The treatment of mild upper respiratory tract infections - a position paper with recommendations for best practice.

Following the waning severity of COVID-19 due to vaccination and the development of immunity, the current variants of SARS-CoV-2 often lead to mild upper respiratory tract infections (MURTIs), suggesting it is an appropriate time to review the pathogenesis and treatment of such illnesses. The present article reviews the diverse causes of MURTIs and the mechanisms leading to symptomatic illness. Different symptoms of MURTIs develop in a staggered manner and require targeted symptomatic treatment. A wide variety of remedies for home treatment is available, including over-the-counter drugs and plant-derived substances. Recent pharmacological research has increased the understanding of molecular effects, and clinical studies have shown the efficacy of certain herbal remedies. However, the use of subjective endpoints in these clinical studies may suggest limited validity of the results. In this position paper, the importance of patient-centric outcomes, including a subjective perception of improved well-being, is emphasized. A best practice approach for the management of MURTIs, in which pharmacists and physicians create an improved multi-professional healthcare setting and provide healthcare education to patients, is proposed. Pharmacists act as first-line consultants and provide patients with remedies, considering the individual patient's preferences towards chemical or plant-derived drugs and providing advice for self-monitoring. Physicians act as second-line consultants if symptoms worsen and subsequently initiate appropriate therapies. In conclusion, general awareness of MURTIs should be increased amongst medical professionals and patients, thus improving their management.

Impact of switching from triple therapy to dual bronchodilation in COPD: the DACCORD 'real world' study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines recommend reserving triple therapy of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) for patients with exacerbations despite dual therapy. However, many patients receive triple therapy without a clear indication. For these patients, it would be useful to know whether ICS can be withdrawn. METHODS: DACCORD was a longitudinal, non-interventional 'real-world' study in three cohorts. This manuscript describes the results of Cohort 3, which recruited patients with COPD who had received triple therapy for ≥ 6 months. Prior to entry, each patient's physician decided to continue triple therapy, or switch to a LABA/LAMA; patients were then followed for 12 months, with exacerbations and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) data recorded every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the time until COPD worsening, defined as the occurrence of a moderate/severe exacerbation or clinically relevant CAT worsening. RESULTS: Of the 1192 patients recruited into the study, 967 completed the end-of-study visit and ≥ 2 of the three interim visits, 292 and 675 receiving LABA/LAMA and triple therapy, respectively. Most baseline demographics were similar between the two groups. A lower proportion of patients in the LABA/LAMA group had COPD worsening than with triple therapy (32.5% vs 55.7% at 12 months), with the time to worsening extended in the LABA/LAMA group (hazard ratio 2.004, p < 0.001). In addition, a significantly lower proportion of patients in the LABA/LAMA group exacerbated (18.5% vs 28.7%; p < 0.001), accompanied by a greater improvement from baseline in CAT total score. Overall, fewer patients in the LABA/LAMA group reported adverse events than in the triple therapy group (12.9% vs 15.1%). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that in a real world setting physicians are able to identify patients who can be 'stepped down' from triple therapy to LABA/LAMA. Following step down, there was no overall decline in COPD-indeed, some patients had better outcomes.

Impact of guideline awareness on the counseling of patients with acute cough among general practitioners and pharmacy personnel.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the awareness and knowledge of applicable guidelines on acute cough among general practitioners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians and to compare their recommendation behavior and clinical decision making to the evidence-based recommendation in the applicable guidelines. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was performed among 303 members of an existing panel of healthcare professionals (HCPs). They were presented with a hypothetical case vignette representative of their daily practice and asked for their treatment recommendations. After being shown an excerpt from the applicable guidelines, these questions were repeated. RESULTS: Forty-six % of participants reported to seek information on cough and respiratory conditions very often or often. Among 12 non-prescription treatments-commonly used over-the-counter-products for acute cough, HCPs most often recommended various plant extract-based products (phytotherapeutic remedies) for the acute cough case, whereas chemically defined options such as ambroxol or N-acetyl-cysteine were recommended less often. Following presentation of the guidelines excerpt, recommendations of the phytotherapeutic remedies decreased moderately whereas that of the guideline-recommended ambroxol more than doubled. Among stated reasons for the recommendation guideline conformity increased from 5% to 35% among the top-3 reasons. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations for the treatment of acute cough by professionals involved in primary healthcare deviated considerably from the applicable guideline recommendation but changed after presentation of a guidelines excerpt and knowledge thereof. We conclude that dissemination of applicable guideline knowledge is relevant to improve evidence-based healthcare and clinical decision making.

Effectiveness and tolerability of the thyme/ivy herbal fluid extract BNO 1200 for the treatment of acute cough: an observational pharmacy-based study.

