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

Contemporary Concise Review 2023: Asthma

Asthma research and management needs to meet the priorities of the end user-patients, carers and clinicians. A better understanding of the natural history of asthma and the progression of disease has highlighted the importance of early identification of patients with asthma and the potential role of early intervention. Management of mild asthma requires a consistent approach with the same detail and consideration used when managing severe disease. Evidence around treatable traits approaches continues to evolve, supporting the role of a personalized medicine in asthma. Oral corticosteroid (OCS) stewardship continues to be an urgent issue in asthma management. Strategies to taper OCS doses and the implementation of biologic therapies for their steroid sparing benefits will be important steps to address this problem. The concept of remission in asthma provides an ambitious target and treatment outcome.

Can we measure whether asthma guidelines lead to improved care?

The British Thoracic Society (BTS) and Scottish Intercollege Guidelines Network (SIGN), as well as National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), have previously produced separate asthma guidance differing in some key aspects in diagnosis and management leading to confusion, potentially hampering guideline dissemination and uptake. While there are inherent challenges, the upcoming release of new joint BTS/SIGN/NICE asthma guidance presents an opportunity to assess guideline adoption and its impact on clinical practice. The use of prescription data via databases such as OpenPrescribing can be used as a surrogate for guideline adoption and potentially linked to clinical outcomes such as hospital episode statistics (HES). The potential recommendation for anti-inflammatory reliever therapy (AIR) and maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) with inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol combination therapy in the next iteration of UK asthma guidance will require the accurate coding for the respective therapeutic approaches on prescribing platforms in order to assess their impact in real-life clinical practice. This could then direct targeted measures to improve wider guidance adoption leading to better clinical care in asthma based on up to date evidence.

Adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy and treatment escalation in the Swedish adult asthma population

BACKGROUND

Patients with uncontrolled asthma should be evaluated for medication adherence. This study aimed to identify characteristics associated with poor adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and to explore adherence prior to treatment escalation.

METHODS

This nationwide longitudinal cohort study included adult asthma patients (n = 30880) with a healthcare visit including Asthma Control Test (ACT) and registered in the Swedish National Airway Register between 1 July 2017 and 28 February 2019 (index date). Patient data was crosslinked to other national registers. Treatment steps two years pre- and one year post-index, were identified by prescribed drugs. Poor adherence was defined as Medication Possession Ratio <80 %.

RESULTS

Poor adherence was identified in 73 % of patients in treatment steps 2-5, where of 35 % had uncontrolled asthma (ACT≤19). In adjusted models, poor adherence was associated with better disease control; ACT≤19 (OR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.71-0.84), short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) overuse (0.69, 0.61-0.79) and exacerbations (0.79, 0.70-0.89) in steps 2-3. Among patients with uncontrolled asthma, poor adherence was associated with SABA overuse (1.71, 1.50-1.95), exacerbations (1.29, 1.15-1.46), current smoking (1.38, 1.21-1.57) and inversely associated with asthma management education (0.85, 0.78-0.93. Similar results were observed in steps 4-5. When investigating post-index treatment, 53 % remained stationary, 30 % stepped down and 17 % escalated treatment. Prior to escalation, 49 % had poor adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor ICS adherence was associated with better asthma control. Among uncontrolled patients, poor adherence was associated with SABA overuse and exacerbations. Our result highlights the importance of asthma management education to improve adherence in uncontrolled patients.

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

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

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

AIMS/OBJECTIVES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Remission in asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current concepts of remission in asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Until 2023, asthma guidelines have been promoting the concept of disease control, recommending the step-wise addition of drugs until the best possible disease control is achieved. With the advent of highly effective, anti-inflammatory disease-modifying antiasthmatic drugs (DMAADs), treatment goals of asthma have changed. Several national guidelines have now announced remission as a general treatment goal in asthma. Currently, all guidelines agree that asthma remission is defined by the presence of at least three characteristics over a period of at least one 1 year: absence of exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use for the treatment of asthma and minimal asthma-related symptoms. In the future, a generally accepted, evidence-based and easy-to-use definition of remission will be needed for daily clinical practice. It is clear, however, that precise phenotyping (including measurement of biomarkers) is an essential prerequisite to achieve clinical remission in each individual patient.

SUMMARY

Remission has been included as the treatment goal in asthma in several national guidelines, reflecting the paradigm shift in asthma, from short-term symptom control to long-term symptom prevention. An international consensus on the criteria for asthma remission is expected in the near future.

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

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

Mild asthma: Conundrums, complexities and the need to customize care

Mild and moderate asthma cover a wide range of asthma presentations, phenotypes and symptom burden, and account for the majority of people with asthma worldwide. Mild asthma has been difficult to define because of its heterogeneity and wide spectrum of impact and outcomes, including being associated with severe exacerbations. Assessment of mild-moderate asthma is best made by combining asthma symptom control and exacerbation risk as the principle means by which to determine treatment needs. Incontrovertible evidence and guidelines support treatment initiation with anti-inflammatory medication, completely avoiding reliever-only treatment of mild asthma. Shared decision making with patients and a treatable traits approach will ensure that a holistic approach is taken to maximize patient outcomes. Most importantly, mild asthma should be regarded as a reversible, potentially curable condition, remaining in long-term remission through minimizing triggers and optimizing care.

Exercise-Induced Asthma: Managing Respiratory Issues in Athletes

Asthma is a complex respiratory condition characterized by chronic airway inflammation and variable expiratory airflow limitation, affecting millions globally. Among athletes, particularly those competing at elite levels, the prevalence of respiratory conditions is notably heightened, varying between 20% and 70% across specific sports. Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is a common issue among athletes, impacting their performance and well-being. The prevalence rates vary based on the sport, training environment, and genetics. Exercise is a known trigger for asthma, but paradoxically, it can also improve pulmonary function and alleviate EIB severity. However, athletes' asthma phenotypes differ, leading to varied responses to medications and challenges in management. The unique aspects in athletes include heightened airway sensitivity, allergen, pollutant exposure, and temperature variations. This review addresses EIB in athletes, focusing on pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment. The pathogenesis of EIB involves complex interactions between physiological and environmental factors. Airway dehydration and cooling are key mechanisms, leading to osmotic and thermal theories. Airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness are common factors. Elite athletes often exhibit distinct inflammatory responses and heightened airway sensitivity, influenced by sport type, training, and environment. Swimming and certain sports pose higher EIB risks, with chlorine exposure in pools being a notable factor. Immune responses, lung function changes, and individual variations contribute to EIB in athletes. Diagnosing EIB in athletes requires objective testing, as baseline lung function tests can yield normal results. Both EIB with asthma (EIBA) and without asthma (EIBwA) must be considered. Exercise and indirect bronchoprovocation tests provide reliable diagnoses. In athletes, exercise tests offer effectiveness in diagnosing EIB. Spirometry and bronchodilation tests are standard approaches, but the diagnostic emphasis is shifting toward provocation tests. Despite its challenges, achieving an optimal diagnosis of EIA constitutes the cornerstone for effective management, leading to improved performance, reduced risk of complications, and enhanced quality of life. The management of EIB in athletes aligns with the general principles for symptom control, prevention, and reducing complications. Non-pharmacological approaches, including trigger avoidance and warming up, are essential. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the cornerstone of asthma therapy in athletes. Short-acting beta agonists (SABA) are discouraged as sole treatments. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) and mast cell stabilizing agents (MCSA) are potential options. Optimal management improves the athletes' quality of life and allows them to pursue competitive sports effectively.