Potential Severe Asthma Hidden in UK Primary Care

Impact of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) and heat-not-burn/heated tobacco products (HnB/HTP) on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a viewpoint of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine

The association of cigarette smoking with several severe and very severe diseases (oncological, cardiovascular, respiratory) which have dramatic epidemiological, medical, and financial impact, is a well-known public threat. Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are highly prevalent diseases in Italy, posing significant public health challenges. Tobacco smoking, a primary risk factor for COPD and a common asthma trigger, remains a critical preventable public health issue. While universally acknowledged that quitting smoking drastically reduces the risk of smoking-related health issues, a significant portion of smokers and patients find quitting challenging or undesirable, hence a need for new ways to deal with it. A worth considering alternative might be the switch to electronic cigarettes (e-cig), and heat-not-burn/heated tobacco products (HnB/HTP). Emerging evidence suggests potential benefits in asthma and COPD management when transitioning from traditional smoking to e-cigs or HnB devices. However, the effectiveness of these products in facilitating smoking cessation is still debated, alongside concerns about their role in promoting smoking initiation among non-smokers. Internists are among the physicians who most frequently assist patients with smoking-related diseases, and in this perspective they cannot avoid paying attention to the progressive diffusion of smoking products alternative to the traditional cigarette, and to the controversies with respect to their use. In this context, the Italian Society of Internal Medicine, also recognizing a growing need for clarity for healthcare providers, has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of existing literature to offer an informed perspective on the health impact of e-cigs and HnB/HTP on asthma and COPD.

Multivariate Cluster Analyses to Characterize Asthma Heterogeneity and Benralizumab Responsiveness

BACKGROUND

An improved understanding of how severe asthma heterogeneity affects response could inform treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES

Characterize heterogeneity and benralizumab responsiveness in patients grouped by predefined Severe Asthma Research Program clusters using a multivariate approach.

METHODS

In post-hoc analyses of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III SIROCCO (NCT01928771) and CALIMA (NCT01914757) studies, patients with severe asthma who received benralizumab or placebo were assigned to clusters using an established discriminant function to analyze 11 clinical characteristics simultaneously. The annualized asthma exacerbation rate, exacerbation incidence, and lung function were analyzed across clusters.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 2,281) met criteria for four of five clusters: cluster 2 (early-onset moderate asthma, n = 393), cluster 4 (early-onset severe asthma, n = 386), cluster 3 (late-onset severe asthma, n = 641), and cluster 5 (late-onset severe, obstructed asthma, n = 861); no patients met cluster 1 criteria. Exacerbation rate reductions were significant in late-onset severe asthma (-48% [95% CI, -61% to -31%]; P < .0001) and late-onset severe, obstructed asthma (-50% [95% CI, -59% to -38%]; P < .0001), with nonsignificant reductions in early-onset clusters. These differences could not be fully explained by blood eosinophil count differences. Values for improvements in FEV1 were significant in late-onset severe asthma (+133 mL [95% CI, 66-200]; P = .0001) and late-onset severe, obstructed asthma (+160 mL [95% CI, 85-235]; P < .0001) while maintaining acute bronchodilator responsiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Benralizumab reduced exacerbations and improved lung function, primarily in late-onset asthma clusters. This multivariate approach to identify subphenotypes, potentially reflecting pathobiological mechanisms, can guide therapy beyond univariate approaches.

Prevalence and burden of difficult-to-treat and severe asthma in Australia: A national population survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Most evidence about difficult-to-treat and severe asthma (DTTA) comes from clinical trials and registries. We aimed to identify people with DTTA from a large nationally representative asthma population and describe their characteristics and healthcare utilization compared with people whose asthma was not 'difficult-to-treat'.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Australians aged ≥18 years with current asthma from large web-based survey panels. Enrolment was stratified by gender, age-group and state/territory based on national population data for people with asthma. Difficult-to-treat or severe asthma was defined by poor symptom control, exacerbations and/or oral corticosteroid/biologic use despite medium/high-dose inhaled therapy. Outcomes included exacerbations, healthcare utilization, multimorbidity, quality of life and coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19)-related behaviour. Weighted data were analysed using SAS version 9.4.

RESULTS

The survey was conducted in February-March 2021. The weighted sample comprised 6048 adults with current asthma (average age 47.3 ± SD 18.1 years, 59.9% female), with 1313 (21.7%) satisfying ≥1 DTTA criteria. Of these, 50.4% had very poorly controlled symptoms (Asthma Control Test ≤15), 36.2% were current smokers, and 85.4% had ≥1 additional chronic condition, most commonly anxiety/depression. More than twice as many participants with DTTA versus non-DTTA had ≥1 urgent general practitioner (GP) visit (61.4% vs. 27.5%, OR 4.8 [4.2-5.5, p < 0.0001]), or ≥1 emergency room visit (41.9% vs. 17.9%, OR 3.8 [3.3-4.4, p < 0.0001]) in the previous 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings emphasize the burden of uncontrolled symptoms, current smoking, multimorbidity and healthcare utilization in people with DTTA in the community, who may be under-represented in registries or clinical trials.

Disentangling difficult-to-treat from severe asthma: What is the true prevalence?

See related article

Big Data Research on Severe Asthma

The continuously increasing prevalence of severe asthma has imposed an increasing burden worldwide. Despite the emergence of novel therapeutic agents, management of severe asthma remains challenging. Insights garnered from big data may be helpful in the effort to determine the complex nature of severe asthma. In the field of asthma research, a vast amount of big data from various sources, including electronic health records, national claims data, and international cohorts, is now available. However, understanding of the strengths and limitations is required for proper utilization of specific datasets. Use of big data, along with advancements in artificial intelligence techniques, could potentially facilitate the practice of precision medicine in management of severe asthma.

Expert consensus on oral corticosteroids stewardship for the treatment of severe asthma in the Middle East and Africa

In the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region, overuse of oral corticosteroids (OCS) for asthma management, both as burst and maintenance therapy, poses a significant challenge. Gaps in knowledge regarding the need to taper OCS in patients with severe asthma and the use of OCS in comorbid conditions have been noted. OCS stewardship can help attain optimal and effective OCS tapering along with reducing OCS overuse and over-reliance. In this paper, we discuss current practices regarding the use of OCS in asthma, globally and in the MEA region. Expert recommendations for achieving OCS stewardship in the MEA region have also been presented. Regional experts recommend increasing awareness among patients about the consequences of OCS overuse, engaging community pharmacists, and educating primary healthcare professionals about the benefits of prompt appropriate referral. Innovative local referral tools like ReferID can be utilized to refer patients with asthma to specialist care. The experts also endorse a multidisciplinary team approach and accelerating access to newer medicines like biologics to implement OCS stewardship and optimize asthma care in the MEA region.

