RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Asthma remission has emerged as a potential treatment goal. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two biologics (mepolizumab/omalizumab) in achieving asthma remission. METHODS: This observational study included 453 severe asthma patients (41% male; mean age ± SD 55.7 ± 14.7 years) from two real-world drug registries: the Australian Mepolizumab Registry and the Australian Xolair Registry. The composite outcome clinical remission was defined as zero exacerbations and zero oral corticosteroids during the previous 6 months assessed at 12 months and 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5) ≤1 at 12 months. We also assessed clinical remission plus optimization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥80%) or stabilization (post-bronchodilator FEV1 not greater than 5% decline from baseline) of lung function at 12 months. Sensitivity analyses explored various cut-offs of ACQ-5/FEV1 scores. The predictors of clinical remission were identified. RESULTS: 29.3% (73/249) of AMR and 22.8% (37/162) of AXR cohort met the criteria for clinical remission. When lung function criteria were added, the remission rates were reduced to 25.2% and 19.1%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses identified that the remission rate ranged between 18.1% and 34.9% in the AMR cohort and 10.6% and 27.2% in the AXR cohort. Better lung function, lower body mass index, mild disease and absence of comorbidities such as obesity, depression and osteoporosis predicted the odds of achieving clinical remission. CONCLUSION: Biologic treatment with mepolizumab or omalizumab for severe asthma-induced asthma remission in a subgroup of patients. Remission on treatment may be an achievable treatment target and future studies should consider remission as an outcome measure.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Asma , Productos Biológicos , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Omalizumab/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Australia/epidemiología , Asma/terapia , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Biologic asthma therapies reduce exacerbations and long-term oral corticosteroids (LTOCS) use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there are limited data on outcomes among patients ineligible for RCTs. Hence, we investigated responsiveness to biologics in a real-world population of adults with severe asthma. METHODS: Adults in the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) with ≥24 weeks of follow-up were grouped into those who did, or did not, initiate biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5/IL5R, anti-IL4/13). Treatment responses were examined across four domains: forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) increase by ≥100 mL, improved asthma control, annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction ≥50%, and any LTOCS dose reduction. Super-response criteria were: FEV1 increase by ≥500 mL, new well-controlled asthma, no exacerbations, and LTOCS cessation or tapering to ≤5 mg/day. RESULTS: 5.3% of ISAR patients met basic RCT inclusion criteria; 2116/8451 started biologics. Biologic initiators had worse baseline impairment than non-initiators, despite having similar biomarker levels. Half or more of initiators had treatment responses: 59% AER reduction, 54% FEV1 increase, 49% improved control, 49% reduced LTOCS, of which 32%, 19%, 30%, and 39%, respectively, were super-responses. Responses/super-responses were more frequent in biologic initiators than in non-initiators; nevertheless, ~40-50% of initiators did not meet response criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with severe asthma are ineligible for RCTs of biologic therapies. Biologics are initiated in patients who have worse baseline impairments than non-initiators despite similar biomarker levels. Although biologic initiators exhibited clinical responses and super-responses in all outcome domains, 40-50% did not meet the response criteria.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: People with severe asthma remain at risk of toxicity from maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and/or frequent OCS burst therapy. Cumulative exposures above 500-1000 mg prednisolone are associated with adverse effects, and recently OCS stewardship principles were promulgated to guide OCS prescription. AIMS: To examine real-world registry data to quantify OCS burden, ascertain trends over time in prescription and assess whether opportunities to implement steroid-sparing strategies were utilised. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in the Australasian Severe Asthma Registry for the period 2013-2021. Assessments were taken at enrolment and then annual follow-up, which included asthma control and OCS use. Descriptive analyses were performed, and subgroups were compared at baseline and over time. RESULTS: Nine hundred and twenty-four participants were evaluated and 215/924 (23%) were taking maintenance OCS at baseline, with 44% and 32% of participants having exposure to ≥500 or 1000 mg of OCS respectively in the prior year. Twelve months later, an additional 10% and 9% of participants reached cumulative doses of 500 or 1000 mg. People exceeding thresholds had ongoing poor asthma control. At baseline, 240/924 (26%) people were treated with asthma biological therapy. An additional 83 (12%) participants were identified as potentially benefiting from this steroid-sparing medication. Of these patients, only 23% commenced a biologic agent in the next 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: A large national asthma registry identifies exposure to toxic cumulative doses of OCS in more than a third of participants, with further subsequent cumulative dose escalation over 2 years. Steroid-sparing strategies were often not employed, highlighting the need for implementation of OCS stewardship initiatives.