Maintenance And Reliever Therapy Research Articles

Asthma patients' and physicians’ perspectives on the burden and management of asthma: Post-hoc analysis of APPaRENT 1 and 2 to assess predictors of treatment adherence

IntroductionPatient adherence to maintenance medication is critical for improving clinical outcomes in asthma and is a recommended guiding factor for treatment strategy. Previously, the APPaRENT studies assessed patient and physician perspectives on asthma care; here, a post-hoc analysis aimed to identify patient factors associated with good adherence and treatment prescription patterns. MethodsAPPaRENT 1 and 2 were cross-sectional online surveys of 2866 adults with asthma and 1883 physicians across Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Italy, Mexico, and the Philippines in 2020–2021. Combined data assessed adherence to maintenance medication, treatment goals, use of asthma action plans, and physician treatment patterns and preferences. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations between patient characteristics and both treatment prescription (by physicians) and patient treatment adherence. ResultsPatient and physician assessments of treatment goals and adherence differed, as did reporting of short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) prescriptions alongside maintenance and reliever therapy (MART). Older age and greater patient-reported severity and reliever use were associated with better adherence. Patient-reported prescription of SABA with MART was associated with household smoking, severe or poorly controlled asthma, and living in China or the Philippines. ConclusionsResults revealed an important disconnect between patient and physician treatment goals and treatment adherence, suggesting that strategies for improving patient adherence to maintenance medication are needed, focusing on younger patients with milder disease. High reliever use despite good adherence may indicate poor disease control. Personalised care considering patient characteristics alongside physician training in motivational communication and shared decision-making could improve patient management and outcomes.

Budesonide Attains Its Wide Clinical Profile by Alternative Kinetics.

The introduction of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) changed over a few decades the treatment focus of mild-to-moderate asthma from bronchodilation to reduction in inflammation. This was achieved by inhaling a suitable corticosteroid (CS), giving a high, protracted airway concentration at a low total dose, thereby better combining efficacy and tolerance than oral therapy. Successful trials with the potent, lipophilic "skin" CS beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) paved the way, suggesting that ICSs require a very low water solubility, prolonging their intraluminal dissolution within airways. The subsequent ICS development, with resulting clinical landmarks, is exemplified here with budesonide (BUD), showing that a similar efficacy/safety relationship is achievable by partly alternative mechanisms. BUD is much less lipophilic, giving it a 100-fold higher water solubility than BDP and later developed ICSs, leading to its more rapid intraluminal dissolution and faster airway and systemic uptake rates. In airway tissue, a BUD fraction is reversibly esterified to intracellular fatty acids, a lipophilic conjugate, which prolongs airway efficacy. Another mechanism is that the rapidly absorbed bulk fraction, via short plasma peaks, adds anti-inflammatory activity at the blood and bone marrow levels. Importantly, these plasma peaks are too short to provoke systemic adverse actions. Controlled clinical trials with BUD changed the use of ICS from a last resort to first-line treatment. Starting ICS treatment immediately after diagnosis ("early intervention") became a landmark for BUD. An established dose response made BUD suitable for the treatment of patients with all degrees of asthma severity. With the development of the budesonide/formoterol combination inhaler (BUD/FORM), BUD contributed to the widely used BUD/FORM maintenance and reliever therapy (MART). Recent studies demonstrated the value of BUD/FORM as a generally recommended as-needed therapy for asthma ("anti-inflammatory reliever", AIR). These abovementioned qualities have all influenced international asthma management and treatment guidelines.

START CARE: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial of step-wise budesonide-formoterol reliever-based treatment in children.