Mixed-methods evaluation of an enhanced asthma biologics clinical pathway in the West Midlands UK

Biologic treatments can alleviate severe asthma symptoms and reduce health service use. However, service capacity limits and low referral rates from primary care indicate unmet patient need. We report a mixed-methods evaluation of an enhanced severe asthma pathway implemented in Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, UK which aimed to optimise primary care referrals through training/education, and increased capacity in specialist clinics. Quantitative analysis assessed patient wait times between pathway stages, prescribing changes, exacerbations, hospital admissions and asthma control. Interviews with 12 stakeholders evaluated perceptions of the enhanced pathway across settings. In 12 months, 564 patients from 28 general practices were reviewed for biologics eligibility, of whom 125 (22.2%) were referred for specialist assessment. Wait times were significantly lower under the enhanced pathway when compared against historic patients following the standard pathway, and reduced overall from a mean of 76.4 to 26.7 weeks between referral and biologics initiation (p < 0.001). Patients commencing biologics (n = 46) showed significantly reduced reliever inhaler prescribing rates (p = 0.037), 60% lower oral steroid use (p < 0.001), significantly reduced exacerbation rates (p < 0.001) and fewer hospital admissions (p < 0.001) compared with the 12 months pre-treatment. Mean asthma control scores reduced from 3.13 pre-initiation to 1.89 post-initiation (p < 0.001) - a clinically significant improvement. Interviewees viewed the enhanced pathway positively, although ongoing issues related to difficulties engaging primary care amid concerns around increased workloads and pathway capacity. The large number of referrals generated from a comparatively small number of general practices confirms substantial unmet need that an enhanced severe asthma pathway could help address if implemented routinely.

Impact of sex on severe asthma: a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of UK primary and specialist care

INTRODUCTION

After puberty, females are more likely to develop asthma and in a more severe form than males. The associations between asthma and sex are complex with multiple intrinsic and external factors.

AIM

To evaluate the sex differences in the characteristics and treatment of patients with severe asthma (SA) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Demographic, clinical and treatment characteristics for patients with SA in the UK Severe Asthma Registry (UKSAR) and Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD) were retrospectively analysed by sex using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted for year, age and hospital/practice.

RESULTS

3679 (60.9% female) patients from UKSAR and 18 369 patients (67.9% female) from OPCRD with SA were included. Females were more likely to be symptomatic with increased Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (UKSAR adjusted OR (aOR) 1.14, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.18) and Royal College of Physicians-3 Question scores (OPCRD aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.47). However, they had a higher forced expiratory volume in 1 second per cent (FEV1%) predicted (UKSAR 68.7% vs 64.8%, p<0.001) with no significant difference in peak expiratory flow. Type 2 biomarkers IgE (UKSAR 129 IU/mL vs 208 IU/mL, p<0.001) and FeNO (UKSAR 36ppb vs 46ppb, p<0.001) were lower in females with no significant difference in blood eosinophils or biological therapy. Females were less likely to be on maintenance oral corticosteroids (UKSAR aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99) but more likely to be obese (UKSAR aOR 1.67, 95% CI 145 to 1.93; OPCRD SA aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Females had increased symptoms and were more likely to be obese despite higher FEV1% predicted and lower type 2 biomarkers with consistent and clinically important differences across both datasets.

Documentation of comorbidities, lifestyle factors, and asthma management during primary care scheduled asthma contacts

Systematically assessing asthma during follow-up contacts is important to accomplish comprehensive treatment. No previous long-term studies exist on how comorbidities, lifestyle factors, and asthma management details are documented in scheduled asthma contacts in primary health care (PHC). We showed comorbidities and lifestyle factors were poorly documented in PHC in this real-life, 12-year, follow-up study. Documented information on rhinitis was found in 8.9% and BMI, overweight, or obesity in ≤1.5% of the 542 scheduled asthma contacts. Of the 145 patients with scheduled asthma contacts, 6.9% had undergone revision of their inhalation technique; 16.6% had documentation of their asthma action plan. Screening of respiratory symptoms was recorded in 79% but nasal symptoms in only 15.5% of contacts. Lifestyle guidance interventions were found in <1% of contacts. These results, based on documented patient data, indicate a need exists to further improve the assessment and guidance of asthma patients in PHC.

Management of asthma in primary care in the changing context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative longitudinal study with patients

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically affected asthma monitoring in primary care, but exploration of patients' views and their experiences of managing their asthma and seeking help from primary care during the pandemic has been limited.

AIM

To investigate patients' experiences of asthma management in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative longitudinal study using semi-structured interviews with patients from four GP practices across diverse regions including Thames Valley, Greater Manchester, Yorkshire, and North West Coast.

METHOD

Interviews were undertaken with patients with asthma, who were usually managed in primary care. The interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analysed using inductive temporal thematic analysis and a trajectory approach.

RESULTS

Forty-six interviews were conducted with 18 patients over an 8-month period that covered contrasting stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients felt less vulnerable as the pandemic subsided, but the process of making sense of risk was dynamic and influenced by multiple factors. Patients relied on self-management strategies, but felt that routine asthma reviews should still have been conducted during the pandemic and highlighted that they had limited opportunities to discuss their asthma with health professionals. Patients with well-controlled symptoms felt that remote reviews were largely satisfactory, but still thought face-to-face reviews were necessary for certain aspects, such as physical examination and patient-led discussions of sensitive or broader issues associated with asthma, including mental health.

CONCLUSION

The dynamic nature of patients' perception of risk throughout the pandemic highlighted the need for greater clarity regarding personal risk. Having an opportunity to discuss their asthma is important to patients, even when access to face-to-face consultations in primary care is more restricted than usual.

Addressing therapeutic inertia for asthma biologics: Lessons from the KOFU study

Despite evidence-based guidelines and the availability of five biologics in Japan to treat severe asthma, approximately one-third of patients with severe asthma continue to have uncontrolled disease. This lack of appropriate evidence-based treatment is a complex issue resulting from therapeutic inertia, a lack of treatment intensification according to evidence-based guidelines for patients who are considered eligible but not receiving therapy, and is often driven by complex factors involving patients, physicians, and healthcare systems. The KOFU study, the largest cross-sectional Internet Survey for severe asthma in Japan, addressed potential barriers to starting biologic treatment and sought a solution for therapeutic inertia regarding asthma biologics. Although the burden of high medical costs is the largest barrier to initiating biologic treatment for patients, other important barriers were also revealed, including an incorrect perception of asthma severity or a poor recognition of the need for treatment intensification, a lack of proper communication with patients or a lack of confidence in the physicians, initiating biologics together with the complicated process of the insurance systems to ease the burden of high medical costs or strict criteria for the approval of biologics for health care insurance systems. Increased awareness and understanding of these barriers to biologic treatment may facilitate an optimal recommendation process to individualize treatment in patients with severe asthma.

Bringing the treatable traits approach to primary care asthma management

Asthma continues to be a major cause of illness with a significant mortality, despite its increasing range of treatments. Adoption of a treatable traits approach in specialist centres has led to improvements in control of asthma and reduced exacerbations in patients with severe asthma. However, most patients with this illness, particularly those with mild-to-moderate asthma, are cared for in primary care according to guidelines that emphasise the use of pharmacotherapeutic ladders uniformly implemented across all patients. These pharmacotherapeutic ladders are more consistent with a "one-size-fits-all" approach than the treatable traits approach. This can be harmful, especially in patients whose symptoms and airway inflammation are discordant, and extra-pulmonary treatable traits are often overlooked. Primary care has extensive experience in patient-centred holistic care, and many aspects of the treatable traits approach could be rapidly implemented in primary care. Blood eosinophil counts, as a biomarker of the treatable trait of eosinophilia, are already included in routine haematology tests and could be used in primary care to guide titration of inhaled corticosteroids. Similarly, poor inhaler adherence could be further assessed and managed in primary care. However, further research is needed to guide how some treatable traits could feasibly be assessed and/or managed in primary care, for example, how to best manage patients in primary care, who are likely suffering from breathing pattern disorders and extra-pulmonary treatable traits, with frequent use of their reliever inhaler in the absence of raised T2 biomarkers. Implementation of the treatable traits approach across the disease severity spectrum will improve the quality of life of patients with asthma but will take time and research to embed across care settings.

