Assessing asthma control: comparison of electronic-recorded short-acting beta-agonist rescue use and self-reported use utilizing the asthma control test.

Background: Question 4 (Q4) of the Asthma Control Test (ACT) asks patients to report their SABA use over the prior 4 weeks, a criterion for evaluating the impairment domain of asthma control. Biases in recall may lead to a misclassification of asthma control and has implications for asthma control determination and management strategies.Objective: To correlate objective electronic-recorded short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) use with self-reported use via Q4 of the ACT.Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with a self-reported diagnosis of asthma were enrolled in a digital health electronic medication monitoring (EMM) platform, which recorded the date and time of SABA actuations and prompted the completion of the ACT. The correlations between ACT Q4 responses and EMM-recorded SABA use were evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.Results: 1,062 patients (mean age: 35.4 years, mean ACT: 16.3) were included in analyses. Higher Q4 scores, indicating lower SABA use, were moderately and negatively correlated with EMM-recorded SABA use (ρ = -0.59 [95% CI: -0.63, -0.54]). Thirty-five percent of patients underreported SABA use when comparing Q4 to EMM-recorded SABA use.Conclusions: While ACT Q4 and EMM-recorded use were moderately correlated, underreported SABA use on the ACT highlights the need for objective measures of SABA use in asthma control assessments. The use of EMM-recorded SABA data has the potential for clinicians to more accurately determine asthma control, guide changes to controller therapy, and estimate imminent exacerbation risk.

Steroid variability in pediatric inpatient asthmatics: survey on provider preferences of dexamethasone versus prednisone.

Objective: Our hospital's pediatric Emergency Department (ED) began using dexamethasone for treating asthma exacerbations after ED studies showed non-inferiority of dexamethasone compared to prednisone. However, providers have not reached consensus on optimal inpatient steroid regimen. This study evaluates provider preference for inpatient steroid treatment.Methods: A survey was distributed to providers who care for inpatient pediatric asthmatics. Respondents answered questions about steroid choice and timing. Data were summarized as percentages; bivariate comparisons were analyzed with Pearson's chi-squared test.Results: Ninety-two providers completed the survey (60% response rate). When patients received dexamethasone in the ED, subsequent inpatient management was variable: 44% continued dexamethasone, 14% switched to prednisone, 2% said no additional steroids, and 40% said it depended on the scenario. Hospitalists were more likely to continue dexamethasone than pulmonologists (61% and 15%, respectively; p < .001). Factors that influenced providers to switch to prednisone in the inpatient setting included severity of exacerbation (73%) and asthma history (47%). Fifty-one percent felt uncomfortable using dexamethasone because of "minimal data to support [its] use inpatient." In case-based questions, 28% selected dexamethasone dosing intervals outside the recommended range. Thirteen percent reported experiencing errors in clinical practice.Conclusions: Use of dexamethasone in the ED for asthma exacerbations has led to uncertainty in inpatient steroid prescribing practices. Providers often revert to prednisone, especially in severe asthma exacerbations, possibly due to experience with prednisone and limited research on dexamethasone in the inpatient setting. Further research comparing the effectiveness of dexamethasone to prednisone in inpatient asthmatic children with various severities of illness is needed.

Can we predict fall asthma exacerbations? Validation of the seasonal asthma exacerbation index.

BACKGROUND: A Seasonal Asthma Exacerbation Predictive Index (saEPI) was previously reported based on 2 prior National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Inner City Asthma Consortium trials. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to validate the saEPI in a separate trial designed to prevent fall exacerbations with omalizumab therapy. METHODS: The saEPI and its components were analyzed to characterize those who had an asthma exacerbation during the Preventative Omalizumab or Step-Up Therapy for Fall Exacerbations (PROSE) study. We characterized those inner-city children with and without asthma exacerbations in the fall period treated with guidelines-based therapy (GBT) in the absence and presence of omalizumab. RESULTS: A higher saEPI was associated with an exacerbation in both the GBT alone (P < .001; area under the curve, 0.76) and the GBT + omalizumab group (P < .01; area under the curve, 0.65). In the GBT group, younger age at recruitment, higher total IgE, higher blood eosinophil percentage and number, and higher treatment step were associated with those who had an exacerbation compared with those who did not. In the GBT + omalizumab group, younger age at recruitment, increased eosinophil number, recent exacerbation, and higher treatment step were also associated with those who had an exacerbation. The saEPI was associated with a high negative predictive value in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: An exacerbation in children treated with GBT with or without omalizumab was associated with a higher saEPI along with higher markers of allergic inflammation, treatment step, and a recent exacerbation. Those that exacerbated on omalizumab had similar features with the exception of some markers of allergic sensitization, indicating a need to develop better markers to predict poor response to omalizumab therapy and alternative treatment strategies for children with these risk factors. The saEPI was able to reliably predict those children unlikely to have an asthma exacerbation in both groups.

Asthma in Children: A Brief Review for Primary Care Providers.

Pediatric asthma is a common chronic condition with wide-ranging implications for children's health, their families, and the health care system. The diagnosis may be relatively straightforward for the child with characteristic symptoms, triggers, and response to therapy, but there are other less common presentations that can make the diagnosis challenging. Diagnosing asthma in a toddler with recurrent wheezing can be particularly difficult. Treating asthma in a step-wise fashion usually reduces symptom frequency and improves asthma control. Asthma exacerbations and poor outcomes from acute exacerbations remain an area in which we have room for improvement. This article provides an overview of the diagnosis and management of childhood asthma for the primary care provider. [Pediatr Ann. 2019;48(3):e103-e109.].

Intermittent steroid inhalation for the treatment of childhood asthma.

Inhaled corticosteroids have long been considered a mainstay of therapy for asthma in children. However, concerns over long-term side effects of chronic steroid administration have led providers to turn to intermittent dosing of these medications in an attempt to treat exacerbations while limiting total corticosteroid received. The data have been somewhat mixed in this area, likely at least partially due to the difficulty providers have in classifying asthma phenotypes in young children. This review will analyze the evidence for chronic daily inhaled corticosteroid use, intermittent inhaled corticosteroid use, and dynamic dosing approaches utilizing inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta agonist combination therapy.

Sweat chloride as a biomarker of CFTR activity: proof of concept and ivacaftor clinical trial data.

BACKGROUND: We examined data from a Phase 2 trial {NCT00457821} of ivacaftor, a CFTR potentiator, in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients with aG551D mutation to evaluate standardized approaches to sweat chloride measurement and to explore the use of sweat chloride and nasal potential difference (NPD) to estimate CFTR activity. METHODS: Sweat chloride and NPD were secondary endpoints in this placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. Standardization of sweat collection, processing,and analysis was employed for the first time. Sweat chloride and chloride ion transport (NPD) were integrated into a model of CFTR activity. RESULTS: Within-patient sweat chloride determinations showed sufficient precision to detect differences between dose-groups and assess ivacaftor treatment effects. Analysis of changes in sweat chloride and NPD demonstrated that patients treated with ivacaftor achieved CFTR activity equivalent to approximately 35%­40% of normal. CONCLUSIONS: Sweat chloride is useful in multicenter trials as a biomarker of CFTR activity and to test the effect of CFTR potentiators.

Consumer empowerment in dermatology.

Health care consumers increasingly confront and collaborate with medical providers. This article describes recent developments in health care consumer activism including dermatology disease advocacy and efforts to improve dermatologist-patient interactions.