reliever, in mild asthma patients.Nine studies were identified that have evaluated the use of ICS as a component of an as-needed reliever in patients with mild asthma. Four of the most recent studies compared the combination of ICS/formoterol to SABA as reliever.ICS-containing reliever medication was superior to SABA as reliever alone, and was equivalent to maintenance ICS and SABA as reliever, particularly in reducing risks of severe asthma exacerbations, in studies which compared these reliever options.SABAs should not be used as a reliever without ICS. The concern about patients with mild asthma not being adherent to maintenance ICS supports a recommendation that ICS/formoterol should be considered as a treatment option instead of maintenance ICS, to avoid the risk of patients reverting to SABA alone.

Discontinuation of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with controlled asthma: The DISCO (Discontinuation of Inhaled Steroid in Controlled asthmatics Over 6 months) study

BACKGROUND

Although inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are the recommended first-line therapy for asthma, determining whether to continue or discontinue ICS treatment in patients with mild asthma remains challenging for clinicians. Several studies have revealed that patients with mild-persistent asthma maintained a well-controlled state after ICS withdrawal. However, the long-term outcomes of ICS withdrawal have not yet been determined.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the possible clinical outcomes of the discontinuation of ICS in patients with well-controlled mild asthma.

METHODS

We investigated the clinical outcomes of discontinuing ICSs in patients with well-controlled mild asthma and compared the time to loss of control (LOC) between patients who stopped ICS treatment (ICS withdrawal group, IWG) and those who continued treatment for 3 years (continuous ICS group, CIG).

RESULTS

A significant difference in the time to LOC was observed between the IWG and CIG (hazard ratio, 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-4.33; P < .001). Increasing fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels (P = 0.008) and sputum eosinophil counts (%) (P = 0.015) revealed a weak but significant association with LOC risk in the CIG. The sputum eosinophil counts (P = 0.039) and serum total immunoglobulin E levels (P = 0.014) were significantly higher in the LOC group than in the non-LOC group of the CIG.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the maintenance of ICS treatment may help keep patients' asthma under control. Furthermore, patients with LOC had significantly higher sputum eosinophil counts in the CIG than those in the non-LOC group. Therefore, continuous ICS use by patients with mild, well-controlled asthma could be associated with good clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: KCT0002234.

A randomized, open-label, pragmatic study to assess reliever-triggered inhaled corticosteroid in African American/Black and Hispanic/Latinx adults with asthma: Design and methods of the PREPARE trial

BACKGROUND

Asthma prevalence, morbidity, and mortality disproportionately impact African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) communities. Adherence to daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), recommended by asthma guidelines in all but the mildest cases of asthma, is generally poor. As-needed ICS has shown promise as a patient-empowering asthma management strategy, but it has not been rigorously studied in AA/B or H/L patients or in a real-world setting. Design and Aim The PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) Study is a randomized, open-label, pragmatic study which aims to assess whether a patient-guided, reliever-triggered ICS strategy called PARTICS (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered Inhaled CorticoSteroid) can improve asthma outcomes in AA/B and H/L adult patient populations. In designing and implementing the study, the PREPARE research team has relied heavily on advice from AA/B and H/L Patient Partners and other stakeholders. Methods PREPARE is enrolling 1200 adult participants (600 AA/Bs, 600H/Ls) with asthma. Participants are randomized to PARTICS + Usual Care (intervention) versus Usual Care (control). Following a single in-person enrollment visit, participants complete monthly questionnaires for 15 months. The primary endpoint is annualized asthma exacerbation rate. Secondary endpoints include asthma control; preference-based quality of life; and days lost from work, school, or usual activities. Discussion The PREPARE study features a pragmatic design allowing for the real-world assessment of a patient-centered, reliever-triggered ICS strategy in AA/B and H/L patients. Outcomes of this study have the potential to offer powerful evidence supporting PARTICS as an effective asthma management strategy in patient populations that suffer disproportionately from asthma morbidity and mortality.

Severe asthma in South Africa: A literature review and management approach for primary care

Severe asthma in South Africa (SA) is underappreciated, especially in the primary care setting. This study highlights the epidemiological context of severe asthma as a phenotypic variant. Primary care practitioners, as first-contact medical providers, need grounding in the management of severe asthma based on the precision of diagnosis and negotiated along the 10-point strategy. The underdiagnosis and undertreatment of asthma ought to inform educational programmes and research in this country.

Real-world patterns and implications of short-acting β2-agonist use in patients with asthma in the United States

BACKGROUND

Short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) use is one measure reflecting asthma control.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations between real-world SABA use and severe asthma exacerbations in the United States.

METHODS

Patients with asthma 12 years of age or older receiving SABA in the IBM MarketScan research databases of US administrative claims from September 30, 2014, to September 30, 2016, were evaluated. Patients with 12 months' continuous eligibility before and after their first SABA claim (index SABA), an asthma diagnosis before through 60 days postindex, and either one additional SABA or at least 1 maintenance fill(s) were included. SABA claims postindex (including index fill) were grouped as follows: low: index only; medium: 2 to 3 canisters per year; and high: 4 or more canisters per year. Differences in SABA exposure with respect to disease severity groups and severe asthma exacerbations (hospitalizations, emergency visits, or outpatient systemic corticosteroids) were analyzed by analysis of variance and χ² (significance, P ≤ .05).

RESULTS

A total of 135,540 patients were included: 62.8% women; mean (SD) age, 40.9 (18.3) years; SABA fills per 12-months postindex: 3.0(2.7). Furthermore, 28% of patients filled 1 SABA, 47% 2 to 3, and 25% 4 or more canisters per year. Despite higher maintenance medication possession ratio with increasing SABA (low, 0.53 (0.37); medium, 0.59 (0.35); high, 0.66 (0.32)), annual exacerbation rate per person per year and percent of patients within each SABA group having at least 1 exacerbation rose as SABA fills increased (low, 1.00 (1.45), 45.8%; medium, 1.20 (1.62), 54.3%; high, 1.50 (1.94), 58.7%). Mean SABA fills differed between patients with 0 exacerbation, 2.8 (2.6); 1 exacerbation, 2.9 (2.5); and 2 or more exacerbations, 3.3 (2.9).

CONCLUSION

Exacerbation risk increased with increasing SABA fills. Management strategies ensuring adequate anti-inflammatory therapy delivered to the airways when symptoms occur may be needed to mitigate asthma morbidity.

As-needed anti-inflammatory reliever therapy for asthma management: evidence and practical considerations

Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease in which airway inflammation is a key feature, even in the milder expressions of the disease. The conventional pharmacological approach to mild asthma has long relied on reliever therapy with as-needed short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs), while anti-inflammatory maintenance with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) has been reserved for patients with more persistent asthma. Poor adherence to maintenance treatment is an important issue in asthma management, and can partly explain suboptimal symptom control. Over-reliance on SABA bronchodilators for rapid symptom relief is common in real life and potentially leads to an increased risk of asthma morbidity and mortality. Combined anti-inflammatory and reliever medications in a single inhaler have the potential to overcome these limitations. Recent studies in patients with mild asthma have shown that anti-inflammatory reliever therapy with budesonide-formoterol, given on an as-needed basis, is superior to SABA in ensuring asthma control and non-inferior to budesonide maintenance therapy in preventing exacerbations. To address the implications of these important findings for the management of patients with asthma, Italian specialists convened at a series of meetings held during the second half of 2018 across Italy. This article presents their position on these topics and includes a review of the evidence supporting the use of anti-inflammatory reliever therapy in mild asthma and the implementation of this novel approach in clinical practice.

A snapshot of exhaled nitric oxide and asthma characteristics: experience from high to low income countries

Nitric oxide is a gas produced in the airways of asthmatic subjects and related to T2 inflammation. It can be measured as fractional nitric oxide (FeNO) in the exhaled air and used as a non-invasive, easy to evaluate, rapid marker. It is now widely used in many settings to determine airway inflammation. The aim of this narrative review is to report relationship between FeNO and the physiopathologic characteristics of asthmatic patients. Factors affecting FeNO levels have also been analysed as well as the impact of corticosteroid, target therapies and rehabilitation programs. Considering the availability of the test, spreading this methodology to low income countries has also been considered as a possibility for evaluating airway inflammation and monitoring adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy. PubMed data search has been performed restricted to English language papers. Research was limited to studies in adults unless studies in children were the only ones reported for a particular issue. This revision could be useful to summarize the role of FeNO in relation to asthma characteristics and help in the use of FeNO in different clinical settings particularly in low income countries.

Managing Asthma in Adolescents and Adults: 2020 Asthma Guideline Update From the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program

IMPORTANCE

Asthma is a major public health problem worldwide and is associated with excess morbidity, mortality, and economic costs associated with lost productivity. The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program has released the 2020 Asthma Guideline Update with updated evidence-based recommendations for treatment of patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To report updated recommendations for 6 topics for clinical management of adolescents and adults with asthma: (1) intermittent inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs); (2) add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists; (3) fractional exhaled nitric oxide; (4) indoor allergen mitigation; (5) immunotherapy; and (6) bronchial thermoplasty.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council chose 6 topics to update the 2007 asthma guidelines based on results from a 2014 needs assessment. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality conducted systematic reviews of these 6 topics based on literature searches up to March-April 2017. Reviews were updated through October 2018 and used by an expert panel (n = 19) that included asthma content experts, primary care clinicians, dissemination and implementation experts, and health policy experts to develop 19 new recommendations using the GRADE method. The 17 recommendations for individuals aged 12 years or older are reported in this Special Communication.

FINDINGS

From 20 572 identified references, 475 were included in the 6 systematic reviews to form the evidence basis for these recommendations. Compared with the 2007 guideline, there was no recommended change in step 1 (intermittent asthma) therapy (as-needed short-acting β2-agonists [SABAs] for rescue therapy). In step 2 (mild persistent asthma), either daily low-dose ICS plus as-needed SABA therapy or as-needed concomitant ICS and SABA therapy are recommended. Formoterol in combination with an ICS in a single inhaler (single maintenance and reliever therapy) is recommended as the preferred therapy for moderate persistent asthma in step 3 (low-dose ICS-formoterol therapy) and step 4 (medium-dose ICS-formoterol therapy) for both daily and as-needed therapy. A short-term increase in the ICS dose alone for worsening of asthma symptoms is not recommended. Add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists are recommended in individuals whose asthma is not controlled by ICS-formoterol therapy for step 5 (moderate-severe persistent asthma). Fractional exhaled nitric oxide testing is recommended to assist in diagnosis and monitoring of symptoms, but not alone to diagnose or monitor asthma. Allergen mitigation is recommended only in individuals with exposure and relevant sensitivity or symptoms. When used, allergen mitigation should be allergen specific and include multiple allergen-specific mitigation strategies. Subcutaneous immunotherapy is recommended as an adjunct to standard pharmacotherapy for individuals with symptoms and sensitization to specific allergens. Sublingual immunotherapy is not recommended specifically for asthma. Bronchial thermoplasty is not recommended as part of standard care; if used, it should be part of an ongoing research effort.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Asthma is a common disease with substantial human and economic costs globally. Although there is no cure or established means of prevention, effective treatment is available. Use of the recommendations in the 2020 Asthma Guideline Update should improve the health of individuals with asthma.

2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group

The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group was coordinated and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health. It is designed to improve patient care and support informed decision making about asthma management in the clinical setting. This update addresses six priority topic areas as determined by the state of the science at the time of a needs assessment, and input from multiple stakeholders:A rigorous process was undertaken to develop these evidence-based guidelines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Evidence-Based Practice Centers conducted systematic reviews on these topics, which were used by the Expert Panel Working Group as a basis for developing recommendations and guidance. The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), an internationally accepted framework, in consultation with an experienced methodology team for determining the certainty of evidence and the direction and strength of recommendations based on the evidence. Practical implementation guidance for each recommendation incorporates findings from NHLBI-led patient, caregiver, and clinician focus groups. To assist clincians in implementing these recommendations into patient care, the new recommendations have been integrated into the existing Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3) asthma management step diagram format.

Treatment strategies for asthma: reshaping the concept of asthma management

Asthma is a common chronic disease characterized by episodic or persistent respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation. Asthma treatment is based on a stepwise and control-based approach that involves an iterative cycle of assessment, adjustment of the treatment and review of the response aimed to minimize symptom burden and risk of exacerbations. Anti-inflammatory treatment is the mainstay of asthma management. In this review we will discuss the rationale and barriers to the treatment of asthma that may result in poor outcomes. The benefits of currently available treatments and the possible strategies to overcome the barriers that limit the achievement of asthma control in real-life conditions and how these led to the GINA 2019 guidelines for asthma treatment and prevention will also be discussed.

Relationships among bronchodilator reversibility, the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, and the parameters of the forced oscillation technique in adult asthma treated with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2 agonists combination

In bronchial asthma, both airway inflammation and reversible airway narrowing require assessment and treatment. These two pathologies are treated primarily with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2 agonists (LABA), respectively. Therefore, ICS-LABA combinations are widely used to treat asthma. Airway inflammation and reversible airway narrowing are assessed primarily with fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) and bronchodilator reversibility (BDR). The forced oscillation technique (FOT) has recently attracted attention as a method for assessing obstructive respiratory disturbance. However, little is known about the relationships among these assessments. Therefore, we investigated the relationships among BDR, FENO, and FOT during ICS-LABA combination therapy. The subjects comprised 87 patients (25 men and 62 women) with asthma undergoing ICS/LABA combination therapy from July to September 2017. We applied the FENO test, FOT, and BDR testing without the patients stopping their therapy. The rates of change in FEV₁ (ΔFEV₁%) was correlated with FENO (r = 0.278). Among the FOT parameters, X5 (r = -0.263), Fres (r = 0.292), and AX (r = 0.245) were significantly correlated with ΔFEV₁%. FENO, Fres and %FEV₁ at baseline in these stable asthmatics were significantly assosiated with ΔFEV₁% independently of the effects of age, atopy and body mass index (BMI). These results suggest that FENO and the results of respiratory function testing and FOT reflect different aspects of asthma and should be combined and comprehensively evaluated.

Study of the beneficial role of exhaled nitric oxide in combination with GINA guidelines for titration of inhaled corticosteroids in children with asthma

BACKGROUND

The use of FE_NO in association with current guidelines in the treatment of asthma has not been studied thoroughly. This study aimed to evaluate the beneficial role of FE_NO in combination with GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) guidelines for titration of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in asthmatic children.

METHODS

It was a prospective and descriptive study. Uncontrolled asthmatic children were randomized to two groups: group 1 (followed GINA guidelines) or group 2 (followed GINA guidelines + FE_NO modification for ICS titration). The two groups were followed-up for 12 months.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients in the study was 10 ± 4 years for group 1 (n = 116) and 11 ± 5 years for group 2 (n = 108). There were 87.9% patients in group 1 and 82.4% in group 2 that had a familial allergic history. There were 58.6% of moderate asthma and 41.4% of severe asthma in group 1, versus 56.4% and 43.6% in group 2, respectively. The percentage of moderate and severe asthma was also significantly modified after 6th and 12th month versus at inclusion (43.1% and 35.3% versus 58.6%, P < 0.01 and P < 0.005; 23.2% and 12.9% versus 41.4%, P < 0.005 and P < 0.001, respectively). The total daily dose of ICS in group 2 at 12th months was significantly lower than that in group 1 (3515 ± 1175 versus 4785 ± 1235 mcg; P < 0.005). The daily cost of ICS treatment in group 2 was also lower than that of group 1 (18 ± 4 versus 27 ± 3 USD; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of FE_NO in combination with GINA guidelines for ICS titration is useful in reducing the daily ICS dose and treatment cost.

Management of acute loss of asthma control: yellow zone strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma exacerbations are associated with a significant burden to both the individual patient and to the healthcare system. Patients often step-up home therapies in response to increased asthma symptoms, and the asthma action plan was created to empower patients to self-manage their asthma care. The yellow (intermediate) zone of the asthma action plan is frequently poorly defined, and current Expert Panel Report 3 guideline recommendations are not effective for all patients. This article reviews the evidence behind various recommended yellow zone intervention strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are many potential methods of delivering yellow zone therapy, and recent studies have assessed preventive efficacy of a scheduled increase in controller medication(s), reliever medication(s), or a symptom-driven combination of both. The literature suggests that, in certain asthma subpopulations, some methods may be more efficacious than others.

SUMMARY

Multiple yellow zone approaches may be beneficial, and the yellow zone is not a 'one size fits all' narrative.

