Differential effects of inhaled corticosteroids in smokers/ex-smokers and nonsmokers with asthma

Combined analysis of five non-interventional studies of the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of the extrafine fixed dose beclomethasone/formoterol combination in the treatment of asthma in Austria

OBJECTIVE

The real-world effectiveness and tolerability of an extrafine fixed dose beclomethasone/formoterol (BDP/FF) treatment of patients with partially or non-controlled asthma was evaluated in five non-interventional studies (NISs) from Austria.

METHODS

Asthma patients enrolled in these five NISs were treated with beclomethasone/formoterol (Foster® or Foster® Nexthaler®) as maintenance and reliever over 12 weeks. Asthma control, lung function and symptom scores were assessed at baseline, after 4-8 weeks and at the end of the investigations in week 12. In addition, tolerability and handling of the devices were evaluated by questionnaires.

RESULTS

The combined analysis included 891 patients (53% female, aged 49.3 years) demonstrating significant improvements in asthma control, lung function parameters (PEF, FEV₁ and FVC) and symptom scores (reduction of breathlessness, wheezing, chest tightness and cough). These changes were already detectable after 4-8 weeks. The treatment was effective irrespective of smoking status, exercise, or previous medication. Tolerability of the therapy with extrafine BDP/FF was rated as "very good" or "good" in 98% of the patients. 95% of the patients intended to continue the treatment, and nearly all (99%) rated the handling of the device as "very good" or "good". No serious adverse reactions were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This combined analysis of five non-interventional studies confirms the effectiveness and tolerability of the extrafine fixed-dose BDP/FF combination (Foster® and Foster® Nexthaler®) in a heterogenous patient population suffering from partially or non-controlled asthma. Therapy was associated with a high patient satisfaction and the absence of serious adverse reactions.

Cigarette Smoking and Asthma

Globally, around half the adult asthma population are current or former cigarette smokers. Cigarette smoking and asthma interact to induce an "asthma-smoking phenotype(s)," which has important implications for diagnosis, pathogenic mechanisms, and management. The lack of progress in understanding the effects of smoking on adults with asthma is due in part to their exclusion from most investigative studies and large clinical trials. In this review, we summarize the adverse clinical outcomes associated with cigarette smoking in asthma, highlight challenges in diagnosing asthma among cigarette smokers with chronic respiratory symptoms, particularly in older individuals with a long-standing smoking history, and review pathogenic mechanisms involving smoking- and asthma-related airway inflammation, tissue remodeling, corticosteroid insensitivity, and low-grade systemic inflammation. We discuss the key components of management including the importance of smoking cessation strategies, evidence for the effectiveness of the Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations on treatment in cigarette smokers, and the role of treatable traits such as type 2 eosinophilic airway inflammation. Lastly, we provide an algorithm to aid clinicians to manage current and former smokers with asthma. In the future, controlled and pragmatic trials in real-world populations should include cigarette smokers with asthma to provide an evidence base for treatment recommendations.

Corticosteroid Resistance in Smokers-A Substudy Analysis of the CORTICO-COP Randomised Controlled Trial

The CORTICO-COP trial showed that eosinophil-guided corticosteroid-sparing treatment for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was non-inferior to standard of care and decreased the accumulated dose of systemic corticosteroids that patients were exposed to by approximately 60%. Smoking status has been shown to affect corticosteroid responsiveness. This post hoc analysis investigated whether eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to conventional treatment in current smokers. The main analysis of current smokers showed no significant difference in the primary endpoint, days alive, and out of hospital within 14 days between the control group (mean, 9.8 days; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8.7-10.8) and the eosinophil-guided group (mean, 8.7 days; 95% CI, 7.5-9.9; p = 0.34). Secondary analyses of the number of exacerbations or deaths, the number of intensive care unit admissions or deaths, lung function improvement, and change in health-related quality of life also showed no significant differences between the two groups. The results of a sensitivity analysis of ex-smokers are consistent with the main analysis. Our results suggest that eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to standard of care in current smokers and ex-smokers. Because data on the impact of smoking status on eosinophil-guided treatments are sparse, more randomised trials are needed to confirm our results.

