Once-daily, single-inhaler mometasone-indacaterol-glycopyrronium versus mometasone-indacaterol or twice-daily fluticasone-salmeterol in patients with inadequately controlled asthma (IRIDIUM): a randomised, double-blind, controlled phase 3 study

Characterization of Moderate and Severe Asthma Exacerbations in the CAPTAIN Study

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist on the relative impact of moderate and severe exacerbations on asthma control and impairment.

OBJECTIVE

To explore data from the CAPTAIN trial to evaluate the relationship between first moderate or severe exacerbation and changes in lung function, symptoms, physical activity limitation scores, and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) usage to determine the clinical relevance of moderate events.

METHODS

CAPTAIN was a phase IIIA 24- to 52-week, multicenter, international, randomized controlled trial evaluating efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus FF/VI in patients with uncontrolled asthma on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist. Outcomes reported include first postrandomization exacerbation event by severity (wk 1-52), frequency and duration of moderate and severe exacerbations, and time course of changes over ± 14-day peri-exacerbation period for lung function, symptoms, limitations, and SABA use.

RESULTS

Of the intent-to-treat population (n = 2,436), 550 patients (23%) continued to 52 weeks. There were 529 moderate and 546 severe exacerbations. Lung function changes were similar, but symptom, physical activity limitation scores, and SABA use were higher, for severe versus moderate exacerbations. Lung function decline preceded increases in symptom, physical activity limitation scores, and SABA use, irrespective of exacerbation severity. Lung function variables, limitation scores, and SABA use returned to pre-exacerbation baseline after approximately 8 to 12 days for both exacerbation severities.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas severe events were associated with greater impact on symptoms, physical activity limitations, and SABA use, onset and time to resolution were generally similar for moderate and severe events. Both exacerbation severities represent clinically important deteriorations comprising clinical and functional changes.

Therapeutic effect of long-acting muscarinic antagonist for treating uncontrolled asthma assessed using impulse oscillometry

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the incorporation of LAMAs into asthma therapy has been expected to enhance symptom control. However, a significant number of patients with asthma continue to experience poorly managed symptoms. There have been limited investigations on LAMA-induced airway alterations in asthma treatment employing IOS. In this study, we administered a LAMA to patients with poorly controlled asthma, evaluated clinical responses and respiratory function, and investigated airway changes facilitated by LAMA treatments using the IOS.

METHODS

Of a total of 1282 consecutive patients with asthma, 118 exhibited uncontrolled symptoms. Among them, 42 switched their treatment to high-dose fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) (ICS/LABA/LAMA). The patients were then assessed using AHQ-33 or LCQ and ACT. Spirometry parameters (such as FEV1 or MMEF) and IOS parameters (such as R20 or AX) were measured and compared before and after exacerbations and the addition of LAMA.

RESULTS

Of the 42 patients, 17 who switched to FF/UMEC/VI caused by dyspnea exhibited decreased pulmonary function between period 1 and baseline, followed by an increase in pulmonary function between baseline and period 2. Significant differences were observed in IOS parameters such as R20, R5-R20, Fres, or AX between period 1 and baseline as well as between baseline and period 2. Among the patients who switched to inhaler due to cough, 25 were classified as responders (n = 17) and nonresponders (n = 8) based on treatment outcomes. Among nonresponders, there were no significant differences in spirometry parameters such as FEV1 or PEF and IOS parameters such as R20 or AX between period 1 and baseline. However, among responders, significant differences were observed in all IOS parameters, though not in most spirometry parameters, between period 1 and baseline. Furthermore, significant differences were noted between baseline and period 2 in terms of FEV1, %MMEF, %PEF, and all IOS parameters.

CONCLUSION

ICS/LABA/LAMA demonstrates superiority over ICS/LABA in improving symptoms and lung function, which is primarily attributed to the addition of LAMA. Additionally, IOS revealed the effectiveness of LAMA across all airway segments, particularly in the periphery. Hence, LAMA can be effective against various asthma phenotypes characterized by airway inflammation, even in real-world cases.

Real-world characteristics of patients with asthma initiating fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol single-inhaler triple therapy in Japan

BACKGROUND

Real-world data assessing characteristics of patients with asthma initiating inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy in Japan are limited.

METHODS

Descriptive, observational study of patients with asthma aged ≥15 years newly initiating single- or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (SITT: fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI], SITT: indacaterol/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate [IND/GLY/MF] or MITT) or ICS/LABA using JMDC/Medical Data Vision (MDV) health insurance databases from February 2021-February 2022 (first prescription date: index date). Patients were assigned to three non-mutually exclusive cohorts: A) new FF/UMEC/VI initiators; B) new FF/UMEC/VI, IND/GLY/MF, or MITT initiators; C) new FF/UMEC/VI, IND/GLY/MF, MITT or ICS/LABA initiators as initial maintenance therapy (IMT). Patient characteristics were assessed descriptively for 12-months pre-treatment initiation (baseline period).

RESULTS

Cohort A: among new FF/UMEC/VI initiators, 12.8% and 0.1% (JMDC) and 21.7% and 0.9% (MDV) of patients had ≥1 moderate and severe exacerbation; 52.0% (JMDC) and 79.2% (MDV) had ICS/LABA use. Cohort B: most patients initiated FF/UMEC/VI and IND/GLY/MF over MITT (JMDC: 91.3% vs 8.7%; MDV: 67.8% vs 32.2%), with fewer exacerbations and lower rescue medication use. Cohort C: a greater proportion of FF/UMEC/VI initiators as IMT experienced a moderate exacerbation at index versus ICS/LABA initiators as IMT (JMDC: 17.8% vs 10.7%; MDV: 8.0% vs 5.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups; SITT initiators had fewer exacerbations and lower rescue medication use than MITT initiators, represented by the greater proportion of IMT among SITT versus MITT initiators. Physicians may have prescribed triple over dual therapy as IMT in response to an exacerbation.

Differences in the effectiveness of single, dual, and triple inhaled corticosteroid therapy for reducing future risk of severe asthma exacerbation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Importance

The effectiveness of different combinations of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapies in reducing severe exacerbations of adult asthma remains unclear.

Objective

This network meta-analysis (NMA) extensively evaluated the treatment effects of single ICS; dual ICS i.e., ICS/long-acting β2-adrenergic agonists (LABA); ICS/LABA as single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART); and triple ICS, i.e., ICS/LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in preventing severe asthma exacerbations.

Data sources

A systematic search of English databases, including PubMed and Web of Science, was conducted until December 31, 2022, using PRISMA-NMA.

Study selection

Using the PICOS criteria, the questions for this study were carefully selected so that the correct keywords could be identified.

Data extraction and synthesis

A pairwise meta-analysis was used to select trials based on the criteria for minimizing heterogeneity (I2). Subsequently, the "BUGSnet" package of R software was used to perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Main outcome measures

The main outcome measures were risk rate and annualized rate ratio of severe asthma exacerbations.

Results

This review included 56 randomized control trials (RCTs; n = 78,171 patients). As the pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated that the annualized rate ratio of severe asthma exacerbation had moderate heterogeneity, we analyzed the risk rate of severe asthma exacerbation using a network meta-analysis. In terms of direct/indirect comparisons with non-ICS, single ICS, dual ICS, SMART, and triple ICS reduced severe asthma exacerbations by 34 %, 47 %, 58 %, and 57 %, respectively. SMART and triple ICS showed high effectiveness in reducing severe exacerbations.

Conclusion

AND RELEVANCE: SMART and triple ICS were ranked higher in effectiveness in reducing severe asthma exacerbations in comparison with other therapies, indicating that these are the most effective treatments for reducing the future risk of severe asthma exacerbations.

Expert opinion on diagnosis and management of Severe Asthma in low and middle income countries (LMIC) with focus on India

OBJECTIVE

In this document, 9 Indian experts have evaluated the factors specific to LMICs when it came to Severe Asthma (SA) diagnosis, evaluation, biologic selection, non-biologic treatment options, and follow-up.

DATA SOURCES

A search was performed using 50 keywords, focusing on the Indian/LMICs perspective, in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The key areas of the search were focused on diagnosis, phenoendotyping, non-biological therapies, selecting a biologic, assessment of treatment response, and management of exacerbation.

STUDY SELECTIONS

The initial search revealed 1826 articles, from these case reports, observational studies, cohort studies, non-English language papers, etc., were excluded and we short-listed 20 articles for each area. Five relevant articles were selected by the experts for review.

RESULTS

In LMICs, SA patients may be referred to the specialist for evaluation a little late for Phenoendotyping of SA. While biologic therapy is now a standard of care, pulmonologists in LMICs may not have access to all the investigations to phenoendotype SA patients like fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), skin prick test (SPT), etc., but phenotyping of SA patients can also be done with simple blood investigations, eosinophil count and serum immunoglobulin E (IgE). Choosing a biologic in the overlapping phenotype of SA and ACO patients is also a challenge in the LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the limitations of LMIC, it is important to select the right patient and explain the potential benefits of biological therapy. Non-biologic add-on therapies can be attempted in a resource-limited setting where biological therapy is not available/feasible for patients.

The evidence base for ICS/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in severe asthma

We agree with P.J. McDowell and co-workers that the patients whose data are recorded in the UK Severe Asthma Registry (UKSAR) have, on average, more severe asthma than participants in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) [1, 2]. However, poor generalisability from RCTs to severe asthma registries is also the case for RCTs of high dose ICS/long-acting β-agonist (LABA) plus short-acting β-agonist (SABA) reliever therapy. There are similar differences in average baseline severity between patients in the UKSAR database and participants in RCTs of high dose versus medium dose ICS/LABA plus SABA therapy, as with those in the MART studies (table 1) [3–13].

ICS/formoterol MART is an evidence-based alternative to high dose ICS/LABA in asthma patients at high risk of severe exacerbations; limited generalisability of RCTs to severe asthma registries applies similarly to high dose ICS/LABA therapy as to MART https://bit.ly/4aVFrNH

Asthma management with triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination to reduce the risk of exacerbation: an umbrella review compliant with the PRIOR statement

INTRODUCTION

According to Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) should be considered as add-on therapy in patients with asthma that remains uncontrolled, despite treatment with medium-dose (MD) or high-dose (HD) inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations. In patients ≥ 18 years, LAMA may be added in triple combination with an ICS and a LABA. To date, the precise efficacy of triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination remains uncertain concerning the impact on exacerbation risk in patients with uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, an umbrella review was performed to systematically summarize available data on the effect of triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination on the risk of asthma exacerbation.

METHODS

An umbrella review has been performed according to the PRIOR statement.

RESULTS

The overall results obtained from 5 systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest that triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination reduces the risk of asthma exacerbation. HD-ICS showed a greater effect particularly in reducing severe asthma exacerbation, especially in patients with evidence of type 2 inflammation biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this umbrella review suggest an optimization of ICS dose in triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination, based on the severity of exacerbation and type 2 biomarkers expression.

Bronchial Cryo-Denervation for Severe Asthma: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Targeting the parasympathetic nervous system innervating the airway with pharmacologic products has been proved to improve the clinical outcomes of severe asthma. Bronchial cryo-denervation (BCD) is a novel non-pharmacologic treatment for severe asthma using an endobronchial cryo-balloon administered via bronchoscopy to denervate parasympathetic pulmonary nerves. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that BCD significantly disrupted vagal innervation in the lung.

METHODS

A total of 15 patients with severe asthma were enrolled in this prospective, single-center pilot study. Patients underwent bifurcated BCD treatment at a 30-day interval after baseline assessment. Follow-up through 12 months included assessment of adverse events, technical feasibility, and changes in pulmonary function; asthma control questionnaire-7 (ACQ-7); and asthma control test (ACT).

RESULTS

BCD was performed on all 15 severe asthma patients, with technical feasibility of 96.7%. There were no device-related and 2 procedure-related serious adverse events through 12 months, which resolved without sequelae. The most frequent nonserious procedure-related adverse event was increased cough in 60% (9 of 15) patients. Pulmonary function remained unchanged, and significant improvements from baseline ACQ-7 (mean, -1.19, p = 0.0032) and ACT (mean, 3.18, p = 0.0011) scores were observed since the first month's follow-up after a single lung airway treatment, with similar trends till the end of the 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first clinical evidence of the safety, feasibility, and initial efficacy of BCD in patients with severe asthma.

When sequential use of mepolizumab and dupilumab in a severe atopic eosinophilic asthmatic questions the role of eosinophils in mediating the clinical expression of the disease: a case report

BACKGROUND

The advent of biologics has resulted in major progress in the treatment of severe T2 high asthmatics. There are currently several classes of biologics approved for severe asthma including anti-immunoglobulin E, anti-interleukin-5/interleukin 5R, anti-interleukin 4/interleukin 13R, and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin.

CASE PRESENTATIONS

Here we report the case of a 55-year-old Caucasian man with severe eosinophilic atopic asthma, who sequentially benefited from a treatment with mepolizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody, followed by treatment with dupilumab, an anti-interleukin-4/interleukin-13R antibody, the switch being justified by a flare-up of dermatitis while on mepolizumab. Overall, the patient has been followed for 72 months, including 42 months on mepolizumab and 30 months on dupilumab. Close monitoring of exacerbations, asthma control, lung function, asthma quality of life, and biomarkers shows that both biologics reduced asthma exacerbation and provided an improvement in asthma control and quality of life, with the patient achieving remission after 30 months on dupilumab. However, the effects of the two biologics on the biomarkers were very different, with mepolizumab controlling eosinophilic inflammation and dupilumab reducing serum immunoglobulin E and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels.

CONCLUSION

The originality of this case resides in the description of clinical status and biomarker evolution after a sequential use of mepolizumab and dupilumab in a severe atopic eosinophilic asthmatic. It shows that mepolizumab reduces exacerbation and improves asthma control by curbing eosinophilic inflammation whereas dupilumab provides asthma remission without controlling airway eosinophilic inflammation.