Observational UK cohort study to describe intermittent oral corticosteroid prescribing patterns and their association with adverse outcomes in asthma

INTRODUCTION

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) for asthma are associated with increased risks of developing adverse outcomes (adverse outcomes); no previous study has focused exclusively on intermittent OCS use.

METHODS

This historical (2008-2019) UK cohort study using primary care medical records from two anonymised, real-life databases (OPCRD and CPRD) included patients aged≥4 years with asthma receiving only intermittent OCS. Patients were indexed on their first recorded intermittent OCS prescription for asthma and categorised by OCS prescribing patterns: one-off (single), less frequent (≥90 day gap) and frequent (<90 day gap). Non-OCS patients matched 1:1 on gender, age and index date served as controls. The association of OCS prescribing patterns with OCS-related AO risk was studied, stratified by age, Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2020 treatment step, and pre index inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) prescriptions using a multivariable Cox-proportional hazard model.

FINDINGS

Of 476 167 eligible patients, 41.7%, 26.8% and 31.6% had one-off, less frequent and frequent intermittent OCS prescribing patterns, respectively. Risk of any AO increased with increasingly frequent patterns of intermittent OCS versus non-OCS (HR; 95% CI: one-off 1.19 (1.18 to 1.20), less frequent 1.35 (1.34 to 1.36), frequent 1.42 (1.42 to 1.43)), and was consistent across age, GINA treatment step and ICS and SABA subgroups. The highest risks of individual OCS-related adverse outcomes with increasingly frequent OCS were for pneumonia and sleep apnoea.

CONCLUSION

A considerable proportion of patients with asthma receiving intermittent OCS experienced a frequent prescribing pattern. Increasingly frequent OCS prescribing patterns were associated with higher risk of OCS-related adverse outcomes. Mitigation strategies are needed to minimise intermittent OCS prescription in primary care.

Personalised management and supporting individuals to live with their asthma in a primary care setting

INTRODUCTION

Complementing recognition of biomedical phenotypes, a primary care approach to asthma care recognizes diversity of disease, health beliefs, and lifestyle at a population and individual level.

AREAS COVERED

We review six aspects of personalized care particularly pertinent to primary care management of asthma: personalizing support for individuals living with asthma; targeting asthma care within populations; managing phenotypes of wheezy pre-school children; personalizing management to the individual; meeting individual preferences for provision of asthma care; optimizing digital approaches to enhance personalized care.

EXPERT OPINION

In a primary care setting, personalized management and supporting individuals to live with asthma extend beyond the contemporary concepts of biological phenotypes and pharmacological 'treatable traits' to encompass evidence-based tailored support for self-management, and delivery of patient-centered care including motivational interviewing. It extends to how we organize clinical practiceand the choices provided in mode of consultation. Diagnostic uncertainty due to recognition of phenotypes of pre-school wheeze remains a challenge for primary care. Digital health can support personalized management, but there are concerns about increasing inequities. This broad approach reflects the traditionally holistic ethos of primary care ('knowing their patients and understanding their communities'), but the core concepts resonate with all healthcare.

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.

Identification of autoantigens and their potential post-translational modification in EGPA and severe eosinophilic asthma

Background

The chronic airway inflammation in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) suggests potential autoimmune aetiology with unidentified autoantibodies analogous to myeloperoxidase (MPO) in ANCA-positive EGPA (eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis). Previous research has shown that oxidative post-translational modification (oxPTM) of proteins is an important mechanism by which autoantibody responses may escape immune tolerance. Autoantibodies to oxPTM autoantigens in SEA have not previously been studied.

Methods

Patients with EGPA and SEA were recruited as well as healthy control participants. Autoantigen agnostic approach: Participant serum was incubated with slides of unstimulated and PMA-stimulated neutrophils and eosinophils, and autoantibodies to granulocytes were identified by immunofluorescence with anti-human IgG FITC antibody. Target autoantigen approach: Candidate proteins were identified from previous literature and FANTOM5 gene set analysis for eosinophil expressed proteins. Serum IgG autoantibodies to these proteins, in native and oxPTM form, were detected by indirect ELISA.

Results

Immunofluorescence studies showed that serum from patients with known ANCA stained for IgG against neutrophils as expected. In addition, serum from 9 of 17 tested SEA patients stained for IgG to PMA-stimulated neutrophils undergoing NETosis. Immunofluorescent staining of eosinophil slides was evident with serum from all participants (healthy and with eosinophilic disease) with diffuse cytoplasmic staining except for one SEA individual in whom subtle nuclear staining was evident. FANTOM5 gene set analysis identified TREM1 (triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 1) and IL-1 receptor 2 (IL1R2) as eosinophil-specific targets to test for autoantibody responses in addition to MPO, eosinophil peroxidase (EPX), and Collagen-V identified from previous literature. Indirect ELISAs found high concentrations of serum autoantibodies to Collagen-V, MPO, and TREM1 in a higher proportion of SEA patients than healthy controls. High concentrations of serum autoantibodies to EPX were evident in serum from both healthy and SEA participants. The proportion of patients with positive autoantibody ELISAs was not increased when examining oxPTM compared to native proteins.

Discussion

Although none of the target proteins studied showed high sensitivity for SEA, the high proportion of patients positive for at least one serum autoantibody shows the potential of more research on autoantibody serology to improve diagnostic testing for severe asthma.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier, NCT04671446.

A Charter to Fundamentally Change the Role of Oral Corticosteroids in the Management of Asthma

Asthma affects 339 million people worldwide, with an estimated 5-10% experiencing severe asthma. In emergency settings, oral corticosteroids (OCS) can be lifesaving, but acute and long-term treatment can produce clinically important adverse outcomes and increase the risk of mortality. Therefore, global guidelines recommend limiting the use of OCS. Despite the risks, research indicates that 40-60% of people with severe asthma are receiving or have received long-term OCS treatment. Although often perceived as a low-cost option, long-term OCS use can result in significant health impairments and costs owing to adverse outcomes and increased utilization of healthcare resources. Alternative treatment methods, such as biologics, may produce cost-saving benefits with a better safety profile. A comprehensive and concerted effort is necessary to tackle the continued reliance on OCS. Accordingly, a threshold for OCS use should be established to help identify patients at risk of OCS-related adverse outcomes. Receiving a total dose of more than 500 mg per year should trigger a review and specialist referral. Changes to national and local policies, following examples from other chronic diseases, will be crucial to achieving this goal. Globally, multiple barriers to change still exist, but specific steps have been identified to help clinicians reduce reliance on OCS. Implementing these changes will result in positive health outcomes for patients and social and economic benefits for societies.

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.

Severe Asthma Standard-of-Care Background Medication Reduction With Benralizumab: ANDHI in Practice Substudy

BACKGROUND

The phase IIIb, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled ANDHI double-blind (DB) study extended understanding of the efficacy of benralizumab for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. Patients from ANDHI DB could join the 56-week ANDHI in Practice (IP) single-arm, open-label extension substudy.

OBJECTIVE

Assess potential for standard-of-care background medication reductions while maintaining asthma control with benralizumab.

METHODS

Following ANDHI DB completion, eligible adults were enrolled in ANDHI IP. After an 8-week run-in with benralizumab, there were 5 visits to potentially reduce background asthma medications for patients achieving and maintaining protocol-defined asthma control with benralizumab. Main outcome measures for non-oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent patients were the proportions with at least 1 background medication reduction (ie, lower inhaled corticosteroid dose, background medication discontinuation) and the number of adapted Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step reductions at end of treatment (EOT). Main outcomes for OCS-dependent patients were reductions in daily OCS dosage and proportion achieving OCS dosage of 5 mg or lower at EOT.

RESULTS

For non-OCS-dependent patients, 53.3% (n = 208 of 390) achieved at least 1 background medication reduction, increasing to 72.6% (n = 130 of 179) for patients who maintained protocol-defined asthma control at EOT. A total of 41.9% (n = 163 of 389) achieved at least 1 adapted GINA step reduction, increasing to 61.8% (n = 110 of 178) for patients with protocol-defined EOT asthma control. At ANDHI IP baseline, OCS dosages were 5 mg or lower for 40.4% (n = 40 of 99) of OCS-dependent patients. Of OCS-dependent patients, 50.5% (n = 50 of 99) eliminated OCS and 74.7% (n = 74 of 99) achieved dosages of 5 mg or lower at EOT.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate benralizumab's ability to improve asthma control, thereby allowing background medication reduction.

Patient characteristics and eligibility for biologics in severe asthma: Results from the Greek cohort of the RECOGNISE "real world" study

BACKGROUND

Some patients with severe asthma do not achieve sufficient symptom control despite guideline-based treatment, and therefore receive oral (OCS) and systemic corticosteroids (SCS) on regular basis. The side effects of corticosteroid use negatively impact patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and increase the disease burden. Biologics have shown promise in asthma therapy; however, identifying patients who might benefit from biologic therapy is complex due to the heterogeneous pathophysiology of the disease.

METHODS

The European, non-interventional, multicentre RECOGNISE study (NCT03629782) assessed patient characteristics, asthma medication and control, HRQoL as assessed by St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and health care resource use in patients with severe asthma, as well as their eligibility for biologic treatment. Here, data from the Greek cohort (N = 97) are reported.

RESULTS

In Greece, patients with severe asthma were more often female (71%) and never smokers (68%). 87% of patients were assessed as eligible for biologic treatment by investigator's judgement (per label criteria: 76%). Most patients had been previously treated with SCS (82% eligible vs 85% non-eligible), with OCS use being more common in non-eligible patients (23.1% vs 11.9%). More eligible patients had poorly controlled asthma (76% vs 54%), and more impaired HRQoL (mean total SGRQ score: 46% vs 39%); symptom burden was significantly higher (mean symptom score: 60% vs. 44%, p: 0.0389).

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of Greek patients with severe asthma are eligible for biologic therapy; however, individual risk factors and differences between asthma types must be considered before the introduction of targeted therapy.

Oral Corticosteroids for Patients with Eosinophilic Diseases: An Expert Panel View on Use, Overuse, and Strategies to Reduce Use

Severe asthma (SA), chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) are three conditions driven by IL-5 and eosinophilic inflammation. As these conditions have high use of healthcare services, as well as lifestyle and psychological burdens, safe treatment to achieve optimal control is key. In all three conditions, as for many other eosinophilic diseases (ED), oral corticosteroids (OCS) are often used for both acute and maintenance treatment where disease activity is high. While, in general, OCS are very effective, their use is limited by a well-recognised high potential for adverse effects (AE). Moreover, cumulative exposure to OCS may not be acknowledged in many patients, especially for those predominantly treated in primary care, exposing patients to potentially damaging long-term OCS-related AEs. To discuss the use of OCS for these eosinophilic diseases, as well as to provide guidance on how to help limit their use, a board of European experts within each field was gathered. The experts completed questionnaires regarding treatment and referral pathways for patients with SA, CRSwNP, or EGPA; then, in an online meeting, discussed a number of issues in regard to OCS use. Here, the authors present the key recommendations from the expert advisory panel alongside some background to these conditions regarding treatment with OCS.

The feasibility and impact of implementing a computer-guided consultation to target health inequality in Asthma

Greater Manchester has a greater prevalence and worse asthma outcomes than the national average. This study aims to evaluate a digital approach to primary care asthma management and in particular the initial impact of implementing Clinical Decision Support System software in the form of a computer-guided consultation (CGC) in the setting of primary care asthma reviews in deprived areas of Greater Manchester. The CGC (LungHealth Ltd) is an intelligent decision support system ensuring accurate guideline-based staging of asthma and assessment of asthma control with the software subsequently prompting guideline-standard management. Patients on asthma registers in Greater Manchester Primary Care Networks were identified and underwent remote review by nursing staff using the CGC linked directly to the GP clinical system. Three-hundred thirty-eight patients (mean age 59 (SD 17) years; 60% Female) were reviewed. The CGC reported the patient's asthma control to be "Good" in 22%, "Partial" in 6% and "Poor" in 72%. ACT scores were significantly higher in those patients exhibiting "Good" and "Partial" control when compared to those with "Poor" control. The number of steroid courses and hospital admissions in the previous 12 months was significantly lower in those patients exhibiting "Good" and "Partial" control when compared to those with "Poor" control. Nineteen percent were found not to have a personalised asthma management plan during CGC review, which was alerted by the CGC and subsequently, all but 3 patients had this created on review completion (McNemar's test; p < 0.001). 5% were found not to have been prescribed regular inhaled steroid therapy resulting in the operator being alerted by the CGC in all cases. Overall, 44% underwent alteration in asthma therapy following the CGC review with 82% of these representing treatment escalation. An end-to-end digital service solution is feasible for Asthma within primary care and the utilisation of a CGC when conducting primary care asthma reviews increases implementation of guideline-level management thus addressing healthcare inequality while enabling identification of "high risk" asthma patients and guiding appropriate therapy escalation and de-escalation.

Systemic corticosteroids in asthma: A call to action from World Allergy Organization and Respiratory Effectiveness Group

Systemic corticosteroids (SCS) are a highly effective treatment for acute exacerbations and long-term symptom control in asthma. Long-term SCS use is highly prevalent across all asthma severities, occurring in over 20% of patients with severe or uncontrolled disease globally. It is now well known that exposure to both long-term and repeated acute courses of SCS is associated with a high risk of serious adverse effects (AEs), such as osteoporosis, and metabolic and cardiovascular complications, especially when prescribed onto a background of other corticosteroids. The aim of this call-to-action article, endorsed by the World Allergy Organization and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group, is to review the accumulating evidence on the burden of SCS on patients with asthma and provide an overview of potential strategies for implementing SCS Stewardship. Primary prevention of exacerbations and improvement of asthma control is a key first step in achieving SCS Stewardship, by optimizing maintenance asthma medications and addressing modifiable risk factors, such as adherence and inhaler technique. Other key elements of SCS Stewardship include increasing appropriate specialist referrals for multidisciplinary review, assessment of biomarkers, and consideration of oral corticosteroid-sparing add-on therapies (eg, biologics). In cases where SCS use is deemed clinically justified, it should be tapered to the lowest possible dose. In addition, patients receiving long-term SCS or frequent acute courses should be closely monitored for emergence of SCS-related AEs. Because of the extensive data available on the costly and burdensome AEs associated with SCS use, as well as the range of treatment options now available, there is a need for healthcare providers (HCPs) to carefully evaluate whether the benefits of SCS outweigh the potential harms, to adopt SCS-sparing and Stewardship strategies, and to consider alternative therapies where possible. Development of a structured and collaborative SCS Stewardship approach is urgently required to protect patients from the potential harm of SCS use.