Efficacy of indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in current and ex-smokers: a pooled analysis of IGNITE trials

Inhaled corticosteroids have proven to be less effective in asthmatic patients who smoke; however, there is limited information on the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid-containing regimens in COPD patients who continue smoking. We evaluate the differential efficacy of once-daily indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 µg compared with twice-daily salmeterol/fluticasone 50/500 µg in current smokers and ex-smokers with COPD.

A pooled analysis of data from ILLUMINATE, LANTERN and FLAME studies was conducted to assess the efficacy of indacaterol/glycopyrronium compared with salmeterol/fluticasone in current smokers and ex-smokers with COPD. Efficacy was assessed in terms of improvements in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁)_, transition dyspnoea index (TDI) focal score, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, reduced rescue medication use and exacerbation prevention at 26 weeks after the start of the therapy.

In total, 1769 (38%) current smokers and 2848 (62%) ex-smokers were included. Patients treated with indacaterol/glycopyrronium experienced greater improvements in trough FEV₁versus salmeterol/fluticasone in both current and ex-smokers (least squares mean treatment difference, 105 mL and 78 mL, respectively). Improvements in TDI focal score, SGRQ total score and reduction in rescue medication use were also greater with indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in current and ex-smokers. Furthermore, indacaterol/glycopyrronium reduced all exacerbations (moderate/severe) compared with salmeterol/fluticasone, irrespective of smoking status. The difference in efficacy in favour of indacaterol/glycopyrronium was more prominent in current smokers in most cases.

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium demonstrated greater efficacy versus salmeterol/fluticasone, and the differences were generally more prominent in current smokers suggesting smoking may reduce the effects of salmeterol/fluticasone.

In both current smokers and ex-smokers with COPD, indacaterol/glycopyrronium demonstrates greater efficacy than salmeterol/fluticasone but the difference is more prominent in current smokers for most of the evaluated parametershttps://bit.ly/2Ih8Hq3

[Smoking cessation in asthmatic patients and its impact]

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of smoking in asthmatic patients is similar to, or even higher than in the general population.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review addresses (1) the effects of smoking on asthma, (2) smoking cessation strategies in asthmatic patients, and (3) the consequences of smoking cessation for people with asthma.

RESULTS

Active or passive smoking can promote the development of asthma. The few studies on smoking cessation in asthma confirm the efficacy of validated smoking cessation strategies in these patients (nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, bupropion, cognitive and behavioural therapies). Smoking cessation in parents with asthmatic children is essential and is based on the same strategies. Electronic cigarettes may be a useful help to quit smoking in some patients. Smoking cessation is beneficial in asthmatic smokers and associated with (1) a reduction of asthma symptoms, acute exacerbations, bronchial hyperresponsiveness, and bronchial inflammation, (2) decreased use of rescue medications and in doses of inhaled corticosteroids, (3) improved asthma control, quality of life, and lung function.

CONCLUSION

In asthmatic patients, it is essential to assess smoking status and health professionals must assist them to quit smoking.

Quality standards in respiratory real-life effectiveness research: the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): report from the Respiratory Effectiveness Group-European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force

INTRODUCTION

A Task Force was commissioned jointly by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG) to develop a quality assessment tool for real-life observational research to identify high-quality real-life asthma studies that could be considered within future guideline development.

METHODS

The resulting REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT) was achieved through an extensive analysis of existing initiatives in this area. The first version was piloted among 9 raters across 6 articles; the revised, interim, version underwent extensive testing by 22 reviewers from the EAACI membership and REG collaborator group, leading to further revisions and tool finalisation. RELEVANT was validated through an analysis of real-life effectiveness studies identified via systematic review of Medline and Embase databases and relating to topics for which real-life studies may offer valuable evidence complementary to that from randomised controlled trials. The topics were selected through a vote among Task Force members and related to the influence of adherence, smoking, inhaler device and particle size on asthma treatment effectiveness.

RESULTS

Although highlighting a general lack of high-quality real-life effectiveness observational research on these clinically important topics, the analysis provided insights into how identified observational studies might inform asthma guidelines developers and clinicians. Overall, RELEVANT appeared reliable and easy to use by expert reviewers.

CONCLUSIONS

Using such quality appraisal tools is mandatory to assess whether specific observational real-life effectiveness studies can be used to inform guideline development and/or decision-making in clinical practice.

[Role of non pharmacological Interventions for asthma]

Smoking cessation remains a major issue for asthmatic smokers. Respiratory rehabilitation and respiratory physiotherapy have shown a benefit in controlling symptoms, preventing exacerbations and improving the quality of life. The control of the environment is crucial and must be approached in a global way. Management of obesity and psychological disorders should be systematically proposed. Allergen immunotherapy may be discussed in allergic persistent asthma to house dust mites. Certain dietary interventions or alternative medicines have not proved their worth.

Challenges in the management of asthma associated with smoking-induced airway diseases

INTRODUCTION

Smoking-induced airway diseases such as chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and small airway dysfunction contribute to the chronic respiratory symptoms experienced by adults with asthma, including those with spirometric chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), termed asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). Drug treatment of symptomatic smokers with asthma or ACO is uncertain due to their exclusion from most clinical trials.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes evidence for the efficacy of small molecule drugs used in the clinic to treat current and former smokers with a diagnostic label of asthma or ACO. Other therapeutic interventions are reviewed, including smoking cessation and biologics.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical trials and observational studies suggest that smoking cessation and approved drugs used to treat non-smokers with asthma produce clinical benefits in smokers with asthma or ACO, although the overall quality of evidence is low. The efficacy of some treatments for asthma is altered in current smokers, including reduced responsiveness to short-term inhaled corticosteroids and possibly improved responsiveness to leukotriene receptor antagonists. Preliminary findings suggest that low-dose theophylline, statins, and biologics, such as omalizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab, may improve clinical outcomes in smokers with asthma or ACO. Improved phenotyping and endotyping of asthma and smoking-induced airway diseases should lead to better targeted therapies.

The effect of DPP-4 inhibitors on asthma control: an administrative database study to evaluate a potential pathophysiological relationship

Rationale

DPP-4 may regulate immunological pathways implicated in asthma. Assessing whether DPP-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) use might affect asthma control is clinically important because DPP-4i use in type 2 diabetes mellitus management (T2DM) is increasing. This study evaluated associations between DPP-4i use and asthma control.

Methods

This was a retrospective, observational, matched cohort study using administrative claims in the MarketScan^® Commercial Claims and Encounters (Commercial) and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits (Medicare Supplemental) databases. Adult asthma patients initiating an oral DPP-4i or a non-DPP-4i between November 1, 2006 and March 31, 2014 were included. Patients were followed for asthma-related outcomes for 12 months after initiation of the antidiabetes medication. Outcomes included risk-domain asthma control (RDAC), defined as no asthma hospitalizations, no lower respiratory tract infections, and no oral corticosteroid (OCS) prescriptions; overall asthma control (RDAC criteria plus limited short-acting beta agonist use); treatment stability (RDAC criteria plus no increase of ≥50% in inhaled corticosteroid dose or addition of other asthma therapy); and severe asthma exacerbation rates (asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency room visits, or acute treatments with OCS). Comparisons were made between two matched cohorts (DPP-4i vs. non-DPP-4i initiators) using multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear modeling. Covariates included baseline demographic and clinical characteristics related to asthma and T2DM.

Results

The adjusted odds of achieving RDAC (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.964 to 1.147), overall asthma control (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.956 to 1.135), and treatment stability (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.949 to 1.115) did not differ between the DPP-4i and non-DPP-4i cohorts. A difference was not found between cohorts in severe asthma exacerbation rates during the 12 months following initiation of antidiabetes treatment (mean = 0.32 vs. 0.34 exacerbations per subject-year, respectively; p=0.064).

