Rational oral corticosteroid use in adult severe asthma: A narrative review

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Biologics for Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Asthma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) in addition to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2-agonists in patients with severe asthma leads to long-term adverse events. Oral corticosteroid-sparing agents are of high priority.

OBJECTIVE

This network meta-analysis assessed biologics' comparative efficacy and safety in OCS-dependent patients with asthma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials that addressed the efficacy and safety of biologics compared with placebo in OCS-dependent patients with asthma from inception to July 2023. The primary outcome was an overall reduction in the OCS dose while asthma control was maintained.

RESULTS

We included seven randomized controlled trials involving 1,052 OCS-dependent patients with asthma. Compared with placebo, benralizumab every 8 weeks, benralizumab every 4 weeks, dupilumab, and mepolizumab were efficacious in achieving a reduction in the OCS dose with low to moderate confidence (odds ratio [95% CI]: 4.12 [2.22-7.64]; 4.09 [2.22-7.55]; 3.25 [1.90-5.55]; and 2.39 [1.25-4.57], respectively) whereas tralokinumab, tezepelumab, and subcutaneous reslizumab were ineffective. An indirect comparison found no significant differences among benralizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab. Efficacy in reducing exacerbations was consistent with the primary analysis. High baseline blood eosinophil counts benefit from anti-IL-5 therapies, whereas high FeNO levels favor dupilumab regardless of blood eosinophil counts. Adverse events between biologics and placebo were comparable, except for eosinophilia with dupilumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In OCS-dependent patients with asthma, benralizumab, dupilumab, and mepolizumab were superior to placebo in reducing the OCS dose. Evaluating baseline biomarkers helps in choosing the proper biologics to maximize treatment effects.

Expert consensus on the use of systemic glucocorticoids for managing eosinophil-related diseases

Eosinophil-related diseases represent a group of pathologic conditions with highly heterogeneous clinical presentation and symptoms ranging from mild to critical. Both systemic and localized forms of disease are typically treated with glucocorticoids. The approval of novel biologic therapies targeting the interleukin-5 pathway can help reduce the use of systemic glucocorticoids (SGC) in eosinophilic diseases and reduce the risk of SGC-related adverse effects (AEs). In this article, a panel of experts from different medical specialties reviewed current evidence on the use of SGC in two systemic eosinophilic diseases: Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with PolyAngiitis (EGPA) and HyperEosinophilic Syndrome (HES); and in two single-organ (respiratory) eosinophilic diseases: Chronic RhinoSinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) and Severe Asthma with Eosinophil Phenotype (SA-EP), and contrasted it with their experience in clinical practice. Using nominal group technique, they reached consensus on key aspects related to the dose and tapering of SGC as well as on the initiation of biologics as SGC-sparing agents. Early treatment with biologics could help prevent AEs associated with medium and long-term use of SGC.

Factors influencing poor response to type 2 targeted therapies in severe asthma: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

A significant breakthrough has been made in treating severe asthma, with the recognition of various asthma phenotypes and an updated management guideline. Type 2 targeted therapies, such as benralizumab and omalizumab; have been identified as an effective treatment for severe asthma, improving patient response, lung function tests and asthma symptom control. This study aimed to evaluate factors contributing to poor response to therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center cohort study of 162 patients with severe asthma who started biologic therapy; their data were retrieved from medical records for further analysis. Poor responders were patients remained clinically and functionally uncontrolled despite even after augmenting all treatment options.

RESULTS

Childhood-onset asthma, bronchiectasis, poor symptom control (ACT below 19), severe airway obstruction (< 60% predicted), and maintenance oral corticosteroid (mOCS) use were significantly associated with poor response to omalizumab and benralizumab; p = 0.0.4 and 0.01; 0.003 and 0.01; 0.01 and 0.001, 0.05 and 0.04; 0.006 and 0.02, respectively. However, chronic rhinosinusitis and IgE < 220kIU/L were associated with higher poor response rates to omalizumab (p = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). At the same time, female patients and those with blood eosinophils level < 500 cells/mm3 had a higher poor response rate to benralizumab (p = 0.02 and 0.01, respectively). Ischemic heart disease (IHD), bronchiectasis, and continued use of OCS increased the likelihood of poor response to omalizumab by 21, 7, and 24 times (p = 0.004, 0.008, and 0.004, respectively). In contrast, the female gender, childhood-onset asthma and higher BMI increased the likelihood of poor response to benralizumab by 7, 7 and 2 times more, p = 0.03, 0.02 and 0.05, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Poor response to omalizumab treatment was independently associated with ischemic heart disease (IHD), bronchiectasis, and a history of maintenance oral corticosteroid (mOCS) use. Conversely, poor response to benralizumab therapy was independently linked to female gender, childhood-onset asthma and higher body mass index (BMI).

Long-term efficacy of dupilumab in severe asthma by baseline oral corticosteroid dose

Background

Dupilumab has been shown to improve clinical outcomes long term while reducing oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose in patients with severe OCS-dependent asthma. This post hoc analysis assesses the impact of OCS dose at baseline (≤10 or >10 mg·day-1) on long-term outcomes of dupilumab treatment.

Methods

Annualised severe asthma exacerbation rates, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), measures of asthma control and quality of life, and OCS dose were evaluated in patients from the phase 3 VENTURE trial with severe OCS-dependent asthma, further categorised by OCS dose ≤10 or >10 mg·day-1 at parent study baseline (PSBL), who enrolled in TRAVERSE.

Results

Dupilumab reduced the annualised exacerbation rate in VENTURE, and it remained low throughout TRAVERSE (0.202-0.265 (OCS ≤10 mg·day-1 at PSBL) and 0.221-0.366 (OCS >10 mg·day-1 at PSBL)). Improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV1, asthma control and quality of life observed in VENTURE dupilumab patients were sustained throughout TRAVERSE. Patients on placebo during VENTURE showed rapid improvements in FEV1 upon initiating dupilumab in TRAVERSE, which were sustained to the end of TRAVERSE. Reductions in OCS dose observed in VENTURE were maintained throughout TRAVERSE, with more than two-thirds of patients achieving reductions in OCS doses to ≤5 mg·day-1 by TRAVERSE week 48.

Conclusions

Improvements in clinical outcomes and reductions in OCS dose with dupilumab observed in VENTURE were maintained throughout TRAVERSE, regardless of baseline disease severity. Patients who switched from placebo in VENTURE to dupilumab in TRAVERSE had improved clinical outcomes and reductions in OCS dose comparable to those given dupilumab in VENTURE.

Observational UK cohort study to describe intermittent oral corticosteroid prescribing patterns and their association with adverse outcomes in asthma

INTRODUCTION

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) for asthma are associated with increased risks of developing adverse outcomes (adverse outcomes); no previous study has focused exclusively on intermittent OCS use.

METHODS

This historical (2008-2019) UK cohort study using primary care medical records from two anonymised, real-life databases (OPCRD and CPRD) included patients aged≥4 years with asthma receiving only intermittent OCS. Patients were indexed on their first recorded intermittent OCS prescription for asthma and categorised by OCS prescribing patterns: one-off (single), less frequent (≥90 day gap) and frequent (<90 day gap). Non-OCS patients matched 1:1 on gender, age and index date served as controls. The association of OCS prescribing patterns with OCS-related AO risk was studied, stratified by age, Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2020 treatment step, and pre index inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) prescriptions using a multivariable Cox-proportional hazard model.

FINDINGS

Of 476 167 eligible patients, 41.7%, 26.8% and 31.6% had one-off, less frequent and frequent intermittent OCS prescribing patterns, respectively. Risk of any AO increased with increasingly frequent patterns of intermittent OCS versus non-OCS (HR; 95% CI: one-off 1.19 (1.18 to 1.20), less frequent 1.35 (1.34 to 1.36), frequent 1.42 (1.42 to 1.43)), and was consistent across age, GINA treatment step and ICS and SABA subgroups. The highest risks of individual OCS-related adverse outcomes with increasingly frequent OCS were for pneumonia and sleep apnoea.

CONCLUSION

A considerable proportion of patients with asthma receiving intermittent OCS experienced a frequent prescribing pattern. Increasingly frequent OCS prescribing patterns were associated with higher risk of OCS-related adverse outcomes. Mitigation strategies are needed to minimise intermittent OCS prescription in primary care.

Treatable traits, combination inhaler therapy and the future of asthma management

The landscape of asthma has considerably changed in the last decade. Effective medications and inhaler devices have been developed and integrated into the asthma pharmacopoeia, but unfortunately, the proportion of uncontrolled patients remains unacceptably high. This is now recognized to be mainly due to the inappropriate use of medications or inhaler devices, heterogeneity of the disease or other factors contributing to the disease. Currently, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), with or without long-acting beta agonists (LABA), are the cornerstone of asthma management, and recently international guidelines recognized the importance of combination inhaler therapy (ICS/LABA) even in mild asthma. In future, ultra-long-acting personalized medications and smart inhalers will complement combination inhaler therapy in order to effectively addresses issues such as adherence, inhaler technique and polypharmacy (both of drugs and devices). Asthma is now acknowledged as a multifaceted cluster of disorders and the treatment model has evolved from one-size-fits-all to precision medicine approaches such as treatable traits (TTs, defined as measurable and treatable clinically important factors) which encourages the quality use of medications and identification and management of all underlying behavioural and biological treatable risk factors. TT requires research and validation in a clinical context and the implementation strategies and efficacy in various settings (primary/secondary/tertiary care, low-middle income countries) and populations (mild/moderate/severe asthma) are currently evolving. Combination inhaler therapy and the TTs approach are complementary treatment approaches. This review examines the current status of personalized medicine and combination inhaler therapy, and describes futuristic views for these two strategies.

Impact of Initiating Biologics in Patients With Severe Asthma on Long-Term Oral Corticosteroids or Frequent Rescue Steroids (GLITTER): Data From the International Severe Asthma Registry

BACKGROUND

Effectiveness of biologics has neither been established in patients with high oral corticosteroid exposure (HOCS) nor been compared with effectiveness of continuing with HOCS alone.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of initiating biologics in a large, real-world cohort of adult patients with severe asthma and HOCS.

METHODS

This was a propensity score-matched, prospective cohort study using data from the International Severe Asthma Registry. Between January 2015 and February 2021, patients with severe asthma and HOCS (long-term OCSs for ≥1 year or ≥4 courses of rescue OCSs within a 12-month period) were identified. Biologic initiators were identified and, using propensity scores, matched 1:1 with noninitiators. The impact of biologic initiation on asthma outcomes was assessed using generalized linear models.

RESULTS

We identified 996 matched pairs of patients. Both groups improved over the 12-month follow-up period, but improvement was greater for biologic initiators. Biologic initiation was associated with a 72.9% reduction in the average number of exacerbations per year versus noninitiators (0.64 vs 2.06; rate ratio, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.10-0.71]). Biologic initiators were 2.2 times more likely than noninitiators to take a daily long-term OCS dose of less than 5 mg (risk probability, 49.6% vs 22.5%; P = .002) and had a lower risk of asthma-related emergency department visits (relative risk, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21-0.58]; rate ratio, 0.26 [0.14-0.48]) and hospitalizations (relative risk, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.18-0.52]; rate ratio, 0.25 [0.13-0.48]).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting, including patients with severe asthma and HOCS from 19 countries, and within an environment of clinical improvement, initiation of biologics was associated with further improvements across multiple asthma outcomes, including exacerbation rate, OCS exposure, and health care resource utilization.

Omalizumab for Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical setting: a prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This single-centre, prospective, observational study included Chinese patients aged 14-75 years with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma according to the Global Initiative for Asthma criteria. Omalizumab was administered subcutaneously, and the investigator collected real-world data on exacerbations, steroid exposure, pulmonary function and laboratory assessments at weeks 16, 24, 52, 104 and 156 after treatment initiation. The primary outcome was reduced exacerbations, measured as the proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year following omalizumab initiation. Bowker's test for paired proportions was performed to compare exacerbation rates before and after treatment initiation. A generalised linear mixed model was used to compare the number of exacerbations.

RESULTS

The mean treatment duration was 46.6 weeks for the full analysis set (n=398). The proportion of patients with exacerbations in the year before and after omalizumab initiation was 80.4% (181/225) and 18.7% (42/225) (difference: -61.8%, 95% CI -68.5 to -54.0, p<0.0001), respectively. At week 52, 67.4% of patients discontinued oral corticosteroids, and 19.5% reduced inhaled corticosteroids. The Asthma Control Test scores increased by 4.6 at week 52 from baseline (p<0.001). Forced expiratory volume in 1 s increased by 11.2% and 9.0% at weeks 24 and 52, respectively, from baseline (p<0.01). Injection site reactions (5.2%) were the most frequently reported adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, omalizumab treatment remarkably reduced exacerbations in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. Omalizumab reduced the use of oral corticosteroids and improved asthma control and pulmonary function.

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.

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.

A Charter to Fundamentally Change the Role of Oral Corticosteroids in the Management of Asthma

Asthma affects 339 million people worldwide, with an estimated 5-10% experiencing severe asthma. In emergency settings, oral corticosteroids (OCS) can be lifesaving, but acute and long-term treatment can produce clinically important adverse outcomes and increase the risk of mortality. Therefore, global guidelines recommend limiting the use of OCS. Despite the risks, research indicates that 40-60% of people with severe asthma are receiving or have received long-term OCS treatment. Although often perceived as a low-cost option, long-term OCS use can result in significant health impairments and costs owing to adverse outcomes and increased utilization of healthcare resources. Alternative treatment methods, such as biologics, may produce cost-saving benefits with a better safety profile. A comprehensive and concerted effort is necessary to tackle the continued reliance on OCS. Accordingly, a threshold for OCS use should be established to help identify patients at risk of OCS-related adverse outcomes. Receiving a total dose of more than 500 mg per year should trigger a review and specialist referral. Changes to national and local policies, following examples from other chronic diseases, will be crucial to achieving this goal. Globally, multiple barriers to change still exist, but specific steps have been identified to help clinicians reduce reliance on OCS. Implementing these changes will result in positive health outcomes for patients and social and economic benefits for societies.

Eosinophilic Airway Diseases: From Pathophysiological Mechanisms to Clinical Practice

Eosinophils play a key role in airway inflammation in many diseases, such as allergic and non-allergic asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In these chronic disabling conditions, eosinophils contribute to tissue damage, repair, remodeling, and disease persistence through the production a variety of mediators. With the introduction of biological drugs for the treatment of these respiratory diseases, the classification of patients based on clinical characteristics (phenotype) and pathobiological mechanisms (endotype) has become mandatory. This need is particularly evident in severe asthma, where, despite the great scientific efforts to understand the immunological pathways underlying clinical phenotypes, the identification of specific biomarkers defining endotypes or predicting pharmacological response remains unsatisfied. In addition, a significant heterogeneity also exists among patients with other airway diseases. In this review, we describe some of the immunological differences in eosinophilic airway inflammation associated with severe asthma and other airway diseases and how these factors might influence the clinical presentation, with the aim of clarifying when eosinophils play a key pathogenic role and, therefore, represent the preferred therapeutic target.

Effect of Stepping Up to High-Dose Inhaled Corticosteroids in Patients With Asthma: UK Database Study

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether patients with asthma benefit from stepping up to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of stepping up to high-dose ICSs.

METHODS

A historic cohort study of patients with asthma (≥13 years old), identified from 2 large UK electronic medical record databases, was conducted. Patients who remained on medium-dose ICSs were compared with those who stepped up from medium- to high-dose ICSs, whereas patients who stepped up from low- to medium-dose ICSs were compared with those who stepped up from low- to high-dose ICSs. Time to first severe exacerbation (primary outcome) between treatment groups was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, and the number of exacerbations and antibiotics courses was analyzed using negative binomial regression. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to handle confounding.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time to first exacerbation was 2.7 ± 2.7 years for those who remained on stable medium-dose ICSs and 2.0 ± 2.2 years for those who stepped up from medium- to high-dose ICSs. A similar pattern was noted for those who stepped up from low- to medium-dose ICSs (2.6 ± 2.5 years) and from low- to high-dose ICSs (2.3 ± 2.5 years). Patients who stepped up from medium- to high-dose ICSs (n = 6879) had a higher risk of exacerbations during follow-up compared with those who remained on medium-dose ICSs (n = 51,737; hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.12-1.22). This was similar in patients stepping up from low- to high-dose (n = 3232) compared with low- to medium-dose (n = 12,659) ICSs (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17). A step-up to high-dose ICSs was also associated with a higher number of asthma exacerbations and antibiotics courses. No significant difference in associations was found across subgroups of patients with different blood eosinophil counts.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that a step-up to high-dose ICSs is effective in preventing future asthma exacerbations.

Unmet Need for Oral Corticosteroids Use and Exacerbations of Asthma in Primary Care in Taiwan

Patients with asthma are treated in primary healthcare facilities (PHCFs) in Taiwan, where the asthma control status associated with acute exacerbation (AE) and use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) inhalers remains unclear. A cross-sectional, close-ended, face-to-face questionnaire survey invited board-certified physicians who treat adult asthma patients in PHCFs. The contents of the questionnaire included three parts: rescue OCS to treat AE, regular OCS for asthma control, and AE-related adverse outcomes. There were 445 out of 500 physicians who completed the questionnaire, with 61% of them being non-pulmonologists. A substantial proportion of asthma patients needed rescue OCS or regular OCS each month, or ≥3 canisters of SABA inhalers per year. Approximately 86% of physicians reported their patients with ≥2 AE-related unscheduled visits to clinics or emergency departments in the past year. A total of 41% of physicians reported their patients receiving intubation or intensive care in the past year. A total of 92% of physicians prescribed rescue OCS ≤ 40 mg/day. A total of 92% of physicians prescribed rescue OCS for a duration of ≤7 days for AEs. A total of 85% of physicians prescribed regular OCS ≤ 10 mg/day for asthma control. This is the first study to present the perceptions of asthma-treating physicians on the use of OCS in PHCFs. In summary, 31% of physicians reported ≥ 6% of their patients needed OCS for asthma control and 41% of physicians reported their patients with adverse outcomes in the past year. Thus, the need to improve asthma control in Taiwan is suggested by our study results.

Systemic corticosteroids in asthma: A call to action from World Allergy Organization and Respiratory Effectiveness Group

Systemic corticosteroids (SCS) are a highly effective treatment for acute exacerbations and long-term symptom control in asthma. Long-term SCS use is highly prevalent across all asthma severities, occurring in over 20% of patients with severe or uncontrolled disease globally. It is now well known that exposure to both long-term and repeated acute courses of SCS is associated with a high risk of serious adverse effects (AEs), such as osteoporosis, and metabolic and cardiovascular complications, especially when prescribed onto a background of other corticosteroids. The aim of this call-to-action article, endorsed by the World Allergy Organization and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group, is to review the accumulating evidence on the burden of SCS on patients with asthma and provide an overview of potential strategies for implementing SCS Stewardship. Primary prevention of exacerbations and improvement of asthma control is a key first step in achieving SCS Stewardship, by optimizing maintenance asthma medications and addressing modifiable risk factors, such as adherence and inhaler technique. Other key elements of SCS Stewardship include increasing appropriate specialist referrals for multidisciplinary review, assessment of biomarkers, and consideration of oral corticosteroid-sparing add-on therapies (eg, biologics). In cases where SCS use is deemed clinically justified, it should be tapered to the lowest possible dose. In addition, patients receiving long-term SCS or frequent acute courses should be closely monitored for emergence of SCS-related AEs. Because of the extensive data available on the costly and burdensome AEs associated with SCS use, as well as the range of treatment options now available, there is a need for healthcare providers (HCPs) to carefully evaluate whether the benefits of SCS outweigh the potential harms, to adopt SCS-sparing and Stewardship strategies, and to consider alternative therapies where possible. Development of a structured and collaborative SCS Stewardship approach is urgently required to protect patients from the potential harm of SCS use.

Long-Term Use of Maintenance Systemic Corticosteroids is Associated with Multiple Adverse Conditions in a Large, Real-World Cohort of US Adults with Severe Asthma

There is growing recognition of the adverse consequences of maintenance systemic corticosteroid (mSCS) therapy in severe asthma (SA). The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of potential adverse effects of long-term mSCS therapy in adults with specialist-confirmed SA in the United States (US). CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional, observational study of US adults with SA treated by allergists/immunologists and pulmonologists. Once enrolled, patients' duration of mSCS therapy was reported by sites based on medical record review. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021, the prevalence of SCS-associated conditions was evaluated among those with no reported history of mSCS use, or mSCS use with < 2 years or ≥ 2 years cumulative duration. Prevalence and incidence estimates were adjusted for age and smoking history. Of 2793 patients enrolled, 311 and 231 had mSCS use for < 2 and ≥ 2 years, respectively. In adjusted analyses, adrenal insufficiency, pneumonia, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis/osteopenia, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, hypertension, anxiety, and depression were statistically significantly associated with any mSCS use. By duration, mSCS use ≥ 2 years was associated with osteopenia/osteoporosis, coronary artery disease, adrenal insufficiency, and diabetes-related neuropathy; mSCS use < 2 years was associated with depression and osteopenia/osteoporosis, and diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and hypertension during the 12 months prior to enrollment. Overall, among patients with specialist-confirmed SA, mSCS use was associated with a high prevalence of multiple adverse conditions. Healthcare professionals should employ mSCS-sparing treatment strategies to avoid these negative consequences.

Adrenal function recovery after durable oral corticosteroid sparing with benralizumab in the PONENTE study

BACKGROUND

Oral corticosteroid (OCS) dependence among patients with severe eosinophilic asthma can cause adverse outcomes, including adrenal insufficiency. PONENTE's OCS reduction phase showed that, following benralizumab initiation, 91.5% of patients eliminated corticosteroids or achieved a final dosage ≤5 mg·day-1 (median (range) 0.0 (0.0-40.0) mg).

METHODS

The maintenance phase assessed the durability of corticosteroid reduction and further adrenal function recovery. For ∼6 months, patients continued benralizumab 30 mg every 8 weeks without corticosteroids or with the final dosage achieved during the reduction phase. Investigators could prescribe corticosteroids for asthma exacerbations or increase daily dosages for asthma control deteriorations. Outcomes included changes in daily OCS dosage, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-6 and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), as well as adrenal status, asthma exacerbations and adverse events.

RESULTS

598 patients entered PONENTE; 563 (94.1%) completed the reduction phase and entered the maintenance phase. From the end of reduction to the end of maintenance, the median (range) OCS dosage was unchanged (0.0 (0.0-40.0) mg), 3.2% (n=18/563) of patients experienced daily dosage increases, the mean ACQ-6 score decreased from 1.26 to 1.18 and 84.5% (n=476/563) of patients were exacerbation free. The mean SGRQ improvement (-19.65 points) from baseline to the end of maintenance indicated substantial quality-of-life improvements. Of patients entering the maintenance phase with adrenal insufficiency, 32.4% (n=104/321) demonstrated an improvement in adrenal function. Adverse events were consistent with previous reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients successfully maintained maximal OCS reduction while achieving improved asthma control with few exacerbations and maintaining or recovering adrenal function.

