A Practical Guide to Implementing SMART in asthma management

Short-acting β2-agonists (SABA) overuse in asthma and patients' perceptions for this behavior

BACKGROUND

Short-acting β2-agonists (SABA) overuse is associated with poor asthma control. The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2019-updated strategy report has therefore taken a paradigm shift in reliever therapy recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

(I) To investigate the status of SABA overuse and medication dispensing patters in asthma in the Netherlands (II) validate dispensing data for SABA overuse identification and (III) understand patients' perspectives towards this SABA-taking behavior to inform future improvement strategies.

METHODS

An annually repeated cross-sectional study was conducted from 2017 to 2021 using pharmacy dispensing data in a real-world setting, including asthma patients aged 18-45 with ≥1 inhaler. A following qualitative study was performed in identified SABA overusing patients with a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews, supported by theoretical frameworks.

RESULTS

Dispensing data was available from 87 % of all community pharmacies (n = 1994) in 2017 and 95 % (n = 2005) in 2021. SABA overuse prevalence was constant for the five study-years with 20.6 % (±0.5 %). Increased ICS-formoterol and decreased SABA dispenses were observed in starters of inhalation therapy in 2021. 53 asthma patients completed the questionnaire of whom 43 patients confirmed SABA overuse, generating a positive predictive value of 81 %. Key behavioral drivers covered 7 themes regarding capability (knowledge; skills; memory, attention and decision process) motivation (emotion; beliefs about-capabilities; consequences) and opportunity (environmental context).

CONCLUSION

SABA overuse remains in one-fifth of asthma patients across the Netherlands, requiring careful attention from healthcare professionals. Dispensing data is a valid measure for SABA overuse in a clinical setting, facilitating patient selection. To meet patients' varied supporting needs, integration of tailored behavioral interventions is essential.

Trends in polypharmacy among U.S. adults with asthma, 2001-2020

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate trends in polypharmacy prevalence among adults with asthma in the United States.

METHODS

Data from the 2001-2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used to estimate the weighted prevalence of polypharmacy. Joinpoint regression analysis was conducted to evaluate trends in polypharmacy. Trends were first evaluated overall and then stratified by asthma severity and asthma control. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with polypharmacy.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2020, a stable trend in polypharmacy among U.S. adults with asthma was observed (average annual percent change [AAPC]=1.02, p=0.71). Trends across different asthma severity were stable (mild asthma: AAPC=2.93, p=0.20; moderate asthma: AAPC=-2.22, p=0.35; severe asthma: AAPC=0.45, p=0.82). Trends in adults with good asthma control and those with poor control stayed constant (good control: AAPC=0.82, p=0.68; poor control: AAPC=-1.22, p=0.82). Several factors, including older age, females, Non-Hispanic Black, health insurance coverage, family income, number of healthcare visits, former smokers, multi-morbidities, asthma severity, and asthma control, were associated with polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy prevalence has remained constant among U.S. adults with asthma over the past two decades. Despite a stable overall trend, disparities in polypharmacy prevalence persist across different asthma severity and control status, underscoring the need for tailored medication management to improve asthma care.

Risk Factors for Acute Asthma Exacerbations in Adults With Mild Asthma

BACKGROUND

Although individuals with mild asthma account for 30% to 40% of acute asthma exacerbations (AAEs), relatively little attention has been paid to risk factors for AAEs in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors associated with AAEs in patients with mild asthma.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. We used administrative data from a large managed care organization to identify 199,010 adults aged 18 to 85 years who met study criteria for mild asthma between 2013 and 2018. An asthma-coded qualifying visit (index visit) was identified for each patient. We then used information at the index visit or from the year before the index visit to measure potential risk factors for AAEs in the subsequent year. An AAE was defined as either an asthma-coded hospitalization or emergency department visit, or an asthma-related systemic corticosteroid administration (intramuscular or intravenous) or oral corticosteroid dispensing. Poisson regression models with robust SEs were used to estimate the adjusted risk ratios for future AAEs.

RESULTS

In the study cohort, mean age was 44 years and 64% were female; 6.5% had AAEs within 1 year after the index visit. In multivariate models, age, sex, race, ethnicity, smoking status, body mass index, prior acute asthma care, and a variety of comorbidities and other clinical characteristics were significant predictors for future AAE risk.