Benefits of specialist severe asthma management: demographic and geographic disparities

BACKGROUND

The benefits of specialist assessment and management have yet to be evaluated within the biologic era of UK severe asthma treatment, and potential disparities have not been considered.

METHODS

In an uncontrolled before-and-after study, we compared asthma symptoms (Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6)), exacerbations, unscheduled secondary care use, lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)) and oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose after 1 year. We compared outcomes by sex, age (18-34, 35-49, 50-64 and ≥65 years), ethnicity (Caucasian versus non-Caucasian) and hospital site after adjusting for demographics and variation in biologic therapy use.

RESULTS

1140 patients were followed-up for 1370 person-years from 12 specialist centres. At annual review, ACQ-6 score was reduced by a median (interquartile range (IQR)) of 0.7 (0.0-1.5), exacerbations by 75% (33-100%) and unscheduled secondary care by 100% (67-100%). FEV1 increased by a median (IQR) of 20 (-200-340) mL, while OCS dose decreased for 67% of patients. Clinically meaningful improvements occurred across almost all patients, including those not receiving biologic therapy. There was little evidence of differences across demographic groups, although those aged ≥65 years demonstrated larger reductions in exacerbations (69% versus 52%; p<0.001) and unscheduled care use (77% versus 50%; p<0.001) compared with patients aged 18-34 years. There were >2-fold differences between the best and worst performing centres across all study outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Specialist assessment and management is associated with substantially improved patient outcomes, which are broadly consistent across demographic groups and are not restricted to those receiving biologic therapy. Significant variation exists between hospitals, which requires further investigation.

Determinants of Severe Asthma - A Long-Term Cohort Study in Northern Sweden

Background

Risk factors for severe asthma are not well described. The aim was to identify clinical characteristics and risk factors at study entry that are associated with severe asthma at follow-up in a long-term prospective population-based cohort study of adults with asthma.

Methods

Between 1986 and 2001, 2055 adults with asthma were identified by clinical examinations of population-based samples in northern Sweden. During 2012-2014, n = 1006 (71% of invited) were still alive, residing in the study area and participated in a follow-up, of which 40 were identified as having severe asthma according to ERS/ATS, 131 according to GINA, while 875 had other asthma. The mean follow-up time was 18.7 years.

Results

Obesity at study entry and adult-onset asthma were associated with severe asthma at follow-up. While severe asthma was more common in those with adult-onset asthma in both men and women, the association with obesity was observed in women only. Sensitization to mites and moulds, but not to other allergens, as well as NSAID-related respiratory symptoms was more common in severe asthma than in other asthma. Participants with severe asthma at follow-up had lower FEV₁, more pronounced FEV₁ reversibility, and more wheeze, dyspnea and nighttime awakenings already at study entry than those with other asthma.

Conclusion

Adult-onset asthma is an important risk factor for development of severe asthma in adults, and obesity increased the risk among women. The high burden of respiratory symptoms already at study entry also indicate long-term associations with development of severe asthma.

Clinical review: The suggested management pathway for urticaria in primary care

Background

Urticaria is a common condition presenting both as acute and chronic disease within primary care. To those without specialist training it is poorly understood from the points of view of diagnosis and management. It causes a considerable disease burden to sufferers with marked impact on quality of life.

Purpose of this review

The recent publication of the EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI Guideline for the Definition, Classification, Diagnosis and Management of Urticaria guideline prompted us to take this excellent resource and re-configure its findings and recommendations to a non-specialist audience with particular reference to the needs of the primary care team.

A Pragmatic Primary Practice Approach to Using Specific IgE in Allergy Testing in Asthma Diagnosis, Management, and Referral

Asthma afflicts an estimated 339 million people globally and is associated with ill health, disability, and early death. Strong risk factors for developing asthma are genetic predisposition and environmental exposure to inhaled substances that may provoke allergic reactions. Asthma guidelines recommend identifying causal or trigger allergens with specific IgE (sIgE) testing after a diagnosis of asthma has been made. Allergy testing with sIgE targets subpopulations of patients considered at high risk, such as those with frequent exacerbations, emergency visits or hospitalizations, or uncontrolled symptoms. Specific recommendations apply to preschool children, school-age children, patients with persistent or difficult-to-control asthma, patients needing oral corticosteroids or high-dose inhaled steroids, patients seeking understanding and guidance about their disease, and candidates for advanced therapies (biologics, allergen immunotherapy). Allergen skin testing is common in specialized settings but less available in primary care. Blood tests for total and sIgE are accessible and yield quantifiable results for tested allergens, useful for detecting sensitization. Results are interpreted in the context of the patient’s clinical presentation, age, and relevant allergen exposures. Incorporating sIgE testing into asthma management adds objective information to identify specific allergies and can guide personalized treatment plans, which reinforce patient-doctor communication. Test results can also be used to predict exacerbations and response to therapies. Additional diagnostic information can be gleaned from (i) eosinophil count ≥300 μL, which significantly increases the odds of having exacerbations, and emerging eosinophil biomarkers (eg, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin), which can be measured in plasma or serum samples, and (ii) fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), with values ≥25 ppb regarded as the cutoff for diagnosis, evaluating inhaled corticosteroid response, and of probable response to anti-IgE, anti-IL4 and anti-IL5 receptor biologics. Referral to asthma/allergy specialists is warranted when the initial diagnosis is uncertain, and when asthma symptoms, impairment, or exacerbations are repeated or severe.

Asthma exacerbations are associated with a decline in lung function: a longitudinal population-based study

RATIONALE

Progressive lung function (LF) decline in patients with asthma contributes to worse outcomes. Asthma exacerbations are thought to contribute to this decline; however, evidence is limited with mixed results.

METHODS

This historical cohort study of a broad asthma patient population in the Optimum Patient Care Research Database, examined asthma patients with 3+eligible post-18th birthday peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) records (primary analysis) or records of forced expiratory flow in 1 s (FEV₁) (sensitivity analysis). Adjusted linear growth models tested the association between mean annual exacerbation rate (AER) and LF trajectory.

RESULTS

We studied 1 09 182 patients with follow-up ranging from 5 to 50 years, of which 75 280 had data for all variables included in the adjusted analyses. For each additional exacerbation, an estimated additional -1.34 L/min PEF per year (95% CI -1.23 to -1.50) were lost. Patients with AERs >2/year and aged 18-24 years at baseline lost an additional -5.95 L/min PEF/year (95% CI -8.63 to -3.28) compared with those with AER 0. These differences in the rate of LF decline between AER groups became progressively smaller as age at baseline increased. The results using FEV₁ were consistent with the above.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this study is the largest nationwide cohort of its kind and demonstrates that asthma exacerbations are associated with faster LF decline. This was more prominent in younger patients but was evident in older patients when it was related to lower starting LF, suggesting a persistent deteriorating phenotype that develops in adulthood over time. Earlier intervention with appropriate management in younger patients with asthma could be of value to prevent excessive LF decline.

