Manifesto on united airways diseases (UAD): an Interasma (global asthma association - GAA) document.

OBJECTIVE: The large amount of evidence and the renewed interest in upper and lower airways involvement in infectious and inflammatory diseases has led Interasma (Global Asthma Association) to take a position on United Airways Diseases (UAD). METHODS: Starting from an extensive literature review, Interasma executive committee discussed and approved this Manifesto developed by Interasma scientific network (INES) members. RESULTS: The manifesto describes the evidence gathered to date and defines, states, advocates, and proposes issues on UAD (rhinitis, rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis), and concomitant/comorbid lower airways disorders (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchiectasis, cystic fibrosis, obstructive sleep apnoea) with the aim of challenging assumptions, fostering commitment, and bringing about change. UAD refers to clinical pictures characterized by the coexistence of upper and lower airways involvement, driven by a common pathophysiological mechanism, leading to a greater burden on patient's health status and requiring an integrated diagnostic and therapeutic plan. The high prevalence of UAD must be taken into account. Upper and lower airways diseases influence disease control and patient's quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with UAD need to have a timely and adequate diagnosis, treatment, and, when recommended, referral for management in a specialized center. Diagnostic testing including skin prick or serum specific IgE, lung function, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), polysomnography, allergen-specific immunotherapies, biological therapies and home based continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) whenever these are recommended, should be part of the management plan for UAD. Education of medical students, physicians, health professionals, patients and caregivers on the UAD is needed.

Manifesto on inhaled triple therapy in asthma: an Interasma (Global Asthma Association - GAA) document.

Objective: The optimal use of drug combinations for the management of asthma is providing significant results. This has prompted Interasma (Global Asthma Association) to take a position on inhaled triple therapy in asthma.Methods: We performed an extensive literature research to clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews.Results: Starting from an extensive literature review, Interasma executive committee discussed and approved this Manifesto, developed by Interasma scientific network (INES) members.Conclusions: The manifesto describes the evidence gathered to date and states, advocates, and proposes issues on inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus long-acting beta 2 agonist (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) with the aim of challenging assumptions, fostering commitment, and bringing about change.

Beliefs and preferences regarding biological treatments for severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers' specialty and experience. METHODS: We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice.