Adherence to corticosteroids and clinical outcomes in mepolizumab therapy for severe asthma

The clinical effectiveness of mepolizumab treatment in severe eosinophilic asthma; outcomes from four years cohort evaluation

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials and real world studies demonstrated benefit of mepolizumab treatment in severe asthma but data on its effectiveness beyond 2 years remain limited. Herein, we provide mepolizumab treatment evaluation up to 4 years.

METHODS

we studied all patients initiated on mepolizumab in our center from June 2017 to August 2018. Clinical outcomes data were retrieved from the local dendrite systems registry. Comparison analyses and logistic regression were conducted to explore longevity and predictors of response to mepolizumab treatment.

RESULTS

a total of 66 patients initiated on mepolizumab with a median follow-up of 45.8 (42.4,48.1) months were included in the study [mean age 50.3 years (range 18-79), females 50 (73%) ]. At 20.7 months of treatment, 42 patients (63.6%) had positive response, 13 (19.7%) negative response, and 11 (16.7%) discontinued due to other factors. At 45.8 months, 35 (53%) patients were still on mepolizumab, 21 (31.8%) switched to a different biologic, and 10 (15.2%) discontinued biologics. Two deaths were recorded during the study period.The median blood eosinophil was reduced from 0.43x109/L (0.27, 0.75) to 0.04 (0.0, 0.1) (p < 0.00001)]. The median annual exacerbations were reduced from 6.0 (4,8) to 1.0 (0.0,3.0) (p < 0.00001), and mOCS use was reduced from59% to 29%, p = 0.001. The mean asthma control questionnaire-6 (ACQ6) improved from 3.1 ± 1.7 to 2.1 ± 1.3 (p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

mepolizumab clinical benefit was sustained over 4 years. However, approximately half of the cohort discontinued the treatment prompting the need for further research into the treatment response longevity.

Cost-Effectiveness and Impact on Health Care Utilization of Interventions to Improve Medication Adherence and Outcomes in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Poor adherence to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease maintenance therapies impairs health outcomes. Proven and cost-effective programs to promote adherence and persistence are not yet in regular widespread use. Implementation costs are a potential barrier to uptake of such programs.

OBJECTIVE

We undertook a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis of studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of treatment adherence-promoting programs or that determined their impact on health care budget directly or via health care resource use (HCRU).

METHODS

We identified relevant publications using Medline and PreMEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Embase.com, Elsevier), and EconLit for publications between January 2000 and July 2021. We also searched clinical trial databases and selected conference proceedings.

RESULTS

Of 1,910 potentially relevant articles, 26 met prespecified inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. Eleven reported a direct assessment of adherence, 15 included economic evaluations, and 17 described HCRU. None included an analysis of biologic medication use. When they were studied, interventions were often found to be highly cost-effective, with dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in some cases. Reductions in direct costs and HCRU (health care visits, hospital admissions, and/or the use of medications, including add-on/reliever treatment and antibiotics) were frequently reported. Reported use of maintenance treatments improved in some studies. Counseling and/or digitally informed programs were used in all cases in which favorable outcomes were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence-promoting interventions are mostly cost-effective and often result in reduced HCRU and associated costs. Multidisciplinary care involving one-to-one advice and digitally enhanced communications appear to offer the greatest benefit.

Digitally monitored inhaled therapy: a 'smart' way to manage severe asthma?

INTRODUCTION

One of the fundamental challenges of managing patients with severe asthma is treatment adherence, particularly with inhaled corticosteroids. Adherence is difficult to measure objectively and poor adherence is associated with worse outcomes. In this study, assess the ability of a 'smart' inhaler to record adherence in severe asthma patients and measure the impact of this on asthma control.

METHODS

Consecutive consenting patients meeting criteria for biologics had their existing high-dose ICS/LABA//LAMA combination inhaler/s switched to mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium (114/46/136). Routine clinical data, including blood eosinophils, FeNO, and ACQ-6 scores were collected at baseline and at 4 wk. Adherence was then checked on the Propeller Health app, and good adherence was defined as >80% of prescribed usage. Participants were then followed-up at 12 months to record the proportion of patients who were initiated on biologics.

RESULTS

77 patients (mean [SD] age = 50.4 [15.7] years, 67.5% female [n = 52]) participated. 71 participants were able to use the device and 65% (n = 46) of these attained good asthma control and were not initiated on biologics at 12-month follow-up. Both groups demonstrated a significant reduction in ACQ6 score at follow-up (2.81 vs. 1.92, p < 0.001 and 3.05 vs. 2.60, p < 0.001, respectively), but there was no statistically significant difference in improvement between groups. Patients with optimal adherence also demonstrated a significant reduction in median FeNO at follow-up (47 ppb vs. 40 ppb, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In severe asthma patients, 'smart' inhalers may represent an effective management tool to improve adherence and asthma control, therefore avoiding the need for patients to commence biological therapies.

Reduction of daily maintenance inhaled corticosteroids in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (SHAMAL): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study

BACKGROUND

Stepwise intensification of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is routine for severe eosinophilic asthma, despite some poor responses to high-dose ICS. Dose reductions are recommended in patients responding to biologics, but little supporting safety evidence exists.

METHODS

SHAMAL was a phase 4, randomised, open-label, active-controlled study done at 22 study sites in four countries. Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) with severe eosinophilic asthma and a five-item Asthma Control Questionnaire score below 1·5 and who received at least three consecutive doses of benralizumab before screening. We randomly assigned patients (3:1) to taper their high-dose ICS to a medium-dose, low-dose, and as-needed dose (reduction group) or continue (reference group) their ICS-formoterol therapy for 32 weeks, followed by a 16-week maintenance period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reducing their ICS-formoterol dose by week 32. The primary outcome was assessed in the reduction group, and safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients receiving study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04159519.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 12, 2019, and Feb 16, 2023, we screened and enrolled in the run-in period 208 patients. We randomly assigned 168 (81%) to the reduction (n=125 [74%]) and reference arms (n=43 [26%]). Overall, 110 (92%) patients reduced their ICS-formoterol dose: 18 (15%) to medium-dose, 20 (17%) to low-dose, and 72 (61%) to as-needed only. In 113 (96%) patients, reductions were maintained to week 48; 114 (91%) of patients in the reduction group had zero exacerbations during tapering. Rates of adverse events were similar between groups. 91 (73%) patients had adverse events in the reduction group and 35 (83%) in the reference group. 17 patients had serious adverse events in the study: 12 (10%) in the reduction group and five (12%) in the reference group. No deaths occurred during the study.

INTERPRETATION

These findings show that patients controlled on benralizumab can have meaningful reductions in ICS therapy while maintaining asthma control.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

The role of the clinical pharmacist in the respiratory or sleep multidisciplinary team

The role of the pharmacist has evolved significantly, not least over the last 20 years. It delivers a skilled profession with a vital role in medicines optimisation and the management of patients with a respiratory or sleep disorder. While pharmacists are capable of acting as independent practitioners delivering direct patient care, this article explores their contribution to multidisciplinary teams within asthma, COPD, cystic fibrosis, tuberculosis, interstitial lung disease and sleep medicine. Having identified patient cohorts needing specialist medicines support, notably those with poor medicines adherence or specific medicines-related needs (for example during adolescence, or women who are pregnant or breastfeeding), these pharmacists work within primary, secondary and specialist tertiary care. The aim of this review is to share and inspire innovative models of working to include more pharmacists in respiratory and sleep medicine.

TAT decorated siRNA polyplexes for inhalation delivery in anti-asthma therapy

In this work, a novel protonable copolymer was designed to deliver siRNA through the inhalation route, as an innovative formulation for the management of asthma. This polycation was synthesized by derivatization of α,β-poly(N-2-hydroxyethyl)D,L-aspartamide (PHEA) first with 1,2-Bis(3-aminopropylamino)ethane (bAPAE) and then with a proper amount of maleimide terminated poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-MLB), with the aim to increase the superficial hydrophilicity of the system, allowing the diffusion trough the mucus layer. Once the complexation ability of the copolymer has been evaluated, obtaining nanosized polyplexes, polyplexes were functionalized on the surface with a thiolated TAT peptide, a cell-penetrating peptide (CPP), exploiting a thiol-ene reaction. TAT decorated polyplexes result to be highly cytocompatible and able to retain the siRNA with a suitable complexation weight ratio during the diffusion process through the mucus. Despite polyplexes establish weak bonds with the mucin chains, these can diffuse efficiently through the mucin layer and therefore potentially able to reach the bronchial epithelium. Furthermore, through cellular uptake studies, it was possible to observe how the obtained polyplexes penetrate effectively in the cytoplasm of bronchial epithelial cells, where they can reduce IL-8 gene expression, after LPS exposure. In the end, in order to obtain a formulation administrable as an inhalable dry powder, polyplexes were encapsulated in mannitol-based microparticles, by spray freeze drying, obtaining highly porous particles with proper technological characteristics that make them potentially administrable by inhalation route.

Electronic monitoring with a digital smart spacer to support personalized inhaler use education in patients with asthma: The randomized controlled OUTERSPACE trial

BACKGROUND

Poor adherence to inhaled medication has been associated with poor outcomes. Smart spacers can monitor inhaler use and technique, yet their feasibility in adults with asthma and their potential benefits are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Assessing the feasibility of undertaking a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) of smart spacer-based inhaler education and explore potential clinical benefits in adults with asthma.

METHODS

Two-month randomized controlled feasibility OUtcomes following Tailored Education and Retraining: Studying Performance and AdherenCE (OUTERSPACE) trial comparing personalized smart spacer-based inhaler education versus usual care. Patients were recruited in four Dutch primary care centres. Outcomes were feasibility (inclusion speed, patient acceptance), medication adherence, inhaler technique, clinical effects (lung function, ACQ, FeNO) and usability (System Usability Scale [SUS]).

RESULTS

42 patients were randomized and all completed the study. The feasibility of performing a larger trial focusing on asthma patient education using a smart spacer was demonstrated with all patients included in four months and a participation rate of 86%. In the intervention group, inhalation errors per day decreased by 26.2% while in the usual care group inhalation errors increased by 14.6% (p = 0.021). Adherence decreased slightly in the intervention group as opposed to improvement in the control group (difference 12%, p = 0.028). No changes in lung function, ACQ or FeNO were observed. Usability was deemed high (SUS patients 71, nurses 89).

CONCLUSION

This RCT showed that smart spacer-driven education in patients with asthma is feasible and in this short-term study reduced inhaler errors. Longer-term and larger studies are required to assess clinical effects.

Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Suppression Testing as an Adherence Screening Tool Among Patients With Difficult-to-Control Asthma

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of adults on long-term asthma medication are nonadherent. Current methods to detect nonadherence have had limited effect. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide suppression testing (FeNOSuppT) has demonstrated clinical effectiveness as an adherence screening tool to detect poor adherence to inhaled corticosteroids in difficult-to-control asthma prior to initiation of expensive biologic therapy.

OBJECTIVE

Estimate the cost effectiveness and budget impact of FeNOSuppT as a screen prior to the initiation of biologic therapy among U.S. adults with difficult-to-control asthma and high fractional exhaled nitric oxide (≥45 ppb).

METHODS

A decision tree simulated the progression of a cohort of patients over a 1-year time horizon into 1 of 3 states ([1] discharged from or [2] remain in specialist care; or [3] progress to biologics). Two strategies, with and without FeNOSuppT, were examined and the incremental net monetary benefit estimated using a discount rate of 3% and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity analysis and a budget impact analysis were also undertaken.

RESULTS

In the baseline scenario, FeNOSuppT prior to the initiation of biologic therapy was associated with lower costs ($4,435/patient) and fewer QALYs (0.0023 QALY/patient) compared with no FeNOSuppT over 1 year and was considered cost effective (incremental net monetary benefit = $4,207). The FeNOSuppT was consistently found to be cost effective across a range of scenarios and in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Assuming differential levels of FeNOSuppT uptake (20%-100%), this was associated with budget savings ranging from USD $5 million to $27 million.

CONCLUSIONS

The FeNOSuppT is likely to be cost effective as a protocol-driven, objective, biomarker-based tool for identifying nonadherence in difficult-to-control asthma. This cost effectiveness is driven by cost savings from patients not progressing to expensive biologic therapy.

Effectiveness and economic impact of Dupilumab in asthma: a population-based cohort study

RATIONALE

Severe asthma is burdened by relevant socio-economic and clinical impact. Randomized controlled trials on Dupilumab showed efficacy and a good safety profile, but post-market studies are needed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of Dupilumab on (i) the use of anti-asthmatic drugs, including oral corticosteroids (OCS), (ii) the rates of asthma exacerbation-related hospital admissions, and (iii) the healthcare costs in patients with asthma.

METHODS

Data were retrieved from Healthcare Utilization database of Lombardy region (Italy). We compared healthcare resources use between the 6 months after Dupilumab initiation ("post-intervention period") and (i) the 6 months before Dupilumab initiation ("wash-out period") and (ii) the corresponding 6 months of the prior year ("pre-intervention period").

MAIN RESULTS

In a cohort of 176 patients, Dupilumab significantly reduced anti-asthmatic drugs use (including OCS and short-acting β2-agonists, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonists and ICS alone) when comparing the "pre-intervention" to the "post-intervention" period. When considering hospital admissions, we observed a not statistically or marginally significant reduction between both periods before Dupilumab and the post-intervention period. Six-months discontinuation rate was 8%. Overall healthcare costs had a tenfold increase between the "pre-intervention" and "post-intervention" period, which was mainly led by the biologic drug cost. Conversely, expenditures connected to hospital admissions did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

Our real-world investigation suggests that Dupilumab reduced anti-asthmatic drugs use, including OCS, in comparison to a corresponding period in the prior year. However, long-term healthcare sustainability remains an open issue.

Electronic Monitoring Devices to Support Inhalation Technique in Patients with Asthma: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

Improper inhaling technique is common and is associated with poor patient outcomes. However, digital e-health devices may offer novel opportunities for educational support. This narrative review provides an overview of electronic monitoring devices (EMDs) measuring patient inhalation technique. We summarise their technical features, capabilities and limitations and discuss the steps necessary for implementation in clinical practice.