Asthma is the most common chronic childhood respiratory condition globally. Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol reliever-based regimens reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations compared with conventional short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) reliever-based regimens in adults and adolescents. The current limited evidence for anti-inflammatory reliever therapy in children means it is unknown whether these findings are also applicable to children. High-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are needed. The study aim is to determine the efficacy and safety of budesonide-formoterol reliever alone or maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) compared with standard therapy: budesonide or budesonide-formoterol maintenance, both with terbutaline reliever, in children aged 5 to 11 years with mild, moderate and severe asthma. A 52-week, multicentre, open-label, parallel group, phase III, two-sided superiority RCT will recruit 400 children aged 5 to 11 years with asthma. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to either budesonide-formoterol 100/6 µg Turbuhaler reliever alone or MART; or budesonide or budesonide-formoterol Turbuhaler maintenance, with terbutaline Turbuhaler reliever. The primary outcome is moderate and severe asthma exacerbations as rate per participant per year. Secondary outcomes are asthma control, lung function, exhaled nitric oxide and treatment step change. Assessment of Turbuhaler technique and cost-effectiveness analysis are also planned. This will be the first RCT to compare the efficacy and safety of a step-wise budesonide-formoterol reliever alone or MART regimen with conventional inhaled ICS or ICS-long-acting β-agonist maintenance plus SABA reliever in children. The results will provide a much-needed evidence base for the treatment of asthma in children.

Budesonide/Formoterol or Budesonide/Albuterol as Anti-Inflammatory Reliever Therapy for Asthma

Over use of reliever as short acting beta-agonist (SABA) and associated underuse of controller as inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) administered via separate inhalers results in worse asthma outcomes . Such discordance can be obviated by combining both controller and reliever in the same inhaler. So called anti-inflammatory reliever (AIR) therapy comprises the use of a single inhaler containing an ICS such as budesonide (BUD) in conjunction with a reliever as either albuterol (ALB) or formoterol (FORM) ,to be used on demand with variable dosing driven by asthma symptoms in a flexible patient centred regimen. Global guidelines now support the use of BUD-ALB as AIR therapy to reduce exacerbations , either on its own in mild asthma or in conjunction with fixed dose maintenance ICS-long acting beta-agonist (LABA) in moderate to severe asthma . Using BUD-FORM on its own allows patients to seamlessly move in an intuitive flexible fashion between AIR or maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) , by stepping up and down the dosing escalator across a spectrum of asthma severities . Head to head clinical studies are indicated to compare BUD-FORM versus BUD-ALB as AIR in mild asthma ,and also BUD-FORM as MART versus BUD-ALB as AIR plus maintenance ICS-LABA in moderate to severe asthma. Patients should be encouraged to make an informed decision in conjunction with their health care professional regarding the best therapeutic option tailored to their individual needs , which in turn is likely to result in long term compliance and associated optimal asthma control.

Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (MART) for young people with asthma

Maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) is one device, which serves as both preventer and reliever. In children and young people, the choice is more limited in terms of device and this is called Symbicort MART (SMART). One of the most common modifiable factors for optimal asthma control at any age is adherence to prescribed preventer therapy ( British Thoracic Society(BTS)/Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN), 2019 ). As young patients grow and take increasing responsibility for their own health, perfect adherence can feel impossible for the developing brain (and with this, the ability to effectively analyse risk). As health professionals, it can be easy to focus on the adherence issue as a failure to organise, and to assume all have the capacity to optimally administer a medication twice daily. What we are increasingly learning through the multiple health inequality and psychosocial workstreams is that there are families who are fundamentally less likely to achieve this, even with additional support from their health team, due to an actual or perceived inability to deal with the modifiable factors highlighted by BTS/SIGN.

Improvement of asthma control in adult patients using extrafine inhaled beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination as maintenance therapy as well as maintenance and reliever therapy – CONTROL study

IntroductionExtrafine formulation of beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination (BDP/F pMDI HFA) is approved for both fixed maintenance and maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) of asthma, and recent data has proven that BDP/F pMDI HFA maintenance and reliever therapy is an effective alternative to other regimens. ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the level of asthma control in a real-life setting in adult patients using extrafine BDP/F pMDI HFA fixed combination in a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) as fixed maintenance dosing as well as maintenance and maintenance and reliever therapy. Additionally, we examined patients’ satisfaction with the inhaler device and compliance with therapy as essential factors determining asthma control. MethodsThis multicenter prospective non-interventional observational study lasted 4 months with 3 patient visits. We used the Asthma Control Questionnaire 7 (ACQ-7) to evaluate the degree of asthma control and Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4) to assess compliance. A self-developed questionnaire was used to assess satisfaction with the inhaler device. Results2179 patients using BDP/F pMDI HFA fixed combination as maintenance and reliever therapy or BDP/F pMDI HFA as maintenance therapy and SABA (short-acting beta2-agonist) as a reliever for at least 2 months were included. During the prospective follow-up, we observed an upward trend in the FEV1% (forced expiratory volume in 1 s) predicted values, improvement in the control of symptoms as indicated by a decline in the mean ACQ-7 score was noted (1.62 at Visit 1 vs. 1.21 at Visit 2 vs. 0.94 at Visit 3, p < 0.001) and increase in patients’ compliance (the number of patients that reported forgetting at times to take their medication was reduced from 49.7 % to 27.1 %, p < 0.001). At the same time, we noted a reduction in the number of as-needed doses used for symptom relief (p < 0.001). Most patients were satisfied with the pMDI, considered it easy and convenient to use, and preferred it to a dry powder inhaler (p < 0.001). ConclusionsThe use of extrafine BDP/F pMDI HFA as maintenance as well as reliever therapy seems to be associated with increased asthma control and better compliance to therapy.

