Albuterol-Budesonide Fixed-Dose Combination Rescue Inhaler for Asthma

[Advances in the management of asthma]

Asthma is a heterogeneous inflammatory airway disease that causes relevant morbidity across individuals of all age cohorts. In recent years, advances in the understanding of asthma pathophysiology have led to the development of treatments tailored to specific pheno- and endotypes of the disease. This has significantly changed asthma management, especially for patients with severe disease. These new treatment options offer individuals with asthma access to personalized and disease-modifying therapies. The present paper is a comprehensive overview of recent clinical studies and of German and international guideline updates on asthma management.

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.

Adoption and implementation of maintenance and reliever therapy for adults with moderate-to-severe asthma

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency at which MART was recommended to patients with moderate-to-severe asthma being seen at subspecialty pulmonary and allergy practices at an academic healthcare system, and the patient and clinician characteristics associated with the use of MART.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of the electronic medical records of an academic healthcare system in the Northeastern United States between January 2021 and October 2023. Patient demographic and clinician data were collected, and MART recommendation was confirmed by chart review. We assessed the relationships among patient demographics, clinician characteristics, and MART recommendation.

RESULTS

Of 2016 patients reviewed, 293 (14.5%) were recommended MART, with 255 (87%) concurrently prescribed short-acting bronchodilators. Patients on inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol at baseline were significantly more likely to be recommended MART, whereas older patients and those on Medicare were significantly less likely to be recommended MART; 22 of 50 clinicians (44%) did not recommend MART ever, and only 3 clinicians recommended MART to 30% to 60% of their patients. Clinicians who were part of the asthma group 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 more than 40% of clinicians not recommending it.

Recent Progress in Nucleic Acid Pulmonary Delivery toward Overcoming Physiological Barriers and Improving Transfection Efficiency

Pulmonary delivery of therapeutic agents has been considered the desirable administration route for local lung disease treatment. As the latest generation of therapeutic agents, nucleic acid has been gradually developed as gene therapy for local diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, and lung fibrosis. The features of nucleic acid, specific physiological structure, and pathophysiological barriers of the respiratory tract have strongly affected the delivery efficiency and pulmonary bioavailability of nucleic acid, directly related to the treatment outcomes. The development of pharmaceutics and material science provides the potential for highly effective pulmonary medicine delivery. In this review, the key factors and barriers are first introduced that affect the pulmonary delivery and bioavailability of nucleic acids. The advanced inhaled materials for nucleic acid delivery are further summarized. The recent progress of platform designs for improving the pulmonary delivery efficiency of nucleic acids and their therapeutic outcomes have been systematically analyzed, with the application and the perspectives of advanced vectors for pulmonary gene delivery.

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

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

Budesonide/Formoterol or Budesonide/Albuterol as Anti-Inflammatory Reliever Therapy for Asthma

Overuse of reliever as short-acting beta-agonist and associated underuse of controller as inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) administered via separate inhalers results in worse asthma outcomes. Such discordance can be obviated by combining both controller and reliever in the same inhaler. So-called anti-inflammatory reliever (AIR) therapy comprises the use of a single inhaler containing an ICS such as budesonide (BUD) in conjunction with a reliever as either albuterol (ALB) or formoterol (FORM), to be used on demand, with variable dosing driven by asthma symptoms in a flexible patient-centered regimen. Global guidelines now support the use of BUD-ALB as AIR therapy to reduce exacerbations, either on its own in mild asthma or in conjunction with fixed-dose maintenance ICS-long-acting beta-agonist in moderate to severe asthma. Using BUD-FORM on its own allows patients to seamlessly move in an intuitive flexible fashion between AIR and maintenance and reliever therapy, by stepping up and down the dosing escalator across a spectrum of asthma severities. Head-to-head clinical studies are indicated to compare BUD-FORM versus BUD-ALB as AIR in mild asthma, and also BUD-FORM as maintenance and reliever therapy versus BUD-ALB as AIR plus maintenance ICS-long-acting beta-agonist in moderate to severe asthma. Patients should be encouraged to make an informed decision in conjunction with their health care professional regarding the best therapeutic option tailored to their individual needs, which in turn is likely to result in long-term compliance and associated optimal asthma control.