Recent Findings

Six EMDs measuring inhalation were identified. The quality of published evidence varied widely. Devices differed in the inhalation technique steps measured, the feedback provided and the type of sensor employed. Sustainability and battery life differed according to whether devices were built into inhalers or add-ons. Nevertheless, all EMDs could reliably capture diverse inhaler technique errors, and some can guide educational interventions and follow-up treatment. In addition, some EMDs may serve as an early warning system for exacerbations.

Summary

New-generation EMDs can measure patient inhalation technique, yet there is limited data on patient preferences, acceptability of inhaler technique monitoring, cost-effectiveness and the influence of inhaler technique monitoring on clinical outcomes, all representing areas for further research.

Interval change in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) reflects short-term change in adherence following electronic inhaler reminders

BACKGROUND

In asthma, suppression of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) is a marker of adherence in the short-term. The usefulness of FENO to indicate change in adherence in the longer term is unknown. The aims of this study were to determine the relationship between changes in adherence and corresponding changes in FENO over short (1 week) and long-term (3 month) periods.

METHODS

After establishing initial ICS adherence using electronic inhaler monitor (EIM) devices, reminders were switched on for 1 week ('short-term') to optimize adherence. Reminders were then switched off and patients followed up after 3 months ('long-term'). FENO was measured at the start and end of each period. Using linear regression, we analyzed change in FENO in relation to change in adherence.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients contributed complete data for analysis. In the short-term, change in adherence was independently associated with change in FENO (β = -0.36, p = 0.036) even after adjusting for initial adherence and ICS dose. The higher the initial FENO, the greater the decline in FENO with improved adherence. This relationship between change in adherence and change in FENO was not observed in the long-term.

CONCLUSION

Change in adherence over 1 week following the use of EIM reminders independently predicted change in FENO. This relationship was not maintained at 3 months.

The CFHealthHub Learning Health System: Using Real-Time Adherence Data to Support a Community of Practice to Deliver Continuous Improvement in an Archetypal Long-Term Condition

CFHealthHub is a learning health system active in over 50% of adult CF Centres in England, supporting people with CF to develop habits of self-care around adherence to preventative inhaled therapy. This is achieved through the delivery of a behaviour change intervention, alongside collection of objective adherence data. As is common to long-term conditions, adherence to prescribed therapy is low, despite clear evidence of beneficial long-term impact on outcomes. This article explains how CFHealthHub is underpinned by coherent conceptual frameworks. We discuss how application of implementation and quality improvement strategies has facilitated CFHealthHub's progression from a pilot study to a large, randomised control trial and now to a learning health system, becoming embedded within routine care. CFHealthHub is now able to support real-time health technology assessments, quality improvement and research trials and is in the process of being implemented in routine clinical care across participating centres.

Benefits of specialist severe asthma management: demographic and geographic disparities

BACKGROUND

The benefits of specialist assessment and management have yet to be evaluated within the biologic era of UK severe asthma treatment, and potential disparities have not been considered.

METHODS

In an uncontrolled before-and-after study, we compared asthma symptoms (Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6)), exacerbations, unscheduled secondary care use, lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)) and oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose after 1 year. We compared outcomes by sex, age (18-34, 35-49, 50-64 and ≥65 years), ethnicity (Caucasian versus non-Caucasian) and hospital site after adjusting for demographics and variation in biologic therapy use.

RESULTS

1140 patients were followed-up for 1370 person-years from 12 specialist centres. At annual review, ACQ-6 score was reduced by a median (interquartile range (IQR)) of 0.7 (0.0-1.5), exacerbations by 75% (33-100%) and unscheduled secondary care by 100% (67-100%). FEV1 increased by a median (IQR) of 20 (-200-340) mL, while OCS dose decreased for 67% of patients. Clinically meaningful improvements occurred across almost all patients, including those not receiving biologic therapy. There was little evidence of differences across demographic groups, although those aged ≥65 years demonstrated larger reductions in exacerbations (69% versus 52%; p<0.001) and unscheduled care use (77% versus 50%; p<0.001) compared with patients aged 18-34 years. There were >2-fold differences between the best and worst performing centres across all study outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Specialist assessment and management is associated with substantially improved patient outcomes, which are broadly consistent across demographic groups and are not restricted to those receiving biologic therapy. Significant variation exists between hospitals, which requires further investigation.

Characterization of Patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry with High Steroid Exposure Who Did or Did Not Initiate Biologic Therapy

Background

Many severe asthma patients with high oral corticosteroid exposure (HOCS) often do not initiate biologics despite being eligible. This study aimed to compare the characteristics of severe asthma patients with HOCS who did and did not initiate biologics.

Methods

Baseline characteristics of patients with HOCS (long-term maintenance OCS therapy for at least 1 year, or ≥4 courses of steroid bursts in a year) from the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR; https://isaregistries.org/), who initiated or did not initiate biologics (anti-lgE, anti-IL5/5R or anti-IL4R), were described at the time of biologic initiation or registry enrolment. Statistical relationships were tested using Pearson’s chi-squared tests for categorical variables, and t-tests for continuous variables, adjusting for potential errors in multiple comparisons.

Results

Between January 2015 and February 2021, we identified 1412 adult patients with severe asthma from 19 countries that met our inclusion criteria of HOCS, of whom 996 (70.5%) initiated a biologic and 416 (29.5%) did not. The frequency of biologic initiation varied across geographical regions. Those who initiated a biologic were more likely to have higher blood eosinophil count (483 vs 399 cells/µL, p=0.003), serious infections (49.0% vs 13.3%, p<0.001), nasal polyps (35.2% vs 23.6%, p<0.001), airflow limitation (56.8% vs 51.8%, p=0.013), and uncontrolled asthma (80.8% vs 73.2%, p=0.004) despite greater conventional treatment adherence than those who did not start a biologic. Both groups had similar annual asthma exacerbation rates in the previous 12 months (5.7 vs 5.3, p=0.147).

Conclusion

Around one third of severe HOCS asthma patients did not receive biologics despite a similar high burden of asthma exacerbations as those who initiated a biologic therapy. Other disease characteristics such as eosinophilic phenotype, serious infectious events, nasal polyps, airflow limitation and lack of asthma control appear to dictate biologic use.

Biologic therapy practices in severe asthma; outcomes from the UK Severe Asthma Registry and survey of specialist opinion

BACKGROUND

several biological treatments have become available for management of severe asthma. There is a significant overlap in the indication of these treatments with lack of consensus on the first-line biologic choice and switching practice in event of treatment failure.

AIMS

to evaluate outcomes of biologic treatments through analysis of the UK Severe Asthma Registry (UKSAR), and survey of the UK severe asthma specialists' opinion.

METHODS

patients registered in the UKSAR database and treated with biologics for severe asthma in the period between January 2014 and August 2021, were studied to explore biologic treatments practice. This was complemented by survey of opinion of severe asthma specialists.

RESULTS

a total of 2,490 patients from 10 severe asthma centres were included in the study (mean age 51.3 years, 61.1% female, mean BMI 30.9kg/m2 ). Biologics use included mepolizumab 1,115 (44.8%), benralizumab 925 (37.1%), omalizumab 432 (17.3%), dupilumab 13 (0.5%), and reslizumab 5 (0.2%). Patients on omalizumab were younger and had earlier age of onset asthma than those prescribed mepolizumab or benralizumab. Patients prescribed mepolizumab and benralizumab had similar clinical characteristics. Those on benralizumab were more likely to continue treatment at approximately one year follow up (93.9%), than those on mepolizumab (80%), or omalizumab (69.6%). The first choice biologic differed between centres and changed over the study time period. Experts' opinion also diverged in terms of biologic initiation choice and switching practice.

CONCLUSION

We observed significant variation and divergence in the prescribing practices of biologics in severe asthma that necessitates further research and standardisation.

Electronic Inhaler Monitoring for Chronic Airway Disease: Development and Application of a Multidimensional Efficacy Framework

Inhaled therapy is the cornerstone of chronic airway disease therapy, but poor adherence to controller inhalers worsens clinical outcomes and increases cost. Monitoring of controller use is needed to improve adherence, and monitoring of reliever use can predict impending exacerbations. Both can be accurately achieved by electronic inhaler monitoring (EIM). However, evidence for EIM use in clinical practice is limited and varied, and knowledge gaps remain across different outcomes and health settings. We aimed to develop a framework to assess EIM systematically across all aspects of efficacy, apply this framework to the current literature, and identify gaps in efficacy to inform future development in the field. We adapted an existing framework for diagnostic tests, consisting of six levels of efficacy with ascending clinical relevance: technical, diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic thinking, therapeutic, patient outcome, and societal efficacy. Tailoring this framework to EIM, we incorporated expert feedback and applied it to the EIM efficacy literature. We found that EIM has good diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic thinking, and therapeutic efficacies, but evidence is lacking for specific aspects of technical, patient outcome, and societal efficacies. Further development of EIM requires improved reliability, usability, and data security for patients, and optimal integration with electronic medical records and overall patient care. Defining appropriate target patient groups and pairing EIM data with effective interventions, in conjunction with reducing costs through technological innovation and economies of scale, will enhance patient and societal outcome efficacies.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

To compare global differences in ease of access to biologics.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Current unmet needs and potential solutions to uncontrolled asthma

Despite the availability of effective inhaled therapies, many patients with asthma have poor asthma control. Uncontrolled asthma presents a significant burden on the patient and society, and, for many, remains largely preventable. There are numerous reasons why a patient may remain uncontrolled despite access to therapies, including incorrect inhaler technique, poor adherence to treatment, oversight of triggers and suboptimal medical care. Shared decision-making, good patient–clinician communication, supported self-management, multidisciplinary patient education, new technology and risk stratification may all provide solutions to this major unmet need in asthma. Novel treatments such as biologics could benefit patients’ lives, while the investigations into biomarkers, non-Type 2 asthma, treatable traits and disease modification give an exciting glimpse into the future of asthma care.

Despite effective therapies, many patients with asthma have poor asthma control, which is preventable. The benefits of shared decision-making, supported self-management, risk stratification and novel treatments in transforming patient care are reviewed.https://bit.ly/3A386Nm

Eosinophils and eosinophilic immune dysfunction in health and disease

The functions ascribed to eosinophils have classically been limited to host defence against certain parasitic infections and potentially deleterious effects in the setting of specific diseases that are associated with elevated eosinophil counts in blood and/or tissue. The ability to induce eosinophil depletion either experimentally in animal models or through targeted therapies in humans has extended our understanding of the roles played by eosinophils in health and homeostasis as well as in disease pathogenesis. When associated with human disease aetiology, the eosinophil takes on a pathogenic rather than a protective role. This maladaptive response, called "eosinophilic immune dysfunction" herein, appears central to exacerbation pathogenesis and disease control in severe asthma and may be involved in the aetiology of other eosinophil-related conditions ranging from organ-system-limited diseases such as phenotypic subsets of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis to more broadly systemic diseases such as eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis and hypereosinophilic syndrome. In this review, we describe the evidence supporting eosinophilic functions related to health and homeostasis and explore the contribution of eosinophilic immune dysfunction to human disease.

FeNO in Asthma

Asthma is a common disease affecting 350 million people worldwide, which is characterized by airways inflammation and hyperreactivity. Historically diagnosis and treatment have been mainly based on symptoms, which have the potential to result in misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment. Nitric oxide (NO) is exhaled in human breath and is a marker of airways inflammation. Levels of NO are increased in the exhaled breath of patients with type 2 asthma and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) provides an objective biomarker of airway inflammation. FeNO testing is an accessible, noninvasive, and easy-to-use test. Cut-off values have been established by the American Thoracic Society (ATS), the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) but vary between guidance. FeNO levels have been shown to be predictive of blood and sputum eosinophil levels but should not be used in isolation and current guidance emphasizes the importance of incorporating clinical symptoms and testing when utilizing FeNO results. The inclusion of FeNO testing can increase diagnostic accuracy of asthma, while high levels in asthmatic patients can help predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and suppression of levels with ICS to monitor adherence. FeNO levels are also a predictor of asthma risk with increased exacerbation rates and accelerated decline in lung function associated with high levels as well as having an emerging role in predicting response to some biologic therapies in severe asthma. FeNO testing is cost-effective and has been shown, when combined with clinical assessment, to improve asthma management.

Rhinovirus Infections and Their Roles in Asthma: Etiology and Exacerbations

Rhinovirus infections can cause wheezing illnesses in all age groups. In preschool children, rhinovirus infections frequently initiate acute wheezing illnesses. Children who wheeze with rhinoviruses are at increased risk to go on to develop asthma. Once asthma is established, rhinovirus infections are potent triggers for acute airway obstruction and exacerbations in children and adults. Paradoxically, for most individuals, rhinovirus infections commonly cause cold symptoms with little or no involvement of the lower airways. This paradox has led investigators to identify specific risk factors and mechanisms for rhinovirus wheezing, and this review will outline progress in 3 main areas. First, the 3 species of rhinoviruses have different patterns of infection and virulence. Second, personal factors such as lung function and immunity influence lower respiratory outcomes of rhinovirus infection. The mucosal immune response is critical, and the quality of the interferon response and allergic inflammation interacts to determine the risk for rhinovirus wheezing. Finally, rhinovirus infections can promote pathogen-dominated airway microbiota that increase the risk for wheezing. Although specific antivirals for rhinovirus are still not available, identifying risk factors for wheezing illnesses has provided several other potential targets and strategies for reducing the risk of rhinovirus-induced wheezing and exacerbations of asthma.

A pragmatic guide to choosing biologic therapies in severe asthma

There are now several monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies (“biologics”) available to treat severe asthma. Omalizumab is an anti-IgE mAb and is licensed in severe allergic asthma. Current evidence suggests it may decrease exacerbations by augmenting deficient antiviral immune responses in asthma. Like all other biologics, clinical efficacy is greatest in those with elevated T2 biomarkers. Three biologics target the interleukin (IL)-5–eosinophil pathway, including mepolizumab and reslizumab that target IL-5 itself, and benralizumab that targets the IL-5 receptor (IL-5R-α). These drugs all reduce the exacerbation rate in those with raised blood eosinophil counts. Mepolizumab and benralizumab have also demonstrated steroid-sparing efficacy. Reslizumab is the only biologic that is given intravenously rather than by the subcutaneous route. Dupilumab targets the IL-4 receptor and like mepolizumab and benralizumab is effective at reducing exacerbation rate as well as oral corticosteroid requirements. It is also effective for the treatment of nasal polyposis and atopic dermatitis. Tezepelumab is an anti-TSLP (thymic stromal lymphopoietin) mAb that has recently completed phase 3 trials demonstrating significant reductions in exacerbation rate even at lower T2 biomarker thresholds.

Many patients with severe asthma qualify for more than one biologic. To date, there are no head-to-head trials to aid physicians in this choice. However, post-hoc analyses have identified certain clinical characteristics that are associated with superior responses to some therapies. The presence of allergic and/or eosinophilic comorbidities, such as atopic dermatitis, nasal polyposis or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, that may additionally benefit by the choice of biologic should also be taken into consideration, as should patient preferences which may include dosing frequency. To date, all biologics have been shown to have excellent safety profiles.

Biologics in Asthma: A Molecular Perspective to Precision Medicine

Recent developments in therapeutic strategies have provided alternatives to corticosteroids as the cornerstone treatment for managing airway inflammation in asthma. The past two decades have witnessed a tremendous boost in the development of anti-cytokine monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies for the management of severe asthma. Novel biologics that target eosinophilic inflammation (or type 2, T2 inflammation) have been the most successful at treating asthma symptoms, though there are a few in the drug development pipeline for treating non-eosinophilic or T2-low asthma. There has been significant improvement in clinical outcomes for asthmatics treated with currently available monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E, anti-interleukin (IL)-4 receptor α subunit, anti-IL-5, anti-IL-5Rα, anti-IL-6, anti-IL-33, and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP). Despite these initiatives in precision medicine for asthma therapy, a significant disease burden remains, as evident from modest reduction of exacerbation rates, i.e., approximately 40-60%. There are numerous studies that highlight predictors of good responses to these biologics, but few have focused on those who fail to respond adequately despite targeted treatment. Phenotyping asthmatics based on blood eosinophils is proving to be inadequate for choosing the right drug for the right patient. It is therefore pertinent to understand the underlying immunology, and perhaps, carry out immune endotyping of patients before prescribing appropriate drugs. This review summarizes the immunology of asthma, the cytokines or receptors currently targeted, the possible mechanisms of sub-optimal responses, and the importance of determining the immune make-up of individual patients prior to prescribing mAb therapy, in the age of precision medicine for asthma.

Effect of benralizumab in a patient with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps refractory to mepolizumab treatment

Severe eosinophilic asthma is associated with a high corticosteroid burden, particularly in patients with comorbid chronic sinusitis/nasal polyps. This case study reports a 33-year-old woman who presented to the severe asthma center with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Despite maximized asthma treatment, including maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) for 7 years, the patient experienced one to two hospitalizations per year, had daily symptoms that substantially impacted her quality of life, and elevated type 2 inflammatory markers (blood eosinophils, 0.72 × 10⁹/L; fractional exhaled nitric oxide, 134 to 300 parts per billion). Her asthma worsened during her first pregnancy, in which she required five hospital admissions despite treatment with maintenance OCS. Mepolizumab treatment was commenced after pregnancy but showed limited efficacy (blood eosinophil levels up to 0.94 × 10⁹/L); treatment was discontinued because of a second pregnancy. The patient's asthma worsened and resulted in four hospitalizations and an increase in monthly OCS dose. Mepolizumab was recommenced after pregnancy, but her asthma remained uncontrolled, symptoms persisted, and one hospitalization and nine OCS courses were required. The patient was switched to benralizumab treatment when it became available. Although her CRSwNP symptoms remained, benralizumab treatment resulted in a marked improvement in asthma control, zero hospitalizations, and suppressed blood eosinophil levels. Notably, the patient was successfully weaned off maintenance OCS after >11 years of treatment. In summary, these findings support the use of benralizumab as a corticosteroid-sparing treatment option in difficult-to-treat severe eosinophilic asthma refractory to mepolizumab treatment.

•

Benralizumab was a potent suppressor of blood eosinophils in this case study.

•

Benralizumab resulted in a marked reduction in maintenance corticosteroid use.

•

Benralizumab improved asthma exacerbations, control, and symptoms.

•

Benralizumab had efficacy in severe asthma after unsuccessful mepolizumab treatment.

Packaging and Delivery of Asthma Therapeutics

Asthma is a life-altering, chronic disease of heterogenous origin that features a complex interplay of immune and environmental signaling. Although very little progress has been made in prevention, diverse types of medications and delivery systems, including nanoscale systems, have been or are currently being developed to control airway inflammation and prevent exacerbations and fibrosis. These medications are delivered through mechanical methods, with various inhalers (with benefits and drawbacks) existing, and new types offering some variety in delivery. Of particular interest is the progress being made in nanosized materials for efficient penetration into the epithelial mucus layer and delivery into the deepest parts of the lungs. Liposomes, nanoparticles, and extracellular vesicles, both natural and synthetic, have been explored in animal models of asthma and have produced promising results. This review will summarize and synthesize the latest developments in both macro-(inhaler) and micro-sized delivery systems for the purpose of treating asthma patients.

Real-life effectiveness of mepolizumab in severe asthma: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in randomized controlled trials is well established. Following approval of mepolizumab as add-on therapy for severe eosinophilic asthma in multiple regions worldwide, it is now important to determine its impact in real-world settings in which patients are not subject to stringent eligibility criteria. This systematic literature review assessed published evidence of clinical outcomes, safety, and healthcare resource use among patients with severe asthma receiving mepolizumab in real-world settings.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE In-Process via Ovid.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Eligible studies were observational, and enrolled ≥10 patients with asthma who received mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously. Data extracted included annualized exacerbation rate, mean daily oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose, proportion of patients using OCS, several measures of lung function, patient-reported asthma control and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety, and economic burden.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles (22 unique studies; 2,040 patients with severe asthma on mepolizumab) were identified. Mepolizumab use was associated with a reduction in annualized exacerbation rates (requiring OCS) of 54-97% (p < 0.05 in all studies), reduced mean/median daily OCS doses, and OCS discontinuation during follow-up (27-84% of patients). Improvements in lung function, asthma control, and HRQoL were also observed. The most commonly reported adverse events included headache and arthralgia; discontinuation of mepolizumab due to adverse events occurred in 0-10.6% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Findings show that patients with severe asthma consistently demonstrate clinically relevant benefits with mepolizumab treatment in a real-world setting.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .

2021 Brazilian Thoracic Association recommendations for the management of severe asthma

Advances in the understanding that severe asthma is a complex and heterogeneous disease and in the knowledge of the pathophysiology of asthma, with the identification of different phenotypes and endotypes, have allowed new approaches for the diagnosis and characterization of the disease and have resulted in relevant changes in pharmacological management. In this context, the definition of severe asthma has been established, being differentiated from difficult-to-control asthma. These recommendations address this topic and review advances in phenotyping, use of biomarkers, and new treatments for severe asthma. Emphasis is given to topics regarding personalized management of the patient and selection of biologicals, as well as the importance of evaluating the response to treatment. These recommendations apply to adults and children with severe asthma and are targeted at physicians involved in asthma treatment. A panel of 17 Brazilian pulmonologists was invited to review recent evidence on the diagnosis and management of severe asthma, adapting it to the Brazilian reality. Each of the experts was responsible for reviewing a topic or question relevant to the topic. In a second phase, four experts discussed and structured the texts produced, and, in the last phase, all experts reviewed and approved the present manuscript and its recommendations.

The use of biologics in personalized asthma care

INTRODUCTION

The role of biologic treatments in severe asthma continues to expand, with five agents now approved. Selection of biologic treatment has become increasingly complex in the setting of overlapping indications and in the absence of head-to-head trials. Long-term safety data are still limited for more recently approved agents.

AREAS COVERED

We review the evidence supporting the choice of biologic and predicting treatment response utilizing existing widely available biomarkers. In addition, we provide a digest of the long-term safety data currently available for agents approved since 2015. Data sources were identified by using PubMed in 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

We generally favor omalizumab in the first instance for those severe asthma patients also eligible for other biologics, due to the greater long-term safety data available for this agent. Clinical characteristics predicting response, treatment priorities, and comorbidities must also be considered.

A real-world study of ICS use in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with mepolizumab

BACKGROUND

Mepolizumab is a humanized anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). There is limited evidence that patients treated with mepolizumab can reduce inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate changes in ICS use and clinical outcomes in patients with SEA who initiated mepolizumab treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study (GSK ID: 212695/HO-20-19951) used administrative claims data from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Database (identification period: November 2015-March 2018). Eligible patients had SEA and were receiving high-dose ICS and mepolizumab. ICS, oral corticosteroid (OCS), short acting β2-agonist (SABA) use, and exacerbation frequency were analyzed quarterly during the 12-month follow-up period following mepolizumab initiation.

RESULTS

In total, 351 patients were included. The proportion of patients using highdose ICS decreased in quarters 1-4 following mepolizumab initiation (79.8%, 74.6%, 68.9%, 65.5%, respectively); 49.0% of patients reduced or discontinued ICS for ≥1 quarter. Comparing patients who discontinued ICS versus those who remained on high-dose ICS, a lower proportion had chronic OCS use (3.4-9.2% vs 13.9-16.8%) and OCS burst use (15.4-20.8% vs 19.7-26.1%) in quarters 1-4; similarly in quarters 3 and 4, a lower proportion of patients had exacerbations (16.9% and 20.3% vs 27.2% and 27.7%) and SABA claims (35.4% and 39.2% vs 43.3% and 49.0%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In patients with SEA on high-dose ICS, a reduction in both ICS and OCS use was observed after initiating mepolizumab. These findings have important implications for clinical outcomes and follow-up care in this patient population.

Effective Management of Severe Asthma with Biologic Medications in Adult Patients: A Literature Review and International Expert Opinion

Severe asthma often remains uncontrolled despite effective treatments and evidence-based guidelines. A group of global experts in asthma and biologic medications from 9 countries considered the most relevant clinical variables to manage severe asthma in adult patients and guide treatment choice. The resulting recommendations address the investigation of biomarker levels (blood eosinophil count along with fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]), clinical features (oral corticosteroid [OCS] dependence, specific comorbid disease entities associated with severe type 2 asthma), and safety considerations. Current evidence suggests that biomarkers, including both blood or sputum eosinophil counts as well as FeNO, add prognostic and predictive value and should be measured in all patients with severe asthma. OCS use is an important factor in biologic selection, especially given the documented ability of some biologics to reduce OCS dependence. Comorbid diseases and relevant safety considerations to each biologic should also be considered. More data are needed to determine whether biomarker profiles identify patients suited to one biologic versus another as limited data support differential predictors of response. Further prospective head-to-head trials and post hoc analyses of clinical trial data are warranted. The authors believe that these recommendations have value as they offer expert opinion to assist health care providers in making difficult decisions regarding the quality of care in severe, type 2 asthma with biologic medications. They remain conditional and are based on limited data owing to a lack of head-to-head comparisons.

Measuring Medication Adherence in a Population-Based Asthma Administrative Pharmacy Database: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Limited studies have systematically reviewed the literature to identify and compare the various database methods and optimal thresholds for measuring medication adherence specific to adolescents and adults with asthma. In the present study, we aim to identify the methods and optimal thresholds for measuring medication adherence in population-based pharmacy databases.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), Web of Science, Google Scholar, and grey literature from January 1, 1998, to March 16, 2021. Two independent reviewers screened the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the studies. A quantitative knowledge synthesis was employed.

Results

Thirty-eight (38) retrospective cohort studies were eligible. This review identified 20 methods for measuring medication adherence in adolescent and adult asthma administrative health records. Two measures namely the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) were commonly reported in 87% of the literature included in this study. From the meta-analysis, asthma patients who achieved adherence threshold of "0.75-1.00" [OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.77] and ">0.5" [OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.94] were less likely to experience asthma exacerbation.

Conclusion

Despite their limitations, the PDC and the MPR still remain the most common measures for assessing adherence in asthma pharmacy claim databases. The evidence synthesis showed that an adherence threshold of at least 0.75 is optimal for classifying adherent and non-adherent asthma patients.

Obese, non-eosinophilic asthma: frequent exacerbators in a real-world setting

OBJECTIVE

In the UK, asthma deaths are at their highest level this century. Increased recognition of at-risk patients is needed. This study phenotyped frequent asthma exacerbators and used machine learning to predict frequent exacerbators.

METHODS

Patients admitted to a district general hospital with an asthma exacerbation between 1st March 2018 and 1st March 2020 were included. Patients were organized into two groups: "Infrequent Exacerbators" (1 admission in the previous 12 months) and "Frequent Exacerbators" (≥2 admissions in the previous 12 months). Patient data were retrospectively collected from hospital and primary care records. Machine learning models were used to predict frequent exacerbators.

RESULTS

200 patients admitted for asthma exacerbations were randomly selected (73% female; mean age 47.8 years). Peripheral eosinophilia was uncommon in either group (21% vs 19%). More frequent exacerbators were being treated with high-dose ICS than infrequent exacerbators (46.5% vs 23.2%; P < 0.001), and frequent exacerbators used more SABA inhalers (10.9 vs 7.40; P = 0.01) in the year preceding the current admission. BMI was raised in both groups (34.2 vs 30.9). Logistic regression was the most accurate machine learning model for predicting frequent exacerbators (AUC = 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted for asthma are predominately female, obese and non-eosinophilic. Patients who require multiple admissions per year have poorer asthma control at baseline. Machine learning algorithms can predict frequent exacerbators using clinical data available in primary care. Instead of simply increasing the dose of corticosteroids, multidisciplinary management targeting Th2-low inflammation should be considered for these patients.

Using FeNO Measurement in Clinical Asthma Management

Asthma is a common and heterogeneous disease, characterised by lower airway inflammation and airflow limitation. Critical factors in asthma management include establishing an accurate diagnosis and ensuring appropriate selection and dosage of anti-inflammatory therapies. The majority of asthma patients exhibit type 2 (T2) inflammation, with increased interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13 signalling, often with associated eosinophilia. Identifying lower airway eosinophilia with sputum induction improves asthma outcomes, but is time consuming and costly. Increased T2-inflammation leads to upregulation of nitric oxide (NO) release into the airway, with increasing fractional exhaled NO (FeNO) reflecting greater T2-inflammation. FeNO can be easily and quickly measured in the clinic, offering a point of care surrogate measure of the degree of lower airway inflammation. FeNO testing can be used to help confirm an asthma diagnosis, to guide inhaled corticosteroid therapy, to assess adherence to treatment, and to aid selection of appropriate biologic therapy. However, FeNO levels may also be influenced by a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic factors other than asthma, including nasal polyposis and cigarette smoking, and must be interpreted in the broader clinical context rather than viewed in isolation. This review discusses the clinical application of FeNO measurement in asthma care, from diagnosis to treatment selection, and describes its place in current international expert guidelines.

Utility of fractional exhaled nitric oxide suppression as a prediction tool for progression to biologic therapy

Rationale

The utility of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (F _ENO) suppression (FeNOSuppT) to identify non-adherence to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment has previously been reported, but whether it can predict clinical outcome remains unclear.

Objectives

We examined the utility of FeNOSuppT in prediction of progression to biologic agents or discharge from specialist care.

Methods

FeNOSuppT was measured at home using remote monitoring technology of inhaler use alongside daily F _ENO measurement over 7 days. Long-term clinical outcomes in terms of progression to biologic agent or discharge from specialist care were compared for non-suppressors and suppressors.

Measurements and main results

Of the 162 subjects, 135 successfully completed the test with 81 (60%) positive F _ENO suppression tests. Subjects with a negative FeNOSuppT were more likely to proceed to biologic therapy (39 of 54 patients, 72%) compared to those with a positive FeNOSuppT (35 of 81 patients, 43%, p=0.001). In subjects with a positive FeNOSuppT, predictors of progression to biologic therapy included higher dose of maintenance steroid at initial assessment and prior intensive care unit admission. These subjects had a significant rise in F _ENO between post-suppression test and follow-up (median, 33 (IQR 25-55) versus 71 (IQR 24-114); p=0.009), which was not explained by altered corticosteroid dose.

Conclusions

A negative FeNOSuppT correlates with progression to biologic therapy. A positive FeNOSuppT, with subsequent maintenance of "optimised" F _ENO, predicts a subgroup of patients in whom asthma control is preserved with adherence to high-dose ICS/long-acting β2 agonist and who can be discharged from specialist care.

Pro: Access to advanced therapies for severe asthma should be restricted to patients with satisfactory adherence to maintenance treatment

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the core component of asthma treatment and the only maintenance therapy known to prevent asthma death. There is currently no evidence that biologics prevent asthma death in people with asthma, and as such, biologics cannot be recommended as an alternative to ICS therapy. Taking the time to assess adherence and provide interventions and education to support patients in asthma self-management has been shown to improve patient outcomes. It is therefore our responsibility as healthcare professionals to ensure that patients are supported, educated and motivated to adhere to ICS therapy before progressing to biologic therapies.

ICS save lives. It is therefore our responsibility as healthcare professionals to ensure that patients are supported, educated and motivated to improve poor ICS adherence before treatment is further escalated to biologic therapy. https://bit.ly/3o2q26i

Dynamics of inhaled corticosteroid use are associated with asthma attacks

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) suppress eosinophilic airway inflammation in asthma, but patients may not adhere to prescribed use. Mean adherence-averaging total doses taken over prescribed-fails to capture many aspects of adherence. Patients with difficult-to-treat asthma underwent electronic monitoring of ICS, with data collected over 50 days. These were used to calculate entropy (H) a measure of irregular inhaler use over this period, defined in terms of transitional probabilities between different levels of adherence, further partitioned into increasing (H_inc) or decreasing (H_dec) adherence. Mean adherence, time between actuations (Gap_max), and cumulative time- and dose-based variability (area-under-the-curve) were measured. Associations between adherence metrics and 6-month asthma status and attacks were assessed. Only H and H_dec were associated with poor baseline status and 6-month outcomes: H and H_dec correlated negatively with baseline quality of life (H:Spearman r_S = - 0·330, p = 0·019, H_dec:r_S = - 0·385, p = 0·006) and symptom control (H:r_S = - 0·288, p = 0·041, H_dec: r_S = - 0·351, p = 0·012). H was associated with subsequent asthma attacks requiring hospitalisation (Wilcoxon Z-statistic = - 2.34, p = 0·019), and H_dec with subsequent asthma attacks of other severities. Significant associations were maintained in multivariable analyses, except when adjusted for blood eosinophils. Entropy analysis may provide insight into adherence behavior, and guide assessment and improvement of adherence in uncontrolled asthma.

Improving adherence in chronic airways disease: are we doing it wrongly?

Non-adherence to medicines is a significant clinical and financial burden, but successful strategies to improve it, and thus bring about significant improvements in clinical outcome, remain elusive. Many barriers exist, including a lack of awareness amongst some healthcare professionals as to the extent and impact of non-adherence and a dearth of skills to address it successfully. Patients may not appreciate that they are non-adherent, feel they cannot disclose it or underestimate its impact on their health in the short and longer term. In describing the evidence-based frameworks that identify the causal factors behind medicines taking (or not taking) behaviours, we can start to personalise interventions to enable individuals to make informed decisions about their treatments and thus overcome real and perceived barriers to adherence.

Medicines non-adherence is common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. @GrainnedAn and colleagues outline causal factors behind this behaviour and the appropriate individualised interventions available to support optimal medicines use.https://bit.ly/3ejJNTV

The clinical impact of adherence to therapy in airways disease

For a physician, the final step of a consultation consists of developing a treatment plan and prescription. For the patient, this is the start of a process. First, their role in the treatment plan must be clarified, then they may have to obtain an alternative prescription from their general practitioner. Next, they must have the prescription filled and dispensed from the pharmacy and, finally, they must take the treatment on time and for the required duration. For people with chronic conditions, this requires repeatedly returning to the pharmacy for the prescription to be renewed and dispensed. Given that many patients are on multiple treatment regimens and may have poor health literacy, this becomes a complex process and it is not surprising that this can, and frequently does, go wrong.

Research shows that when a patient does not adhere to standard asthma or COPD treatment, they report poor control and overuse of rescue β-agonists, experience frequent exacerbations and are often prescribed add-on treatments such as biological agents. In short, poor treatment adherence can manifest in the same way as a refractory condition.

These clinical features should prompt a clinician to investigate poor adherence as they might investigate a new blood or radiological finding. Examining a patient's prescription refill records or a digitally enabled inhaler can demonstrate a number of patterns of inhaler use. A small minority regularly use their treatment as prescribed but many appear to be “cluster users”: a group of patients who use their treatment correctly when they are unwell, but once some level of personal control is attained, they cease or reduce their use. Others may cease using their treatment because they are not perceiving a benefit or because an alternative condition accounts for their symptoms. In other words, clinicians can consider that treatment adherence is like a clinical sign: something to be investigated so that they may understand the patient's condition better.

Suspected poor treatment adherence should be treated as a clinical sign. It should be suspected among patients with asthma and COPD who have excessive reliever use or recurrent exacerbations. It can be detected using pharmacy data or electronic devices.https://bit.ly/3oqwS5L

Global burden of medication non-adherence in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma: a narrative review of the clinical and economic case for smart inhalers

Medication non-adherence to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy poses a significant burden for patients and societies. Non-adherence encompasses poor initiation, implementation (including poor inhalation technique) and non-persistence. Globally, non-adherence is associated with poor clinical outcomes, reduced quality of life and high healthcare and societal costs. Costs are mainly caused by excess hospitalizations and impaired work productivity. Multiple intervention programs to increase adherence in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have been conducted. However, these intervention programs are generally not as effective as intended. Additionally, adherence outcomes are mostly examined with non-objective or non-granular measures (e.g., self-report, dose count, pharmacy records). Recently developed smart inhalers could be the key to objectively diagnose and manage non-adherence effectively in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Smart inhalers register usage of the inhaler, record time and date, send reminders, give feedback about adherence and some are able to assess inhaler technique and predict exacerbations. Still, some limitations need to be overcome before smart inhalers can be incorporated in usual care. For example, their cost-effectiveness and budget impact need to be examined. It is likely that smart inhalers are particularly cost-effective in specific asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease subgroups, including patients with asthma eligible for additional GINA-5 therapy (oral corticosteroids or biologics), patients with severe asthma in GINA-5, patients with asthma with short-acting beta2 agonists overuse, patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with frequent exacerbations and patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease of working-age. While there is high potential and evidence is accumulating, a final push seems needed to cost-effectively integrate smart inhalers in the daily management of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

How to Assess Effectiveness of Biologics for Asthma and What Steps to Take When There Is Not Benefit

Five biologic medications are approved in the United States for the treatment of asthma that is not well controlled with other therapies. All target asthma with elevated type 2 inflammatory markers, such as elevated eosinophils, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, or total and specific IgE. Asthma severity, phenotype, age, biomarkers, treatment goals/outcomes, comorbid conditions, safety, and cost should all help guide the initial biologic choice. In addition, a shared decision-making process with the patient is needed to optimize adherence, with special attention to patient preference regarding outcomes, safety concerns, and medication administration options. After a biologic agent is initiated, sufficient time is needed to monitor efficacy and response. For patients who do not respond favorably, patient-, disease-, and medication-related factors should be considered and remedied, if possible. Persistent suboptimal responders necessitate a reexamination of asthma phenotype, biomarkers, and the suspected immune response pathways. For some patients, a change in biologic therapy or other therapeutic options may be warranted. In this review, we examine the clinical approach for choosing an initial biologic for the treatment of asthma, the assessment of response to biologics, and the process of troubleshooting and adjusting biologic treatment for those patients with suboptimal responses.

Uncontrolled Asthma: Unmet Needs in the Management of Patients

The recent scientific research has provided clinicians with the tools for substantially upgrading the standard of care in the field of bronchial asthma. Nevertheless, satisfactory asthma control still remains an unmet need worldwide. Identifying the major determinants of poor control in different asthma severity levels represents the first step towards the improvement of the overall patients' management. The present review aims to provide an overview of the main unmet needs in asthma control and of the potential tools for overcoming the issue. Implementing a personalized medicine approach is essential, not only in terms of pharmacological treatments, biologic drugs or sophisticated biomarkers. In fact, exploring the complex profile of each patient, from his inflammation phenotype to his preferences and expectations, may help in filling the gap between the big potential of currently available treatments and the overall unsatisfactory asthma control. Telemedicine and e-health technologies may provide a strategy to both optimize disease assessment on a regular basis and enhance patients' empowerment in managing their asthma. Increasing patients' awareness as well as the physicians' knowledge about asthma phenotypes and treatment options besides corticosteroid probably represent the key and more difficult goals of all the players involved in asthma management at every level.

Real-World Effectiveness of Anti-IL-5/5R Therapy in Severe Atopic Eosinophilic Asthma with Fungal Sensitization

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma with fungal sensitization (SAFS) is a complex clinical phenotype associated with poorly controlled type 2 inflammation and significant morbidity from both the disease itself and a high steroid burden.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of biologic therapies targeting eosinophilic inflammation in SAFS.

METHODS

We assessed the effectiveness of treatment with mepolizumab or benralizumab in patients with SAFS, and compared outcomes with patients with severe atopic asthma without fungal sensitization and patients with severe nonatopic asthma. Baseline clinical characteristics and clinical outcomes at 48 weeks were evaluated. A subgroup analysis was performed of patients who met the criteria for allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) rather than SAFS.

RESULTS

A total of 193 patients treated with mepolizumab (n = 63) or benralizumab (n = 130) were included. Patients with SAFS had higher baseline IgE level compared with patients with severe atopic asthma without fungal sensitization and severe nonatopic asthma (733 ± 837 IU/mL vs 338 ± 494 and 142 ± 171, respectively; both P < .001). There were no other significant baseline differences in clinical characteristics between groups. At 48 weeks, there were significant improvements in 6-item asthma control questionnaire score and exacerbation frequency, and reduction in maintenance oral corticosteroid dose across all groups (all P < .05). No significant between-group differences in outcomes were observed at 48 weeks. Patients with ABPA (n = 9) had a significant reduction in exacerbation frequency (P = .013) with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with eosinophil-targeting biologics led to improvements in exacerbation frequency, oral corticosteroid requirements, and patient-reported outcomes in patients with SAFS, with a reduction in exacerbations in the subgroup of patients with ABPA. These data highlight the potential clinical utility of targeting eosinophilic inflammation in SAFS and ABPA.

Fractional exhaled nitric oxide and asthma treatment adherence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite increased clinician awareness, nonadherence to inhaled corticosteroid treatment presents a major challenge to successful asthma management and risks inappropriate treatment escalation, particularly in severe disease. In patients with Type-2 mediated biology, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) has a role in assessment and monitoring of adherence to inhaled corticosteroids.

RECENT FINDINGS

Asthmatic patients with elevated FeNO are at an increased risk of exacerbation. High FeNO is often secondary to suboptimal adherence to inhaled corticosteroid treatment, whether intentional or nonintentional. FENO-suppression can 'unmask' underlying adherence issues and is a useful test in the presence of Type-2 biology in the 'difficult-to-control' asthma population. Identification of nonadherence can improve asthma control and prevent inappropriate commencement of costly biologic therapies.

SUMMARY

Assessment of adherence and FeNO response to monitored inhaled corticosteroid in Type-2 biomarker high asthmatic individuals may prevent unnecessary escalation to biologic therapy. Establishing an 'optimised' FeNO may alert clinicians to the possibility of underlying nonadherence at future clinical assessments.

EAACI Biologicals Guidelines-Recommendations for severe asthma

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities.

Biologic treatment options for severe asthma

Asthma is a common condition that causes episodic expiratory airflow limitation due to bronchial smooth muscle constriction and airways inflammation resulting in increased respiratory symptoms and acute asthma exacerbations. Patients with severe asthma have relied on either recurrent courses or daily use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) to control their disease. However a high level of OCS exposure is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In recent years the elucidation of the role of T2 inflammation underpinning asthma pathogenesis has led to the development of monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies targeting this pathway. Established therapies now include omalizumab targeting IgE, mepolizumab and reslizumab targeting IL-5, benralizumab targeting the IL-5R and dupilumab targeting IL-4R. For many patients these therapies have been transformative and their use has additionally advanced our understanding of the immunology that underpins the disease. This article reviews the biologic therapies currently available for the treatment of severe asthma.