"As-Needed" Inhaled Corticosteroids for Patients With Asthma

Assessing medication adherence in adults with asthma and its effect on rescue therapy for exacerbations

Introduction

Adherence to prescribed inhaled controller medication is a determinant of asthma health outcomes. Traditional methods for assessing medication adherence (MA) can be challenging in real-world clinical settings. A new behavioral science approach presents opportunities to develop a novel MA assessment tool that also allows the prediction of acute asthma exacerbations. The current study aims to evaluate MA among adults with asthma based on their prescription collection behavior and its relationship with subsequent exacerbations.

Method

This retrospective study was conducted on Asian adults with clinically diagnosed asthma and managed in public primary care clinics in Singapore from 2016 to 2023. Clinical data of patients, including socio-demographical, clinical (including Asthma Control Test scores), and prescription records were thoroughly examined to determine MA. The participants were stratified into the Full Collection (FC) group for those collections of prescribed asthma medication within a week; Partial Collection (PC) group for partial medication collection; No Collection (NC) group for no dispensation record within 1 year of the prescription date. The Proportion of Days Covered (PDC), defined as the proportion of days in which a patient gets access to the medication was determined to correlate with the prescription collection method. Multiple stepwise logistic regression was used to assess MA with rescue therapy (RT) occurrence as indicators of acute asthma exacerbations.

Results

In this study, complete records of 13,482 patients were analyzed. The patients were categorized into three groups: FC (23.2%), PC (72.9%), and NC (3.9%) groups. Those who had PC or NC were more likely to have RT in the following year (19.5% and 9.4%, respectively), compared to FC (5.2%) group. Patients with RT demonstrated higher oral steroid dispensed compared to those without RT (mean (SD) of 319.7 (273.7) vs. 143.6 (175.8) compared to patients without RT (0.78 [0.26] vs. 0.81 [0.29]). Logistic regression analysis revealed that both patients from PC and NC groups had a greater probability of experiencing RT in the following year (partial: 2.364 (1.964-2.847), p < 0.001); no collection: 2.030 (1.318-3.127), p = 0.001). Lower minimum ACT scores (0.317 vs. 1.0) were noted for the PC group and an increase in minimal ACT score of 0.167 for every unit increase in PDC was also observed.

Conclusion

Patients in the FC group exhibited higher MA and were less likely to receive RT due to their asthma exacerbations in subsequent years.

Efficacy and safety profile of doxofylline in asthma: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This work aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of doxofylline in asthma treatment.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant studies published before March 2023 were retrieved from EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science databases.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) was applied to determine the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relative risks (RR, 95% confidence intervals [CI]) and weighted mean differences (WMD, 95% CI) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively, under fixed or random-effects models.

RESULTS

A total of eight clinical trials comprising 1627 patients were analyzed. The meta-analysis revealed no notable change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (WMD = 0.48; 95% CI: -2.09 to 3.05), the use of albuterol as a rescue medication (WMD = -0.02; 95% CI: -0.57 to 0.52), forced vital capacity (FVC) (WMD = 0.19; 95% CI: -0.28 to 0.67) and FEV1 predicted value (WMD = 1.53; 95%CI: -0.88 to 3.94) between doxofylline and control groups. However, doxofylline treatment significantly reduced adverse reactions (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.84) and decreased the incidence of asthma events (WMD = -0.18; 95% CI: -0.33 to 0.03). Subgroup analysis results indicated that the improvement in FEV1 with doxofylline combined with budesonide was superior to that of budesonide combined with montelukast or tiotropium but inferior to that of budesonide plus formoterol combination.

CONCLUSION

Doxofylline treatment significantly reduces the risk of asthma events and adverse events (AEs), demonstrating good safety and longer-term benefits.

As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid-Formoterol in a Single Inhaler Compared to Inhaled Corticosteroid-Albuterol in Separate Inhalers as Reliever Therapy in Mild Pediatric Asthma: A Cost-Utility Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Since 2019 as-needed low-dose ICS-formoterol in a single inhaler has been recommended for treatment of mild asthma in children aged more than 12 years. Alternatively, the use of ICS-albuterol has been proposed in countries where ICS-formoterol is not available or affordable. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-utility of as-needed ICS-albuterol in separate inhalers compared to ICS-formoterol in a single inhaler as reliever therapy in pediatric patients with mild asthma living in Colombia.

METHODS

A Markov-type model was developed to estimate the costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with mild asthma treated for 12 months. The effectiveness data and transition probabilities were obtained from relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The main outcome was the variable "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs).

RESULTS

The base-case analysis showed that compared with the use of as-needed ICS-albuterol in separate inhalers, the use of ICS-formoterol in a single in pediatric patients with mild asthma was associated with lower costs (US$475.51 vs. 735.33 average cost per patient) and the greatest gain in QALYs (0.9367 vs. 0.9352 QALYs on average per patient), thus leading to dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the use of as-needed ICS-albuterol in separate inhalers, the use of ICS-formoterol in a single inhaler as reliever therapy is cost-effective in patients aged 12 years or more with mild asthma, because it showed a greater gain in QALYs at lower total treatment costs.

Application of different counseling strategies for better adult asthma control

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of three distinct counseling methods to determine the most effective approach.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study with a two-month follow-up, A group of non-smoking adults, aged 19-60 years, were randomly collected at outpatients clinic with prior asthma diagnosis, based on the forced expiratory volume in one seconds to forced vital capacity ratio (FEV1/FVC) and the guidelines outlined by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), At the baseline assessment, all patients, underwent FEV1/FVC measurements, asthma symptom evaluations using Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), and GINA symptoms control assessment questionnaire, and assessment of pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) usage. The patients were divided into three groups, each assigned a distinct counseling strategy: traditional verbal counseling, advanced counseling utilizing the Asthma smartphone-application, and a combination of advanced-verbal counseling. We conducted a two-month monitoring period for all three groups.

RESULTS

Significant differences (p < .001) were observed among the three counseling groups in ACT, FEV1/FVC ratio, and GINA symptoms control assessment scores from the first month to the second month visit. Regarding ACQ, the study unveiled a noteworthy disparity in ACQ scores during the second week, with a significant difference (p = .025) observed between the verbal and advanced-verbal counseling groups. Similarly, a significant difference (p = .016) was noted between the advanced counseling group and the advanced-verbal counseling groups.

CONCLUSION

The study findings indicate that the combining advanced-verbal counseling by incorporating the Asthma smartphone-application alongside traditional verbal counseling is a more effective approach for improving asthma control in adults.

Impact of CYP3A5 Polymorphisms on Pediatric Asthma Outcomes

Genetic variation among inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-metabolizing enzymes may affect asthma control, but evidence is limited. This study tested the hypothesis that single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in Cytochrome P450 3A5 (CYP3A5) would affect asthma outcomes. Patients aged 2-18 years with persistent asthma were recruited to use the electronic AsthmaTracker (e-AT), a self-monitoring tool that records weekly asthma control, medication use, and asthma outcomes. A subset of patients provided saliva samples for SNP analysis and participated in a pharmacokinetic study. Multivariable regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, race, and ethnicity was used to evaluate the impact of CYP3A5 SNPs on asthma outcomes, including asthma control (measured using the asthma symptom tracker, a modified version of the asthma control test or ACT), exacerbations, and hospital admissions. Plasma corticosteroid and cortisol concentrations post-ICS dosing were also assayed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Of the 751 patients using the e-AT, 166 (22.1%) provided saliva samples and 16 completed the PK study. The e-AT cohort was 65.1% male, and 89.6% White, 6.0% Native Hawaiian, 1.2% Black, 1.2% Native American, 1.8% of unknown race, and 15.7% Hispanic/Latino; the median age was 8.35 (IQR: 5.51-11.3) years. CYP3A5*3/*3 frequency was 75.8% in White subjects, 50% in Native Hawaiians and 76.9% in Hispanic/Latino subjects. Compared with CYP3A5*3/*3, the CYP3A5*1/*x genotype was associated with reduced weekly asthma control (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.98; p < 0.001), increased exacerbations (OR: 6.43; 95% CI: 4.56-9.07; p < 0.001), and increased asthma hospitalizations (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.43-1.93; p < 0.001); analysis of 3/*3, *1/*1 and *1/*3 separately showed an allelic copy effect. Finally, PK analysis post-ICS dosing suggested muted changes in cortisol concentrations for patients with the CYP3A5*3/*3 genotype, as opposed to an effect on ICS PK. Detection of CYP3A5*3/3, CYPA35*1/*3, and CYP3A5*1/*1 could impact inhaled steroid treatment strategies for asthma in the future.

