The Use of Albuterol/Budesonide as Reliever Therapy to Reduce Asthma Exacerbations

Prevention of asthma exacerbations and reduction of systemic corticosteroid burden remain unmet needs in asthma. US asthma guidelines recommend concomitant short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) as an alternative reliever at step 2. The Food and Drug Administration approved a pressurized metered-dose inhaler containing albuterol and budesonide for as-needed treatment or prevention of bronchoconstriction and for reducing exacerbation risk in patients with asthma aged ≥18 years. This combination is approved for use as a reliever with or without maintenance therapy, but it is not indicated for maintenance therapy (or for single maintenance and reliever therapy). Intervening with as-needed SABA-ICS during the window of opportunity to reduce inflammation during loss of asthma control can reduce exacerbation risk, by exerting both genomic and nongenomic anti-inflammatory effects. We propose that the use of albuterol-budesonide rather than albuterol as a reliever to manage episodic symptoms driven by acute bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation can improve outcomes. This combination approach, shown to decrease asthma exacerbations and oral corticosteroid burden in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, represents a paradigm shift for asthma treatment in the United States. Further safety and efficacy studies should provide evidence that this type of reliever should be standard of care.

Advancing assessment of asthma control with a composite tool: The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

National and international asthma guidelines and reports do not include control tools that combine impairment assessment with exacerbation history in one instrument.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the performance of the composite Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) in assessing both domains of control and predicting exacerbation risk compared with the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 4-question symptom control tool (GINA SCT), Asthma Control Test (ACT), and physician expert opinion (EO) informed by GINA SCT responses and appraisal of GINA-identified risk factors for poor asthma outcomes.

METHODS

Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated AIRQ and GINA SCT as predictors of ACT. McNemar's test compared the proportion of patients categorized at baseline as completely or well-controlled by each assessment but with current impairment or previous-year and subsequent-year exacerbations.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1064 patients aged 12 years or older; mean (SD) age 43.8 years (19.3); 70% female; 79% White; and 6% Hispanic or Latino. AIRQ and GINA SCT were highly predictive of ACT well-controlled vs not well-controlled and very poorly controlled (receiver operator characteristic area under curve AIRQ = 0.90, GINA SCT = 0.86, P = .03 AIRQ vs GINA SCT) and ACT very poorly controlled vs well-controlled and not well-controlled asthma (receiver operator characteristic area under curve AIRQ = 0.91, GINA SCT = 0.87, P = .01 AIRQ vs GINA SCT). AIRQ rated fewer patients as having completely or well-controlled asthma who had current impairment (P < .01) or with previous-year and subsequent-year exacerbations (P < .001) than did GINA SCT, ACT, and EO.

CONCLUSION

AIRQ performs better in assessing both domains of current control and predicting exacerbation risk than do control tools and EO informed by GINA SCT and risk factors for poor asthma outcomes.

Albuterol-budesonide fixed-dose combination rescue inhaler for asthma: a plain language summary of the MANDALA study

What is this summary about?This summary describes the results of a clinical study called MANDALA that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2022. In the MANDALA study, researchers looked at a new asthma rescue inhaler that contains both albuterol and budesonide in a single inhaler (known as albuterol-budesonide, AIRSUPRA™). This summary describes the results for people aged 18 yearsand older who took part in the study.

Albuterol-Budesonide Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Asthma: Results of the DENALI Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 MANDALA trial, as-needed albuterol-budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler significantly reduced severe exacerbation risk vs as-needed albuterol in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroid-containing maintenance therapy. This study (DENALI) was conducted to address the US Food and Drug Administration combination rule, which requires a combination product to demonstrate that each component contributes to its efficacy.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do both albuterol and budesonide contribute to the efficacy of the albuterol-budesonide combination pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This phase 3 double-blind trial randomized patients aged ≥ 12 years with mild-to-moderate asthma 1:1:1:1:1 to four-times-daily albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg or 180/80 μg, albuterol 180 μg, budesonide 160 μg, or placebo for 12 weeks. Dual-primary efficacy end points included change from baseline in FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 6 h (FEV1 AUC0-6h) over 12 weeks (assessing albuterol effect) and trough FEV1 at week 12 (assessing budesonide effect).

RESULTS

Of 1,001 patients randomized, 989 were ≥ 12 years old and evaluable for efficacy. Change from baseline in FEV1 AUC0-6h over 12 weeks was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 μg vs budesonide 160 μg (least-squares mean [LSM] difference, 80.7 [95% CI, 28.4-132.9] mL; P = .003). Change in trough FEV1 at week 12 was greater with albuterol-budesonide 180/160 and 180/80 μg vs albuterol 180 μg (LSM difference, 132.8 [95% CI, 63.6-201.9] mL and 120.8 [95% CI, 51.5-190.1] mL, respectively; both P < .001). Day 1 time to onset and duration of bronchodilation with albuterol-budesonide were similar to those with albuterol. The albuterol-budesonide adverse event profile was similar to that of the monocomponents.

INTERPRETATION

Both monocomponents contributed to albuterol-budesonide lung function efficacy. Albuterol-budesonide was well tolerated, even at regular, relatively high daily doses for 12 weeks, with no new safety findings, supporting its use as a novel rescue therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03847896; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Real-world effectiveness of benralizumab in US subspecialist-treated adults with severe asthma: Findings from CHRONICLE

BACKGROUND

Patients with eosinophilic severe asthma (SA) have an increased risk of asthma exacerbations. Benralizumab is approved for eosinophilic SA, and there is great value in understanding real-world effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to examine the effectiveness of benralizumab in a real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated US patients with eosinophilic SA.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For this analysis, eligible patients enrolled from February 2018 to February 2021, had received ≥1 dose of benralizumab, and had study data for ≥3 months before and after benralizumab initiation. The primary analysis included patients with prior exacerbations reported and 12 months of outcomes data before and after initiation. Patient outcomes occurring 6-12 months before and after initiation were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patients had ≥3 months of follow-up before and after first benralizumab dose. For patients with 12 months (n = 107) and 6-12 months (n = 166) of data, significant reductions were observed in annualized rates of exacerbations (62%; P < 0.001 and 65%; P < 0.001, respectively), with similar reductions in the rates of hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Benralizumab recipients with blood eosinophil counts (BEC) of ≥300/μL and <300/μL at baseline and 12 months of data also had significant reductions in exacerbations (68%; P < 0.001, 61%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This real-world, noninterventional analysis reinforces the clinical value of benralizumab in the management of patients with eosinophilic SA.

Number of patient-reported asthma triggers predicts uncontrolled disease among specialist-treated patients with severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe asthma (SA) experience a high disease burden, often precipitated by exposure to disease triggers.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis examined the prevalence and effects of patient-reported triggers on asthma disease burden in a cohort of subspecialist-treated patients with SA in the United States.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an observational study of adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or whose disease is uncontrolled on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and additional controllers. Data were analyzed for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021. This analysis examined patient-reported triggers from a 17-category survey and associations with multiple measures of disease burden.

RESULTS

Among 2793 enrolled patients, 1434 (51%) completed the triggers questionnaire. The median trigger number per patient was 8 (IQR: 5, 10). The most frequent triggers were weather/air changes, viral infections, seasonal allergies, perennial allergies, and exercise. Patients reporting more triggers experienced more poorly controlled disease, worse quality of life, and reduced work productivity. The annualized rates of exacerbations and asthma hospitalizations increased by 7% and 17%, respectively, for each additional trigger (both P < .001). For all measures, trigger number was a stronger predictor of disease burden than blood eosinophil count.

CONCLUSION

Among United States specialist-treated patients with SA, asthma trigger number was positively and significantly associated with greater uncontrolled disease burden across multiple measures, which highlights the importance of understanding patient-reported triggers in SA.

Dupilumab Efficacy in Patients With Uncontrolled or Oral Corticosteroid-Dependent Allergic and Nonallergic Asthma

BACKGROUND

Type 2 cytokines IL-4/IL-5/IL-13 play an important role in pathogenesis of type 2 conditions, including asthma. Dupilumab, a human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for IL-4/IL-13, inhibiting signaling. In phase 2b (P2B) (NCT01854047) and phase 3 VENTURE (NCT02528214), dupilumab reduced annualized severe exacerbation rates (AER), improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), and was generally well tolerated in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe, or oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE

The post hoc assessment of dupilumab efficacy versus placebo in P2B and VENTURE in patients stratified by allergic status.

METHODS

Allergic asthma was defined as total serum IgE ≥30 IU/mL and ≥1 perennial aeroallergen-specific IgE ≥0.35 kU/L at baseline. AER, prebronchodilator (BD) FEV₁, FEV₁/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio, asthma control (5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire), type 2 biomarkers, specific IgE, and OCS reduction (VENTURE only) were assessed.

RESULTS

In patients with allergic asthma, dupilumab (P2B: pooled 200/300 mg; VENTURE: 300 mg) every 2 weeks versus placebo reduced AER (P2B: -60%, P < .01; VENTURE: -72%, P < .001), and, in P2B, increased pre-BD FEV₁ (P < .01) and FEV₁/FVC (P < .05). In both studies, dupilumab significantly improved asthma control and HRQoL and reduced most type 2 biomarkers. Dupilumab significantly reduced OCS use in VENTURE. Similar benefits were observed in patients without evidence of allergic asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab significantly reduced AER and improved lung function, asthma control, and HRQoL in patients with or without evidence of allergic asthma.

Relationship Between Asthma Control as Measured by the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) and Patient Perception of Disease Status, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Treatment Adherence

Purpose

Critical asthma outcomes highlighted in clinical guidelines include asthma-related quality of life, asthma exacerbations, and asthma control. An easy-to-implement measure of asthma control that assesses both symptom impairment and exacerbation risk and reflects the impact of asthma on patients' lives is lacking. Hence, the objective of this study was to assess the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ^®) construct validity relative to patient self-perception of asthma status and validated disease-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.

Patients and methods

Baseline data were analyzed from patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with asthma participating in a 12-month observational study assessing the ability of AIRQ to predict exacerbations. At entry, patients completed a sociodemographic questionnaire, AIRQ, 3 questions addressing self-perceived asthma status, Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), and Adult Asthma Adherence Questionnaire (AAAQ). Descriptive statistics were calculated for demographic and clinical characteristics. AIRQ construct validity was evaluated by assessing correlations between total AIRQ score and patient self-assessments, SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ scores. Comparisons of SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ total and component/domain scores by AIRQ control category were performed using general linear models and Scheffe's post hoc adjustments for pairwise comparisons.