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

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

Impact of COVID-19 measures on exacerbation rates and healthcare visits in US asthma patients

Objective: To compare exacerbation rates and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in real-world patients in the United States who had moderate-to-severe asthma on medium- or high-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist therapy at different stages before and after the pandemic. Methods: This noninterventional, retrospective study described demographics, exacerbations, HCRU, and medication use in patients from a US-wide healthcare claims database in 4 consecutive years anchored around March 15, 2020 (start date of the first emergency health measures against coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19], or the first lockdown, in the United States, termed "restriction onset" hereafter). Four cohorts of patients potentially eligible for moderate-to-severe asthma clinical trials at the beginning (index) of each of four 1-year periods (March 15, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, respectively) were built. Exacerbations, healthcare visits, and asthma medication use were counted in the 1-year period after the index for each cohort. Results: The prevalence of patients with one or more exacerbation per year decreased by 10.00% in the first year after the restriction onset compared with the year before and attenuated over time to 6.37% in the second year. The proportion of inpatient, emergency department, and physician's office visits remained stable over the time periods evaluated for all patients and those patients who experienced one or more exacerbations. Asthma treatment of patients who experienced one or more exacerbations also remained stable over the 4 years. Conclusion: The effect of COVID-19 public health measures on asthma exacerbation rates might have affected clinical trials being run during this period and should be considered in their analysis. Asthma clinical trials run under pandemic hygiene restrictions should consider lower exacerbation frequency in their study design, while treatment and healthcare visits seem unchanged.

One-day systemic corticosteroid administration for asthma and future "short bursts" risk in real clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

Systemic corticosteroid administration, also called short bursts (SB), is harmful for patients with asthma; however, the actual burden of one-day SB remains unsolved. This study aimed to elucidate the characteristics of patients requiring one-day SB against asthma in clinical practice.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who regularly visited our hospital for asthma treatment between January 2019 and December 2020 were reviewed and followed for one year. SB was defined as ≥3 days of systemic corticosteroid treatment for an exacerbation. One-day SB was defined as one-day of systemic corticosteroid to treat an exacerbation. The one-day SB group included patients who received only one-day SB but no SB during the preceding year. Frequent SB was defined as that occurring ≥2 times/year.

RESULTS

Data on 229 patients were analyzed. Among them, 2.6% (95% confidence interval 1.2-5.6%) were in the one-day SB group. The one-day SB group was female-dominant, obese, non-eosinophilic, and non-atopic. The median one-day SB was 1.5 times/year and almost half of one-day SB were performed by patients themselves. Independent of the low pulmonary function, high blood eosinophil count, and inhaled corticosteroid dose, one-day SB was associated with future frequent SB (adjusted odds ratio = 18.2, 95% confidence interval 1.1-288, P = 0.040, compared to the no SB group).

CONCLUSIONS

Although one-day SB was not frequently experienced, even one-day SB without conventional SB was associated with future frequent SB. It is important to grasp the actual condition of one-day SB and to reinforce the treatment used.

Efficacy of mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with inadequately controlled asthma with respect to baseline eosinophil count: Post hoc analysis of IRIDIUM study

BACKGROUND

Baseline characteristics could potentially guide asthma treatments. We evaluated whether baseline eosinophil levels affect the efficacy of mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium (MF/IND/GLY) in patients with inadequately controlled asthma.

METHOD

In this post hoc analysis of IRIDIUM study, efficacy of high-dose MF/IND/GLY (160/150/50 μg, once-daily [o.d.]) versus high-dose MF/IND (320/150 μg o.d.) and high-dose fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL [500/50 μg, twice-daily [b.i.d.]); and efficacy of pooled MF/IND/GLY (160/150/50 μg and 80/150/50 μg) versus pooled MF/IND (320/150 μg and 160/150 μg) was evaluated in patient subgroups with baseline blood eosinophil count of <300 cells/μL or ≥300 cells/μL.

RESULTS

Overall, 3065 patients were included. At Week 26, high-dose MF/IND/GLY showed improved trough FEV1 versus high-dose MF/IND (Δ78mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ54mL [≥300 cells/μL]) and FLU/SAL (Δ112mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ98mL [≥300 cells/μL]). Similarly, pooled MF/IND/GLY also showed improved trough FEV1 versus pooled MF/IND (Δ75mL [<300 cells/μL]; Δ68mL [≥300 cells/μL]). Over 52 weeks, high-dose MF/IND/GLY reduced the annualized rate of moderate or severe asthma exacerbations by 23% and 10%, severe exacerbations by 31% and 15%, and all exacerbation by 33% and 10% versus high-dose MF/IND for subgroups with <300 cells/μL and ≥300 cells/μL, respectively; and by 33% and 41%, 45% and 42%, 42% and 39% versus FLU/SAL, respectively. Similarly, pooled MF/IND/GLY reduced exacerbations by 22% and 8%, 21% and 7%, 27% and 8%, versus pooled MF/IND, for the respective subgroups.

CONCLUSION

MF/IND/GLY showed improvement in lung function and reduction in asthma exacerbations over MF/IND and FLU/SAL independent of baseline eosinophil levels, indicating that eosinophil levels did not affect the efficacy of MF/IND/GLY in patients with inadequately controlled asthma.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02571777 (IRIDIUM).

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).

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02571777.

Open-inhaler versus single-inhaler triple therapy (long-acting muscarinic antagonist, inhaled corticosteroid, and long-acting β2-agonist) in asthma patients: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence for the use of open-inhaler (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] plus long-acting β2-agonist [LABA] with separate add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) versus single-inhaler triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA combination) and the merits of add-on LAMA to ICS/LABA in patients with uncontrolled asthma.

DATA SOURCES

Original research articles were identified from PubMed using the search term "triple therapy asthma." Information was also retrieved from the ClinicalTrials.gov website.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Articles detailing the use of add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open-inhaler triple therapy), and closed triple therapy compared with ICS plus LABA dual therapy, addressing patient symptoms, exacerbations, and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Open-inhaler triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of hospitalizations and emergency department visits and a decrease in ICS dose, oral corticosteroids use, and antibiotics use. Exacerbations and acute respiratory events were also reduced. Single-inhaler triple therapy showed a greater improvement in lung function, asthma control, and health status and was noninferior to open-inhaler triple therapy for Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores. Single-inhaler triple therapy may also lead to improved therapy adherence.

CONCLUSION

Add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open- or single-inhaler triple therapy) improves the response in patients who remain symptomatic and provides a reasonable alternative to ICS dose escalation in treatment-refractory patients.