Adherence, Disease Control, and Misconceptions Related to the Use of Inhalation Therapy in Patients with Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background and Objectives: Inadequate treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) might have a negative impact on their progression. Inhalation therapy is the cornerstone of pharmacotherapy for these conditions. However, challenges such as low adherence, negative attitudes, and misconceptions about inhaled medications still persist, impeding effective disease management. This study aimed to evaluate adherence, ascertain the level of disease control in asthma and COPD, explore potential misconceptions surrounding inhalation therapy among patients with obstructive lung diseases and the general population in Vojvodina, and evaluate the reliability of newly developed questionnaires employed in the study. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized a battery of questionnaires encompassing sociodemographic data, the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), along with two novel questionnaires-one for assessing adherence and another for analyzing attitudes toward inhalation therapy. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software, version 25.0. Results: The average ACT score among patients with asthma was 17.31, while it was 19.09 for the CAT questionnaire among COPD patients. The composite score on the newly developed adherence assessment questionnaire was 2.27, exhibiting a reliability coefficient lower than recommended (α = 0.468). Significant statistical differences emerged among sample subgroups regarding attitudes and misconceptions toward inhalation therapy. The reliability coefficient for this questionnaire was deemed satisfactory (α = 0.767). Conclusions: Adherence rates were notably suboptimal in both subgroups of the studied population. The disease control levels were higher among asthma patients, while they exhibited less prevalent misconceptions regarding inhalation therapy compared to COPD patients and the healthy population.

The Wiser Strategy of Using Beta-Agonists in Asthma: Mechanisms and Rationales

Concerns regarding the safety of beta-2 agonists have led to revisions of the major asthma guidelines to better address these issues. Although these updates allow for a combination of previous and current strategies, they may confuse clinical practitioners. Beta-2 agonists are vital for alleviating asthma symptoms by relaxing smooth muscles; however, they also pose significant risks by inducing pro-inflammatory mediators both in vitro and in vivo. In addition to the risks of overuse and symptom masking, the use of beta-agonists alone at therapeutic doses can worsen airway inflammation and enhance virus-induced inflammation during asthma exacerbation. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) can effectively prevent these adverse effects. With new insights into the mechanisms of these adverse events, reserving short-acting beta-agonists for acute symptom relief during exacerbations and only for those who are already on ICS or oral steroids represents a careful approach to using beta-agonists with least adverse effects in patients with asthma. However, a major drawback of this approach is the potential non-compliance with ICS, leading to beta-agonist use without the necessary counteraction by ICS. An optimal strategy, both during and outside exacerbations, would integrate beta-agonists into an anti-inflammatory regimen that includes ICS, ideally combined with the same inhaler to ensure their concurrent use where finances allow. This would maintain the beneficial effects of beta-agonists, such as bronchodilation, while preventing the adverse effects from the induction of inflammatory mediators. This method is aligned with diverse clinical settings, maximizes the safe use of beta-agonists, and supports a comprehensive guideline-compliant management strategy.

A Roadmap for Using Causal Inference and Machine Learning to Personalize Asthma Medication Selection

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) is a mainstay treatment for controlling asthma and preventing exacerbations in patients with persistent asthma. Many types of ICS drugs are used, either alone or in combination with other controller medications. Despite the widespread use of ICSs, asthma control remains suboptimal in many people with asthma. Suboptimal control leads to recurrent exacerbations, causes frequent ER visits and inpatient stays, and is due to multiple factors. One such factor is the inappropriate ICS choice for the patient. While many interventions targeting other factors exist, less attention is given to inappropriate ICS choice. Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with variable underlying inflammations and biomarkers. Up to 50% of people with asthma exhibit some degree of resistance or insensitivity to certain ICSs due to genetic variations in ICS metabolizing enzymes, leading to variable responses to ICSs. Yet, ICS choice, especially in the primary care setting, is often not tailored to the patient's characteristics. Instead, ICS choice is largely by trial and error and often dictated by insurance reimbursement, organizational prescribing policies, or cost, leading to a one-size-fits-all approach with many patients not achieving optimal control. There is a pressing need for a decision support tool that can predict an effective ICS at the point of care and guide providers to select the ICS that will most likely and quickly ease patient symptoms and improve asthma control. To date, no such tool exists. Predicting which patient will respond well to which ICS is the first step toward developing such a tool. However, no study has predicted ICS response, forming a gap. While the biologic heterogeneity of asthma is vast, few, if any, biomarkers and genotypes can be used to systematically profile all patients with asthma and predict ICS response. As endotyping or genotyping all patients is infeasible, readily available electronic health record data collected during clinical care offer a low-cost, reliable, and more holistic way to profile all patients. In this paper, we point out the need for developing a decision support tool to guide ICS selection and the gap in fulfilling the need. Then we outline an approach to close this gap via creating a machine learning model and applying causal inference to predict a patient's ICS response in the next year based on the patient's characteristics. The model uses electronic health record data to characterize all patients and extract patterns that could mirror endotype or genotype. This paper supplies a roadmap for future research, with the eventual goal of shifting asthma care from one-size-fits-all to personalized care, improve outcomes, and save health care resources.

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

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

Pharmacoequity in Allergy-Immunology: Disparities in Access to Medications for Allergic Diseases and Proposed Solutions in the United States and Globally

Pharmacoequity is the principle that individuals should have access to high-quality medications regardless of race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or availability of resources. In this review, we summarize access to therapeutics for allergic diseases in the United States and other selected countries. We focus on domains of health care access (health insurance coverage, medication availability, and specialist access) as well as system-level factors and clinician- and patient-level factors such as interpersonal racism and cultural beliefs, and how they can affect timely access to appropriate therapy for allergic diseases. Finally, we propose how pharmacoequity in allergy-immunology can be achieved by highlighting solutions to factors limiting access to medications for allergic diseases, and identify potential future research directions.

The Saudi initiative for asthma - 2024 update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children

The Saudi Initiative for Asthma 2024 (SINA-2024) is the sixth version of asthma guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma for adults and children that was developed by the SINA group, a subsidiary of the Saudi Thoracic Society. The main objective of the SINA is to have guidelines that are up-to-date, simple to understand, and easy to use by healthcare workers dealing with asthma patients. To facilitate achieving the goals of asthma management, the SINA Panel approach is mainly based on the assessment of symptom control and risk for both adults and children. The approach to asthma management is aligned for age groups: adults, adolescents, children aged 5-12 years, and children aged <5 years. SINA guidelines have focused more on personalized approaches reflecting a better understanding of disease heterogeneity with the integration of recommendations related to biologic agents, evidence-based updates on treatment, and the role of immunotherapy in management. The medication appendix has also been updated with the addition of recent evidence, new indications for existing medication, and new medications. The guidelines are constructed based on the available evidence, local literature, and the current situation at national and regional levels. There is also an emphasis on patient-doctor partnership in the management that also includes a self-management plan.