Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 12(1): 146-155.e5, 2024 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37832820

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of biologics in severe, uncontrolled asthma have excluded patients with a cumulative tobacco exposure of more than 10 pack-years. Therefore, our knowledge of the impact of smoking exposure on the clinical effects of biologics in severe asthma remains incomplete. However, because many patients with asthma are current or former smokers, investigating the potential impacts of tobacco exposure on the effects of biologic treatment is clinically important. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of smoking history and tobacco exposure on the effectiveness of biologic therapy in real-life patients with severe asthma. METHODS: We used data from a complete nationwide cohort of patients with severe asthma who were receiving biologics, the Danish Severe Asthma Register. We divided patients according to smoking history and cumulative tobacco exposure and analyzed data at baseline and after 12 months of biologic treatment. RESULTS: A total of 724 bio-naive patients were identified in the Danish Severe Asthma Register, 398 of whom had never been smokers (55%), 316 were previous smokers (44%), and 10 were current smokers (1%). Within the group of current and former smokers, 37% had 1 to 9 pack-years of tobacco exposure, 26% had 10 to 19 pack-years, and 37% had 20 or more pack-years of tobacco exposure. Patients with tobacco exposure had similar reductions in the number of exacerbations, reductions in maintenance oral corticosteroid use, and improvements in asthma symptoms compared with patients with 0 pack-years. CONCLUSION: Former smoking history and lifetime tobacco exposure do not have an impact on the efficacy of biologics in patients with severe asthma.


Asunto(s)
Asma , Productos Biológicos , Humanos , Fumar/epidemiología , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiología , Asma/diagnóstico , Terapia Biológica , Dinamarca/epidemiología , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico
2.
Chest ; 165(2): 253-266, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37925144

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The development of novel targeted biologic therapies for severe asthma has provided an opportunity to consider remission as a new treatment goal. RESEARCH QUESTION: How many patients with severe asthma treated with biologic therapy achieve clinical remission, and what predicts response to treatment? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Danish Severe Asthma Register is a nationwide cohort including all adult patients receiving biologic therapy for severe asthma in Denmark. This observational cohort study defined "clinical response" to treatment following 12 months as a ≥ 50% reduction in exacerbations and/or a ≥ 50% reduction in maintenance oral corticosteroid dose, if required. "Clinical remission" was defined by cessation of exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroids, as well as a normalization of lung function (FEV1 > 80%) and a six-question Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 1.5 following 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: Following 12 months of treatment, 104 (21%) of 501 biologic-naive patients had no response to treatment, and 397 (79%) had a clinical response. Among the latter, 97 (24%) fulfilled the study criteria of clinical remission, corresponding to 19% of the entire population. Remission was predicted by shorter duration of disease and lower BMI in the entire population of patients treated with biologic therapy. INTERPRETATION: Clinical response was achieved in most adult patients initiating biologic therapy, and clinical remission was observed in 19% of the patients following 12 months of treatment. Further studies are required to assess the long-term outcome of achieving clinical remission with biologic therapy.


Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Productos Biológicos , Adulto , Humanos , Corticoesteroides , Terapia Biológica , Estudios de Cohortes , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico
3.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 19(9): 1498-1506, 2022 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35588357

RESUMEN

Rationale: Moderate to severe asthma is associated with impaired asthma control and quality of life (QoL) despite access to specialist care and modern pharmacotherapy. Breathing exercises (BrEX) improve QoL in incompletely controlled mild asthma, but impact in moderate to severe asthma is unknown. Objectives: To investigate the effectiveness of BrEX as adjuvant treatment on QoL in patients with uncontrolled moderate to severe asthma. Methods: Adult patients with incompletely controlled asthma attending respiratory specialist clinics were randomized to usual specialist care (UC) or UC and BrEX (UC + BrEX) with three individual physiotherapist-delivered sessions and home exercises. Primary outcome was asthma-related QoL (Mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire [Mini-AQLQ]) at 6 months on the basis of intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes: Mini-AQLQ at 12 months, lung function, 6-minute-walk test, physical activity level, Nijmegen Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and adverse events. Repeated-measures mixed-effects models were used to analyze data. Poisson regression models were used to analyze adverse event incidence rate ratio. Results: A total of 193 participants were allocated to UC + BrEX (n = 94) or UC (n = 99). UC + BrEX was superior in the primary outcome (adjusted mean change difference, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.62). Superiority in Mini-AQLQ was sustained at 12 months (0.38; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.65). A minor improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression score at 6 months favoring UC + BrEX (-0.90; 95% CI, -1.67 to -0.14) was observed. Asthma-related adverse events occurred similarly in UC + BrEX and UC participants: 14.9% versus 18.1% (P = 0.38). Conclusions: BrEX as add-on to usual care improve asthma-related QoL in incompletely controlled asthma regardless of severity and with no evidence of harm. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03127059).