2020 Brazilian Thoracic Association recommendations for the management of asthma

The pharmacological management of asthma has changed considerably in recent decades, as it has come to be understood that it is a complex, heterogeneous disease with different phenotypes and endotypes. It is now clear that the goal of asthma treatment should be to achieve and maintain control of the disease, as well as to minimize the risks (of exacerbations, disease instability, accelerated loss of lung function, and adverse treatment effects). That requires an approach that is personalized in terms of the pharmacological treatment, patient education, written action plan, training in correct inhaler use, and review of the inhaler technique at each office visit. A panel of 22 pulmonologists was invited to perform a critical review of recent evidence of pharmacological treatment of asthma and to prepare this set of recommendations, a treatment guide tailored to use in Brazil. The topics or questions related to the most significant changes in concepts, and consequently in the management of asthma in clinical practice, were chosen by a panel of experts. To formulate these recommendations, we asked each expert to perform a critical review of a topic or to respond to a question, on the basis of evidence in the literature. In a second phase, three experts discussed and structured all texts submitted by the others. That was followed by a third phase, in which all of the experts reviewed and discussed each recommendation. These recommendations, which are intended for physicians involved in the treatment of asthma, apply to asthma patients of all ages.

Adherence to adding inhaled corticosteroids to rescue therapy in a pragmatic trial with adults with asthma: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Underuse of guideline-recommended inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) controller therapy is a risk factor for greater asthma burden. ICS concomitantly used with rescue inhalers (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered ICS ['PARTICS']) reduced asthma exacerbations in efficacy trials, but whether PARTICS is effective in pragmatic trials is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted this pilot to determine the feasibility of executing a large-scale pragmatic PARTICS trial and to improve study protocols.

METHODS

Four sites recruited 33 Hispanic or black adults with persistent asthma, randomized them approximately 3:1 to intervention or usual care, and followed them for 12 weeks. All participants received asthma guideline-based educational videos; intervention participants received video-based instructions on implementing PARTICS plus usual medications. The study involved 1 randomization visit and monthly questionnaires. Timely questionnaire responses (±2 weeks) were monitored. Participants underwent qualitative phone interviews to assess self-reported adherence to PARTICS and understand barriers to completing study procedures.

RESULTS

Timely questionnaire response rates were 61%, 64%, and 70% at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, respectively. Self-reported adherence to PARTICS was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%-94% [n = 21]), 88% (95%CI, 72%-100% [n = 16]), and 62% (95%CI, 36%-88% [n = 13]) at weeks 1, 6, and 12, respectively. Barriers to completing study procedures included difficulties with questionnaire access, remembering to use ICS and rescue inhalers together, and obtaining refills. Only 22% of participants recognized their short-acting bronchodilator as "reliever" or "rescue."

CONCLUSION

Recruitment was feasible within the allocated period. Adherence to PARTICS was incomplete, questionnaire completion was suboptimal, and common rescue inhaler nomenclature usage was limited. We have modified the full study protocol to attempt to improve adherence to PARTICS and minimize barriers to study procedures.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

pilot study for 'PeRson EmPowered Asthma Relief' (PREPARE, NCT02995733).

Biomarker-guided management reduces exacerbations in non-eosinophilic asthma in pregnancy: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The aim of this secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of asthma management in pregnancy was to determine the treatment decision differences between a symptom control algorithm and a fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO)-guided algorithm, and whether the approach was effective in non-eosinophilic asthma (NEA).

METHODS

In this double-blind parallel group RCT, women with asthma were randomized prior to 22 weeks gestation to treatment adjustment according to a symptom control algorithm (control group), or a FENO-guided algorithm (inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose adjusted according to FENO with long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) added for uncontrolled symptoms). NEA was classified as baseline blood eosinophils <0.26 × 10⁹ /L and FENO ≤29 ppb. Exacerbations requiring medical intervention were recorded.

RESULTS

Among 220 non-smokers (n = 109 control, n = 111 FENO), 1006 treatment decisions were made, with significant group differences after the first and second algorithm applications. 53% of women had NEA. Treatment was better targeted to phenotype in the FENO group: ICS use increased in eosinophilic asthma (EA, 48-86%), while ICS/LABA increased in NEA (11-30%). Fewer women in the FENO group had exacerbations during pregnancy in NEA only (18.9% FENO vs 44% control, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The FENO algorithm was more effective in treating NEA, resulting in reduced exacerbations, compared to a symptom control algorithm. This was not the result of ICS overtreatment, since the benefits occurred at a lower median daily ICS dose. Two applications of the FENO-guided algorithm, one month apart, were sufficient to achieve beneficial effects in terms of asthma exacerbations, among pregnant women with asthma.

Exacerbation-prone asthma in the context of race and ancestry in Asthma Clinical Research Network trials

BACKGROUND

Minority groups of African descent experience disproportionately greater asthma morbidity compared with other racial groups, suggesting that genetic variation from a common ancestry could influence exacerbation risk.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated clinical trial measures in the context of self-reported race and genetic ancestry to identify risk factors for asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

One thousand eight hundred forty multiethnic subjects from 12 Asthma Clinical Research Network and AsthmaNet trials were analyzed for incident asthma exacerbations with Poisson regression models that included clinical measures, self-reported race (black, non-Hispanic white, and other), and estimates of global genetic African ancestry in a subgroup (n = 760).

RESULTS

Twenty-four percent of 1840 subjects self-identified as black. Black and white subjects had common risk factors for exacerbations, including a history of 2 or more exacerbations in the previous year and FEV₁ percent predicted values, whereas chronic sinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and gastroesophageal reflux disease were only associated with increased exacerbation risk in black subjects. In the combined multiethnic cohort, neither race (P = .30) nor percentage of genetic African ancestry as a continuous variable associated with exacerbation risk (adjusted rate ratio [RR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.94-1.70; P = .13]; RR per 1-SD change [32% ancestry], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.78-1.19; P = .74]). However, in 161 black subjects with genetic data, those with African ancestry greater than the median (≥82%) had a significantly greater risk of exacerbation (RR, 3.06 [95% CI, 1.09-8.6; P = .03]).

CONCLUSION

Black subjects have unique risk factors for asthma exacerbations, of which global African genetic ancestry had the strongest effect.

Expression of eosinophil β chain-signaling cytokines receptors, outer-membrane integrins, and type 2 inflammation biomarkers in severe non-allergic eosinophilic asthma

Background

Severe non-allergic eosinophilic asthma (SNEA) is a rare asthma phenotype associated with severe clinical course, frequent exacerbations, and resistance to therapy, including high steroid doses. The key feature is type 2 inflammation with predominant airway eosinophilia. Eosinophil maturation, activation, survivability, and recruitment are mainly induced by interleukin (IL)-3, IL-5 and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) through their receptors on eosinophil surface and related with integrins activation states. The aim of the study was to estimate the expression of eosinophil β chain-signaling cytokines receptors, outer-membrane integrins, and serum-derived type 2 inflammation biomarkers in SNEA.

Methods

We examined 8 stable SNEA patients with high inhaled steroid doses, 12 steroid-free patients with non-severe allergic asthma (AA), 12 healthy subjects (HS). Blood eosinophils were isolated using Ficol gradient centrifugation and magnetic separation. Eosinophils were lysed, and mRNA was isolated. Gene expressions of IL-5Rα, IL-3Rα, GM-CSFRα, and α4β1, αMβ2 integrins were analyzed using quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Type 2 inflammation activity was evaluated measuring exhaled nitric oxide concentration (FeNO) collected with the electrochemical sensing device. Serum IL-5, IL-3, GM-CSF, periostin, chemokine ligand (CCL) 17 and eotaxin concentrations were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Results

Eosinophils from SNEA patients demonstrated significantly increased gene expression of IL-3Rα, IL-5Rα and GM-CSFRα as well as α4, β1 and αM integrin subunits compared with the AA group. The highest IL-5 serum concentration was in the SNEA group; it significantly differed compared with AA and HS. GM-CSF serum levels were similar in the SNEA and AA groups and were significantly lower in the HS group. No differences in serum IL-3 concentration were found among all groups. Furthermore, serum levels of eotaxin, CCL17 and FeNO, but not periostin, differed in all groups, with the highest levels in SNEA patients.

Conclusions

Eosinophil demonstrated higher expression of IL-3, IL-5, GM-CSF α-chain receptors and α4, β1, αM integrins subunits in SNEA compared with the AA group. Additionally, SNEA patients had increased serum levels of IL-5, eotaxin and CCL-17.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03388359.

Association of elevated fractional exhaled nitric oxide concentration and blood eosinophil count with severe asthma exacerbations

Background

Blood eosinophil count (BEC) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) concentration are established biomarkers in asthma, associated particularly with the risk of exacerbations. We evaluated the relationship of BEC and FeNO as complementary and independent biomarkers of severe asthma exacerbations.

Methods

This observational study included data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Asthma patients (18–80 years) with valid continuous data for 1 year before FeNO reading, ≥ 1 inhaled corticosteroid prescription, and BEC recorded ≤ 5 years before FeNO reading were separated into cohorts. Categorisation 1 was based on the American Thoracic Society criteria for elevated FeNO concentration (high: ≥ 50 ppb; non-high: < 25 ppb) and BEC (high: ≥ 0.300 × 10⁹ cells/L; non-high: < 0.300 × 10⁹ cells/L). Categorisation 2 (FeNO concentration, high: ≥ 35 ppb; non-high: < 35 ppb) was based on prior research. Reference groups included patients with neither biomarker raised.

Results

In categorisation 1, patients with either high FeNO or high BEC (n = 200) had a numerically greater exacerbation rate (unadjusted rate ratio, 1.31 [95% confidence interval: 0.97, 1.76]) compared with patients in the reference group. Combination of high FeNO and high BEC (n = 27) resulted in a significantly greater exacerbation rate (3.67 [1.49, 9.04]). Similarly, for categorisation 2, when both biomarkers were raised (n = 53), a significantly greater exacerbation rate was observed (1.72 [1.00, 2.93]).

Conclusion

The combination of high FeNO and high BEC was associated with significantly increased severe exacerbation rates in the year preceding FeNO reading, suggesting that combining FeNO and BEC measurements in primary care may identify asthma patients at risk of exacerbations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13601-019-0282-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

It is time to change the way we manage mild asthma: an update in GINA 2019

Asthma is a heterogeneous lung disease, usually characterised by chronic airway inflammation. Although evidence-based treatments are available in most countries, asthma control remains suboptimal, and asthma-related deaths continue to be an ongoing concern. Generally, it is believed that between 50 to 75% of patients with asthma can be considered as having mild asthma.

Previous versions of Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) suggested that mild asthma in adults can be well managed with either reliever medications, for example, short-acting beta₂ agonists (SABA) alone or with the additional use of controllers such as regular low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Given the low frequency or non-bothersome nature of symptoms in mild asthma, patients’ adherence towards their controller medications, especially to ICS is usually not satisfactory. Such patients often rely on SABA alone to relieve symptoms, which may contribute to SABA over-reliance. Overuse of relievers such as SABAs has been associated with poor asthma outcomes, such as exacerbations and even deaths. The new GINA 2019 asthma treatment recommendations represent significant shifts in asthma management at Steps 1 and 2 of the 5 treatment steps. The report acknowledges an emerging body of evidence suggesting the non-safety of SABAs overuse in the absence of concomitant controller medications, therefore does not support SABA-only therapy in mild asthma and has included new off-label recommendations such as symptom-driven (as-needed) low dose ICS-formoterol and “low dose ICS taken whenever SABA is taken”.

The GINA 2019 report highlights significant updates in mild asthma management and these recommendations represent a clear deviation from decades of clinical practice mandating the use of symptom-driven SABA treatment alone in those with mild asthma. While the new inclusions of strategies such as symptom-driven (as-needed) ICS-formoterol and “ICS taken whenever SABA is taken” are based on several key trials, data in this context are still only emergent data, with clear superiority of as needed ICS-formoterol combinations over maintenance ICS regimens yet to be established for valid endpoints. Nevertheless, current and emerging data position the clinical asthma realm at a watershed moment with imminent changes for the way we manage mild asthma likely in going forward.