Addition of long-acting beta2 agonists or long-acting muscarinic antagonists versus doubling the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma with medium dose ICS: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay treatment for persistent asthma. Escalating treatment is required when asthma is not controlled with ICS therapy alone, which would include, but is not limited to, adding a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or doubling the dose of ICS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of adding a LABA or LAMA to ICS therapy versus doubling the dose of ICS in adolescents and adults whose asthma is not well controlled on medium-dose (MD)-ICS using a network meta-analysis (NMA), and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization ICTRP for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from January 2008 to 19 December 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for studies including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with or were eligible for MD-ICS, comparing it to high-dose (HD)-ICS, ICS/LAMA, or ICS/LABA. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs. Studies were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to a previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome is asthma exacerbations (moderate and severe).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38,276 participants from 35 studies (median duration 24 weeks (range 12 to 78); mean age 44.1; 38% male; 69% white; mean forced expiratory volume in one second 2.1 litres and 68% of predicted). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA likely reduce and MD-ICS/LAMA possibly reduces moderate to severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.59 to 0.82; moderate certainty; HR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.46 to 0.76; moderate certainty; and HR 0.56, 95% CrI 0.38 to 0.82; low certainty, respectively), whereas HD-ICS probably does not (HR 0.94, 95% CrI 0.70 to 1.24; moderate certainty). There is no clear evidence to suggest that any combination therapy or HD-ICS reduces severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (low to moderate certainty). This study suggests no clinically meaningful differences in the symptom or quality of life score between dual combinations and monotherapy (low to high certainty). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA increase or likely increase the odds of Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) responders at 6 and 12 months compared to MD-ICS (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% CrI 1.23 to 1.76; high certainty; and OR 1.59, 95% CrI 1.31 to 1.94; high certainty at 6 months; and OR 1.61, 95% CrI 1.22 to 2.13; moderate certainty and OR 1.55, 95% CrI 1.20 to 2.00; high certainty at 12 months, respectively). MD-ICS/LAMA probably increases the odds of ACQ responders at 6 months (OR 1.32, 95% CrI 1.11 to 1.57; moderate certainty). No data were available at 12 months. There is no clear evidence to suggest that HD-ICS increases the odds of ACQ responders or improves the symptom or qualify of life score compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA or ICS/LAMA reduces asthma-related or all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). HD-ICS results in or likely results in little or no difference in the included safety outcomes compared to MD-ICS as well as HD-ICS/LABA compared to MD-ICS/LABA. The pairwise meta-analysis shows that MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause adverse events (AEs) and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.96; 4 studies, 2238 participants; moderate certainty; and RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.99; 4 studies, 2239 participants; absolute risk reduction 10 fewer per 1000 participants; moderate certainty, respectively). The NMA evidence is in agreement with the pairwise evidence on treatment discontinuation due to AEs, but very uncertain on all-cause AEs, due to imprecision and heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review findings suggest that MD- or HD-ICS/LABA and MD-ICS/LAMA reduce moderate to severe asthma exacerbations and increase the odds of ACQ responders compared to MD-ICS whereas HD-ICS probably does not. The evidence is generally stronger for MD- and HD-ICS/LABA than for MD-ICS/LAMA primarily due to a larger evidence base. There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA, ICS/LAMA, or HD-ICS/LABA reduces severe asthma exacerbations or SAEs compared to MD-ICS. MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause AEs and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS. The above findings may assist in deciding on a treatment option during the stepwise approach of asthma management. Longer-term safety of higher than medium-dose ICS needs to be addressed in phase 4 or observational studies given that the median duration of included studies was six months.

The Role of Long-Acting Antimuscarinic Agents in the Treatment of Asthma

The journey of using anticholinergics in the treatment of asthma started with anticholinergic-containing plants such as Datura stramonium and Atropa belladonna, followed by ipratropium bromide and continued with tiotropium, glycopyrronium, and umeclidinium. Although antimuscarinics were used in the maintenance treatment of asthma over a century ago, after a long time (since 2014), it has been recommended to be used as an add-on long-acting antimuscarinic agent (LAMA) therapy in the maintenance treatment of asthma. The airway tone controlled by the vagus nerve is increased in asthma. Allergens, toxins, or viruses cause airway inflammation and inflammation-related epithelial damage, increased sensory nerve stimulation, ganglionic and postganglionic acetylcholine (ACh) release by inflammatory mediators, intensification of ACh signaling at M1 and M3 muscarinic ACh receptors (mAChRs), and dysfunction of M2 mAChR. Optimal anticholinergic drug for asthma should effectively block M3 and M1 receptors, but have minimal effect on M2 receptors. Tiotropium, umeclidinium, and glycopyrronium are anticholinergic agents with this feature. Tiotropium has been used in a separate inhaler as an add-on treatment to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and glycopyrronium and umeclidinium have been used in a single inhaler as a combination of ICS/LABA/LAMA in asthma in recent years. Guidelines recommend this regimen as an optimization step for patients with severe asthma before initiating any biologic or systemic corticosteroid therapy. In this review, the history of antimuscarinic agents, their effectiveness and safety in line with randomized controlled trials, and real-life studies in asthma treatment will be discussed according to the current data.

[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.

Budget Impact Analysis of Single-Inhaler Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients with Asthma in the Dubai Academic Healthcare Corporation

Purpose

Asthma is a common, chronic respiratory disorder associated with substantial societal and economic burden globally, despite the availability of different treatment modalities. GSK has developed a once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT), comprised of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI); a combination of inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and long-acting β₂-agonist for patients with uncontrolled asthma. A budget impact analysis was conducted to determine the financial impact of introducing FF/UMEC/VI SITT from the perspective of the Dubai Academic Healthcare Corporation (DAHC).

Methods

A budget impact model was constructed using an epidemiology-based approach and used to estimate the expected 5-year budget impact of including FF/UMEC/VI for the treatment of eligible patients within the DAHC in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The model included both pharmacy and efficacy-related costs. The perspective of the DAHC healthcare payer was adopted, thus only direct payer costs were included in the analysis. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of the model structure, assumptions, and input parameters.

Results

The total budget impact was estimated to save 1 million United States Dollars (USD) over 5 years, with budget impacts of 0.08 million USD in Year 1; 0.14 million USD in Year 2; 0.22 million USD in Year 3; 0.28 million USD in Year 4; and 0.33 million USD in Year 5. The overall budget impact per patient was estimated to save 12.2 USD over 5 years. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the budget impact was most sensitive to changes in the market uptake of FF/UMEC/VI.

Conclusion

Healthcare payers may consider FF/UMEC/VI in the management of uncontrolled asthma which would save costs and reduce healthcare resource use in the UAE.

Open and Closed Triple Inhaler Therapy in Patients with Uncontrolled Asthma

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a class of inhalers that has recently been included as add-on therapy in the GINA guidelines, either in a single inhaler device with inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2-agonists (ICS + LABA) (closed triple inhaler therapy) or in a separate one (open triple inhaler therapy). This review summarizes the existing evidence on the addition of LAMAs in patients with persistently uncontrolled asthma despite ICS + LABA treatment based on clinical efficacy in the reduction of asthma symptoms and exacerbations, the improvement in lung function, and its safety profile.

