Real-World Assessment of Asthma Specialist Visits Among U.S. Patients with Severe Asthma

Impact of Clinical Characteristics and Biomarkers on Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire Exacerbation Prediction Ability

BACKGROUND

Complex models combining impairment-based control assessments with clinical characteristics and biomarkers have been developed to predict asthma exacerbations. The composite Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) with adjustments for demographics (age, sex, race, and body mass index) predicts 12-month exacerbation occurrence similarly to these more complex models.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether AIRQ exacerbation prediction is enhanced when models are adjusted for a wider range of clinical characteristics and biomarkers.

METHODS

Patients aged 12 years and older completed monthly online surveys regarding exacerbation-related oral corticosteroid use, emergency department or urgent care visits, and hospitalizations. Univariate logistic regressions to predict exacerbations were performed with sociodemographics, comorbidities, exacerbation history, lung function, blood eosinophils, IgE, and FeNO. Significant (P ≤ .05) variables were included in multivariable logistic regressions with and without AIRQ control categories to predict 12-month exacerbations (log odds ratio [95% Wald confidence interval]). Model performances were compared.

RESULTS

Over 12 months, 1,070 patients (70% female; mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.4] years; 22% non-White; body mass index [SD], 30.6 [8.7]) completed one or more survey (mean [SD], 10.5 [2.8] surveys). In the multivariable analysis, AIRQ control category adjusted for significant clinical characteristics and biomarkers was predictive of one or more exacerbations: odds ratio (95% CI) not well-controlled versus well-controlled: 1.93 (1.41-2.62), very poorly controlled versus well-controlled: 3.81 (2.65-5.47). Receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) for this more complex model of exacerbation prediction (AUC = 0.72) did not differ from AIRQ (AUC = 0.70). Models with AIRQ performed better than those without AIRQ (AUC = 0.67; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Costly and time-consuming complex modeling with clinical characteristics and biomarkers does not enhance the strong exacerbation prediction ability of AIRQ.

Gaps in Care Among Uncontrolled Severe Asthma Patients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Understanding the implementation of key guideline recommendations is critical for managing severe asthma (SA) in the treatment of uncontrolled disease.

OBJECTIVE

To assess specialist visits and medication escalation in US patients with SA after events indicating uncontrolled disease (EUD) and associations with health outcomes and social disparity indicators.

METHODS

Patients with SA appearing in administrative claims data spanning 2015 to 2020 were indexed hierarchically on asthma-related EUD, including hospitalizations, emergency department visits with systemic corticosteroid treatment, or outpatient visits with systemic corticosteroid treatment. Patients with SA without EUD served as controls. Eligibility included age 12 or greater, 12 months enrollment before and after index, no biologic use, and no other major respiratory disease during the pre-period. Escalation of care in the form of specialist visits and medication escalation, health care resource use, costs, and disease exacerbations were assessed during follow-up.

RESULTS

We identified 180,736 patients with SA (90,368 uncontrolled and 90,368 controls). Between 35% and 51% of patients with SA with an EUD had no specialist visit or medication escalation. Follow-up exacerbations ranged from 51% to 4% across EUD cohorts, compared with 13% in controls. Among uncontrolled patients with SA who were Black or Hispanic/Latino, 41% and 38%, respectively, had no specialist visit or medication escalation after EUD, compared with 33% of non-Hispanic White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of uncontrolled patients with SA had no evidence of specialist visits or medication escalation after uncontrolled disease, and there was a clear relationship between uncontrolled disease and subsequent health care resource use and exacerbations. Findings highlight the need for improved guideline-based care delivery to patients with SA, particularly for those facing social disparities.

Dupilumab sustains efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe type 2 asthma regardless of inhaled corticosteroids dose

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab, a human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukins-4/13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation. The TRAVERSE (NCT02134028) open-label extension study demonstrated the long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in patients ≥12 years who completed a previous dupilumab asthma study. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in the parent studies. Here, we assess whether dupilumab sustains long-term efficacy in patients regardless of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at parent study baseline (PSBL).

METHODS

Patients from phase 2b (NCT01854047) or phase 3 (QUEST; NCT02414854) studies receiving high- or medium-dose ICS at PSBL and enrolled in TRAVERSE were included. We analyzed unadjusted annualized severe exacerbation rates, change from PSBL in pre-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 ), 5-item asthma control questionnaire, and type 2 biomarkers in patients with type 2 asthma at baseline (blood eosinophils ≥150 cells/μL or fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO] ≥25 ppb), and subgroups defined by baseline blood eosinophils or FeNO.

RESULTS

Of patients with type 2 asthma (n = 1666), 891 (53.5%) were receiving high-dose ICS at PSBL. In this subgroup, unadjusted exacerbation rates for dupilumab versus placebo were 0.517 versus 1.883 (phase 2b) and 0.571 versus 1.300 (QUEST) over the parent study (52 weeks) and remained low throughout TRAVERSE (0.313-0.494). Improvements in pre-BD FEV1 were sustained throughout TRAVERSE. Similar clinical efficacy was observed among patients receiving medium-dose ICS at PSBL and biomarker subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab showed sustained efficacy for up to 3 years in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe type 2 asthma on high- or medium-dose ICS.

Interdisciplinary collaboration in the diagnosis and management of chronic cough: the role and importance of primary care providers

Chronic cough (CC) is associated with many conditions, so identifying contributing causes poses a diagnostic challenge. However, guidelines written for US physicians do not explicitly outline suggested roles for primary care providers (PCPs) in the approach to patients with CC, including refractory or unexplained CC. The objective of this review is to describe the role of PCPs in the diagnosis and treatment of CC in adults. This narrative review draws upon literature (identified via a PubMed search performed January 9, 2023, using primary care/disease state-related terms) and expertise from specialist physicians to provide recommendations for CC management in primary care. Cough is one of the top reasons patients seek care from PCPs; accordingly, PCPs are often the first physicians to conduct workup and initiate treatment. Patients with CC often experience a burdensome cough that lasts for years, have high healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), undergo multiple or failed treatment trials, and have limited success finding an etiology. Although specialist referral may be needed for many diagnostic tests, initial aspects of CC workup and management should be completed in primary care. Often more accessible than specialists, real-world evidence on HCRU suggests PCPs are important stakeholders in diagnosing and managing CC, including during initial workup and treatment for the most common causes of CC (i.e. upper-airway cough syndrome, asthma, noneosinophilic asthmatic bronchitis, and gastroesophageal reflux disease). Thorough workup at the primary care level may facilitate earlier identification of CC cause(s), improving patient journey to diagnosis and management.

Provision of Food Allergy Care in the United Kingdom and United States: Current Issues and Future Directions

Food allergy (FA) is a growing issue worldwide. The United Kingdom and United States are high-income, industrialized countries with reported increases in FA prevalence over the past few decades. This review compares delivery of FA care in the United Kingdom and United States and each country's response to the heightened demand and disparities for FA services. In the United Kingdom, allergy specialists are scarce and general practitioners (GPs) provide most allergy care. Whereas the United States has more allergists per capita than the United Kingdom, there is still a shortage of allergy services owing to the greater reliance on specialist care for FA in America and wide geographic variation in access to allergist services. Currently, generalists in these countries lack the specialty training and equipment to diagnose and manage FA optimally. Moving forward, the United Kingdom aims to enhance training for GPs so they may provide better quality frontline allergy care. In addition, the United Kingdom is implementing a new tier of semi-specialized GPs and increasing cross-center collaboration through clinical networks. The United Kingdom and United States aim to increase the number of FA specialists, which is critical at a time of rapidly expanding management options for allergic and immunologic diseases requiring clinical expertise and shared decision-making to select appropriate therapies. While these countries aim to grow their supply of quality FA services actively, further efforts to build clinical networks and perhaps recruit international medical graduates and expand telehealth services are necessary to reduce disparities in access to care. For the United Kingdom in particular, increasing quality services will require additional support from the leadership of the centralized National Health Service, which remains challenging.

Burden and unmet need for specialist care in poorly controlled and severe childhood asthma in a Danish nationwide cohort

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common disease in childhood and adolescence with lifelong consequences particularly among those at risk of severe disease, poor control and/or frequent exacerbations. Specialist care is recommended for at-risk children and adolescents, yet access to specialist management in free-to-access healthcare settings remains poorly understood.

METHODS

A Danish nationwide cohort of children and adolescents aged 2-17 years with persistent asthma, defined as repeated redemption of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) during 2015, were followed for two years, to identify at-risk children and adolescents comprising those with severe asthma (classified according to GINA 2020 guidelines), poor control (defined as use of 400/600 (ages 2-11/12 +) annual doses of short-acting bronchodilators), or frequent exacerbations (defined as use of oral steroids or hospitalization), and access to specialist care. The population is chosen due to detailed medical records in the setting of universal health care.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised of 29,851 children and adolescents (59% boys), with a median age of 9 years. While 17% of children were on high dose ICS, 22% were on daily ICS below GINA low dose cut-off. Prevalence of severe asthma (3.0-6.5%) was lower than poor asthma control (6.4-25%); both declined from childhood to adolescence. Exacerbations occurred in 7.1-9.0% of children, with median number of exacerbations being 1 (IQR 1-1). Despite being classified as having mild-to-moderate asthma, 15% had poor asthma control and 3.8% experienced exacerbation(s), respectively. While 61% of children with severe asthma and 58% with exacerbation-prone disease were in specialist care, only 24% with uncontrolled disease were receiving specialist care. Of children and adolescents using high-dose ICS, 71% were managed in primary care, while the use of additional controllers was more common in specialist care.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughout childhood and adolescence, there was a high prevalence of severe asthma and poor control, although their prevalence declined with age. We demonstrate a large unmet need for specialist care among children with at-risk asthma, particularly among those with poorly controlled asthma, even in a system with free-to-access, tax-funded healthcare.

Over-prescription of short-acting β2-agonists is associated with poor asthma outcomes: results from the Latin American cohort of the SABINA III study

OBJECTIVE

Short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) over-reliance is associated with poor asthma outcomes. As part of the SABA Use IN Asthma (SABINA) III study, we assessed SABA prescriptions and clinical outcomes in patients from six Latin American countries.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, data on disease characteristics/asthma treatments were collected using electronic case report forms. Patients (aged ≥12 years) were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity (guided by the 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma) and practice type (primary/specialist care). Multivariable regression models analyzed the associations between SABA prescriptions and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Data from 1096 patients (mean age, 52.0 years) were analyzed. Most patients were female (70%), had moderate-to-severe asthma (79.4%), and were treated by specialists (87.6%). Asthma was partly controlled/uncontrolled in 61.5% of patients; 47.4% experienced ≥1 severe exacerbation in the previous 12 months. Overall, 39.8% of patients were prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters in the preceding 12 months (considered over-prescription). SABA canisters were purchased over the counter (OTC) by 17.2% of patients, of whom 38.8% purchased ≥3 canisters in the 12 months prior. Of patients who purchased SABA OTC, 73.5% were prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters. Higher SABA prescriptions (vs. 1 - 2 canisters) were associated with an increased incidence rate of severe exacerbations (ranging from 1.31 to 3.08) and lower odds ratios of having at least partly controlled asthma (ranging from 0.63 to 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

SABA over-prescription was common in Latin America, highlighting the need for urgent collaboration between healthcare providers and policymakers to align clinical practices with the latest evidence-based recommendations to address this public health concern.