CONCLUSION

Population-based disease management strategies for asthma should be expanded to include people with mild asthma in addition to those with moderate to severe disease.

The Wiser Strategy of Using Beta-Agonists in Asthma: Mechanisms and Rationales

Concerns regarding the safety of beta-2 agonists have led to revisions of the major asthma guidelines to better address these issues. Although these updates allow for a combination of previous and current strategies, they may confuse clinical practitioners. Beta-2 agonists are vital for alleviating asthma symptoms by relaxing smooth muscles; however, they also pose significant risks by inducing pro-inflammatory mediators both in vitro and in vivo. In addition to the risks of overuse and symptom masking, the use of beta-agonists alone at therapeutic doses can worsen airway inflammation and enhance virus-induced inflammation during asthma exacerbation. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) can effectively prevent these adverse effects. With new insights into the mechanisms of these adverse events, reserving short-acting beta-agonists for acute symptom relief during exacerbations and only for those who are already on ICS or oral steroids represents a careful approach to using beta-agonists with least adverse effects in patients with asthma. However, a major drawback of this approach is the potential non-compliance with ICS, leading to beta-agonist use without the necessary counteraction by ICS. An optimal strategy, both during and outside exacerbations, would integrate beta-agonists into an anti-inflammatory regimen that includes ICS, ideally combined with the same inhaler to ensure their concurrent use where finances allow. This would maintain the beneficial effects of beta-agonists, such as bronchodilation, while preventing the adverse effects from the induction of inflammatory mediators. This method is aligned with diverse clinical settings, maximizes the safe use of beta-agonists, and supports a comprehensive guideline-compliant management strategy.

All shook up: how the COVID-19 pandemic rocked pediatric asthma care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma management is a crucial aspect of public health. The landscape of asthma management underwent significant change in the wake of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. These changes greatly affected existing patients, individuals suffering with undiagnosed illness, providers, and the healthcare system as a whole.

RECENT FINDINGS

Providers had to navigate through the potential risk of exposure while weighing the benefit of office visits for patients. This promoted the rapid uptake of telemedicine and virtual outreach, as well as modifications to acute management and controller therapies. Telehealth allowed for the remote monitoring of these patient populations, increased compliance with home-based self-management, and an emphasis on patient education. Furthermore, the pandemic underscored the importance of proactive asthma management as many individuals were left untreated or undiagnosed for various reasons. It is evident that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic reshaped the landscape of various components of the healthcare system, including asthma management, necessitating innovative approaches to monitoring and patient education.

SUMMARY

Understanding the lessons learned from this time period is crucial for enhancing the resilience of our health system in the wake of future challenges that may be posed against our system.

The Role of ICS-Containing Rescue Therapy Versus SABA Alone in Asthma Management Today

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) recommends that short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) monotherapy should no longer be prescribed, and that as-needed combination inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-formoterol is the preferred reliever therapy in adults and adolescents with mild asthma. These recommendations are based on the risks of SABA monotherapy, the evidence that ICS-formoterol reliever therapy markedly decreases the occurrence of severe asthma exacerbations compared with SABA reliever therapy alone, and because ICS-formoterol reliever therapy has a favorable risk/benefit profile compared with maintenance ICS plus SABA reliever therapy. Data supporting the use of combination ICS-albuterol reliever therapy in mild asthma are more limited, but there are studies that inform its use in this population. In this review, we compare, using a pros and cons format, the (1) long-term safety and efficacy of ICS-formoterol reliever therapy versus SABA reliever therapy alone, (2) long-term safety and efficacy of ICS-albuterol reliever therapy versus SABA reliever therapy alone, (3) immediate bronchodilator effects of ICS-formoterol versus SABA alone, and (4) clinical and regulatory factors that may inform reliever therapy prescription decisions. By presenting the evidence of these reliever inhaler options, we hope to inform the reader while also calling for necessary future effectiveness and implementation research.

Inhaled beta2 -agonist, formoterol, enhances intense exercise performance, and sprint ability in elite cyclists

PURPOSE

Many athletes use long-acting beta2 -agonist formoterol in treatment of asthma. However, studies in non-athlete cohorts demonstrate that inhaled formoterol can enhance sprint performance calling into question whether its use in competitive sports should be restricted. We investigated whether formoterol at upper recommended inhaled doses (54 μg) would enhance sprint ability and intense exercise performance in elite cyclists.

METHODS

Twenty-one male cyclists (V̇O2max : 70.4 ± 4.3 mL × min-1  × kg-1 , mean ± SD) completed two 6-s all-out sprints followed by 4-min all-out cycling after inhaling either 54 μg formoterol or placebo. We also assessed cyclists' leg muscle mass by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and muscle fiber type distribution of vastus lateralis biopsies.

RESULTS

Peak and mean power output during the 6-s sprint was 32 W (95% CI, 19-44 W, p < 0.001) and 36 W (95% CI, 24-48 W, p < 0.001) higher with formoterol than placebo, corresponding to an enhancing effect of around 3%. Power output during 4-min all-out cycling was 9 W (95% CI, 2-16 W, p = 0.01) greater with formoterol than placebo, corresponding to an enhancing effect of 2.3%. Performance changes in response to formoterol were unrelated to cyclists' VO2max and leg lean mass, whereas muscle fiber Type I distribution correlated with change in sprinting peak power in response to formoterol (r2  = 0.314, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that an inhaled one-off dose of 54 μg formoterol has a performance-enhancing potential on sprint ability and short intense performance in elite male cyclists, which is irrespective of training status but partly related to muscle fiber type distribution for sprint ability.

Managing Asthma During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in pregnancy and is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Asthma symptoms worsen in approximately 40% of women, and exacerbations requiring medical intervention occur in at least 20% of women. Factors associated with exacerbation and worsening asthma include multiparity, obesity, Black race, exacerbations before pregnancy, and poor asthma control. Exacerbations are associated with further increased risks for poor perinatal outcomes, including low birth weight, preterm birth, and small for gestational age (SGA) status, as well as an increase in the development of asthma in early childhood. Common medications used for asthma, including short-acting β-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids, are considered safe to use in pregnancy. Whereas guidelines generally suggest traditional step therapy for managing asthma in pregnancy, there are alternative models of care and management approaches that may be effective in pregnancy, but require more research. These include single-inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy, treatment adjustment with FeNO, treatable traits personalized medicine approaches, and telemedicine. Little is known about changes to asthma in the postpartum period. However, low adherence to medication and the potential effects of postpartum depression on asthma exacerbation risk warrant further research.

Research progress on the mechanism of astragaloside IV in the treatment of asthma

Asthma is a common chronic respiratory disease, and its treatment is a core problem and challenge in clinical practice. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are the first-line therapy for the treatment of asthma. Local and systemic adverse reactions caused by GCs create obstacles to the treatment of asthma. Therefore, the research target is to find a new, safe, and effective therapeutic medicine at present. Natural products are an important source for treating asthma with low cost and low toxicity. Astragaloside IV (AS-IV) is an active ingredient of traditional Chinese medicine Astragalus mongholicus Bunge. Previous studies have indicated that AS-IV plays a therapeutic role in the treatment of asthma by inhibiting airway inflammation and remodeling the airway, and by regulating immunity and neuroendocrine function (Fig. 1) . It has a variety of biological characteristics such as multi-target intervention, high safety, and good curative effect. This article reviews the specific mechanism of AS-IV for the treatment of asthma to provide references for subsequent research.

Beginning to Address an Implementation Gap in Asthma: Clinicians' Views of Prescribing Reliever Budesonide-Formoterol Inhalers and SMART in the United States

BACKGROUND

The Global Initiative for Asthma and National Asthma Education and Prevention Program recently made paradigm-shifting recommendations regarding inhaler management in asthma. The Global Initiative for Asthma now recommends that combination inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol inhalers replace short-acting β-agonists as the preferred reliever therapy at all steps of asthma management. Although the most recent guidelines of the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program did not review reliever ICS-formoterol usage in mild asthma, they similarly recommended single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) at steps 3 and 4 of asthma management. Despite these recommendations, many clinicians-particularly in the United States-are not prescribing new inhaler paradigms. Clinician-level reasons for this implementation gap remain largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

To gain an in-depth understanding of the facilitators and barriers to prescribing reliever ICS-formoterol inhalers and SMART in the United States.