Executive summary: Japanese guidelines for adult asthma (JGL) 2021

Asthma is characterized by chronic airway inflammation, variable airway narrowing, and sensory nerve irritation, which manifest as wheezing, dyspnea, chest tightness, and cough. Longstanding asthma may result in airway remodeling and become intractable. Despite the increased prevalence of asthma in adults, asthma-associated deaths have decreased in Japan (0.94 per 100,000 people in 2020). The goals of asthma treatment include the control of symptoms and reduction of future risks. A functional partnership between physicians and patients is indispensable for achieving these goals. Long-term management with medications and the elimination of triggers and risk factors are fundamental to asthma treatment. Asthma is managed via four steps of pharmacotherapy ("controllers"), ranging from mild to intensive treatments, depending on disease severity; each step involves daily administration of an inhaled corticosteroid, which varies from low to high dosage. Long-acting β₂ agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, sustained-release theophylline, and long-acting muscarinic antagonists are recommended as add-on drugs. Allergen immunotherapy is a new option that is employed as a controller treatment. Further, as of 2021, anti-IgE antibody, anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor α-chain antibodies, and anti-IL-4 receptor α-chain antibodies are available for the treatment of severe asthma. Bronchial thermoplasty can be performed for asthma treatment, and its long-term efficacy has been reported. Algorithms for their usage have been revised. Comorbidities, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, should also be considered during the treatment of chronic asthma. Depending on the severity of episodes, inhaled short-acting β₂ agonists, systemic corticosteroids, short-acting muscarinic antagonists, oxygen therapy, and other approaches are used as needed ("relievers") during exacerbation.

Efficacy of once-daily, single-inhaler, fixed-dose combination of mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with asthma with or without persistent airflow limitation: Post hoc analysis from the IRIDIUM study

BACKGROUND

A novel, once-daily, fixed-dose combination of mometasone furoate/indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide (MF/IND/GLY) delivered via Breezhaler® is the first inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ꞵ₂-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (ICS/LABA/LAMA) therapy approved for the maintenance treatment of asthma in adults inadequately controlled on ICS/LABA combination. In patients with asthma and persistent airflow limitation (PAL), maximal treatment, especially with combination is suggested. This post hoc analysis of data from the IRIDIUM study assessed the efficacy of MF/IND/GLY in asthma patients with and without PAL.

METHODS

Patients with post-bronchodilator FEV₁ ≤80% of predicted and FEV₁/FVC ratio of ≤0.7 were categorised as PAL subgroup and the remaining as the non-PAL subgroup. Lung function parameters (FEV₁, PEF, and FEF_25%-75%) and annualised asthma exacerbations rates were evaluated in both subgroups across the treatment arms: once-daily high-dose MF/IND/GLY (160/150/50 μg), high-dose MF/IND (320/150 μg) and twice-daily high-dose fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL; 500/50 μg).

RESULTS

Of the 3092 randomised patients, 64% (n = 1981) met the criteria for PAL. Overall, there was no evidence of treatment difference between PAL and non-PAL subgroups (interaction P-value for FEV₁, FEF_25%-75%, PEF, moderate or severe exacerbations, severe exacerbations and all exacerbations were 0.42, 0.08, 0.43 0.29, 0.35 and 0.12, respectively). In the PAL subgroup, high-dose MF/IND/GLY versus high-dose MF/IND and high-dose FLU/SAL improved trough FEV₁ (mean difference: 102 mL [P < 0.0001] and 137 mL [P < 0.0001]) and reduced moderate or severe (16% and 32%), severe (25% and 39%) and all exacerbations (19% and 38%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily fixed-dose MF/IND/GLY was efficacious in asthma patients with and without persistent airflow limitation.

Long-term safety of once-daily indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate high-dose, and indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate high-dose, in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma: Results from two open-label, 52-week studies

INTRODUCTION

The 52-week long-term safety of once-daily indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate (IND/GLY/MF) high-dose (150/50/160 µg) and IND/MF high-dose (150/320 µg) was evaluated in two studies enrolling Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma.

METHODS

Study 1 (IND/GLY/MF) and Study 2 (IND/MF) were 52-week, phase III, open-label, single-arm, multicenter studies conducted in Japanese adult patients with inadequately controlled asthma. The primary endpoint was incidence and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) over 52-weeks.

RESULTS

In Study 1, 94 patients received IND/GLY/MF high-dose and 84 (89.4%) patients completed the 52-week study treatment; in Study 2, 51 patients received IND/MF high-dose and 48 (94.1%) patients completed the 52-week study treatment. In Study 1, 68.1% and 6.4% of 94 patients reported ≥1 AE and ≥1 serious AE (SAE) respectively. In Study 2, 78.4% of 51 patients reported ≥1 AE; no patients reported SAEs. The most commonly reported AEs were asthma (exacerbation; 30.9% and 54.9%) and nasopharyngitis (18.1% and 29.4%) in Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. Severe AEs including asthma (exacerbation) were reported in 13.8% and 13.7% of patients in Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. In Study 1, 10 patients (10.6%) reported treatment-related AEs, of which dysphonia (9 patients [9.6%]) was the most commonly reported; no treatment-related AEs were reported in Study 2. In Study 1, one death (not study drug-related) was reported after study discontinuation (92 days after last dose of study medication).

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily IND/GLY/MF and IND/MF high-dose were well-tolerated in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma. No unexpected safety findings were observed.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at.

Mometasone/Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium (MF/IND/GLY) and MF/IND at Different MF Strengths versus Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Xinafoate (FLU/SAL) and FLU/SAL+ Tiotropium in Patients with Asthma

Background

Once-daily, single-inhaler mometasone furoate/indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide (MF/IND/GLY, an ICS/LABA/LAMA) and MF/IND (an ICS/LABA) via Breezhaler^® have been approved for the maintenance treatment of patients with asthma inadequately controlled with medium-or high-dose ICS or medium-or high-dose ICS/LABA treatment.

Objective

Once-daily (o.d.) formulations of MF/IND/GLY and MF/IND at different MF dose strengths have been compared with twice-daily (b.i.d.) fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate (FLU/SAL), and b.i.d. FLU/SAL+ o.d. tiotropium (TIO) in the PALLADIUM, IRIDIUM and ARGON studies.

Methods

The similarity in study design and consistent outcomes in these studies prompted the pooling of data in this review to better characterise these novel once-daily controller formulations.

Results

Pooled data from PALLADIUM and IRIDIUM studies showed comparable or greater efficacy with o.d. MF/IND formulations versus b.i.d. FLU/SAL. The o.d. MF/IND/GLY was superior to b.i.d. FLU/SAL in the IRIDIUM study, and similar to, if not more efficacious than b.i.d. FLU/SAL + o.d. TIO in the ARGON study.

Conclusion

These formulations therefore provide novel once-daily treatment options for patients across asthma severity and flexibility for clinicians to step-up or step-down the treatment using the same device and formulations.

The Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Therapy in Controller-Naïve and Symptomatic Adults with Asthma: A Preliminary Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

The efficacy and safety of first-line triple and dual therapy remain unclear because the stepwise strategy is a worldwide standard in controller-naïve asthma. A preliminary retrospective cohort study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of first-line triple and dual therapy for managing controller-naïve and symptomatic adult patients with asthma.

