Triple Therapy and Clinical Control in B+ COPD Patients: A Pragmatic, Prospective, Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment with LABA/LAMA is recommended in GOLD B patients. We hypothesized that triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) will be superior to LABA/LAMA in achieving and maintaining clinical control (CC), a composite outcome that considers both impact and disease stability in a subgroup of GOLD B patients (here termed GOLD B+ patients) characterized by: (1) remaining symptomatic (CAT≥10) despite regular LABA/LAMA therapy; (2) having suffered one moderate exacerbation in the previous year; and (3) having blood eosinophil counts (BEC) ≥150cells/µL. METHODS: The ANTES B+ study is a prospective, multicenter, open label, randomized, pragmatic, controlled trial designed to test this hypothesis. It will randomize 1028 B+ patients to continue with their usual LABA/LAMA combination prescribed by their attending physician or to begin fluticasone furoate (FF) 92µg/umeclidinium (UMEC) 55µg/vilanterol (VI) 22µg in a single inhaler q.d. for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome will be the level of CC achieved. Secondary outcomes include the clinical important deterioration index (CID), annual rate of exacerbations, and FEV1. Exploratory objectives include the interaction of BEC and smoking status, all-cause mortality and proportion of patients on LABA/LAMA arm that switch therapy arms. Safety analysis include adverse events and incidence of pneumonia. RESULTS: The first patient was recruited on February 29, 2024; results are expected in the first quarter of 2026. CONCLUSIONS: The ANTES B+ study is the first to: (1) explore the efficacy and safety of triple therapy in a population of B+ COPD patients and (2) use a composite index (CC) as the primary result of a COPD trial.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a type of medication delivered via an inhaler device that are commonly used in the treatment of asthma. ICS can also be used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a progressive respiratory condition in which the lungs become worse over time. However, unlike in asthma, ICS are only effective in a small proportion of people with COPD. ICS can cause significant side effects in people with COPD, including pneumonia. Because of this, guidelines written by COPD experts recommend that ICS should largely be prescribed to people with COPD whose symptoms flare up frequently and become difficult to manage (episodes known as exacerbations). Despite this guidance, records collected from routine clinical practice suggest that many healthcare professionals prescribe ICS to people with COPD who do not have frequent exacerbations, putting them at unnecessary risk of side effects. The over-prescription of ICS in COPD may partly be due to the recent introduction of single-inhaler combination therapies, which combine ICS with other medicines (bronchodilators). This 'one inhaler for all' approach is a concerning trend as it goes against global COPD treatment guidelines, which recommend ICS use in only a small proportion of people. This is a plain language summary of a review article originally published in the journal NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine. In this review, we investigate the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD. Using data from both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, we explain which people benefit from ICS use, and why health regulatory bodies have concluded that ICS do not help people with COPD to live longer. Lastly, we provide practical guidance for doctors and people with COPD regarding when ICS should be prescribed and when they should be withdrawn.

Identifying critical inhalation technique errors in Dry Powder Inhaler use in patients with COPD based on the association with health status and exacerbations: findings from the multi-country cross-sectional observational PIFotal study.

BACKGROUND: Correct inhaler use depends on a complex interplay of factors, including device preparation and generating sufficient inspiratory flow. It is currently unknown which inhalation technique errors can be considered critical in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients on Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between inhalation technique errors and health status or exacerbations in patients with COPD. Additionally, the association between the number of errors and COPD outcomes was determined. METHODS: The PIFotal study is a cross-sectional multi-country observational study in a primary care setting, including 1434 COPD patients aged ≥ 40 years (50.1% female; mean age 69.2 yrs) using a DPI for their maintenance therapy. Inhalation technique was video recorded and scored by two independent researchers using inhaler-specific checklists. Health status was assessed with two questionnaires; the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). The number of moderate and severe exacerbations in the past 12 months was recorded. Critical errors were identified based on their association with health status or exacerbations through multi-level prediction models adjusted for identified confounding. RESULTS: Errors in inhalation technique steps 'Breathe in', 'Hold breath', and 'Breathe out calmly after inhalation' were significantly associated with poorer CCQ and CAT outcomes and thus deemed critical. None of the errors were significantly associated with moderate exacerbations. Patients with errors 'Preparation', 'Hold inhaler in correct position during inhalation', and 'Breathe in' had significantly more severe exacerbations, and therefore these errors were also deemed critical. 81.3% of patients with COPD made at least one critical error. Specific combinations of errors were associated with worse outcomes. The more inhalation technique errors identified, the poorer the health status and the higher the exacerbation rate. CONCLUSION: In this study, we identified multiple critical inhalation technique errors in COPD patients using DPIs each associated with poorer outcomes. Explorative analysis revealed that specific combinations of errors may be of clinical relevance, especially those related to the inhalation manoeuvre. COPD outcomes worsened with increasing error count. These results warrant further prospective longitudinal studies to establish the effect of correcting these errors on COPD control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853 (31/08/2020).