Racial Inequities in Asthma Care

Racial inequities in asthma care are evolving as a recognized factor in long-standing inequities in asthma outcomes (e.g., hospitalization and mortality). Little research has been conducted regarding the presence or absence of racial inequities among patients seen in asthma specialist settings, this is an important area of future research given that asthma specialist care is recommended for patients experiencing the poor asthma outcomes disproportionately experienced by Black and Hispanic patients. This study provides a systematic review of racial asthma care inequities in asthma epidemiology, clinical assessment, medication prescription, and asthma specialist referral practices.

Disease Control, Not Severity, Drives Job Absenteeism in Young Adults with Asthma - A Nationwide Cohort Study

Introduction

The impact of asthma and disease control on job absenteeism in young adults is sparsely investigated and conflicting evidence exist. Based on a nationwide cohort, the present study aims to describe the overall job absenteeism across asthma severities and describe the possible influence of asthma control.

Methods

REASSESS is a nationwide cohort of Danish asthma patients aged 18–45 using controller medication between 2014 and 2018, followed retrospectively for up to 15 years using national databases. Impact of asthma was investigated using negative binomial regression adjusted for age, sex, Charlson score and level of education and presented as adjusted incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

A total of 60,534 patients with asthma (median age 33 (25, 39), 55% female, 19% uncontrolled disease and 5.7% possible severe asthma) were followed for 12.7 (6.5–14.8) years. The prevalence of any absenteeism was more common in both mild-to-moderate and possible severe asthma compared to the background population (67%, 80% and 62%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Compared to the background population, mild-to-moderate and possible severe asthma were more likely to have temporary sick leave (1.37 (1.33–1.42); 1.78 (1.62–1.96)), unemployment (1.11 (1.07–1.14); 1.26 (1.15–1.38)) and obtain disability benefits (1.67 (1.66–1.67); 2.64 (2.63–2.65)). Uncontrolled asthma had increased temporary sick leave (1.42 (1.34–1.50)), unemployment (1.40 (1.32–1.48)) and disability (1.26 (1.26–1.27)) when compared to controlled disease. Significant increases in absenteeism could be measured already at ≥100 annual doses of rescue medication (1.09 (1.04–0.1.14)), patients’ first moderate or severe exacerbation (1.31 (1.15–1.49) and 1.31 (1.24–1.39), respectively). Further increases in absenteeism were observed with increasing rescue medication use and severe exacerbations.

Conclusion

Across severities, job absenteeism is increased among patients with asthma compared to the background population. Increases in absenteeism was seen already at ≥100 annual doses of rescue medication, representing a substantial, and probably preventable, reduction in productivity among young adults.

Annual and Post-Exacerbation Follow-Up of Asthma Patients in Clinical Practice – A Large Population-Based Study in Sweden

Background

Symptom control has not improved in Swedish asthma patients during the last two decades. Guidelines recommend annual reviews for asthma patients treated with maintenance inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). We aimed to describe how visit patterns in an ICS-treated asthma population in Sweden were related to applicable asthma guidelines.

Methods

Swedish electronic health data for incident asthma patients, ≥18 years, with at least one ICS collection (index date) between 2006 and 2017 were included. Exacerbations were defined as hospitalizations, emergency visits, or collection of oral corticosteroids (OCS). Probability of an asthma-related regular follow-up visit and probability of a follow-up visit after an exacerbation, both within 15 months, were estimated using the cumulative incidence function, time-to-event analysis, and incident rate ratios.

Results

In 51,349 asthma patients (mean age 47.6 years, 63% females), 17,573 had a regular asthma visit in primary or secondary care within 15 months after the index, yielding an overall probability of a visit of 37.4%. Patients with a follow-up visit had higher ICS collection and lower OCS collection than patients without regular visits. Among 22,097 patients with acute exacerbations, the probability of a visit within 15 months after an exacerbation was 31.0%. The probability of having a visit increased during the study period.

Conclusion

Only one-third of ICS-treated asthma patients, regardless of asthma severity, had a regular or post-exacerbation follow-up visit within a 15-month period. The consequences of this lack of adherence to guidelines need further evaluation to secure optimal asthma management.