METHODS

Community and academic primary care providers, pulmonologists, and allergists who reported regularly caring for adults with asthma were interviewed. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, qualitatively coded, and analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Interviews were continued until theme saturation.

RESULTS

Among 20 interviewed clinicians, only 6 clinicians described regularly prescribing ICS-formoterol inhalers as a reliever inhaler (either alone or within SMART). Significant barriers to new inhaler approaches included concerns surrounding a lack of Food and Drug Administration labeling for ICS-formoterol as a reliever therapy, a lack of awareness regarding a patient's formulary-preferred ICS-long-acting β-agonist choices, the high cost of combination inhalers, and time constraints. Facilitators to using new inhaler approaches included clinicians' beliefs that the latest inhaler recommendations are simpler and more congruent with real-world patients' behavior, and that a potential change in management strategy would offer a valuable opportunity for shared decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Although new guidelines exist in asthma, many clinicians described significant barriers to using them including medicolegal issues, pharmaceutical formulary confusion, and high drug costs. Nonetheless, most clinicians believed that the latest inhaler approaches would be more intuitive for their patients and would offer an opportunity for patient-centered collaboration and care. Stakeholders may find these results useful in future attempts to increase the real-world adoption of recent asthma recommendations.

Patterns of Asthma Medication Use in New Zealand After Publication of National Asthma Guidelines

BACKGROUND

In June 2020, the New Zealand (NZ) adolescent and adult asthma guidelines recommended budesonide/formoterol, taken as maintenance and/or reliever therapy, as the preferred therapeutic approach.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether these recommendations were associated with changes in clinical practice indicated by asthma medication use trends.

METHODS

NZ national dispensing data for inhaler medications from January 2010 to December 2021 were reviewed. Monthly "dispensings" of inhaled budesonide/formoterol, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), other ICS/long-acting β2-agonists (LABA), and inhaled short-acting β2-agonists (SABA), for the 12+ age group, were displayed graphically with piecewise regression used to produce plots of rates by time with a July 1, 2020, break point. The number of dispensings in the last 6 months that data were available (July-December 2021) was compared with the corresponding period, July-December 2019.

RESULTS

Budesonide/formoterol dispensing increased markedly after July 1, 2020 (regression coefficient 41.1 inhalers dispensed/100,000 population per month [95% confidence interval (CI): 36.3-45.6, P < .0001]; 64.7% increase in the number of dispensings between July-December 2019 and July-December 2021), in contrast to "other ICS/LABA" (regression coefficient: -15.9 [95% CI: -22.2 to -9.6, P < .0001]; -1.7% decrease) and SABA (regression coefficient: -14.7 [95% CI: -29.7 to 0.3, P = .055]; -10.6% decrease), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In NZ, a progressive increase in budesonide/formoterol dispensing, accompanied by a reduction in SABA and "other ICS/LABA" dispensing, occurred after publication of the 2020 NZ asthma guidelines. While acknowledging the limitations in the interpretation of temporal associations, these findings suggest that the transition to ICS/formoterol reliever-based therapy can be achieved if recommended and promoted as the preferred therapeutic approach in national guidelines.

Get SMART: Teaching Pediatric Residents the 2020 Focused Asthma Updates' Recommendations for Symptom-Based Medication Increases

Introduction

The 2020 Focused Asthma Updates introduced a paradigm shift in the treatment of asthma that includes symptom-based adjustments to outpatient asthma treatment that vary by age and severity. The length and complexity of the updates have made them challenging to adopt.

Methods

We implemented an educational session among pediatric residents to increase their familiarity with, comprehension of, and plans to adopt two evidence-based recommendations introduced in the 2020 Updates for symptom-based therapy. Facilitators led groups of four to six pediatric residents in cased-based discussions during a 30-minute, ambulatory care-based session. One week prior, participants and facilitators received synopses of the 2007 Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma and the 2020 Updates. Facilitators also received a guide and scripts explaining new concepts, providing supporting data, and highlighting learning objectives. Retrospective pre/post surveys assessed participants' familiarity with, comprehension of, and planned adoption of recommendations for intermittent steroids and single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) before and after the conference. The surveys also assessed prior exposure to the 2020 Updates and reflections on the educational session.

Results

There were 26 participants. Ratings of familiarity, comprehension, and adoption plans regarding the recommendations significantly improved (ps < .001, Wilcoxon signed rank test). The case-based approach was well received, and the material was deemed relevant.

Discussion

This educational session significantly increased pediatric residents' familiarity with, comprehension of, and plans to adopt two new evidence-based treatments. Dissemination of this educational session may improve outpatient asthma management.

Safety and Effectiveness of As-Needed Formoterol in Asthma Patients Taking Inhaled Corticosteroid (ICS)-Formoterol or ICS-Salmeterol Maintenance Therapy

BACKGROUND

As-needed low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol reliever is recommended in patients with asthma prescribed maintenance ICS-formoterol. Clinicians often ask whether ICS-formoterol reliever can be used with other maintenance ICS-long-acting β2-agonists.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of as-needed formoterol in patients taking maintenance ICS-formoterol or ICS-salmeterol from the RELIEF study.

METHODS

RELIEF (SD-037-0699) was a 6-month, open-label study that randomized 18,124 patients with asthma to as-needed formoterol 4.5 μg or salbutamol 200 μg on top of maintenance therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients on maintenance ICS-formoterol or ICS-salmeterol (n = 5436). The primary safety outcome was a composite of serious adverse events (SAEs) and/or adverse events leading to discontinuation (DAEs); the primary effectiveness outcome was time-to-first exacerbation.

RESULTS

For both maintenance groups and both relievers, similar numbers of patients had ≥1 SAE and/or DAE. In patients taking maintenance ICS-salmeterol, but not ICS-formoterol, significantly more non-asthma-related and nonserious DAEs occurred with as-needed formoterol versus as-needed salbutamol (P = .0066 and P = .0034, respectively). In patients taking maintenance ICS-formoterol, there was a significantly lower risk in time-to-first exacerbation with as-needed formoterol versus as-needed salbutamol (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70, 0.95; P = .007). In patients taking ICS-salmeterol maintenance, time-to-first exacerbation was not significantly different between treatment arms (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.84, 1.06; P = .35).

CONCLUSIONS

As-needed formoterol significantly reduced exacerbation risk compared with as-needed salbutamol when added to maintenance ICS-formoterol, but not to maintenance ICS-salmeterol. More DAEs were seen with ICS-salmeterol maintenance therapy plus as-needed formoterol. Further research is needed to assess whether this is relevant to as-needed combination ICS-formoterol.

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.

Treating asthma in the time of COVID

The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma clinical trials network is actively assessing novel treatments for severe asthma during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and has needed to adapt to various clinical dilemmas posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Pharmacologic interactions between established asthma therapies and novel drug interventions for COVID-19 infection, including antivirals, biologics, and vaccines, have emerged as a critical and unanticipated issue in the clinical care of asthma. In particular, impaired metabolism of some long-acting beta-2 agonists by the cytochrome P4503A4 enzyme in the setting of antiviral treatment using ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (NVM/r, brand name Paxlovid) may increase risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Although available data have documented the potential for such interactions, these issues are largely unappreciated by clinicians who treat asthma, or those dispensing COVID-19 interventions in patients who happen to have asthma. Because these drug-drug interactions have not previously been relevant to patient care, clinicians have had no guidance on management strategies to reduce potentially serious interactions between treatments for asthma and COVID-19. The Precision Interventions for Severe and/or Exacerbation-Prone Asthma network considered the available literature and product information, and herein share our considerations and plans for treating asthma within the context of these novel COVID-19-related therapies.

"As-Needed" Inhaled Corticosteroids for Patients With Asthma

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

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

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

Toward a Predict and Prevent Approach in Obstructive Airway Diseases

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are currently diagnosed and treated after the demonstration of variable airflow limitation and symptoms. Under this framework, undiagnosed and unchecked airway inflammation is associated with recurrent acute attacks, airway remodeling, airflow limitation, adverse effects of corticosteroids, and impaired quality of life, ultimately leading to the collection of side effects termed "people remodeling." This one-size-fits-all damage control approach aims to control symptoms and treat exacerbations rather than modify the underlying disease process. The advent of highly effective therapies targeting proximal drivers of airway inflammation calls for a paradigm shift; upstream-acting therapies offer potential to alter the disease course and achieve clinical remission. We propose moving away from downstream firefighting and toward a "predict and prevent" model, measuring inflammation and providing anti-inflammatory therapy early, without waiting for further clinical deterioration. Much in the same way that high blood pressure and cholesterol are used to predict and prevent heart attacks, in asthma, elevated blood eosinophils and/or exhaled nitric oxide can be used to predict and prevent asthma attacks. We also advocate moving research further upstream by identifying patients with subclinical airway inflammation or disease who may be at risk of progressing to airflow limitation and associated morbidities and intervening early to prevent them. In summary, we call for a predict and prevent approach in obstructive airway disease.

Key recommendations for primary care from the 2022 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) update

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) was established in 1993 by the World Health Organization and the US National Heart Lung and Blood Institute to improve asthma awareness, prevention and management worldwide. GINA develops and publishes evidence-based, annually updated resources for clinicians. GINA guidance is adopted by national asthma guidelines in many countries, adapted to fit local healthcare systems, practices, and resource availability. GINA is independent of industry, funded by the sale and licensing of its materials. This review summarizes key practical guidance for primary care from the 2022 GINA strategy report. It provides guidance on confirming the diagnosis of asthma using spirometry or peak expiratory flow. GINA recommends that all adults, adolescents and most children with asthma should receive inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapy to reduce the risk of severe exacerbations, either taken regularly, or (for adults and adolescents with "mild" asthma) as combination ICS-formoterol taken as needed for symptom relief. For patients with moderate-severe asthma, the preferred regimen is maintenance-and-reliever therapy (MART) with ICS-formoterol. Asthma treatment is not "one size fits all"; GINA recommends individualized assessment, adjustment, and review of treatment. As many patients with difficult-to-treat or severe asthma are not referred early for specialist review, we provide updated guidance for primary care on diagnosis, further investigation, optimization and treatment of severe asthma across secondary and tertiary care. While the GINA strategy has global relevance, we recognize that there are special considerations for its adoption in low- and middle-income countries, particularly the current poor access to inhaled medications.

Landscape of short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) overuse in Europe

This review article provides an overview of short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) use and prescribing trends in Europe, summarizing updated data on the results from the industry-funded SABINA program (SABA use IN asthma) and other studies on this matter. SABA use continues to increase worldwide. Overuse has been defined as ≥3 canisters/year. Almost a third of European patients with asthma, at all severity levels, overuse SABA. Guidelines recommend close monitoring of patients who overuse SABA and avoiding over-reliance on SABA monotherapy. SABA overuse is associated with increased risk of asthma exacerbations and mortality, increased use of health services and negative physical and mental health outcomes. Reliance on SABA monotherapy can be unsafe and therefore it is necessary to change asthma treatment approaches and policies. Changes in physician and patient behaviours towards SABA use are required to ensure that patients with asthma are not over-reliant on SABA monotherapy. Notwithstanding, the limitations of the studies on the use of SABA should be considered, taking into account that the prescription/purchase of medication canisters does not always represent the actual use of the medication and that associations between SABA overuse and poor asthma outcomes may not be directly causal. National health systems and asthma guidelines must align asthma management with global recommendations and adjust them to local needs.

Ensuring equitable access to guideline-based asthma care across the lifespan: Tips and future directions to the successful implementation of the new NAEPP 2020 guidelines, a Work Group Report of the AAAAI Asthma, Cough, Diagnosis, and Treatment Committee

The most recent recommendations from the 2020 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Update and Global Initiative for Asthma 2021 guide evidence-based clinical decision making. However, given the present state of health disparities by age, income, and race, the equitable implementation and dissemination of these guidelines will be unlikely without further guidance. This work group report reviews the current state of the new asthma guideline implementation; presents updated evidence-based therapeutic options with attention to specific patient populations; and addresses barriers to the implementation of these guidelines in minoritized, historically marginalized, and underresourced communities. Allergists and immunologists can use practical ways to accomplish the goals of improved asthma care access and advanced asthma care across the life span, with specific considerations to historically marginalized populations. Modifiable barriers to guideline implementation include financial barriers, environmental factors, and allergy subspecialty access and care coordination. Various programs to improve access to guideline-based asthma care include community programs, school-based asthma programs, and digital health solutions, with an emphasis on reducing disparities by race.

Implementation of standardized asthma management programs in outpatient settings

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews new approaches, facilitators, barriers, and opportunities to increasing adoption of standardized asthma management programs in the outpatient care setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Primary care clinicians providing asthma care in the outpatient setting are challenged by the complexity of guidelines and want standardization of tools that are easy to use and that can be integrated within their practice's workflow. Programs that integrate clinical decision support tools within a practice's electronic health record and provide support from specialists may enhance uptake of asthma management programs in the outpatient setting and reduce asthma morbidity. Lack of an implementation science framework, consideration for organizational context, and clinician buy-in are recently recognized barriers to adoption of asthma programs and improved asthma outcomes. In addition, many of these interventions are labor intensive, costly, and may not be capable of wide dissemination because of the EHR interoperability problem.

CONCLUSION

Programs that simplify the guidelines, integrate clinical decision support within the EHR, and ground their approach with an implementation science framework may improve the quality of asthma care provided in the outpatient setting.

Definition, Phenotyping of Severe Asthma, Including Cluster Analysis

Asthma is defined as severe when it is uncontrolled despite the high intensity of treatment, or that loses control when a therapeutic step down is tried.These patients, for years, have been "uniformly" treated with massive doses of inhaled and oral corticosteroids regardless of their inflammatory state.Initially, asthma was considered of genesis "exclusively allergic." Subsequently, thanks to the development of noninvasive tools and of human monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin 5, a pathogenetic role has been given to eosinophils. Management of steroids based on sputum eosinophil counts has been suggested according to clinical phenotypes identified through cluster analysis.The algorithms obtained from the cluster analysis have proved later to be poorly predictive of the inflammatory phenotype and difficult to apply in clinical practice.In the new era of precision medicine, the greatest challenge is finding clinical or biological elements predictive of response to therapies such as biologics. Cluster analyses performed on omics data or on cohorts of patients treated with biologics are more promising in this sense.In this article, starting from the current definition of severe asthma, we review the phenotypes proposed over time to date, showing the difficulty underlying the process of "phenotyping" due to the scarcity of available biomarkers.

Challenges in the Pharmacotherapeutic Management of Pediatric Asthma

Bronchial asthma is one of the most common chronic conditions in pediatric practice, with increasing prevalence hampered by poor socioeconomic impacts, leading to major public health issues. Considered as a complex heterogeneous syndrome, not a single disease, the management of the disease is a real challenge, impacting medical staff, patients and caregivers. Over the decades, a significant number of diagnostic and treatment regimen have been developed to achieve good standards, sustaining balanced control of the disease. This paper attempts a review on the establishment of new trends in the management of bronchial asthma in the pediatric age group.

Is This Medication Safe for My Child? How to Discuss Safety of Commonly Used Medications With Parents

All drugs have potential side effects, but thoughtful use can maximize benefits while minimizing risks. Children should not be considered just small adults regarding drug safety because their growth and development are discordant with their ability to sense and self-report drug side effects. Detecting side effects requires vigilance and education from prescribers to parents, who are tasked with monitoring their child over time. A drug's safety profile is published in the package label after pivotal trials are conducted in relatively small and sometimes narrow segments of the population during the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process. Drug safety profiles can change as data from postmarketing reports and long-term monitoring during phase IV trials emerge. As such, prescribers are obligated to maintain current understanding of any changes to drug labels. Discussing potential side effects, monitoring, and when to report concerns can be a time-consuming process during patient encounters. This review offers current information regarding potential side effects of some of the most commonly used medications for allergic conditions, asthma, and atopic dermatitis. This information and discussion will hopefully assist clinicians in their conversations with parents, including advice surrounding prescribing medication to minimize adverse effects, parental monitoring, and documentation.

Topical corticosteroids for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis: GRADE systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is associated with a significant disease burden. The optimal use of and administration route for intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) when managing CRSwNP are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We systematically synthesized the evidence addressing INCS for CRSwNP.