Conclusion

Asthma control was similar between patients initiating DPP-4i and non-DPP-4i antidiabetes medications, suggesting no association between DPP-4i use and asthma control.

Extrafine Versus Fine Inhaled Corticosteroids in Relation to Asthma Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Real-Life Studies

BACKGROUND

The particle size of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) may affect airway drug deposition and effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of extrafine ICSs (mass median aerodynamic diameter, <2 μm) versus fine-particle ICSs administered as ICS monotherapy or ICS-long-acting β-agonist combination therapy by conducting a meta-analysis of observational real-life asthma studies to estimate the treatment effect of extrafine ICSs.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were reviewed for asthma observational comparative effectiveness studies from January 2004 to June 2016. Studies were included if they reported odds and relative risk ratios and met all inclusion criteria (Respiratory Effectiveness Group/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology quality standards, comparison of extrafine ICSs with same or different ICS molecule, ≥12-month follow-up). End-point data (asthma control, exacerbations, prescribed ICS dose) were pooled. Random-effects meta-analysis modeling was used. The study protocol is published in the PROSPERO register CRD42016039137.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 33,453 subjects aged 5 to 80 years met eligibility criteria for inclusion. Six studies used extrafine beclometasone propionate and 1 study used both extrafine beclometasone propionate and extrafine ciclesonide as comparators with fine-particle ICSs. The overall odds of achieving asthma control were significantly higher for extrafine ICSs compared with fine-particle ICSs (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.22-1.46). Overall exacerbation rate ratios (0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.97) and ICS dose (weighted mean difference, -170 μg; 95% CI, -222 to -118 μg) were significantly lower for extrafine ICSs compared with fine-particle ICSs.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrates that extrafine ICSs have significantly higher odds of achieving asthma control with lower exacerbation rates at significantly lower prescribed doses than fine-particle ICSs.

Extrafine compared to non-extrafine particle inhaled corticosteroids in smokers and ex-smokers with asthma

BACKGROUND

Smoking is as prevalent in asthmatics as in the general population. Asthmatic smokers benefit less from inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) than non-smoking asthmatics, possibly due to more smoking-induced small airways disease. Thus targeting small airways may be important in treating asthmatic (ex-)smokers. We hypothesized that extrafine particle ICS improve small airways function more than non-extrafine particle ICS in asthmatic (ex-)smokers.

METHODS

We performed an open-label, randomized, three-way cross-over study comparing extrafine beclomethasone (HFA-QVAR) to non-extrafine beclomethasone (HFA-Clenil) and fluticasone (HFA-Flixotide) in 22 smokers and 21 ex-smokers with asthma (?5 packyears).

RESULTS

Improvement from baseline in PD20 adenosine after using QVAR, Clenil or Flixotide was 1.04 ± 1.71, 1.09 ± 2.12 and 0.94 ± 1.97 doubling doses, mean ± standard deviation (SD), respectively. The change from baseline in R5-R20 at PD20 adenosine after using QVAR, Clenil or Flixotide was ?0.02 ± 0.27, 0.02 ± 0.21, and ?0.02 ± 0.31 kPa sL?1, mean ± SD, respectively. The change in PD20 adenosine and R5-R20 at PD20 adenosine were neither statistically significant different between QVAR and Clenil (p = 0.86 and p = 0.82) nor between QVAR and Flixotide (p = 0.50 and p = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

Similar effectiveness in improving small airways function was found for extrafine and non-extrafine particle ICS treatment for asthmatic smokers and ex-smokers.

Effects of Age and Disease Severity on Systemic Corticosteroid Responses in Asthma

RATIONALE

Phenotypic distinctions between severe asthma (SA) and nonsevere asthma (NONSA) may be confounded by differential adherence or incorrect use of corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if there are persistent phenotypic distinctions between SA (as defined by 2014 American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society guidelines) and NONSA after intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide (TA), and to identify predictors of a corticosteroid response in these populations.

