Beclometasone-formoterol as maintenance and reliever treatment in patients with asthma: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Advances in inhaler therapy for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a comprehensive review of Fostair™ and Trimbow™

The management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses considerable challenges due to the intricate nature of these respiratory conditions. Fostair™ and Trimbow™, two pressurized metered dose inhalers, have emerged as noteworthy therapeutic options for treating both asthma and COPD. Fostair combines an inhaled corticosteroid, specifically beclometasone dipropionate, with a long-acting beta2-agonist, formoterol fumarate dihydrate, offering a dual-action approach to mitigate airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction. Conversely, Trimbow integrates a tri-particulate formulation consisting of beclometasone dipropionate, formoterol fumarate dihydrate, and glycopyrronium bromide, providing a comprehensive strategy to target the pathophysiology of COPD and asthma. Recent clinical trials have underscored Trimbow's superior efficacy compared with Fostair, particularly in terms of reducing exacerbation rates and enhancing lung function. However, despite their therapeutic promise, both inhalers encounter challenges, including limited generalizability of study findings and a disparity between in vitro and human trial results. This literature review offers an in-depth analysis of Fostair and Trimbow, delving into their mechanisms of action, clinical applications, and outcomes in human studies for asthma and COPD. Additionally, the review discusses the role of combination therapy in managing respiratory diseases and underscores the necessity for further research to address existing knowledge gaps and optimize therapeutic outcomes.

Management of Chronic Asthma in Adults

Asthma is characterized by chronic inflammation and respiratory symptoms such as wheezing and coughing. In the United States, it affects 25 million people annually. Chronic smokers, poor adherence to medications, incorrect use of inhalers, and overall poor asthma control are known risk factors that lead to poorly controlled chronic asthmatics. Although asthma is traditionally categorized by severity, treatment by primary care providers is guided by the Global Initiative for Asthma or the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. As more research is available, shared decision-making between health care providers and patients will lead to improved outcomes in managing chronic asthma.

Adoption and Implementation of Maintenance and Reliever Therapy for Adults with Moderate to Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

The use of single combination inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting bronchodilator for maintenance and relief (MART) significantly reduces asthma exacerbations and has been incorporated into asthma guidelines since December 2020, but there is limited data regarding the implementation of this approach to asthma management.

OBJECTIVE

Determine how often MART was prescribed to patients with moderate to severe asthma being seen at subspecialty pulmonary and allergy practices at an academic health care system, and the patient and clinician characteristics associated with the use of MART.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of the EMR of an academic health care system in the Northeastern US between January 2021 and October 2023. Patient demographic and clinician data was collected, and MART recommendation was confirmed by chart review. We assessed the relationships between patient demographics, clinician characteristics, and MART recommendation.

RESULTS

Of 2,016 patients reviewed, 293 (14.5%) were recommended MART, with 255 (87%) concurrently prescribed short acting bronchodilators. Patients on ICS/formoterol at baseline were significantly more likely to be recommended MART, while older patients and those on Medicare were significantly less likely to be recommended MART. Twenty-two (44%) of 50 clinicians did not recommend MART ever and only three clinicians recommended MART to 30-60% of their patients. Clinicians who were part of the asthma group and those with less than 16 years in practice were significantly more likely to recommend MART.

CONCLUSION

Among academic subspecialty clinicians, there has been limited implementation of MART, with a small number of clinicians adopting MART routinely and over 40% of clinicians not recommending it.

A network meta-analysis of the association between patient traits and response to regular dosing with ICS plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever or ICS/formoterol reliever only in mild asthma

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

Mild asthma treatment recommendations include intermittent inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol dosing or regular ICS dosing with short-acting β2-agonist reliever. Due to the heterogeneity of asthma, identification of traits associated with improved outcomes to specific treatments would be clinically beneficial.

AIMS/OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of patient traits on treatment outcomes of regular ICS dosing compared with intermittent ICS/formoterol dosing, a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Searches identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with asthma aged ≥12 years, containing ≥1 regular ICS dosing or intermittent ICS/formoterol dosing treatment arm, reporting traits and outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

The SLR identified 11 RCTs of mild asthma, of 14,516 patients. A total of 11 traits and 11 outcomes of interest were identified. Of these, a feasibility assessment indicated possible assessment of three traits (age, baseline lung function, smoking history) and two outcomes (exacerbation rate, change in lung function). The NMA found no significant association of any trait with any outcome with regular ICS dosing relative to intermittent ICS/formoterol dosing. Inconsistent reporting of traits and outcomes between RCTs limited analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic analysis of associations between patient traits and differential treatment outcomes in mild asthma. Although the traits analysed were not found to significantly interact with relative treatment response, inconsistent reporting from the RCTs prevented assessment of some of the most clinically relevant traits and outcomes, such as adherence. More consistent reporting of respiratory RCTs would provide more comparable data and aid future analyses.