Overuse of Oral Corticosteroids in Asthma Is Often Underdiagnosed and Inadequately Addressed

BACKGROUND

Overuse of oral corticosteroids (OCS) is associated with serious adverse effects. It is currently unknown what proportion of patients with asthma regularly use these drugs, or whether they are optimally treated by specialists to minimize the use of these drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate (1) the prevalence of patients requiring ≥2 courses or maintenance use of OCS (ie, frequent users), (2) their use of inhaled corticosteroids, and (3) who prescribed their asthma medications.

METHODS

We analyzed OCS prescription data (Dutch IQVIA Prescription Database) focusing on adult patients receiving asthma medication between March 2017 and March 2018 (focus year). An OCS course was defined as ≥20 mg prednisolone equivalent for 3 to 28 days; maintenance OCS as 2.5 to 17.5 mg/day for >28 days. Prescribers were classified as specialist or general practitioners.

RESULTS

Of 182,849 adults taking asthma medications, 77.8% had not received a prescription for OCS and 7.2% of patients were frequent OCS users: 2.6% received ≥2 OCS courses and 4.6% were on maintenance OCS. Of the frequent OCS users, 45.8% received only low or medium doses (<500 μg/day) of inhaled corticosteroids. Within the preceding 3 years (2014-2017), 51.1% and 34.3% of patients prescribed ≥2 OCS courses or maintenance OCS, respectively, had received prescriptions from a general practitioner without medication adjustments by a specialist.

CONCLUSION

This prescription-fill study shows that 7.2% of Dutch patients with asthma were overexposed to OCS, of whom only about half used adequate doses of inhaled corticosteroids, and 40.3% had not received specialist intervention within the previous 3 years. This suggests that OCS overuse is often underdiagnosed and inadequately addressed.

Characterisation of the Australian Adult Population Living with Asthma: Severe - Exacerbation Frequency, Long-Term OCS Use and Adverse Effects

Introduction

Asthma poses a significant burden for the Australian population. Understanding severe exacerbation rates, and steroid-related burden for adults diagnosed with asthma stands to offer insights into how this could be reduced.

Methods

Electronic medical records (EMR) and questionnaires from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database Australia (OPCRDA) were utilised retrospectively. OPCRDA is a real-world database with >800,000 medical records from Australian primary care practices. Outcomes were severe asthma exacerbations in Australian adults, over a 12-month period, stratified by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment intensity steps, and steroid associated comorbidities.

Results

Of the 7868 adults treated for asthma, 19% experienced at least one severe exacerbation in the last 12-months. Severe exacerbation frequency increased with treatment intensity (≥1 severe exacerbation GINA 1 13%; GINA 4 23%; GINA 5a 33% and GINA 5b 28%). Questionnaire participants reported higher rates of severe exacerbations than suggested from their EMR (32% vs 23%) especially in steps 1, 4 and 5. Patients repeatedly exposed to steroids had an increased risk of osteoporosis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.43–2.66) and sleep apnoea (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.30–2.46).

Conclusion

The Australian population living with GINA 1, 4, 5a and 5b asthma have high severe exacerbation rates and steroid-related burden, especially when compared to other first world countries, with these patients needing alternative strategies or possibly specialist assessment to better manage their condition.

Biologics in severe asthma: the role of real-world evidence from registries

Asthma is one of the most common noncommunicable diseases; in the majority of patients it is well controlled with inhaled bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids, but the management of severe asthma has been a significant challenge historically. The introduction of novel biologic drugs in the past few decades has revolutionised the field, presenting physicians with a variety of biologic drugs with different mechanisms for the treatment of severe asthma.It is of crucial importance to evaluate the effectiveness of these drugs by following their "real-life" effectiveness rather than relying solely on their efficacy, established in carefully designed clinical trials, which therefore do not necessarily match the profile of the real-life patient. Understanding the actual effectiveness of the specific drugs in real-life patients is a crucial part of tailoring the right drugs to the right patients. Registries serve as an important tool in obtaining real-life evidence, since they are in effect observational studies, following the entire patient population.

Trends and predictors of specialist assessments in oral corticosteroid treated asthma among young adults

Background

Repeated oral corticosteroid use indicates uncontrolled disease among asthma patients and referral for asthma specialist assessment is recommended. We aimed to describe trends and predictors associated with specialist contacts among young adults with asthma and repeated oral corticosteroid use.

Methods

Individuals aged 18–45 years with ≥2 dispensed asthma medication prescriptions and two dispended oral corticosteroid prescriptions (including short-term and long-term treatments) within 12 months during 1999–2018 were identified by use of Danish healthcare registers. The frequency of specialist contacts within 1 year of follow-up was assessed among individuals without previous specialist contacts within 5 years of inclusion. Factors associated with specialist contact were identified by logistic regression models. Furthermore, oral corticosteroid prescriber sources were assessed.

Results

For the 11 223 individuals included, 2444 (22%) had previous specialist contacts care within 5 years prior of inclusion and additionally 926 (8.3%) within 1 year of follow-up. Among those without previous specialist contacts (n 8779), the frequency of incident specialist contacts within 1 year of follow-up increased from 6.3% in 1999 to 18% in 2017. Factors associated with incident specialist contacts included dispensing ≥12 SABA canisters and previous asthma-related emergency department visits and hospitalisations. The majority of oral corticosteroid prescriptions at baseline (71%) were prescribed by general practitioners, though with decreasing proportions from 1999–2018.

Conclusions

The majority (70%) of young adults with asthma and repeated oral corticosteroid use do not seem to receive specialist assessment in Denmark. This highlights a potential room for improvement in the patient referral pathway for at-risk asthma patients.

Improving Care in Eosinophil-Associated Diseases: A Charter

Eosinophil-associated diseases (EADs) are a range of heterogeneous conditions in which eosinophils are believed to play a critical pathological role. EADs include common illnesses such as eosinophilic asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis and rare conditions such as hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs). EADs are associated with substantial burdens for the patient, including chronic, debilitating symptoms, increased financial burden, decreased health-related quality of life, and the need for repeated visits to multiple different healthcare professionals (HCPs), emergency departments, and/or hospitals. Poor EAD recognition by HCPs often contributes to delayed diagnoses, which further delays patient access to appropriate care and effective treatments, contributing to poor health outcomes. The objective of this charter is to outline key patient rights and expectations with respect to the management of their condition(s) and to set forth an ambitious action plan to improve health outcomes for patients with EADs: (1) people with EADs, their caretakers, HCPs, and the public must have greater awareness and education about EADs; (2) people with EADs must receive a timely, accurate diagnosis; (3) all people with EADs must have access to an appropriate multidisciplinary team, when necessary; and (4) people with EADs must have access to safe and effective treatment options without unnecessary regulatory delays. The principles described in this charter demonstrate the core elements of quality care that people with EADs must receive, and they represent clear steps by which to reduce patient and caregiver burden and improve patient outcomes. We urge HCPs, healthcare systems, and policymakers worldwide to swiftly adopt these principles to ensure patients with EADs have an accurate diagnosis in a timely manner and access to high-level care and treatment in an appropriate setting.

