Optimising treatment for severe asthma

Geographical differences in the use of oral corticosteroids in patients with severe asthma in Spain: heat map based on existing databases analyses

BACKGROUND

Although there are currently alternative treatments to the long-term use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in severe asthma, recent studies show excessive use depending on geography and differences in medical practice. The objective of the study was to describe the differences in OCS use for severe asthma across the Spanish geography.

METHODS

This is a real-world study using existing databases (year 2019): longitudinal patient database (EMR), based on electronic medical records, and database of pharmacological consumption (Sell-in) in basic healthcare areas. With EMR, the percentage of OCS prescriptions corresponding to patients with severe asthma (ICD-9 "asthma" and prescription of biological treatment and/or high dose of inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting inhaled β2 agonists) was calculated. This percentage was transferred to the OCS consumption of each basic healthcare area as reported in the Sell-in database and a national heat map was created. The estimation of OCS use in patients with severe asthma per 100,000 inhabitants for each region was calculated by grouping basic healthcare areas and the mean OCS use per patient for different regions in Spain was also estimated.

RESULTS

Patients with severe asthma in Spain were mostly female (69.6%), with a mean age (SD) of 57.6 years (18.01). Median time (Pc25-Pc75) since asthma diagnosis was 83.1 months (34.65-131.56). Of all patients with OCS prescriptions in 2019 identified in EMR, 4.4% corresponded to patients with severe asthma. Regions with the highest OCS use were Asturias, Andalucía, and Galicia, whereas those with the lowest use were Navarra, Baleares, Madrid and País Vasco. The mean OCS use per patient with severe asthma in 2019 throughout Spain was 1099.85 mg per patient, ranging from 782.99 mg in Navarra to 1432.64 in Asturias.

CONCLUSIONS

There are geographical differences between Spanish regions with respect to the use of OCS in patients with severe asthma. The national mean consumption of OCS per patient with severe asthma and year is above the limits that indicate good asthma control.

A Systematic and Critical Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Regulators have called for greater emphasis on the role of the patient voice to inform medical product development and decision making, and expert guidelines and reports for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) both explicitly recommend the consideration of patient preferences in the management of these diseases. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are commonly used to quantify stakeholders’ treatment preferences and estimate the trade-offs they are willing to make between outcomes such as treatment benefits and risks.

Objective

The aim of this systematic literature review is to provide an up-to-date and critical review of DCEs published in asthma and COPD; specifically, we aim to evaluate the subject of preference studies conducted in asthma and COPD, what attributes have been included, stakeholders’ preferences, and the consistency in reporting of instrument development, testing and reporting of results.

Methods

A systematic review of published DCEs on asthma and COPD treatments was conducted using Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Studies were included if they included a DCE conducted in a relevant population (e.g. patients with asthma or COPD or their caregivers, asthma or COPD-treating clinicians, or the general population), and reported quantitative outcomes on participants’ preferences. Study characteristics were summarised descriptively, and descriptive analyses of attribute categories, consistency in reporting on key criteria, and stakeholder preferences were undertaken.

Results

A total of 33 eligible studies were identified, including 28 unique DCEs. The majority (n = 20; 71%) of studies were conducted in a patient sample. Studies focused on inhaler treatments, and included attributes in five key categories: symptoms and treatment benefits (n = 23; 82%), treatment convenience (n = 19; 68%), treatment cost (n = 17; 61%), treatment risks (n = 13; 46%), and other (n = 10; 36%). Symptoms and treatment benefits were the attributes most frequently ranked as important to patients (n = 26, 72%), followed by treatment risks (n = 7, 39%). Several studies (n = 9, 32%) did not qualitatively pre-test their DCE, and a majority did not report the uncertainty in estimated outcomes (n = 18; 64%).

Conclusions

DCEs in asthma and COPD have focused on treatment benefits and convenience, with less evidence generated on participants’ risk tolerance. Quality criteria and reporting standards are needed to promote study quality and ensure consistency in reporting between studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-021-00536-w.

What matters to people with severe asthma? Exploring add-on asthma medication and outcomes of importance

There is an increasing number of new therapies for severe asthma; however, what outcomes people with severe asthma would like improved and what aspects they prioritise in new medications remain unknown. This study aimed to understand what outcomes are important to patients when prescribed new treatments and to determine the characteristics of importance to patients in their choice of asthma treatments.

Participants with severe asthma (n=50) completed a cross-sectional survey that ranked 17 potential hypothetical outcomes of treatment using a seven-point Likert scale, as well as selecting their top five overall outcomes. Participants also completed hypothetical scenarios trading off medication characteristics for four hypothetical add-on asthma treatments.

Participants (58% male), had a mean±sd age of 62.2±13.5 years. Their top three prioritised outcomes were: to improve overall quality of life (selected by 83% of people), reduce number and severity of asthma attacks (72.3%), and being able to participate in physical activity (59.6%) When trading off medication characteristics, the majority of patients with severe asthma chose the hypothetical medication with the best treatment efficacy (68%). However, a subgroup of patients prioritised the medication's side-effect profile and mode of delivery to select their preferred medication.

People with severe asthma value improved quality of life as an important outcome of treatment. Shared decision-making discussions between clinicians and patients that centre around medication efficacy and side-effect profile can incorporate patient preferences for add-on therapy in severe asthma.

Improving quality of life is an important treatment outcome. Shared decision-making discussions between clinicians and patients that centre around efficacy and side-effect profile incorporate patient preferences for add-on therapy in severe asthma.https://bit.ly/2GY1Sc4

The Patients' Experience of Severe Asthma Add-On Pharmacotherapies: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

PURPOSE

Add-on therapies for severe asthma are continually emerging with proven efficacy in randomised controlled trials. To date, however, there are no qualitative studies exploring patients' experiences with these treatments. We aimed to understand the experience of patients who were treated with an add-on therapy for their severe asthma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study was conducted, participants were recruited from the respiratory clinics and databases of a tertiary referral hospital. Participants with treatment-refractory severe asthma (n=20) prescribed an add-on therapy for >4 months (75% mepolizumab; 25% omalizumab, and 25% macrolide) were recruited. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted, with interviews thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Participants' mean (SD) age was 59.5 (15.3) years, and 50% were male. Participants reported 4.5 (2.3) exacerbations in the past year. Asthma Control Questionnaire score was 2.0 (1.4). The monoclonal add-on therapies had been prescribed for a median (IQR) of 12.5 (7.0, 24.0) months. Experience was captured in four emergent themes: "Life is just easier" provided an overall message that the add-on therapy made the participants' life easier in terms of increasing participation, levelling out symptoms, providing more energy and reducing healthcare use. "Prednisone: A necessary evil" was discussed, particularly in terms of dose and dependence and damaging side effects. The theme "worry and hope for the future" referenced treatment non-response or cessation of effect which was discussed by some participants. Finally, "holistic care" was centred on the sentiment that the participant's asthma management and overall health were not related to one aspect or medication alone.

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe asthma experience vast improvements in quality-of-life and life participation with add-on therapies, but there remains a significant burden related to oral corticosteroids and incomplete treatment responses. Addressing this residual burden is an important area for future research.

RGS proteins, GRKs, and beta-arrestins modulate G protein-mediated signaling pathways in asthma

Asthma is a highly prevalent disorder characterized by chronic lung inflammation and reversible airways obstruction. Pathophysiological features of asthma include episodic and reversible airway narrowing due to increased bronchial smooth muscle shortening in response to external and host-derived mediators, excessive mucus secretion into the airway lumen, and airway remodeling. The aberrant airway smooth muscle (ASM) phenotype observed in asthma manifests as increased sensitivity to contractile mediators (EC₅₀) and an increase in the magnitude of contraction (E_max); collectively these attributes have been termed "airways hyper-responsiveness" (AHR). This defining feature of asthma can be promoted by environmental factors including airborne allergens, viruses, and air pollution and other irritants. AHR reduces airway caliber and obstructs airflow, evoking clinical symptoms such as cough, wheezing and shortness of breath. G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have a central function in asthma through their impact on ASM and airway inflammation. Many but not all treatments for asthma target GPCRs mediating ASM contraction or relaxation. Here we discuss the roles of specific GPCRs, G proteins, and their associated signaling pathways, in asthma, with an emphasis on endogenous mechanisms of GPCR regulation of ASM tone and lung inflammation including regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins, G-protein coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and β-arrestin.

Comparison of dental caries (DMFT and DMFS indices) between asthmatic patients and control group in Iran: a meta-analysis

Background

The association between caries index, which is diagnosed by Decayed, Missing, and Filled Teeth (DMFT), and asthma has been assessed in several studies, which yielded contradictory results. Meta-analysis is the statistical procedure for combining data from multiple studies and reducing the differences among parameters due to the increased number of studies involved in the analysis process. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the relationship between dental caries using decayed, missing, filled teeth indices (DMFT, dmft, and DMFS indices) and asthma using meta-analysis.

Methods

Databases were searched using such keywords as “Asthma,” “Caries,” “DMFT,” “DMFS,” “Iran,” and OR operators, AND, and NOT. After the elimination of duplicate documentation, the articles which met the inclusion criteria were selected. Quality assessment was performed based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Checklist (NOS). After that, standardized mean difference (SMD) of DMFT, dmft, and Decayed, Missing, and Filled Surfaces (DMFS) indices were estimated.

Results

The number of 10 evidence was extracted out of nine studies in which mean oral health indices were compared between asthmatic patients and the control group. Out of 10 evidences that examined the association of DMFT, dmft, and DMFS with asthma, these indices were higher in asthmatic patients than the control group in seven cases. In three cases, these differences were statistically significant. The SMD of DMFT, dmft, and DMFS indices between asthmatic patients and the control group at the confidence level of 95% were reported as 0.29 (− 0.05, 0.62), 0.48 (− 0.20, 1.17), and − 0.05(− 0.30, 0.21), respectively.

Conclusion

According to the results, the prevalence of dental caries is higher among patients with asthma than in the control group. Therefore, having asthma could be considered a risk factor for the development of dental caries.

Single-cell transcriptomic analysis reveals the immune landscape of lung in steroid-resistant asthma exacerbation

Exaggerated airway hyperresponsiveness and inflammation are hallmarks of asthma, and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) exposure is linked to the severity of the disease and steroid resistance. To investigate the mechanisms underlying asthma exacerbation, we established a mouse model of LPS-induced steroid-resistant exacerbation on the background of house dust mite (HDM)-induced asthma to profile the immune cells in lung by using single-cell RNA deep sequencing. Twenty immune subsets were identified by their molecular and functional properties. Specific cell clusters of basophils, type 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2), and CD8+ memory T cells were the predominant sources of interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 transcripts whose expressions were dexamethasone resistant. Production of IL-13 by these cells was validated by IL-13-reporter mice. Neutralization of IL-13 abolished HDM/LPS-induced airway hyperresponsiveness, airway inflammation, and decreased mucus hypersecretion. Furthermore, using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis systems, we identified canonical pathways and upstream regulators that regulate the activation of basophils, ILC2, and CD8+ memory T cells. Our study provides mechanistic insights and an important reference resource for further understanding of the immune landscape during asthma exacerbation.

Respiratory syncytial virus upregulates IL-33 expression in mouse model of virus-induced inflammation exacerbation in OVA-sensitized mice and in asthmatic subjects

BACKGROUND

Bronchial asthma (BA) is a chronic disease of the airways. The great majority of BA exacerbations are associated with respiratory viral infections. Recent findings point out a possible role of proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-33 (IL-33) in the development of atopic diseases. Although, little is known about the role of IL-33 in virus-induced BA exacerbations.

METHODS

We used mouse models of RSV (respiratory syncytial virus)-induced inflammation exacerbation in OVA-sensitized mice and RSV infection alone in adult animals to characterize expression of il33 in the mouse lungs. Moreover, we studied the influence of il33 knockdown with intranasally administrated siRNA on the development of RSV-induced inflammation exacerbation. In addition, we evaluated the expression of IL33 in the ex vivo stimulated PBMCs from allergic asthma patients and healthy subjects with and without confirmed acute respiratory viral infection.

RESULTS

Using mouse models, we found that infection with RSV drives enhanced il33 mRNA expression in the mouse lung. Treatment with anti-il33 siRNA diminishes airway inflammation in the lungs (we found a decrease in the number of inflammatory cells in the lungs and in the severity of histopathological alterations) of mice with RSV-induced inflammation exacerbation, but do not influence viral load. Elevated level of the IL33 mRNA was detected in ex vivo stimulated blood lymphocytes of allergic asthmatics infected with respiratory viruses. RSV and rhinovirus were the most detected viruses in volunteers with symptoms of respiratory infection.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides additional evidence of the crucial role of the IL-33 in pathogenesis of RSV infection and virus-induced allergic bronchial asthma exacerbations.

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.

How do biologicals and other novel therapies effect clinically used biomarkers in severe asthma?

While there has been much interest in using biomarkers to select patients for particular targeted therapies, there has been much less attention paid to how these biomarkers change in patients once treatment begins. This is an area of great interest to practising clinicians, especially respiratory physicians and allergists who manage severe asthma. In this article, we review monoclonal antibodies and related targeted therapies, especially those that are currently available or in late stage clinical trials, focussing on the differential effects such agents have on biomarkers in widespread clinical practice such as eosinophils, FeNO and total IgE. Serial measurements of biomarkers can be useful in determining whether a particular targeted therapy is having its expected biological effect and invaluable in assessing the reasons for treatment failure should that occur.

Bronchial Asthma: Current Trends in Treatment

Asthma is a heterogenous disease which pathophysiology is still poorly understood. Asthma was traditionally divided into allergic (extrinsic) and non-allergic (intrinsic) types, while patients with allergic type responded better to corticosteroids. Since 2013 the definition of asthma has changed. Recently, better insight into clinical consi -derations and underlying inflammatory phenotypes has been gained. Defining these phenotypes has already led to more specific clinical trials and, therefore, to more personalized and successfully targeted therapy. For future, much more effort is put in identifying new phenotype-specific biomarkers which could be helpful in stratification of heterogeneous patients with asthma.

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

OCS play an important role in the management of asthma. However, steroid‐related AE are common and represent a leading cause of morbidity. Limited published studies suggest OCS usage varies across countries and recent registry data indicate that at least 25–60% of patients with severe asthma in developed countries may at some stage be prescribed OCS. Recent evidence indicate that many patients do not receive optimal therapy for asthma and are often prescribed maintenance OCS or repeated steroid bursts to treat exacerbations. Given the recent progress in adult severe asthma and new treatment options, judicious appraisal of steroid use is merited. A number of strategies and add‐on therapies are now available to treat severe asthma. These include increasing specialist referral for multidisciplinary assessments and implementing OCS‐sparing interventions, such as improving guideline adherence and add‐on tiotropium and macrolides. Biologics have recently become available for severe asthma; these agents reduce asthma exacerbations and lower OCS exposure. Further research, collaboration and consensus are necessary to develop a structured stewardship approach including realistic OCS‐weaning programmes for patients with severe asthma on regular OCS; education and public health campaigns to improve timely access to specialized severe asthma services for treatment optimization; and implementing targeted strategies to identify patients who warrant OCS use using objective biomarker‐based strategies.

Approaches to the assessment of severe asthma: barriers and strategies

Asthma is a chronic condition with great variability. It is characterized by intermittent episodes of wheeze, cough, chest tightness, dyspnea and backed by variable airflow limitation, airway inflammation and airway hyper-responsiveness. Asthma severity varies uniquely between individuals and may change over time. Stratification of asthma severity is an integral part of asthma management linking appropriate treatment to establish asthma control. Precision assessment of severe asthma is crucial for monitoring the health of people with this disease. The literature suggests multiple factors that impede the assessment of severe asthma, these can be grouped into health care professional, patient and organizational related barriers. These barriers do not exist in isolation but interact and influence one another. Recognition of these barriers is necessary to promote precision in the assessment and management of severe asthma in the era of targeted therapy. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge of the barriers that impede assessment in severe asthma and recommend potential strategies for overcoming these barriers. We highlight the relevance of multidimensional assessment as an ideal approach to the assessment and management of severe asthma.

Difficult-to-treat and severe asthma in general practice: delivery and evaluation of an educational program

Background

Asthma, a common yet complex airway disorder affecting about 11% of Australians, is well-controlled in only 54% of people with asthma. Those with difficult-to-treat and severe asthma are more likely to experience recurrent and potentially life-threatening exacerbations. It is therefore important that GPs can initiate a systematic approach for the management of patients with difficult-to-treat asthma to identify those whose condition may improve by addressing contributory factors and those who require specialist input. We therefore aimed to develop and deliver an educational program for GPs on the systematic management of patients with difficult-to-treat and severe asthma and evaluate the effectiveness of this program.

Methods

We developed an educational program on the management of difficult-to-treat and severe asthma in primary care that was delivered to GPs and other health professionals between January and June 2018. We evaluated the effectiveness of the program using a retrospective pre-test with post-survey, administered to GPs directly after program participation.

Results

Over 1000 general practice health professionals participated in the educational program, including 890 GPs of whom 226 (25%) completed the survey. Following program participation, a greater proportion of GPs identified factors they would assess in managing a patient with poor asthma control, particularly for considering the risk of future adverse outcomes (+ 51%), changes in lifestyle (+ 38%), and self-management strategies (+ 35%). GPs indicated a greater awareness of the biologic therapies that specialists could consider prescribing to their patients with severe asthma (+ 75%), of the requirements for a patient to be prescribed a biologic therapy (+ 73%) and that patients with different phenotypic characteristics can respond differently to standard therapy (+ 67%). The proportion of GPs who would refer appropriate patients to a specialist also significantly increased.

Conclusions

This study suggests that an evidence-based educational program can improve GP knowledge, confidence and intended practice in managing patients with difficult-to-treat and severe asthma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0991-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.