RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Achieving remission in severe asthma holds paramount importance in elevating patient quality of life and reducing both individual and societal burdens associated with this chronic condition. This study centers on identifying pivotal patient-relevant endpoints through standardized, reproducible methods, while also developing a patient-centric definition of remission, essential for effective disease management. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to assess patients' perceptions on the four primary criteria for defining severe asthma remission, as outlined by the SANI survey. Additionally, it investigated the correlation between these perceptions and improvements in the doctor-patient therapeutic alliance during treatment decision-making. RESULTS: 249 patients (70% aged between 31-60, 59% women and 82% without other pathologies requiring corticosteroids) prioritize the use of oral corticosteroids (OCS, 48%) and the Asthma Control Test (ACT, 27%) in defining their condition, ranking these above lung function and exacerbations. This preference for OCS stems from its direct role in treatment, tangible tracking, immediate symptom relief, and being a concrete measure of disease severity compared to the less predictable and quantifiable exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: This study explores severe asthma remission from patients' perspectives using clinician-evaluated parameters. The DCE revealed that most patients highly value OCS and the ACT, prefer moderate improvement, and avoid cortisone cycles. No definitive preference was found for lung function status. Integrating patient-reported information with professional insights is crucial for effective management and future research. Personalized treatment plans focusing on patient preferences, adherence, and alternative therapies aim to achieve remission and enhance quality of life.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: People with severe asthma (SA) often have poor disease control and quality of life, and are at high risk of exacerbations, lung function decline and asthma-related death. The present expert opinion article aimed to identify unmet needs in the management of SA in Italy, and propose possible solutions to address these needs. METHODS: At five multidisciplinary events in Italy, attendees identified factors that interfered with the effective management of SA and suggested how these barriers could be overcome. A core group of 12 Italian experts (pulmonologists, general practitioners, allergists, payers and patients) identified the main issues and proposed possible solutions based on the results from the meetings and relevant articles from the literature. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We reviewed the gap between real-world practice and guidelines, oral corticosteroid overuse, SA-related mortality, and barriers to effective SA treatment. Common themes were lack of awareness about SA among both patients and clinicians, and lack of networking/information exchange between those involved in the treatment of SA. Participants agreed on the need to implement patient education and create multidisciplinary groups of specialists to improve SA management through multidisciplinary educational initiatives, meetings with local experts, development of a flow chart for referral/connection with local experts and specialized centers. Clinical instruments that might help specialists improve SA management included referral networks, integrated care pathways, phenotyping and treatment algorithms, exacerbation tracking, and examination of electronic medical records for patients with uncontrolled asthma. The following actions need to be implemented in Italy: i) maximize the use of advanced therapies, eg, biologics; ii) increase/improve education for physicians and patients; iii) improve multidisciplinary communication and care coordination; iv) introduce regional and local protocols for SA diagnosis and treatment; and v) change the structure of healthcare services to reduce specialist waiting times and facilitate access to biologic therapies.