SMART for the treatment of asthma: A network meta-analysis of real-world evidence

A Simulation Study of the Effect of Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Choice on Reliever Medication Use, Symptom Control and Exacerbation Risk in Moderate-Severe Asthma

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between immediate symptom control, reliever medication use and exacerbation risk on treatment response and factors that modify it have not been assessed in an integrated manner. Here we apply simulation scenarios to evaluate the effect of individual baseline characteristics on treatment response in patients with moderate-severe asthma on regular maintenance dosing monotherapy with fluticasone propionate (FP) or combination therapy with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR).

METHODS

Reduction in reliever medication use (puffs/24 h), change in symptom control scores (ACQ-5), and annualised exacerbation rate over 12 months were simulated in a cohort of patients with different baseline characteristics (e.g. time since diagnosis, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ-5) symptom score, smoking status, body mass index (BMI) and sex) using drug-disease models derived from large phase III/IV clinical studies.

RESULTS

Simulation scenarios show that being a smoker, having higher baseline ACQ-5 and BMI, and long asthma history is associated with increased reliever medication use (p < 0.01). This increase correlates with a higher exacerbation risk and higher ACQ-5 scores over the course of treatment, irrespective of the underlying maintenance therapy. Switching non-responders to ICS monotherapy to combination therapy after 3 months resulted in immediate reduction in reliever medication use (i.e. 1.3 vs. 1.0 puffs/24 h for FP/SAL and BUD/FOR, respectively). In addition, switching patients with ACQ-5 > 1.5 at baseline to FP/SAL resulted in 34% less exacerbations than those receiving regular dosing BUD/FOR (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified baseline characteristics of patients with moderate to severe asthma that are associated with greater reliever medication use, poor symptom control and higher exacerbation risk. Moreover, the effects of different inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta agonist (LABA) combinations vary significantly when considering long-term treatment performance. These factors should be considered in clinical practice as a basis for personalised management of patients with moderate-severe asthma symptoms.

The Anti-Inflammatory Reliever (AIR) Algorithm Study: a protocol for a single-group study of an AIR stepwise approach to the treatment of adult asthma

Background

The stepwise approach to long-term asthma management, which traditionally incorporates short-acting β2-agonist reliever therapy, has been a core feature of asthma guidelines for over 30 years. There have been no studies, however, directly investigating the use of an entire guideline-recommended track. Recently, inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol has been recommended as the preferred reliever therapy in adult asthma, in accordance with a stepwise "Anti-Inflammatory Reliever" (AIR) treatment track.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the AIR stepwise approach recommended by the New Zealand adolescent and adult asthma guidelines, in combination with a novel algorithm for transitioning between treatment steps.

Methods

This 52-week, open-label, single-group study will recruit 100 adults aged 18 to 75 years with mild, moderate and moderate-severe asthma (ACTRN12620001010987). Participants will be allocated to budesonide-formoterol 200/6 µg, one actuation as needed (Step 1), one actuation twice daily and as needed (Step 2), or two actuations twice daily and one as needed (Step 3). Treatment steps will be adjusted throughout the study, in response to reliever use and asthma attacks, according to a stepwise AIR algorithm. Following a 26-week period of investigator-led transitions, participants will adjust their own treatment step. The primary outcome is participant satisfaction as measured by the Global Satisfaction score of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication. Secondary outcomes will assess efficacy and safety, and describe patterns of medication use and participant flow through the treatment steps.

Conclusion

This is the first trial to assess the AIR treatment track and algorithm. The results will provide knowledge to guide the clinical use of this approach.

Revisiting asthma pharmacotherapy: where do we stand and where do we want to go?

Several current guidelines/strategies outline a treatment approach to asthma, which primarily consider the goals of improving lung function and quality of life and reducing symptoms and exacerbations. They suggest a strategy of stepping up or down treatment, depending on the patient's overall current asthma symptom control and future risk of exacerbation. While this stepwise approach is undeniably practical for daily practice, it does not always address the underlying mechanisms of this heterogeneous disease. In the last decade, there have been attempts to improve the treatment of severe asthma, such as the addition of a long-acting antimuscarinic agent to the traditional inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist treatment and the introduction of therapies targeting key cytokines. However, despite such strategies several unmet needs in this population remain, motivating research to identify novel targets and develop improved therapeutic and/or preventative asthma treatments. Pending the availability of such therapies, it is essential to re-evaluate the current conventional "one-size-fits-all" approach to a more precise asthma management. Although challenging, identifying "treatable traits" that contribute to respiratory symptoms in individual patients with asthma may allow a more pragmatic approach to establish more personalised therapeutic goals.

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.

A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Asthma Medications on Asthma Exacerbations in Real World National Cohort

Background

Although a wide variety of asthma medications have been developed and are used in clinical practice, there is limited evidence of their comparative effects on asthma exacerbations.

Methods

We used claims data provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. We selected subjects commencing asthma treatment between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018, with no change in drug regimen. The primary outcome was asthma exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids. Cox regression analysis was used to assess outcomes considering the exacerbation-free period.

Results

Of the 254,951 asthma subjects, 107,694 subjects (42.2%) experienced asthma exacerbation. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.378–0.508), ICS-long-acting β₂-agonist (LABAs) (HR, 0.284–0.479), long-acting muscarine antagonists (LAMAs) (HR, 0.432–0.572), leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) (HR, 0.371–0.419), and xanthines (HR, 0.326–0.482) significantly reduced the rate of first and second exacerbation of asthma (all P-values, <0.001). The clinical effectiveness of asthma medications varied according to the active ingredient (HR 0.164–0.670) and was significant for all active ingredients (all P-values, <0.001). The effectiveness of combination treatment using ICS-LABA and LTRA varied (HR, 0.159–0.670); however, all combination treatment options evaluated were effective in preventing asthma exacerbations (all P-values, <0.001). Long-term use of ICS-LABA (HR, 0.278–0.653), LTRA (HR, 0.259–0.628), and xanthines (HR, 0.351–0.783) showed consistent effectiveness (all P-values, <0.001).

Conclusion

This real-world study showed that the effectiveness of asthma medications varied according to drug type, active ingredient, combination, and period of use, although effectiveness was significant in all cases studied.

Sex differences in adult asthma and COPD therapy: a systematic review

Background

Although asthma is more prevalent in women and the prevalence of COPD is increasing in women, the current international recommendations for the management and prevention of asthma and COPD provide no sex-related indication for the treatment of these diseases. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the evidence across literature on the sex-related effectiveness of asthma and COPD therapy.

Methods

This systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO and performed according to PRISMA-P. The PICO framework was applied for the literature search strategy: "patient problem” included adult patients suffering from asthma or COPD, “Intervention” regarded the pharmacological treatments for asthma or COPD, “Comparison” was vs. baseline, active controls, or placebo, “Outcome” was any difference sex-related in the effectiveness of interventions.

Results

In asthma 44% of the evidence reported that men responded better than women to the therapy, whereas this percentage was 28% in COPD. ICS was generally less effective in women than in men to treat asthma, and consistent evidence suggests that in asthmatic patients ICS/LABA/LAMA combination may be equally effective in both men and women. Due to the inconsistent available evidence, it is not possible to identify specific treatments whose effectiveness is related to sex difference in COPD patients.

Conclusions

There is a strong need of investigating the sex-related impact of asthma and COPD treatments. Pre-specified analyses in men and women should be planned in future trial protocols, a necessary condition that should be requested also by the regulatory agencies to overcome the anachronistic “one-size-fits-all” approach to therapeutics associated with suboptimal outcomes for patients.

Single dose of budesonide/formoterol turbuhaler compared to salbutamol pMDI for speed of bronchodilator onset in asthma: a randomised cross-over trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare bronchodilator response after to salbutamol and budesonide/formoterol in adults with stable asthma.

METHODS

A double-blind, cross-over, single-centre, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Adults with stable asthma were randomised to different orders of two treatment regimens: two actuations of placebo via MDI and one actuation of budesonide/formoterol 200/6 µg via turbuhaler; and one actuation of placebo turbuhaler and two actuations of salbutamol 100 µg via MDI. The primary outcome measure was FEV1 after 2 min. Secondary outcome measures included FEV1, mBorg Dyspnoea Scale score and visual analogue score for breathlessness over 30 min.

RESULTS

Forty-nine of 50 potential participants were randomised. One participant withdrew following the first intervention visit and another could not be randomised due to COVID-19 restrictions. The mean (SD) change from baseline FEV1 2 min after treatment administration for budesonide/formoterol and salbutamol was 0.08 (0.14) L, n=49, and 0.17 (0.18) L, n=48, respectively, mean (95% CI) paired difference of -0.097 L (-0.147 to -0.047), p=0.07, against a non-inferiority bound of -0.06 L. In the secondary analysis, FEV1 over 30 min was lower for budesonide/formoterol compared with salbutamol, difference (95% CI): -0.10 (-0.12 to -0.08) L, p<0.001. There were no differences in Visual Analogue Scale score or mBorg Dyspnoea Scale score between treatments.

CONCLUSION

The results do not support the primary hypothesis of non-inferiority at the boundary of -0.06 L for the difference between budesonide/formoterol 200/6 µg compared with salbutamol 200 µg for FEV1 at 2 min, and could be consistent with inferiority with a p value of 0.07. For the secondary analysis of FEV1 measurements over time, the FEV1 was higher with salbutamol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12619001387112).

Stem Cell-Based Regenerative Therapy and Derived Products in COPD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

COPD is an incurable disorder, characterized by a progressive alveolar tissue destruction and defective mechanisms of repair and defense leading to emphysema. Currently, treatment for COPD is exclusively symptomatic; therefore, stem cell-based therapies represent a promising therapeutic approach to regenerate damaged structures of the respiratory system and restore lung function. The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative synthesis of the efficacy profile of stem cell-based regenerative therapies and derived products in COPD patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA-P. Data from 371 COPD patients were extracted from 11 studies. Active treatments elicited a strong tendency towards significance in FEV1 improvement (+71 mL 95% CI -2−145; p = 0.056) and significantly increased 6MWT (52 m 95% CI 18−87; p < 0.05) vs. baseline or control. Active treatments did not reduce the risk of hospitalization due to acute exacerbations (RR 0.77 95% CI 0.40−1.49; p > 0.05). This study suggests that stem cell-based regenerative therapies and derived products may be effective to treat COPD patients, but the current evidence comes from small clinical trials. Large and well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to really quantify the beneficial impact of stem cell-based regenerative therapy and derived products in COPD.

An update on the currently available and emerging synthetic pharmacotherapy for uncontrolled asthma

INTRODUCTION

: The treatment of uncontrolled asthma has improved because of triple therapy that includes a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and biological drugs, but several patients are resistant to corticosteroids and/or cannot achieve adequate asthma control using such therapies.

AREAS COVERED

: Herein, the authors review the current and emerging synthetic pharmacotherapy for uncontrolled asthma to overcome obstacles and limitations of biological therapies. The authors also provide their expert perspectives and opinion on the treatment of uncontrolled asthma.

EXPERT OPINION

: LAMAs should be added to inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combinations much earlier than currently recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma strategy because they can influence the course of small airways disease, reducing lung hyperinflation and improving asthma control. Biological therapies are a major advance in the treatment of severe asthma, but their use is still very limited for several reasons. An alternative to overcome the use of biological therapies is to synthesise compounds that target inflammation-signalling pathways. Several pathways have been identified as potential targets to design either therapeutic or prophylactic drugs against asthma. Some new compounds have already been tested in humans, but results have often been disappointing probably because existing phenotypic and endotypic variants may unpredictably limit the therapeutic value of blocking a specific pathway in most asthmatics, although there may be a substantial benefit for a subgroup of patients.