OBJECTIVE: Efficacy and safety of an oral thyme/ivy syrup for the treatment of acute cough was previously demonstrated in a randomized clinical trial. Here, we present real-life data from a pharmacy-based, observational study on the effectiveness and tolerability of another thyme/ivy combination (BNO 1200, Bronchipret drops). METHODS: This observational, prospective, uncontrolled study was conducted in 305 German pharmacies. Cough and associated symptoms, cough severity and health related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed at baseline, after 4 days and at individual end of treatment (EoT) in patients with acute cough due to upper respiratory tract infections who bought BNO 1200. Patients took BNO 1200 until resolution of cough and completed three validated questionnaires: patient-adapted Bronchitis Severity Score (BSS), cough severity visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ-acute). They also rated speed of onset of treatment action on a VAS and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 749 patients participated in the study; 730 were included in the analysis. Mean treatment duration was 7.0 ± 3.6 days. Symptom severity assessed by BSS improved from 8.7 ± 3.8 score points (baseline) to 2.4 ± 2.6 at EoT (p < .0001). Clinically relevant improvements (MCID = 17 mm) in cough severity were reported by 87.2% of patients at EoT. HRQoL improved significantly (12.2 ± 3.3 points at baseline vs. 18.5 ± 2.7 at EoT; p < .0001), exceeding the MCID (=2 points) in 90.0% of patients. Tolerability was rated "good" or "very good" by 98.0% of patients. No adverse drug reactions were reported. CONCLUSION: Patients with acute cough taking BNO 1200 had a significant reduction in BSS, cough severity and improvement in HRQoL confirming RCT data with the syrup formulation. BNO 1200 was well tolerated.

[Acute and chronic cough-What is new?] / Akuter und chronischer Husten ­ gibt es etwas Neues?

The most frequent cause of acute cough (lasting up to 3 weeks) or subacute cough (3-8 weeks) is a viral infection, which is mostly a self-limiting disease in otherwise healthy persons. Some herbal compounds, the antitussive dextromethorphan and ambroxol are effective for symptom relief. Antibiotics are ineffective and should not be used due to resistance development. If after appropriate diagnostic procedures the cause of chronic cough, i.e. cough lasting more than 8 weeks, cannot be attributed to a well-established respiratory disease, it meets the definition of a disease in its own right, chronic idiopathic (unexplained) cough (CIH). This is caused by hypersensitivity of the cough reflex. Thus, even weak low threshold stimuli, e.g. changing temperature, extensive speaking and odors can trigger the cough reflex. In the case of nonresponse to guideline-conform treatment the definition of chronic refractory cough is met.

GOLD 2017 treatment pathways in 'real life': An analysis of the DACCORD observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The 2017 update to the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy document includes recommendations for treatment intensification or step-down in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although recognises that limited supporting information is available. DACCORD is an ongoing observational, non-interventional study, recruiting patients following COPD maintenance treatment change or initiation, a subset of whom were receiving a long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination (FDC) on entry. Since there were no requirements in terms of prior medication (and no washout before commencing LABA/LAMA FDC), this provides an opportunity to generate 'real world' data to test the GOLD 2017 recommendations. METHODS: To reduce heterogeneity, the current analyses include patients receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium at baseline, and who, prior to the study, were receiving no COPD maintenance medication ('none'), LABA or LAMA monotherapy ('mono'), LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS; 'LABA/ICS'), or triple therapy ('triple'). At the baseline visit, data collected included: demographic and disease characteristics; COPD Assessment Test (CAT); and exacerbations in the 6 months prior to entry. At 3, 6, 9 and 12 months data on exacerbations were collected, with CAT recorded at 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 2724 patients were included in the baseline analyses: 795, 954, 598 and 377 in the 'none', 'mono', 'LABA/ICS' and 'triple' subgroups, respectively. There were no clinically relevant differences in baseline demographics between the four groups. In terms of disease characteristics, the 'triple' group had the highest proportion of patients with a disease duration of more than 1 year since diagnosis and with severe/very severe airflow limitation, but a similar percentage of non-exacerbators compared to the 'none' group. Over the 1-year follow-up, the majority of patients in all four subgroups did not exacerbate (exacerbation rates 0.16, 0.19, 0.21, and 0.26 in the 'none', 'mono', 'LABA/ICS' and 'triple' groups, respectively). At 12 months, 61.4%, 65.0%, 71.0% and 52.4% of patients had a clinically relevant improvement in CAT score. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the results support the GOLD recommendations in suggesting that a switch from a mono-bronchodilator or LABA plus ICS to LABA/LAMA FDC is a valid treatment option for patients with COPD. The results also validate the use of a LABA/LAMA FDC as initial maintenance treatment for COPD, and provide first 'real world' evidence to support the newly added 'step down' recommendation (from triple to LABA/LAMA FDC).