Results

A total of 1112 patients were enrolled: 70% female, 78% White, mean (standard deviation) age 43.9 (19.5) years. There were highly significant correlations between AIRQ score and patient self-perception of overall control (r = 0.69; p < 0.001), total SGRQ (r = 0.74, p < 0.001), and mini-AQLQ (r = -0.78, p < 0.001) scores. As AIRQ control category worsened, so did total and domain SGRQ, mini-AQLQ, and AAAQ impediment-to-inhaled-corticosteroid-adherence scores (all pairwise comparisons p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Findings demonstrate the construct validity of AIRQ relative to patient self-perception of asthma status, disease-specific PRO measures, and treatment adherence barriers. AIRQ can be a useful instrument to raise awareness of the unrecognized impacts of asthma on patients' lives.

Identifying Patients for Self-Administration of Omalizumab

Omalizumab, a recombinant anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody, is indicated for moderate to severe allergic asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, and nasal polyps, and is approved for self-administration. However, specific guidance on identifying candidates with characteristics suitable for this type of administration is lacking. To help address this issue, this article provides practical considerations for the health care provider treating patients with omalizumab. We encourage health care providers to consider self-administration of omalizumab as an option for all appropriate, but not all, patients, and we recommend an individualized approach when considering self-administration of omalizumab.

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.

Albuterol-Budesonide Fixed-Dose Combination Rescue Inhaler for Asthma

BACKGROUND

As asthma symptoms worsen, patients typically rely on short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) rescue therapy, but SABAs do not address worsening inflammation, which leaves patients at risk for severe asthma exacerbations. The use of a fixed-dose combination of albuterol and budesonide, as compared with albuterol alone, as rescue medication might reduce the risk of severe asthma exacerbation.

METHODS

We conducted a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, randomized, event-driven trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of albuterol-budesonide, as compared with albuterol alone, as rescue medication in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma who were receiving inhaled glucocorticoid-containing maintenance therapies, which were continued throughout the trial. Adults and adolescents (≥12 years of age) were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three trial groups: a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 160 μg of budesonide (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg and 80 μg, respectively [the higher-dose combination group]), a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 80 μg of budesonide (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg and 40 μg, respectively [the lower-dose combination group]), or 180 μg of albuterol (with each dose consisting of two actuations of 90 μg [the albuterol-alone group]). Children 4 to 11 years of age were randomly assigned to only the lower-dose combination group or the albuterol-alone group. The primary efficacy end point was the first event of severe asthma exacerbation in a time-to-event analysis, which was performed in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

A total of 3132 patients underwent randomization, among whom 97% were 12 years of age or older. The risk of severe asthma exacerbation was significantly lower, by 26%, in the higher-dose combination group than in the albuterol-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.89; P = 0.001). The hazard ratio in the lower-dose combination group, as compared with the albuterol-alone group, was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.00; P = 0.052). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the three trial groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of severe asthma exacerbation was significantly lower with as-needed use of a fixed-dose combination of 180 μg of albuterol and 160 μg of budesonide than with as-needed use of albuterol alone among patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma who were receiving a wide range of inhaled glucocorticoid-containing maintenance therapies. (Funded by Avillion; MANDALA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03769090.).

Evaluating construct validity of the Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire using a 3-month exacerbation recall

BACKGROUND

Recurrent assessment of asthma control is essential to evaluating disease stability and intervention impacts. An assessment that can be administered between annual clinic visits is needed. The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) is a cross-sectionally validated, 10-item, yes or no, composite control tool evaluating previous 2-week symptoms and previous 12-month exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the construct validity of the AIRQ using a 3-month recall period for exacerbation-based risk questions and retaining the 2-week recall for symptom-based impairment items.

METHODS

At baseline, patients completed the AIRQ with 12-month recall exacerbation items, Asthma Control Test (ACT), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and global self-assessments of asthma risk, control, and symptom severity. Patient-reported exacerbations were captured monthly. The AIRQ with 3-month recall exacerbation items, ACT, and global self-assessments was administered at months 3, 6, and 9, and SGRQ at month 6.

RESULTS

A total of 1112 patients aged 12 years or older were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.5] years). The AIRQ and each administration of the AIRQ with 3-month recall exacerbation items classified asthma control similarly to an ACT plus exacerbation validation standard. For both AIRQ versions, SGRQ scores were higher with worsening asthma control (P < .001). At months 3, 6, and 9, worse AIRQ control levels were associated with higher proportions of patients with 1 or more and 2 or more exacerbations in the previous 3 months and patient global self-assessments indicating greater asthma morbidity (all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The AIRQ using exacerbation risk items with a 3-month recall period exhibits construct validity for classifying current asthma control and can be administered between annual AIRQ assessments.

Severe asthma exacerbation rates are increased among female, Black, Hispanic, and younger adult patients: results from the US CHRONICLE study

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical outcomes in patients with severe asthma (SA) by common sociodemographic determinants of health: sex, race, ethnicity, and age.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an observational study of subspecialist-treated, United States adults with SA receiving biologic therapy, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2020, clinical characteristics and asthma outcomes were assessed by sex, race, ethnicity, age at enrollment, and age at diagnosis. Treating subspecialists reported exacerbations, exacerbation-related emergency department visits, and asthma hospitalizations from 12 months before enrollment through the latest data collection. Patients completed the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Test at enrollment.

RESULTS

Among 1884 enrolled patients, the majority were female (69%), reported White race (75%), non-Hispanic ethnicity (69%), and were diagnosed with asthma as adults (60%). Female, Black, Hispanic, and younger patients experienced higher annualized rates of exacerbations that were statistically significant compared with male, White, non-Hispanic, and older patients, respectively. Black, Hispanic, and younger patients also experienced higher rates of asthma hospitalizations. Female and Black patients exhibited poorer symptom control and poorer health-related quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary, real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated adults with SA, female sex, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and younger age were important determinants of health, potentially attributable to physiologic and social factors. Knowledge of these disparities in SA disease burden among subspecialist-treated patients may help optimize care for all patients.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .

Efficacy and safety of as-needed albuterol/budesonide versus albuterol in adults and children aged ≥4 years with moderate-to-severe asthma: rationale and design of the randomised, double-blind, active-controlled MANDALA study

Introduction

Uncontrolled asthma is associated with substantial morbidity. While fast-acting bronchodilators provide quick relief from asthma symptoms, their use as rescue fails to address the underlying inflammation. Combining a short-acting beta₂-agonist, such as albuterol (salbutamol), with an inhaled corticosteroid, such as budesonide, in a single inhaler as rescue therapy could help control both bronchoconstriction and inflammation, and reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations.

Methods and analysis

The Phase 3 MANDALA study was designed to determine the efficacy of albuterol in combination with budesonide (albuterol/budesonide 180/160 µg or 180/80 µg, two actuations of 90/80 µg or 90/40 µg, respectively) versus albuterol (180 µg, two actuations of 90 µg) as rescue therapy in adult, adolescent and paediatric patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. This event-driven study enrolled symptomatic patients (3000 adults/adolescents and 100 children aged 4–11 years) who experienced ≥1 severe asthma exacerbation in the previous year and were receiving maintenance therapy for ≥3 months prior to study entry. The primary efficacy endpoint was time-to-first severe asthma exacerbation.

Ethics and dissemination

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki, and that are consistent with International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use and Good Clinical Practice and the applicable regulatory requirements.

Trial registration

NCT03769090.

A Comprehensive Analysis of the Stability of Blood Eosinophil Levels

Rationale: Blood eosinophil counts are used to inform diagnosis/management of eosinophilic asthma. Objectives: Examine blood eosinophil variability and identify factors affecting eosinophil levels to inform clinical interpretation. Methods:Post hoc analysis to understand eosinophil variability using data from four randomized controlled asthma trials. We examined 1) influence of intrinsic/extrinsic factors (comorbidities, medication, and patient history) using baseline data (n = 2,612); 2) monthly variation using placebo-treated patient data (n = 713); 3) stability of eosinophil classification (<150, 150-299, and ⩾300 cells/μl) in placebo-treated patients with monthly measurements over a 1-year period (n = 751); and 4) impact of technical factors (laboratory-to-laboratory differences and time from collection to analysis). Results: Of intrinsic/extrinsic factors examined, nasal polyps increased eosinophil levels by 38%, whereas current smoking decreased levels by 23%. Substantial seasonal differences in eosinophil counts were observed, with differences of ∼20% between July and January. Eosinophil levels between 150 and 299 cells/μl were least stable, with 44% of patients remaining in the same classification for seven of 10 measurements versus 59% and 66% of patients in the <150 and ⩾300 cells/μl subgroups, respectively. Measurements at different laboratories showed high association (Spearman's correlation coefficient, R = 0.89); however, eosinophil counts were reduced, with longer time from collection to analysis, and variability increased with increasing eosinophil counts. Conclusions: Several intrinsic, extrinsic, and technical factors may influence, and should be considered in, clinical interpretation of eosinophil counts. Additionally, a single measurement may not be sufficient when using eosinophil counts for diagnosis/management of eosinophilic asthma.

2020 NAEPP Guidelines Update and GINA 2021-Asthma Care Differences, Overlap, and Challenges

The 2020 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group (NAEPP [2020 Focused Asthma Update]) guidelines and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 strategy report are compared in this Rostrum article. The methodologies of each publication are described. Subsequently, 4 different selected pharmacological recommendations are compared in the 2 documents: step 1 for children 0 to 4 years of age with viral-induced wheezing, step 2 in ages 12 years and older with the intermittent use of inhaled corticosteroid, steps 3 and 4 with single-inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy with inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol (SMART), and steps 3, 4, and 5 with add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy. Nonpharmacological recommendations are also considered and contrasted, including for exhaled nitric oxide, environmental control, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. Similarities and differences in these 2 documents are highlighted, and recommendations are made about harmonizing the approaches where possible.

Albuterol/budesonide for the treatment of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in patients with asthma: The TYREE study

BACKGROUND

PT027 is a fixed-dose combination of albuterol (salbutamol) and budesonide in a single pressurized metered-dose inhaler.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of albuterol/budesonide compared with placebo in patients with asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB).

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, 2-period, single-dose crossover study, adolescents and adults with asthma and EIB (defined by ≥20% decrease from pre-exercise challenge forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁]) were randomized to albuterol/budesonide (180/160 µg) followed by placebo (n = 29) or the reverse sequence (n = 31). Subjects were stratified by background therapy (as-needed short-acting β₂-agonist alone or low-to-medium dose inhaled corticosteroid plus as-needed short-acting β₂-agonist). FEV₁ was measured 5 minutes pre-dose, 30 minutes postdose (5 minutes pre-exercise challenge [baseline]), and 5, 10, 15, 30, and 60 minutes postexercise. The primary end point was maximum percentage fall from baseline in FEV₁ up to 60 minutes postexercise challenge.

RESULTS

Least squares mean maximum percentage fall in FEV₁ up to 60 minutes postexercise challenge was 5.45% with albuterol/budesonide vs 18.97% with placebo (difference, -13.51% [95% confidence interval, -16.94% to -10.09%]; P < .001). More subjects were fully protected (maximum percentage fall in FEV₁ post-exercise challenge < 10%) with albuterol/budesonide than with placebo (78.3% vs 28.3%; P < .001). The treatment effect was consistent irrespective of background inhaled corticosteroid therapy, and albuterol/budesonide was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In adolescents and adults with asthma and EIB, a single dose of albuterol/budesonide 180/160 µg taken approximately 30 minutes before exercise was significantly more effective than placebo in preventing EIB.

Omalizumab in Asthma with Fixed Airway Obstruction: Post Hoc Analysis of EXTRA

BACKGROUND

Although asthma is typically characterized by bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR), fixed airflow obstruction (FAO) occurs in ∼50% of patients with severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE

Do FAO/BDR associate with efficacy of omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets IgE?

METHODS

In EXTRA, patients aged 12-75 years with inadequately controlled severe allergic asthma despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β₂-agonists were randomized to omalizumab (n = 427) or placebo (n = 423) for 48 weeks of treatment. In this post hoc analysis, high/low BDR were defined as ≥12%/<12% increases in baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) after bronchodilator administration, respectively. FAO presence (+)/absence (-) were defined as baseline postbronchodilator FEV₁/forced vital capacity <70%/≥70%, respectively. Poisson regression/analysis of covariance models were used to estimate exacerbation relative rate reductions (RRRs)/least-squares mean changes in FEV₁, respectively.

RESULTS

In patients with high BDR, omalizumab reduced exacerbations more than placebo over the 48-week treatment period regardless of FAO status (RRR [95% confidence interval (CI)]: FAO+, 59.8% [17.7-80.4%]; FAO-, 44.3% [16.6-62.8%]). Omalizumab improved FEV₁ compared with placebo in the FAO-, high BDR subgroup (FEV₁ change from baseline [95% CI] for omalizumab vs placebo, 0.065 L [-0.071 to 0.201 L] to 0.236 L [0.112-0.359 L]) across 48 weeks. This was not observed in patients with low BDR, irrespective of FAO.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab was more efficacious than placebo at reducing exacerbations in patients with high, but not low, BDR, regardless of the presence of FAO. Lung function improvement primarily occurred in FAO-, high BDR patients, suggesting that asthma with low BDR may represent a difficult-to-treat phenotype.

Differing perceptions of asthma control and treatment effectiveness by patients with severe asthma and treating subspecialists in the United States

Objective: For patients with severe asthma (SA), overestimation of asthma control may lead to poorer outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess concurrent patient and specialist assessments of asthma control and treatment effectiveness among a large US cohort of SA patients.Methods: CHRONICLE is an ongoing observational study of patients with SA treated by US subspecialists. Asthma control was assessed using the patient-completed Asthma Control Test™ (ACT™) and specialist clinical assessment of control. Treatment effectiveness was measured using the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE) completed by patients and specialists.Results: 1109 patients who completed online surveys at enrollment were included. 14%, 28%, 25%, and 33% of patients had ACT™ scores of 5-9, 10-15, 16-19, and 20-25, respectively. Compared with 67% of patients with uncontrolled asthma by ACT™, 44% were uncontrolled by specialist assessment. 54% of patients who were uncontrolled according to the ACT™ were rated as controlled by specialists, demonstrating overestimation of asthma control. Based on ACT™ score, asthma control was more frequent among patients treated with biologics compared to other treatments. Using the GETE, 90% of patients reported treatment effectiveness compared with 71% of specialists. Patient and specialist treatment effectiveness categorizations agreed for 73%.Conclusion: Specialists commonly overestimated asthma control relative to ACT™ scores. Patients reported treatment effectiveness more frequently than specialists. These findings emphasize the importance of validated instruments to assess asthma control and reduce potential treatment gaps associated with patient-specialist discordance.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Productivity Among US Patients with Severe Asthma

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and productivity of patients with confirmed severe asthma (SA) have not been well characterized in large, real-world populations.

Purpose

To characterize SA impact on HRQoL, work productivity, and activity impairment in a large, real-world cohort in the United States (US).

Methods

CHRONICLE is an observational study of specialist-treated adults (≥18 years) in the US with SA receiving biologics or maintenance systemic corticosteroids (mSCS), or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers (HD ICS+). At enrollment, patients completed the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. Results were analyzed for those enrolled between February 2018 and February 2020.

Results

Among patients who completed enrollment questionnaires (n = 1109), mean age was 54 years and most were women (70%). Among SGRQ respondents (n = 960), mean (SD) total score was 43 (23); 51% reported good/very good health. Among WPAI respondents (n = 1057; 566 employed), mean (SD) overall work impairment was 21% (25). Patients receiving biologics (vs mSCS, HD ICS+ only) had better SGRQ total scores (38 vs 59, 48) and lower work impairment (17% vs 34%, 27%). Patients with better SGRQ activity scores relative to symptom scores had better SGRQ impacts scores, total scores, and reported better overall health.

Conclusion

SA significantly affects HRQoL, work productivity, and activity. The SGRQ is a valuable research instrument for evaluating HRQoL in SA. Due to its association with HRQoL and overall health, activity impairment should be a focus when monitoring patients’ disease control.

Study Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

T2-"Low" Asthma: Overview and Management Strategies

Although the term "asthma" has been applied to all patients with airway lability and variable chest symptoms for centuries, phenotypes of asthma with distinct clinical and molecular features that may warrant different treatment approaches are well recognized. Patients with type 2 (T2)-"high" asthma are characterized by upregulation of T2 immune pathways (ie, IL-4 and IL-13 gene sets) and eosinophilic airway inflammation, whereas these features are absent in patients with T2-"low" asthma and may contribute to poor responsiveness to corticosteroid treatment. This review details definitions and clinical features of T2-"low" asthma, potential mechanisms and metabolic aspects, pediatric considerations, and potential treatment approaches. Priority research questions for T2-"low" asthma are also discussed.

Possible Protective Effect of Omalizumab on Lung Function Decline in Patients Experiencing Asthma Exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Frequent exacerbations are associated with greater FEV₁ decline in patients with asthma. The effect of omalizumab versus placebo on lung function in patients experiencing asthma exacerbations has not been previously examined.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between postbaseline (treatment phase) exacerbation status and lung function decline in children, adolescents, and adults treated with omalizumab versus placebo using data from 3 pediatric and adolescent/adult studies.

METHODS

Changes in percent predicted FEV₁ (ppFEV₁) and FEV₁ by treatment (omalizumab/placebo) and postbaseline exacerbation status (exacerbators/nonexacerbators) were assessed in patients aged 6 to 11 years (IA05, n = 576) and 12 to 75 years (EXTRA/INNOVATE pooled, n = 1202). Pediatric patients were examined at treatment weeks 12, 24, 28, 40, and 52, and adolescent/adult data at weeks 4, 12, 20, and 28.

RESULTS

Omalizumab-treated patients experienced larger increases in ppFEV₁ and FEV₁ compared with placebo-treated patients in the pediatric and pooled adolescent/adult populations. The response was observed in pediatric exacerbators, with significantly larger increases in ppFEV₁ and FEV₁ at week 12 (mean difference [95% CI], 4.11% [0.93%-7.30%], P = .011 for ppFEV₁; 80 [10-140] mL, P = .017 for FEV₁) and week 28 (mean difference [95% CI], 3.65% [0.11%-7.19%], P = .043 for ppFEV₁; 100 [30-170] mL, P = .007 for FEV₁). In the adolescent/adult population, both exacerbators and nonexacerbators derived similar benefit with omalizumab compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this post hoc analysis suggest that omalizumab may confer some protection against lung function decline among patients who experienced exacerbations during treatment.

The Added Burden of Allergen Sensitization Among Children with Severe or Poorly Controlled Asthma

BACKGROUND

Allergen sensitization (AS) may negatively affect asthma outcomes in children with severe or poorly controlled (SPC) asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the impact of AS on asthma exacerbations, health care use, and costs among children with SPC asthma in private and public insurance settings.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed children with SPC asthma aged 6 to 11 years from the MarketScan Commercial (private insurance) and Medicaid databases. Selection of children with SPC asthma was based on medical claims and asthma medication prescription claims. AS status was based on diagnoses of extrinsic asthma and allergic conditions. Children were followed for at least 12 months. Outcomes included asthma exacerbations, days with oral corticosteroids (OCS), and asthma-related health care use and costs. Adjusted generalized linear models were fit to compare outcomes in children with versus those without AS.

RESULTS

Among children with SPC asthma, 34% had AS (private insurance: N = 11,448; Medicaid: N = 10,800), 20% did not have AS (private insurance: N = 7744; Medicaid: N = 6535), and, in the remainder, AS status could not be determined. Claims data were available for ≥3 years on average. Children with AS had significantly higher adjusted rates of asthma exacerbations during follow-up than children without AS, and significantly more days with OCS use. Rates of asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and health care costs were significantly higher among children with AS than among children without AS.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with SPC asthma and AS have relatively greater asthma-related health care use and costs compared with children with SPC asthma without AS.

From the pages of AllergyWatch®: November 2020

For this month's edition of "From the Pages of AllergyWatch," I have chosen reviews of articles of interest to the clinical allergist. The first study found that wheezing infants with atopic sensitization at the time of the first wheezing episode was strongly associated with bronchial reactivity in childhood. The next review, of an article published in the Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, investigated the complexity of atopic sensitization to foods in children with atopic dermatitis (AD). The final study confirms the determination of the US Environmental Protection Agency to the likely causal link between exposures to particulate matter and ozone and respiratory illness.

The burden of exacerbations in mild asthma: a systematic review

Background

Although most patients with asthma have mild disease, data on how mild asthma is defined, and how frequently exacerbations occur in this patient population are scarce, so we aimed to redress this.

Methods

We searched Medline and Medline In-Process (PubMed), and Embase in OVID for English-language publications containing “mild asthma” plus at least one relevant therapy and outcome/keyword, limited to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published between January 1990 and February 2019. Publications were filtered to ensure appropriate data extraction. The main outcomes were the definitions of mild asthma and exacerbations, baseline exacerbation rates and exacerbation data for placebo recipients in prospective studies. Meta-analysis of exacerbation rates was planned.

Findings

Of 4064 articles identified, 64 were included in our review (49 743 subjects); 54 RCTs and 10 observational/other studies. Six main types of definitions of mild asthma were identified. While care was taken to ensure inclusion only of patients with mild asthma, marked heterogeneity was revealed in the definitions of mild asthma and hence the study populations. Reporting of exacerbations also varied widely between studies, precluding meta-analysis. Between 0–22% of patients were hospitalised for asthma or had a severe exacerbation in the previous year, according to baseline data from prospective studies. In RCTs, severe exacerbation rates in placebo recipients taking only short-acting β₂-agonist therapy ranged from 0.20–2.88 per year.

Conclusions

These data provide new evidence of the burden of exacerbations in mild asthma and highlight the need for standardised definitions of mild asthma and of exacerbations to progress further research.

This comprehensive literature review highlights the risk of exacerbations for patients with mild asthmahttps://bit.ly/3cauSb3

The CHRONICLE Study of US Adults with Subspecialist-Treated Severe Asthma: Objectives, Design, and Initial Results

BACKGROUND

Approximately 5-10% of patients with asthma have severe disease. High-quality real-world studies are needed to identify areas for improved management.

OBJECTIVE

Aligned with the International Severe Asthma Registry, the CHRONICLE study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03373045) was developed to address this need in the US.

STUDY DESIGN

Learnings from prior studies were applied to develop a real-world, prospective, noninterventional study of US patients with confirmed severe asthma who are treated by subspecialist physicians and require biologic or maintenance systemic immunosuppressant therapy or who are uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids and additional controllers. Target enrollment is 4000 patients, with patient observation for ≥3 years. A geographically diverse sample of allergist/immunologist and pulmonologist sites approach all eligible patients under their care and report patient characteristics, treatment, and health outcomes every 6 months. Patients complete online surveys every 1-6 months.

INITIAL RESULTS

From February 2018 to February 2019, 102 sites screened 1428 eligible patients; 936 patients enrolled. Study sites (40% allergist/immunologist, 42% pulmonologist, 18% both) were similar to other US asthma subspecialist samples. Enrolled patients were 67% female with median ages at enrollment and diagnosis of 55 (range: 18-89) and 26 (0-80) years, respectively. Median body mass index was 31 kg/m2; 3% and 29% were current or former smokers, respectively, and >60% reported ≥1 exacerbation in the prior year and suboptimal symptom control.

CONCLUSION

CHRONICLE will provide high-quality provider- and patient-reported data from a large, real-world cohort of US adults with subspecialist-treated severe asthma.

Efficacy of dupilumab on clinical outcomes in patients with asthma and perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Comorbid perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) or year-round aeroallergen sensitivity substantially contributes to disease burden in patients with asthma. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor for interleukin (IL) 4 and IL-13, key drivers of type 2 inflammation that play important roles in asthma and PAR. In the LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST trial (NCT02414854), dupilumab reduced severe asthma exacerbations and improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma, with greater efficacy observed in patients with elevated type 2 inflammatory biomarkers at baseline (blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled nitric oxide).

OBJECTIVE

To assess dupilumab efficacy in LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST patients with comorbid PAR.

METHODS

Severe asthma exacerbation rates, FEV₁, asthma control (5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire), rhinoconjunctivitis-specific health-related quality of life (Standardized Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire +12 scores), and type 2 inflammatory biomarkers during the 52-week treatment period were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 814 of the 1902 patients (42.8%) had comorbid PAR (defined as an allergic rhinitis history and ≥1 perennial aeroallergen specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) level ≥0.35 kU/L at baseline). Dupilumab, 200 and 300 mg every 2 weeks, vs placebo reduced severe exacerbations rates by 32.2% and 34.6% (P < .05 for both) and improved FEV₁ at week 12 by 0.14 L and 0.18 L (P < .01 for both); greater efficacy was observed in patients with elevated baseline blood eosinophil counts (≥300 cells/μL) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide. Dupilumab treatment also numerically improved the 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire and Standardized Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire +12 scores and suppressed type 2 inflammatory biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab improved key asthma-related outcomes, asthma control, and rhinoconjunctivitis-specific health-related quality of life while suppressing type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and perennial allergen-specific IgE in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma and comorbid PAR, highlighting its dual inhibitory effects on IL-4 and IL-13 and its role in managing asthma and PAR.

Biologic and maintenance systemic corticosteroid therapy among US subspecialist-treated patients with severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma (SA) often requires subspecialist management and treatment with biologic therapies or maintenance systemic corticosteroids (mSCS).

OBJECTIVE

To describe contemporary, real-world biologic and mSCS use among US subspecialist-treated patients with SA.

METHODS

CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of US adults with SA treated by allergists/immunologists or pulmonologists. Eligible patients are receiving biologics or mSCS or are uncontrolled on high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. Biologic and mSCS use patterns and patient characteristics were summarized for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2019.

RESULTS

Among protocol-eligible patients, 58% and 12% were receiving biologics and mSCS, respectively, with 7% receiving both. Among 796 enrolled, most were women (67%), non-Hispanic white (71%), of suburban residence (50%), and had elevated body mass index (median: 31). Respiratory and nonrespiratory comorbidities were highly prevalent. With biologics (n = 557), 51% were anti-immunoglobulin E and 48% were anti-interleukin (IL)-5/IL-5Rα; from May 2018, 76% of initiations were anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα. In patients receiving mSCS, median prednisone-equivalent daily dose was 10 mg. Multivariate logistic regression found that patients of hospital clinics, sites with fewer nonphysician staff, and with a recorded concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis were less likely to receive biologics and more likely to receive mSCS.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world sample of US subspecialist-treated patients with SA not controlled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers, mSCS use was infrequent and biologic use was common, with similar prevalence of anti-immunoglobulin E and anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα biologics. Treatment differences associated with patient and site characteristics should be investigated to ensure equitable access to biologics and minimize mSCS use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

Disease Burden and Long-Term Risk of Persistent Very Poorly Controlled Asthma: TENOR II

BACKGROUND

Severe/difficult-to-treat disease occurs in 5% to 10% of patients with asthma, but accounts for more than 50% of related economic costs. Understanding factors associated with persistent very poorly controlled (VPC) asthma may improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize persistent VPC asthma after more than 10 years of standard of care.

METHODS

The Epidemiology and Natural history of asthma: Outcomes and treatment Regimens (TENOR) II (N = 341) was a multicenter, observational study of patients with severe/difficult-to-treat asthma with a single, cross-sectional visit more than 10 years after TENOR I. Persistent VPC asthma was defined as VPC asthma at TENOR I and TENOR II enrollment; without VPC asthma was defined as well- or not well-controlled asthma at either or both visits. Multivariable logistic regression assessed long-term predictors of persistent VPC asthma using TENOR I baseline variables.

RESULTS

Of 327 patients, nearly half (48.0%, n = 157) had persistent VPC asthma. Comorbidities and asthma triggers were more frequent in patients with persistent VPC asthma than in patients without VPC asthma. Total geometric mean IgE was higher in patients with persistent VPC asthma (89.3 IU/mL vs 55.7 IU/mL); there was no difference in eosinophil levels. Lung function was lower in patients with persistent VPC asthma (mean % predicted pre- and postbronchodilator FEV₁, 63.0% vs 82.8% and 69.6% vs 87.2%, respectively). Exacerbations in the previous year were more likely in patients with persistent VPC asthma (29.7% vs 9.0%, respectively). Predictors of persistent VPC asthma were black versus white race/ethnicity, allergic trigger count (4 vs 0), systemic corticosteroid use, and postbronchodilator FEV₁ (per 10% decrease).

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of persistent VPC asthma is high in severe/difficult-to-treat disease; management of modifiable risk factors, maximization of lung function, and trigger avoidance may improve outcomes.

Tiotropium in children and adolescents with asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a major cause of morbidity in children, despite the availability of various treatments. In adults, tiotropium-a long-acting muscarinic antagonist-as add-on therapy to an inhaled corticosteroid with or without a long-acting β₂-agonist provides clinical benefit with a safety profile similar to placebo.

OBJECTIVE

To review published evidence on the efficacy and safety of tiotropium as add-on a long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy in children and adolescents with asthma that is uncontrolled despite use of an inhaled corticosteroid with or without additional controller medication(s).

METHODS

We searched PubMed from inception until June 12, 2018, for randomized controlled trials of children and adolescents aged 1 to 17 years treated with tiotropium and reporting a primary outcome of any pulmonary function test and a secondary outcome of adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, 7 randomized controlled trials of 1902 preschool children (aged 1-5 years; n = 102), school-age children (aged 6-11 years; n = 905), and adolescents (aged 12-17 years; n = 895) with moderate to severe asthma were included in the analysis. Once-daily tiotropium (5, 2.5, or 1.25 μg) improved lung function parameters, including peak and trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second, vs placebo. Commonly reported adverse events across treatment groups included asthma worsening or exacerbations, decreased peak expiratory flow rate, nasopharyngitis, viral respiratory tract infection, and respiratory tract infection.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily tiotropium as add-on therapy is efficacious and safe in adolescents and children with moderate to severe asthma. These results support the expanded indication by regulatory authorities for add-on tiotropium in patients 6 years or older.