Is the BTS/SIGN guideline confusing? A retrospective database analysis of asthma therapy

Real-World Dispensing Patterns of Inhalation Medication in Young Adult Asthma: An Inception Cohort Study

Purpose

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) suggests a step-wise approach for pharmacological treatment of asthma. Valid study of real-world treatment patterns using dispensing databases includes proper measurement of medication adherence. We aim to explore such patterns by applying a time-varying proportion of days covered (tPDC)-based algorithm.

Patients and Methods

We designed a retrospective inception cohort study using the University of Groningen IADB.nl community pharmacy dispensing database. Included were 19,184 young adults who initiated asthma medication anywhere between 1994 and 2021, in the Netherlands. Main treatment steps were defined as: 1 - SABA/ICS-formoterol as needed, 2 - low dose ICS, 3 - low dose ICS + LABA or tiotropium, or intermediate dose ICS, 4 - intermediate to high dose ICS + LABA or tiotropium, triple therapy, or high dose ICS, 5 - treatment prescribed by a specialist. Changes in treatment steps were determined using a time-varying proportion of days covered (tPDC)-based algorithm. Individual drug treatment trajectories were visualized over time using a lasagna plot.

Results

At initiation, of the 19,184 included individuals, 52%, 7%, 15%, 16%, and 10% started treatment in steps 1 to 5, respectively. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 3 (1-7) years. Median (IQR) number of switches was 1 (0-3). Comparing starting step to last observed step, 37% never switched between treatment steps, 20% of individuals stepped down and 22% stepped up.

Conclusion

The low proportion of treatment switches between steps indicates that tailoring of treatment to patients' needs might be suboptimal. The tPDC-based algorithm functions well in translating dispensing data into continuous drug-utilization data, enabling a more granular assessment of treatment patterns among asthma patients.

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.

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.

Systematic Literature Review of Systemic Corticosteroid Use for Asthma Management

Systemic corticosteroid use to manage uncontrolled asthma and its associated healthcare burden may account for important health-related adverse effects. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the real-world extent and burden of systemic corticosteroid use in asthma. We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify English-language articles published in 2010–2017, using search terms for asthma with keywords for oral corticosteroids and systemic corticosteroids. Observational studies, prescription database analyses, economic analyses, and surveys on oral/systemic corticosteroid use in children (>5 yr old), adolescents (12–17 yr old), and adults with asthma were included. We identified and reviewed 387 full-text articles, and our review included data from 139 studies. The included studies were conducted in Europe, North America, and Asia. Overall, oral/systemic corticosteroids were commonly used for asthma management and were more frequently used in patients with severe asthma than in those with milder disease. Long-term oral/systemic corticosteroid use was, in general, less frequent than short-term use. Compared with no use, long-term and repeated short-term oral/systemic corticosteroid use were associated with an increased risk of acute and chronic adverse events, even when doses were comparatively low. Greater oral/systemic corticosteroid exposure was also associated with increased costs and healthcare resource use. This review provides a comprehensive overview of oral/systemic corticosteroid use and associated adverse events for patients with all degrees of asthma severity and exposure duration. We report that oral/systemic corticosteroid use is prevalent in asthma management, and the risks of acute and chronic complications increase with the cumulative oral corticosteroid dosage.

Real-life prescribing of asthmatic treatments in UK general practice over time using 2014 BTS/SIGN steps

The 2014 British Thoracic Society (BTS) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to asthma management. We investigated the management of asthma in primary care in the UK to understand how real-world practice compares with BTS/SIGN guidelines. Asthma patients were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink from September 2006 to August 2016. Aims were to classify patients according to BTS/SIGN steps, describe the proportion of patients transitioning between steps and describe patient demographics and clinical characteristics per group. Overall, 647,308 patients with asthma were identified (40,096 aged 5–11 years; 607,212 aged 12–80 years). Most treated patients were in step 1 or 2 (88.3% of children/67.5% of adults in December 2007; 83.0% of children/67.0% of adults in June 2016). Most patients remained within their treatment step within a 6-month interval (>78% of children and adults throughout the study duration). The proportion of patients stepping up and down reduced from the beginning of the study, although stepping down to step 1 was relatively common in both adults and children. Few patients had a recorded asthma review in the year before reference date (18.8% of children and 14.8% of adults). Although prescribing patterns meant that most patients remained within their treatment step throughout the study, we cannot be sure that this was because their disease was truly stable. The small proportion of patients stepping up/down and the lack of recorded asthma review suggest that patients may not be treated in accordance with BTS/SIGN guidelines.

Budesonide + formoterol delivered via Spiromax® for the management of asthma and COPD: The potential impact on unscheduled healthcare costs of improving inhalation technique compared with Turbuhaler®

BACKGROUND

Fixed-dose combinations of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β₂ agonists are commonly used for the treatment of asthma and COPD. However, the most frequently prescribed dry powder inhaler delivering this medicine - Symbicort^® (budesonide and formoterol, BF) Turbuhaler^® - is associated with poor inhalation technique, which can lead to poor disease control and high disease management costs. A recent study showed that patients make fewer inhaler errors when using the novel DuoResp^® (BF) Spiromax^® inhaler, compared with BF Turbuhaler^®. Therefore switching patients from BF Turbuhaler^® to BF Spiromax^® could improve inhalation technique, and potentially lead to better disease control and healthcare cost savings.

METHODS

A model was developed to estimate the budget impact of reducing poor inhalation technique by switching asthma and COPD patients from BF Turbuhaler^® to BF Spiromax^® over three years in Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK. The model estimated changes to the number, and associated cost, of unscheduled healthcare events. The model considered two scenarios: in Scenario 1, all patients were immediately switched from BF Turbuhaler^® to BF Spiromax^®; in Scenario 2, 4%, 8% and 12% of patients were switched in years 1, 2 and 3 of the model, respectively.

RESULTS

In Scenario 1, per patient cost savings amounted to €60.10, €49.67, €94.14 and €38.20 in Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK, respectively. Total cost savings in each country were €100.86 million, €19.42 million, €36.65 million and €15.44 million over three years, respectively, with an estimated 597,754, 151,480, 228,986 and 122,368 healthcare events avoided. In Scenario 2, cost savings totalled €8.07 million, €1.55 million, €2.93 million and €1.23 million over three years, respectively, with 47,850, 12,118, 18,319, and 9789 healthcare events avoided. Savings per patient were €4.81, €3.97, €7.53 and €3.06.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that reductions in poor inhalation technique by switching patients from BF Turbuhaler^® to BF Spiromax^® are likely to improve patients' disease control and generate considerable cost savings through healthcare events avoided.

The economic burden of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the impact of poor inhalation technique with commonly prescribed dry powder inhalers in three European countries

BACKGROUND

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are common chronic inflammatory respiratory diseases, which impose a substantial burden on healthcare systems and society. Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2 agonists (LABA), often administered using dry powder inhalers (DPIs), are frequently prescribed to control persistent asthma and COPD. Use of DPIs has been associated with poor inhalation technique, which can lead to increased healthcare resource use and costs.

METHODS

A model was developed to estimate the healthcare resource use and costs associated with asthma and COPD management in people using commonly prescribed DPIs (budesonide + formoterol Turbuhaler(®) or fluticasone + salmeterol Accuhaler(®)) over 1 year in Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom (UK). The model considered direct costs (inhaler acquisition costs and scheduled and unscheduled healthcare costs), indirect costs (productive days lost), and estimated the contribution of poor inhalation technique to the burden of illness.

RESULTS

The direct cost burden of managing asthma and COPD for people using budesonide + formoterol Turbuhaler(®) or fluticasone + salmeterol Accuhaler(®) in 2015 was estimated at €813 million, €560 million, and €774 million for Spain, Sweden and the UK, respectively. Poor inhalation technique comprised 2.2-7.7 % of direct costs, totalling €105 million across the three countries. When lost productivity costs were included, total expenditure increased to €1.4 billion, €1.7 billion and €3.3 billion in Spain, Sweden and the UK, respectively, with €782 million attributable to poor inhalation technique across the three countries. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model results were most sensitive to changes in the proportion of patients prescribed ICS and LABA FDCs, and least sensitive to differences in the number of antimicrobials and oral corticosteroids prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of managing asthma and COPD using commonly prescribed DPIs is considerable. A substantial, and avoidable, contributor to this burden is poor inhalation technique. Measures that can improve inhalation technique with current DPIs, such as easier-to-use inhalers or better patient training, could offer benefits to patients and healthcare providers through improving disease outcomes and lowering costs.

Contemporaneous International Asthma Guidelines Present Differing Recommendations: An Analysis

Background. Several international groups develop asthma guidelines. Conflicting recommendations across guidelines have been described in several disease areas and may contribute to practice variability. Accordingly, we compared the latest Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) asthma guideline with contemporaneous international asthma guidelines to evaluate conflicting recommendations and their causes. Methods. We identified the latest CTS asthma guideline update (2012) and the following societies which also updated their guidelines in 2012: the British Thoracic Society and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and the Global Initiative for Asthma. We compared these three guidelines on (1) key methodological factors and (2) adult pharmacotherapy recommendations. Results. Methods used and documentation provided for literature search strategy and dates, evidence synthesis, outcomes considered, evidence appraisal, and recommendation formulation varied between guidelines. Criteria used to define suboptimal asthma control varied widely between guidelines. Inhaled corticosteroid dosing recommendations diverged, as did recommendations surrounding use of budesonide/formoterol as a reliever and controller and recommendations in the subsequent step. Conclusions. There are important differences between recommendations provided in contemporaneous asthma guidelines. Causes include differences in methods used for interpreting evidence and formulating recommendations. Adopting a common set of valid and explicit methods across international societies could harmonize recommendations and facilitate guideline implementation.

A comparison of medication adherence/persistence for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the United Kingdom

AIM

To describe and compare adherence and persistence with maintenance therapies in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the United Kingdom (UK).

METHODS

A retrospective prescribing database cohort was obtained from 44 general practitioner surgeries in National Health Service Forth Valley Scotland. Patients with physician-diagnosed asthma or COPD who received maintenance therapy between January 2008 and December 2009 were included. Five classes of therapy were assessed: inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta-agonists, combination therapy inhalers, theophyllines and long-acting muscarinic antagonists. Adherence was calculated using the medication possession ratio (MPR) and persistence was determined using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for the time to discontinuation (TTD) over 1 year. Two step-wise logistic regressions were performed to assess the contribution of diagnosis to adherence/persistence.

RESULTS

A total of 13,322 patients were included in the analysis: 10,521 patients with asthma and 2801 patients with COPD. 25.2% of medication episodes for asthma and 45.6% of medication episodes for COPD were classified as having an adequate medication supply (MPR of 80-120%). The overall median TTD was 92 days (IQR, interquartile range: 50-186 days) for patients with asthma and 116 days (IQR: 58-259 days, comparison p < 0.001) for patients with COPD. Patients with COPD were found to be more likely to achieve an MPR of at least 80% (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.15-1.40), but had a similar likelihood of persistence at 1 year to patients with asthma.

CONCLUSION

Adherence and persistence with respiratory therapies in the UK is relatively low. There is suggestion that patients with COPD may display more adherent behaviours than patients with asthma.