Characteristics of Oral Corticosteroid Users Among Persons with Asthma on GINA Step 3 Therapy and Above: A Cross-Sectional Study in Portuguese Community Pharmacies

PURPOSE

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are frequently used in asthma management but have an important risk-profile. The aim of the study is to characterize and compare the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, treatment regimen and asthma control between OCS users and non-users among the population of asthma patients (≥18 years) at GINA step 3 and above treated with a fixed combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta-agonist (ICS/LABA).

METHODS

Cross-sectional study in Portuguese community pharmacies. Data was collected via paper-based interview delivered at the pharmacy (sociodemographic characteristics and asthma treatment regimen, namely ICS/LABA and OCS utilization), followed by a telephonic interview collecting smoking history, comorbidities, body mass index (BMI), history of exacerbations and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in the previous 12 months, as well as asthma control using the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT®).

RESULTS

A total of 347 patients recruited in 98 pharmacies were included in the analysis. Of those, 328 had completed both questionnaires. A quarter of the individuals reported OCS use in the previous 12 months (OCS users), either as add-on therapy (6%) or exacerbation treatment (19%). Patients were mostly females (72%), with an average age of 59.5 years (SD=15.4). OCS users were significantly older and reported more frequently having conjunctivitis (25.9% vs 15.0%), osteoporosis (25.9% vs 13.4%), arthritis (14.6% vs 6.9%), and gastrointestinal disease (16.1% vs 8.1%). OCS users also reported greater urgent HCRU: unscheduled consultations (33.3% vs 9.3%) and emergency department (ED) visits (32.1% vs 12.1%). Both groups presented poor disease control (85.2% of OCS users vs 72.9% of non-OCS users).

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the burden of OCS therapy to asthma patients and the need to improve asthma management, by adopting OCS sparing strategies in this subgroup of patients.

Uso de glucocorticoides sistémicos para el tratamiento del asma grave: Consenso multidisciplinar español

Background and aim

Since their effectiveness was initially demonstrated, oral corticosteroids (OCS) have been routinely used to treat asthma. We now know that their usage is linked to the development of side effects such osteoporosis and adrenal insufficiency. This is an observational study based on Delphi methodology. The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections: OCS generalities, maintenance treatment, short-term treatment, and adverse events.

Materials and methods

Two rounds of a 68-item questionnaire were completed by a panel of 48 allergists and pneumologists.

Results

Definitions were agreed upon, as was the proper use of OCS in the treatment of severe asthma. The experts agreed that the use of OCS should be minimized as much as possible and that in the event of maintenance treatments, a slow and progressive tapering strategy should be used. They also emphasized the importance of standardizing the technique for measuring the amount of SCG delivered in both cases.

Conclusions

This consensus document attempts to bring together scientifically supported suggestions from specialists in the management of asthma to reduce the use of OCS in Spain.

Healthcare utilisation and health-related quality of life of severe asthma patients in Singapore

BackgroundNotwithstanding unequivocal consensus on the disproportionate effect of severe asthma (SA) on asthma morbidity, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, work impairment and socioeconomic burden, the burden of SA patients in Singapore has not been appraised.ObjectivesTo determine the burden of disease and extent of quality of life impairment in SA patients in Singapore.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis of SA patients seen in Singapore General Hospital (2020-2021) to investigate emergency healthcare utilization, oral corticosteroid (OCS) burden and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with primary endpoint EuroQoL-5 Dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L) scores. The empirical measurement properties of the EQ-5D utility index in SA were comprehensively assessed through multivariate regression analyses.ResultsA total of 336 SA patients were recruited, 51.2% of SA patients had at least one acute healthcare resource utilization during the previous year, with 25.6% of patients having an emergency healthcare visit to the hospital. Overall mean (SD) EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-3L utility scores in SA patients were 6.22 (1.51) and 0.77 (0.30), respectively. EQ-5D utility scores were 0.14 lower in uncontrolled vs controlled asthma and 0.09 lower in the presence of severe exacerbation, whereas barely changed by maintenance OCS dose and airflow limitation.ConclusionSA patients were found to have high disease burden, high healthcare resource utilization and OCS use, low biologics usage, poor HRQoL and utility in comparison with other chronic diseases.

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.

Overprescription of short-acting β2-agonists is associated with poor asthma symptom control: results from five Middle Eastern countries included in the SABINA International (III) study

BACKGROUND

Although short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) overuse is associated with poor treatment outcomes, data on SABA use in the Middle East are lacking.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study in patients (aged ≥12 years) with asthma, data on disease characteristics and asthma treatments were collected from the Middle Eastern cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA) III study. Patients were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity and practice type. Multivariable regression models analyzed the association between SABA prescriptions and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 1389 patients (mean age, 46.7 years; female, 69.5%), 85.7% had moderate-to-severe asthma and 88.7% were treated by specialists. Overall, 51.3% of patients experienced ≥1 severe asthma exacerbation in the previous 12 months, with 58.2% having partly controlled or uncontrolled asthma. Notably, 47.1% of patients were prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters (considered overprescription). SABA canisters were purchased over the counter by 15.3% of patients. Higher SABA prescriptions (vs 1-2 canisters), except 3-5 canisters, were associated with increased odds of uncontrolled asthma (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

SABA overprescription occurred in almost half of all patients in the Middle East, underscoring the need for healthcare providers and policymakers to adhere to the latest evidence-based recommendations to address this public health concern.

Management of Uncontrolled Asthma: A Framework for Novel and Legacy Biologic Treatments

Asthma continues to be a complex respiratory disease to control for many despite optimal standard inhaler therapy. The increased dependence on steroid-sparing biologic treatments in the 21^st century has created a dilemma between identifying the patient’s intrinsic biomarkers and their “life markers.” With Tezepelumab being the most recent FDA-approved biologic for asthma, it is even more critical for asthma specialists to better understand and establish a framework to determine which biologic would work best for their patients. While cost and payor approvals limit access to certain asthma biologics, medical decisions on which biologic to select should be centered around shared decision-making, the rationale for biologic initiation, and critical biologic education to help achieve successful asthma control.

Investigational approaches for unmet need in severe asthma

INTRODUCTION

Molecular antibodies (mAb) targeting inflammatory mediators are effective in T2-high asthma. The recent approval of Tezepelumab presents a novel mAb therapeutic option to those with T2-low asthma.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss a number of clinical problems pertinent to severe asthma which are less responsive to current therapies, such as persistent airflow obstruction and airway hyperresponsiveness. We discuss selected investigational approaches, including a number of candidate therapies under investigation in two adaptive platform trials currently in progress, with particular reference to this unmet need, as well as their potential in phenotypes such as neutrophilic asthma and obese asthma, which may or may not overlap with a T2-high phenotype.

EXPERT OPINION

The application of discrete targeting approaches to T2-low molecular phenotypes, including those phenotypes in which inflammation may not arise within the airway, has yielded variable results to date. Endotypes associated with T2-low asthma are likely to be diverse but await validation. Investigational therapeutic approaches must, likewise, be diverse if the goal of remission is to become attainable for all those living with asthma.

Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022

Severe asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with several clinical variants and often represents a complex disease requiring a specialized and multidisciplinary approach, as well as the use of multiple drugs. The prevalence of severe asthma varies from one country to another, and it is estimated that 50% of these patients present a poor control of their disease. For the best management of the patient, it is necessary a correct diagnosis, an adequate follow-up and undoubtedly to offer the best available treatment, including biologic treatments with monoclonal antibodies. With this objective, this consensus process was born, which began in its first version in 2018, whose goal is to offer the patient the best possible management of their disease in order to minimize their symptomatology. For this 2020 consensus update, a literature review was conducted by the authors. Subsequently, through a two-round interactive Delphi process, a broad panel of asthma experts from SEPAR and the regional pulmonology societies proposed the recommendations and conclusions contained in this document.