A network meta-analysis of the association between patient traits and response to regular dosing with ICS/long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2 agonist reliever or maintenance and reliever therapy for asthma

IntroductionCurrent treatment for moderate–severe asthma with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-based therapy can follow two strategies: a single inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) regimen, or regular dosing with ICS/long-acting β2-agonist used as maintenance therapy plus a separate short acting β2-agonist reliever inhaler. It would be clinically useful to understand the potential of patient traits to influence regular dosing or MART treatment outcomes. ObjectivesA systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis was conducted to identify specific patient traits that may predict improved clinical outcomes with regular dosing or MART. ResultsThe SLR identified 28 studies in patients with moderate–severe asthma assessing regular dosing or MART treatments and reporting the traits and outcomes of interest. Network meta-regressions found no significant difference in the relative efficacy of regular dosing as compared with MART on any of the clinical outcomes (exacerbation rate, time to first exacerbation, FEV1, reliever use and adherence) for any of the patient traits (baseline lung function, baseline ACQ, age, BMI, and smoking history) evaluated. However, some trends towards traits influencing treatment efficacy were identified. Inconsistent reporting of traits and outcomes was observed between trials. ConclusionsThe analysed patient traits evaluated in this study were associated with similar efficacy for the analysed outcomes to either regular dosing or MART; however, trends from the data observed encourage future analyses for possible identification of additional traits, or a combination of traits, that may be of interest. More comparable reporting of clinically important traits and outcomes would improve future analyses.

Assessing the Effects of Changing Patterns of Inhaled Corticosteroid Dosing and Adherence with Fluticasone Furoate and Budesonide on Asthma Management.

Pharmacological asthma management focuses on the use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies, which reduce airway inflammation and provide bronchoprotection, improving symptom control and reducing exacerbation risk. ICS underuse due to poor adherence is common, leading to poor clinical outcomes including increased risk of mortality. This article reviews efficacy versus systemic activity profiles for various adherence patterns and dosing regimens of fluticasone furoate (FF)-containing and budesonide (BUD)-containing asthma therapies in clinical trials and real-world studies. We performed a structured literature review (1January 2000-3March 2022) and mathematical modelling analysis of FF-containing and BUD-containing regular daily dosing in patients with mild-to-severe asthma, as-needed BUD/formoterol (FOR) in mild asthma, and BUD/FOR maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) dosing in moderate-to-severe asthma, to assess efficacy (bronchoprotection) and systemic activity (cortisol suppression) profiles of dosing patterns of ICS use in multiple adherence scenarios. A total of 22 manuscripts were included in full-text review and 18 in the model simulations. Focusing on FF-containing or BUD-containing treatments at comparable adherence rates, regular daily FF or FF/vilanterol (VI) dosing provided more prolonged bronchoprotection and fewer systemic effects than daily BUD, daily BUD/FOR, or BUD/FOR MART dosing, especially in low adherence scenarios. In model simulations and the real-world setting, FF/VI generally provided longer bronchoprotection, lower systemic activity, and greater clinical benefits over BUD/FOR as well as consistently higher adherence. In this literature review and modelling analysis, FF/VI was found to show clinical advantages on asthma control over BUD/FOR. These findings have implications for helping clinicians select the most suitable inhaled therapy for their patients with asthma.

