High dose versus low dose inhaled corticosteroid as initial starting dose for asthma in adults and children

The Saudi initiative for asthma - 2024 update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children

The Saudi Initiative for Asthma 2024 (SINA-2024) is the sixth version of asthma guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma for adults and children that was developed by the SINA group, a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society. The main objective of the SINA is to have guidelines that are up-to-date, simple to understand, and easy to use by healthcare workers dealing with asthma patients. To facilitate achieving the goals of asthma management, the SINA Panel approach is mainly based on the assessment of symptom control and risk for both adults and children. The approach to asthma management is aligned for age groups: adults, adolescents, children aged 5-12 years, and children aged <5 years. SINA guidelines have focused more on personalized approaches reflecting a better understanding of disease heterogeneity with the integration of recommendations related to biologic agents, evidence-based updates on treatment, and the role of immunotherapy in management. The medication appendix has also been updated with the addition of recent evidence, new indications for existing medication, and new medications. The guidelines are constructed based on the available evidence, local literature, and the current situation at national and regional levels. There is also an emphasis on patient-doctor partnership in the management that also includes a self-management plan.

Triple Therapy with Mometasone/Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium or Doubling the ICS/LABA Dose in GINA Step 4: IRIDIUM Analyses

INTRODUCTION

GINA guidelines recommend increasing the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as a step-up option for patients with inadequately controlled asthma at GINA step 4 [inadequately controlled asthma on medium-dose ICS/long-acting beta-2 agonist (LABA)]. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) add-on to medium-dose ICS/LABA in patients at GINA 2022 step 4.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of the IRIDIUM study evaluated the change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume (FEV1 ) in patients receiving medium-dose MF/IND/GLY versus high-dose MF/IND and high-dose FLU/SAL at Week 26. Other outcomes included improvement in lung functions [peak expiratory flow (PEF), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of the FVC (FEF)25-75%)], asthma control [Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7)], responder analysis (≥ 0.5 unit improvement in ACQ-7), and reduction in asthma exacerbations at Weeks 26 and 52.

RESULTS

A total of 1930 patients were included in this analysis. Medium-dose MF/IND/GLY improved trough FEV1 versus high-dose MF/IND (Δ 41 mL; 95% CI - 7-90) and high-dose FLU/SAL (Δ 88 mL; 95% CI 39-137) at Week 26 which were sustained until Week 52. Exacerbation rates were 16% lower with medium-dose MF/IND/GLY versus high-dose MF/IND for all (mild, moderate, and severe) exacerbations and 21-30% lower versus high-dose FLU/SAL for all (mild, moderate, and severe), moderate or severe, and severe exacerbations over 52 weeks. Further improvements in other lung functions were observed with medium-dose MF/IND/GLY. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSION

Medium-dose MF/IND/GLY improved lung function and reduced asthma exacerbations compared to high-dose ICS/LABA and may be an undervalued option in patients at GINA 2022 step 4.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02571777.

A Current Perspective of Allergic Asthma: From Mechanisms to Management

Asthma is a result of heterogenous, complex gene-environment interactions with variable clinical phenotypes, inflammation, and remodeling. It affects more than 330 million of people worldwide throughout their educational and working lives, while exacerbations put a heavy cost/burden on productivity. Childhood asthma is characterized by a predominance of allergic sensitization and multimorbidity, while in adults polysensitization has been positively associated with asthma occurrence. Despite significant improvements in recent decades, asthma management remains challenging. Recently, a group of specialists suggested that the term "asthma" should be preferably used as a descriptive term for symptoms. Moreover, type 2 inflammation has emerged as a pivotal disease mechanism including overlapping endotypes of specific IgE production, while type 2-low asthma includes several disease endotypes. Optimal asthma control requires both appropriate pharmacological interventions, tailored to each patient, as well as trigger avoidance measures. Regular monitoring for maintenance of symptom control, preservation of lung function, and detection of treatment-related adverse effects are warranted. Allergen-specific immunotherapy and the advent of new targeted therapies for patients with difficult to control asthma offer diverse treatment options. The current review summarizes up-to-date knowledge on epidemiology, definitions, diagnosis, and current therapeutic strategies.

The Saudi Initiative for Asthma - 2019 Update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children

This is the fourth version of the updated guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma, developed by the Saudi Initiative for Asthma (SINA) group, a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society. The main objective of the SINA is to have guidelines that are up to date, simple to understand, and easy to use by healthcare workers dealing with asthma patients. To facilitate achieving the goals of asthma management, the SINA panel approach is mainly based on the assessment of symptom control and risk for both adults and children. The approach to asthma management is now more aligned for different age groups. The guidelines have focused more on personalized approaches reflecting better understanding of disease heterogeneity with integration of recommendations related to biologic agents, evidence-based updates on treatment, and role of immunotherapy in management. The medication appendix has also been updated with the addition of recent evidence, new indications for existing medication, and new medications. The guidelines are constructed based on the available evidence, local literature, and current situation at national and regional levels. There is also an emphasis on patient–doctor partnership in the management that also includes a self-management plan.

Inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: what is their role in therapy?

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are a mainstay of COPD treatment for patients with a history of exacerbations. Initial studies evaluating their use as monotherapy failed to show an effect on rate of pulmonary function decline in COPD, despite improvements in symptoms and reductions in exacerbations. Subsequently, ICS use in combination with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) was shown to provide improved reductions in exacerbations, lung function, and health status. ICS-LABA combination therapy is currently recommended for patients with a history of exacerbations despite treatment with long-acting bronchodilators alone. The presence of eosinophilic bronchial inflammation, detected by high blood eosinophil levels or a history of asthma or asthma-COPD overlap, may define a population of patients in whom ICSs may be of particular benefit. Prospective clinical studies to determine an appropriate threshold of eosinophil levels for predicting the beneficial effects of ICSs are needed. Further study is also required in COPD patients who continue to smoke to assess the impact of cell- and tissue-specific changes on ICS responsiveness. The safety profile of ICSs in COPD patients is confounded by comorbidities, age, and prior use of systemic corticosteroids. The risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD is increased, particularly with more advanced age and worse disease severity. ICS-containing therapy also has been shown to increase pneumonia risk; however, differences in study design and the definition of pneumonia events have led to substantial variability in risk estimates, and some data indicate that pneumonia risk may differ by the specific ICS used. In summary, treatment with ICSs has a role in dual and triple therapy for COPD to reduce exacerbations and improve symptoms. Careful assessment of COPD phenotypes related to risk factors, triggers, and comorbidities may assist in individualizing treatment while maximizing the benefit-to-risk ratio of ICS-containing COPD treatment.

Description of the protocol for the PRACTICAL study: a randomised controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of ICS/LABA reliever therapy in asthma

Introduction

In adult asthma, combination inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/fast-onset long-acting beta agonist (LABA) used solely as reliever therapy may represent an effective and safe alternative to ICS maintenance and short-acting beta agonist (SABA) reliever therapy.

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of ICS/fast-onset LABA reliever therapy with ICS maintenance and SABA reliever therapy in adults with asthma.

Methods and analysis

A 52-week, open-label, parallel group, multicentre, phase III randomised controlled trial with 1:1 randomisation to either budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler 200/6 µg, one actuation as required for symptom relief, or budesonide Turbuhaler 200 µg, one actuation twice daily and terbutaline Turbuhaler 250 µg, two actuations as required for symptom relief. 890 adults aged 18–75 years with asthma for whom maintenance ICS and SABA reliever therapy is indicated by current guidelines will be recruited in New Zealand. The primary outcome variable is the rate of severe exacerbations per patient per year. This study will investigate a novel treatment regimen that might lead to a paradigm shift in asthma management for adults for whom guidelines currently recommend maintenance ICS and SABA reliever therapy.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been granted (15/NTB/178). Study findings will be published according to Iinternational Committee of Medical Journal Editors' recommendations.

Trial registration number

ACTRN12616000377437; Pre-results.

Contemporaneous International Asthma Guidelines Present Differing Recommendations: An Analysis

Background. Several international groups develop asthma guidelines. Conflicting recommendations across guidelines have been described in several disease areas and may contribute to practice variability. Accordingly, we compared the latest Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) asthma guideline with contemporaneous international asthma guidelines to evaluate conflicting recommendations and their causes. Methods. We identified the latest CTS asthma guideline update (2012) and the following societies which also updated their guidelines in 2012: the British Thoracic Society and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and the Global Initiative for Asthma. We compared these three guidelines on (1) key methodological factors and (2) adult pharmacotherapy recommendations. Results. Methods used and documentation provided for literature search strategy and dates, evidence synthesis, outcomes considered, evidence appraisal, and recommendation formulation varied between guidelines. Criteria used to define suboptimal asthma control varied widely between guidelines. Inhaled corticosteroid dosing recommendations diverged, as did recommendations surrounding use of budesonide/formoterol as a reliever and controller and recommendations in the subsequent step. Conclusions. There are important differences between recommendations provided in contemporaneous asthma guidelines. Causes include differences in methods used for interpreting evidence and formulating recommendations. Adopting a common set of valid and explicit methods across international societies could harmonize recommendations and facilitate guideline implementation.

The Saudi Initiative for Asthma - 2016 update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of asthma, developed by the Saudi Initiative for Asthma (SINA) group, a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society. The main objective of SINA is to have guidelines that are up to date, simple to understand and easy to use by nonasthma specialists, including primary care and general practice physicians. SINA approach is mainly based on symptom control and assessment of risk as it is the ultimate goal of treatment. The new SINA guidelines include updates of acute and chronic asthma management, with more emphasis on the use of asthma control in the management of asthma in adults and children, inclusion of a new medication appendix, and keeping consistency on the management at different age groups. The section on asthma in children is rewritten and expanded where the approach is stratified based on the age. The guidelines are constructed based on the available evidence, local literature, and the current situation in Saudi Arabia. There is also an emphasis on patient-doctor partnership in the management that also includes a self-management plan.

The Saudi initiative for asthma - 2012 update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children

This an updated guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma, developed by the Saudi Initiative for Asthma (SINA) group, a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society. The main objective of SINA is to have updated guidelines, which are simple to understand and easy to use by non-asthma specialists, including primary care and general practice physicians. This new version includes updates of acute and chronic asthma management, with more emphasis on the use of Asthma Control Test in the management of asthma, and a new section on "difficult-to-treat asthma." Further, the section on asthma in children was re-written to cover different aspects in this age group. The SINA panel is a group of Saudi experts with well-respected academic backgrounds and experience in the field of asthma. The guidelines are formatted based on the available evidence, local literature, and the current situation in Saudi Arabia. There was an emphasis on patient-doctor partnership in the management that also includes a self-management plan. The approach adopted by the SINA group is mainly based on disease control as it is the ultimate goal of treatment.

An integrative review of systematic reviews related to the management of breathlessness in respiratory illnesses

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness is a debilitating and distressing symptom in a wide variety of diseases and still a difficult symptom to manage. An integrative review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in non-malignant disease was undertaken to identify the current state of clinical understanding of the management of breathlessness and highlight promising interventions that merit further investigation.

METHODS

Systematic reviews were identified via electronic databases between July 2007 and September 2009. Reviews were included within the study if they reported research on adult participants using either a measure of breathlessness or some other measure of respiratory symptoms.

RESULTS

In total 219 systematic reviews were identified and 153 included within the final review, of these 59 addressed non-pharmacological interventions and 94 addressed pharmacological interventions. The reviews covered in excess of 2000 trials. The majority of systematic reviews were conducted on interventions for asthma and COPD, and mainly focussed upon a small number of pharmacological interventions such as corticosteroids and bronchodilators, including beta-agonists. In contrast, other conditions involving breathlessness have received little or no attention and studies continue to focus upon pharmacological approaches. Moreover, although there are a number of non-pharmacological studies that have shown some promise, particularly for COPD, their conclusions are limited by a lack of good quality evidence from RCTs, small sample sizes and limited replication.

CONCLUSIONS

More research should focus in the future on the management of breathlessness in respiratory diseases other than asthma and COPD. In addition, pharmacological treatments do not completely manage breathlessness and have an added burden of side effects. It is therefore important to focus more research on promising non-pharmacological interventions.

Tiotropium bromide step-up therapy for adults with uncontrolled asthma

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) therapy improves symptoms in patients whose asthma is poorly controlled by an inhaled glucocorticoid alone. Alternative treatments for adults with uncontrolled asthma are needed.

METHODS

In a three-way, double-blind, triple-dummy crossover trial involving 210 patients with asthma, we evaluated the addition of tiotropium bromide (a long-acting anticholinergic agent approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but not asthma) to an inhaled glucocorticoid, as compared with a doubling of the dose of the inhaled glucocorticoid (primary superiority comparison) or the addition of the LABA salmeterol (secondary noninferiority comparison).

RESULTS

The use of tiotropium resulted in a superior primary outcome, as compared with a doubling of the dose of an inhaled glucocorticoid, as assessed by measuring the morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), with a mean difference of 25.8 liters per minute (P<0.001) and superiority in most secondary outcomes, including evening PEF, with a difference of 35.3 liters per minute (P<0.001); the proportion of asthma-control days, with a difference of 0.079 (P=0.01); the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) before bronchodilation, with a difference of 0.10 liters (P=0.004); and daily symptom scores, with a difference of -0.11 points (P<0.001). The addition of tiotropium was also noninferior to the addition of salmeterol for all assessed outcomes and increased the prebronchodilator FEV1 more than did salmeterol, with a difference of 0.11 liters (P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

When added to an inhaled glucocorticoid, tiotropium improved symptoms and lung function in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Its effects appeared to be equivalent to those with the addition of salmeterol. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00565266.).

Asthma in childhood

Management decisions for pediatric asthma (in patients younger than 12 years of age) based on extrapolation from available evidence in adolescents and adults (age 12 years and older) is common but rarely appropriate. This article addresses the disparity in response between the two age groups, presents the available pediatric evidence, and highlights the important areas in which further research is required. Evidence-based recommendations for acute and interval management of pediatric asthma are provided.

[The relationship between inflammation and symptoms in asthma]

In asthma, symptoms are the main reason for recourse to healthcare and are a fundamental parameter for the evaluation of asthma control. Currently, asthma is defined as a chronic inflammatory disease. Uncontrolled asthmatics have an increased number of eosinophils in induced sputum and an increased production of exhaled NO. Control by anti-inflammatory treatment is accompanied by a reduction in bronchial eosinophilia and exhaled NO. Asthma symptoms are the result of complex mechanisms and many factors modify their perception. Experimental data suggests that there is a relationship between the perception of symptoms and eosinophilic inflammation, and that inhaled corticoid therapy improves this perception. Although they are still not applicable in routine practice, follow-up strategies based on the evaluation of inflammation are thought to be more effective in reducing exacerbations than those usually recommended based on retrospective evaluation of symptoms and sequential analysis of respiratory function. Inhaled corticosteroid therapy is the reference maintenance therapy for persistent asthma and adjustment of anti-inflammatory treatment based on symptoms is an effective strategy to prevent exacerbations and reduce the total dose of inhaled corticosteroids. A French expert group has undertaken a study of the association between inflammation and asthma symptoms by carrying out a critical review of the international literature.

Daily versus as-needed inhaled corticosteroid for mild persistent asthma (The Helsinki early intervention childhood asthma study)

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of inhaled budesonide given daily or as-needed on mild persistent childhood asthma. Patients, design and

INTERVENTIONS

176 children aged 5-10 years with newly detected asthma were randomly assigned to three treatment groups: (1) continuous budesonide (400 microg twice daily for 1 month, 200 microg twice daily for months 2-6, 100 microg twice daily for months 7-18); (2) budesonide, identical treatment to group 1 during months 1-6, then budesonide for exacerbations as needed for months 7-18; and (3) disodium cromoglycate (DSCG) 10 mg three times daily for months 1-18. Exacerbations were treated with budesonide 400 microg twice daily for 2 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Lung function, the number of exacerbations and growth.

RESULTS

Compared with DSCG the initial regular budesonide treatment resulted in a significantly improved lung function, fewer exacerbations and a small but significant decline in growth velocity. After 18 months, however, the lung function improvements did not differ between the groups. During months 7-18, patients receiving continuous budesonide treatment had significantly fewer exacerbations (mean 0.97), compared with 1.69 in group 2 and 1.58 in group 3. The number of asthma-free days did not differ between regular and intermittent budesonide treatment. Growth velocity was normalised during continuous low-dose budesonide and budesonide therapy given as needed. The latter was associated with catch-up growth.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular use of budesonide afforded better asthma control but had a more systemic effect than did use of budesonide as needed. The dose of ICS could be reduced as soon as asthma is controlled. Some children do not seem to need continuous ICS treatment.

The development of an evidence-based physical self-management rehabilitation programme for cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes the development of a physical training programme for cancer patients. Four related but conceptually and empirically distinct physical problems are described: decreased aerobic capacity, decreased muscle strength, fatigue and impaired role physical functioning. The study aimed to identify the optimal content for an exercise programme that addresses these four physical problems, based on the highest level of evidence available. The study further aimed to review the evidence available on the delivery of the programmes. The final goal was to develop a programme in which content and delivery are based on the best available evidence.

METHODS

Literature searches (PUBMED and MEDLINE, to July 2006) on content looked for evidence about the efficacy of exercise on aerobic capacity, muscle strength, fatigue and impaired role physical functioning. Literature searches on delivery looked for self-management and/or self-efficacy enhancing techniques in relation to outcome, adherence to and/or adoption of a physically active lifestyle.

RESULTS

Evidence on the effectiveness of exercise in cancer patients varies and increases when moving from muscle strength (RCT level), fatigue and physical role functioning to aerobic capacity (all at the meta-analysis level). Effect sizes for aerobic capacity were moderate, while effect sizes for fatigue and physical role functioning were zero and/or small. Many of the studies have significant methodological shortcomings. There was some evidence (meta-analyses) that self-management programmes and self-efficacy enhancing programmes have beneficial effects on health outcomes in a variety of chronic diseases, on the quality of life in cancer patients, and on exercise adherence and later exercise behaviour.

CONCLUSION

Limited data are available on the effectiveness of exercise for cancer patients. Although evidence supports the positive effects of exercise on exercise capacity during and after completion of cancer treatment, the effects for fatigue and role functioning are ambiguous. Evidence on the effectiveness of progressive exercise training on muscle strength is promising. In addition, some evidence supports the positive effects of self-management programmes and self-efficacy enhancing programmes on health outcomes, exercise adherence and later exercise behaviour.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The resulting programme was developed on the basis of the highest quality of evidence available regarding content and delivery. The content is based on information obtained from the present review, and on the recommendations of the American College of Sports Medicine. Potential advantages of the programme include: (a) tailored physical training towards focusing on the patient's established problems and (b) delivery of the training as a self-management programme that might have beneficial effects on health outcome, exercise adherence and a long-term physically active lifestyle.

Ciclesonide versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids are an integral part of asthma management, and act as an anti-inflammatory agent in the airways of the lung. These agents confer significant benefit in terms of symptom management and improvement in lung function, but may also cause harm in terms of local and systemic side-effects. Ciclesonide is a novel steroid that has efficient distribution and release properties that mean it can be taken once daily, making it potentially useful in ongoing asthma management.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of inhaled ciclesonide in adults and children with chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with pre-defined terms. Additional searches of CENTRAL and PubMed were undertaken. The literature searches for this review are current up to June 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised parallel or crossover studies were eligible for the review. We included studies comparing ciclesonide with placebo, and we also included studies comparing ciclesonide at different doses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed studies for inclusion in the review, extracted data independently and checked each others' work. We contacted study investigators in order to obtain additional data. Extracted data were entered into RevMan 4.2 and analysed as fixed effect mean differences for continuous data, and fixed effect risk ratios for dichotomous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials (reporting 20 study comparisons) met the review entry criteria. We report findings from 18 group comparisons where data were available (6343 participants, of whom 1692 were children). Ciclesonide versus placebo: The short duration of the included studies means that there is a lack of data with respect to the impact of ciclesonide on asthma exacerbations. At doses of 100 mcg/d or less up to 400 mcg/d in mild to moderate asthma, ciclesonide improved lung function, asthma symptoms and rescue inhaler use, compared with placebo.Dose response outcomes: Comparisons of 100 versus 200 mcg/d, 100 versus 400 mcg/d and 400 versus 800 mcg/d did not yield significant differences in lung function outcomes. Adverse event data were not available in sufficient detail to permit assessment of the safety profile of this drug.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ciclesonide was more effective than placebo, in the short term, in improving lung function in patients with mild to moderate asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. There remain questions as to dose response, and the lack of data on the longer term impact on exacerbations and safety profile should be addressed in future studies.

Patient satisfaction with different asthma-training variants

OBJECTIVE

Information on patient satisfaction with professional health care delivery in asthmatics is rare, and the question as to how asthma education programmes affect such satisfaction has not yet been addressed.

METHODS

This multi-centre study investigated three different variants of an asthma education programme for adults. Patients participated either in variant B (basic training with teacher-directed presentation, two 90 min sessions), variant C (comprehensive training, four sessions), variant D (including additional psychological components, minimum five sessions), or variant E (equivalent to B in outpatient context). At the end of the training the perceived satisfaction with the programme and reported personal benefit were assessed by means of a new inventory that was developed.

RESULTS

The sample comprised N = 320 patients (n = 244 inpatients and n = 76 outpatients) ranging in age from 18 to 80 years (M = 46.3 years). The average total score for educational satisfaction of all participants was 8.0 (maximum score = 10). Choice of topics was judged particularly positive (M = 8.58), followed by the structure of training/setting-conditions (M = 8.0). The perceived personal benefit from the training was evaluated less positively (M = 7.32). When comparing the programme variants, patients' average satisfaction tends to increase with the extent and intensity of the training offered. Outpatients showed significantly less satisfaction in contrast to inpatients. Inpatients' satisfaction with the three variants increased with extensiveness and intensity of the training, while the contrast of between-group comparisons (B-C, B-D and C-D) was significant.

CONCLUSION

Assessment of the patient's view of health care services should complement standardised evaluation methods, especially in multi-intervention rehabilitation programmes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Rehabilitation-specific diagnostic measures should be developed and validated in order to better assess patients' satisfaction and training efficacy from the patient's perspective. Further study is recommended on how far individualised training measures might increase subjective benefit.

Asthma exacerbations . 4: Prevention

Asthma exacerbations are common. They account for a significant morbidity and contribute a disproportionate amount to the cost of asthma management. The optimal strategies for the prevention of asthma exacerbations include the early introduction of anti-inflammatory treatment-most commonly, low dose inhaled corticosteroids. This should be coupled with a structured education programme which has a written action plan as an integral component. Where patients continue to be poorly controlled, the addition of a long acting beta agonist should be considered. The latter should not be used as monotherapy and should always be used with inhaled corticosteroids. Atopic patients with a history of repeated exacerbations, especially if they are steroid dependent and with a raised IgE, may be considered as potential candidates for omalizumab. In the early stages of an asthma exacerbation, doubling the dose of inhaled corticosteroids has been shown to be ineffective. The ideal strategy for the management of worsening asthma in patients on combination treatment, especially salmeterol and fluticasone, is uncertain. There is an emerging body of evidence for strategies on how to prevent progression to an exacerbation in patients taking a combination of budesonide and formoterol.

Prescribed doses of inhaled steroids in Dutch children: too little or too much, for too short a time

AIMS

To investigate the dosage and duration of inhaled steroids prescribed to children and to compare the prescribed doses with recommended doses for the treatment of asthma in children.

METHODS

For 2514 Dutch children aged 0-12 years who had used inhaled steroids in 2002, pharmacy dispensing data were obtained from the InterAction database, type of steroid (beclomethason, budesonide, fluticasone) and type of user (first time or existing) and the average prescribed doses according to age were determined and compared with the doses as recommended in the national Dutch Nederlands Huisartsen Genootschap (NHG) guideline. Furthermore, for all first-time users the duration of therapy with inhaled steroids was determined using a Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

The major findings were that: (i) overall 43% of children starting inhaled steroids were prescribed doses that are half the recommended dose or less; (ii) overall 8% of the children starting inhaled steroids were prescribed doses that were twice the recommended dose or more, up to 50% in the 12-year-olds fluticasone group; and (iii) only 8% of the children who started with inhaled steroids used them continuously for a full year.

CONCLUSIONS

Doses of inhaled steroids for many children deviate from those recommended, with lower doses more frequently occurring than higher doses. Less than 10% of the children receive prescriptions for a prolonged period of time.

The dose-response characteristics of inhaled corticosteroids when used to treat asthma: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

Inhaled corticosteroids form the cornerstone of treatment for most patients with asthma. A range of compounds are available with a wide range of prescribable doses. In this overview, we summarize the findings from a number of Cochrane systematic reviews that have examined the relative benefits of different doses of beclometasone dipropionate, budesonide and fluticasone propionate when used to treat children and adults. The key findings are that all inhaled corticosteroids demonstrate a dose-response relationship for efficacy measures, but most of the benefit in mild-to-moderate severity disease is gained in the low-to-moderate dose range of each drug. In this group, high doses of fluticasone lead to small improvements in measures of control at the expense of a steep increase in the incidence of oral side-effects. In patients with severe disease who are dependent on oral steroids, there may be appreciable benefit in reducing oral steroids from very high compared with high doses of fluticasone.