A Pragmatic Trial of Symptom-Based Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in African-American Children with Mild Asthma

BACKGROUND

Symptom-based adjustment (SBA) of inhaled corticosteroids may be an alternative patient-centered approach in which day-to-day inhaled corticosteroid use is adjusted by symptoms and short-acting β-agonist need.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of SBA in the primary care setting.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, open-label, pragmatic equivalence trial in African-American children (6-17 years old) with mild asthma managed by 12 primary care providers (PCPs). A total of 206 participants were randomized to SBA (as-needed beclomethasone 80 μg with rescue short-acting β-agonist) or provider-based guideline-directed adjustment (PBA): maintenance beclomethasone 80 μg/d (6-11 years old), 160 μg/d (12-17 years old), with subsequent guideline-based dose adjustment by PCPs. PCPs implemented both treatment assignments, with outcomes measured by blinded staff. All participants received symptom recognition and albuterol use education from peer educators. Primary outcome was change in asthma control (measured by Asthma Control Test [ACT]/childhood ACT [cACT]) over 12 months.

RESULTS

Participants had adequately controlled asthma (mean ACT or cACT score = 21.6 ± 2.8) at baseline. After 1 year, there was no significant between-group difference in change in ACT scores (SBA - PBA): ACT: -0.88 (95% CI, -2.19 to 0.42), cACT: -0.73 (-2.09 to 0.62), or combined ACT and cACT (P = .10), and was within the predefined statistical clinical equivalence. The proportion with an exacerbation and measures of lung function were similar between groups. Compared with PBA, SBA led to less beclomethasone use (SBA: 526 μg/mo [95% CI, 412-639 μg] vs PBA: 1961 μg/mo [95% CI, 1681-2241]; P < .0001). More parents in the SBA arm felt they were managing their child's asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

SBA in African-American children with mild asthma was similar to PBA in asthma control and events when implemented by PCPs with lower inhaled corticosteroid exposure.

Treatment strategies for the yellow zone

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate relevant studies and documents that address treatment strategies for acute loss of asthma control (yellow zone).

DATA SOURCES

Publications available on various treatment strategies for the yellow zone, Global Initiative for Asthma, and FDA Drug Safety Communication.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies that assessed the effectiveness of specific therapies as yellow zone strategies were included in this review.

RESULTS

Multiple yellow zone strategies exist, but only a few have been shown consistently effective. No specific evidence suggests that scheduled SABA can prevent exacerbation. Results for intermittent leukotriene receptor antagonist use have been mixed. Strong evidence supports intermittent inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosing for preschool-aged children with intermittent viral-induced wheeze, but data regarding this strategy for older children and adults are limited. As for short-term increase in scheduled ICS controller, doubling the dose seems to be ineffective, whereas results for a more substantial increase in ICS dose (quadrupling and quintupling) have been mixed. Dynamic dosing appears most promising, because symptom-driven ICS in tandem with rescue beta agonist use (whether short- or long-acting) is the strategy with the most robust data demonstrating reduction in exacerbations while minimizing ICS exposure.

CONCLUSION

Varying study designs and the heterogeneity of asthma itself likely account for the difference in outcomes seen with the various yellow zone intervention strategies studied. More studies are needed to determine the right yellow zone therapies for the right patients, but this is likely to be most effective through a personalized approach.

Asthma progression and mortality: the role of inhaled corticosteroids

Overall, asthma mortality rates have declined dramatically in the last 30 years, due to improved diagnosis and to better treatment, particularly in the 1990s following the more widespread use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). The impact of ICS on other long-term outcomes, such as lung function decline, is less certain, in part because the factors associated with these outcomes are incompletely understood. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the effect of pharmacological interventions, particularly ICS, on asthma progression and mortality. Furthermore, we review the potential mechanisms of action of pharmacotherapy on asthma progression and mortality, the effects of ICS on long-term changes in lung function, and the role of ICS in various asthma phenotypes.Overall, there is compelling evidence of the value of ICS in improving asthma control, as measured by improved symptoms, pulmonary function and reduced exacerbations. There is, however, less convincing evidence that ICS prevents the decline in pulmonary function that occurs in some, although not all, patients with asthma. Severe exacerbations are associated with a more rapid decline in pulmonary function, and by reducing the risk of severe exacerbations, it is likely that ICS will, at least partially, prevent this decline. Studies using administrative databases also support an important role for ICS in reducing asthma mortality, but the fact that asthma mortality is, fortunately, an uncommon event makes it highly improbable that this will be demonstrated in prospective trials.