As-needed low-dose inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol therapy in patients with severe asthma included in the German Asthma Net cohort

After the GINA update in 2019, the proportion of SMART therapy increased with evidence for better disease control in SMART patients compared to SABA alone https://bit.ly/3SSPX1C.

Improvement of asthma control in adult patients using extrafine inhaled beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination as maintenance therapy as well as maintenance and reliever therapy - CONTROL study

INTRODUCTION

Extrafine formulation of beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination (BDP/F pMDI HFA) is approved for both fixed maintenance and maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) of asthma, and recent data has proven that BDP/F pMDI HFA maintenance and reliever therapy is an effective alternative to other regimens.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the level of asthma control in a real-life setting in adult patients using extrafine BDP/F pMDI HFA fixed combination in a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) as fixed maintenance dosing as well as maintenance and maintenance and reliever therapy. Additionally, we examined patients' satisfaction with the inhaler device and compliance with therapy as essential factors determining asthma control.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective non-interventional observational study lasted 4 months with 3 patient visits. We used the Asthma Control Questionnaire 7 (ACQ-7) to evaluate the degree of asthma control and Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4) to assess compliance. A self-developed questionnaire was used to assess satisfaction with the inhaler device.

RESULTS

2179 patients using BDP/F pMDI HFA fixed combination as maintenance and reliever therapy or BDP/F pMDI HFA as maintenance therapy and SABA (short-acting beta2-agonist) as a reliever for at least 2 months were included. During the prospective follow-up, we observed an upward trend in the FEV1% (forced expiratory volume in 1 s) predicted values, improvement in the control of symptoms as indicated by a decline in the mean ACQ-7 score was noted (1.62 at Visit 1 vs. 1.21 at Visit 2 vs. 0.94 at Visit 3, p < 0.001) and increase in patients' compliance (the number of patients that reported forgetting at times to take their medication was reduced from 49.7 % to 27.1 %, p < 0.001). At the same time, we noted a reduction in the number of as-needed doses used for symptom relief (p < 0.001). Most patients were satisfied with the pMDI, considered it easy and convenient to use, and preferred it to a dry powder inhaler (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of extrafine BDP/F pMDI HFA as maintenance as well as reliever therapy seems to be associated with increased asthma control and better compliance to therapy.

Systematic literature review of traits and outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of asthma with regular dosing of inhaled corticosteroids with short-acting β2-agonist reliever, as-needed ICS/formoterol, or ICS/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy

INTRODUCTION

Asthma treatments based solely on diagnostic label do not benefit patients equally. To identify patient traits that may be associated with improved treatment response to regular inhaled corticosteroid (ICSs) dosing with short-acting β2-agonist reliever or ICS/formoterol-containing therapy, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted.

METHODS

Searches of databases including MEDLINE and Embase identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with asthma, aged ≥12 years, published 1998-2022, containing ≥1 regular ICS dosing or ICS/formoterol-containing treatment arm, and reporting patient traits and outcomes of interest. Relevant data was extracted and underwent a feasibility assessment to determine suitability for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The SLR identified 39 RCTs of 72,740 patients and 90 treatment arms, reporting 11 traits and 11 outcomes. Five patient traits (age, body mass index, FEV1, smoking history, asthma control) and five outcomes (exacerbation rate, lung function, asthma control, adherence, time to first exacerbation) were deemed feasible for inclusion in meta-analyses due to sufficient comparable reporting. Subgroups of clinical outcomes stratified by levels of patient traits were reported in 16 RCTs.

CONCLUSION

A systematic review of studies of regular ICS dosing with SABA or ICS/formoterol-containing treatment strategies in asthma identified consistent reporting of five traits and outcomes, allowing exploration of associations with treatment response. Conversely, many other traits and outcomes, although being potentially relevant, were inconsistently reported and limited subgroup reporting meant analyses of treatment response for subgroups of traits was not possible. We recommend more consistent measurement and reporting of clinically relevant patient traits and outcomes in respiratory RCTs.

BDP/FF NEXThaler to Improve Asthma Control Status in the Real World: The NEWTON Study

In this article, we discuss the importance of real-world data in the treatment of patients with asthma and specifically the role of maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) with beclometasone dipropionate (BDP)/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) delivered through a dry-powder inhaler (DPI) that contains an extrafine formulation. We also present the design of the NEWTON study. This multinational, multicenter, prospective, observational study will evaluate the real-world use of extrafine BDP/FF via a DPI as maintenance therapy and MART in patients with moderate to severe asthma. The study's primary outcome will be the proportion of patients improving their asthma control. Digitally collected patient-reported outcomes, such as the 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire, the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level, and the Test of the Adherence to Inhalers, will be used to assess the patient's asthma control, quality of life, and treatment adherence. Moreover, a new patient-reported outcome, the "Speed of change in health feeling" questionnaire, will be validated in a subgroup of patients. Overall, the results of this study will provide a real-life assessment of patients who perceived clinical benefits in a large cohort of asthmatics in Europe treated as per current clinical practice.

GEMA 5.3. Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma

The Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma, better known by its acronym in Spanish GEMA, has been available for more than 20 years. Twenty-one scientific societies or related groups both from Spain and internationally have participated in the preparation and development of the updated edition of GEMA, which in fact has been currently positioned as the reference guide on asthma in the Spanish language worldwide. Its objective is to prevent and improve the clinical situation of people with asthma by increasing the knowledge of healthcare professionals involved in their care. Its purpose is to convert scientific evidence into simple and easy-to-follow practical recommendations. Therefore, it is not a monograph that brings together all the scientific knowledge about the disease, but rather a brief document with the essentials, designed to be applied quickly in routine clinical practice. The guidelines are necessarily multidisciplinary, developed to be useful and an indispensable tool for physicians of different specialties, as well as nurses and pharmacists. Probably the most outstanding aspects of the guide are the recommendations to: establish the diagnosis of asthma using a sequential algorithm based on objective diagnostic tests; the follow-up of patients, preferably based on the strategy of achieving and maintaining control of the disease; treatment according to the level of severity of asthma, using six steps from least to greatest need of pharmaceutical drugs, and the treatment algorithm for the indication of biologics in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma based on phenotypes. And now, in addition to that, there is a novelty for easy use and follow-up through a computer application based on the chatbot-type conversational artificial intelligence (ia-GEMA).

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.]

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

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.

Management of Chronic Asthma in Adults

Asthma is characterized by chronic inflammation and respiratory symptoms such as wheezing and coughing. In the United States, it affects 25 million people annually. Chronic smokers, poor adherence to medications, incorrect use of inhalers, and overall poor asthma control are known risk factors that lead to poorly controlled chronic asthmatics. Although asthma is traditionally categorized by severity, treatment by primary care providers is guided by the Global Initiative for Asthma or the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. As more research is available, shared decision-making between health care providers and patients will lead to improved outcomes in managing chronic asthma.

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.

Combined analysis of five non-interventional studies of the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of the extrafine fixed dose beclomethasone/formoterol combination in the treatment of asthma in Austria

OBJECTIVE

The real-world effectiveness and tolerability of an extrafine fixed dose beclomethasone/formoterol (BDP/FF) treatment of patients with partially or non-controlled asthma was evaluated in five non-interventional studies (NISs) from Austria.

METHODS

Asthma patients enrolled in these five NISs were treated with beclomethasone/formoterol (Foster® or Foster® Nexthaler®) as maintenance and reliever over 12 weeks. Asthma control, lung function and symptom scores were assessed at baseline, after 4-8 weeks and at the end of the investigations in week 12. In addition, tolerability and handling of the devices were evaluated by questionnaires.

RESULTS

The combined analysis included 891 patients (53% female, aged 49.3 years) demonstrating significant improvements in asthma control, lung function parameters (PEF, FEV₁ and FVC) and symptom scores (reduction of breathlessness, wheezing, chest tightness and cough). These changes were already detectable after 4-8 weeks. The treatment was effective irrespective of smoking status, exercise, or previous medication. Tolerability of the therapy with extrafine BDP/FF was rated as "very good" or "good" in 98% of the patients. 95% of the patients intended to continue the treatment, and nearly all (99%) rated the handling of the device as "very good" or "good". No serious adverse reactions were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This combined analysis of five non-interventional studies confirms the effectiveness and tolerability of the extrafine fixed-dose BDP/FF combination (Foster® and Foster® Nexthaler®) in a heterogenous patient population suffering from partially or non-controlled asthma. Therapy was associated with a high patient satisfaction and the absence of serious adverse reactions.

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.

Symptom versus exacerbation control: an evolution in GINA guidelines?

The article traces the concept of asthma control within GINA guidelines over the past 25 years. In the first 15 years after 1995, the main objective of asthma management was to obtain the control of all clinical and functional characteristics of asthma. A landmark study (GOAL) showed for the first time that a good control of asthma is a reasonable outcome that can be achieved in a large proportion of asthmatics with a regular appropriate treatment. In the following years, more emphasis was placed on the role of exacerbations as critical manifestations of poor asthma control, whose frequency is associated with excessive FEV1 decline and increased risk of death. Accordingly, the 2014 GINA report makes a clear distinction between the control of the day-by-day symptoms and the reduction in the risk of severe exacerbations, stating that both conditions should be obtained. The 2019 update included a significant change in the management of mild asthma, prioritizing the prevention of exacerbations to that of mild symptoms. This view was repeated in the 2021 update, where the prevention of exacerbations, together with an acceptable symptom control with a minimal use of rescue medication, appeared to be the real main goal of asthma management. While a discrepancy between current symptoms and exacerbations may be present in mild asthma, a significant relationship between these two features is observed in moderate-severe asthma: a persistent poor symptom control is a major risk factor for exacerbations, whereas achieving symptom control through regular treatment is associated with a reduction in exacerbation rate. Thus, the opinion that frequent symptoms are not important in the absence of acute exacerbations should be discouraged, whereas education of patients to a good symptom perception and to improve adherence to regular treatment should be implemented. Furthermore, the persistence of risk factors, such as increased airway inflammation, even in a patient with minor daily symptoms, should be considered for optimizing treatment.

It is time to end our love affair with short-acting β2-agonists in asthma

In this issue of ERJOR, Noorduynet al. add data to the growing literature showing that SABA overuse in asthma is both common and associated with severe exacerbations. It is time to take note and act to tackle this global issue. https://bit.ly/3BfwhfS.

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".

Retrospective observational study of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease prevalence and associated healthcare resource utilization in a large, integrated healthcare system

Limited data exist on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management—major drivers of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in the USA. We describe prevalence and exacerbation rates, therapeutic interventions, and HCRU for asthma and/or COPD within a large, integrated healthcare system. Patients with asthma, COPD, and asthma + COPD were identified from retrospective electronic health record data (2016–2018) of >1.7 million patients. Descriptive analysis of disease prevalence and exacerbation frequencies, pharmacotherapies, and HCRU was performed. Time-to-event analysis of time to first exacerbation was performed in patients with asthma and/or COPD. Exacerbation rates, pharmacotherapies, and HCRU were examined by exploratory analysis in an outpatient subset. Overall, 149,086 unique patients (8.6%) had encounters for asthma, COPD, or asthma + COPD. Acute care utilization was high, including emergency department visits (asthma, 52.9%; COPD, 35.1%) and hospitalizations (asthma, 26.7%; COPD, 65.7%). Many patients were prescribed short-acting therapies (asthma, 45.3%; COPD, 40.0%; asthma + COPD, 54.7%). Prescription rates for maintenance therapies were low (17.1%, 20.8%, 31.7%) and annual exacerbation rates were 0.65, 0.80, and 1.33. This analysis showed a substantive prevalence of pulmonary disease, variability between documented prescriptions and pharmacotherapy guidelines, and high HCRU. Appropriate tailoring of pharmacotherapies and management of asthma and COPD over a continuum are opportunities to improve patient care.

Assessment of Symptoms Control, Pulmonary Function and Related Quality of Life in Asthmatic Patients Treated with Extrafine Beclomethasone Dipropionate/Formoterol Fumarate 100/6 μg pMDI: Results of a Multicenter Observational Study in Romania (ALFRESCO Study)

Introduction

Asthma treatment guidelines advocate the use of long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) in addition to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients whose asthma is uncontrolled by ICS alone. This is the first study done in Romania, which collected the real-world data on the effects of Foster^® (extrafine beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate BDP/FF in a pressurized metered-dose inhaler pMDI 100/6 μg formulation) in adult asthmatic population.

Objective

We aimed to assess the asthma symptoms control, pulmonary function and quality of life parameters in a heterogeneous Romanian asthmatic adult outpatient population, treated with extrafine BDP/FF 100/6 μg pMDI.

Methods

This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study involving 30 pulmonologists randomly selected from the Romanian healthcare system, which did not declare any competing interests. Recruitment period was Oct 2018 - Feb 2019, while the patients' observational period was 24 weeks. The study included poorly controlled and uncontrolled adult asthma outpatients treated with non-extrafine formulations medication, for which the treatment indication, according to Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2018, was the use of an ICS-LABA combination. The study collected demographic data, smoking habits, comorbidities, data regarding asthma diagnosis, the evolution of asthma symptoms, spirometry, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7) scoring test, current and concomitant treatment.

Results

Of 302 included patients, 290 completed the study. Pulmonary function parameters assessed during the trial (forced expiratory volume in one second - FEV1 and forced vital capacity - FVC) showed a significant improvement versus baseline (p<0.001). ACQ-7 score decreased significantly from 3.09±0.83 (visit 1) to 1.56±0.89 (visit 2) and to 1.09±0.81 (visit 3) (p<0.001). At the end of the study, 127 (43.79%) patients were well controlled (ACQ-7 score < 0.75).

Conclusion

This observational study demonstrates the effectiveness and safety of extrafine fixed combination of BDP/FF (100/6 μg) pMDI in Romanian adult asthma patients uncontrolled with non-extrafine medication in a real-world setting, leading to clinically and statistically improvements in asthma control and pulmonary function.

Understanding the Updates in the Asthma Guidelines

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

Single inhaler triple therapy (SITT) in asthma: Systematic review and practice implications

A significant number of patients with asthma remain uncontrolled despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2 adrenergic bronchodilators (LABA). The addition of long-acting antimuscarinic agents (LAMA) can improve the management of asthma in these patients. Recently, three novel triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) formulations in a single-inhaler device (SITT) have been investigated in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite ICS/LABA treatment. Here, we review systematically the evidence available to date in relation to SITT in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite ICS-LABA treatment and conclude that SITT is a safe and effective therapeutic alternative in these patients. We also discuss how to position this new therapeutic alternative in their practical clinical management as well as the opportunities and challenges that it may generate for patients, physicians, and payers.

Evaluation of Budesonide-Formoterol for Maintenance and Reliever Therapy Among Patients With Poorly Controlled Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) recommends 2 alternative treatments for patients receiving treatment at steps 3 to 5: single inhaler combination inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol as both maintenance and reliever (SMART) or inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist as maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist as reliever.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether switching to SMART is associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever among patients with poorly controlled asthma.

DATA SOURCES

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the literature, internal study databases at AstraZeneca and the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, and references from a previous systematic review and meta-analysis on SMART were searched to identify randomized clinical trials published from January 1990 to February 2018, that compared budesonide-formoterol by SMART with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials of at least 24 weeks' duration were included if they reported baseline data on GINA treatment step, asthma control status, and efficacy measures of severe exacerbations. Included patients were adults and adolescents with asthma and baseline Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item version scores of 1.5 or higher.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Patient-level data were identified by independent extraction, and analyses were performed using a fixed-effect model. Data analysis was performed from August 2018 to November 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time to first severe asthma exacerbation associated with each treatment, analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 4863 patients were included (3034 [62.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 39.8 [16.3] years). Switching patients with uncontrolled asthma at GINA step 3 (n = 1950) to SMART at either step 3 or 4 was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation, with a 29% reduced risk compared with stepping up to step 4 inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97). For patients with uncontrolled asthma at step 3 and step 4 (n = 2913), switching to SMART was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation and a 30% reduced risk compared with remaining at the same treatment step (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, for patients with poorly controlled asthma, SMART was associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever. These findings suggest that if an adult or adolescent receiving treatment at GINA step 3 or 4 has poorly controlled asthma, it is preferable to switch to the SMART regimen rather than to step up or continue the GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever therapy.

How to Choose the Right Inhaler Using a Patient-Centric Approach?

There are many different inhaler devices and medications on the market for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, with over 230 drug-delivery system combinations available. However, despite the abundance of effective treatment options, the achieved disease control in clinical practice often remains unsatisfactory. In this context, a key determining factor is the match or mismatch of an inhalation device with the characteristics or needs of an individual patient. Indeed, to date, no ideal device exists that fits all patients, and a personalized approach needs to be considered. Several useful choice-guiding algorithms have been developed in the recent years to improve inhaler–patient matching, but a comprehensive tool that translates the multifactorial complexity of inhalation therapy into a user-friendly algorithm is still lacking. To address this, a multidisciplinary expert panel has developed an evidence-based practical treatment tool that allows a straightforward way of choosing the right inhaler for each patient.

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

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

SMART - is it practical in the United States?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The 2020 focused updates to the asthma management guidelines by the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group advocate for inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol combinations as single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) for patients with persistent asthma. We review the rationale, the evidence supporting SMART use in asthma, and barriers limiting its wide adoption in the United States.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing body of evidence supports the use of SMART over the conventional use of controller medicaments with an as-needed short-acting β2 agonist for rescue therapy for the purpose of reducing the risk of asthma exacerbation and maintaining asthma control in adolescents and adults with persistent disease. Lack of US Food and Drug Administration approval, inconsistent insurance coverage, and limited options of ICS-formoterol combination available for use as SMART represent obstacles to wider integration of SMART in clinical practice.

SUMMARY

SMART represents a paradigm shift in asthma management. By identifying and addressing the current and anticipated barriers to implementing SMART, its adoption by providers is likely to increase in the United States.

Efficacy and safety of as-needed albuterol/budesonide versus albuterol in adults and children aged ≥4 years with moderate-to-severe asthma: rationale and design of the randomised, double-blind, active-controlled MANDALA study

Introduction

Uncontrolled asthma is associated with substantial morbidity. While fast-acting bronchodilators provide quick relief from asthma symptoms, their use as rescue fails to address the underlying inflammation. Combining a short-acting beta₂-agonist, such as albuterol (salbutamol), with an inhaled corticosteroid, such as budesonide, in a single inhaler as rescue therapy could help control both bronchoconstriction and inflammation, and reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations.