Patients and Methods

Patients with asthma who received first-line single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) or dual therapy (SIDT) for at least 8 weeks were selected between December 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021, in Fujiki Medical and Surgical Clinic, Miyazaki, Japan. Data on daytime and nighttime visual analog scale (VAS) scores, lung function tests, fractional exhaled nitrogen oxide (F_ENO), and adverse events were compared between SITT and SIDT pre- and post-treatment.

Results

The SITT significantly improved the nighttime, but not daytime, VAS scores better than the SIDT 2 weeks post-treatment (P = 0.0026), whereas SITT and SIDT significantly improved daytime and nighttime VAS scores after treatment compared to baseline. Both therapies also significantly improved lung functions and F_ENO post-treatment. The proportion of patients achieving complete control in the nighttime VAS scores after SITT was significantly higher than that four (P = 0.0186) and 8 weeks (P = 0.0061) after SIDT. Only patients with SITT experienced dry mouth.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that first-line SITT and SIDT were effective, and SITT improved disease control faster than SIDT in controller-naïve and symptomatic adult patients with asthma. The first-line SITT may contribute to faster and better control levels in symptomatic patients with asthma.

Effectiveness and tolerability of dual and triple combination inhaler therapies compared with each other and varying doses of inhaled corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend a higher-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) when asthma is not controlled with medium-dose (MD) ICS/long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) combination therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual (ICS/LABA) and triple therapies (ICS/LABA/LAMA) compared with each other and with varying doses of ICS in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks of study duration from 2008 to 18 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched studies, including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with, or were eligible for, MD-ICS/LABA, comparing dual and triple therapies. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to the previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations and asthma-related hospitalisations (moderate to severe and severe exacerbations).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17,161 patients with uncontrolled asthma from 17 studies (median duration 26 weeks; mean age 49.1 years; male 40%; white 81%; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (MEF 1)1.9 litres and 61% predicted). The quality of included studies was generally good except for some outcomes in a few studies due to high attrition rates. Medium-dose (MD) and high-dose (HD) triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.71 to 0.99] and 0.69 [0.58 to 0.82], respectively) (high-certainty evidence), but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA. High-dose triple therapy likely reduces steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations compared to MD triple therapy (HR 0.83 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.996], [moderate certainty]). Subgroup analyses suggest the reduction in steroid-requiring exacerbations associated with triple therapies may be only for those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year but not for those without. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause adverse events (AEs) and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.79 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.90], [high certainty] and 0.50 [95% CrI 0.30 to 0.84], [moderate certainty], respectively). Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to dual therapy (high certainty). The evidence suggests triple therapy results in little or no clinically important difference in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medium-dose and HD triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations, but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA especially in those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year. High-dose triple therapy is likely superior to MD triple therapy in reducing steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations. Triple therapy is unlikely to result in clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the MCIDs. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause AEs and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA. Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related SAEs compared to dual therapy. HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA, although long-term safety of higher rather than MD- ICS remains to be demonstrated given the median duration of included studies was six months. The above findings may assist deciding on a treatment option when asthma is not controlled with MD-ICS/LABA.

Residual Dyspnea May Predict Small Airways Dysfunction and Poor Responsiveness to Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in Asthmatic Patients

PURPOSE

Recently, single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) has demonstrated efficacy in patients with uncontrolled asthma who were symptomatic despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2 agonists. However, the characteristics of patients who benefit from SITT remain unclear in the real-world. The aim of this study was to examine the predictors of responsiveness to SITT in patients with asthma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 45 patients with asthma who had regularly visited our respiratory clinic and were started on SITT from March 2019 to March 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients' demographic characteristics, residual respiratory symptoms, type 2 biomarkers, and lung function before SITT were assessed from the patients' medical records. Predictors of responsiveness to four-week SITT were evaluated in these patients. The definition of responders was based on the physician-assessed global evaluation of treatment effectiveness.

RESULTS

Thirty-four (75%) of 45 patients were identified as responders to SITT. Non-responders showed significantly lower forced vital capacity (FVC) (%predicted) values, and complained of dyspnea more frequently than responders before SITT (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics and type 2 biomarkers between responders and non-responders. Clinical predictors of poor response to SITT were residual dyspnea (OR = 0.14, p = 0.02), low FVC (%predicted) values (OR = 1.05, p = 0.01), and FVC (%predicted) <80% (OR = 0.11, p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis showed that poor response to SITT was associated with residual dyspnea before SITT (OR = 0.14, p = 0.02). On the other hand, patients with residual dyspnea had significantly lower FEF_25-75 (%predicted) values than patients without residual dyspnea before SITT (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Residual dyspnea, reflecting small airways dysfunction, may predict poor responsiveness to short-term SITT in patients with asthma.

Clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and adherence in patients with asthma on multiple inhaler triple therapy: a review of findings

INTRODUCTION

The value of treating asthma with the triple regimen of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) delivered using multiple inhalers (MITT), or a single inhaler (SITT) is supported by a growing body of evidence, although research is still limited regarding the use of MITT.

AREAS COVERED

Clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, disease burden, and persistence/adherence associated with MITT use in asthma. The MEDLINE database was searched to identify references from inception until October 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of MITT is not very frequent in asthma patients, although it improves lung function and reduces the incidence of severe exacerbations. This may be due to existing concerns about using different devices on adherence and persistence to treatment, with a negative influence on outcomes, and to the fear that the patient will discontinue ICS/LABA but not LAMA. Nevertheless, although the current trend favors the SITT approach, some physicians may be induced to prescribe MITT over SITT because it allows the titration of individual components of triple therapy to be increased or decreased. Therefore, there is an evident need for pragmatic real-life studies to document when to prefer SITT and when MITT should be used.

Adherence and Persistence to Single-Inhaler Versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Asthma Management

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines recommend triple therapy for patients with asthma who remain uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist therapy. Previously, triple therapy was only available via multiple inhalers. Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) is approved as maintenance treatment for asthma; however, real-world information on adherence and persistence is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare adherence and persistence among adult patients with asthma receiving single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used IQVIA PharMetrics Plus data to evaluate patients with asthma who initiated once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 mcg or MITT between September 18, 2017, and September 30, 2019. Inverse probability weighting and multivariable regression adjusted for differences in characteristics between the FF/UMEC/VI and MITT cohorts. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) and proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥0.8 and PDC ≥0.5. Non-persistence was identified as a >45-day gap between fills.

RESULTS

The study included 1396 FF/UMEC/VI and 5115 MITT initiators. Three months after initiation, FF/UMEC/VI users had significantly higher mean PDC versus MITT users (0.68 vs 0.59; P < .001) and 31% more likely to be adherent (PDC ≥0.8; 40.6% vs 31.3%; adjusted risk ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.31 [1.13-1.54]; P < .001). Similar patterns were observed at 6 and 12 months post initiation. In addition, FF/UMEC/VI users were 49% more likely to persist at 12 months than MITT users (25.9% vs 15.1%, adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 1.49 [1.39-1.60]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with asthma initiating triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI had significantly better adherence and persistence compared with MITT initiators.