METHODS

A total of 526 adults age 18 years and older (315 SA) and 188 children age 6 to less than 18 years (107 SA) in the NHLBI Severe Asthma Research Program III were characterized before and 3 weeks after TA. The primary outcome for corticosteroid response was defined as greater than or equal to 10-point improvement in percent predicted FEV1.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Adult asthma groups exhibited a small but significant mean FEV1% predicted improvement after TA (SA group mean difference, 3.4%; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-4.7%; P = 0.001), whereas children did not. Adult SA continued to manifest lower FEV1 and worse asthma control as compared with NONSA after TA. In children, after TA only prebronchodilator FEV1 distinguished SA from NONSA. A total of 21% of adults with SA and 20% of children with SA achieved greater than or equal to 10% improvement after TA. Baseline bronchodilator response and fractional exhaled nitric oxide had good sensitivity and specificity for predicting response in all groups except children with NONSA.

CONCLUSIONS

One in five patients with SA exhibit greater than or equal to 10% improvement in FEV1 with parenteral corticosteroid. Those likely to respond had greater bronchodilator responsiveness and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels. In adults, differences in airflow obstruction and symptoms between SA and NONSA persist after parenteral corticosteroids, suggesting a component of corticosteroid nonresponsive pathobiology in adults with SA that may differ in children. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01606826).

Asthma and smoking-induced airway disease without spirometric COPD

Due to the high prevalence rates of cigarette smoking and asthma, current and ex-smokers frequently develop chronic airway disease without spirometric evidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), either alone or associated with asthma. This review considers the classification, clinical outcomes, inflammatory and imaging variables, phenotypes, and management of current and ex-smokers with airway disease without COPD, focusing on overlaps in those with and without asthma. These individuals have more respiratory symptoms, worse quality of life, increased exacerbation rates, reduced lung function and more comorbidities than never-smokers with asthma or healthy never-smokers. As well as clinical features, airway inflammatory and structural changes in smoking-induced airway disease without COPD overlap with those found in smokers with asthma. Cigarette smoking is associated with worse clinical outcomes in some phenotypes of asthma. Management involves public health measures to control exposure to tobacco smoke, personal advice on smoking cessation and the use of appropriate targeted therapies, although evidence is limited on their effectiveness. Understanding the mechanisms, natural history and management of current and ex-smokers with asthma and smoking-induced airway disease without COPD is a priority for future research.

Does co-payment for inhaler devices affect therapy adherence and disease outcomes? A historical, matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adherence to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment has been shown to depend on patient-level factors, such as disease severity, and medication-level factors, such as complexity. However, little is known about the impact of prescription charges - a factor at the health care system level. This study used real-life data to investigate whether co-payment affects adherence (implementation and persistence) and disease outcomes in patients with asthma or COPD.

METHODS

A matched, historical cohort study was carried out using two UK primary care databases. The exposure was co-payment for prescriptions, which is required for most patients in England but not in Scotland. Two comparison cohorts were formed: one comprising patients registered at general practices in England and the other comprising patients registered in Scotland. Patients aged 20-59 years with asthma, or 40-59 years with COPD, who were initiated on fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate, were included, matched to patients in the opposite cohort, and followed up for 1 year following fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate initiation. The primary outcome was good adherence, defined as medication possession ratio ≥80%, and was analyzed using conditional logistic regression. Secondary outcomes included exacerbation rate.

RESULTS

There were 1,640 patients in the payment cohort, ie, England (1,378 patients with asthma and 262 patients with COPD) and 619 patients in the no-payment cohort, ie, Scotland (512 patients with asthma and 107 patients with COPD). The proportion of patients with good adherence was 34.3% and 34.9% in the payment and no-payment cohorts, respectively, across both disease groups. In a multivariable model, no difference in odds of good adherence was found between the cohorts (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.27). There was also no difference in exacerbation rate.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in adherence between matched patients registered in England and Scotland, suggesting that prescription charges do not have an impact on adherence to treatment.