Methods and analysis

The Phase 3 MANDALA study was designed to determine the efficacy of albuterol in combination with budesonide (albuterol/budesonide 180/160 µg or 180/80 µg, two actuations of 90/80 µg or 90/40 µg, respectively) versus albuterol (180 µg, two actuations of 90 µg) as rescue therapy in adult, adolescent and paediatric patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. This event-driven study enrolled symptomatic patients (3000 adults/adolescents and 100 children aged 4–11 years) who experienced ≥1 severe asthma exacerbation in the previous year and were receiving maintenance therapy for ≥3 months prior to study entry. The primary efficacy endpoint was time-to-first severe asthma exacerbation.

Ethics and dissemination

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki, and that are consistent with International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use and Good Clinical Practice and the applicable regulatory requirements.

Trial registration

NCT03769090.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Practical Guide to Implementing SMART in asthma management

The use of a single inhaler containing the combination of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and formoterol, a specific long-acting bronchodilator, for both maintenance and quick relief therapy (single maintenance and reliever therapy [SMART or MART]) is recommended by both the Global Initiative for Asthma and the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee in steps 3 and 4 of asthma management. This article provides practical advice about implementing SMART in clinical practice based on evidence and clinical experience. Fundamental to SMART is that ICS-formoterol provides quick relief of asthma symptoms similar to that of short-acting β₂-agonists such as albuterol, while reducing the risk for severe asthma exacerbations and at an overall lower ICS exposure. Most SMART clinical trials were in adults and adolescents (aged ≥12 years), using budesonide-formoterol 160/4.5 μg (delivered dose), one inhalation once or twice daily (step 3) and two inhalations twice daily (step 4). For both steps 3 and 4, patients take additional inhalations of budesonide-formoterol 160/4.5 μg, one inhalation whenever needed for symptom relief, up to a maximum for adults and adolescents of 12 total inhalations in any single day (delivering 54 μg formoterol). The efficacy and safety of SMART with budesonide-formoterol and beclometasone-formoterol have been confirmed, but other ICS-long-acting bronchodilator combinations have not been studied. The SMART regimen should be introduced with a careful explanation of its role in self-management, preferably with a customized written asthma action plan. The cost to patients and the availability of SMART treatment will depend on the prescribed dose and national or local payer agreements.

Manifesto on the overuse of SABA in the management of asthma: new approaches and new strategies

The risks of overusing short-acting β₂-agonists (SABA), including an increase in asthma-related deaths, are many and well known. The Global Initiative on Asthma (GINA) 2019 and 2020 updates recommend as-needed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol as the preferred rescue medication in mild asthma as monotherapy and also in moderate to severe asthma when the maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) strategy is used. Using SABA for symptom relief, however, was the standard of treatment for many years, and consequently this practice persists, particularly in patients not taking ICS regularly. Here, we examine the rationale for this shift from a long-standing recommendation for as-needed SABA treatment to the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol and consider clinical evidence on strategies for asthma treatment and patient management.

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

A large proportion of asthmatic patients are treated with protocols resulting from data obtained by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for which they would not have been eligible. Therefore, the aim of this study was to undertake a quantitative synthesis on real-world evidence comparing single inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) and maintenance ICS/long-acting β₂-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) + as-needed short-acting β₂-adrenoceptor agonist (SABA). A network meta-analysis of real-world studies was performed to compare SMART with ICS/LABA + as-needed SABA therapies in asthmatic patients. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve analysis was used to rank efficacy. The posterior probability distribution was reported as 95% credible interval (95%CrI). Data of 11,360 asthmatic patients were extracted from 6 studies. SMART including an ICS at medium-dose (MD) was more effective than MD ICS/LABA FDC + as-needed SABA (RR 0.54 95%CrI 0.42-0.69; P < 0.001) and low-dose (LD) SMART (RR 0.82 95%CrI 0.70-0.95; P < 0.05) against severe asthma exacerbation. MD SMART improved the Asthma Control Questionnaire score more than MD ICS/LABA FDC + as-needed SABA (delta effect -0.33 95%CrI -0.62 to -0.01; P < 0.05). The efficacy rank was: MD SMART > LD SMART > ICS + LABA free combination + as-needed SABA > ICS/LABA FDC + as-needed SABA > MD ICS/LABA FDC + as-needed SABA. The findings of this network meta-analysis of real-world evidence, and concordance with the effect estimates resulting from previous meta-analyses of RCTs, suggest that SMART may represent the preferred therapeutic option to reduce the risk of severe exacerbation in adults with moderate to severe asthma.

