At-home asthma mortality unchanged despite declining mortality in other settings: US death certificate data (2000-2019).

BACKGROUND: Asthma mortality rates in the United States have declined since 1999; however, asthma mortality by place of death has not been comprehensively evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate temporal trends in asthma mortality rates and place of death in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a population-based analysis using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research platform to evaluate deaths with asthma as the underlying cause (2000-2019) among US residents of all ages. Absolute numbers of asthma-related deaths were described by place of death. Counts were applied to US Census Bureau population counts to calculate mortality rates per 100,000 persons. RESULTS: In the 20-year period evaluated, 67,695 asthma deaths were registered in the United States. An overall 32% decline in the asthma mortality rate was observed, from 1.43 to 0.98 per 100,000 persons from 2000 to 2019, respectively. Although asthma mortality rates declined in all medical facility locations, the at-home asthma mortality rate remained stable (0.32 and 0.34 per 100,000 persons in 2000 and 2019, respectively). Consequently, the proportion of at-home asthma deaths increased from 23% in 2000 to 2001 to 36% in 2018 to 2019. The distribution of place of death varied by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and geographic region. CONCLUSION: Despite an overall decline in asthma mortality in the United States, at-home asthma mortality has remained unchanged. In recent years, more than one-third of asthma deaths have occurred at home. These findings warrant further study and underscore the importance of increased efforts to identify and treat uncontrolled asthma across demographic groups.

Geographic variation in disease burden among patients with severe persistent asthma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, a few studies have evaluated geographic variation of severe asthma at the subnational level. OBJECTIVE: To assess state-level geographic variation in the prevalence and characteristics of severe persistent asthma in the United States. METHODS: Patients aged above or equal to 12 years with severe persistent asthma were identified using nationally representative data from IQVIA open-source Medical/Pharmacy Claims and PharMetrics Plus databases (January 2019-December 2020). The index date was defined as the patient's earliest qualifying date for a severe asthma diagnosis. Baseline characteristics were measured during the 12-month pre-index period. Outcomes including exacerbation occurrence, asthma control, and medication use were measured during the 12-month post-index period and compared across states using census-level projections. RESULTS: A total of 2,092,799 patients with asthma were identified; 496,750 (23.7%) met criteria for severe persistent asthma and all inclusion criteria. Mean age was 50.5 years; 68.4% were females. The prevalence of severe persistent asthma varied across states, ranging from 19.6% (New Mexico) to 31.9% (Alaska). Among patients with severe persistent asthma, 40.9% had more than or equal to 1 exacerbation, ranging from 34.2% (Vermont) to 45.6% (Louisiana); 21.1% had uncontrolled disease, ranging from 16.5% (Vermont) to 24.0% (Arizona). Among patients with exacerbations, 13.7% had exacerbation-related emergency department visits or hospitalizations, ranging from 7.0% (North Carolina) to 17.7% (Nevada). Among patients with severe uncontrolled asthma, 15.6% used biologics post-index, ranging from 2.2% (Hawaii) to 27.9% (Mississippi). CONCLUSION: There is significant variability in severe persistent asthma prevalence and disease burden across US states. Reasons for geographic variation may include differences in socioeconomic/environmental factors or asthma management.

Patient and Clinician Preferences for Biologic Treatments for Severe Uncontrolled Asthma: A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE).

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the preferences of patients with asthma and asthma-treating clinicians for attributes of biologic treatments, to compare patients' and clinicians' preferences, and to better understand the reasons for their preferences. METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe asthma and clinicians who treat asthma in the US completed a cross-sectional, online survey including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that consisted of seven attributes spanning treatment efficacy, risk and convenience. Marginal utilities were estimated using a mixed logit model, and relative attribute importance scores calculated. Clinicians were also asked about the value of biomarker agnostic biologic treatments. The survey was followed by qualitative interviews targeting a sub-sample of survey participants, in which the rationale behind their survey responses was discussed. RESULTS: In the DCE, both patients and clinicians placed the most importance on exacerbation and hospitalization rate reduction, and risk of injection site reaction. Patients valued location of administration more than clinicians. Rationale for individual-level preferences varied, with patients and clinicians reporting their preference depended on event frequency and anticipated quality of life impacts. Clinicians mentioned compliance and financial impacts, while patients mentioned personal experience, particularly around site reactions. Most patients and clinicians would value a biomarker agnostic asthma treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma treatment preferences are largely driven by treatment efficacy and minimizing the risk of site reactions, although preferences differ between patients and clinicians across other attributes, highlighting the need for shared decision-making and individualized care.

Efficacy of Tezepelumab in Severe, Uncontrolled Asthma: Pooled Analysis of the PATHWAY and NAVIGATOR Clinical Trials.

Rationale: Tezepelumab reduced exacerbations in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma across a range of baseline blood eosinophil counts and fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, and irrespective of allergy status, in the phase 2b PATHWAY (Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of MEDI9929 [AMG 157] in Adult Subjects With Inadequately Controlled, Severe Asthma; NCT02054130) and phase 3 NAVIGATOR (Study to Evaluate Tezepelumab in Adults & Adolescents With Severe Uncontrolled Asthma; NCT03347279) trials. Objectives: To examine the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in additional clinically relevant subgroups using pooled data from PATHWAY and NAVIGATOR. Methods: PATHWAY and NAVIGATOR were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with similar designs. This pooled analysis included patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma (PATHWAY, 18-75 years old; NAVIGATOR, 12-80 years old) who received tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The annualized asthma exacerbation rate over 52 weeks and secondary outcomes were calculated in the overall population and in subgroups defined by inflammatory biomarker levels or clinical characteristics. Measurements and Main Results: Overall, 1,334 patients were included (tezepelumab, n = 665; placebo, n = 669). Tezepelumab reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate versus placebo by 60% (rate ratio, 0.40 [95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.48]) in the overall population, and clinically meaningful reductions in exacerbations were observed in tezepelumab-treated patients with type 2-high and type 2-low disease by multiple definitions. Tezepelumab reduced exacerbation-related hospitalization or emergency department visits and improved secondary outcomes compared with placebo overall and across subgroups. The incidence of adverse events was similar between treatment groups. Conclusions: Tezepelumab resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in exacerbations and improvements in other outcomes in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, across clinically relevant subgroups. Clinical trials registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02054130 [PATHWAY], NCT03347279 [NAVIGATOR]).

Efficacy of tezepelumab in patients with evidence of severe allergic asthma: Results from the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study.

BACKGROUND: Allergic asthma is the most common phenotype among patients with severe asthma. In the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study (NCT03347279), tezepelumab significantly reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) versus placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. This exploratory analysis evaluated the efficacy of tezepelumab in NAVIGATOR participants with evidence of severe allergic asthma. METHODS: Patients (12-80 years old) receiving medium- or high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and ≥ 1 additional controller medication, with or without oral corticosteroids, were randomized to tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks in NAVIGATOR. In this analysis, the AAER, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 ), patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and type 2 biomarker levels were evaluated in patients grouped by sensitivity to perennial aeroallergens, confirmed symptomatic allergy, and eligibility for omalizumab treatment according to the United States (OMA-US) and the European Union (OMA-EU) prescribing information, including subgroups according to baseline blood eosinophil counts and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels. RESULTS: Of 1059 patients who received treatment in NAVIGATOR, 680 (64%) had perennial aeroallergen sensitivity and 318 (30%) had confirmed symptomatic allergy; 379 (36%) and 359 (34%) patients were OMA-US- and OMA-EU-eligible, respectively. Tezepelumab reduced the AAER over 52 weeks versus placebo by 58% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47-67) to 68% (95% CI: 55-77) across these subgroups. Among omalizumab-eligible patients, AAERs were reduced in patients across baseline blood eosinophil counts and FeNO levels. Tezepelumab improved FEV1 and PROs, and reduced type 2 biomarkers, versus placebo in patients with and without perennial allergy. CONCLUSIONS: Tezepelumab was efficacious in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with evidence of allergic inflammation, defined by multiple clinically relevant definitions. These findings further support the benefits of tezepelumab in a broad population of patients with severe asthma, including those with severe allergic asthma.