Fluticasone versus HFA-beclomethasone dipropionate for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of fluticasone (FP) and beclomethasone (BDP) propelled with CFCs has been well established. The potency of HFA-BDP is thought to have been improved with new propellant and some studies suggest that it may equipotent at half the dose of CFC propelled-BDP. There is a need to revisit this question in the light of a potentially more potent new non-CFC propellant.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of FP and HFA-propelled BDP in chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched using pre-specified terms. Searches were current as of January 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. We compared either CFC or HFA-propelled FP with HFA-propelled BDP. We made a distinction between HFA-BDP and HFA-BDP extra fine, which dispenses smaller particles of drug, leading to different, usually more peripheral distribution in the airways. Any inhaler device was considered, and there was no restriction on studies with or without spacers. We included studies which assessed HFA-BDP given via either pMDI, breath-actuated MDI, or DPI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. Data were extracted and entered in to RevMan 4.2 using standard meta-analytical techniques with predefined criteria for exploring statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies (1260 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. One study was conducted in children. Study reporting quality was fair, but all studies were of short duration (three to twelve weeks). Only studies assessing HFA-BDP extra fine in comparison with FP were identified. Lung function was not significantly different between extra fine BDP and FP when compared at the same dose in parallel studies, change in FEV1: 0.04 litres (95% CI -0.03 to 0.11 litres; three studies, 659 adults); change in am PEF: -0.69 litres (95% CI -11.21 to 9.83 litres; two studies, 364 adults). Individual studies reported non-significant findings in symptom scores and quality of life questionnaires. There was no significant difference between FP and HFA-BDP in the risk of study withdrawal, dysphonia or when data were reported as any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between FP and extra fine HFA-BDP on FEV(1) or peak flow at a dose ratio of 1:1. However, the number of studies and width of the confidence intervals in the analyses do not exclude a clinically meaningful difference between these two drugs. Difficulty in the successful manipulation of the devices studied may be a barrier to the widespread use of MDIs. One paediatric study was included in the review, so extrapolation of the findings of this review to children is limited. Further longer term studies in adults and children with moderate and severe asthma are required.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus sodium cromoglycate in children and adults with asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and sodium cromoglycate (SCG) have become established as effective controller medications for children and adults with asthma, but their relative efficacy is not clear.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative effectiveness and adverse effects of ICS and SCG among children and adults with chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Systematic search of the Cochrane Airways Group's special register of controlled trials (to Feb. 2004), hand searches of the reference lists of included trials and relevant review papers, and written requests for identification of additional trials from pharmaceutical manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of ICS with SCG in children and adults with chronic asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All studies were assessed independently for eligibility by three review authors. Disagreements were settled by consensus. Trial authors were contacted to supply missing data or to verify methods. Eligible studies were abstracted and fixed- and random-effects models were implemented to pool studies. Separate analyses were conducted for paediatric and adult studies. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression models were fit to explore heterogeneity of lung function outcomes by type of RCT, category of ICS or SCG dosage, asthma severity of participants, and study quality on outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 67 identified studies, 17 trials involving 1279 children and eight trials involving 321 adults with asthma were eligible. Thirteen (76%) of the paediatric studies and six (75%) of the adult studies were judged to be high quality. Among children, ICS were associated with a higher final mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.07 litres, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02 to 0.11) and higher mean final peak expiratory flow rate [PEF] (WMD 17.3 litres/minute, 95% CI 11.3 to 23.3) than SCG. In addition, ICS were associated with fewer exacerbations (WMD -1.18 exacerbations per year, 95% CI -2.15 to - 0.21), lower asthma symptom scores, and less rescue bronchodilator use than SCG. There were no group differences in the proportion of children with adverse effects. Among adults, ICS were similarly associated with a higher mean final FEV1 (WMD 0.21 litres, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.28) and a higher final endpoint PEF (WMD 28.2 litres/minute, 95% CI 18.7 to 37.6) than SCG. ICS were also associated with fewer exacerbations (WMD -3.30 exacerbations per year, 95% CI -5.62 to -0.98), lower asthma symptom scores among cross-over trials but not parallel trials, and less rescue bronchodilator use than SCG. There were no differences in the proportion of adults with adverse effects. In subgroup analyses involving lung function measures, paediatric and adult studies judged to be of high quality had results consistent with the overall results. Lung function measures in children were higher in studies with medium BDP-equivalent steroid dosages than low BDP-equivalent dosages, while adult studies could not be compared by steroid dosage since they all incorporated similar dosages. There were no significant differences in lung function by the asthma severity of participants for adult or child studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ICS were superior to SCG on measures of lung function and asthma control for both adults and children with chronic asthma. There were few studies reporting on quality of life and health care utilization, which limited our ability to adequately evaluate the relative effects of these medications on a broader range of outcomes. Although there were no differences in adverse effects between ICS and SCG, most trials were short and may not have been of sufficient duration to identify long-term effects. Our results support recent consensus statements in the U.S. and elsewhere that favour the use of ICS over SCG for control of persistent asthma.

Fluticasone versus HFA-beclomethasone dipropionate for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of fluticasone (FP) and beclomethasone (BDP) propelled with CFCs has been well established. The potency of HFA-BDP is thought to have been improved with new propellant and some studies suggest that it may equipotent at half the dose of CFC propelled-BDP. There is a need to revisit this question in the light of a potentially more potent new non-CFC propellant.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of FP and HFA-propelled BDP in chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched using pre-specified terms. Searches were current as of March 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. We compared either CFC or HFA-propelled FP with HFA-propelled BDP. We made a distinction between HFA-BDP and HFA-BDP extra fine, which dispenses smaller particles of drug, leading to different, usually more peripheral distribution in the airways. Any inhaler device was considered, and there was no restriction on studies with or without spacers. We included studies which assessed HFA-BDP given via either pMDI, breath-actuated MDI, or DPI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. Data were extracted and entered in to RevMan 4.2 using standard meta-analytical techniques with predefined criteria for exploring statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies (1230 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. One study was conducted in children. Study reporting quality was fair, but all studies were of short duration (three to twelve weeks). Only studies assessing HFA-BDP extra fine in comparison with FP were identified. Lung function was not significantly different between extra fine BDP and FP when compared at the same dose in parallel studies, change in FEV1: 0.04 litres (95% CI -0.03 to 0.11 litres; three studies, 659 adults); change in am PEF: -0.69 litres (95% CI -11.21 to 9.83 litres; two studies, 364 adults). Individual studies reported non-significant findings in symptom scores and quality of life questionnaires. There was no significant difference between FP and HFA-BDP in the risk of study withdrawal, dysphonia or when data were reported as any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between FP and extra fine HFA-BDP on FEV(1) or peak flow at a dose ratio of 1:1. However, the number of studies and width of the confidence intervals in the analyses do not exclude a clinically meaningful difference between these two drugs. Difficulty in the successful manipulation of the devices studied may be a barrier to the widespread use of MDIs. One paediatric study was included in the review, so extrapolation of the findings of this review to children is limited. Further longer term studies in adults and children with moderate and severe asthma are required.

Titrating steroids on exhaled nitric oxide in children with asthma: a randomized controlled trial

RATIONALE

Corticosteroids are the antiinflammatory treatment of choice in asthma. Treatment guidelines are mainly symptom-driven but symptoms are not closely related to airway inflammation. The fraction of nitric oxide in exhaled air (FENO) is a marker of airway inflammation in asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated whether titrating steroids on FENO improved asthma management in children.

METHODS

Eighty-five children with atopic asthma, using inhaled steroids, were allocated to a FENO group (n=39) in which treatment decisions were made on both FENO and symptoms, or to a symptom group (n=46) treated on symptoms only. Children were seen every 3 months over a 1-year period.

MEASUREMENTS

Symptoms were scored during 2 weeks before visits and 4 weeks before the final visit. FeNO was measured at all visits, and airway hyperresponsiveness and FEV1 were measured at the start and end of the study. Primary endpoint was cumulative steroid dose.

RESULTS

Changes in steroid dose from baseline did not differ between groups. In the FENO group, hyperresponsiveness improved more than in the symptom group (2.5 vs. 1.1 doubling dose, p=0.04). FEV1 in the FENO group improved, and the change in FEV1 was not significantly different between groups. The FENO group had 8 severe exacerbations versus 18 in the symptom group. The change in symptom scores did not differ between groups. FENO increased in the symptom group; the change in FENO from baseline differed between groups (p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

In children with asthma, 1 year of steroid titration on FENO did not result in higher steroid doses and did improve airway hyperresponsiveness and inflammation.

Patient knowledge of immunotherapy before and after an educational intervention: a comparison of 2 methods

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy is an invaluable therapy for allergic asthma, allergic rhinitis, and hymenoptera hypersensitivity. It is, however, not without risks.

OBJECTIVES

To examine patient knowledge regarding immunotherapy and to determine the most effective educational method to improve their knowledge by answering the following questions: Before educational intervention, what is the current knowledge level regarding allergy vaccinations of patients receiving immunotherapy? What effect does an educational encounter have on that level of knowledge? Which educational intervention--a one-on-one session vs a handout--if either, increases patient knowledge more?

METHODS

An original, self-administered patient questionnaire was distributed to all patients receiving immunotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to a control group, an intervention group that received an educational handout monthly for 2 months, or an intervention group that had a one-on-one educational session with a physician or nurse practitioner. After 3 months, all patients completed an identical follow-up questionnaire. Pretest and posttest scores were compared for each group and among the different groups to determine which method was more effective. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine the effect of instruction type on differences in pretest and posttest scores.

RESULTS

All 3 groups significantly improved their mean overall questionnaire scores (P < .001). The amount of change was greater in the intervention groups than in the control group, but it did not reach statistical significance (P = .59).

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline immunotherapy knowledge of allergy vaccination patients was better than expected, and further educational interventions did not significantly improve this knowledge.