Treatment and outcomes in patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis in the United kingdom

Long-acting beta-agonists plus inhaled corticosteroids safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized studies

Background

Although several systematic reviews investigated the safety of long-acting beta–agonists (LABAs) in asthma, they mainly addressed randomized clinical trials while evidence from non-randomized studies has been mostly neglected. We aim to assess the risk of serious adverse events in adults and children with asthma treated with LABAs and Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICs), compared to patients treated only with ICs, from published non-randomized studies.

Methods

The protocol registration number was CRD42012003387 (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/Prospero). Literature search for articles published since 1990 was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Two authors selected studies independently for inclusion and extracted the data. A third reviewer resolved discrepancies. To assess the risk of serious adverse events, meta-analyses were performed calculating odds ratio summary estimators using random effect models when heterogeneity was found, and fixed effect models otherwise.

Results

Of 4,415 candidate articles, 1,759 abstracts were reviewed and 220 articles were fully read. Finally, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of them were retrospective observational cohorts. Sample sizes varied from 50 to 514,216. The meta-analyses performed (69,939-624,303 participants according to the outcome considered) showed that odds ratio of the LABAs and ICs combined treatment when compared with ICs alone was: 0.88 (95% CI 0.69-1.12) for asthma-related hospitalization; 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.84) for asthma-related emergency visits; 1.02 (95% CI 0.94-1.10) for systemic corticosteroids; and 0.95 (95% CI 0.9-1.0) for the combined outcome.

Conclusions

Evidence from observational studies shows that the combined treatment of LABAs and ICs is not associated with a higher risk of serious adverse events, compared to ICs alone. Major gaps identified were prospective design, paediatric population and inclusion of mortality as a primary outcome.

Impact of montelukast on asthma associated with rhinitis, and other triggers and co-morbidities

INTRODUCTION

Rhinitis and other specific triggers or co-morbidities (tobacco exposure, excess weight, aspirin sensitivity or heredity factors) are frequently associated with uncontrolled asthma. Asthma associated with these exacerbating factors appears to be related to an increase in leukotriene-mediated inflammation.

METHODS

We reviewed the role of montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in the treatment of asthma associated with these factors by using the PubMed database to search the English and French biomedical literature for articles describing randomized-controlled trials, large observational studies and reviews (published up to May 2012, inclusive).

RESULTS

Montelukast, either alone or in combination with other drugs, is an effective treatment against rhinitis-associated asthma. Montelukast also offers therapeutic benefits against exercise-induced asthma or in cases of asthma linked to tobacco exposure, excess weight or aspirin hypersensitivity. Thus, for some patients, montelukast may constitute an alternative to the gold-standard treatment of inhaled corticosteroids. Polymorphisms in several genes encoding proteins of the leukotriene signaling pathway may contribute to the variability in response to montelukast.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we have shown that montelukast treatment could be of particular benefit to subgroups of patients with asthma associated with rhinitis, exercise, tobacco exposure, being overweight or aspirin hypersensitivity.

Prevalence and impact of rhinitis in asthma. SACRA, a cross-sectional nation-wide study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Asthma and rhinitis are common co-morbidities everywhere in the world but nation-wide studies assessing rhinitis in asthmatics using questionnaires based on guidelines are not available.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence, classification, and severity of rhinitis using the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) criteria in Japanese patients with diagnosed and treated asthma.

METHODS

The study was performed from March to August 2009. Patients in physicians' waiting rooms, or physicians themselves, filled out questionnaires on rhinitis and asthma based on ARIA and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) diagnostic guides. The patients answered questions on the severity of the diseases and a Visual Analog Scale. Their physicians made the diagnosis of rhinitis.

RESULTS

In this study, 1910 physicians enrolled 29,518 asthmatics; 15,051 (51.0%) questionnaires were administered by physician, and 26,680 (90.4%) patients were evaluable. Self- and physician-administered questionnaires gave similar results. Rhinitis was diagnosed in 68.5% of patients with self-administered questionnaires and 66.2% with physician-administered questionnaires. In this study, 994 (7.6%) patients with self-administered and 561 (5.2%) patients with physician-administered questionnaires indicated rhinitis symptoms on the questionnaires without a physician's diagnosis of rhinitis. Most patients with the physician's diagnosis of rhinitis had moderate/severe rhinitis. Asthma control was significantly impaired in patients with a physician's diagnosis of rhinitis for all GINA clinical criteria except exacerbations. There were significantly more patients with uncontrolled asthma as defined by GINA in those with a physician's diagnosis of rhinitis (25.4% and 29.7%) by comparison with those without rhinitis (18.0% and 22.8%).

CONCLUSION

Rhinitis is common in asthma and impairs asthma control.

Importance of allergic rhinitis management in achieving asthma control: ARIA update

Asthma continues to be a major burden for the health and healthcare of people worldwide. The recent updates of the Global Initiative for Asthma and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute asthma guidelines stress the need for achieving and monitoring asthma 'control', emphasizing the importance of identifying, assessing and treating comorbid conditions. Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a major comorbid condition in people with asthma and is related to inflammation of the upper portions of the airway. Recognizing and treating AR has been shown to improve asthma control, specifically by decreasing rates of asthma attacks or asthma exacerbations. In 2008, updated Allergic Rhinitis in Asthma (ARIA) guidelines were published. The updated version of the guidelines has a familiar look, with classification systems and care algorithms that are similar to those presented in other asthma guidelines. The new ARIA guidelines make one major change that should affect the care of adults and children with asthma: everyone with asthma should be assessed for AR. In addition, AR should be considered a risk factor for asthma, and all children and adults with AR, especially persistent AR, should be assessed for asthma, including testing lung function for reversible obstruction whenever feasible. Treatment for AR follows a similar format to that for asthma, including symptom management, treatment of chronic inflammation, identification and management of triggers, including allergens, and ongoing education for self-management. Pharmacotherapies that address both asthma and AR include corticosteroids (intranasal and inhaled), leukotriene receptor antagonists, immunomodulation or immunotherapy. Too often, pharmacotherapy is not supplemented by the necessary education and evaluation related to allergen, trigger identification and management.

Use of long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled steroids in asthma: meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Current asthma guidelines recommend the use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) for long-term control and prevention of symptoms in persistent asthma. Data on the risk of asthma exacerbations of LABAs in combination with ICSs, as prescribed in typical clinical practice, are very scarce.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of observational studies to examine the risk of asthma exacerbations, measured as asthma-related hospitalization and/or asthma-related emergency room (ER) visits, in adults receiving LABAs plus ICSs in a fixed-dose combination compared with patients receiving ICSs alone.

RESULTS

Seven studies, all retrospective cohort studies conducted in the United States, representing approximately 96,000 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis found that the use of ICSs plus LABAs was associated with a lower risk of asthma-related hospitalizations and/or ER visits than ICSs alone (odds ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.72-0.94). Sensitivity analyses to explore heterogeneity of endpoint definition, duration of follow-up, and patient characteristics did not significantly alter the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this systematic meta-analysis suggests that patients in clinical practice treated with a single inhaler containing ICSs plus LABAs experience fewer asthma exacerbations than similar patients treated with ICSs alone.

Impact of comorbidities on asthma

Asthma is a common and serious illness with suboptimal outcomes of care. Epidemiological studies show certain comorbidities occurring more frequently than expected with asthma, with some being associated with poor control and a differential response to therapy options. This review summarizes the evidence of clinically important comorbidities, focusing on the best-explored conditions, including rhinitis and rhinosinusitis, anxiety and depression, obesity, gastroesophageal reflux, smoking and dysfunctional breathing. The evidence of epidemiological and pathophysiological associations for these comorbidities is explored, and the practical therapeutic implications are considered. Comorbidities are important for clinicians treating asthma as they may be markers of patients at risk of poor outcomes, they may point to specific effective treatment options and they are important to researchers as possible confounding factors in clinical trials.

Montelukast as an alternative to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids in the management of mild asthma (the SIMPLE trial): an open-label effectiveness trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of montelukast as monotherapy for patients with mild asthma who remain uncontrolled or unsatisfied while on inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy.

DESIGN

A multicentre, open-label study. Patients (six years of age or older) had ICS therapy discontinued and were treated with orally administered montelukast once daily for six weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the rate at which asthma symptom control was achieved or maintained after six weeks of treatment. The secondary outcome measures were to compare compliance and physician satisfaction, and to further assess the safety and tolerability of montelukast.

RESULTS

Of the 534 patients enrolled, 481 (90.1%) completed the study. Mean (+/- SD) age was 27.8+/-19.0 years. The number of patients with uncontrolled symptoms decreased from 455 (85.2%) at baseline to 143 (26.8%) at week 6 (P<0.001), and mean Asthma Control Questionnaire score decreased from 1.4+/-0.8 to 0.6+/-0.6 (P<0.001), representing a clinically significant improvement. Of the 79 patients with controlled asthma symptoms at baseline, 73.4% maintained asthma control at week 6. Compliance to asthma therapy increased from 41% at baseline for ICS to 88% at week 6 for montelukast (P<0.001). Physician satisfaction with treatment increased from 43% to 85% (P<0.001) and patient satisfaction increased from 45% at baseline to 94% at week 6. No serious adverse events were reported over the course of the study.

CONCLUSION

Montelukast is an effective and well-tolerated alternative to ICS treatment in patients with mild asthma who are uncontrolled or unsatisfied with low-dose ICS therapy.

Asthma control in patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis receiving add-on montelukast therapy for 12 months: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Montelukast, a potent leukotriene receptor antagonist, is approved for treatment of both asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR). No studies to date have examined whether montelukast can improve asthma control over a long period of time in patients with seasonal AR and asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate asthma control and use of asthma-related medical resources by patients with inadequately controlled mild to moderate persistent asthma and seasonal AR who required addition of montelukast as part of routine care.

METHODS

This multicenter, 24-month, pre-post retrospective observational study included patients receiving current inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy (alone or in combination with long-acting beta-agonist [LABA]), who received add-on treatment with montelukast for 12 consecutive months. The incidence of asthma attacks, defined as emergency department visit, hospitalization, or oral corticosteroid use for asthma, was compared for the year before and the year after addition of montelukast to therapy.

RESULTS

For the 696 patients from Italy, Poland, and Spain who were included in the analyses, the proportion of patients experiencing an asthma attack declined from 31.5% in the year before to 10.1% (p < 0.001) the year after addition of montelukast to therapy. Proportions of patients with an asthma-related emergency room visit, hospitalization, and oral corticosteroid use declined from 18.7% to 3.9%, from 5.2% to 1.4%, and from 17.5% to 5.9% (all p < 0.01), respectively. The incidence of these outcomes declined in all three countries, regardless of baseline asthma severity or asthma therapy (ICS alone or ICS + LABA). Important study limitations include the possibility of selection bias or missing medical chart data in this retrospective study design. Also noteworthy is the inclusion of only those patients who remained persistent with montelukast therapy. Therefore, the results of the study are relevant for patients who remain persistent with montelukast therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of montelukast to current ICS therapy improved long-term asthma control and resulted in substantial reductions in asthma-related resource use by patients with mild or moderate persistent asthma and concomitant seasonal AR who were persistent with montelukast therapy in this retrospective observational study.