Severe asthma care trajectories: the French RAMSES cohort.

Background: The French RAMSES study is an observational prospective multicentre real-life cohort including severe asthmatic subjects. The objective of the study was to compare the characteristics of patients, in terms of phenotype and asthma care trajectories, between those managed by tertiary referral centres (TRCs) or secondary care centres (SCCs). Methods: Patients were prospectively recruited and enrolled for a 5-year follow-up. Patients' characteristics were analysed at inclusion and compared between TRCs and SCCs. Results: 52 centres (24 TRCs and 28 SCCs) included 2046 patients: 1502 (73.4%) were included by a TRC and 544 (26.6%) by a SCC. Patients were mainly women (62%), 53±15 years old, 67% with Asthma Control Test <20; at inclusion, 14% received oral corticosteroids (OCS) and 66% biologics. Compared with the SCC group, the TRC group had more frequent comorbidities and lower blood eosinophil counts (262 versus 340 mm-3; p=0.0036). OCS and biologics use did not differ between groups, but patients in the TRC group benefited more frequently from an educational programme (26% versus 18%; p=0.0008) and received more frequently two or more sequential lines of biologics (33% versus 24%; p=0.0105). In-depth investigations were more frequently performed in the TRC group (allergy tests: 74% versus 62%; p<0.0001; exhaled nitric oxide fraction: 56% versus 21%; p<0.0001; induced sputum: 6% versus 3%; p=0.0390). Conclusions: Phenotypes and care trajectories differed in the RAMSES cohort between SCCs and TRCs, probably related to different levels of asthma severity and differences in medical resources and practices among centres. This highlights the need for standardisation of severe asthma care.

Articular manifestations related to anti-interleukin-5 therapies in severe asthma: a case series.

Articular manifestations should be screened before and during anti-IL-5/5R biologic treatment in severe asthma. Rigorous multidisciplinary team discussion should be carried out to assess the risk-benefit balance of withholding effective treatment. https://bit.ly/3vfPn4k.

Improvement in severe asthma patients receiving biologics and factors associated with persistent insufficient control: a real-life national study.

BACKGROUND: Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of severe asthma with type 2 inflammation. Although such treatments are very effective in reducing exacerbation and the dose of oral steroids, little is known about the persistence of symptoms in severe asthma patients treated with biologics. PURPOSE: We aim to describe asthma control and healthcare consumption of severe asthma patients treated with biologics. DESIGN: The Second Souffle study is a real-life prospective observational study endorsed by the Clinical Research Initiative in Severe Asthma: a Lever for Innovation & Science Network. METHODS: Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of severe asthma for at least 12 months' duration were enrolled in the study. A self-administered questionnaire including the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and a compliance evaluation test was given to the patients. Healthcare consumption within 12 months prior to enrolment was documented. In patients receiving biologics, doctors indicated whether the patients were biologic responders or non-responders. RESULTS: The characteristics of 431 patients with severe asthma were analysed. Among them, 409 patients (94.9%) presented asthma with type 2 inflammation (T2 high) profile, and 297 (72.6%) patients with a T2 high phenotype were treated with a biologic. Physicians estimated that 88.2% of patients receiving biologics were responders. However, asthma control was only achieved in 25.3% of those patients (ACQ > 0.75). A high proportion of patients (77.8%) identified as responders to biologics were not controlled according to the ACQ score. About 50% of patients continue to use oral corticosteroids either daily (25.2%) or more than three times a year for at least three consecutive days (25.6%). Gastro-oesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and Obstructive Sleep Apnoea syndrome (OSA) were identified as independent factors associated with uncontrolled asthma. CONCLUSION: Although a high proportion of severe asthma patients respond to biologics, only 25.3% have controlled asthma. GERD and OSA are independent factors of uncontrolled asthma.

Updated guidelines (2021) for management and follow-up of asthmatic patients of the French Society of Pneumology (SPLF) and the French Society of Pediatric Pneumology and Allergology (SP2A). Short version.

The therapeutic management strategy is based on the regular evaluation of the control of asthmatic disease, with an effective minimum dose research and the assessment of environmental factors, not to mention the important place of therapeutic education. These professional recommendations relate to the management and follow-up of adult and adolescent asthma patients aged 12 and over. The recommendations answer the following questions: 1. How to make the initial diagnosis of asthma? 2. What allergological check-up should be done in asthmatics 3. How to manage an asthma exacerbation? 4. How to manage difficult asthma? 5. What therapeutic strategies? 6. How to manage a woman's asthma during pregnancy? 7. Environmental factors in asthma management review.

De-labelling severe asthma diagnosis: the challenge of DIPNECH.

DIPNECH is a differential diagnosis of severe asthma with no specific biomarkers. Chronic cough and multiple nodules on CT should prompt clinicians to consider this diagnosis. Differentiating DIPNECH from severe asthma remains crucial. https://bit.ly/3mmFbQn.

Self-reported asthma prevalence and management in adults in France in 2018: ASTHMAPOP survey.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of epidemiological data on asthma classified by disease severity in France. The ASTHMAPOP cross-sectional study aimed to review the prevalence and current management of asthma in people aged ≥18 years in France. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 19 676 people representative of the French population in age, gender, region, and socio-economic status. Asthma was classified by treatment steps per the 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) report, according to prescribed treatments. Analyses were mostly descriptive. RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 81.7% (n = 16 083), and 15 587 questionnaires were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime asthma was 12.8% (95% confidence interval (CI):12.3-13.3%; n = 1 989) in 2018. The prevalence of current asthma (i.e., 12 months before the survey) was 6.4% (95% CI: 6.0-6.8%; n = 993); most of these respondents (95.3% [n = 946]) were receiving asthma treatment, and 49.4% (n = 491) were treated for mild asthma (GINA step 1 or 2). Of people with current asthma, 47.6% reported ≥1 asthma exacerbation in the past 12 months-defined as episodes (several days) during which symptoms (cough, sputum, and dyspnea) were worse than usual; 14.3% had ≥1 emergency visit, and 3.1% had ≥1 hospitalization due to asthma. Of those taking continuous asthma controller medications who answered all Morisky Medication Adherence Scale questions (n = 501), 46.4% were adherent (score=4) to their treatment regimen. Based on the 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire scores, asthma was partially controlled or uncontrolled in 47.7% of 969 people. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of asthma in France has remained stable since 2006, but levels of asthma control and treatment adherence continue to be relatively poor. Asthma management in France requires improvement.