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

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

The pharmacological management of asthma in adults: 2023 update

INTRODUCTION

The pharmacotherapy of asthma is a dynamic process that changes as our knowledge of the underlying pathophysiology and treatment of this disease continues to evolve. This implies the need for continuous revision of the recommendations of asthma guidelines and strategies.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the latest key practical information on the pharmacological management of asthma in adults. We provide the background to the 2023 update of the GINA strategy report, focusing on changes and discussing areas of uncertainty. We review current and emerging pharmacotherapy for uncontrolled asthma, including synthetic agents and new biologics, and provide expert perspectives and opinions on the treatment of uncontrolled asthma.

EXPERT OPINION

The current pharmacological treatment of asthma, based on a step-by-step, control-based approach, with ICSs, LABAs and LAMAs being the mainstay generally provides good symptom control. Biologic therapies are often effective in treating T2high severe asthma. However, there is still room for improvement, such as the discovery of new molecules that specifically target chronic inflammation and, most importantly, the ability to provide solutions to the various areas of uncertainty that still exist. Also finding solutions to improve the accessibility and affordability of rescue ICS in resource-constrained settings is critical.

Cost-effectiveness of budesonide-formoterol vs inhaled epinephrine in US adults with mild asthma

BACKGROUND

The management of mild asthma has lacked an over-the-counter (OTC) option aside from inhaled epinephrine, which is available in the United States. However, inhaled epinephrine use without an inhaled corticosteroid may increase the risk of asthma death.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost-effectiveness of OTC as-needed budesonide-formoterol as a plausible alternative to inhaled epinephrine.

METHODS

We developed a probabilistic Markov model to compare OTC as-needed budesonide-formoterol inhaler use vs inhaled epinephrine use in adults with mild asthma from a US societal perspective over a lifetime horizon, with a 3% annual discount rate (2022 US dollars). Inputs were derived from the SYmbicort Given as-needed in Mild Asthma (SYGMA) trials, published literature, and commercial costs. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), severe asthma exacerbations, well-controlled asthma days, and asthma-related deaths. Microsimulation was used to evaluate underinsured Americans living with mild asthma (n = 5,250,000).

RESULTS

Inhaled epinephrine was dominated (with lower QALYs gains at a higher cost) by both as-needed budesonide-formoterol (INMB, $15,541 at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000 per QALY) and the no-OTC inhaler option (INMB, $1023). Adults using as-needed budesonide-formoterol had 145 more well-controlled asthma days, 2.79 fewer severe exacerbations, and an absolute risk reduction of 0.23% for asthma-related death compared with inhaled epinephrine over a patient lifetime. As-needed budesonide-formoterol remained dominant in all sensitivity and scenario analyses, with a 100% probability of being cost-effective compared with inhaled epinephrine in probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

If made available, OTC as-needed budesonide-formoterol for treating mild asthma in underinsured adults without HCP management improves asthma outcomes, prevents fatalities, and is cost-saving.

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.

Development and validation of analytical methods for selective determination of albuterol and budesonide in Airsupra inhalation aerosol using spectrophotometry

Airsupra inhalation aerosol is a recently approved FDA medication that combines albuterol and budesonide for treating or preventing bronchoconstriction and lowering the risk of relapses in asthma patients who are 18 years of age and older. To selectively determine albuterol and budesonide in both pure and pharmaceutical dosage forms, two analytical methods were developed: the zero-order absorption method and the dual-wavelength method. Even though the two drugs absorption spectra overlapped, the distinctive peak of budesonide at the zero absorbance point of albuterol, 245 nm, allowed for direct detection of budesonide in the combination using the zero-order absorption method. The mathematical dual-wavelength method, on the other hand, allowed for the measurement of both albuterol and budesonide by choosing two wavelengths for each drug in such a way that the absorbance difference for the second drug was zero. Budesonide exhibited comparable absorbance values at wavelengths 227 and 261.40 nm; hence, these two wavelengths were utilized to identify albuterol; similarly, 221.40 and 231.20 nm were chosen to determine budesonide in their binary mixes. The methods were validated according to the ICH guideline for validation of analytical procedures Q2(R1) and demonstrated excellent linearity, sensitivity, accuracy, precision, and selectivity for determining both drugs in synthetic mixed solutions and pharmaceutical formulations. The availability of these analytical methods would be valuable for the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory authorities for quality control and assessment of pharmaceutical formulations containing albuterol and budesonide.

Patterns of rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a clinical encounter for an asthma exacerbation

BACKGROUND

A "window of opportunity" has been proposed where anti-inflammatory therapy administration in response to symptoms could prevent exacerbation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a severe asthma exacerbation serious enough to require a face-to-face clinical encounter.

METHODS

Merative MarketScan research databases (US administrative claims 2011 to 2017) were analyzed for patients aged ≥4 years, with an asthma diagnosis code, who filled short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) and Global Initiative for Asthma Steps 3 to 5 maintenance therapies. Patients were indexed on a random SABA claim and had 12 months' continuous health plan eligibility pre- and post-index. Serious exacerbations were severe exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids prescribed from an outpatient clinic, urgent care or emergency department, or hospitalization for asthma. SABA and maintenance claims 30 days pre- and post-event were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 319,342 patients (30% children 4 to 11 years; 70% adults or adolescents ≥12 years), 27.2% of children and 16.8% of adolescents or adults experienced ≥ 1 serious exacerbation (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.85 [95% confidence interval, 1.81-1.88]). In the 30 days pre-event, 42.6% filled ≥1 SABA (children: 44.3%; adolescents or adults: 41.5%; OR, 1.12 [1.09-1.16]) and 57.4% filled maintenance (children: 59.0%; adolescents or adults: 56.3%; OR, 1.12 [1.08-1.15]). In the 30 days post-event, 61.4% filled SABA (children: 69.7%; adolescents or adults: 55.6%; OR, 1.84 [1.78-1.90]) and 94.8% filled maintenance (children: 98.6%; adolescents or adults: 92.2%; OR, 6.09 [5.45-6.81]).

CONCLUSION

Many patients treated as having moderate-to-severe asthma escalate SABA claims before a serious exacerbation, but approximately 40% have no anti-inflammatory maintenance fill, highlighting a "window of opportunity" to prevent exacerbations using inhaled corticosteroids concomitantly with SABA as rescue.

European Respiratory Society short guidelines for the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol in mild asthma

Recent clinical trials of as-needed fixed-dose combination of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol have provided new evidence that may warrant a reconsideration of current practice. A Task Force was set up by the European Respiratory Society to provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of as-needed ICS/formoterol as treatment for mild asthma. The Task Force defined two questions that were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. The Task Force utilised the outcomes to develop recommendations for a pragmatic guideline for everyday clinical practice. The Task Force suggests that adults with mild asthma use as-needed ICS/formoterol instead of regular ICS maintenance treatment plus as-needed short-acting β2-antagonist (SABA) and that adolescents with mild asthma use either as-needed ICS/formoterol or ICS maintenance treatment plus as-needed SABA (conditional recommendation; low certainty of evidence). The recommendation for adults places a relatively higher value on the reduction of systemic corticosteroid use and the outcomes related to exacerbations, and a relatively lower value on the small differences in asthma control. Either treatment option is suggested for adolescent patients as the balance is very close and data more limited. The Task Force recommends that adult and adolescent patients with mild asthma use as-needed ICS/formoterol instead of as-needed SABA (strong recommendation; low certainty of evidence). This recommendation is based on the benefit of as-needed ICS/formoterol in mild asthma on several outcomes and the risks related to as-needed SABA in the absence of anti-inflammatory treatment. The implementation of this recommendation is hampered in countries (including European Union countries) where as-needed ICS/formoterol is not approved for mild asthma.

Asthma and COPD: A Focus on β-Agonists - Past, Present and Future

Asthma has been recognised as a respiratory disorder for millennia and the focus of targeted drug development for the last 120 years. Asthma is one of the most common chronic non-communicable diseases worldwide. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, is caused by exposure to tobacco smoke and other noxious particles and exerts a substantial economic and social burden. This chapter reviews the development of the treatments of asthma and COPD particularly focussing on the β-agonists, from the isolation of adrenaline, through the development of generations of short- and long-acting β-agonists. It reviews asthma death epidemics, considers the intrinsic efficacy of clinical compounds, and charts the improvement in selectivity and duration of action that has led to our current medications. Important β2-agonist compounds no longer used are considered, including some with additional properties, and how the different pharmacological properties of current β2-agonists underpin their different places in treatment guidelines. Finally, it concludes with a look forward to future developments that could improve the β-agonists still further, including extending their availability to areas of the world with less readily accessible healthcare.

[Advances in the management of asthma]

Asthma is a heterogeneous inflammatory airway disease that causes relevant morbidity across individuals of all age cohorts. In recent years, advances in the understanding of asthma pathophysiology have led to the development of treatments tailored to specific pheno- and endotypes of the disease. This has significantly changed asthma management, especially for patients with severe disease. These new treatment options offer individuals with asthma access to personalized and disease-modifying therapies. The present paper is a comprehensive overview of recent clinical studies and of German and international guideline updates on asthma management.

Albuterol-Budesonide Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Asthma: Results of the DENALI Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 MANDALA trial, as-needed albuterol-budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler significantly reduced severe exacerbation risk vs as-needed albuterol in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroid-containing maintenance therapy. This study (DENALI) was conducted to address the US Food and Drug Administration combination rule, which requires a combination product to demonstrate that each component contributes to its efficacy.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do both albuterol and budesonide contribute to the efficacy of the albuterol-budesonide combination pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This phase 3 double-blind trial randomized patients aged ≥ 12 years with mild-to-moderate asthma 1:1:1:1:1 to four-times-daily albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg or 180/80 μg, albuterol 180 μg, budesonide 160 μg, or placebo for 12 weeks. Dual-primary efficacy end points included change from baseline in FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 6 h (FEV1 AUC0-6h) over 12 weeks (assessing albuterol effect) and trough FEV1 at week 12 (assessing budesonide effect).

RESULTS

Of 1,001 patients randomized, 989 were ≥ 12 years old and evaluable for efficacy. Change from baseline in FEV1 AUC0-6h over 12 weeks was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg vs budesonide 160 μg (least-squares mean [LSM] difference, 80.7 [95% CI, 28.4-132.9] mL; P = .003). Change in trough FEV1 at week 12 was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 and 180/80 μg vs albuterol 180 μg (LSM difference, 132.8 [95% CI, 63.6-201.9] mL and 120.8 [95% CI, 51.5-190.1] mL, respectively; both P < .001). Day 1 time to onset and duration of bronchodilation with albuterol-budesonide were similar to those with albuterol. The albuterol-budesonide adverse event profile was similar to that of the monocomponents.

INTERPRETATION

Both monocomponents contributed to albuterol-budesonide lung function efficacy. Albuterol-budesonide was well tolerated, even at regular, relatively high daily doses for 12 weeks, with no new safety findings, supporting its use as a novel rescue therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03847896; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

A Discrete Choice Experiment to Assess Patient Preferences for Asthma Rescue Therapy and Disease Management

BACKGROUND

With the expanding treatment landscape for asthma, the process of identifying best-fit, individualized management options is becoming increasingly complicated. Understanding patients' preferences can inform shared decision-making between clinicians and patients.

OBJECTIVES

To examine preferences of adults with asthma for therapeutic and management attributes and determine how these preferences vary among patients.

METHODS

We conducted an online discrete choice experiment survey in US adults with asthma. Patient preferences were analyzed using logit models. Factors affecting patients' preferences were identified by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1,184 patients completed the survey (60% female; mean [SD] age, 49.2 [15.0] years). Patients most valued fewer asthma attacks requiring urgent health care professional visits, fewer exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids, and a reduced risk for oral thrush. Higher value was placed on reducing the risk of short-term (oral thrush) versus long-term side effects (diabetes). Patients were willing to increase rescue medication use in exchange for decreasing exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids and attacks requiring urgent health care professional visits. Patients preferred a single inhaler for rescue and maintenance and least valued asthma action plans. Demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors affected patient preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients sought convenient management options that focused mainly on decreasing the short-term morbidity associated with asthma exacerbations and therapies. Preferences varied by demographics, clinical factors, and socioeconomics. It is important for shared decision-making discussions to include conversations about morbidity and how available therapeutic options align with individual patient preferences.

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

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

[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'.

Inhaled drug delivery for the targeted treatment of asthma

Asthma is a chronic lung disease affecting millions worldwide. While classically acknowledged to result from allergen-driven type 2 inflammatory responses leading to IgE and cytokine production and the influx of immune cells such as mast cells and eosinophils, the wide range in asthmatic pathobiological subtypes lead to highly variable responses to anti-inflammatory therapies. Thus, there is a need to develop patient-specific therapies capable of addressing the full spectrum of asthmatic lung disease. Moreover, delivery of targeted treatments for asthma directly to the lung may help to maximize therapeutic benefit, but challenges remain in design of effective formulations for the inhaled route. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of asthmatic disease progression as well as genetic and epigenetic disease modifiers associated with asthma severity and exacerbation of disease. We also overview the limitations of clinically available treatments for asthma and discuss pre-clinical models of asthma used to evaluate new therapies. Based on the shortcomings of existing treatments, we highlight recent advances and new approaches to treat asthma via inhalation for monoclonal antibody delivery, mucolytic therapy to target airway mucus hypersecretion and gene therapies to address underlying drivers of disease. Finally, we conclude with discussion on the prospects for an inhaled vaccine to prevent asthma.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Mild asthma: Lessons learned and remaining questions

Patients living with mild disease represent the largest proportion of asthma patients. There are significant challenges in proposing a definition that would best describe these patients, while also accurately identifying at-risk individuals. Current literature suggests considerable inflammatory and clinical heterogeneity within this group. Research has shown that these patients are at risk of poor control, exacerbations, lung function decline, and death. Despite conflicting data on its prevalence, eosinophilic inflammation appears to be a predictor of poorer outcomes in mild asthma. There is an immediate need to better understand phenotypic clusters in mild asthma. It is also important to understand factors that influence disease progression and remission, as it is evident that both vary in mild asthma. Guided by robust literature that supports inhaled corticosteroid-based strategies over short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) reliant regimens, the management of these patients has evolved considerably. Unfortunately, SABA use remains high in clinical practice despite strong advocacy from the Global Initiative for Asthma. Future mild asthma research should explore the role of biomarkers, develop prediction tools based on composite risk scores, and explore targeted therapies at least for at-risk individuals.

Questions in Mild Asthma: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Patients with mild asthma are believed to represent the majority of patients with asthma. Disease-associated risks such as exacerbations, lung function decline, and death have been understudied in this patient population. There have been no prior efforts from major societies to describe research needs in mild asthma. Methods: A multidisciplinary, diverse group of 24 international experts reviewed the literature, identified knowledge gaps, and provided research recommendations relating to mild asthma definition, pathophysiology, and management across all age groups. Research needs were also investigated from a patient perspective, generated in conjunction with patients with asthma, caregivers, and stakeholders. Of note, this project is not a systematic review of the evidence and is not a clinical practice guideline. Results: There are multiple unmet needs in research on mild asthma driven by large knowledge gaps in all areas. Specifically, there is an immediate need for a robust mild asthma definition and an improved understanding of its pathophysiology and management strategies across all age groups. Future research must factor in patient perspectives. Conclusions: Despite significant advances in severe asthma, there remain innumerable research areas requiring urgent attention in mild asthma. An important first step is to determine a better definition that will accurately reflect the heterogeneity and risks noted in this group. This research statement highlights the topics of research that are of the highest priority. Furthermore, it firmly advocates the need for engagement with patient groups and for more support for research in this field.

"As-Needed" Inhaled Corticosteroids for Patients With Asthma

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Approaches to Management of Asthma: Guidelines for Stepped Care and Self-Monitoring

While the twentieth century brought rapid changes to the diagnosis and management of asthma, consensus guidelines did not exist until the mid-1980s. Over the subsequent four decades, guidelines evolved from expert-based recommendations to comprehensive, evidenced-based references. The main two guidelines to be discussed in this chapter are the expert panel reports (EPR) published by the United States National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention Report (GINA) published by the NHLBI and World Health Organization (WHO). While these guidelines both focus on evidence-based approaches to the diagnosis and management of asthma, there are significant differences in both organization and recommendations. Just as the introduction of evidence-based guidelines was revolutionary to asthma management over the last 20 years, we anticipate further development of recommendations specific to precision medicine based on ongoing cutting-edge clinical research.