Asunto(s)
Asma , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Asma/terapia , Ejercicios Respiratorios , Terapia por Ejercicio , Humanos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
4.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 10(5): 1202-1216.e23, 2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34990866

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Regulatory bodies have approved five biologics for severe asthma. However, regional differences in accessibility may limit the global potential for personalized medicine. OBJECTIVE: To compare global differences in ease of access to biologics. METHODS: In April 2021, national prescription criteria for omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab were reviewed by severe asthma experts collaborating in the International Severe Asthma Registry. Outcomes (per country, per biologic) were (1) country-specific prescription criteria and (2) development of the Biologic Accessibility Score (BACS). The BACS composite score incorporates 10 prescription criteria, each with a maximum score of 10 points. Referenced to European Medicines Agency marketing authorization specifications, a higher score reflects easier access. RESULTS: Biologic prescription criteria differed substantially across 28 countries from five continents. Blood eosinophil count thresholds (usually ≥300 cells/µL) and exacerbations were key requirements for anti-IgE/anti-IL-5/5R prescriptions in around 80% of licensed countries. Most countries (40% for dupilumab to 54% for mepolizumab) require two or more moderate or severe exacerbations, whereas numbers ranged from none to four. Moreover, 0% (for reslizumab) to 21% (for omalizumab) of countries required long-term oral corticosteroid use. The BACS highlighted marked between-country differences in ease of access. For omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, only two, one, four, and seven countries, respectively, scored equal or higher than the European Medicines Agency reference BACS. For reslizumab, all countries scored lower. CONCLUSIONS: Although some differences were expected in country-specific biologic prescription criteria and ease of access, the substantial differences found in the current study present a challenge to implementing precision medicine across the world.


Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Productos Biológicos , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiología , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico , Terapia Biológica , Humanos , Omalizumab/uso terapéutico , Prescripciones
5.
BMJ Open ; 9(12): e032984, 2019 12 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31892661

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Uncontrolled asthma is a global health challenge with substantial impact on quality of life (QoL) and overall healthcare costs. Unrecognised and/or unmanaged comorbidities often contribute to presence of uncontrolled asthma. Abnormalities in breathing pattern are termed dysfunctional breathing and are not only common in asthma but also lead to asthma-like symptoms and reduced QoL, and, in keeping with this, improvement with breathing normalisation. Evidence-based guidelines recommend breathing retraining interventions as an adjuvant treatment in uncontrolled asthma. Physiotherapy-based breathing pattern modification interventions incorporating relaxation have been shown to improve asthma-related QoL in primary care patients with impaired asthma control. Despite anecdotal reports, effectiveness of breathing retraining in patients referred to secondary care with incomplete asthma control has not been formally assessed in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). We aim to investigate the effect of breathing exercises on asthma-related QoL in patients with incomplete asthma control despite specialist care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This two-armed assessor-blinded multicentre RCT will investigate the effect of physiotherapist-delivered breathing retraining on asthma QoL questionnaire (MiniAQLQ) in addition to usual specialist care, recruiting from seven outpatient departments and one specialised clinic representing all regions of Denmark during 2017-2019. We will include 190 consenting adults with incomplete asthma control, defined as Asthma Control Questionnaire 6-item score ≥0.8. Participants will randomly be allocated to either breathing exercise programme in addition to usual care (BrEX +UC) or UC alone. BrEX compiles three physiotherapy sessions and encouragement to perform home exercise daily. Both groups continue usual secondary care management. Primary outcome is between-group difference in MiniAQLQ at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcome measures, spirometry and accelerometer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics Committee, Region Zealand (SJ-552) and Danish Data Protection Agency (REG-55-2016) approved the trial. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03127059; Pre-results.


Asunto(s)
Manejo de la Vía Aérea , Asma , Ejercicios Respiratorios/métodos , Calidad de Vida , Acelerometría/métodos , Adulto , Manejo de la Vía Aérea/métodos , Manejo de la Vía Aérea/psicología , Asma/fisiopatología , Asma/psicología , Asma/terapia , Dinamarca , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Fisioterapeutas , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/psicología , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/normas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Espirometría/métodos
6.
Ugeskr Laeger ; 179(2)2017 Jan 09.
Artículo en Danés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28074763

RESUMEN

Dysfunctional breathing (DB) is a common comorbidity in adults with incomplete asthma control. The few available large-scale, randomized studies suggest efficacy of physiotherapy on symptom burden. In this article we discuss the current evidence including the need for systematic description of physiotherapeutic interventions. We also describe how access to physiotherapy service for DB (with or without asthma) is highly heterogeneous in Denmark, and that there is a need for increasing awareness of physiotherapy implementation for and research in DB (with or without concomitant asthma).


Asunto(s)
Asma/complicaciones , Trastornos Respiratorios , Ejercicios Respiratorios , Ejercicio Físico , Humanos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Trastornos Respiratorios/complicaciones , Trastornos Respiratorios/diagnóstico , Trastornos Respiratorios/psicología , Trastornos Respiratorios/terapia , Estrés Psicológico
7.
Immunol Allergy Clin North Am ; 33(3): 347-62, viii, 2013 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23830129

RESUMEN

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) describes the transient narrowing of the airways during, and particularly after exercise and occurs commonly in asthmatic individuals. Limitation of exercise capacity is a frequent complaint in all age groups, and severity of EIB ranges from mild impairment of performance to severe bronchospasm and a large reduction in FEV1. Treatment of EIB varies from daily to less frequent therapy, depending on the level of activity. In this article, the authors evaluate the treatment possibilities before, during, and after exercise. They also review medications currently used to treat EIB.


Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Asma Inducida por Ejercicio/terapia , Antiasmáticos/farmacología , Asma Inducida por Ejercicio/tratamiento farmacológico , Suplementos Dietéticos , Tolerancia a Medicamentos , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA