Consistent trajectories of rhinitis control and treatment in 16,177 weeks: The MASK ‐air® longitudinal study

INTRODUCTION

Data from mHealth apps can provide valuable information on rhinitis control and treatment patterns. However, in MASK-air®, these data have only been analyzed cross-sectionally, without considering the changes of symptoms over time. We analyzed data from MASK-air® longitudinally, clustering weeks according to reported rhinitis symptoms.

METHODS

We analyzed MASK-air® data, assessing the weeks for which patients had answered a rhinitis daily questionnaire on all 7 days. We firstly used k-means clustering algorithms for longitudinal data to define clusters of weeks according to the trajectories of reported daily rhinitis symptoms. Clustering was applied separately for weeks when medication was reported or not. We compared obtained clusters on symptoms and rhinitis medication patterns. We then used the latent class mixture model to assess the robustness of results.

RESULTS

We analyzed 113,239 days (16,177 complete weeks) from 2590 patients (mean age ± SD = 39.1 ± 13.7 years). The first clustering algorithm identified ten clusters among weeks with medication use: seven with low variability in rhinitis control during the week and three with highly-variable control. Clusters with poorly-controlled rhinitis displayed a higher frequency of rhinitis co-medication, a more frequent change of medication schemes and more pronounced seasonal patterns. Six clusters were identified in weeks when no rhinitis medication was used, displaying similar control patterns. The second clustering method provided similar results. Moreover, patients displayed consistent levels of rhinitis control, reporting several weeks with similar levels of control.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 16 patterns of weekly rhinitis control. Co-medication and medication change schemes were common in uncontrolled weeks, reinforcing the hypothesis that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms.

Digital Coaching Using Smart Inhaler Technology to Improve Asthma Management in Patients With Asthma in Italy: Community-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Reliance on short-acting β-2 agonists and nonadherence to maintenance medication are associated with poor clinical outcomes in asthma. Digital health solutions could support optimal medication use and therefore disease control in patients with asthma; however, their use in community settings has not been determined.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study is to investigate community implementation of the Turbu+ program designed to support asthma self-management, including adherence to budesonide and formoterol (Symbicort) Turbuhaler, a combination inhaler for both maintenance therapy or maintenance and reliever therapy. The secondary objective is to provide health care professionals with insights into how patients were using their medication in real life.

METHODS

Patients with physician-diagnosed asthma were prescribed budesonide and formoterol as maintenance therapy, at a dose of either 1 inhalation twice daily (1-BID) or 2 inhalations twice daily (2-BID), or as maintenance and reliever therapy (1-BID and reliever or 2-BID and reliever in a single inhaler), and they received training on Turbu+ in secondary care centers across Italy. An electronic device attached to the patients' inhaler for ≥90 days (data cutoff) securely uploaded medication use data to a smartphone app and provided reminders, visualized medication use, and motivational nudge messages. Average medication adherence was defined as the proportion of daily maintenance inhalations taken as prescribed (number of recorded maintenance actuations per day or maintenance inhalations prescribed per day) averaged over the monitoring period. The proportion of adherent days was defined as the proportion of days when all prescribed maintenance inhalations were taken on a given day. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the proportion of adherent days between patients in the maintenance regimen and patients in the maintenance and reliever regimen of a given dose.

RESULTS

In 661 patients, the mean (SD) number of days monitored was 217.2 (SD 109.0) days. The average medication adherence (maintenance doses taken/doses prescribed) was 70.2% (108,040/153,820) overall and was similar across the groups (1-BID: 6332/9520, 66.5%; 1‑BID and reliever: 43,578/61,360, 71.0%; 2-BID: 10,088/14,960, 67.4%; 2-BID and reliever: 48,042/67,980, 70.7%). The proportion of adherent days (prescribed maintenance doses/doses taken in a given day) was 56.6% (31,812/56,175) overall and was higher with maintenance and reliever therapy (1-BID and reliever vs 1-BID: 18,413/30,680, 60.0% vs 2510/4760, 52.7%; P<.001; 2-BID and reliever vs 2-BID: 8995/16,995, 52.9% vs 1894/3740, 50.6%; P=.02). Rates of discontinuation from the Turbu+ program were significantly lower with maintenance and reliever therapy compared with maintenance therapy alone (P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high medication adherence observed during the study might be attributed to the electronic monitoring and feedback mechanism provided by the Turbu+ program.

The Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) Approach of Value-Added Medicines: As-Needed Treatment in Allergic Rhinitis

Drug repurposing is a major field of value-added medicine. It involves investigating and evaluating existing drugs for new therapeutic purposes that address unmet healthcare needs. Several unmet needs in allergic rhinitis could be improved by drug repurposing. This could be game-changing for disease management. Current medications for allergic rhinitis are centered on continuous long-term treatment, and medication registration is based on randomized controlled trials carried out for a minimum of 14 days with adherence of 70% or greater. A new way of treating allergic rhinitis is to propose as-needed treatment depending on symptoms, rather than classical continuous treatment. This rostrum will discuss existing clinical trials on as-needed treatment for allergic rhinitis and real-world data obtained by the mobile health app MASK-air, which focuses on digitally-enabled, patient-centered care pathways.

Academic Productivity of Young People With Allergic Rhinitis: A MASK-air Study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested an impact of allergic rhinitis on academic productivity. However, large studies with real-world data (RWD) are not available.

OBJECTIVE

To use RWD to assess the impact of allergic rhinitis on academic performance (measured through a visual analog scale [VAS] education and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire plus Classroom Impairment Questions: Allergy Specific [WPAI+CIQ:AS] questionnaire), and to identify factors associated with the impact of allergic rhinitis on academic performance.

METHODS

We assessed data from the MASK-air mHealth app of users aged 13 to 29 years with allergic rhinitis. We assessed the correlation between variables measuring the impact of allergies on academic performance (VAS education, WPAI+CIQ:AS impact of allergy symptoms on academic performance, and WPAI+CIQ:AS percentage of education hours lost due to allergies) and other variables. In addition, we identified factors associated with the impact of allergic symptoms on academic productivity through multivariable mixed models.

RESULTS

A total of 13,454 days (from 1970 patients) were studied. VAS education was strongly correlated with the WPAI+CIQ:AS impact of allergy symptoms on academic productivity (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58; 0.80]), VAS global allergy symptoms (0.70 [95% CI = 0.68; 0.71]), and VAS nose (0.66 [95% CI = 0.65; 0.68]). In multivariable regression models, immunotherapy showed a strong negative association with VAS education (regression coefficient = -2.32 [95% CI = -4.04; -0.59]). Poor rhinitis control, measured by the combined symptom-medication score, was associated with worse VAS education (regression coefficient = 0.88 [95% CI = 0.88; 0.92]), higher impact on academic productivity (regression coefficient = 0.69 [95% CI = 0.49; 0.90]), and higher percentage of missed education hours due to allergy (regression coefficient = 0.44 [95% CI = 0.25; 0.63]).

CONCLUSION

Allergy symptoms and worse rhinitis control are associated with worse academic productivity, whereas immunotherapy is associated with higher productivity.

Management of allergic rhinitis symptoms in the pharmacy Pocket guide 2022

Background

Allergic rhinitis (AR) management requires a coordinated effort from healthcare providers and patients. Pharmacists are key members of these integrated care pathways resolving medication-related problems, optimizing regimens, improving adherence and recommending therapies while establishing liaisons between patients and physicians.

Methods

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) first published a reference document on the pharmacist's role in allergic rhinitis management in 2004. Several guidelines were developed over the past 20 years improving the care of allergic rhinitis patients through an evidence-based, integrated care approach.

Results

This ARIA/EAACI/FIP Position Paper is based on the latest ARIA in the Pharmacy guidelines and provides: (a) a structured approach to pharmacists identifying people with AR and/or allergic conjunctivitis as well as those at risk of poor disease control; (b) an evidence-based clinical decision support tool for optimising the management of allergic rhinitis in the community pharmacy; and (c) a framework of referral to the physician.

Conclusion

This document is not intended to be a mandatory standard of care but is provided as a basis for pharmacists and their staff to develop relevant local standards of care for their patients, within their local practice environment. Pharmacy care varies between countries, and the guide should be adapted to the local situation.

Comparison of rhinitis treatments using MASK-air® data and considering the minimal important difference

BACKGROUND

Different treatments exist for allergic rhinitis (AR), including pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy (AIT), but they have not been compared using direct patient data (i.e., "real-world data"). We aimed to compare AR pharmacological treatments on (i) daily symptoms, (ii) frequency of use in co-medication, (iii) visual analogue scales (VASs) on allergy symptom control considering the minimal important difference (MID) and (iv) the effect of AIT.

METHODS

We assessed the MASK-air® app data (May 2015-December 2020) by users self-reporting AR (16-90 years). We compared eight AR medication schemes on reported VAS of allergy symptoms, clustering data by the patient and controlling for confounding factors. We compared (i) allergy symptoms between patients with and without AIT and (ii) different drug classes used in co-medication.

RESULTS

We analysed 269,837 days from 10,860 users. Most days (52.7%) involved medication use. Median VAS levels were significantly higher in co-medication than in monotherapy (including the fixed combination azelastine-fluticasone) schemes. In adjusted models, azelastine-fluticasone was associated with lower average VAS global allergy symptoms than all other medication schemes, while the contrary was observed for oral corticosteroids. AIT was associated with a decrease in allergy symptoms in some medication schemes. A difference larger than the MID compared to no treatment was observed for oral steroids. Azelastine-fluticasone was the drug class with the lowest chance of being used in co-medication (adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.71-0.80).

CONCLUSION

Median VAS levels were higher in co-medication than in monotherapy. Patients with more severe symptoms report a higher treatment, which is currently not reflected in guidelines.

Behavioural patterns in allergic rhinitis medication in Europe: A study using MASK-air® real-world data

BACKGROUND

Co-medication is common among patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), but its dimension and patterns are unknown. This is particularly relevant since AR is understood differently across European countries, as reflected by rhinitis-related search patterns in Google Trends. This study aims to assess AR co-medication and its regional patterns in Europe, using real-world data.

METHODS

We analysed 2015-2020 MASK-air^® European data. We compared days under no medication, monotherapy and co-medication using the visual analogue scale (VAS) levels for overall allergic symptoms ('VAS Global Symptoms') and impact of AR on work. We assessed the monthly use of different medication schemes, performing separate analyses by region (defined geographically or by Google Trends patterns). We estimated the average number of different drugs reported per patient within 1 year.

RESULTS

We analysed 222,024 days (13,122 users), including 63,887 days (28.8%) under monotherapy and 38,315 (17.3%) under co-medication. The median 'VAS Global Symptoms' was 7 for no medication days, 14 for monotherapy and 21 for co-medication (p < .001). Medication use peaked during the spring, with similar patterns across different European regions (defined geographically or by Google Trends). Oral H₁ -antihistamines were the most common medication in single and co-medication. Each patient reported using an annual average of 2.7 drugs, with 80% reporting two or more.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergic rhinitis medication patterns are similar across European regions. One third of treatment days involved co-medication. These findings suggest that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms (irrespective of how they understand AR) and that co-medication use is driven by symptom severity.

Dupilumab Demonstrates Rapid Onset of Response Across Three Type 2 Inflammatory Diseases

BACKGROUND

Type 2 inflammatory diseases often coexist in patients. Dupilumab targets type 2 inflammation and has demonstrated treatment benefits in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), asthma, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) with an acceptable safety profile.