Randomized controlled trials and real-world observational studies in evaluating cardiovascular safety of inhaled bronchodilator therapy in COPD.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) bronchodilators and their combination are recommended for the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although the efficacy of LAMAs and LABAs has been well established through randomized controlled trials (RCTs), questions remain regarding their cardiovascular (CV) safety. Furthermore, while the safety of LAMA and LABA monotherapy has been extensively studied, data are lacking for LAMA/LABA combination therapy, and the majority of the studies that have reported on the CV safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy were not specifically designed to assess this. Evaluation of CV safety for COPD treatments is important because many patients with COPD have underlying CV comorbidities. However, severe CV and other comorbidities are often exclusion criteria for RCTs, contributing to a lack in external validity and generalizability. Real-world observational studies are another important tool to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COPD therapies in a broader population of patients and can improve upon the external validity limitations of RCTs. We examine what is already known regarding the CV and cerebrovascular safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy from RCTs and real-world observational studies, and explore the advantages and limitations of data derived from each study type. We also describe an ongoing prospective, observational, comparative post-authorization safety study of a LAMA/LABA combination therapy (umeclidinium/vilanterol) and LAMA monotherapy (umeclidinium) versus tiotropium, with a focus on the relative merits of the study design.

Comprehensive evidence-based review on European antitussives.

Acute cough caused by viral respiratory tract infections is probably the most common illness to afflict mankind. Despite the widespread but ineffective prescribing of antibiotics, there is no specific therapy. Home remedies and over-the-counter medicines are the mainstay for treatment of this short-lived but debilitating condition where cough is a major troublesome symptom. Across Europe, there are large variations in the recommendations made by healthcare professionals for the treatment of acute cough. This has arisen through custom and practice based on the evidence of historical studies performed to standards well short of what would be considered legitimate today. Acute cough is particularly difficult to study in a controlled setting because of the high rate of spontaneous remission and a large placebo effect. Here we detail the validated modern methodology used to assess the efficacy of antitussives and review the drugs commonly used in Europe against these standards.

A re-evaluation of the role of inhaled corticosteroids in the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

INTRODUCTION: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (in fixed combinations with long-acting ß2-agonists [LABAs]) are frequently prescribed for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), outside their labeled indications and recommended treatment strategies and guidelines, despite having the potential to cause significant side effects. AREAS COVERED: Although the existence of asthma in patients with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) clearly supports the use of anti-inflammatory treatment (typically an ICS/LABA combination, as ICS monotherapy is usually not indicated for COPD), the current level of ICS/LABA use is not consistent with the prevalence of ACOS in the COPD population. Data have recently become available showing the comparative efficacy of fixed bronchodilator combinations (long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]/LABA with ICS/LABA combinations). Additionally, new information has emerged on ICS withdrawal without increased risk of exacerbations, under cover of effective bronchodilation. EXPERT OPINION: For patients with COPD who do not have ACOS, a LAMA/LABA combination may be an appropriate starting therapy, apart from those with mild disease who can be managed with a single long-acting bronchodilator. Patients who remain symptomatic or present with exacerbations despite effectively delivered LAMA/LABA treatment may require additional drug therapy, such as ICS or phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors. When prescribing an ICS/LABA, the risk:benefit ratio should be considered in individual patients.

Patient-centred assessment of COPD in primary care: experience from a cross-sectional study of health-related quality of life in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Europe are treated in primary care, but perceptions on what guides primary care physicians (PCPs) in managing patients are lacking. AIMS: To describe factors associated with the assessment by PCPs of COPD severity and those associated with impaired health status, as assessed by patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQL) in 2,294 COPD patients from five European countries. The severity of COPD was clinically judged by the PCPs and GOLD stage severity was calculated using spirometry data. RESULTS: PCPs' categories of severity reflected a wider range of HRQL scores (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score: mild 30.3; moderate 41.7; severe 55.0; very severe 66.1) than GOLD severity grading (Stage I 38.2; Stage II 41.1; Stage III 49.9; Stage IV 58.5). Multiple ordinal logistic regression models showed that factors most closely related to PCP-rated COPD severity were Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea grade, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) percent predicted, HRQL score (either SGRQ or COPD Assessment Test (CAT)), and previous hospitalisations (model generalised R²=0.45 or 0.44 (SQRQ or CAT in model, respectively); all factors p<0.0001). Factors with the highest association with HRQL scores (SGRQ or CAT) were MRC dyspnoea grade, COPD severity (PCP-rated), sputum production, and number of co-morbidities (model R²=0.46 or 0.37 (SQRQ or CAT in multiple linear regression model, respectively); all factors p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs successfully graded COPD severity clinically and appeared to have greater discriminative power for assessing severity in COPD than FEV1-based staging. Their more holistic approach appeared to reflect the patients' HRQL rating and was consistent across five European countries.