Real-world severe asthma biologic administration and adherence differs by biologic: CHRONICLE study results.

BACKGROUND: Patient adherence to biologic therapies is crucial for clinical benefits. Previous assessments of US patient adherence to severe asthma (SA) biologic therapies have relied on health care insurance claims data that have limitations. OBJECTIVE: To describe real-world, specialist-reported, biologic administration and adherence among US adults with SA. METHODS: CHRONICLE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03373045) is an ongoing real-world, noninterventional study of patients with SA treated by US subspecialists. Sites report date and location for all biologic administrations. We evaluated biologic (benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab, reslizumab) adherence as the proportion of days covered (PDC) during the first 52 weeks and the mean number of days until patients received the expected number of doses for 13, 26, and 52 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 2117 patients received biologic administrations between February 2018 and February 2022. Most patients (84%) received biologic administrations at a subspecialist site. Over time, administrations at specialist sites decreased, whereas at-home administrations increased. The median PDC was 87%; the mean number of days to receive a 52-week (364-day) equivalent number of doses was 423 for all biologics (average delay of 58 days). Dupilumab had the lowest PDC and highest mean delays in dosing across all intervals; better adherence was observed among commercially insured patients. CONCLUSION: Patients with SA are mostly adherent to biologic therapies. Biologics with shorter dosing intervals and at-home administration had worse adherence, likely because of greater opportunities for delays. Specialist-reported administration data provide a unique perspective on biologic adherence, which may be overestimated for at-home administrations by insurance claims data. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03373045.

Number of patient-reported asthma triggers predicts uncontrolled disease among specialist-treated patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma (SA) experience a high disease burden, often precipitated by exposure to disease triggers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and effects of patient-reported triggers on asthma disease burden in a cohort of subspecialist-treated patients with SA in the United States. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an observational study of adults with SA receiving biologics or maintenance systemic corticosteroids or whose disease is uncontrolled on high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids and additional controllers. Data were analyzed for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021. This analysis evaluated patient-reported triggers from a 17-category survey and associations with multiple measures of disease burden. RESULTS: Among 2793 enrolled patients, 1434 (51%) completed the trigger questionnaire. The median trigger number per patient was 8 (interquartile range, 5-10). The most frequent triggers were weather or air changes, viral infections, seasonal allergies, perennial allergies, and exercise. Patients reporting more triggers experienced more poorly controlled disease, worse quality of life, and reduced work productivity. The annualized rates of exacerbations and asthma hospitalizations increased by 7% and 17%, respectively, for each additional trigger (both P < .001). For all measures, trigger number was a stronger predictor of disease burden than blood eosinophil count. CONCLUSION: Among US specialist-treated patients with SA, asthma trigger number was positively and significantly associated with greater uncontrolled disease burden across multiple measures, which highlights the importance of understanding patient-reported triggers in SA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

Effect of tezepelumab on healthcare utilization in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma: The NAVIGATOR study.

BACKGROUND: Tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody, blocks thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study, tezepelumab reduced exacerbations and improved lung function, asthma control, and health-related quality of life compared with placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. However, little is known about the impact of tezepelumab on healthcare utilization (HCU) in these patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate to what extent tezepelumab reduces patients' HCU. METHODS: In NAVIGATOR, patients were randomized to receive subcutaneous tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo, every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. For this analysis, the main outcomes of interest were asthma-related HCU. A blinded, systematic analysis of the symptoms and HCU recorded in the investigator-reported narratives describing exacerbation-related hospitalizations was also conducted; the narratives included blinded ratings of event intensity, recorded as mild, moderate, or severe. RESULTS: Recipients of tezepelumab (n = 528) required fewer asthma-related unscheduled specialist visits (tezepelumab, 285 events; placebo, 406 events), telephone calls with a healthcare provider (tezepelumab, 234; placebo, 599), ambulance transports (tezepelumab, 5; placebo, 22), emergency department visits (without subsequent hospitalization; tezepelumab, 16; placebo, 37), hospitalizations (tezepelumab, 14; placebo, 78), and intensive care days (tezepelumab, 0; placebo, 31) than did recipients of placebo (n = 531). Among patients with asthma exacerbation-related hospitalizations, 38% of those hospitalized and receiving tezepelumab (5/13) had an event rated as severe, compared with 82% of those hospitalized and receiving placebo (32/39). CONCLUSION: Tezepelumab substantially reduced HCU across all outcomes measured compared with placebo, in addition to the severity of asthma exacerbations requiring hospitalization. Tezepelumab can reduce the overall burden of disease of severe, uncontrolled asthma. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home), identifier: NCT03347279.

Tezepelumab reduces exacerbations across all seasons in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma (NAVIGATOR).

BACKGROUND: Asthma exacerbation frequencies vary throughout the year owing to seasonal triggers. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that targets thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study (NCT03347279), tezepelumab significantly reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) vs placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of tezepelumab on asthma exacerbations across all seasons in NAVIGATOR patients (post hoc). METHODS: NAVIGATOR was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (12-80 years old) were randomized 1:1 to tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. AAER over 52 weeks was assessed by season. Data from patients in the Southern Hemisphere were transformed to align with Northern Hemisphere seasons. RESULTS: Tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo by 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52-72) in winter, 46% (95% CI, 26-61) in spring, 62% (95% CI, 48-73) in summer, and 54% (95% CI, 41-64) in fall. In matched climates, during the spring allergy season (March 1 to June 15) and ragweed allergy season (September), tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo in patients with seasonal allergy by 59% (95% CI, 29-77) and 70% (95% CI, 33-87), respectively. In patients with perennial allergy and in those with seasonal allergy, tezepelumab reduced the AAER vs placebo across all seasons. CONCLUSION: Tezepelumab reduced exacerbations across all seasons vs placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, including patients with seasonal and perennial allergies. These data further support the efficacy of tezepelumab in a broad population of patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03347279 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03347279).

Biologic use and outcomes among adults with severe asthma treated by US subspecialists.

BACKGROUND: Multiple biologics are now available for severe asthma (SA) treatment and can improve outcomes for patients. However, few available data describe the real-world use and effectiveness of multiple approved biologics, including biologic switching, among subspecialists in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate biologic use and associated exacerbation outcomes in a large cohort of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of subspecialist-treated US adults with SA receiving biologics, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or those persistently uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For enrolled patients, sites report asthma exacerbations and medication use starting 12 months before enrollment. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2021, biologic use and exacerbation outcomes before and after biologic initiation are described. RESULTS: Among 2793 enrolled patients, 66% (n = 1832) were receiving biologics. The most used biologic (> 1 biologic use per patient allowed) was omalizumab (47%), followed by benralizumab (27%), mepolizumab (26%), dupilumab (18%), and reslizumab (3%). Overall, 16% of patients had biologic switches, 13% had stops, and 89% had ongoing biologic use. Patients starting and switching biologics experienced a 58% (1.80 vs 0.76 per patient-year) and 49% (1.47 vs 0.75 per patient-year) reduction in exacerbations, respectively (both P < .001), with a numerically greater reduction observed among those starting non-anti-immunoglobulin E biologics compared with anti-immunoglobulin E. CONCLUSION: Real-world starting and switching of biologic therapies for SA were associated with meaningful reductions in exacerbations. With increasing biologic options available, individualized approaches to therapy may improve patient outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03373045.

Severe asthma exacerbation rates are increased among female, Black, Hispanic, and younger adult patients: results from the US CHRONICLE study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical outcomes in patients with severe asthma (SA) by common sociodemographic determinants of health: sex, race, ethnicity, and age. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an observational study of subspecialist-treated, United States adults with SA receiving biologic therapy, maintenance systemic corticosteroids, or uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2020, clinical characteristics and asthma outcomes were assessed by sex, race, ethnicity, age at enrollment, and age at diagnosis. Treating subspecialists reported exacerbations, exacerbation-related emergency department visits, and asthma hospitalizations from 12 months before enrollment through the latest data collection. Patients completed the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Test at enrollment. RESULTS: Among 1884 enrolled patients, the majority were female (69%), reported White race (75%), non-Hispanic ethnicity (69%), and were diagnosed with asthma as adults (60%). Female, Black, Hispanic, and younger patients experienced higher annualized rates of exacerbations that were statistically significant compared with male, White, non-Hispanic, and older patients, respectively. Black, Hispanic, and younger patients also experienced higher rates of asthma hospitalizations. Female and Black patients exhibited poorer symptom control and poorer health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary, real-world cohort of subspecialist-treated adults with SA, female sex, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, and younger age were important determinants of health, potentially attributable to physiologic and social factors. Knowledge of these disparities in SA disease burden among subspecialist-treated patients may help optimize care for all patients.Supplemental data for this article is available online at at www.tandfonline.com/ijas .

Differing perceptions of asthma control and treatment effectiveness by patients with severe asthma and treating subspecialists in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: For patients with severe asthma (SA), overestimation of asthma control may lead to poorer outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess concurrent patient and specialist assessments of asthma control and treatment effectiveness among a large US cohort of SA patients. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an ongoing observational study of patients with SA treated by US subspecialists. Asthma control was assessed using the patient-completed Asthma Control Test™ (ACT™) and specialist clinical assessment of control. Treatment effectiveness was measured using the Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE) completed by patients and specialists. RESULTS: 1109 patients who completed online surveys at enrollment were included. 14%, 28%, 25%, and 33% of patients had ACT™ scores of 5-9, 10-15, 16-19, and 20-25, respectively. Compared with 67% of patients with uncontrolled asthma by ACT™, 44% were uncontrolled by specialist assessment. 54% of patients who were uncontrolled according to the ACT™ were rated as controlled by specialists, demonstrating overestimation of asthma control. Based on ACT™ score, asthma control was more frequent among patients treated with biologics compared to other treatments. Using the GETE, 90% of patients reported treatment effectiveness compared with 71% of specialists. Patient and specialist treatment effectiveness categorizations agreed 73% of the time. CONCLUSION: Specialists commonly overestimated asthma control relative to ACT™ scores. Patients reported treatment effectiveness more frequently than specialists. These findings emphasize the importance of validated instruments to assess asthma control and reduce potential treatment gaps associated with patient-specialist discordance. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

Severe asthma exacerbations in the United States:: Incidence, characteristics, predictors, and effects of biologic treatments.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma (SA) have a heightened risk of exacerbations including hospitalization. The real-world, specialist-verified incidence and characteristics of exacerbations among patients with SA in the United States have not been described. OBJECTIVE: To describe the real-world incidence, characteristics, and predictors of exacerbations among patients with SA in the United States. METHODS: The CHRONICLE study is an ongoing observational study of specialist-treated adults with SA in the United States receiving biologic treatment or maintenance systemic corticosteroids or uncontrolled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. For patients enrolled from February 2018 to February 2020, annualized rates and characteristics of exacerbation-related events were summarized by treatment category for 12 months before enrollment and after enrollment through the latest data collection. Results were further analyzed for subgroups of interest. RESULTS: Among 1884 enrolled patients, 53.5% and 12.3% experienced an exacerbation and asthma hospitalization, respectively (0.81 and 0.14 per person-year). Of all exacerbations, 36%, 9%, and 15% required an unscheduled health care provider visit, emergency department visit without hospitalization, and hospitalization, respectively. Among patients not receiving biologics or systemic corticosteroids, higher blood eosinophil count, higher fractional exhaled nitric oxide, and lower total immunoglobulin E level were associated with higher exacerbation rates. Exacerbation rates decreased after starting or switching biologics (n = 1299). Multivariate analyses of enrolled patients revealed previous-year exacerbations or hospitalizations, lack of asthma control, and the geographic region also predicted event risk. CONCLUSION: In this real-world cohort of specialist-treated adults with SA in the United States, there was a substantial burden of exacerbations and associated health care resource utilization. Patients receiving biologics had a lower exacerbation burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

Unintended Consequences Following the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Change for Palivizumab Prophylaxis among Infants Born at Less than 29 Weeks' Gestation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare outpatient respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis (IP) use and relative RSV hospitalization (RSVH) rates for infants <29 weeks' gestational age (wGA) versus term infants before and after the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy change. STUDY DESIGN: Infants were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases. Outpatient RSV IP receipt and relative <29 wGA/term hospitalization risks in 2012 to 2014 and 2014 to 2016 were assessed using rate ratios and a difference-in-difference model. RESULTS: Outpatient RSV IP receipt by infants <29 wGA and aged <3 months in the Commercial and Medicaid populations and those aged 3 to <6 months in the Medicaid population declined after 2014. Relative RSVH risks for infants <29 wGA were numerically greater after 2014, with infants aged <3 months and Medicaid infants experiencing the greatest increases. Difference-in-difference results indicated a significantly increased relative risk of RSVH for infants <29 wGA versus term (both cohorts aged 0 to <6 months) in the Medicaid-insured population (1.68, p = 0.0054). A nonsignificant increase of similar magnitude occurred in the commercially insured population (1.57, p = 0.2867). CONCLUSION: The 2014 policy change was associated with a decrease in RSV IP use and an increase in RSVH risk among otherwise healthy infants <29 wGA.

An expert consensus framework for asthma remission as a treatment goal.

With novel therapies in development, there is an opportunity to consider asthma remission as a treatment goal. In this Rostrum, we present a generalized framework for clinical and complete remission in asthma, on and off treatment, developed on the basis of medical literature and expert consensus. A modified Delphi survey approach was used to ascertain expert consensus on core components of asthma remission as a treatment target. Phase 1 identified other chronic inflammatory diseases with remission definitions. Phase 2 evaluated components of those definitions as well as published definitions of spontaneous asthma remission. Phase 3 evaluated a remission framework created using consensus findings. Clinical remission comprised 12 or more months with (1) absence of significant symptoms by validated instrument, (2) lung function optimization/stabilization, (3) patient/provider agreement regarding remission, and (4) no use of systemic corticosteroids. Complete remission was defined as clinical remission plus objective resolution of asthma-related inflammation and, if appropriate, negative bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Remission off treatment required no asthma treatment for 12 or more months. The proposed framework is a first step toward developing asthma remission as a treatment target and should be refined through future research, patient input, and clinical study.

Biologic and maintenance systemic corticosteroid therapy among US subspecialist-treated patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Severe asthma (SA) often requires subspecialist management and treatment with biologic therapies or maintenance systemic corticosteroids (mSCS). OBJECTIVE: To describe contemporary, real-world biologic and mSCS use among US subspecialist-treated patients with SA. METHODS: CHRONICLE is an ongoing, noninterventional study of US adults with SA treated by allergists/immunologists or pulmonologists. Eligible patients are receiving biologics or mSCS or are uncontrolled on high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers. Biologic and mSCS use patterns and patient characteristics were summarized for patients enrolled between February 2018 and February 2019. RESULTS: Among protocol-eligible patients, 58% and 12% were receiving biologics and mSCS, respectively, with 7% receiving both. Among 796 enrolled, most were women (67%), non-Hispanic white (71%), of suburban residence (50%), and had elevated body mass index (median: 31). Respiratory and nonrespiratory comorbidities were highly prevalent. With biologics (n = 557), 51% were anti-immunoglobulin E and 48% were anti-interleukin (IL)-5/IL-5Rα; from May 2018, 76% of initiations were anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα. In patients receiving mSCS, median prednisone-equivalent daily dose was 10 mg. Multivariate logistic regression found that patients of hospital clinics, sites with fewer nonphysician staff, and with a recorded concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis were less likely to receive biologics and more likely to receive mSCS. CONCLUSION: In this real-world sample of US subspecialist-treated patients with SA not controlled by high-dosage inhaled corticosteroids with additional controllers, mSCS use was infrequent and biologic use was common, with similar prevalence of anti-immunoglobulin E and anti-IL-5/IL-5Rα biologics. Treatment differences associated with patient and site characteristics should be investigated to ensure equitable access to biologics and minimize mSCS use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03373045.

SENTINEL1: Two-Season Study of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Hospitalizations among U.S. Infants Born at 29 to 35 Weeks' Gestational Age Not Receiving Immunoprophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: The SENTINEL1 observational study characterized confirmed respiratory syncytial virus hospitalizations (RSVH) among U.S. preterm infants born at 29 to 35 weeks' gestational age (wGA) not receiving respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis (IP) during the 2014 to 2015 and 2015 to 2016 RSV seasons. STUDY DESIGN: All laboratory-confirmed RSVH at participating sites during the 2014 to 2015 and 2015 to 2016 RSV seasons (October 1-April 30) lasting ≥24 hours among preterm infants 29 to 35 wGA and aged <12 months who did not receive RSV IP within 35 days before onset of symptoms were identified and characterized. RESULTS: Results were similar across the two seasons. Among infants with community-acquired RSVH (N = 1,378), 45% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and 19% required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). There were two deaths. Infants aged <6 months accounted for 78% of RSVH observed, 84% of ICU admissions, and 91% requiring IMV. Among infants who were discharged from their birth hospitalization during the RSV season, 82% of RSVH occurred within 60 days of birth hospitalization discharge. CONCLUSION: Among U.S. preterm infants 29 to 35 wGA not receiving RSV IP, RSVH are often severe with almost one-half requiring ICU admission and about one in five needing IMV.

2015-2016 Vaccine Effectiveness of Live Attenuated and Inactivated Influenza Vaccines in Children in the United States.

Background: In the 2015-2016 season, quadrivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and both trivalent and quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) were available in the United States. Methods: This study, conducted according to a test-negative case-control design, enrolled children aged 2-17 years presenting to outpatient settings with fever and respiratory symptoms for <5 days at 8 sites across the United States between 30 November 2015 and 15 April 2016. A nasal swab was obtained for reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for influenza, and influenza vaccination was verified in the medical record or vaccine registry. Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated using a logistic regression model. Results: Of 1012 children retained for analysis, most children (59%) were unvaccinated, 10% received LAIV, and 31% received IIV. Influenza A (predominantly antigenically similar to the A/California/7/2009 strain) was detected in 14% and influenza B (predominantly a B/Victoria lineage) in 10%. For all influenza, VE was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7%-69%) for LAIV and 65% (48%-76%) for IIV. VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 50% (95% CI, -2% to 75%) for LAIV and 71% (51%-82%) for IIV. The odds ratio for vaccine failure with RT-PCR-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 was 1.71 (95% CI, 0.78-3.73) in LAIV versus IIV recipients. Conclusions: LAIV and IIV demonstrated effectiveness against any influenza among children aged 2-17 years in 2015-2016. When compared to all unvaccinated children, VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was significant for IIV but not LAIV. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01997450.