Asthma Management in Adults

Management of asthma in adults has advanced in the past 10 years. Central to these advances has been further clarification of type (T) 2 mechanisms of airway inflammation and utilization of T2 biomarkers, that is, eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide. In addition, epithelial cells are emerging as significant contributors to inflammation through generation of alarmins to initiate local injury as well as downstream pathways. Five new biologics, mepolizumab, benralizumab, reslizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, were approved to join omalizumab and revolutionize severe asthma treatment. These biologics significantly prevent exacerbations to spare systemic corticosteroids use and their side effects. Guidelines attest to the effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β-agonists (formoterol) for both maintenance and rescue therapy. Focused updates to the Expert Panel Report addressed limited but specific questions relevant to asthma control. Future guidelines should include phenotype/endotype-directed therapeutics to gain more precision-directed treatment.

Salbutamol in the Management of Asthma: A Review

Asthma is a common inflammatory disease of the lungs. The prevalence of asthma is increasing worldwide, and the tendency indicates that the number of asthma sufferers will soar in the coming years for several reasons, in particular, the lifestyles we have adopted that expose us to risk factors. Salbutamol is the first selective short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) used as an alternative reliever in the treatment of asthma. Its therapeutic effect is based on its potent smooth muscle relaxant properties, which allow the inhibition of bronchial smooth muscle contraction and subsequent bronchodilation. Salbutamol can be administered orally, intravenously (IV), intramuscularly (IM), subcutaneously, or by inhalation. For this reason, the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters-absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination-are highly diverse and, consequently, the efficacy and adverse effects also differ between each formulation. Here, we review the pharmacological profile of different salbutamol formulations, focusing on their efficacy and adverse effects for its original application, asthma.

Advances in Evaluation and Treatment of Severe Asthma (Part Two)

Providers caring for patients with severe, therapy-resistant asthma have novel options for their treatment. Administration of additional inhaled corticosteroids at the time of increased symptoms, a strategy referred to as anti-inflammatory rescue or AIR, has been proved to be effective in reducing the frequency of exacerbations and improving asthma-related quality of life. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists can be used in combination with long-acting beta-agonist bronchodilators for additional bronchodilation. The care of the patient with severe asthma must also include a strategy to help avoid severe, life-threatening asthma attacks, with intense patient education and a recommended survival toolkit.

Increased versus stable doses of inhaled corticosteroids for exacerbations of chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

People with asthma may experience exacerbations, or 'attacks', during which their symptoms worsen and additional treatment is required. Written action plans sometimes advocate a short-term increase in the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at the first sign of an exacerbation to reduce the severity of the attack and to prevent the need for oral steroids or hospital admission.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical effectiveness and safety of increased versus stable doses of ICS as part of a patient-initiated action plan for the home management of exacerbations in children and adults with persistent asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, which is derived from searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and handsearched abstracts to 20 December 2021. We also searched major trial registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel and cross-over randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that allocated people with persistent asthma to take a blinded inhaler in the event of an exacerbation which either increased their daily dose of ICS or kept it stable (placebo).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed quality, and extracted data. We reassessed risk of bias for all studies at the result level using the revised risk of bias tool for RCTs (Risk of Bias 2), and employed the GRADE approach to assess our confidence in the synthesised effect estimates. The primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as the need for rescue oral steroids in the randomised population. Secondary outcomes were treatment failure in the subset who initiated the study inhaler (treated population), unscheduled physician visits, unscheduled acute care, emergency department or hospital visits, serious and non-serious adverse events, and duration of exacerbation.

MAIN RESULTS

This review update added a new study that increased the number of people in the primary analysis from 1520 to 1774, and incorporates the most up-to-date methods to assess the likely impact of bias within the meta-analyses. The updated review now includes nine RCTs (1923 participants; seven parallel and two cross-over) conducted in Europe, North America, and Australasia and published between 1998 and 2018. Five studies evaluated adult populations (n = 1247; ≥ 15 years), and four studies evaluated child or adolescent populations (n = 676; < 15 years). All study participants had mild to moderate asthma. Studies varied in the dose of maintenance ICS, age, fold increase of ICS in the event of an exacerbation, criteria for initiating the study inhaler, and allowed medications. Approximately 50% of randomised participants initiated the study inhaler (range 23% to 100%), and the included studies reported treatment failure in a variety of ways, meaning assumptions were required to permit the combining of data. Participants randomised to increase their ICS dose at the first signs of an exacerbation had similar odds of needing rescue oral corticosteroids to those randomised to a placebo inhaler (odds ratio (OR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.25; 8 studies; 1774 participants; I2 = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We could draw no firm conclusions from subgroup analyses conducted to investigate the impact of age, time to treatment initiation, baseline dose, smoking history, and fold increase of ICS on the primary outcome. Results for the same outcome in the subset of participants who initiated the study inhaler were unchanged from the previous version, which provides a different point estimate with very low confidence due to heterogeneity, imprecision, and risk of bias (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30; 7 studies; 766 participants; I2 = 42%; random-effects model). Confidence was reduced due to risk of bias and assumptions that had to be made to include study data in the intention-to-treat and treated-population analyses. Sensitivity analyses that tested the impact of assumptions made for synthesis and to exclude cross-over studies, studies at overall high risk of bias, and those with commercial funding did not change our conclusions. Pooled effects for unscheduled physician visits, unscheduled acute care, emergency department or hospital visits, and duration of exacerbation made it very difficult to determine where the true effect may lie, and confidence was reduced by risk of bias. Point estimates for both serious and non-serious adverse events favoured keeping ICS stable, but imprecision and risk of bias due to missing data and outcome measurement and reporting reduced our confidence in the effects (serious adverse events: OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.77 to 3.71; 2 studies; 394 participants; I² = 0%; non-serious adverse events: OR 2.15, 95% CI 0.68 to 6.73; 2 studies; 142 participants; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from double-blind trials of adults and children with mild to moderate asthma suggests there is unlikely to be an important reduction in the need for oral steroids from increasing a patient's ICS dose at the first sign of an exacerbation. Other clinically important benefits and potential harms of increased doses of ICS compared with keeping the dose stable cannot be ruled out due to wide confidence intervals, risk of bias in the trials, and assumptions that had to be made for synthesis. Included studies conducted between 1998 and 2018 reflect evolving clinical practice and study methods, and the data do not support thorough investigation of effect modifiers such as baseline dose, fold increase, asthma severity and timing. The review does not include recent evidence from pragmatic, unblinded studies showing benefits of larger dose increases in those with poorly controlled asthma. A systematic review is warranted to examine the differences between the blinded and unblinded trials using robust methods for assessing risk of bias to present the most complete view of the evidence for decision makers.

Asthma-related hospitalizations after implementing SABA-free asthma management with a maintenance and anti-inflammatory reliever regimen

Overreliance on short-acting β₂-agonists (SABA) has been a common feature of asthma management globally for at least 30 years. However, given the evidence against the long-term use of SABA, including potentially increased risk of exacerbations, emergency room visits, overall healthcare resource utilization, and mortality, the latest Global Initiative for Asthma report no longer recommends SABA only therapy. Since 2014, we implemented an ICS-containing reliever strategy at our asthma center at the G Baigorria Hospital in Argentina; we only administered budesonide/formoterol via a single inhaler device across the spectrum of asthma severity and completely eliminated the use of SABA therapy. In this article, we compare hospitalization data from our center, previously reported in the EAGLE study (when inhaled corticosteroids plus as-needed SABA was administered) for the years 1999 and 2004 with data from 2017 to 2018 (when budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler device was administered as maintenance and/or anti-inflammatory reliever therapy [MART/AIR] without any SABA) from our center, to assess the impact of two distinct asthma management strategies on asthma-related hospitalizations. MART/AIR regimens in our SABA-free center reduced asthma hospitalizations from 9 (1999 and 2004) to 1 (2017 and 2018) (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.031; odds ratio = 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.013-0.98); the hospitalization rate was reduced by 92% (1.47% in 1999 and 2004 to 0.12% in 2017 and 2018). Our data provide preliminary real-world evidence that MART/AIR with budesonide/formoterol simultaneously with SABA elimination across asthma severities is an effective asthma management strategy for reducing asthma-related hospitalizations.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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