Cigarette Smoking and Asthma

Globally, around half the adult asthma population are current or former cigarette smokers. Cigarette smoking and asthma interact to induce an "asthma-smoking phenotype(s)," which has important implications for diagnosis, pathogenic mechanisms, and management. The lack of progress in understanding the effects of smoking on adults with asthma is due in part to their exclusion from most investigative studies and large clinical trials. In this review, we summarize the adverse clinical outcomes associated with cigarette smoking in asthma, highlight challenges in diagnosing asthma among cigarette smokers with chronic respiratory symptoms, particularly in older individuals with a long-standing smoking history, and review pathogenic mechanisms involving smoking- and asthma-related airway inflammation, tissue remodeling, corticosteroid insensitivity, and low-grade systemic inflammation. We discuss the key components of management including the importance of smoking cessation strategies, evidence for the effectiveness of the Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations on treatment in cigarette smokers, and the role of treatable traits such as type 2 eosinophilic airway inflammation. Lastly, we provide an algorithm to aid clinicians to manage current and former smokers with asthma. In the future, controlled and pragmatic trials in real-world populations should include cigarette smokers with asthma to provide an evidence base for treatment recommendations.

Primary Care Severe Asthma Registry and Education Project (PCSAR-EDU): Phase 1 - an e-Delphi for registry definitions and indices of clinician behaviour

INTRODUCTION

Although most asthma is mild to moderate, severe asthma accounts for disproportionate personal and societal costs. Poor co-ordination of care between primary care and specialist settings is recognised as a barrier to achieving optimal outcomes. The Primary Care Severe Asthma Registry and Education (PCSAR-EDU) project aims to address these gaps through the interdisciplinary development and evaluation of both a 'real-world' severe asthma registry and an educational programme for primary care providers. This manuscript describes phase 1 of PCSAR-EDU which involves establishing interdisciplinary consensus on criteria for the: (1) definition of severe asthma; (2) generation of a severe asthma registry and (3) definition of an electronic-medical record data-based Clinician Behaviour Index (CBI).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In phase 1, a modified e-Delphi activity will be conducted. Delphi panellists (n≥13) will be invited to complete a 30 min online survey on three separate occasions (i.e., three separate e-Delphi 'rounds') over a 3-month period. Expert opinion will be collected via an open-ended survey ('Open' round 1) and 5-point Likert scale and ranking surveys ('Closed' round 2 and 3). A fourth and final Delphi round will occur via synchronous meeting, whereby panellists approve a finalised ideal 'core criteria list', CBI and corresponding item weighting.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained for the activities involved in phase 1 from the University of Toronto's Human Research Ethics Programme (approval number 39695). Future ethics approvals will depend on information gathered in the proceeding phase; thus, ethical approval for phase 2 and 3 of this study will be sought sequentially. Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and knowledge translation tools.

The Korean Severe Asthma Registry (KoSAR): real world research in severe asthma

Severe asthma constitutes a serious health burden with significant morbidity and socioeconomic costs. The development and introduction of new biologics targeting type 2 inflammation changed the paradigm for management of severe asthma and initiated a biological era. These changes impose a challenge to clinicians in managing difficult-to-treat and severe asthma. To understand the characteristics and heterogeneity of severe asthma and to develop a better strategy to manage it, the Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Working Group on Severe Asthma, has organized the Korean Severe Asthma Registry (KoSAR). In this review, we describe the challenges of severe asthma management regarding diagnosis, disease burden, heterogeneity, guidelines, and organization of severe asthma clinics. This review also examines the current global activities of national and regional registries and study groups. In addition, we present the KoSAR vision and organization and describe the findings of KoSAR in comparison with those of other countries.

Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Adult Patients with Asthma: A Population-Based Cohort Study from UK Primary Care

Introduction

Asthma morbidity and health-care utilization are known to exhibit a steep socioeconomic gradient. Further investigation into the modulators of this effect is required to identify potentially modifiable factors.

Methods

We identified a cohort of patients with asthma from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD). We compared demographics, clinical variables, and health-care utilization by quintile of the UK 2011 Indices of Multiple Deprivation based on the location of the patients’ general practice. Multivariable analyses were conducted using generalized linear models adjusting for year, age, and sex. We conducted subgroup analyses and interaction tests to investigate the impact of deprivation by age, sex, ethnicity, and treatment step.

Results

Our analysis included 127,040 patients with asthma. Patients from the most deprived socio-economic status (SES) quintile were more likely to report uncontrolled disease (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.16, 2.05) and to have an exacerbation during follow-up (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.42) than the least deprived quintile. They had higher blood eosinophils (ratio: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.06) and decreased peak flow (ratio: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.94, 0.97) when compared to those in the least deprived quintile. The effect of deprivation on asthma control was greater among those aged over 75 years (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.73) compared to those aged less than 35 years (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.85, 1.74; p_interaction=0.019). Similarly, socioeconomic disparities in exacerbations were larger among those from ethnic minority groups (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.40, 2.68) than white patients (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.39; p_interaction=0.012).

Conclusion

We found worse disease control and increased exacerbation rates among patients with asthma from more deprived areas. There was evidence that the magnitude of socioeconomic disparities was elevated among older patients and those from ethnic minority groups. The drivers of these differences require further exploration.

Association Between a Type 2 Inflammatory Disease Burden Score and Outcomes Among Patients with Asthma

Background

Although prevalence of co-existing type 2 inflammatory diseases (cT2) in asthma patients has been reported, limited data exist regarding their impact on asthma outcomes.

Objective

To assess the impact of cT2 burden on asthma outcomes and to evaluate patterns of clustering of cT2 in a real-world setting.

Methods

From medical records of 4.5 million enrollees in 650 primary care practices in the UK (January 2010–December 2017), patients with ≥1 diagnosis code for asthma at any time pre-index date (date of most recent asthma-related medical encounter) and ≥2 asthma-related prescriptions during the year before index date were categorized into the Global Initiative of Asthma (GINA) guideline severity steps. A cT2 burden score (range 0–9) was assigned based on the total number of co-existing conditions (allergic conjunctivitis, allergic rhinitis, anaphylaxis, eczema/atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, food allergy, nasal polyps, or urticaria) for which patients received a medical diagnosis. Multivariate regression models evaluated associations between cT2 burden score and asthma exacerbations and asthma control. Factor analysis was performed to assess which cT2 comorbidities were correlated and exhibited patterns of clustering.

Results

Overall, 245,893 patients with asthma were included (mean [SD] age 44.8 [22.1] years; 43.8% male). Between 55% (GINA step 1) and 60% (GINA step 5) of asthma patients had a medical diagnosis for ≥1 other type2dx. Patients with increased cT2 burden were significantly more likely to experience asthma exacerbations and less likely to achieve asthma control.

Conclusion

Asthma patients with a higher cumulative cT2 burden score were more likely to experience worse asthma outcomes than those without any cT2 (burden score of 0).