Clinical recommendations for dry powder inhaler use in the management of COPD in primary care.

Over 1400 patients using dry powder inhalers (DPIs) to deliver COPD maintenance therapies were recruited across Europe and Australia. Their peak inspiratory flow (PIF) was measured, inhaler technique was observed, and adherence to treatment assessed. From relating the findings with patient health status, and thereby identifying critical errors, key clinical recommendations for primary care clinicians were determined, namely - measure PIF before prescribing a DPI to ensure inhalation manoeuvre ability is well-matched with the device. Some patients could benefit from inhalation training whereas others should have their DPI changed for one better suited to their inspiratory ability or alternatively be prescribed an active device (such as a soft mist inhaler or pressurized metered dose inhaler). Observing the inhalation technique was valuable however this misses suboptimal PIF (approaching one fourth of patients with a satisfactory observed manoeuvre had a suboptimal PIF for their DPI). Assess adherence as deliberate non-adherence can point to a mismatch between a patient and their inhaler (deliberate non-adherence was significantly associated with PIFs below the minimum for the DPI). In-person observation of inhalation technique was found to be inferior to video rating based on device-specific checklists. Where video assessments are not possible, observation training for healthcare professionals would therefore be valuable particularly to improve the ability to identify the critical errors associated with health status namely 'teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece', 'breathe in' and 'breathing out calmly after inhalation'. However, it is recommended that observation alone should not replace PIF measurement in the DPI selection process.Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853 .

Validation of the Spanish Activity Questionnaire in COPD (SAQ-COPD) in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Purpose: The Spanish Activity Questionnaire in COPD (SAQ-COPD) is a short, simple physical activity (PA) measurement instrument for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this study, we analyzed its validity and sensitivity to change. Methods: Prospective scale validation study. An accelerometer (DynaPort MoveMonitor®) and the Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS) were used as reference standards. The analyses examined the criterion validity (Spearman correlations), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), factorial structure, test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC), sensitivity to change and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to classify patients with low PA. Results: A total of 300 patients diagnosed with COPD were analyzed (73% males, mean age 66 ± 8 years, 40.3% with severe airflow limitation). Cronbach's alpha was 0.60 and Spearman's correlations with accelerometer measurements of PA [number of steps, metabolic equivalents (MET), physical activity level (PAL)] and YPAS ranged from 0.37 to 0.53 (all p < 0.001). ICC was 0.69 (95% CI 0.61-0.74) and the area under the ROC curve to identify low PA was 0.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.58-0.73). Significant variations in SAQ-COPD scores were found between groups defined by YPAS for change. Conclusion: The SAQ-COPD questionnaire is a valid instrument for classifying PA in patients with COPD. Correlations with other instruments provide criterion validity and also demonstrate good sensitivity to change.

Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow and Critical Inhalation Errors are Associated with Higher COPD-Related Healthcare Costs.

Purpose: To assess the relationship between suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow (sPIF), inhalation technique errors, and non-adherence, with Healthcare Resource Utilisation (HCRU) in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients receiving maintenance therapy via a Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI). Patients and methods: The cross-sectional, multi-country PIFotal study included 1434 COPD patients (≥40 years) using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured with the In-Check DIAL G16, and sPIF was defined as a typical PIF lower than required for the device. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings and grouped into 10 steps. Patients completed the "Test of Adherence to Inhalers" questionnaire. HCRU was operationalised as COPD-related costs for primary healthcare, secondary healthcare, medication, and total COPD-related costs in a 1-year period. Results: Participants with sPIF had higher medication costs compared with those with optimal PIF (cost ratio [CR]: 1.07, 95% CI [1.01, 1.14]). Multiple inhalation technique errors were associated with increased HCRU. Specifically, "insufficient inspiratory effort" with higher secondary healthcare costs (CR: 2.20, 95% CI [1.37, 3.54]) and higher total COPD-related costs (CR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31). "no breath-hold following the inhalation manoeuvre (<6 s)" with higher medication costs (CR: 1.08, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15]) and total COPD-related costs (CR 1.17, 95% CI [1.07, 1.28]), and "not breathing out calmly after inhalation" with higher medication costs (CR: 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.37]). Non-adherence was not significantly associated with HCRU. Conclusion: sPIF and inhalation technique errors were associated with higher COPD-related healthcare utilisation and costs in COPD patients on DPI maintenance therapy.