Adherence, quality of life, and satisfaction with conventional fix combined therapy versus maintenance and reliever therapy in patients with asthma after inhaler training

Objective: Treatment adherence, asthma control, inhaler satisfaction, and quality of life of patients with asthma were investigated to examine whether there were any differences between conventional fixed combined therapy and maintenance and reliever therapy after inhaler education.Methods: Cross-sectional observational follow-up of 120 patients with asthma receiving third- and fourth-step treatment was completed at zero, three, and six months. Fifty-eight patients received long-acting beta-agonists or inhaler corticosteroids (ICS) as maintenance therapy and short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) as reliever therapy (CONV) with Diskus and Ellipta devices. Sixty-two patients received ICS/formoterol as maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) with metered-dose inhaler and Turbuhaler devices. The asthma control test (ACT), feeling of satisfaction with the inhaler (FSI-10) questionnaire, Morisky Green Levine (MGL) scale, and quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) were evaluated at each visit.Results: Significant improvement was observed in the ACT, AQLQ, FSI-10, MGL scales, and inhaler technique in both groups over time (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the MGL scale between the groups at all visits. Nonadherence was highest in the Diskus device group (55%) and lowest in the Ellipta device group at the first visit (25%). While 36% of the patients had low adherence at the first visit, this decreased to 12% by the last visit. A significant correlation was found between ACT and MGL at all visits (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Asthma control, adherence, inhaler satisfaction, and quality of life improved equally with regular follow-up and standard inhaler education in the CONV and MART groups.

How I do it. Work-up of severe asthma

CASE EXAMPLE

A 56-year-old gentleman has difficult to control asthma and a history of four exacerbations in the prior 12 months despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and additional controller therapies. Is he suitable for more advanced therapeutic options?

SCOPE OF REVIEW

We herein review the clinical assessment of a patient with suspected severe asthma, discuss factors contributing to poor asthma control and how biomarkers assist in disease investigation and stratification.

HOW I DO IT

The key components of our multidisciplinary approach are to confirm an asthma diagnosis and adherence to treatment, to assess any contributing comorbidities or confounding factors, and to stratify what type of asthma our patient has. The combination of spirometry and repeated measures of key biomarkers of type-2 airway inflammation - the blood eosinophil count and fractional exhaled nitric oxide - identifies whether poor disease control is driven by uncontrolled, ICS-resistant type-2 airway inflammation or ongoing airflow obstruction. A failure to elicit evidence of either suggests an alternative driver for the patient's symptoms including chronic airway infection and non-asthma causes. Each phenotype represents a treatable trait that requires a specific targeted approach. Critically, steroids can cause harm and their use should be guided by objective evidence of inflammation rather than symptoms alone.

CASE CONCLUSION

After assessment of treatment adherence and exclusion of relevant comorbidities, the patient was found to have severe asthma with ICS-resistant type-2 airway inflammation. We will consider additional treatment options at our next appointment (Part 2/2 of this How I Do It series).

Combination fixed-dose beta agonist and steroid inhaler as required for adults or children with mild asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma affects 350 million people worldwide including 45% to 70% with mild disease. Treatment is mainly with inhalers containing beta₂-agonists, typically taken as required to relieve bronchospasm, and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as regular preventive therapy. Poor adherence to regular therapy is common and increases the risk of exacerbations, morbidity and mortality. Fixed-dose combination inhalers containing both a steroid and a fast-acting beta₂-agonist (FABA) in the same device simplify inhalers regimens and ensure symptomatic relief is accompanied by preventative therapy. Their use is established in moderate asthma, but they may also have potential utility in mild asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of single combined (fast-onset beta₂-agonist plus an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)) inhaler only used as needed in people with mild asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal. We contacted trial authors for further information and requested details regarding the possibility of unpublished trials. The most recent search was conducted on 19 March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cross-over trials with at least one week washout period. We included studies of a single fixed-dose FABA/ICS inhaler used as required compared with no treatment, placebo, short-acting beta agonist (SABA) as required, regular ICS with SABA as required, regular fixed-dose combination ICS/long-acting beta agonist (LABA), or regular fixed-dose combination ICS/FABA with as required ICS/FABA. We planned to include cluster-randomised trials if the data had been or could be adjusted for clustering. We excluded trials shorter than 12 weeks. We included full texts, abstracts and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (OR) or rate ratios (RR) and continuous data as mean difference (MD). We reported 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures of meta-analysis. We applied the GRADE approach to summarise results and to assess the overall certainty of evidence. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, hospital admissions/emergency department or urgent care visits for asthma, and measures of asthma control.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies of which five contributed results to the meta-analyses. All five used budesonide 200 μg and formoterol 6 μg in a dry powder formulation as the combination inhaler. Comparator fast-acting bronchodilators included terbutaline and formoterol. Two studies included children aged 12+ and adults; two studies were open-label. A total of 9657 participants were included, with a mean age of 36 to 43 years. 2.3% to 11% were current smokers. FABA / ICS as required versus FABA as required Compared with as-required FABA alone, as-required FABA/ICS reduced exacerbations requiring systemic steroids (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.60, 2 RCTs, 2997 participants, high-certainty evidence), equivalent to 109 people out of 1000 in the FABA alone group experiencing an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids, compared to 52 (95% CI 40 to 68) out of 1000 in the FABA/ICS as-required group. FABA/ICS as required may also reduce the odds of an asthma-related hospital admission or emergency department or urgent care visit (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.60, 2 RCTs, 2997 participants, low-certainty evidence). Compared with as-required FABA alone, any changes in asthma control or spirometry, though favouring as-required FABA/ICS, were small and less than the minimal clinically-important differences. We did not find evidence of differences in asthma-associated quality of life or mortality. For other secondary outcomes FABA/ICS as required was associated with reductions in fractional exhaled nitric oxide, probably reduces the odds of an adverse event (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95, 2 RCTs, 3002 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and may reduce total systemic steroid dose (MD -9.90, 95% CI -19.38 to -0.42, 1 RCT, 443 participants, low-certainty evidence), and with an increase in the daily inhaled steroid dose (MD 77 μg beclomethasone equiv./day, 95% CI 69 to 84, 2 RCTs, 2554 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). FABA/ICS as required versus regular ICS plus FABA as required There may be little or no difference in the number of people with asthma exacerbations requiring systemic steroid with FABA/ICS as required compared with regular ICS (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.07, 4 RCTs, 8065 participants, low-certainty evidence), equivalent to 81 people out of 1000 in the regular ICS plus FABA group experiencing an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids, compared to 65 (95% CI 49 to 86) out of 1000 FABA/ICS as required group. The odds of an asthma-related hospital admission or emergency department or urgent care visit may be reduced in those taking FABA/ICS as required (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91, 4 RCTs, 8065 participants, low-certainty evidence). Compared with regular ICS, any changes in asthma control, spirometry, peak flow rates (PFR), or asthma-associated quality of life, though favouring regular ICS, were small and less than the minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Adverse events, serious adverse events, total systemic corticosteroid dose and mortality were similar between groups, although deaths were rare, so confidence intervals for this analysis were wide. We found moderate-certainty evidence from four trials involving 7180 participants that FABA/ICS as required was likely associated with less average daily exposure to inhaled corticosteroids than those on regular ICS (MD -154.51 μg/day, 95% CI -207.94 to -101.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found FABA/ICS as required is clinically effective in adults and adolescents with mild asthma. Their use instead of FABA as required alone reduced exacerbations, hospital admissions or unscheduled healthcare visits and exposure to systemic corticosteroids and probably reduces adverse events. FABA/ICS as required is as effective as regular ICS and reduced asthma-related hospital admissions or unscheduled healthcare visits, and average exposure to ICS, and is unlikely to be associated with an increase in adverse events. Further research is needed to explore use of FABA/ICS as required in children under 12 years of age, use of other FABA/ICS preparations, and long-term outcomes beyond 52 weeks.

New Perspectives in the Management of Mild to Moderate Asthma in Children

Mild to moderate asthma makes up the greatest proportion of all asthma severities in childhood. Children who are treated with steps 1–2 are defined as having mild asthma and step 3 as having moderate asthma, according to the guidelines. Although many studies focused on the management of severe asthma over the last decade, there have also been important changes and improvements in the management of mild to moderate asthma. In this article, new perspectives in the management of children with mild to moderate asthma will be reviewed and compared according to the two major guidelines.

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

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

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

IMPORTANCE

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

OBJECTIVE

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

EVIDENCE REVIEW

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

FINDINGS

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

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

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

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

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

Multidisciplinary consensus on inhaled therapy in asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is managed by health professionals from different specialties. We aim to reach a consensus on the optimal use of inhaled therapy and the initial steps of asthma treatment, taking into account the opinions of the involved specialists.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was used. A scientific committee provided 52 controversial statements, which were submitted to primary care physicians, allergists, and pulmonologists. Discrepancies among specialties were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 209 specialists completed the questionnaire (20.2 ± 9.3 years of asthma management experience). A consensus was reached on 37 statements (71.1%), discrepancies among specialties were found in 14. The most recommended maintenance treatment for mild persistent asthma in adults/adolescents was low-dose-inhaled corticosteroids daily. MART (Maintenance and Reliever Therapy) was recommended as salvage treatment for moderate persistent asthma. Panelists agreed on the most frequent critical errors with pressurized Metered-Dose Inhalers or Dry-Powder Inhalers, and considered that Breath-Actuated Inhalers are a suitable option for all patients with the ability to inhale voluntarily.

CONCLUSIONS

The experts endorse the main guidelines recommendations; however, do not fully agree on recent GINA recommendations about the treatment of the initial steps of the disease. The experts value positively the differential characteristics of BAI over other devices.