Optimizing asthma management: Role of long-acting muscarinic antagonists

Patients with asthma who are suboptimally responsive to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) are frequently exposed to oral corticosteroids and high-dose ICS, which can lead to significant side effects. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have demonstrated efficacy and safety in a subset of these patients. This review summarizes the results of key studies using LAMAs in patients with asthma aged 12 years or older. LAMA as an add-on treatment improved lung function and asthma control in patients with uncontrolled asthma across studies. The efficacy of LAMAs as an add-on to ICS was superior to that of placebo and ICS dose escalation and comparable with that of LABAs. LAMA plus ICS plus LABA provided modest improvements in bronchodilation and increased the time to first severe exacerbation versus ICS plus LABA. Single-inhaler triple therapy was associated with decreased health care resource utilization and improved cost-effectiveness versus multiple inhalers. LAMAs were generally well tolerated; asthma exacerbations, bronchitis, and nasopharyngitis were common adverse events with LAMA in combination with ICS alone or ICS plus LABA. Thus, the overall evidence presented in this review supports the use of add-on LAMA treatment as a reasonable option in patients with asthma uncontrolled with ICS plus LABA or ICS alone.

The 5T approach in asthma: Triple Therapy Targeting Treatable Traits

Using a therapeutic strategy that is free from traditional diagnostic labels and based on the identification of "treatable traits" (TTs), which are influential in clinical presentations in each patient, might overcome the difficulties in identifying and validating asthma phenotypes and endotypes. Growing evidence is documenting the importance of using the triple therapy with ICS, LABA, and LAMAs in a single inhaler (SITT) in cases of asthma not controlled by ICS/LABA and in the prevention of exacerbations. The identification of TTs may overcome the possibility of using SITT without considering the specific needs of the patient. In effect, it allows a treatment strategy that is closer to the precision strategy now widely advocated for the management of patients with asthma. There are different TTs in asthma that may benefit from treatment with SITT, regardless of guideline recommendations. The airflow limitation and small airway dysfunction are key TTs that are present in different phenotypes/endotypes, do not depend on the degree of T2 inflammation, and respond better than other treatments to SITT. We suggest that the 5T (Triple Therapy Targeting Treatable Traits) approach should be applied to the full spectrum of asthma, not just severe asthma, and, consequently, SITT should begin earlier than currently recommended.

A Review of the Unique Drug Development Strategy of Indacaterol Acetate/Glycopyrronium Bromide/Mometasone Furoate: A First-in-Class, Once-Daily, Single-Inhaler, Fixed-Dose Combination Treatment for Asthma

A novel, once-daily (o.d.), fixed-dose combination (FDC) of indacaterol acetate (IND), glycopyrronium bromide (GLY), and mometasone furoate (MF), delivered by the inhaler Breezhaler^® device, is the first long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/LAMA/ICS) therapy to be approved for maintenance treatment of asthma in adults inadequately controlled on LABA/ICS. The approval of IND/GLY/MF in the European Union (EU) also included an optional electronic sensor and smartphone (or other suitable device) application, making it the first “digital companion” that can be prescribed with an asthma medication. As a result, the European Medicines Agency included this approval as one of the “outstanding contributions to public health” (for Pneumology/Allergology) in their 2020 highlights report. Alongside IND/GLY/MF, an o.d. LABA/ICS FDC, IND/MF, was also developed and approved. This review outlines the unique strategy used in the accelerated development of IND/GLY/MF that combined various approaches: (1) selecting individual components with established efficacy/safety, (2) bridging doses to optimize efficacy/safety of IND/GLY/MF and IND/MF delivered via the Breezhaler^® device, (3) developing IND/GLY/MF and IND/MF in parallel, and (4) submission for regulatory approval before formal completion of the pivotal phase III studies. IND/GLY/MF and IND/MF were combined in a single-development plan (PLATINUM program), which comprised four phase III studies: QUARTZ and PALLADIUM evaluated IND/MF while IRIDIUM and ARGON evaluated IND/GLY/MF. A unique feature was the inclusion of two LABA/ICS comparators in the pivotal IRIDIUM study—IND/MF as an internal comparator, and high-dose salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate (SAL/FLU) as a marketed comparator. In the ARGON study, IND/GLY/MF was compared against o.d. tiotropium (via Respimat^®) plus twice-daily (b.i.d.) high-dose SAL/FLU (via Diskus^®). As a result of this development strategy, the development and approval of IND/GLY/MF was accelerated by ca. 4 years as against what would be expected from a traditional approach, novel data were generated, and a unique optional digital companion was approved in the EU.

Potential Drawbacks of ICS/LABA/LAMA Triple Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in the Treatment of Asthma: A Quantitative Synthesis of Safety Profile

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Understanding the role of long-acting muscarinic antagonists in asthma treatment

OBJECTIVE

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have been used in the treatment of obstructive pulmonary diseases for years. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists were previously mainly used as bronchodilators in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but the use of LAMAs in the treatment of asthma has gained great interest. There is now ample evidence of the efficacy and safety of LAMAs as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combinations in patients with moderate to severe uncontrolled asthma. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists have subsequently been included in asthma guidelines. This review summarizes the scientific evidence on the use of LAMAs in asthma and aims to provide a better understanding of the role of LAMAs in the asthma treatment care algorithm and the current gaps in our knowledge.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed review using the following words: long-acting muscarinic antagonists, asthma, muscarinic receptors, tiotropium, glycopyrronium, umeclidinium.

STUDY SELECTIONS

This review focused on the key trials that led to the inclusion of LAMAs in asthma guidelines. In addition, we highlighted a number of studies with other study designs and populations.

RESULTS

We identified 6 major studies that led to inclusion in asthma guidelines and 3 studies with other study designs and populations.

CONCLUSION

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists add-on therapy to ICS-LABA improves lung function, reduces exacerbations, and modestly improves asthma control in patients with moderate to severe asthma who are uncontrolled despite the use of ICS-LABA. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists are effective in all asthma phenotypes and endotypes.

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.

Current unmet needs and potential solutions to uncontrolled asthma

Despite the availability of effective inhaled therapies, many patients with asthma have poor asthma control. Uncontrolled asthma presents a significant burden on the patient and society, and, for many, remains largely preventable. There are numerous reasons why a patient may remain uncontrolled despite access to therapies, including incorrect inhaler technique, poor adherence to treatment, oversight of triggers and suboptimal medical care. Shared decision-making, good patient-clinician communication, supported self-management, multidisciplinary patient education, new technology and risk stratification may all provide solutions to this major unmet need in asthma. Novel treatments such as biologics could benefit patients' lives, while the investigations into biomarkers, non-Type 2 asthma, treatable traits and disease modification give an exciting glimpse into the future of asthma care.

Use of single-inhaler triple therapy in the management of obstructive airway disease: Indian medical experts' review

Obstructive airway disease (OAD), which includes COPD and asthma, is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in India. Long-acting bronchodilators (long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) and/or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs)) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a vital role in the management of patients with OAD. While symptom burden and exacerbations are common amongst treated patients, poor adherence to inhaler therapy is a frequent challenge. Better treatment options that optimise symptom control, improve quality of life, reduce exacerbation risk and improve adherence are desired. Triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) is recommended in the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2021 guidelines for symptomatic COPD patients on ICS/LABA or LABA/LAMA, and who are at increased risk for frequent or severe exacerbations. Similarly, add-on LAMA is recommended in uncontrolled asthma patients on medium- to high-dose ICS/LABA by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 guideline. In the real world, high-risk and overlapping phenotypes exist, which necessitate early initiation of triple therapy. We aim to provide an expert review on the use of single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) for OAD management in global and Indian settings, knowledge from which can be extrapolated for appropriate treatment of Indian patients. The OAD population in India may benefit from early optimisation to SITT characterised by a high burden of exacerbating OAD, nonsmoker COPD and asthma-COPD overlap.

Characteristics and treatment patterns of patients with asthma on multiple-inhaler triple therapy in Spain

The aim of this observational, retrospective study was to describe characteristics, treatment patterns, and adherence among patients with asthma who initiated multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in Catalonia, Spain. This study used data of patients initiating MITT in 2016 from the SIDIAP (Information System for Research in Primary Care) database, which covers ~80% of the Catalonian population (5.8 million). Of 1,204 patients initiating MITT, 361 (30.0%) stepped down (discontinued ≥ 1 and continued ≥1 MITT component) and 89 (7.4%) stopped all three components of MITT for a period of 60 days during the following 12 months. In the follow-up period, 196 (16.3%) patients were considered adherent to MITT (>0.8 proportion of days covered [PDC]), with a mean (standard deviation) PDC of 0.52 (0.51) days. Given the low adherence and substantial rates of step down/discontinuation among patients initiating MITT, there is an urgent need to implement strategies to improve treatment adherence/persistence.

Indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate: a combination therapy for asthma

Abstract:

Despite the wide range of available therapies, asthma remains uncontrolled in 40–65% of patients for a number of different reasons. Treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) is recommended in the Global Initiative for Asthma 2021 report for patients across all asthma severities, with treatment options combining an ICS with a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) or a LABA and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), depending on disease severity. Based on this, the availability of single inhaler fixed-dose ICS/LABA/LAMA combination is a major need in asthma management. Indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate has been developed as a once-daily inhaled asthma treatment that combines an ICS (mometasone furoate), a LABA (indacaterol acetate) and a LAMA (glycopyrronium bromide) in a formulation delivered using the dry powder inhaler Breezhaler®, for patients with uncontrolled asthma on medium- or high-dose ICS/LABA. This article provides an overview of the different and complementary mechanisms of action, and the clinical effectiveness of the monocomponents of the indacaterol/glycopyrronium/mometasone furoate fixed combination, and highlights the benefits of using the three agents in combination in patients with moderate and severe asthma.

Guidelines for the management of asthma in adults and adolescents: Position statement of the South African Thoracic Society - 2021 update

Asthma prevalence is increasing worldwide, and surveys indicate that most patients in developed and developing countries, including South Africa, do not receive optimal care and are therefore not well controlled. Standard management guidelines adapted to in-country realities are important to support optimal care. The South African Thoracic Society (SATS) first published a guideline for the management of chronic persistent asthma in 1992, which has subsequently been revised several times.

The main aim of the present document was to revise and update SATS’ statement on the suggested management of chronic asthma, based on the need to promote optimal care and control of asthma, together with the incorporation of new concepts and drug developments. This revised document reinforces optimal care and incorporates the following primary objectives to achieve the recent advances in asthma care:

continued emphasis on the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as the foundation of asthma treatment

to reduce the reliance on short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) monotherapy for asthma symptoms

to incorporate the evidence and strategy for the use of the combination of an ICS and formoterol for acute symptom relief (instead of a SABA)

to incorporate the evidence and strategy for the use of as-needed ICS-long-acting beta agonists (LABA) for patients with infrequent symptoms or ‘mild’ asthma

to incorporate the evidence and strategy for the use of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in combination with ICS-LABA; and

to incorporate the evidence and strategy for the use of and management with a biologic therapy in severe asthma.

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

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

[Translated article] Spanish Asthma Management Guidelines (GEMA) v.5.1. Highlights and Controversies

In this fifth phase of development, the contents of the Spanish Asthma Management Guidelines (GEMA), which include versions 5.0 and 5.1, have undergone a thorough review. The aim here is to set the main changes in context. These could be summarized as follows: DIAGNOSIS: new FENO cut-off and severity classification based on treatment needed to maintain control; INTERMITTENT ASTHMA: a more restrictive concept and treatment extended to include a glucocorticoid/adrenergic combination as needed; MILD ASTHMA: glucocorticoid/adrenergic therapy as needed as an alternative in case of low therapeutic adherence to conventional fixed-dose steroids; SEVERE ASTHMA: readjustment of phenotypes, incorporation of triple therapy in a single inhaler, and criteria for selection of a biologic in severe uncontrolled asthma; OTHERS: specific scoring in childhood asthma, incorporation of certain organizational aspects (care circuits, asthma units, telemedicine), new sections on COVID-19 and nasal polyposis.

Clinical Interpretation of Efficacy Outcomes in Pharmacological Studies on Triple Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy for Uncontrolled Asthma: Assessment of IRIDIUM and ARGON Studies

The IRIDIUM and ARGON studies provided positive findings concerning the benefits of the once-daily triple mometasone furoate/indacaterol/glycopyrronium (MF/IND/GLY) fixed-dose combination (FDC) for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma, at the least by a strict statistical point of view. In the IRIDIUM study patients received medium-dose (MD) or high-dose (HD) MF/IND/GLY or MF/IND oncex daily or HD fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL) twice daily; in the ARGON study patients received MD or HD MF/IND/GLY once daily or HD FLU/SAL twice daily + tiotropium (TIO) once daily. Since a detailed interpretation of clinical results has not yet been performed, we provided the clinical interpretation of efficacy outcomes resulting from the IRIDIUM and ARGON studies according to the currently available minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds. The triple MF/IND/GLY FDC elicited beneficial clinically relevant effects compared to active comparators in asthmatic patients, according to the levels of ICS doses, by generally achieving and overcoming the MCID. The level of clinical benefit was usually greater in patients treated with HD-MF/IND/GLY compared to those treated with MD-MF/IND/GLY. Overall, HD-MF/IND/GLY induced greater clinically relevant benefits even when compared to HD-FLU/SAL + TIO. Considering that a balanced triple MF/IND/GLY FDC with MD ICS resulted as effective as HD-MF/IND in preventing moderate or severe exacerbations, thus triple ICS/LABA/LAMA FDCs with MD ICS should be considered for the treatment not only of uncontrolled asthma but also for those patients suffering from less severe forms of disease with airflow limitation as well as a possible as-needed therapeutic option.