Extrafine Beclometasone Dipropionate/Formoterol Fumarate vs Double Bronchodilation Therapy in Patients with COPD: A Historical Real-World Non-Inferiority Study.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of initiating extrafine beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate (BDP/FF) versus double bronchodilation (long-acting beta-agonists [LABA]/long-acting muscarinic antagonists [LAMA]) among patients with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Patients and Methods: A historical cohort study was conducted using data from the UK's Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Patients with COPD ≥40 years at diagnosis were included if they initiated extrafine BDP/FF or any LABA/LAMA double therapy as a step-up from no maintenance therapy or monotherapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LAMA, or LABA and a history of ≥2 moderate/severe exacerbations in the previous two years. The primary outcome was exacerbation rate from therapy initiation until a relevant therapy change or end of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included rate of acute respiratory events, acute oral corticosteroids (OCS) courses, and antibiotic prescriptions with lower respiratory indication, modified Medical Research Council score (mMRC) ≥2, and time to first pneumonia diagnosis. The non-inferiority boundary was set at a relative difference of 15% on the ratio scale. Five potential treatment effect modifiers were investigated. Results: A total of 1735 patients initiated extrafine BDP/FF and 2450 patients initiated LABA/LAMA. The mean age was 70 years, 51% were male, 41% current smokers, and 85% had FEV1 <80% predicted. Extrafine BDP/FF showed non-inferiority to LABA/LAMA for rate of exacerbations (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.01 [95% CI 0.94-1.09]), acute respiratory events (IRR = 0.98 [0.92-1.04]), acute OCS courses (IRR = 1.01 [0.91-1.11]), and antibiotic prescriptions (IRR = 0.99 [0.90-1.09]), but not for mMRC (OR = 0.93 [0.69-1.27]) or risk of pneumonia (HR = 0.50 [0.14-1.73]). None of the a priori defined effect modifier candidates affected the comparative effectiveness. Conclusion: This study found that stepping up to extrafine BDP/FF from no maintenance or monotherapy was not inferior to stepping up to double bronchodilation therapy in patients with a history of exacerbations.

Pediatric asthma: An unmet need for more effective, focused treatments.

BACKGROUND: Despite remarkable advances in our understanding of asthma, there are still several unmet needs associated with the management of pediatric asthma. METHODS: A two-day, face-to-face meeting was held in London, United Kingdom, on October 28 and 29, 2017, involving a group of international expert clinicians and scientists in asthma management to discuss the challenges and unmet needs that remain to be addressed in pediatric asthma. RESULTS: These unmet needs include a lack of clinical efficacy and safety evidence, and limited availability of non-steroid-based alternative therapies in patients <6 years of age. An increased focus on children is needed in the context of clinical practice guidelines for asthma; current pediatric practice relies mostly on extrapolations from adult recommendations. Furthermore, no uniform definition of pediatric asthma exists, which hampers timely and robust diagnosis of the condition in affected patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a uniform definition of pediatric asthma, clearly distinguishable from adult asthma. Furthermore, guidelines which provide specific treatment recommendations for the management of pediatric asthma are also needed. Clinical trials and real-world evidence studies assessing anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) therapies and other monoclonal antibodies in children <6 years of age with asthma may provide further information regarding the most appropriate treatment options in these vulnerable patients. Early intervention with anti-IgE and non-steroid-based alternative therapies may delay disease progression, leading to improved clinical outcomes.

A pragmatic, three-arm randomised controlled trial of spiritual healing for asthma in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Well-designed trials are required to assess if complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is effective. AIM: This study assessed the effectiveness of spiritual healing for asthma. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Aberdeen, Scotland. METHOD: This was a single-blind, three-armed randomised, controlled trial of spiritual healing for asthma, comparing the effectiveness of five sessions of spiritual healing with placebo (delivered by an actor), and with a control group receiving normal care only. The primary outcome measure was the Juniper Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). Secondary outcomes were forced expiratory flow in one second (FEV1), peak expiratory flow (PEF), HADS (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale), SF-36 and MYMOP (Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile). Baseline and follow-up data were collected. RESULTS: Eighty-eight adult patients receiving pharmacological treatment for asthma participated. AQLQ scores improved significantly from baseline and the end of treatment in all groups (spiritual healing P = 0.008; 'sham' healing P = 0.001 and control P = 0.01) but there was no significant difference between groups (P = 0.57). These improvements were maintained at follow-up 1 for two of the groups (spiritual healing P = 0.016; sham healing P = 0.001 and control P = 0.09) but none of the groups showed an improvement at follow-up 2 (spiritual healing P = 0.161; sham healing P = 0.016 and control P = 0.11). Similar proportions of patients in each group showed a clinically important improvement in AQLQ score. Analysis of AQLQ scores at end of treatment and both follow-up periods indicated no significance between group differences. No consistent changes were seen in secondary outcome measures, possibly due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Spiritual healing does not appear to have any specific affect on patient asthma related quality of life.