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides , Asma , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Administración Oral , Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Antiasmáticos/administración & dosificación , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/efectos adversos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Australia/epidemiología , Adulto Joven , Australasia/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are frequently used for asthma treatment. This medication is highly effective for both acute and chronic diseases, but evidence indicates that indiscriminate OCS use is common, posing a risk of serious side effects and irreversible harm. There is now an urgent need to introduce OCS stewardship approaches, akin to successful initiatives that optimized appropriate antibiotic usage. The aim of this TSANZ (Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand) position paper is to review current knowledge pertaining to OCS use in asthma and then delineate principles of OCS stewardship. Recent evidence indicates overuse and over-reliance on OCS for asthma and that doses >1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent cumulatively are likely to have serious side effects and adverse outcomes. Patient perspectives emphasize the detrimental impacts of OCS-related side effects such as weight gain, insomnia, mood disturbances and skin changes. Improvements in asthma control and prevention of exacerbations can be achieved by improved inhaler technique, adherence to therapy, asthma education, smoking cessation, multidisciplinary review, optimized medications and other strategies. Recently, add-on therapies including novel biological agents and macrolide antibiotics have demonstrated reductions in OCS requirements. Harm reduction may also be achieved through identification and mitigation of predictable adverse effects. OCS stewardship should entail greater awareness of appropriate indications for OCS prescription, risk-benefits of OCS medications, side effects, effective add-on therapies and multidisciplinary review. If implemented, OCS stewardship can ensure that clinicians and patients with asthma are aware that OCS should not be used lightly, while providing reassurance that asthma can be controlled in most people without frequent use of OCS.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Administración Oral , Adolescente , Corticoesteroides/efectos adversos , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Crónica , Humanos , Nueva ZelandaRESUMEN
Severe asthma is a high-burden disease. Real-world data on mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma is needed to assess whether the data from randomised controlled trials are applicable in a broader population.The Australian Mepolizumab Registry (AMR) was established with an aim to assess the use, effectiveness and safety of mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma in Australia.Patients (n=309) with severe eosinophilic asthma (median age 60â years, 58% female) commenced mepolizumab. They had poor symptom control (median Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score of 3.4), frequent exacerbations (median three courses of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the previous 12â months), and 47% required daily OCS. Median baseline peripheral blood eosinophil level was 590â cells·µL-1 Comorbidities were common: allergic rhinitis 63%, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 52%, obesity 46%, nasal polyps 34%.Mepolizumab treatment reduced exacerbations requiring OCS compared with the previous year (annualised rate ratio 0.34 (95% CI 0.29-0.41); p<0.001) and hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.46 (95% CI 0.33-0.63); p<0.001). Treatment improved symptom control (median ACQ-5 reduced by 2.0 at 6â months), quality of life and lung function. Higher blood eosinophil levels (p=0.003) and later age of asthma onset (p=0.028) predicted a better ACQ-5 response to mepolizumab, whilst being male (p=0.031) or having body mass index ≥30 (p=0.043) predicted a lesser response. Super-responders (upper 25% of ACQ-5 responders, n=61, 24%) had a higher T2 disease burden and fewer comorbidities at baseline.Mepolizumab therapy effectively reduces the significant and long-standing disease burden faced by patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-world setting.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Eosinófilos/efectos de los fármacos , Administración Oral , Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Antiasmáticos/efectos adversos , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Australia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Lineales , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Calidad de Vida , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the level of dispensing of oral corticosteroids (OCS) for managing asthma in Australia, with a particular focus on the cumulative dispensing of doses associated with long term toxicity (≥ 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study; analysis of 10% random sample of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) dispensing data. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING: People aged 12 years or more treated for asthma during 2014-2018, according to dispensing of controller inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of people dispensed OCS for managing asthma during 2014-2018; proportion who were cumulatively dispensed at least 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent. The secondary outcome was the number of people dispensed at least 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent during 2018, stratified by inhaler controller dose and use. RESULTS: 124 011 people had been dispensed at least two prescriptions of ICS during 2014-2018 and met the study definition for asthma, of whom 64 112 (51.7%) had also been dispensed OCS, including 34 580 (27.9% of the asthma group) cumulatively dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more. Of 138 073 people dispensed OCS at this level, 68 077 (49%) were patients with airway diseases. Dispensing of diabetes and osteoporosis medications was more common for people cumulatively dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more. During 2018, 4633 people with asthma using high dose ICS controllers were dispensed 1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent or more, for 2316 of whom (50%) controller use was inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative exposure to OCS in Australia reaches levels associated with toxicity in one-quarter of patients with asthma using ICS. Cumulative dispensing of potentially toxic OCS amounts often accompanies inadequate inhaler controller dispensing. Better approaches are needed to improve adherence to controller therapy, improve outcomes for people with asthma, and to minimise the use and toxicity of OCS.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Antiasmáticos/administración & dosificación , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Administración Oral , Adolescente , Corticoesteroides/toxicidad , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/toxicidad , Australia , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OCS play an important role in the management of asthma. However, steroid-related AE are common and represent a leading cause of morbidity. Limited published studies suggest OCS usage varies across countries and recent registry data indicate that at least 25-60% of patients with severe asthma in developed countries may at some stage be prescribed OCS. Recent evidence indicate that many patients do not receive optimal therapy for asthma and are often prescribed maintenance OCS or repeated steroid bursts to treat exacerbations. Given the recent progress in adult severe asthma and new treatment options, judicious appraisal of steroid use is merited. A number of strategies and add-on therapies are now available to treat severe asthma. These include increasing specialist referral for multidisciplinary assessments and implementing OCS-sparing interventions, such as improving guideline adherence and add-on tiotropium and macrolides. Biologics have recently become available for severe asthma; these agents reduce asthma exacerbations and lower OCS exposure. Further research, collaboration and consensus are necessary to develop a structured stewardship approach including realistic OCS-weaning programmes for patients with severe asthma on regular OCS; education and public health campaigns to improve timely access to specialized severe asthma services for treatment optimization; and implementing targeted strategies to identify patients who warrant OCS use using objective biomarker-based strategies.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Oral , Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Corticoesteroides/efectos adversos , Adulto , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Macrólidos/uso terapéutico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Bromuro de Tiotropio/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A new taxonomic and management approach, termed treatable traits, has been proposed for airway diseases including severe asthma. This study examined whether treatable traits could be identified using registry data and whether particular treatable traits were associated with future exacerbation risk. METHODS: The Australasian Severe Asthma Web-Based Database (SAWD) enrolled 434 participants with severe asthma and a comparison group of 102 participants with non-severe asthma. Published treatable traits were mapped to registry data fields and their prevalence was described. Participants were characterized at baseline and every 6 months for 24 months. RESULTS: In SAWD, 24 treatable traits were identified in three domains: pulmonary, extrapulmonary and behavioural/risk factors. Patients with severe asthma expressed more pulmonary and extrapulmonary treatable traits than non-severe asthma. Allergic sensitization, upper-airway disease, airflow limitation, eosinophilic inflammation and frequent exacerbations were common in severe asthma. Ten traits predicted exacerbation risk; among the strongest were being prone to exacerbations, depression, inhaler device polypharmacy, vocal cord dysfunction and obstructive sleep apnoea. CONCLUSION: Treatable traits can be assessed using a severe asthma registry. In severe asthma, patients express more treatable traits than non-severe asthma. Traits may be associated with future asthma exacerbation risk demonstrating the clinical utility of assessing treatable traits.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Clasificación/métodos , Manejo de Atención al Paciente , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/epidemiología , Asma/fisiopatología , Asma/terapia , Australasia/epidemiología , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Manejo de Atención al Paciente/métodos , Manejo de Atención al Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Prevalencia , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Brote de los SíntomasRESUMEN
The treatment landscape in severe asthma is changing rapidly, with multiple new therapies emerging that promise to transform patient outcomes. In a patient who is not responding to conventional therapy with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonists, it is important to first consider if the diagnosis of asthma is correct and, second, to reflect on whether readily modifiable factors are contributing to poor asthma control. In selected patients it may be appropriate to consider a modified n-of-1 trial of add-on therapies such as long-acting anti-muscarinic agents, leukotriene blockers, theophylline or low dose macrolide antibiotics. A number of monoclonal antibodies are now available that target the molecular pathways that contribute to asthma pathogenesis, and more such agents are likely to emerge in the near future. These biologicals can be transformative in selected patients, markedly reducing the frequency of asthma exacerbations, and allowing many patients to reduce or eliminate their use of long term oral corticosteroids. If the promise of personalised treatment is to be fully realised, it is important that better methods are developed to target these new and expensive treatments to patients most likely to respond. The ultimate goal of inducing remission or cure of asthma is still some distance away.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Administración por Inhalación , Australia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Quimioterapia Combinada , HumanosRESUMEN
Severe asthma encompasses treatment-refractory asthma and difficult-to-treat asthma. There are a number of barriers in primary, secondary and tertiary settings which compromise optimal care for severe asthma in Australia. Guidelines recommend a multidimensional assessment of severe asthma, which includes confirming the diagnosis, severity and phenotype and identifying and treating comorbidities and risk factors. This approach has been found to improve severe asthma symptoms and quality of life and reduce exacerbations. Primary care providers can contribute significantly to the multidimensional approach for severe asthma by performing spirometry, optimising therapy and addressing risk factors such as non-adherence and smoking before referring the patient to a respiratory physician for review. Primary care practitioners are encouraged to remain engaged with the management of a patient with severe asthma following specialist review by assisting with community-based allied health referrals, managing general medical comorbidities and administering prescribed biological therapies. Specialists can support primary care by providing advice to individuals with indeterminate diagnosis, streamlining investigation and management of unrecognised risk factors and complex comorbidities, optimising treatment for severe or difficult asthma including assessment of suitability for and, if appropriate, initiating advanced therapies such as biological therapies. When discharging patients back to primary care, specialists should provide clear recommendations regarding ongoing management and should specify the indications requiring further specialist review, ideally offering a streamlined re-referral pathway.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas/métodos , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Australia , Humanos , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Derivación y ConsultaRESUMEN
Severe asthma leads to debilitating symptoms for patients and excessive socioeconomic burden for the community. Comprehensive models of care are required to address complex issues, risk factors and comorbidities in patients with severe asthma, and to identify patients most appropriate for specialised treatments. Dedicated severe asthma services improve asthma control, reduce asthma exacerbations and hospital admissions, and improve quality of life. Currently, diverse models of care exist for managing severe asthma across Australia. Most referrals to severe asthma services are from respiratory physicians seeking a second opinion or from primary care for poorly controlled asthma. Despite benefits of specialised severe asthma services, many patients are not referred and resources are limited, often resulting in long waiting times. Patient referral is often unstructured and there are considerable variations in the management of severe asthma with limited access to other health care professionals such as speech pathologists and dieticians, and restricted scope to optimise patient work-up before referral. Ongoing communication between the specialist and referring clinician is essential for continuity of care but is often lacking. Referral pathways can be optimised by developing referral criteria and guidelines to triage patients with severe asthma and to improve resource efficiency. Additional education and tools for assessing and managing severe asthma are needed, and mechanisms should be developed for involving primary care in the management of stabilised patients. Strategies to increase patient access to multidisciplinary services are recommended.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Costo de Enfermedad , Manejo de Atención al Paciente , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Calidad de Vida , Derivación y Consulta/organización & administración , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/epidemiología , Asma/terapia , Australia , Humanos , Modelos Organizacionales , Evaluación de Necesidades , Manejo de Atención al Paciente/métodos , Manejo de Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
The objective of this study was to investigate the discriminant validity of commonly used depression and anxiety screening tools in order to determine the most suitable tool for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). COPD patients (n = 56) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). These scores were compared to confirmed clinical diagnoses of depression and anxiety using the Mini Neuropsychiatric Interview. HADS depression subscale (HADS-D) sensitivity/specificity was 78/81%; BDI-II 89/77%; HADS anxiety subscale (HADS-A) 71/81%; and BAI 89/62%. HADS-D sensitivity/specificity was improved (100/83%) with the removal of Q4 'I feel as if I am slowed down' and adjusted cut-off (≥5). Removal of BDI-II Q21 'Loss of interest in sex' with adjusted cut-off ≥12 resulted in similar improvement (100/79%). No problematic items were identified for HADS-A or BAI. Previously reported low sensitivity/specificity of the HADS for COPD patients was not replicated. Furthermore, simple modifications of the HADS-D markedly improved sensitivity/specificity for depression.BDI-II, HADS-A and BAI produced acceptable sensitivity/specificity unmodified. Pending further research for COPD patients we recommend continued use of the HADS-A with standard cut-off (≥8) and removal of Q4 of the HADS-D with lower cut-off ≥5.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos de Ansiedad/diagnóstico , Depresión/diagnóstico , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/complicaciones , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Trastornos de Ansiedad/etiología , Trastornos de Ansiedad/psicología , Depresión/etiología , Depresión/psicología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/psicología , Curva ROC , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Disease of the peripheral (or small) airways is fundamental in asthma, being closely related to symptoms (or lack of control of them), airway hyperresponsiveness, spirometric abnormalities, risk of loss of control, or exacerbations and inflammation. Current technology now allows routine measurement of peripheral airway function. Having a working concept of peripheral airways disease in asthma is arguably very useful to clinicians and beneficial to patients because it allows a more comprehensive assessment of asthma severity (rather than just symptoms alone, which is the norm), tracking of progress or deterioration, and assessing response to treatment. Oscillometry is a sensitive way to monitor the peripheral airways, whereas multiple breath nitrogen washout parameters are excellent measures of future risk. In the longer term, physiologic measurements will be crucial in research to define causes and find new disease-modifying treatments.
RESUMEN
Background: To date, studies investigating the association between pre-biologic biomarker levels and post-biologic outcomes have been limited to single biomarkers and assessment of biologic efficacy from structured clinical trials. Aim: To elucidate the associations of pre-biologic individual biomarker levels or their combinations with pre-to-post biologic changes in asthma outcomes in real-life. Methods: This was a registry-based, cohort study using data from 23 countries, which shared data with the International Severe Asthma Registry (May 2017-February 2023). The investigated biomarkers (highest pre-biologic levels) were immunoglobulin E (IgE), blood eosinophil count (BEC) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). Pre- to approximately 12-month post-biologic change for each of three asthma outcome domains (i.e. exacerbation rate, symptom control and lung function), and the association of this change with pre-biologic biomarkers was investigated for individual and combined biomarkers. Results: Overall, 3751 patients initiated biologics and were included in the analysis. No association was found between pre-biologic BEC and pre-to-post biologic change in exacerbation rate for any biologic class. However, higher pre-biologic BEC and FeNO were both associated with greater post-biologic improvement in FEV1 for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R, with a trend for anti-IL4Rα. Mean FEV1 improved by 27-178 mL post-anti-IgE as pre-biologic BEC increased (250 to 1000 cells/µL), and by 43-216 mL and 129-250 mL post-anti-IL5/5R and -anti-IL4Rα, respectively along the same BEC gradient. Corresponding improvements along a FeNO gradient (25-100 ppb) were 41-274 mL, 69-207 mL and 148-224 mL for anti-IgE, anti-IL5/5R, and anti-IL4Rα, respectively. Higher baseline BEC was also associated with lower probability of uncontrolled asthma (OR 0.392; p=0.001) post-biologic for anti-IL5/5R. Pre-biologic IgE was a poor predictor of subsequent pre-to-post-biologic change for all outcomes assessed for all biologics. The combination of BEC + FeNO marginally improved the prediction of post-biologic FEV1 increase (adjusted R2: 0.751), compared to BEC (adjusted R2: 0.747) or FeNO alone (adjusted R2: 0.743) (p=0.005 and <0.001, respectively); however, this prediction was not improved by the addition of IgE. Conclusions: The ability of higher baseline BEC, FeNO and their combination to predict biologic-associated lung function improvement may encourage earlier intervention in patients with impaired lung function or at risk of accelerated lung function decline.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Productos Biológicos , Biomarcadores , Eosinófilos , Inmunoglobulina E , Humanos , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/inmunología , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inmunoglobulina E/sangre , Inmunoglobulina E/inmunología , Adulto , Eosinófilos/inmunología , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Sistema de Registros , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Recuento de Leucocitos , Óxido Nítrico/metabolismo , Anciano , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
Introduction: Asthma poses a significant burden for the Australian population. Understanding severe exacerbation rates, and steroid-related burden for adults diagnosed with asthma stands to offer insights into how this could be reduced. Methods: Electronic medical records (EMR) and questionnaires from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database Australia (OPCRDA) were utilised retrospectively. OPCRDA is a real-world database with >800,000 medical records from Australian primary care practices. Outcomes were severe asthma exacerbations in Australian adults, over a 12-month period, stratified by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment intensity steps, and steroid associated comorbidities. Results: Of the 7868 adults treated for asthma, 19% experienced at least one severe exacerbation in the last 12-months. Severe exacerbation frequency increased with treatment intensity (≥1 severe exacerbation GINA 1 13%; GINA 4 23%; GINA 5a 33% and GINA 5b 28%). Questionnaire participants reported higher rates of severe exacerbations than suggested from their EMR (32% vs 23%) especially in steps 1, 4 and 5. Patients repeatedly exposed to steroids had an increased risk of osteoporosis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.43-2.66) and sleep apnoea (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.30-2.46). Conclusion: The Australian population living with GINA 1, 4, 5a and 5b asthma have high severe exacerbation rates and steroid-related burden, especially when compared to other first world countries, with these patients needing alternative strategies or possibly specialist assessment to better manage their condition.
RESUMEN
Genetic variations, in part, determine individual susceptibility to sepsis and pneumonia. Advances in genetic sequence analysis as well as high throughput platform analysis of gene expression has allowed for a better understanding of immunopathogenesis during sepsis. Differences in genes can also modulate immune and inflammatory response during sepsis thereby translating to differences in clinical outcomes. An increasing number of candidate genes have been implicated to play a role in sepsis susceptibility, most of which are controversial with few exceptions. This does not refute the significance of genetic polymorphisms in sepsis, but rather highlights the difficulties and pitfalls related to genetic association studies. These difficulties include differences in study design such as heterogeneous patient cohorts and differences in pathogenic organisms, linkage disequilibrium, and lack of power for detailed haplotype analysis or examination of gene-gene interactions. There is extensive diversity in the pathways of inflammation and immune response during sepsis making it even harder to prove the functional and clinical significance of one single genetic polymorphism which could be easily masqueraded or compensated by other upstream or downstream events of the pathway involved. The majority of studies have analysed candidate genes in isolation from other possible polymorphisms. It is likely that susceptibility to sepsis is the result of polymorphisms from multiple genes rather than one single mutation. Future studies should aim for multi-centered collaborative approach looking at genome wide association or gene profiling to provide a more complete appraisal of the key genetic players in determining genetic susceptibility to sepsis. This review paper will summarise the prominent candidate gene polymorphisms with known functional changes or those with haplotype data. In addition, a summary of the expanding research in the field of epigenetics and post-sepsis immunosuppression will be discussed.
Asunto(s)
Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Estudio de Asociación del Genoma Completo , Polimorfismo Genético , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/genética , Sepsis/genética , Haplotipos , Humanos , Tolerancia Inmunológica , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/inmunología , Sepsis/inmunologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Oral corticosteroids (OCS) carry serious health risks. Innovative treatment options are required to reduce excessive exposure and promote OCS stewardship. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the trajectories of OCS exposure (prednisolone-equivalent) in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma before and after starting mepolizumab and the predictors of becoming OCS free after 6 months of mepolizumab therapy. METHODS: This real-world observational study included 309 patients from the Australian Mepolizumab Registry who were followed up for 1 year (n = 225). RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 60 (interquartile range: 50, 68) years, and 58% were female. At baseline, 48% used maintenance OCS, 96% had ≥1 OCS burst, and 68% had received ≥1 g of OCS in the previous year. After commencing mepolizumab, only 55% of those initially on maintenance OCS remained on this treatment by 12 months. Maintenance OCS dose reduced from median 10 (5.0, 12.5) mg/day at baseline to 2 (0, 7.0) mg/day at 12 months (P < .001). Likewise, proportions of patients receiving OCS bursts in the previous year reduced from 96% at baseline to 50% at 12 months (P < .001). Overall, 137 (48%) patients required OCS (maintenance/burst) after 6 months' mepolizumab therapy. Becoming OCS free was predicted by a lower body mass index (odds ratio: 0.925; 95% confidence interval: 0.872-0.981), late-onset asthma (1.027; 1.006-1.048), a lower Asthma Control Test score (1.111; 0.011-1.220), and not receiving maintenance OCS therapy at baseline (0.095; 0.040-0.227). CONCLUSION: Mepolizumab led to a significant and sustained reduction in OCS dependence in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. This study supports the OCS-sparing effect of mepolizumab and highlights the pivotal role of mepolizumab in OCS stewardship initiatives.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Australia/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Little is known about long-term survival of patients surviving the first episode of type II respiratory failure requiring non-invasive ventilation (NIV). We aimed to determine the 1-, 2- and 5-year survival, cause of death and potential prognostic indicators in this patient cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 100 sequential COPD patients (mean age 70, mean FEV(1) 37% predicted) treated with NIV for the first time. Mortality and data on hospital morbidity and potential prognostic factors were collected from patient records and a State Health Data Linkage Service. RESULTS: Survival at 1, 2 and 5 years was 72%, 52% and 26%, respectively. Respiratory failure secondary to COPD was the commonest cause of death (56.8%), followed by cardiovascular events (25.7%). Readmission rate at 1 year was 60% for those who survived 2 years or more and 52% for those deceased within 2 years. Recurrent respiratory failure requiring NIV was observed in 31% of the cohort. Only advance age (P = 0.04), BMI ( P = 0.014) and prior domiciliary oxygen use (P = 0.03) correlated with death within 5 years. Severity of respiratory failure did not correlate with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The 2- and 5-year mortality rates for patients with COPD surviving their first episode of respiratory failure requiring NIV are high. Physiological measures of the severity of respiratory failure at presentation do not predict subsequent survival and nor does the time interval between first and second admissions requiring NIV. Age, BMI and prior need for domiciliary oxygen are the main predictors of mortality at 5 years.
Asunto(s)
Respiración con Presión Positiva , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/mortalidad , Estudios de Cohortes , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Pronóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Globally, asthma is one of the most common chronic conditions that affect individuals of all ages. When poorly controlled, it negatively impacts patient's ability to enjoy life and work. At the population level, effective use of recommended strategies in children and adults can reduce symptom burden, improve quality of life and significantly reduce the risk of exacerbation, decline of lung function and asthma-related death. Inhaled corticosteroid as the initial maintenance therapy, ideally started within 2 years of symptom onset, is highly effective in both children and adults and across various degrees of asthma severity. If asthma is not controlled, the choice of subsequent add-on therapies differs between children and adults. Evidence supporting pharmacological approach to asthma management, especially for those with more severe disease, is more robust in adults compared to children. This is, in part, due to various challenges in the diagnosis of asthma, in the recruitment into clinical trials and in the lack of objective outcomes in children, especially those in the preschool age group. Nevertheless, where evidence is emerging for younger children, it seems to mirror the observations in adults. Clinicians need to develop strategies to implement guideline-based recommendations while taking into consideration individual variations in asthma clinical phenotypes, pathophysiology and treatment responses at different ages.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Anxiety and depression are common comorbidities in people diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite concomitant psychological symptomatology being reported in 22-48% of people with COPD, most literature focuses on identifying the risk factors for anxiety or depression separately. Therefore, our objective was to determine whether there is an association between people living with concomitant anxiety and depression and sociodemographic risk factors in people and living with COPD. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 242 people living with COPD. Symptomatology of anxiety and depression were assessed using the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II). Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to test the association between symptomatology and demographic predictor variables. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were derived. RESULTS: Of the 242 people included, 48.8% (nâ¯=â¯118) had no symptoms of anxiety or depression and 33.5%% (nâ¯=â¯81) had symptomatology for both. Multivariable modelling suggested younger age, having a carer, having a previous psychological medical history, having a higher number of comorbidities and poorer quality of life were associated with concomitant anxiety and depression compared to those without symptomatology. CONCLUSION: Further work should be done to build upon our results which adds to the limited literature surrounding risk factors for concomitant psychological symptomatology to facilitate future discussion surrounding reducing these detrimental comorbidities in people with COPD.