Real-Life Outcomes for Patients with Asthma Prescribed Spacers for Use with Either Extrafine- or Fine-Particle Inhaled Corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

Spacers are often used with pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) to eliminate the need for coordinating inhalation with actuation.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the real-life effectiveness of spacers prescribed for use with either extrafine- or fine-particle inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs).

METHODS

This historical matched cohort study examined anonymous medical record data over 2 years (1-year baseline, 1-year outcome) for patients with asthma aged 12 to 80 years initiating ICSs by pMDI with or without prescribed spacer. We compared outcomes for spacer versus no-spacer arms, matched for key baseline and asthma-related characteristics, within 2 ICS cohorts: (1) extrafine-particle ICS (beclomethasone) and (2) fine-particle ICS (fluticasone). Effectiveness end points were compared using conditional regression methods.

RESULTS

Matched spacer and no-spacer arms of the extrafine-particle ICS cohort each included 2090 patients (69% females; median age, 46-47 years) and the 2 arms of the fine-particle ICS cohort each included 444 patients (67% females; median age, 45 years). With extrafine-particle ICS, we observed no significant difference between spacer and no-spacer arms in severe exacerbation rate (primary end point): adjusted rate ratio, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.83-1.23). With fine-particle ICS, the severe exacerbation rate ratio with spacers was 0.77 (0.47-1.25). Oropharyngeal candidiasis incidence was low and similar in spacer and no-spacer arms for both ICS cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that prescribed spacer devices are associated with improved asthma outcomes for extrafine- or fine-particle ICS administered by pMDI. These findings challenge long-standing assumptions that spacers should improve pMDI effectiveness and indicate the need for pragmatic trials of spacers in clinical practice.

Asthma-Related Outcomes in Patients Initiating Extrafine Ciclesonide or Fine-Particle Inhaled Corticosteroids

Purpose

Extrafine-particle inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have greater small airway deposition than standard fine-particle ICS. We sought to compare asthma-related outcomes after patients initiated extrafine-particle ciclesonide or fine-particle ICS (fluticasone propionate or non-extrafine beclomethasone).

Methods

This historical, matched cohort study included patients aged 12-60 years prescribed their first ICS as ciclesonide or fine-particle ICS. The 2 cohorts were matched 1:1 for key demographic and clinical characteristics over the baseline year. Co-primary endpoints were 1-year severe exacerbation rates, risk-domain asthma control, and overall asthma control; secondary endpoints included therapy change.

Results

Each cohort included 1,244 patients (median age 45 years; 65% women). Patients in the ciclesonide cohort were comparable to those in the fine-particle ICS cohort apart from higher baseline prevalence of hospitalization, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and rhinitis. Median (interquartile range) prescribed doses of ciclesonide and fine-particle ICS were 160 (160-160) µg/day and 500 (250-500) µg/day, respectively (P<0.001). During the outcome year, patients prescribed ciclesonide experienced lower severe exacerbation rates (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI], 0.69 [0.53-0.89]), and higher odds of risk-domain asthma control (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 1.62 [1.27-2.06]) and of overall asthma control (2.08 [1.68-2.57]) than those prescribed fine-particle ICS. The odds of therapy change were 0.70 (0.59-0.83) with ciclesonide.

Conclusions

In this matched cohort analysis, we observed that initiation of ICS with ciclesonide was associated with better 1-year asthma outcomes and fewer changes to therapy, despite data suggesting more difficult-to-control asthma. The median prescribed dose of ciclesonide was one-third that of fine-particle ICS.

Long-Acting β-Agonist in Combination or Separate Inhaler as Step-Up Therapy for Children with Uncontrolled Asthma Receiving Inhaled Corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

Adding a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) using a fixed-dose combination (FDC) inhaler is the UK guideline recommendation for children aged more than 4 years with uncontrolled asthma. The evidence of benefit of adding an FDC inhaler over a separate LABA inhaler is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a LABA added as an FDC inhaler, and as a separate inhaler, in children with uncontrolled asthma.

METHODS

Two UK primary care databases were used to create a matched cohort study with a 2-year follow-up period. We included children prescribed their first step-up from ICS monotherapy. Two cohorts were formed for children receiving an add-on LABA as an FDC inhaler, or a separate LABA inhaler. Matching variables and confounders were identified by comparing characteristics during a baseline year of follow-up. Outcomes were examined during the subsequent year. The primary outcome was an adjusted odds ratio for overall asthma control (defined as follows: no asthma-related hospital admission or emergency room visit, prescription for oral corticosteroids or antibiotic with evidence of respiratory consultation, and ≤2 puffs of short-acting β-agonist daily).

RESULTS

The final study consisted of 1330 children in each cohort (mean age 9 years; 59% male). In the separate ICS+LABA cohort, the odds of achieving overall asthma control were lower (adjusted odds ratio, 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.91]; P = .001) compared with the FDC cohort.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates a small but significant benefit in achieving asthma control from an add-on LABA as an FDC, compared with a separate inhaler and this supports current guideline recommendations.

Addressing corticosteroid insensitivity in adults with asthma

Corticosteroids are the most effective treatment for asthma, but the therapeutic response varies markedly between individuals, with up to one third of patients showing evidence of insensitivity to corticosteroids. This article summarizes information on genetic, environmental and asthma-related factors as well as demographic and pharmacokinetic variables associated with corticosteroid insensitivity in asthma. Molecular mechanisms proposed to explain corticosteroid insensitivity are reviewed including alterations in glucocorticoid receptor subtype, binding and nuclear translocation, increased proinflammatory transcription factors and defective histone acetylation. Current therapies and future interventions that may restore corticosteroid sensitivity in asthma are discussed, including small molecule drugs and biological agents. In the future, biomarkers may be used in the clinic to predict corticosteroid sensitivity in patients with poorly controlled asthma.

Establishing the relationship of inhaler satisfaction, treatment adherence, and patient outcomes: a prospective, real-world, cross-sectional survey of US adult asthma patients and physicians

Background

Inhaled asthma medications are the mainstay of treatment for chronic asthma. However, nonadherence rates for long-term inhaler therapy among adults are estimated to exceed 50 %. Nonadherence is associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes and diminished quality of life. Research suggests that adherence is associated with patients’ satisfaction with their treatment regimen and other factors, such as concomitant allergic rhinitis and tobacco use.

Methods

This prospective, cross-sectional survey of physicians and their patients evaluated the relationship between patient satisfaction with attributes of inhaler devices, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes. Primary care and specialist physicians completed a physician-reported patient record form for patients with a confirmed asthma diagnosis. Patients for whom a physician-reported form was completed were invited to complete a patient-reported form. Both surveys collected information about demographics, symptoms, exacerbation history, treatment, smoking status, comorbidities, type of inhaler device, and treatment adherence. Patients also indicated the degree to which they were satisfied with attributes of their currently prescribed inhaler device(s). Partial least squares path modeling quantified relationships between latent variables and clinical outcomes.

Results

A total of 243 patients were included in our analysis and 41 % had poorly controlled asthma. More favorable clinical outcomes were significantly associated with greater patient satisfaction with drug delivery (P = 0.002), higher medication adherence (P = 0.049), no history of tobacco use (P < 0.001), and absence of comorbid allergic rhinitis (P = 0.005). Attributes associated with device satisfaction included patient perceptions of consistency in the amount of drug delivery to the lungs, ease of use, and feedback about the number of remaining doses.

Conclusions

Higher patient satisfaction with their asthma drug delivery inhaler device is a significant predictor of more favorable clinical outcomes while allergic rhinitis and smoking history were negatively associated with optimal control of asthma. These findings provide clinicians with opportunities to improve patients’ clinical outcomes by tailoring choice of inhaler device therapy and providing education about the correct way to use the device to ensure optimal outcomes. Patients will likely benefit from medical therapy to manage comorbid allergic rhinitis and smoking cessation interventions. Patients unable to stop smoking may require alternative medical therapies to improve their clinical outcomes.