Characterisation of the Australian Adult Population Living with Asthma: Severe - Exacerbation Frequency, Long-Term OCS Use and Adverse Effects

Introduction

Asthma poses a significant burden for the Australian population. Understanding severe exacerbation rates, and steroid-related burden for adults diagnosed with asthma stands to offer insights into how this could be reduced.

Methods

Electronic medical records (EMR) and questionnaires from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database Australia (OPCRDA) were utilised retrospectively. OPCRDA is a real-world database with >800,000 medical records from Australian primary care practices. Outcomes were severe asthma exacerbations in Australian adults, over a 12-month period, stratified by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment intensity steps, and steroid associated comorbidities.

Results

Of the 7868 adults treated for asthma, 19% experienced at least one severe exacerbation in the last 12-months. Severe exacerbation frequency increased with treatment intensity (≥1 severe exacerbation GINA 1 13%; GINA 4 23%; GINA 5a 33% and GINA 5b 28%). Questionnaire participants reported higher rates of severe exacerbations than suggested from their EMR (32% vs 23%) especially in steps 1, 4 and 5. Patients repeatedly exposed to steroids had an increased risk of osteoporosis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.43–2.66) and sleep apnoea (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.30–2.46).

Conclusion

The Australian population living with GINA 1, 4, 5a and 5b asthma have high severe exacerbation rates and steroid-related burden, especially when compared to other first world countries, with these patients needing alternative strategies or possibly specialist assessment to better manage their condition.

Global Variability in Administrative Approval Prescription Criteria for Biologic Therapy in Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

Regulatory bodies have approved five biologics for severe asthma. However, regional differences in accessibility may limit the global potential for personalized medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To compare global differences in ease of access to biologics.

METHODS

In April 2021, national prescription criteria for omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab were reviewed by severe asthma experts collaborating in the International Severe Asthma Registry. Outcomes (per country, per biologic) were (1) country-specific prescription criteria and (2) development of the Biologic Accessibility Score (BACS). The BACS composite score incorporates 10 prescription criteria, each with a maximum score of 10 points. Referenced to European Medicines Agency marketing authorization specifications, a higher score reflects easier access.

RESULTS

Biologic prescription criteria differed substantially across 28 countries from five continents. Blood eosinophil count thresholds (usually ≥300 cells/μL) and exacerbations were key requirements for anti-IgE/anti-IL-5/5R prescriptions in around 80% of licensed countries. Most countries (40% for dupilumab to 54% for mepolizumab) require two or more moderate or severe exacerbations, whereas numbers ranged from none to four. Moreover, 0% (for reslizumab) to 21% (for omalizumab) of countries required long-term oral corticosteroid use. The BACS highlighted marked between-country differences in ease of access. For omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, only two, one, four, and seven countries, respectively, scored equal or higher than the European Medicines Agency reference BACS. For reslizumab, all countries scored lower.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some differences were expected in country-specific biologic prescription criteria and ease of access, the substantial differences found in the current study present a challenge to implementing precision medicine across the world.

Effect of benralizumab in a patient with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps refractory to mepolizumab treatment

Severe eosinophilic asthma is associated with a high corticosteroid burden, particularly in patients with comorbid chronic sinusitis/nasal polyps. This case study reports a 33-year-old woman who presented to the severe asthma center with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Despite maximized asthma treatment, including maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) for 7 years, the patient experienced one to two hospitalizations per year, had daily symptoms that substantially impacted her quality of life, and elevated type 2 inflammatory markers (blood eosinophils, 0.72 × 10⁹/L; fractional exhaled nitric oxide, 134 to 300 parts per billion). Her asthma worsened during her first pregnancy, in which she required five hospital admissions despite treatment with maintenance OCS. Mepolizumab treatment was commenced after pregnancy but showed limited efficacy (blood eosinophil levels up to 0.94 × 10⁹/L); treatment was discontinued because of a second pregnancy. The patient's asthma worsened and resulted in four hospitalizations and an increase in monthly OCS dose. Mepolizumab was recommenced after pregnancy, but her asthma remained uncontrolled, symptoms persisted, and one hospitalization and nine OCS courses were required. The patient was switched to benralizumab treatment when it became available. Although her CRSwNP symptoms remained, benralizumab treatment resulted in a marked improvement in asthma control, zero hospitalizations, and suppressed blood eosinophil levels. Notably, the patient was successfully weaned off maintenance OCS after >11 years of treatment. In summary, these findings support the use of benralizumab as a corticosteroid-sparing treatment option in difficult-to-treat severe eosinophilic asthma refractory to mepolizumab treatment.

•

Benralizumab was a potent suppressor of blood eosinophils in this case study.

•

Benralizumab resulted in a marked reduction in maintenance corticosteroid use.

•

Benralizumab improved asthma exacerbations, control, and symptoms.

•

Benralizumab had efficacy in severe asthma after unsuccessful mepolizumab treatment.

Prescription Patterns of Oral Corticosteroids for Asthma Treatment and Related Asthma Phenotypes in University Hospitals in Korea

Purpose

Oral corticosteroids (OCSs) are frequently prescribed for asthma management despite their adverse effects. An understanding of the pattern of OCS treatment is required to optimize asthma treatment and reduce OCS usage. This study evaluated the prescription patterns of OCSs in patients with asthma.

Methods

This is a retrospective multicenter observational study. We enrolled adult (≥18 years) patients with asthma who had been followed up by asthma specialists in 13 university hospitals for ≥3 years. Lung function tests, the number of asthma exacerbations, and prescription data, including the days of supply and OCS dosage, were collected. The clinical characteristics of OCS-dependent and exacerbation-prone asthmatic patients were evaluated.

Results

Of the 2,386 enrolled patients with asthma, 27.7% (n = 660) were OCS users (the median daily dose of OCS was 20 mg/day prednisolone equivalent to a median of 14 days/year). OCS users were more likely to be female, to be treated at higher asthma treatment steps, and to show poorer lung function and more frequent exacerbations in the previous year than non-OCS users. A total of 88.0% of OCS users were treated with OCS burst with a mean dose of 21.6 ± 10.2 mg per day prednisolone equivalent to 7.8 ± 3.2 days per event and 2.4 times per year. There were 2.1% (51/2,386) of patients with OCS-dependent asthma and 9.5% (227/2,386) with exacerbation-prone asthma. These asthma phenotypes were consistent over the 3 consecutive years in 47.1% of OCS-dependent asthmatic patients and 34.4% of exacerbation-prone asthmatic patients when assessed annually over the 3-year study period.

Conclusions

We used real-world data from university hospitals in Korea to describe the OCS prescription patterns and relievers in asthma. Novel strategies are required to reduce the burden of OCS use in patients with asthma.

A Renewed Charter: Key Principles to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma

Asthma is a heterogenous respiratory disease, usually associated with chronic airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness, which affects an estimated 339 million people worldwide. Severe asthma affects approximately 5-10% of patients with asthma, approximately 17-34 million people globally, more than half of whom have uncontrolled disease. Severe asthma carries a substantial burden of disease, including unpredictable symptoms and potentially life-threatening flare-ups. Furthermore, severe asthma has a substantial burden on health care systems and economies worldwide. In 2018, a group of experts from the clinical community, patient support groups, and professional organisations joined together to develop the Severe Asthma Patient Charter, which set out six principles to define what patients should expect for the management of their severe asthma and what should constitute a basic standard of care. Since the publication of that original Charter in 2018, several important changes have occurred, including an improved understanding of asthma and effective asthma management; several new therapies have become available; and finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a spotlight on respiratory conditions, the workforces that treat them, and the fundamental importance of health care system resilience. With those developments in mind, we, representatives of the academic, clinical, and patient advocacy group communities, have updated the Charter to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma with a focus on six principles: (1) I deserve a timely, comprehensive assessment of my asthma and its severity; (2) I deserve a timely, straightforward referral to an appropriate specialist for my asthma when it is not well controlled; (3) I deserve to understand what makes my asthma worse; (4) I deserve access to treatment and care that reduces the impact of asthma on my daily life; (5) I deserve not to be reliant on systemic corticosteroids; (6) I deserve to be involved in decisions about my treatment and care.

A patient case demonstrating the efficacy of benralizumab in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma refractory to omalizumab and mepolizumab treatment

Severe eosinophilic asthma is associated with a heavy burden and impact on daily living in patients experiencing uncontrolled symptoms, exacerbations, and treatment side effects. This case study reports a 49-year-old woman who presented to the severe asthma center with uncontrolled severe asthma despite multiple maintenance medications and omalizumab treatment. On presentation, the patient had experienced two to three hospitalizations per year, frequent asthma exacerbations requiring courses of oral corticosteroids, and symptoms that impacted her quality of life. Omalizumab was previously discontinued, and bronchial thermoplasty was also unsuccessful. The patient stabilized on injectable steroids and commenced mepolizumab once available on prescription. Owing to continued exacerbations and an inability to reduce steroid treatment without exacerbating, mepolizumab was discontinued and the patient commenced benralizumab (30 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks for the first three doses, every 8 weeks thereafter) under the sole care of the severe asthma center. Benralizumab treatment resulted in a reduction in steroid treatment, zero asthma exacerbations, improved asthma control and lung function, and a marked improvement in activity levels that allowed the patient to participate in a long-distance running event. Additionally, 7 months following the initiation of benralizumab treatment, her blood eosinophils were completely depleted. These findings support the use of benralizumab in patients with refractory uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma despite previous biologic treatment with omalizumab and mepolizumab, as improvements in clinical and patient outcomes, including quality of life, can be achieved in difficult-to-treat cases.

•

Blood eosinophils reduced to zero in this severe eosinophilic asthma case study.

•

Benralizumab allowed a substantial reduction in maintenance corticosteroid use.

•

Benralizumab improved exacerbations, asthma control, and quality of life.

•

Benralizumab had efficacy after inadequate biologic therapy/bronchial thermoplasty.

•

A positive patient-clinician relationship can enhance patient outcomes.

Oral corticosteroid elimination via a personalised reduction algorithm in adults with severe, eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (PONENTE): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm study

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists on how to reduce oral corticosteroids after the initiation of biologics in severe asthma. The PONENTE trial evaluated the effectiveness and safety of a rapid, individualised steroid-reduction algorithm, including adrenal insufficiency monitoring, after benralizumab initiation.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, single-arm study was done at 138 clinical asthma treatment centres across 17 countries. We enrolled adult patients (age ≥18 years) with severe, eosinophilic asthma (blood eosinophil count ≥150 cells per μL at enrolment or ≥300 cells per μL in the previous year) requiring maintenance oral corticosteroids for at least 3 months preceding enrolment. Patients received benralizumab 30 mg (subcutaneous injection) every 4 weeks for three doses, then every 8 weeks thereafter. The oral corticosteroid reduction phase began at week 4 with daily oral corticosteroid dosages reduced by 1-5 mg every 1-4 weeks depending on the starting dosage, asthma control, and adrenal function status. Adrenal function was assessed with an early morning serum cortisol measurement, followed by adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation when required, once patients achieved a daily oral corticosteroid dosage of 5 mg/day for 4 weeks. Repeat cortisol measurements were taken for patients with evidence of adrenal insufficiency at first testing. Asthma control was assessed with the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6) weekly throughout the induction and oral corticosteroid reduction phases. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients eliminating daily oral corticosteroids, sustained for at least 4 weeks, and the percentage achieving elimination or a daily prednisone or prednisolone dosage of 5 mg or less, for at least 4 weeks, if the reason for no further reduction was adrenal insufficiency. Safety and efficacy analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of benralizumab and were descriptive. We present results after the oral corticosteroid reduction phase; a maintenance phase is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03557307.

FINDINGS

Between April 1, 2018, and Sept 5, 2020, of 705 patients assessed for eligibility, 598 were recruited and all received at least one dose of benralizumab. Overall, 376 (62·88%, 95% CI 58·86-66·76) of 598 patients eliminated oral corticosteroids and 490 (81·94%, 78·62-84·94) of 598 eliminated use or achieved a dosage of 5 mg or less if the reason for stopping the reduction was adrenal insufficiency. Subgroup analysis showed that dosage reductions were achieved irrespective of baseline eosinophil count, baseline oral corticosteroid dosage, or oral corticosteroid treatment duration. Adrenal insufficiency was detected in 321 (60%) of 533 patients at first assessment and in 205 (38%) of 533 patients 2-3 months later. The safety profile was consistent with previous experience. Most patients (448 [75%] of 598) had no asthma exacerbations during the oral corticosteroid reduction phase with an annualised exacerbation rate of 0·63. Of 598 patients, 38 (6%) experienced a total of 46 exacerbations resulting in emergency department or urgent care visits or hospitalisations.

INTERPRETATION

Despite a high prevalence of adrenal insufficiency, most patients with eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab achieved elimination of oral corticosteroids or maximal possible reduction using a personalised dosage-reduction algorithm.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Oral corticosteroids stewardship for asthma in adults and adolescents: A position paper from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are frequently used for asthma treatment. This medication is highly effective for both acute and chronic diseases, but evidence indicates that indiscriminate OCS use is common, posing a risk of serious side effects and irreversible harm. There is now an urgent need to introduce OCS stewardship approaches, akin to successful initiatives that optimized appropriate antibiotic usage. The aim of this TSANZ (Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand) position paper is to review current knowledge pertaining to OCS use in asthma and then delineate principles of OCS stewardship. Recent evidence indicates overuse and over-reliance on OCS for asthma and that doses >1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent cumulatively are likely to have serious side effects and adverse outcomes. Patient perspectives emphasize the detrimental impacts of OCS-related side effects such as weight gain, insomnia, mood disturbances and skin changes. Improvements in asthma control and prevention of exacerbations can be achieved by improved inhaler technique, adherence to therapy, asthma education, smoking cessation, multidisciplinary review, optimized medications and other strategies. Recently, add-on therapies including novel biological agents and macrolide antibiotics have demonstrated reductions in OCS requirements. Harm reduction may also be achieved through identification and mitigation of predictable adverse effects. OCS stewardship should entail greater awareness of appropriate indications for OCS prescription, risk-benefits of OCS medications, side effects, effective add-on therapies and multidisciplinary review. If implemented, OCS stewardship can ensure that clinicians and patients with asthma are aware that OCS should not be used lightly, while providing reassurance that asthma can be controlled in most people without frequent use of OCS.

Long-term corticosteroid use, adrenal insufficiency and the need for steroid-sparing treatment in adult severe asthma

Secondary adrenal insufficiency (AI) occurs as the result of any process that disrupts normal hypothalamic and/or anterior pituitary function and causes a decrease in the secretion of steroid hormones from the adrenal cortex. The most common cause of secondary AI is exogenous corticosteroid therapy administered at supraphysiologic dosages for ≥ 1 month. AI caused by oral corticosteroids (OCS) is not well-recognized or commonly diagnosed but is often associated with reduced well-being and can be life-threatening in the event of an adrenal crisis. Corticosteroid use is common in respiratory diseases, and asthma is a representative condition that illustrates the potential challenges and opportunities related to corticosteroid-sparing therapies. For individuals with severe asthma (approximately 5%-10% of all cases), reduction or elimination of maintenance OCS without loss of control can now be accomplished with biologic therapies targeting inflammatory mediators. However, the optimal strategy to ensure early identification and treatment of AI and safe OCS withdrawal in routine clinical practice remains to be defined. Many studies with biologics have involved short evaluation periods and small sample sizes; in addition, cautious approaches to OCS tapering in studies with a placebo arm, coupled with inconsistent monitoring for AI, have contributed to the lack of clarity. If the goal is to greatly reduce and, where possible, eliminate long-term OCS use in severe asthma through the increasing adoption of biologic treatments, there is an urgent need for clinical trials that address both the speed of OCS withdrawal and how to monitor for AI.

The multidisciplinary team severe asthma day case assessment and its impact on patient care

People with severe and difficult to control asthma can be a complex and heterogenous group of patients often with multiple comorbidities. Living with this disease imposes a huge physical and psychological burden upon the patient which requires a comprehensive, systematic and patient-focused assessment, using a wide range of clinical expertise from within the multidisciplinary team. This article describes a severe asthma systematic and multidimensional day case assessment, and the positive benefits that the authors perceive it offers for patient care. These benefits include a confirmed diagnosis, consideration of alternative diagnosis, enhanced adherence, medication optimisation, access to and gatekeeping of high-cost specialist medications, improved patient self-management skills and signposting to appropriate therapies. As a consequence, they believe that this facilitates better patient outcomes through a reduction in corticosteroid exposure, exacerbations and hospitalisation. This severe asthma multidisciplinary team day case approach offers more than just physical benefits when compared with the traditional medical model. Patient feedback reports an excellent patient experience, feeling listened to, understood, empowered and hopeful for the future.

Contemporary Concise Review 2020: Asthma

Bushfires and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) were dominate features of 2020. Patients with asthma were significantly affected by the 2019/2020 bushfire season with an increased burden compared to the general population. Patients with controlled asthma do not appear to be at higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection or death than the general population. Personalized medicine is proposed as the next era for asthma management, with treatable traits as a strategy to implement personalized medicine into practice. Patient engagement in personalized medicine strategies is important and needs to be further explored. Oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in asthma is common and contributes a major burden. OCS stewardship is recommended. Biologic therapies reduce exacerbations of severe asthma and biomarkers can be used to predict treatment responders. Epithelia at mucosal and cutaneous surfaces are components in asthma pathogenesis, through airway immunity and inflammation. Dysregulation of resident microbial communities in the lung, gut and skin microbiome is relevant to asthma pathogenesis, but there are still many unknowns in this field.

Overcoming Barriers to the Effective Management of Severe Asthma in Italy

Introduction

People with severe asthma (SA) often have poor disease control and quality of life, and are at high risk of exacerbations, lung function decline and asthma-related death. The present expert opinion article aimed to identify unmet needs in the management of SA in Italy, and propose possible solutions to address these needs.

Methods

At five multidisciplinary events in Italy, attendees identified factors that interfered with the effective management of SA and suggested how these barriers could be overcome. A core group of 12 Italian experts (pulmonologists, general practitioners, allergists, payers and patients) identified the main issues and proposed possible solutions based on the results from the meetings and relevant articles from the literature.

Results and Conclusions

We reviewed the gap between real-world practice and guidelines, oral corticosteroid overuse, SA-related mortality, and barriers to effective SA treatment. Common themes were lack of awareness about SA among both patients and clinicians, and lack of networking/information exchange between those involved in the treatment of SA. Participants agreed on the need to implement patient education and create multidisciplinary groups of specialists to improve SA management through multidisciplinary educational initiatives, meetings with local experts, development of a flow chart for referral/connection with local experts and specialized centers. Clinical instruments that might help specialists improve SA management included referral networks, integrated care pathways, phenotyping and treatment algorithms, exacerbation tracking, and examination of electronic medical records for patients with uncontrolled asthma. The following actions need to be implemented in Italy: i) maximize the use of advanced therapies, eg, biologics; ii) increase/improve education for physicians and patients; iii) improve multidisciplinary communication and care coordination; iv) introduce regional and local protocols for SA diagnosis and treatment; and v) change the structure of healthcare services to reduce specialist waiting times and facilitate access to biologic therapies.

Expert Consensus on the Tapering of Oral Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Asthma. A Delphi Study

Rationale: There is a need to minimize oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in patients with asthma to prevent their costly and burdensome adverse effects. Current guidelines do not provide recommendations for OCS tapering in patients with asthma.Objectives: To develop expert consensus on OCS tapering among international experts.Methods: A modified Delphi method was used to develop expert consensus statements relating to OCS use, tapering, adverse effects, adrenal insufficiency, and patient-physician shared decision-making. Initial statements proposed by experts were categorized, filtered for repetition, and presented back to experts over three ranking rounds to obtain consensus (≥70% agreement).Measurements and Main Results: One hundred thirty-one international experts participated in the study, and 296 statements were ranked. Numerous recommendations and guidance regarding appropriate OCS use were established. Experts agreed that OCS tapering should be attempted in all patients with asthma receiving maintenance OCS therapy, with personalization of tapering rhythm and speed. The importance of recognizing individual adverse effects was also established; however, a unified approach to the assessment of adrenal insufficiency was not reached. Shared decision-making was considered an important goal during the tapering process.Conclusions: In this Delphi study, expert consensus statements were generated on OCS use, tapering, adverse-effect screening, and shared decision-making, which may be used to inform clinical practice. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, highlighting uncertainty among the experts around some aspects of OCS use in asthma, such as adrenal insufficiency, which underscores the need for further research in these domains.

Characteristics of patients with frequent systemic corticosteroid bursts for asthma in real clinical practice: are there frequent "short bursts?"

OBJECTIVE

The data on intermittent systemic corticosteroid therapy for asthma exacerbation, clinically called a "short burst," is limited. This study aimed to investigate the characteristics of patients with frequent systemic corticosteroid bursts for asthma in real clinical practice.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who regularly visited our hospital for asthma treatment between January 2019 and December 2020 were reviewed. The number of systemic corticosteroid bursts during the past 1 year was collected, and those with frequent bursts (≥2 times/year) were defined as the Frequent group.

RESULTS

Data on 236 patients were analyzed. Among them, 5.5% (95% confidence interval 3.2-9.2%) were in the Frequent group. In the Frequent group, 23% of patients had no unplanned visits, and 38% experienced at least one corticosteroid burst without visiting a physician (self-medication). One-third of patients did not undertake high-dose inhaled corticosteroid treatment, and three-fourths of patients did not undertake long-acting muscarinic antagonist treatment. Low pulmonary function and increased blood eosinophils were independently associated with the Frequent group (adjusted odds ratio = 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.99, P = 0.039, per 10% predicted increase in a forced expiratory volume in 1 s; adjusted odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.29, P = 0.025, per 100/μL increase in blood eosinophils).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a certain rate of frequent corticosteroid bursts in real clinical practice. It is important to determine the actual condition, as some patients experienced "hidden" frequent bursts and have the option to reinforce the treatment.

Imaging for precision medicine: can V-P SPECT measure mepolizumab response in asthma?

Monoclonal antibody therapies are effective for many but not all people with severe asthma. Precision medicine guides treatment selection using biomarkers to select patients most likely to respond according to their inflammatory endotypes. However, when assessing response to treatment, greater precision is required. We report a case series describing treatment response to mepolizumab in four severe asthma patients, assessed by traditional methods and with objective ventilation/perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (V-P SPECT). In this series, patients with severe asthma received mepolizumab treatment with clinical outcomes recorded at commencement and at approximately 16 weeks post-treatment initiation. V-P SPECT imaging was performed before and after treatment to determine ventilation heterogeneity and perfusion, and its ability to assess treatment responsiveness. V-P SPECT shows promise as an objective measure to assess lung ventilation and perfusion to observe and assess responsiveness to mepolizumab. With quantification, this measure may allow better precision in determining treatment improvements.

Patterns of azithromycin use in obstructive airway diseases: a real-world observational study

Background and objective Low-dose long-term azithromycin is recommended in clinical practice guidelines for obstructive airway diseases (OADs), however, an optimal therapeutic regimen is not yet established. This study aimed to understand the patterns of azithromycin use in OADs, characterise the patients who received it, and evaluate its safety and efficacy using real-world data.

METHODS

We audited 91 patients who had received azithromycin for at least 4 weeks for the management of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis.

RESULTS

The mean age was 65±18 years, 60% were female, and 48% were ex-smokers. The majority had asthma (75%) either alone (50%) or in combination with COPD (12%) or bronchiectasis (13%). Most (64%) reported cough or sputum at baseline. The most common treatment regimen was azithromycin 250mg daily (73%) for more than 1 year (57%), with only seven adverse events. There was a significant reduction in the proportions of patients requiring emergency department visits (48% versus 32%; p<0.001) and hospital admissions (35% versus 31%; p<0.001) after starting azithromycin. In 88% of cases, physicians favoured the use of azithromycin.

CONCLUSION

Physicians are currently using low-dose azithromycin for a long duration of more than one year for the management of OADs. The typical case-definition is an older non-smoking adult with persistent asthma, often in combination with another OAD, and presenting with bothersome cough or sputum. Azithromycin was well tolerated and led to reduced healthcare utilisation. Further research is required to establish an optimal dosage regimen of azithromycin in OADs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Perspectives on decisions for treatment and care in severe asthma

Background

Severe asthma is a subtype of asthma that can be hard to control, resulting in an exceptional impact on an individual's quality of life. The aim of this review article is to explore the misalignment of perceptions of severe asthma among different stakeholders to identify how to reduce burden and improve delivery of care.

Results

The misalignment of perspectives is best reflected in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in asthma treatments, which are often designed for regulatory approval with a focus on exacerbations with no direct input from the individuals that the treatments are designed for. Based on a literature review and the clinical experience of the authors to overcome this disparity, the goals of people with severe asthma need to be incorporated throughout their care, from study design to the day-to-day management of their condition. Improved education for individuals and their support network will provide them with resources and knowledge so that they can effectively communicate their needs to other stakeholders involved in their care.

Conclusion/recommendation

A collaborative effort from all stakeholders is essential to ensure efficient management of asthma and a reduction in asthma burden on individuals and society.

Potential Severe Asthma Hidden in UK Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma may be underrecognized in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

Identify and quantify patients with potential severe asthma (PSA) in UK primary care, the proportion not referred, and compare primary care patients with PSA with patients with confirmed severe asthma from UK tertiary care.

METHODS

This was a historical cohort study including patients from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (aged ≥16 years, active asthma diagnosis pre-2014) and UK patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry (UK-ISAR aged ≥18 years, confirmed severe asthma in tertiary care). In the OPCRD, PSA was defined as Global INitiative for Asthma 2018 step 4 treatment and 2 or more exacerbations/y or at Global INitiative for Asthma step 5. The proportion of these patients and their referral status in the last year were quantified. Demographic and clinical characteristics of groups were compared.

RESULTS

Of 207,557 Optimum Patient Care Research Database patients with asthma, 16,409 (8%) had PSA. Of these, 72% had no referral/specialist review in the past year. Referred patients with PSA tended to have greater prevalence of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist add-ons (54.1 vs 39.8%), and experienced significantly (P < .001) more exacerbations per year (median, 3 vs 2/y), worse asthma control, and worse lung function (% predicted postbronchodilator FEV₁/forced vital capacity, 0.69 vs 0.72) versus nonreferred patients. Confirmed patients with severe asthma (ie, UK patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry) were younger (51 vs 65 years; P < .001), and significantly (P < .001) more likely to have uncontrolled asthma (91.4% vs 62.5%), a higher exacerbation rate (4/y [initial assessment] vs 3/y), use inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist add-ons (67.7% vs 54.1%), and have nasal polyposis (24.2% vs 6.8) than referred patients with PSA.

CONCLUSIONS

Large numbers of patients with PSA in the United Kingdom are underrecognized in primary care. These patients would benefit from a more systematic assessment in primary care and possible specialist referral.

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab as add-on therapy to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma in Singapore

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab added to standard of care (SOC) compared with SOC alone among patients with severe uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma in the Singapore setting.

METHODS

A Markov model with three health states (asthma on mepolizumab and SOC, asthma on SOC alone, and death) was developed from a healthcare system perspective over a lifetime horizon. During each 4-week cycle, patients in the non-death health states could experience asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroid burst, emergency department visit, or hospitalization. Asthma-related mortality following an exacerbation or all-cause mortality could also occur at each cycle. The model was populated using local costs while utilities were derived from international literature. Transition probabilities were obtained from a mixture of Singapore-specific and internationally published data.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis comparing mepolizumab plus SOC with SOC alone resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of SGD335 486 (USD238 195) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the ICER was most sensitive to the price of mepolizumab, followed by the proportion of exacerbations which required hospital intensive care. Despite restricting mepolizumab use to patients with a higher baseline exacerbation rate (3 in the past year) in a scenario analysis, the ICER remained high at SGD238 876 (USD 169 602) per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

At its current price, mepolizumab is not considered a cost-effective use of healthcare resources in Singapore. Substantial price reductions for mepolizumab are required to improve its cost-effectiveness to an acceptable range. These results will be useful to inform national funding decisions.

Epidemic Thunderstorm Asthma: Lessons Learned from the Storm Down-Under

Epidemic thunderstorm asthma (ETSA) is a global health problem that can strike without sufficient warning and can have catastrophic consequences. Because of climate change, future events are likely to become more common, more disastrous, and more unpredictable. To prevent loss of life and avoid surge events on health care infrastructure, identifying at-risk individuals and their potential biomarkers is the most prophylactic approach that can be taken to mitigate the deadly consequences of ETSA. In this review, we provide an update on the clinical mechanism, global prevalence, and characteristics of those patients moderately or severely at risk of ETSA. Identifying these patient characteristics will aid clinical professionals to provide suitable and personalized treatment plans and, in turn, avoid future loss of life.

Cumulative dispensing of high oral corticosteroid doses for treating asthma in Australia

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the level of dispensing of oral corticosteroids (OCS) for managing asthma in Australia, with a particular focus on the cumulative dispensing of doses associated with long term toxicity (≥ 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study; analysis of 10% random sample of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) dispensing data.

PARTICIPANTS, SETTING

People aged 12 years or more treated for asthma during 2014-2018, according to dispensing of controller inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of people dispensed OCS for managing asthma during 2014-2018; proportion who were cumulatively dispensed at least 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent. The secondary outcome was the number of people dispensed at least 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent during 2018, stratified by inhaler controller dose and use.

RESULTS

124 011 people had been dispensed at least two prescriptions of ICS during 2014-2018 and met the study definition for asthma, of whom 64 112 (51.7%) had also been dispensed OCS, including 34 580 (27.9% of the asthma group) cumulatively dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more. Of 138 073 people dispensed OCS at this level, 68 077 (49%) were patients with airway diseases. Dispensing of diabetes and osteoporosis medications was more common for people cumulatively dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more. During 2018, 4633 people with asthma using high dose ICS controllers were dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more, for 2316 of whom (50%) controller use was inadequate.

CONCLUSIONS

Cumulative exposure to OCS in Australia reaches levels associated with toxicity in one-quarter of patients with asthma using ICS. Cumulative dispensing of potentially toxic OCS amounts often accompanies inadequate inhaler controller dispensing. Better approaches are needed to improve adherence to controller therapy, improve outcomes for people with asthma, and to minimise the use and toxicity of OCS.