Cost-effectiveness analysis of fluticasone versus montelukast in children with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma in the Pediatric Asthma Controller Trial

The pharmacoeconomics of the state-of-the-art drug treatments for asthma: a systematic review

Asthma is a chronic disease characterized by significant morbidities and mortality, with a large impact on socio-economic resources and a considerable burden on health-care systems. In the standard care of asthma, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) associated with long-acting β-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) are a reliable and often cost-effective choice, especially if based on the single inhaler therapy (SIT) strategy; however, in a subset of patients it is not possible to reach an adequate asthma control. In these cases, it is possible to resort to other pharmacologic options, including corticosteroids (OCS) or biologics. Unfortunately, OCS are associated with important side effects, whilst monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) allow excellent results, even if far more expensive. Up to now, the economic impact of asthma has not been compared with equivalent indicators in several studies. In fact, a significant heterogeneity of the cost analysis is evident in literature, for which the assessment of the real cost-effectiveness of asthma therapies is remarkably complex. To maximize the cost-effectiveness of asthma strategies, especially of biologics, attention must be paid on phenotyping and identification of predictors of response. Several studies were included, involving comparative analysis of drug treatments for asthma, comparative analysis of the costs and consequences of therapies, measurement and evaluation of direct drug costs, and the reduction of health service use. The initial research identified 389 articles, classified by titles and abstracts. A total of 311 articles were excluded as irrelevant and 78 articles were selected. Pharmacoeconomic studies on asthma therapies often report conflicting data also due to heterogeneous indicators and different populations examined. A careful evaluation of the existing literature is extremely important, because the scenario is remarkably complex, with an attempt to homogenize and interpret available data. Based on these studies, the improvement of prescriptive appropriateness and the reduction of the use of healthcare resources thanks to controller medications and to innovative therapies such as biologics partially reduce the economic burden of these treatments. A multidisciplinary stakeholder approach can also be extremely helpful in deciding between the available options and thus optimizing healthcare resources.

Economic evaluation of interventions for the treatment of asthma in children: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify and critique full economic evaluations (EEs) of childhood asthma treatments with the intention to guide researchers and commissioners of pediatric asthma services toward potentially cost-effective strategies.

METHODS

"MEDLINE," "Embase," "EconLit," "NHS EED," and "CEA" databases were searched to identify relevant EEs published between 2005 and May 2017. Quality of included studies was assessed with a published checklist.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were identified and comprised one cost-benefit analysis, 11 cost-effectiveness analyses, one cost-minimization analysis, and six cost-utility analyses. Treatments included pharmaceutical (n = 11) and non-pharmaceutical (n = 7) interventions. Fourteen studies identified cost-effective strategies. The quality of the studies varied and there were uncertainties due to the methods and relevance of data used.

CONCLUSION

Good-quality economic evaluation studies of pediatric asthma treatments are lacking. EE of new technologies adapted to local settings is recommended and can result in cost savings.

Daily inhaled corticosteroids or montelukast for preschoolers with asthma or recurrent wheezing: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Most international asthma guidelines recommend that children ≤5 years with asthma or recurrent wheezing be treated with daily low- moderate dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as the preferred controller and leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) as alternative therapy. There is no systematic review comparing the efficacy of ICS versus LTRA monotherapy in this age group.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of daily ICS versus LTRA in preschoolers with asthma or recurrent wheezing.

METHODS

Randomized, prospective, controlled trials published by December 2017, with a minimum of 3-month therapy with daily ICS versus LTRA were identified. The co-primary outcomes were the number of wheezing episodes and daily symptom score. Secondary outcomes included unscheduled emergency visits, need of rescue systemic corticosteroids (SC), hospitalization for exacerbations, lung function, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Of 29 trials identified, six studies (n = 3204 patients, 62% males, age range: 6-54 months) met the inclusion criteria; two were at low risk of bias. Five pertained to children with asthma; one to those with recurrent wheezing. No outcomes were similarly reported in the six studies, preventing meta-analysis. Based on trials at lowest risk of bias and the largest open-labelled studies, ICS was associated with better control of symptoms and less exacerbations than LTRA. And also less need for rescue SC. Insufficient data of high quality prevented firm conclusions on other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In preschoolers with asthma or recurrent wheezing, daily ICS appears more effective than daily LTRA for improving symptom control and decreasing exacerbations, particularly those requiring rescue SC, although the magnitude of benefit remains to be quantified.

Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacological Treatments for Asthma: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article was to summarize the findings of all the available studies on alternative pharmacological treatments for asthma and assess their methodological quality, as well as to identify the main drivers of the cost effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for the disease.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature in seven electronic databases was conducted in order to identify all the available health economic evidence on alternative pharmacological treatments for asthma published up to April 2017. The reporting quality of the included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.

RESULTS

A total of 72 studies were included in the review, classified as follows: medications for acute asthma treatment (n = 5, 6.9%); inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) administered alone or in conjunction with long-acting β-agonists (LABA) or tiotropium for chronic asthma treatment (n = 38, 52.8%); direct comparisons between different combinations of ICS, ICS/LABA, leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), and sodium cromoglycate for chronic asthma treatment (n = 14, 19.4%); and omalizumab for chronic asthma treatment (n = 15, 20.8%). ICS were reported to be cost effective when compared with LTRA for the management of persistent asthma. In patients with inadequately controlled asthma taking ICS, the addition of long-acting β-agonist (LABA) preparations has been demonstrated to be cost effective, especially when combinations of ICS/LABA containing formoterol are used for both maintenance and reliever therapy. In patients with uncontrolled severe persistent allergic asthma, omalizumab therapy could be cost effective in a carefully selected subgroup of patients with the more severe forms of the disease. The quality of reporting in the studies, according to the CHEERS checklist, was very uneven. The main cost-effectiveness drivers identified were the cost or rate of asthma exacerbations, the cost or rate of the use of asthma medications, the asthma mortality risk, and the rate of utilization of health services for asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings are in line with the pharmacological recommendations for stepwise management of asthma given in the most recent evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the disease. The identified reporting quality of the available health economic evidence is useful for identifying aspects where there is room for improvement in future asthma cost-effectiveness studies.

Overweight/obesity status in preschool children associates with worse asthma but robust improvement on inhaled corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

Overweight/obesity (OW) is linked to worse asthma and poorer inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) response in older children and adults.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to describe the relationships between OW and asthma severity and response to ICS in preschool children.

METHODS

This post hoc study of 3 large multicenter trials involving 2- to 5-year-old children compared annualized asthma symptom days and exacerbations among normal weight (NW) (body mass index: 10th-84th percentiles) versus OW (body mass index: ≥85th percentile) participants. Participants had been randomized to daily ICS, intermittent ICS, or daily placebo. Simple and multivariable linear regression was used to compare body mass index groups.

RESULTS

Within the group not treated with a daily controller, OW children had more asthma symptom days (90.7 vs 53.2, P = .020) and exacerbations (1.4 vs 0.8, P = .009) thanNW children did. Within the ICS-treated groups, OW and NW children had similar asthma symptom days (daily ICS: 47.2 vs 44.0 days, P = .44; short-term ICS: 61.8 vs 52.9 days, P = .46; as-needed ICS: 53.3 vs 47.3 days, P = .53), and similar exacerbations (daily ICS: 0.6 vs 0.8, P = .10; short-term ICS: 1.1 vs 0.8 days, P = .25; as-needed ICS: 1.0 vs 1.1, P = .72). Compared with placebo, daily ICS in OW led to fewer annualized asthma symptom days (90.7 vs 41.2, P = .004) and exacerbations (1.4 vs 0.6, P = .006), while similar protective ICS effects were less apparent among NW.

CONCLUSIONS

In preschool children off controller therapy, OW is associated with greater asthma impairment and exacerbations. However, unlike older asthmatic patients, OW preschool children do not demonstrate reduced responsiveness to ICS therapy.

Asthma Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: Are We Using the Recommended Outcomes in Estimating Value?

BACKGROUND

Asthma medication cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) lack the qualitative assessment regarding whether they capture the National Institutes for Health (NIH) 2012 recommended outcomes necessary to allow robust cross-study comparisons.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the current asthma outcomes used in CEAs and recommend a direction for improvement.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search using electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Tufts CEA registry, Cochrane, and NHSEED from January 2010 through December 2015. Key words included (1) cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, economic evaluation, health economics, or cost-benefit AND (2) asthma. All CEA studies evaluating 1 or more asthma medication were included. Authors assessed each CEA study with respect to asthma-specific NIH outcome recommendations including core (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, outpatient visits, medication, interventions costs), supplemental (visit categories and work/school absence), and emerging (academic/job-related) asthma outcomes. Besides outcomes of each CEA, issues that could prevent robust cross-study comparison were identified and thematically summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 12 pre-NIH and 14 post-NIH recommendation CEAs were included. Eleven (91.7%) and 14 (100%) of the pre-/post-NIH studies included at least 1 core outcome, respectively. Of the 26 total studies, 7 (26.9%) included asthma-specific outpatient visit categories, 6 (23.1%) included asthma school or work absences, 5 (19.2%) included respiratory health care use, and none of the studies included emerging outcomes. Other issues that hamper cross-study comparison include lack of standardized cost data, time frames, quality-of-life measures, and incorporation of adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of NIH-recommended asthma core outcomes has improved, there is still room for improvement in using supplemental and emerging outcomes. To allow robust cross-study comparisons, future work should focus on further standardizing of data sources and methods.

Does the use of efficacy or effectiveness evidence in cost-effectiveness analysis matter?

OBJECTIVE

To test the association of clinical evidence type, efficacy-based or effectiveness-based ("E"), versus whether or not asthma interventions' cost-effectiveness findings are favorable.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, Tufts CEA registry, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the UK National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database from 2009 to 2014.

STUDY SELECTION

All cost-effectiveness studies evaluating asthma medication(s) were included. Clinical evidence type, "E," was classified as efficacy-based if the evidence was from an explanatory randomized controlled trial(s) or meta-analysis, while evidence from pragmatic trial(s) or observational study(s) was classified as effectiveness-based. We defined three times the World Health Organization cost-effectiveness willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold or less as a favorable cost-effectiveness finding. Logistic regression tested the likelihood of favorable versus unfavorable cost-effectiveness findings against the type of "E."

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

25 cost-effectiveness studies were included. Ten (40.0%) studies were effectiveness-based, yet 15 (60.0%) studies were efficacy-based. Of 17 studies using endpoints that could be compared to WTP threshold, 7 out of 8 (87.5%) effectiveness-based studies yielded favorable cost-effectiveness results, whereas 4 out of 9 (44.4%) efficacy-based studies yielded favorable cost-effectiveness results. The adjusted odds ratio was 15.12 (95% confidence interval; 0.59 to 388.75) for effectiveness-based versus efficacy-based achieving favorable cost-effectiveness findings. More asthma cost-effectiveness studies used efficacy-based evidence. Studies using effectiveness-based evidence trended toward being more likely to disseminate favorable cost-effective findings than those using efficacy. Health policy decision makers should pay attention to the type of clinical evidence used in cost-effectiveness studies for accurate interpretation and application.

Fluticasone or montelukast in preschool wheeze: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 30% of children younger than 3 years experience at least 1 episode of wheezing. Antiasthmatic medication is routinely prescribed, but its effectiveness remains unclear. Our study was aimed to evaluate the effect of anti-inflammatory treatment on frequency and severity of preschool wheeze episodes (PWEs).