ERS/EAACI statement on adherence to international adult asthma guidelines

Guidelines aim to standardise and optimise asthma diagnosis and management. Nevertheless, adherence to guidelines is suboptimal and may vary across different healthcare professional (HCP) groups.Further to these concerns, this European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) statement aims to: 1) evaluate the understanding of and adherence to international asthma guidelines by HCPs of different specialties via an international online survey; and 2) assess strategies focused at improving implementation of guideline-recommended interventions, and compare process and clinical outcomes in patients managed by HCPs of different specialties via systematic reviews.The online survey identified discrepancies between HCPs of different specialties which may be due to poor dissemination or lack of knowledge of the guidelines but also a reflection of the adaptations made in different clinical settings, based on available resources. The systematic reviews demonstrated that multifaceted quality improvement initiatives addressing multiple challenges to guidelines adherence are most effective in improving guidelines adherence. Differences in outcomes between patients managed by generalists or specialists should be further evaluated.Guidelines need to consider the heterogeneity of real-life settings for asthma management and tailor their recommendations accordingly. Continuous, multifaceted quality improvement processes are required to optimise and maintain guidelines adherence. Validated referral pathways for uncontrolled asthma or uncertain diagnosis are needed.

Severe Asthma in a General Population Study: Prevalence and Clinical Characteristics

PURPOSE

Current guidelines primarily use medication levels to distinguish severe asthma from other types of asthma. In addition, severe asthma must also be uncontrolled at high-intensity treatment or become uncontrolled if treatment level is decreased. To date, only a few studies have used this definition to investigate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of severe asthma in population-based samples. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of individuals with severe asthma in the population-representative West Sweden Asthma Study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional population-based study, a randomly selected sample (n=1172) and a separate asthma sample (n=744) underwent clinical examinations, completed a structured interview and responded to questionnaires. Severe asthma was defined as at least one feature of uncontrolled asthma despite treatment in line with the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) steps 4/5. This treatment level required a minimum medium dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) plus a second controller or oral corticosteroids.

RESULTS

The prevalence of severe asthma was 1.1% in the adult random sample and 9.5% within the asthma sample. Individuals with severe asthma were older and had more symptoms, activity limitations, heart disease and blood neutrophils compared to those with other asthma. They also had lower lung function and despite these impairments, 32% did not have annual contact with a healthcare provider.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of severe asthma was higher compared to previous studies, and many individuals with severe asthma did not have regular contact with healthcare providers. Due to the high burden of symptoms and impairments for individuals with severe asthma, it is important that the healthcare system implement strategies to improve follow-up and evaluate these patients according to existing guidelines.

Overuse of Oral Corticosteroids, Underuse of Inhaled Corticosteroids, and Implications for Biologic Therapy in Asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma patients using high cumulative doses of oral corticosteroids (OCSs) are at risk of serious adverse events and are increasingly being treated with steroid-sparing asthma biologics. However, it is unknown whether prescribing these expensive biologics is always justified.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to (1) assess the prevalence of asthma patients using high cumulative doses of OCSs, (2) explore the role of suboptimal inhaler therapy, and (3) estimate the proportion of patients to whom asthma biologics might be prescribed unnecessarily.

METHODS

All adults (n = 5,002) with at least 1 prescription of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (≥500-1,000 mcg/day fluticasone-equivalent) and/or OCSs (GINA step 4-5) in 2010 were selected from a pharmacy database including 500,500 Dutch inhabitants, and sent questionnaires. Of 2,312 patients who returned questionnaires, 929 had asthma. We calculated the annual cumulative OCS dose and prescription fillings and checked inhaler technique in a sample of 60 patients. Patients estimated to have good adherence and inhaler proficiency who still required high doses of OCSs (≥420 mg/year) were considered candidates for initiating biologic treatment.

RESULTS

29.5% of asthma patients on GINA 4-5 therapy used high doses of OCSs, of which 78.1% were likely to have poor therapy adherence or inadequate inhaler technique. Only 21.9% were considered definitive candidates for biologic therapy.

CONCLUSION

High OCS use in Dutch GINA 4-5 asthma patients was common. However, in 4 out of 5 patients adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy and/or inhalation technique was considered suboptimal. Since optimizing inhaler therapy may reduce the need for OCSs, this should be mandatory before prescribing expensive steroid-sparing drugs.

Asthma Phenotyping in Primary Care: Applying the International Severe Asthma Registry Eosinophil Phenotype Algorithm Across All Asthma Severities

BACKGROUND

We developed an eosinophil phenotype gradient algorithm and applied it to a large severe asthma cohort (International Severe Asthma Registry).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to reapply this algorithm in a UK primary care asthma cohort, quantify the eosinophilic phenotype, and assess the relationship between the likelihood of an eosinophilic phenotype and asthma severity/health care resource use (HCRU).

METHODS

Patients age 13 years and older with active asthma and blood eosinophil count or 1 or greater, who were included from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, were categorized according to the likelihood of eosinophilic phenotype using the International Severe Asthma Registry gradient eosinophilic algorithm. Patient demographic, clinical and HCRU characteristics were described for each phenotype.

RESULTS

Of 241,006 patients, 50.3%, 22.2%, and 21.9% most likely (grade 3), likely (grade 2), and least likely (grade 1), respectively, had an eosinophilic phenotype, and 5.6% had a noneosinophilic phenotype (grade 0). Compared with patients with noneosinophilic asthma, those most likely to have an eosinophilic phenotype tended to have more comorbidities (percentage with Charlson comorbidity index of ≥2: 28.2% vs 6.9%) and experienced more asthma attacks (percentage with one or more attack: 24.8% vs 15.3%). These patients were also more likely to have asthma that was difficult to treat (31.1% vs 18.3%), to receive more intensive treatment (percentage on Global Initiative for Asthma 2020 step 4 or 5: 44.2% vs 27.5%), and greater HCRU (eg, 10.8 vs 7.9 general practitioner all-cause consultations per year).

CONCLUSIONS

The eosinophilic asthma phenotype predominates in primary care and is associated with greater asthma severity and HCRU. These patients may benefit from earlier and targeted asthma therapy.

Socioeconomic biases in asthma control and specialist referral of possible severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Although socioeconomic impact on asthma control has been investigated, little is known about its relation to specialist referral of patients with possible severe asthma, especially in a public healthcare setting. The present study aims to identify socioeconomic patterns in disease control and referral of patients with asthma in a nationwide cohort of adult patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS).

METHODS

Asthma patients fulfilling the following: aged 18-45 and redeeming ≥2 prescriptions of ICS during 2014-18 based on data from Danish national registers were included. Possible severe asthma was defined as GINA 2020 Step 4 (with either ≥2 courses of systemic steroids or ≥1 hospitalisation) or Step 5 treatment. Findings presented as odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence intervals).

RESULTS

Of 60 534 patients (median age 34, 55% female), 3275 (5.7%) were deemed as having possible severe asthma, of whom 61% were managed in primary care alone.Odds of specialist management for possible severe asthma decreased with age (OR 0.66 (0.51-0.85)), 36-45 versus 18-25 years), male sex (OR 0.75 (0.64-0.87)), residence outside the Capital Region (OR 0.70 (0.59-0.82)) and with receiving unemployment or disability benefits OR 0.75 (0.59-0.95)).Having completed higher education increased odds of specialist referral (OR 1.28 (1.03-1.59)), when compared to patients with basic education.

CONCLUSION

Even in settings with nationally available free access to specialist care, the majority of patients with possible severe asthma are managed in primary care. Referral of at-risk asthma patients differs across socioeconomic parameters, calling for initiatives to identify and actively refer these patients.