Improving asthma care through implementation of the SENTINEL programme: findings from the pilot site.

Short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) overuse adversely impacts asthma-related outcomes and the environment. The SABA rEductioN Through ImplemeNting Hull asthma guidELines (SENTINEL) programme aims to reduce SABA overuse through supported implementation of an adult asthma guideline, which advocates for a SABA-free maintenance and reliever therapy (MART)-preferred treatment where appropriate, across six primary care networks (PCNs) in the UK. We present findings on patient/disease characteristics, asthma prescribing patterns and exacerbation rates from the pilot PCN. Patients (aged ≥18 years, prescribed at least one inhaled therapy) and their prescribed asthma treatments were characterised using National Health Service data. Asthma treatments and exacerbations were analysed for three periods: 24‒12 months pre-, 12 months pre- and 12 months post-SENTINEL implementation (November 2020‒January 2021). Of the 2571 registered asthma patients, 33.6% (n=864) underwent an asthma review, of whom 44.7% (n=386) were transitioned to MART. Fewer patients were prescribed three or more SABA canisters per year post-implementation in the overall asthma population (45.4% and 46.2% during 24‒12 months and 12 months pre-implementation, respectively, and 23.9% 12 months post-implementation), and in the two subgroups: 1) those who had an asthma review (74.5% and 83.6% during 24‒12 months and 12 months pre-implementation, respectively, and 26.5% post-implementation); and 2) those transitioned to MART following a review (76.4% and 86.5% during 24‒12 months and 12 months pre-implementation, respectively, and 16.3% post-implementation). A higher proportion of patients were exacerbation-free post-implementation in the overall asthma population and in the two subgroups. At least 71.5% of patients transitioned to MART were still prescribed MART 12 months post-implementation, of whom ≥86.7% were SABA-free. SENTINEL implementation led to reduced SABA prescribing, increased inhaled corticosteroid uptake and fewer asthma exacerbations. MART was considered appropriate for ∼50% of reviewed patients, with improved prescribing patterns sustained post-implementation.

Step 1-3 Asthma Treatment Among Allergists Affected By Reduced Insurance Coverage

New asthma guidelines (GINA, 2022; NAEPP EPR-4, 2020), include considerable changes in treatment recommendations, specifically regarding anti-inflammatory rescue and MAintenance and Reliever Therapy (MART). We wanted to explore ACAAI members’ preferred treatment and perceived hurdles.

Postcovid bronchoobstructive syndrome in practice of general practitioner and pulmonologist: large-scale study

It is hard to make a conclusion about relationship between Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Bronchoobstructive Syndrome (BOS) in the postcovid period based on the literature.The aim. To determine the optimal treatment approaches by conducting a comprehensive assessment of clinical, laboratory and functional parameters, taking into account the risk factors for the development of BOS.Methods. 10,456 patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) were examined, and 7,459 patients were randomized into 2 groups with a newly diagnosed BOS. Group 1 (n = 3,245) was prescribed beclomethasone/formoterol (BDP/FORM) as Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (MART). Group 2 (n = 4,252) was prescribed budesonide suspension (BUD) and salbutamol solution (SAL). The study assessed severity of COVID-19, presence of atopy and frequency of acute respiratory viral infections (SARS) in the medical history, spirometric parameters, blood eosinophils, Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 (ACQ-5) score, use of pro re nata medications, and adverse events.Results. Patients who had mild COVID-19 were diagnosed with BOS at weeks 8 – 24 (73.3%), while patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 were diagnosed at week 4 (54.9%). Virus-induced BOS (VI BOS) was diagnosed in 71.8% of the cases. 13% of the patients with BOS in postcovid period were diagnosed with asthma.Conclusion. The incidence of BOS is significantly higher in patients with atopy and history of frequent SARS who had moderate or severe COVID-19. A fixed combination of extrafine BDP/FORM as MART was superior to nebulized BUD + SALM in the treatment of VI BOS.