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis across five phase 3 studies in patients with moderate to severe AD or asthma, or severe CRSwNP, evaluated time of onset and duration of the treatment response.

METHODS

Patients received subcutaneous dupilumab 200/300 mg or placebo. Assessments included the Eczema Area and Severity Index, Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, and Dermatology Life Quality Index in AD; pre-bronchodilator FEV₁, daily morning peak expiratory flow, and symptom scores in asthma; and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test, daily nasal congestion, and loss of smell scores in CRSwNP.

RESULTS

At week 2 after the initiation of dupilumab versus placebo, 67.8% versus 36.5% of AD patients achieved a clinically meaningful benefit (Eczema Area and Severity Index: 50% or greater improvement; Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale: 3 point or greater improvement; or Dermatology Life Quality Index: 4 point or greater improvement) (P < .001). Moreover, 61.6% versus 39.9% of asthma patients achieved improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ of 100 mL or greater and 48.8% versus 26.3% achieved 200 mL or greater improvement (both P < .001); 33.2% versus 5.6% of CRSwNP patients regained a sense of smell (P < .001). Treatment effects further improved or were sustained to the end of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically meaningful responses were achieved rapidly after the first dupilumab dose in AD, asthma, or CRSwNP and were sustained throughout treatment (see Video in this article's Online Repository at www.jaci-inpractice.org).

Global Variability in Administrative Approval Prescription Criteria for Biologic Therapy in Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

Regulatory bodies have approved five biologics for severe asthma. However, regional differences in accessibility may limit the global potential for personalized medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To compare global differences in ease of access to biologics.

METHODS

In April 2021, national prescription criteria for omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab were reviewed by severe asthma experts collaborating in the International Severe Asthma Registry. Outcomes (per country, per biologic) were (1) country-specific prescription criteria and (2) development of the Biologic Accessibility Score (BACS). The BACS composite score incorporates 10 prescription criteria, each with a maximum score of 10 points. Referenced to European Medicines Agency marketing authorization specifications, a higher score reflects easier access.

RESULTS

Biologic prescription criteria differed substantially across 28 countries from five continents. Blood eosinophil count thresholds (usually ≥300 cells/μL) and exacerbations were key requirements for anti-IgE/anti-IL-5/5R prescriptions in around 80% of licensed countries. Most countries (40% for dupilumab to 54% for mepolizumab) require two or more moderate or severe exacerbations, whereas numbers ranged from none to four. Moreover, 0% (for reslizumab) to 21% (for omalizumab) of countries required long-term oral corticosteroid use. The BACS highlighted marked between-country differences in ease of access. For omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, only two, one, four, and seven countries, respectively, scored equal or higher than the European Medicines Agency reference BACS. For reslizumab, all countries scored lower.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some differences were expected in country-specific biologic prescription criteria and ease of access, the substantial differences found in the current study present a challenge to implementing precision medicine across the world.

Normalisation of airflow limitation in asthma: Post-hoc analyses of TRIMARAN and TRIGGER

Background

In asthma, persistent airflow limitation (PAL) is associated with poorer control, lung function decline and exacerbations. Using post‐hoc analyses we evaluated: the relationship between post‐salbutamol PAL at screening, airflow limitation (AL) during 52 weeks treatment with extrafine beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium (BDP/FF/G) versus BDP/FF and the risk of moderate/severe asthma exacerbations.

Methods

TRIMARAN and TRIGGER were double‐blind studies comparing BDP/FF/G with BDP/FF (TRIMARAN medium‐dose ICS; TRIGGER high‐dose) in adults with uncontrolled asthma. Patients were subgrouped according to post‐salbutamol PAL status at screening, and AL over the 52‐week treatment period.

Results

Most patients with post‐salbutamol PAL at screening had AL at all on‐treatment visits (TRIMARAN 62.8%; TRIGGER 66.8%). A significantly higher proportion of patients had normalised airflow on ≥1 follow‐up visit when receiving BDP/FF/G than BDP/FF (TRIMARAN 44.1 vs. 33.1% [p = 0.003]; TRIGGER 40.1 vs. 26.0% [p < 0.001]). In patients with post‐salbutamol PAL at screening and normalised AL at ≥1 follow‐up visit, exacerbation rates were 15% (p = 0.105) and 19% (p = 0.039) lower in TRIMARAN and TRIGGER versus those with AL on all visits. There was a trend to lower exacerbation rates in patients receiving BDP/FF/G than BDP/FF, particularly in patients in whom AL was normalised.

Conclusion

In these analyses, AL in asthma was associated with an increased exacerbation incidence. Inhaled triple therapy with extrafine BDP/FF/G was more likely to normalise airflow, and was associated with a trend to a lower exacerbation rate than BDP/FF, particularly in the subgroup of patients in whom treatment was associated with airflow normalisation.

ClinicalTrials.gov: TRIMARAN, NCT02676076; TRIGGER, NCT02676089.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with uncontrolled severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and a clinical diagnosis of NSAID-ERD: Results from two randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 trials

Background

About one‐tenth of patients with difficult‐to‐treat chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) have comorbid non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug‐exacerbated respiratory disease (NSAID‐ERD). Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared interleukin (IL)‐4/IL‐13 receptor component, is an approved add‐on treatment in severe CRSwNP. This post hoc analysis evaluated dupilumab efficacy and safety in patients with CRSwNP with/without NSAID‐ERD.

Methods

Data were pooled from the phase 3 SINUS‐24 and SINUS‐52 studies in adults with uncontrolled severe CRSwNP who received dupilumab 300 mg or placebo every 2 weeks. CRSwNP, nasal airflow, lung function, and asthma control outcomes at Week 24 were evaluated, and treatment–subgroup interactions were assessed for patients with and without NSAID‐ERD.

Results

Of 724 patients, 204 (28.2%) had a diagnosis of NSAID‐ERD. At Week 24, least squares mean treatment differences demonstrated significant improvements in nasal polyp score, nasal congestion (NC), Lund–Mackay computed tomography, 22‐item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22), Total Symptom Score (TSS), rhinosinusitis severity visual analog scale, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), six‐item Asthma Control Questionnaire score, and improvement in smell with dupilumab versus placebo (all p < .0001) in patients with NSAID‐ERD. Treatment comparisons demonstrated significantly greater improvements with dupilumab in patients with versus without NSAID‐ERD for NC (p = .0044), SNOT‐22 (p = .0313), TSS (p = .0425), and PNIF (p = .0123).

Conclusions

In patients with uncontrolled severe CRSwNP, dupilumab significantly improved objective measures and patient‐reported symptoms to a greater extent in the presence of comorbid NSAID‐ERD than without. Dupilumab was well tolerated in patients with/without NSAID‐ERD.

Allergen immunotherapy in MASK-air users in real-life: Results of a Bayesian mixed-effects model

Background

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) on allergic rhinitis has been provided mostly by randomised controlled trials, with little data from real‐life studies.

Objective

To compare the reported control of allergic rhinitis symptoms in three groups of users of the MASK‐air^® app: those receiving sublingual AIT (SLIT), those receiving subcutaneous AIT (SCIT), and those receiving no AIT.

Methods

We assessed the MASK‐air^® data of European users with self‐reported grass pollen allergy, comparing the data reported by patients receiving SLIT, SCIT and no AIT. Outcome variables included the daily impact of allergy symptoms globally and on work (measured by visual analogue scales—VASs), and a combined symptom‐medication score (CSMS). We applied Bayesian mixed‐effects models, with clustering by patient, country and pollen season.

Results

We analysed a total of 42,756 days from 1,093 grass allergy patients, including 18,479 days of users under AIT. Compared to no AIT, SCIT was associated with similar VAS levels and CSMS. Compared to no AIT, SLIT‐tablet was associated with lower values of VAS global allergy symptoms (average difference = 7.5 units out of 100; 95% credible interval [95%CrI] = −12.1;−2.8), lower VAS Work (average difference = 5.0; 95%CrI = −8.5;−1.5), and a lower CSMS (average difference = 3.7; 95%CrI = −9.3;2.2). When compared to SCIT, SLIT‐tablet was associated with lower VAS global allergy symptoms (average difference = 10.2; 95%CrI = −17.2;−2.8), lower VAS Work (average difference = 7.8; 95%CrI = −15.1;0.2), and a lower CSMS (average difference = 9.3; 95%CrI = −18.5;0.2).

Conclusion

In patients with grass pollen allergy, SLIT‐tablet, when compared to no AIT and to SCIT, is associated with lower reported symptom severity. Future longitudinal studies following internationally‐harmonised standards for performing and reporting real‐world data in AIT are needed to better understand its ‘real‐world’ effectiveness.

Development and validation of combined symptom-medication scores for allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air^® app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs.

METHODS

We used MASK-air^® data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air^® data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air^® , and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT]).

RESULTS

We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air^® use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820).

CONCLUSION

The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials.

Asthma Phenotyping in Primary Care: Applying the International Severe Asthma Registry Eosinophil Phenotype Algorithm Across All Asthma Severities

BACKGROUND

We developed an eosinophil phenotype gradient algorithm and applied it to a large severe asthma cohort (International Severe Asthma Registry).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to reapply this algorithm in a UK primary care asthma cohort, quantify the eosinophilic phenotype, and assess the relationship between the likelihood of an eosinophilic phenotype and asthma severity/health care resource use (HCRU).

METHODS

Patients age 13 years and older with active asthma and blood eosinophil count or 1 or greater, who were included from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, were categorized according to the likelihood of eosinophilic phenotype using the International Severe Asthma Registry gradient eosinophilic algorithm. Patient demographic, clinical and HCRU characteristics were described for each phenotype.

RESULTS

Of 241,006 patients, 50.3%, 22.2%, and 21.9% most likely (grade 3), likely (grade 2), and least likely (grade 1), respectively, had an eosinophilic phenotype, and 5.6% had a noneosinophilic phenotype (grade 0). Compared with patients with noneosinophilic asthma, those most likely to have an eosinophilic phenotype tended to have more comorbidities (percentage with Charlson comorbidity index of ≥2: 28.2% vs 6.9%) and experienced more asthma attacks (percentage with one or more attack: 24.8% vs 15.3%). These patients were also more likely to have asthma that was difficult to treat (31.1% vs 18.3%), to receive more intensive treatment (percentage on Global Initiative for Asthma 2020 step 4 or 5: 44.2% vs 27.5%), and greater HCRU (eg, 10.8 vs 7.9 general practitioner all-cause consultations per year).

CONCLUSIONS

The eosinophilic asthma phenotype predominates in primary care and is associated with greater asthma severity and HCRU. These patients may benefit from earlier and targeted asthma therapy.

Impact of baseline patient characteristics on dupilumab efficacy in type 2 asthma

Severe asthma affects an estimated 5–10% of the total asthma patient population [1]. Various demographic factors, such as sex, age, obesity and age of onset, have been associated with asthma disease severity [2, 3], and the efficacy of asthma treatments has previously been found to vary depending on patient demographics [4, 5].

Dupilumab treatment versus placebo improved exacerbation rate and lung function outcomes in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma and high type 2 biomarkers at baseline, regardless of baseline characteristics in the phase 3 QUEST studyhttps://bit.ly/3yR7MlD

Burden of allergic rhinitis and impact of MP-AzeFlu from the patient perspective: pan European patient survey

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this survey were to (1) assess the burden of allergic rhinitis (AR) from the patient perspective, (2) investigate MP-AzeFlu use in real life and its impact on patients' lives and (3) explore factors associated with treatment satisfaction.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, quantitative, online, questionnaire-based survey was conducted in seven European countries (March-June 2019). Questions explored AR burden and treatment satisfaction. Satisfaction was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication 9-item (TSQM-9; max score = 100). Participants (aged ≥18 years) had a doctor/healthcare provider confirmed AR diagnosis and used MP-AzeFlu within the last year.

RESULTS

Pre-MP-AzeFlu treatment, participants (n = 1004) reported an average of 3.3 (SD:3.5) doctor visits/year, 8.1 (SD:11.0) days/year absenteeism and 15.8 (SD:18.9) days/year presenteeism due to AR. Only 48% of participants used MP-AzeFlu twice/day as recommended. Post-MP-AzeFlu 57% of participants reported better QoL, 47% reported fewer doctor visits and 52% discontinued polypharmacy. Absenteeism and presenteeism were reduced by 2.5 (SD 10.0) and 7.3 (SD:16.0) days/year, respectively. 70% of participants were more/much more satisfied with MP-AzeFlu versus previous AR treatment(s), and ≥70% were satisfied/extremely satisfied with its ability to prevent/treat AR, relieve symptoms and with its onset of action. Mean global, effectiveness and convenience TSQM-9 scores were 70.0 (SD:19.8), 68.3 (SD:21.6) and 72.7 (SD:20.4), respectively. Treatment satisfaction and effectiveness were significantly improved when MP-AzeFlu was taken as recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of AR on patients' lives remains high. Real-life use of MP-AzeFlu reduces that impact and is associated with a high level of effectiveness, convenience and global satisfaction.

Dupilumab reduces systemic corticosteroid use and sinonasal surgery rate in CRSwNP

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a type 2 inflammatory disease with a high symptom burden and poor quality of life. Treatment options include recurrent surgeries and/or frequent systemic corticosteroids (SCS). Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key drivers of type 2-mediated inflammation. We report results of pooled analyses from 2 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies (SINUS 24 [NCT02912468]; SINUS-52 [NCT02898454]) to evaluate dupilumab effect versus placebo in adults with CRSwNP with/without SCS use and sinonasal surgery.

METHODOLOGY

SINUS-24 patients were randomised 1:1 to subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg (n=143) or placebo (n=133) every 2 weeks (q2w) for 24 weeks. SINUS-52 patients were randomised 1:1:1 to 52 weeks of subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg q2w (n=150), 24 weeks q2w followed by 28 weeks of dupilumab 300 mg every 4 weeks (n=145) or 52 weeks of placebo q2w (n=153).

RESULTS

Dupilumab reduced the number of patients undergoing sinonasal surgery (82.6%), the need for in-study SCS use (73.9%), and SCS courses (75.3%). Significant improvements were observed with dupilumab vs placebo regardless of prior sinonasal surgery or SCS use in nasal polyp, nasal congestion, Lund-MacKay, and Sinonasal Outcome Test (22-items) scores, and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab demonstrated significant improvements in disease signs and symptoms and reduced the need for sino-nasal surgery and SCS use versus placebo in patients with severe CRSwNP, regardless of SCS use in the previous 2 years, or prior sinonasal surgery.

ARIA-EAACI statement on severe allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines - An EAACI-ARIA Position Paper

Further to the approval of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine BNT162b2, several severe anaphylaxis cases occured within the first few days of public vaccination. An investigation is taking place to understand the cases and their triggers. The vaccine will be administered to a large number of individuals worldwide and there are raising concerns that severe adverse events might occur. With the current information, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) states its position for the following preliminary recommendations that are to be revised as soon as more data emerge. To minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions in vaccinated individuals, it is urgently required to understand the specific nature of the reported severe allergic reactions, including the background medical history of the individuals affected and the mechanisms involved. To achieve this goal, all clinical and laboratory information should be collected and reported. Mild and moderate allergic patients should not be excluded from the vaccine as this could have a significant impact on reaching the goal of population immunity. Healthcare practitioners vaccinating against COVID-19 are required to be sufficiently prepared to recognize and treat anaphylaxis properly with the ability to administer adrenaline. Further to vaccine administration, a mandatory observation period of at least 15 minutes should be followed for all individuals. The current data have not shown any higher risk for patients suffering from allergic rhinitis or asthma, and this message should be clearly stated by physicians to enable our patients to trust the vaccine. More than 30% of the population suffers from allergic diseases and the benefit of the vaccination clearly outweighs the risk of severe COVID-19 development.

Heterogeneity of the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis in Europe based on MIDAS and OTCims platforms

BACKGROUND

The practice of allergology varies widely between countries, and the costs and sales for the treatment of rhinitis differ depending on practices and health systems. To understand these differences and their implications, the rhinitis market was studied in some of the EU countries.

METHODS

We conducted a pharmaco-epidemiological database analysis to assess the medications that were being prescribed for allergic rhinitis in the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. We used the IQVIA platforms for prescribed medicines (MIDAS^®- Meaningful Integration of Data, Analytics and Services) and for OTC medicines (OTC International Market Tracking-OTCims). We selected the five most important markets in the EU (France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain).

RESULTS

Intranasal decongestants were excluded from the analyses because they are rarely prescribed for allergic rhinitis. For both Standard Units (SU) and costs, France is leading the other countries. In terms of SU, the four other countries are similar. For costs, Poland is lower than the three others. However, medication use differs largely. For 2018, in SU, intranasal corticosteroid is the first treatment in Poland (70.0%), France (51.3%), Spain (51.1%) and Germany (50.3%), whereas the Italian market is dominated by systemic antihistamines (41.4%) followed by intranasal corticosteroids (30.1%). Results of other years were similar.

DISCUSSION

There are major differences between countries in terms of rhinoconjunctivitis medication usage.

Management of anaphylaxis due to COVID-19 vaccines in the elderly

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID‐19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID‐19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID‐19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA‐EAACI‐EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID‐19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID‐19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients.

Cluster Analysis of Inflammatory Biomarker Expression in the International Severe Asthma Registry

BACKGROUND

Allergy, eosinophilic inflammation, and epithelial dysregulation are implicated in severe asthma pathogenesis.

OBJECTIVE

We characterized biomarker expression in adults with severe asthma.

METHODS

Within the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR), we analyzed data from 10 countries in North America, Europe, and Asia, with prespecified thresholds for biomarker positivity (serum IgE ≥ 75 kU/L, blood eosinophils ≥ 300 cells/μL, and FeNO ≥ 25 ppb), and with hierarchical cluster analysis using biomarkers as continuous variables.

RESULTS

Of 1,175 patients; 64% were female, age (mean ± SD) 53 ± 15 years, body mass index (BMI) 30 ± 8, postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) predicted 72% ± 20%. By prespecified thresholds, 59% were IgE positive, 57% eosinophil positive, and 58% FeNO positive. There was substantial inflammatory biomarker overlap; 59% were positive for either 2 or 3 biomarkers. Five distinct clusters were identified: cluster 1 (61%, low-to-medium biomarkers) comprised highly symptomatic, older females with elevated BMI and frequent exacerbations; cluster 2 (18%, elevated eosinophils and FeNO) older females with lower BMI and frequent exacerbations; cluster 3 (14%, extremely high FeNO) older, highly symptomatic, lower BMI, and preserved lung function; cluster 4 (6%, extremely high IgE) younger, long duration of asthma, elevated BMI, and poor lung function; cluster 5 (1.2%, extremely high eosinophils) younger males with low BMI, poor lung function, and high burden of sinonasal disease and polyposis.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant overlap of biomarker positivity in severe asthma. Distinct clusters according to biomarker expression exhibit unique clinical characteristics, suggesting the occurrence of discrete patterns of underlying inflammatory pathway activation and providing pathogenic insights relevant to the era of monoclonal biologics.