METHODS

We searched studies archived in Medline, Embase, and Central from database inception until September 1, 2021, for randomized controlled trials comparing INCS using any delivery method to placebo or other INCS administration types. Paired reviewers screened records, abstracted data, and rated risk of bias (CLARITY revision of Cochrane Risk of Bias version 1 tool) independently and in duplicate. We synthesized the evidence for each outcome using random effects network meta-analyses. We critically appraised the evidence following the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

We analyzed 61 randomized controlled trials (7176 participants, 8 interventions). Sinusitis-related quality of life might improve with INCS rinse (mean difference [MD] -6.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] -11.94 to -1.71) and exhalation delivery system (EDS) (MD -7.86, 95% CI -14.64 to -1.08) compared to placebo (both low certainty evidence). Nasal obstruction symptoms are likely improved when receiving INCS via stent/dressing (MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.08), spray (MD -0.51, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.41), and EDS (MD -0.35, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.18) (all moderate to high certainty) compared to placebo. We found no important differences in adverse effects among interventions (moderate certainty for INCS spray, very low to low certainty for others).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple delivery forms of INCS are viable therapeutic options for CRSwNP, resulting in improvement of patient-important outcomes. INCS via stent, spray, and EDS appear to be beneficial across the widest range of considered outcomes.

May a different kinetic mode explain the high efficacy/safety profile of inhaled budesonide?

The claimed functional basis for ICSs in asthma and COPD is airway selectivity, attained by inhaling a potent, lipophilic compound with long local dissolution/absorption time. The development has been empirically based, resulting in five widely used ICSs. Among them, budesonide (BUD) deviates by being less lipophilic, leading to a more rapid systemic uptake with plasma peaks with some systemic anti-inflammatory activity. By this, BUD fits less well into the current pharmacological dogma of optimal ICS profile. In this review we compared the physicochemical, pharmacological and clinical properties of BUD, fluticasone propionate (FP) and fluticasone furoate (FF), representing different levels of lipophilicity, airway and systemic kinetics, focusing on their long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations, in line with current GINA and GOLD recommendations. We are aware of the differences between formoterol (FORM) and the not rapid acting LABAs such as e.g. salmeterol and vilanterol but our comparisons are based on currently available combination products. A beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP)/FORM combination is also commented upon. Based on clinical comparisons in asthma and COPD, we conclude that the BUD/formoterol (BUD/FORM) combination is as effective and safe as the FP and FF combinations, and is in some cases even better as it can be used as "maintenance plus reliever therapy" (MART) in asthma and as maintenance in COPD. This is difficult to explain by current views of required ICS's/LABAs pharmacokinetic profiles. We propose that BUD achieves its efficacy by a combination of airway and systemic activity. The airway activity is dominating. The systemic activity contributes by plasma peaks, which are high enough for supportive anti-inflammatory actions at the blood and bone marrow levels but not sufficiently long to trigger a similar level of systemic adverse effects. This may be due to BUD's capacity to exploit a systemic differentiation mechanism as programmed for cortisol's various actions. This differentiation prospect can be reached only for an ICS with short plasma half-life. Here we present an alternative mode for an ICS to reach combined efficacy and safety, based on a poorly investigated and exploited physiological mechanism. A preference of this mode is broader versatility, due to that its straighter dose-response should allow a better adaptation to disease fluctuations, and that its rapid activity enables use as "anti-inflammatory reliever".

SMART in treatment of asthma exacerbations

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness and practicality of SMART (single maintenance and reliever therapy) in the treatment of asthma exacerbation.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Clinical Trial databases using the keywords SMART therapy, maintenance and reliever therapy, and budesonide and formoterol.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles were selected based on their relevance and applicability to this topic.

RESULTS

Multiple studies have evaluated the efficacy of SMART in reducing asthma exacerbations in comparison to standard inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance and short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) rescue therapy. Most of the randomized trials demonstrated a reduction in asthma exacerbation with open-label studies revealing similar effectiveness in reducing asthma exacerbation. Previously, concerns have been raised regarding the administration of increased doses of long-acting beta-agonist that may potentially mask symptoms and delay appropriate medical attention. However, studies have not demonstrated an increase in morbidity or mortality. The primary concern regarding many of these trials is that they have been sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.

CONCLUSION

Although not all studies demonstrated the effectiveness of SMART, the majority revealed a significant reduction in asthma exacerbation frequency and severity.