Factors associated with health status and exacerbations in COPD maintenance therapy with dry powder inhalers.

The study aimed to determine the associations of Peak Inspiratory Flow (PIF), inhalation technique and adherence with health status and exacerbations in participants with COPD using DPI maintenance therapy. This cross-sectional multi-country observational real-world study included COPD participants aged ≥40 years using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured three times with the In-Check DIAL G16: (1) typical PIF at resistance of participant's inhaler, (2) maximal PIF at resistance of participant's inhaler, (3) maximal PIF at low resistance. Suboptimal PIF (sPIF) was defined as PIF lower than required for the device. Participants completed questionnaires on health status (Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ)), adherence (Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI)) and exacerbations. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings. Complete data were available from 1434 participants (50.1% female, mean age 69.2 years). GOLD stage was available for 801 participants: GOLD stage I (23.6%), II (54.9%), III (17.4%) and IV (4.1%)). Of all participants, 29% had a sPIF, and 16% were shown able to generate an optimal PIF but failed to do so. sPIF was significantly associated with worse health status (0.226 (95% CI 0.107-0.346), worse units on CCQ; p = 0.001). The errors 'teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece', 'breathe in', and 'breathe out calmly after inhalation' were related to health status. Adherence was not associated with health status. After correcting for multiple testing, no significant association was found with moderate or severe exacerbations in the last 12 months. To conclude, sPIF is associated with poorer health status. This study demonstrates the importance of PIF assessment in DPI inhalation therapy. Healthcare professionals should consider selecting appropriate inhalers in cases of sPIF.

Inhaled Corticosteroid Use Among COPD Patients in Primary Care in Spain.

PURPOSE: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are frequently used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outside the current recommendations. Our aim was to describe ICS use in COPD patients and to identify factors associated with ICS use among COPD patients treated within primary care in Spain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, non-interventional and multicenter study of patients with COPD treated in primary care. Patient characteristics and exacerbations were described in terms of ICS use among the overall cohort, and among those with spirometry confirmed COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]/forced vital capacity [FVC] ratio <70%). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with ICS use. RESULTS: A total of 901 patients were included, of which 47.9% (n = 432) were treated with ICS. A total of 240 patients (26.6%) experienced moderate/severe exacerbations in the prior year, while 309 (34.3%) during the previous two years. History of asthma totaled 11.6% (n = 105). The most frequent phenotype was non-exacerbator (51.6%), and the proportion of patient with moderate or severe exacerbations was significantly higher among ICS treated patients compared to non-treated: 37.5% versus 16.6% during the previous year (p < 0.001), and 46.8% versus 22.8% during the previous 2-years (p < 0.001), respectively. Patient characteristics were similar among spirometry confirmed patients and the overall population. Factors significantly associated with ICS use were a history of asthma (OR = 4.39, 95% CI: 2.67-7.26), the presence of moderate or severe exacerbations in the last year (OR = 2.52, 95% CI: 1.81-3.49), followed by higher mMRC and higher CAT score. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of patients in primary care in Spain are treated with ICS, despite most of them being non-exacerbators. History of asthma, exacerbations, and worse dyspnea and CAT scores are associated with ICS use.

Analysis of the impact of social determinants and primary care morbidity on population health outcomes by combining big data: A research protocol.

Background: In recent years, different tools have been developed to facilitate analysis of social determinants of health (SDH) and apply this to health policy. The possibility of generating predictive models of health outcomes which combine a wide range of socioeconomic indicators with health problems is an approach that is receiving increasing attention. Our objectives are twofold: (1) to predict population health outcomes measured as hospital morbidity, taking primary care (PC) morbidity adjusted for SDH as predictors; and (2) to analyze the geographic variability of the impact of SDH-adjusted PC morbidity on hospital morbidity, by combining data sourced from electronic health records and selected operations of the National Statistics Institute (Instituto Nacional de Estadística/INE). Methods: The following will be conducted: a qualitative study to select socio-health indicators using RAND methodology in accordance with SDH frameworks, based on indicators published by the INE in selected operations; and a quantitative study combining two large databases drawn from different Spain's Autonomous Regions (ARs) to enable hospital morbidity to be ascertained, i.e., PC electronic health records and the minimum basic data set (MBDS) for hospital discharges. These will be linked to socioeconomic indicators, previously selected by geographic unit. The outcome variable will be hospital morbidity, and the independent variables will be age, sex, PC morbidity, geographic unit, and socioeconomic indicators. Analysis: To achieve the first objective, predictive models will be used, with a test-and-training technique, fitting multiple logistic regression models. In the analysis of geographic variability, penalized mixed models will be used, with geographic units considered as random effects and independent predictors as fixed effects. Discussion: This study seeks to show the relationship between SDH and population health, and the geographic differences determined by such determinants. The main limitations are posed by the collection of data for healthcare as opposed to research purposes, and the time lag between collection and publication of data, sampling errors and missing data in registries and surveys. The main strength lies in the project's multidisciplinary nature (family medicine, pediatrics, public health, nursing, psychology, engineering, geography).

Impact of Blood Eosinophil Variability in Asthma: A Real-Life Population Study.

Rationale: Blood eosinophil count predicts response to inhaled corticosteroids and specific biologic therapies in selected patients with asthma. Despite this important role, fundamental aspects of eosinophil behavior in asthma have not been studied. Objectives: To investigate the behavior of blood eosinophils in a population, comparing their distribution with the general population and studying their intraindividual variability over time in relation to hospital episodes (emergency department visits and hospitalizations) in clinical practice. Methods: The distribution and variability of 35,703 eosinophil determinations in 10,059 stable patients with asthma were investigated in the MAJORICA (Majorca Real-Life Investigation in COPD and Asthma) cohort. Eosinophil distribution in the asthma population was compared with a control sample from the general population of 8,557 individuals. Eosinophil variability and hospital episodes were analyzed using correlations, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and multiple regression analysis. We defined the Eosinophil Variability Index as (Eosmax - Eosmin / Eosmax) × 100%. The findings of the asthma population were retested in an external well-characterized asthma cohort. Results: The eosinophil count values and variability were higher in the asthma population than in the general population (P < 0.001). Variability data showed a better association with hospital episodes than the counting values. An Eosinophil Variability Index ⩾50% was a better predictor for any hospital episode than any of the absolute counting values. These results were validated in the external cohort. Conclusions: The eosinophil variability in patients with asthma better identifies the risk of any hospital episode than the absolute counting values currently used to target specific treatments.

Managing asthma in primary healthcare.

Asthma brings considerable challenges for family doctors because of its variety of shapes, different levels of severity, a wide age range, and the fact that in the last decades clinicians are able to offer much better treatment options with a better level of disease control and a higher quality of life. The objectives of the current review article are to provide an up-to-date review by primary care respiratory leaders from different countries of the most significant challenges regarding asthma diagnosis and management, the importance of team work and the problems in recognizing and dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care. The article provides a short review of the main challenges faced by family physicians and other primary health care professionals in supporting their patients in the management of asthma, such as asthma diagnosis, promoting access to spirometry, the importance of a multiprofessional team for the management of asthma, how to organize an asthma review, the promotion of patient autonomy and shared decision-making, improving the use of inhalers, the importance of the personalized asthma action plan, dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care and choosing when, where and how to refer patients with severe asthma. The article also discusses the development of an integrated approach to asthma care in the community and the promotion of Asthma Right Care.

Targeting exertional breathlessness to improve physical activity: the role of primary care.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). By working together with patients to target exertional breathlessness and increase physical activity, PCPs have an important role to play, early in the disease course, in improving patient outcomes in both the short and long term. In this article, we consider how physical activity affects disease progression from the PCP perspective. We discuss the role of pharmacological therapy, the importance of an holistic approach and the role of PCPs in assessing and promoting physical activity. The complexity and heterogeneity of COPD make it a challenging disease to treat. Patients' avoidance of activity, and subsequent decline in capacity to perform it, further impacts the management of the disease. Improving patient tolerance of physical activity, increasing participation in daily activities and helping patients to remain active are clear goals of COPD management. These may require an holistic approach to management, including pulmonary rehabilitation and psychological programmes in parallel with bronchodilation therapy, in order to address both physiological and behavioural factors. PCPs have an important role to optimise therapy, set goals and communicate the importance of maintaining physical activity to their patients. In addition, optimal treatment that addresses activity-related breathlessness can help prevent the downward spiral of inactivity and get patients moving again, to improve their overall health and long-term prognosis.

GOLD 2021 Strategy Report: Implications for Asthma-COPD Overlap.

In its 2021 strategy report, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease states: "we no longer refer to asthma-COPD overlap (ACO), instead we emphasize that asthma and COPD are different disorders, although they may […] coexist in an individual patient. If a concurrent diagnosis of asthma is suspected, pharmacotherapy should primarily follow asthma guidelines, but pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches may also be needed for their COPD." What does this mean for the treating physician? In this review, we explore the implications of this new guidance on treating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arguing for a personalized approach to treatment.

[What not to do in the therapeutic management of bronchial asthma. Delphi consensus recommendations for physicians who treat asthma]. / Qué no se debe hacer en el manejo terapéutico del asma bronquial. Recomendaciones por consenso Delphi para los médicos que tratan el asma.

Asthma is one of the most prevalent diseases in Spain, yet despite the great diagnostic and therapeutic advances made in this field, health outcomes suggest that up to 80% of patients do not have their asthma well controlled. Although the causes of this situation are diverse, there are some practices among the professionals who treat asthma that are not conducive to improving health outcomes in this disease. Our working group has prepared this document in order to remind clinicians of a series of basic guidelines, aligned with current guidelines and recent literature, and agreed by a multidisciplinary expert panel using Delphi methodology. These recommendations about what not to do in the management of asthma in the adult patient are structured into four areas: diagnosis, monitoring, treatment and prevention of exacerbations.

Work absence in patients with asthma and/or COPD: a population-based study.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma impact on work productivity, but their population-based burden and clinical predictors are understudied. In this observational, real-life study, work absence of 14,383 asthma and/or COPD patients present in the MAJORICA cohort (Spain) was compared with the general population. Using multivariable regression, we studied the association of work absence with demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients with asthma and/or COPD had more work absence than the general population (15.2% vs 8.9%, p < 0.0001). Patients with asthma had more often periods of work absence compared to patients with COPD (16.0% vs 12.8%, p < 0.0001). The number of days absent were, however, less in asthma than in COPD (median: 15 days [IQR: 5-51] vs 39 days [IQR: 13-134], p < 0.001). Patients with asthma-COPD overlap were in between (14.5% with absence; median: 27 days [IQR: 10-82]). Comorbid anxiety, allergic rhinitis, and sleep apnoea were independently associated with more work absence.

Changes in Control Status of COPD Over Time and Their Consequences: A Prospective International Study / Cambios en el estado de control de la EPOC a lo largo del tiempo y sus consecuencias: un estudio internacional prospectivo

INTRODUCTION: Control status may be a useful tool to assess response to treatment at each clinical visit in COPD. Control status has demonstrated to have long-term predictive value for exacerbations, but there is no information about the short-term predictive value of the lack of control and changes in control status over time. METHOD: Prospective, international, multicenter study aimed at describing the short-term (6 months) prognostic value of control status in patients with COPD. Patients with COPD were classified as controlled/uncontrolled at baseline and at 3,6-month follow-up visits using previously validated criteria of control. Moderate and severe exacerbation rates were compared between controlled and uncontrolled visits and between patients persistently controlled, uncontrolled and those changing control status over follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were analyzed: 80 (29.8%) were persistently controlled, 43 (16%) persistently uncontrolled and 144 (53.7%) changed control status during follow-up. Persistently controlled patients were more frequently men, with lower (not increased) body mass index and higher FEV1(%). During the 6 months following an uncontrolled patient visit the odds ratio (OR) for presenting a moderate exacerbation was 3.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.47-4.69) and OR = 4.25 (95%CI 2.48-7.27) for hospitalization compared with a controlled patient visit. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of control status at each clinical visit provides relevant prognostic information about the risk of exacerbation in the next 6 months. Lack of control is a warning signal that should prompt investigation and action in order to achieve control status

INTRODUCCIÓN: El estado de control de la enfermedad puede ser una herramienta útil para evaluar la respuesta al tratamiento de la EPOC en cada asistencia a consulta. El estado de control de la enfermedad ha demostrado tener valor predictivo a largo plazo para las exacerbaciones, pero no existe información sobre el valor predictivo a corto plazo de la falta de control de la EPOC y los cambios en dicho control a lo largo del tiempo. MÉTODO: Estudio prospectivo, internacional, multicéntrico enfocado en describir el valor pronóstico a corto plazo (6 meses) del estado de control de la enfermedad en pacientes con EPOC. Los pacientes con EPOC se clasificaron como con enfermedad controlada/sin controlar al inicio del estudio y en las 3 visitas de seguimiento separadas 6 meses, utilizando criterios de control previamente validados. Se compararon las tasas de exacerbación moderada y grave entre visitas en las que la enfermedad estaba controlada y aquellas en las que no y entre pacientes con control persistente de la enfermedad, pacientes sin control de la enfermedad y aquellos cuyo estado de control cambió durante el seguimiento. RESULTADOS: Se analizó a un total de 267 pacientes: 80 (29,8%) presentaron control persistente de la enfermedad, 43 (16%) permanecieron con enfermedad no controlada de manera persistente y 144 (53,7%) presentaron un cambio en el estado de control de su EPOC durante el seguimiento. Los pacientes con control persistente de su enfermedad fueron con mayor frecuencia hombres, con un índice de masa corporal más bajo (no elevado) y un FEV1 (%) más alto. Durante los 6 meses posteriores a una visita en la que la enfermedad del paciente no estaba controlada, la odds ratio (OR) para presentar una exacerbación moderada fue de 3,41 (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%: 2,47 a 4,69) y la OR = 4,25 (IC del 95%: 2,48 a 7,27) para la hospitalización, en comparación con una visita en la que la EPOC estaba controlada. CONCLUSIONES: La evaluación del estado de control de la EPOC en cada asistencia a consulta proporciona información pronóstica relevante sobre el riesgo de exacerbación en los próximos 6 meses. La falta de control es una señal de alarma que debe motivar la investigación y la acción para lograr el control de la enfermedad

Changes in Control Status of COPD Over Time and Their Consequences: A Prospective International Study.

INTRODUCTION: Control status may be a useful tool to assess response to treatment at each clinical visit in COPD. Control status has demonstrated to have long-term predictive value for exacerbations, but there is no information about the short-term predictive value of the lack of control and changes in control status over time. METHOD: Prospective, international, multicenter study aimed at describing the short-term (6 months) prognostic value of control status in patients with COPD. Patients with COPD were classified as controlled/uncontrolled at baseline and at 3,6-month follow-up visits using previously validated criteria of control. Moderate and severe exacerbation rates were compared between controlled and uncontrolled visits and between patients persistently controlled, uncontrolled and those changing control status over follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were analyzed: 80 (29.8%) were persistently controlled, 43 (16%) persistently uncontrolled and 144 (53.7%) changed control status during follow-up. Persistently controlled patients were more frequently men, with lower (not increased) body mass index and higher FEV1(%). During the 6 months following an uncontrolled patient visit the odds ratio (OR) for presenting a moderate exacerbation was 3.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.47-4.69) and OR=4.25 (95%CI 2.48-7.27) for hospitalization compared with a controlled patient visit. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of control status at each clinical visit provides relevant prognostic information about the risk of exacerbation in the next 6 months. Lack of control is a warning signal that should prompt investigation and action in order to achieve control status.

Asociación entre la utilización de broncodilatadores de corta duración y el riesgo de hospitalización por asma en condiciones de práctica clínica habitual en una cohorte poblacional / Association between the use of short-acting bronchodilators and the risk of hospitalization for asthma in a real-life clinical practice population cohort

OBJETIVO: Determinar la cantidad de envases de broncodilatadores de corta duración (SABA) dispensados en farmacia en un año que se asocia con mayor riesgo de hospitalización por asma en el mismo periodo en pacientes con asma activa. Diseño descriptivo transversal multicéntrico. EMPLAZAMIENTO: Atención primaria, cohorte MAJORICA. Incluye datos codificados durante la práctica asistencial, sociodemográficos, clínicos y del sistema de prescripción electrónica de 68.578 pacientes con EPOC y asma de Baleares. PARTICIPANTES: Se incluyeron 7.648 pacientes mayores de 18 años con asma activa, que retiraron envases de SABA durante el periodo 2014-2015. Se excluyeron pacientes con EPOC. Mediciones principales: Hospitalización por asma, utilización de fármacos respiratorios, tabaquismo, comorbilidades, edad y sexo. RESULTADOS: Edad promedio 47 años, 38% mujeres, 23,2% fumadores activos. Setenta y siete pacientes (1%) ingresaron por exacerbación de asma en el periodo de estudio. Los pacientes que recibieron más de 8 envases de SABA por año aumentaron el riesgo de hospitalización (OR 2,81; IC95% 1,27-6,24). El escalón terapéutico de gravedad, la cantidad de corticoides inhalados, así como la insuficiencia cardíaca y la apnea del sueño se asociaron también significativamente con la hospitalización. CONCLUSIONES: Un mayor escalón terapéutico de gravedad, la presencia de algunas comorbilidades, el consumo de mayor cantidad de corticoides inhalados y de un mayor número de envases de SABA identifica a asmáticos con mayor riesgo de hospitalización. Existe una asociación significativa entre el riesgo de hospitalización y la retirada de un mayor número de envases de SABA de la farmacia. El número de envases/año que mejor define un mayor riesgo de hospitalización es ≥ 8 y se podría utilizar para identificar asmáticos de riesgo

OBJECTIVE: To determine the number of short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) canisters dispensed in a pharmacy during one year that is associated with higher asthma hospitalization risk in the same period in patients with active asthma. Multi-centre cross-sectional descriptive design. LOCATION: Primary care, MAJORICA cohort including sociodemographic, clinical and electronic prescription system data coded during clinical practice from 68,578 patients with COPD and asthma in the Balearic Islands. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 7,648 patients older than 18 years with active asthma, who got any SABA canister from the pharmacy during the 2014-2015 period were included. COPD patients were excluded. Main measurements: Asthma hospitalization, respiratory medication, tobacco, comorbidities, age and gender. RESULTS: Mean age 47 years, 38% women, 23.2% active smokers. Seventy-seven patients (1%) were admitted for asthma exacerbation in the study period. Patients who received more than 8 SABA containers per year increased the risk of hospitalization (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.27-6.24). Severity by therapeutic step and amount of inhaled corticosteroids, as well as heart failure and sleep apnea were also significantly associated with hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant association between the risk of hospitalization and the higher number of SABA canisters dispensed from the pharmacy. The number of canisters/year that best defines a higher risk of hospitalization is ≥ 8 and could be used to identify asthma at risk

The Burden of Self-Reported Rhinitis and Associated Risk for Exacerbations with Moderate-Severe Asthma in Primary Care Patients.

PURPOSE: There is a dearth of research regarding the prevalence and nature of patient-reported rhinitis and its relationship with risk of asthma exacerbations. The aim of this study was to (i) determine the prevalence, severity and treatment of self-reported rhinitis symptoms among adults aged ≥18 years with asthma treated at Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Step 3 and above and (ii) compare the demographics, clinical characteristics, medication use, side-effects and healthcare practitioner review between patients who report rhinitis symptoms and those who do not and (iii) determine whether patient-reported rhinitis is associated with risk of asthma exacerbations in the total patient sample. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis used data from the iHARP (Initiative Helping Asthma in Real-life Patients) asthma review service - a cross-sectional observational study (2011 and 2014) in seven countries that captured data on patient demographics, rhinitis symptoms, asthma symptoms, indicators of exacerbations, medication use, oropharyngeal effects and side-effects, using practitioner- and patient-reported questionnaires. Comparisons between patients with and without rhinitis were tested. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with risk of exacerbations for entry into multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: This report contains data from 4274 patients: 67.4% (2881/4274) reported rhinitis symptoms and of which 65.7% (1894/2881) had not received a doctor diagnosis; 36.5% (1052/2881) had moderate-severe rhinitis, 12.4% (358/2881) had used intranasal corticosteroids and 19.8% (569/2881) oral antihistamines. Patients with coexisting moderate-severe rhinitis were more likely to have GINA-defined uncontrolled asthma than those with mild rhinitis or no rhinitis. Moderate-severe rhinitis was associated with 40% increased risk of asthma exacerbations (OR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.02-1.90). CONCLUSION: This study identified a major gap in the diagnosis and management of rhinitis in a cohort of people with asthma treated at GINA Step 3 and above who are managed in general practice. It highlights the need for practitioners to identify, evaluate and optimally treat rhinitis in adults with asthma, which is a significant factor associated with exacerbation risk.