METHODS

Children aged 6 to 36 months with the first up to the third PWE were randomly assigned to receive montelukast, fluticasone, or no treatment for 12 weeks. The outcome measures were the number of PWEs, the number of hospitalizations due to PWE, and the severity of respiratory symptoms. results: There were no significant differences in outcome measures between the groups. However, tobacco-exposed children treated with fluticasone had significantly fewer PWEs (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Neither montelukast nor fluticasone has proven effective in the prevention of PWE recurrence. Children of smoking parents may benefit from fluticasone treatment after PWE. This observation requires confirmation in larger studies.

Demographic predictors of leukotriene antagonist monotherapy among children with persistent asthma

OBJECTIVE

To describe the children with persistent asthma receiving non-preferred controller therapy in the form of leukotriene receptor antagonist monotherapy (LTRAM).

STUDY DESIGN

In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed 2007-2009 South Carolina Medicaid data of children aged 2- to 18 years with persistent asthma, defined by Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS). Those without either LTRAM or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) were excluded. With multivariable logistic regression modeling, we compared the outcome of LTRAM with the primary predictor of age and adjusted for covariates of race, sex, HEDIS class, rurality, and disease severity. We also used negative binomial regression to compare outcomes of albuterol and oral steroid claims, outpatient and emergency department visits, and hospitalizations with predictors of LTRAM vs ICS therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 19,512 patients with asthma aged 2- to 18-years were studied: 2658 (13.6%) without controllers were excluded, 2508 (12.9%) received LTRAM, and 14 346 (73.5%) received ICS. Age, race, rurality, and HEDIS classification were all significantly associated with LTRAM (all P < .01): 5- to 13-year-olds relative to children <5 years old (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.30-1.64), Caucasians relative to African Americans (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.27-1.53), and rural children relative to urban (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08-1.3) were all more likely to receive LTRAM. Albuterol, oral steroid, and outpatient visits were lower in LTRAM (P < .01). No difference was detected in emergency department visits or admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Children 5- to 13-years of age, rural children, and Caucasian children were more likely to receive LTRAM. Uncovering provider rationale and practices as well as patient influences on this prescribing pattern may be helpful in optimizing asthma controller therapy.

Productivity costs in patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Disease-specific reductions in patient productivity can lead to substantial economic losses to society. The purpose of this study was to: 1) define the annual productivity cost for a patient with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and 2) evaluate the relationship between degree of productivity cost and CRS-specific characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, multi-institutional, observational cohort study.

METHODS

The human capital approach was used to define productivity costs. Annual absenteeism, presenteeism, and lost leisure time was quantified to define annual lost productive time (LPT). LPT was monetized using the annual daily wage rates obtained from the 2012 U.S. National Census and the 2013 U.S. Department of Labor statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients with refractory CRS were enrolled. The mean work days lost related to absenteeism and presenteeism were 24.6 and 38.8 days per year, respectively. A total of 21.2 household days were lost per year related to daily sinus care requirements. The overall annual productivity cost was $10,077.07 per patient with refractory CRS. Productivity costs increased with worsening disease-specific QoL (r = 0.440; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Results from this study have demonstrated that the annual productivity cost associated with refractory CRS is $10,077.07 per patient. This substantial cost to society provides a strong incentive to optimize current treatment protocols and continue evaluating novel clinical interventions to reduce this cost.

