Abstract

Bronchial asthma remains one of the most common chronic respiratory diseases. The apparent heterogeneity of BA underlies the concept of phenotype-specific or patient-centered therapy. However, in real clinical practice, BA continues to be regarded as a rather homogeneous pathological condition and its treatment in the vast majority of cases retains an empirical approach, the basis of which are inhaled glucocorticosteroids, usually in combination with long-acting beta2-agonists. Since this group of drugs is very representative, the physician is faced with the question of choosing the optimal drug. The basis of evidence-based medicine is a hierarchical classification, where systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized clinical trials are considered the highest level of evidence. Because randomized clinical trials are conducted in carefully selected highly selected patient populations, they have little relevance to patients encountered in everyday clinical practice. In contrast, pragmatic randomized clinical trials assess the clinical efficacy of the investigational agent in a large, unselected population in which patients with comorbidities are included. In this context, the Salford Lung Study (SLS) is of particular interest. It was conducted before the registration of a new combination drug containing the modern ICS fluticasone furoate and the long-acting beta2-agonist vilanterol. The SLS results indicated not only that the use of fluticasone furoate with vilanterol provides better control of BA compared to continued "conventional therapy" (ICS ± LABAs) in symptomatic patients, but also leads to a consistent improvement in the surrogate parameters of quality of life.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call