Addition to inhaled corticosteroids of long-acting beta2-agonists versus anti-leukotrienes for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma patients who continue to experience symptoms despite taking regular inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) represent a management challenge. Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and anti-leukotrienes (LTRA) are two treatment options that could be considered as add-on therapy to ICS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and efficacy of adding LABA versus LTRA to the treatment regimen for children and adults with asthma who remain symptomatic in spite of regular treatment with ICS. We specifically wished to examine the relative impact of the two agents on asthma exacerbations, lung function, symptoms, quality of life, adverse health events and withdrawals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register until December 2012. We consulted reference lists of all included studies and contacted pharmaceutical manufacturers to ask about other published or unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in adults or children with recurrent asthma that was treated with ICS along with a fixed dose of a LABA or an LTRA for a minimum of four weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included studies and extracted data. We sought unpublished data and further details of study design when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs (7208 participants), of which 16 recruited adults and adolescents (6872) and two recruited children six to 17 years of age (336) with asthma and significant reversibility to bronchodilator at baseline. Fourteen (79%) trials were of high methodological quality.The risk of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids (primary outcome of the review) was significantly lower with the combination of LABA + ICS compared with LTRA + ICS-from 13% to 11% (eight studies, 5923 adults and 334 children; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.99; high-quality evidence). The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with LABA compared with LTRA to prevent one additional exacerbation over four to 102 weeks was 62 (95% CI 34 to 794). The choice of LTRA, the dose of ICS and the participants' age group did not significantly influence the magnitude of effect. Although results were inconclusive, the effect appeared stronger in trials that used a single device rather than two devices to administer ICS and LABA and in trials of less than 12 weeks' duration.The addition of LABA to ICS was associated with a statistically greater improvement from baseline in lung function, as well as in symptoms, rescue medication use and quality of life, although the latter effects were modest. LTRA was superior in the prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm. More participants were satisfied with the combination of LABA + ICS than LTRA + ICS (three studies, 1625 adults; RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20; moderate-quality evidence). The overall risk of withdrawal was significantly lower with LABA + ICS than with LTRA + ICS (13 studies, 6652 adults and 308 children; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.96; moderate-quality evidence). Although the risk of overall adverse events was equivalent between the two groups, the risk of serious adverse events (SAE) approached statistical significance in disfavour of LABA compared with LTRA (nine studies, 5658 adults and 630 children; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.79; P value 0.06; moderate-quality evidence), with no apparent impact of participants' age group.The following adverse events were reported, but no significant differences were demonstrated between groups: headache (11 studies, N = 6538); cardiovascular events (five studies, N = 5163), osteopenia and osteoporosis (two studies, N = 2963), adverse events (10 studies, N = 5977 adults and 300 children). A significant difference in the risk of oral moniliasis was noted, but this represents a low occurrence rate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults with asthma that is inadequately controlled by predominantly low-dose ICS with significant bronchodilator reversibility, the addition of LABA to ICS is modestly superior to the addition of LTRA in reducing oral corticosteroid-treated exacerbations, with an absolute reduction of two percentage points. Differences favouring LABA over LTRA as adjunct therapy were observed in lung function and, to a lesser extend, in rescue medication use, symptoms and quality of life. The lower overall withdrawal rate and the higher proportion of participants satisfied with their therapy indirectly favour the combination of LABA + ICS over LTRA + ICS. Evidence showed a slightly increased risk of SAE with LABA compared with LTRA, with an absolute increase of one percentage point. Our findings modestly support the use of a single inhaler for the delivery of both LABA and low- or medium-dose ICS. Because of the paucity of paediatric trials, we are unable to draw firm conclusions about the best adjunct therapy in children.

Using fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) to diagnose steroid-responsive disease and guide asthma management in routine care

BACKGROUND

Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is a surrogate marker of eosinophilic airway inflammation and good predictor of corticosteroid response.

AIM

To evaluate how FeNO is being used to guide primary care asthma management in the United Kingdom (UK) with a view to devising practical algorithms for the use of FeNO in the diagnosis of steroid-responsive disease and to guide on-going asthma management.

METHODS

Eligible patients (n = 678) were those in the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD) aged 4-80 years who, at an index date, had their first FeNO assessment via NIOX MINO® or Flex®. Eligible practices were those using FeNO measurement in at least ten patients during the study period. Patients were characterized over a one-year baseline period immediately before the index date. Outcomes were evaluated in the year immediately following index date for two patient cohorts: (i) those in whom FeNO measurement was being used to identify steroid-responsive disease and (ii) those in whom FeNO monitoring was being used to guide on-going asthma management. Outcomes for cohort (i) were incidence of new ICS initiation at, or within the one-month following, their first FeNO measurement, and ICS dose during the outcome year. Outcomes for cohort (ii) were adherence, change in adherence (from baseline) and ICS dose.

OUTCOMES

In cohort (i) (n = 304) the higher the FeNO category, the higher the percentage of patients that initiated ICS at, or in the one month immediately following, their first FeNO measurement: 82%, 46% and 26% of patients with high, intermediate and low FeNO, respectively. In cohort (ii) (n = 374) high FeNO levels were associated with poorer baseline adherence (p = 0.005) but greater improvement in adherence in the outcome year (p = 0.017). Across both cohorts, patients with high FeNO levels were associated with significantly higher ICS dosing (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the UK, FeNO is being used in primary practice to guide ICS initiation and dosing decisions and to identify poor ICS adherence. Simple algorithms to guide clinicians in the practical use of FeNO could improved diagnostic accuracy and better tailored asthma regimens.

Inhaled corticosteroids in lung diseases

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are used extensively in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to their broad antiinflammatory effects. They improve lung function, symptoms, and quality of life and reduce exacerbations in both conditions but do not alter the progression of disease. They decrease mortality in asthma but not COPD. The available ICSs vary in their therapeutic index and potency. Although ICSs are used in all age groups, younger and smaller children may be at a greater risk for adverse systemic effects because they can receive higher mg/kg doses of ICSs compared with older children. Most of the benefit from ICSs occurs in the low to medium dose range. Minimal additional improvement is seen with higher doses, although some patients may benefit from higher doses. Although ICSs are the preferred agents for managing persistent asthma in all ages, their benefit in COPD is more controversial. When used appropriately, ICSs have few adverse events at low to medium doses, but risk increases with high-dose ICSs. Although several new drugs are being developed and evaluated, it is unlikely that any of these new medications will replace ICSs as the preferred initial long-term controller therapy for asthma, but more effective initial controller therapy could be developed for COPD.

Budesonide inhalation suspension versus montelukast in children aged 2 to 4 years with mild persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) and montelukast provide acceptable asthma control, whereas overall measures favored BIS in children aged 2 to 8 years with mild persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We compared BIS and montelukast over a 1-year period in children aged 2 to 4 years with asthma.

METHODS

Data were derived from a 52-week, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, multicenter study (NCT00641472). Children with mild asthma received either BIS 0.5 mg or montelukast 4 to 5 mg once daily. Patients were stepped up to twice-daily BIS or oral corticosteroids for mild or severe asthma worsening, respectively. Primary efficacy assessment was time to first additional asthma medication for exacerbation over 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Two hundred two patients, age 2 to 4 years, received BIS (n = 105) or montelukast (n = 97). No difference was observed between the BIS and montelukast groups in median time to first additional asthma medication over 52 weeks (183 vs 86 days). Statistically significant differences were observed in favor of BIS over montelukast in the percentage of patients requiring oral steroids at 52 weeks (21.9% vs 37.1%; P = .022), the rate (number/patient/year) of additional courses of medication (1.35 vs 2.30; P = .003), the rate of additional oral steroid therapy (0.44 vs 0.88; P = .008), and caregivers' ability to manage the patient's symptoms (P = .026). Both treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

BIS and montelukast provided acceptable asthma control in children aged 2 to 4 years with mild persistent asthma with no significant difference between treatments in the primary end point; however, several secondary outcomes showed statistically significant differences (and many had numerical differences) in favor of BIS over montelukast.

Role of leukotriene receptor antagonists in the management of pediatric asthma: an update

At present, the main indications for leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) in pediatric asthma are as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and as initial controller therapy in children with mild asthma, especially those who cannot or will not use ICS. LTRA are also useful for patients who have concomitant rhinitis, and patients with viral-induced wheeze and exercise-induced asthma. It should be noted that the benefits of LTRA therapy have been demonstrated in children as young as 6 months of age and recent clinical trials have further proven the benefits of LTRA in acute asthma exacerbations. However, considering the important pro-inflammatory effects that leukotrienes (LT) have in experimental models of asthma, it may seem surprising that LTRA treatment outcomes are not better and that in some clinical trials only a minority of patients could be classified as full responders. This could be explained by potential additional LT receptors that are not affected by LTRA. Such receptors could represent new therapeutic targets in asthma. Furthermore, progress in differentiating between asthma phenotypes that result from different pathogenic mechanisms, some of which may involve LT to a lesser degree, should lead to an improved, personalized use of LTRA for treating asthma.

Advances in pediatric asthma in 2011: moving forward

Last year's "Advances in pediatric asthma" concluded with the following statement: "Perhaps new directions in personalized medicine and improved health care access and communication will help maintain steady progress in alleviating the burden of this disease in children, especially young children." This year's summary will focus on recent advances in pediatric asthma that show significant accomplishments in reducing asthma morbidity and mortality over the last 10 years and discuss some pathways to further reduce asthma burden, as indicated in Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology publications in 2011. Some of the recent reports continue to shed light on methods to improve asthma management through steps to reduce asthma exacerbations, identify features of the disease in early childhood, alter asthma progression, intervene with nutrition, and more effectively implement the asthma guidelines. As new information evolves, it is also time to consider a revision of the asthma guidelines based on key studies that affect our management of the disease since the last revision in 2007. Now is also the time to use information recorded in electronic medical records to develop innovative disease management plans that will track asthma over time and enable timely decisions on interventions to maintain control that can lead to disease remission and prevention.

Leukotriene D4 bronchial provocation test: methodology and diagnostic value

BACKGROUND

Although leukotriene D4 (LTD4) is a potent bronchoconstrictor, little is known about airway responsiveness to LTD4 in asthmatics with different inflammation phenotypes.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the methodology and investigate the distribution characters of airway responsiveness, diagnostic value and safety of LTD4 bronchial provocation test.

METHODS

LTD4 bronchial provocation tests were performed in 62 asthmatics and 21 normal controls. Airway responsiveness was assessed based on the cumulative dosage causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PD(20)FEV(1)-LTD4) and was expressed as (median, interquartile range). The fall in spirometric parameters was plotted showing the distribution characters. The diagnostic value was assessed using receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve. All adverse events were recorded during the test.

RESULTS

Airway responsiveness to LTD4 was significantly higher in asthmatics (0.410 nmol, 0.808 nmol) as compared with normal controls (5.00 nmol, 0.00 nmol). The decrease in spirometric parameters varied after bronchoprovocation, which was negatively correlated with PD(20)FEV(1)-LTD4, among which FEV(1) had a maximal slope (r = -0.524, P = 0.000). High diagnostic value (AUC: 0.914, 95%CI: [0.855, 0.974]) was revealed by ROC curve. The major adverse events were dyspnea (82.3%), chest tightness (72.6%), wheezing (32.3%) and coughing (25.8%) in asthmatics, which could overall be recovered within 15.0 minutes after inhalation of 200 ∼ 400 mcg salbutamol MDI. No serious adverse event was reported.

CONCLUSION

The established procedure of LTD4 bronchial provocation test is effective in the diagnosis of asthma and is well tolerated. Future studies are necessary to provide more evidences in terms of safety and efficacy. This may be helpful upon further application in clinical practice.

Low rates of controller medication initiation and outpatient follow-up after emergency department visits for asthma

OBJECTIVE

To determine what proportion of patients who are seen in an emergency department (ED) for asthma receive inhaled corticosteroids or attend follow-up appointments.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of 2007-2009 South Carolina Medicaid data. Enrollees aged 2-18 years who had an ED visit for asthma were included. Patients admitted for asthma or with an inhaled corticosteroid claim in the 2 months before the month of the ED visit were excluded. Covariates were sex, race, age, rural residence, and asthma severity. Outcome measures were a prescription for an inhaled corticosteroid filled within the 2 months after the ED visit and attendance at a follow-up appointment within the 2 months after the ED visit.

RESULTS

A total of 3435 patients were included. Out of the study cohort, 57% were male, 76% were of a minority race/ethnicity, 69% lived in an urban areas, 18% had inhaled corticosteroid use, and 12% completed follow-up. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that patients with severe asthma were more likely to receive an inhaled corticosteroid (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.3-3.7) and attend a follow-up appointment (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5-2.6). Patients aged 2-6 years and those aged >12 years were less likely to attend follow-up (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.90 and OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.83, respectively) (all models P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Children with asthma seen in the ED have low rates of inhaled corticosteroid use and outpatient follow-up. This indicates a need for further interventions to increase the use of inhaled corticosteroids in response to ED visits.

Pediatric asthma: natural history, assessment, and treatment

Wheezing and childhood asthma are not synonymous but rather comprise a heterogeneous group of conditions that have different outcomes over the course of childhood. Most infants who wheeze have a transient condition associated with diminished airway function at birth and have no increased risk of asthma later in life. However, children with persistent wheezing throughout childhood and frequent exacerbations represent the main challenge today. Studying the natural history of asthma is important for the understanding and accurate prediction of the clinical course of different phenotypes. To date, a great improvement has been achieved in reducing the frequency of asthma symptoms. However, neither decreased environmental exposure nor controller treatment, as recommended by the recent National Asthma Education And Prevention Program, can halt the progression of asthma in childhood or the development of persistent wheezing phenotype. This review focuses on the recent studies that led to the current understanding of asthma phenotypes in childhood and the recommended treatments.

Advances in adult asthma diagnosis and treatment and health outcomes, education, delivery, and quality in 2011: what goes around comes around

Last year's review of research advances in adults with asthma emphasized the linear trajectory of translation: the initial studies translating bench findings to the first patients (T1) are connected to larger efficacy studies, including clinical trials studying subjects under tightly controlled conditions (T2), and these in turn are connected to research, including comparative effectiveness research, that tests how the efficacy findings of T2 research fare in the real world, diverse populations, and varied practice settings (T3). This year what was observed was a more interwoven relationship (rather than a linear one), in which each translational level informs the others and new approaches to answering old questions have led to new discoveries. Within this framework, the present review summarizes clinical research on asthma in adults that was reported in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in 2011, with emphasis on health outcomes, education, delivery, and quality in terms of discoveries related to mechanisms of disease, environmental exposures, and management.

Under-utilization of controller medications and poor follow-up rates among hospitalized asthma patients

OBJECTIVE

Recommended preventive care following an asthma admission includes prescribing controller medications and encouraging outpatient follow-up. We sought to determine (1) the proportion of patients who receive controller medications or attend follow-up after asthma admission and (2) what factors predict these outcomes.

METHODS

South Carolina Medicaid data from 2007-2009 were analyzed. Patients who were included were 2 to 18 years old, and had at least one admission for asthma. Variables examined were: age, gender, race, and rural location. Outcome variables were controller medication prescription and follow-up appointment. Any claim for an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/long-acting beta-agonist in the 2 months after admission was considered appropriate. Any outpatient visit for asthma in the 2 months after admission was considered appropriate. Bivariate analyses used chi-square tests. Logistic regression models identified factors that predict controller medications and follow-up.

RESULTS

Five hundred five patients were included, of whom 60% were male, 79% minority race/ethnicity, and 58% urban. Rates of receiving controller medications and attending follow-up appointments were low, and an even lower proportion received both. Overall, 52% received a controller medication, 49% attended follow-up, and 32% had both. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that patients not of minority race or ethnicity were more likely to receive controller medications (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with asthma admitted for acute exacerbations in South Carolina have low rates of controller medication initiation and follow-up attendance. Minority race/ethnicity patients are less likely to receive controller medications. To decrease rates of future exacerbations, inpatient providers must improve the rates of preventive care delivery in the acute care setting with a focus on racial/ethnic minority populations.