Patients' and physicians’ perspectives on the burden and management of asthma: Results from the APPaRENT 2 study

BackgroundThe 2021 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) report recommends 2 treatment tracks depending on choice of reliever therapy: either inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol, or short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) with ICS to be used whenever a SABA is taken. ObjectiveThe Asthma Patients' and Physicians’ Perspectives on the Burden and Management of Asthma (APPaRENT) 2 study aimed to understand current real-world treatment approaches and their alignment with GINA recommendations. MethodsPatients and physicians were recruited for the online survey from online panels from August–November 2021. Inclusion criteria: adults, physician diagnosis of asthma, ≥6 months prescribed inhaler use (patients); primary care, ≥4 patients with asthma per month, ≥3 years clinical practice (physicians). Results1650 patients and 1080 physicians were included. For patients with moderate to severe asthma, physicians prescribed proactive regular dosing (PRD) with ICS/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combination with (47%) or without (15%) SABA as initial therapy. Most pulmonologists (75%) and general practitioners (57%) selected a PRD approach. The majority of patients, 85% (79–91%), considered to be using maintenance and reliever therapy (MART), were also prescribed non-ICS rescue inhaler. ConclusionsPhysicians preferred a preventive regular dosing approach to achieve symptom control for patients with moderate to severe asthma, which is more aligned with GINA 2021 Track 2 recommendations than Track 1. Many patients on MART request additional rescue inhalers, suggesting that MART is being misapplied in most instances and that patients may perceive their asthma as inadequately controlled with MART therapy.

Effectiveness of Maintenance and Reliever Therapy Using Inhaled Corticosteroid–Formoterol in Asthmatics

Real-world evidence on the effectiveness of maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) using inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting beta-2 agonist (ICS-LABA) is sparse. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of MART (ICS-formoterol) by comparing its effectiveness with that of ICS-LABA plus as-needed short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) in adult asthmatics. We retrospectively retrieved data from the medical records of the Ajou University Medical Center, Korea, to compare clinical outcomes between patients treated with MART (the MART group) and those treated with ICS-LABA plus SABA (the non-MART group). Propensity score matching was performed and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Severe asthma exacerbation (SAEx) was the primary end point, and asthma exacerbation (AEx), hospitalization, and pneumonia were secondary end points. Corticosteroid requirement was also analyzed. After propensity score matching, the MART and the non-MART groups included 231 and 512 adult asthmatics, respectively. The risk of SAEx and AEx was significantly lower in the MART group than in the non-MART group (HR [95% CI] 0.39 [0.18-0.77] and 0.61 [0.37-0.99], respectively). There was no significant difference in hospitalization and pneumonia risk between the 2 groups (HR [95% CI] 0.88 [0.55-1.37] and 0.63 [0.03-4.51], respectively). Corticosteroid requirements were lower in the MART group than in the non-MART group (median [interquartile range], 190.0 [97.9-420.0] and 411.0 [143.0-833.0] mg/person-year, respectively; P < .01). The MART strategy of ICS-formoterol was associated with lower risk of AEx and reduced corticosteroid requirement.

New Versus Old: The Impact of Changing Patterns of Inhaled Corticosteroid Prescribing and Dosing Regimens in Asthma Management.

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies are the mainstay of pharmacological management of asthma. They can be administered alone or in combination with a long-acting bronchodilator, depending on asthma severity, and may also be supplemented with short-acting bronchodilators for as-needed rescue medication. Adherence to asthma therapies is generally poor and characterized by underuse of ICS therapies and over-reliance on short-acting bronchodilators, which leads to poor clinical outcomes. This article reviews efficacy versus systemic activity profiles for various dosing regimens of budesonide (BUD) and fluticasone propionate (FP). We performed a structured literature review of BUD and FP regular daily dosing, and BUD/formoterol (FOR) as-needed dosing, to explore the relationship between various dosing patterns of ICS regimens and the risk–benefit profile in terms of the extent of bronchoprotection and cortisol suppression. In addition, we explored how adherence could potentially affect the risk–benefit profile, in patients with mild, moderate, and moderate-to-severe asthma. With a specific focus on BUD or FP-containing treatments, we found that regular daily ICS and ICS/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) dosing had a greater degree of bronchoprotection than as-needed BUD/FOR dosing or BUD/FOR maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) dosing, and still maintained low systemic activity. We also found that the benefits of regular daily ICS dosing regimens were diminished when adherence was low (50%); the shorter duration of bronchoprotection observed was similar to that seen with typical as-needed BUD/FOR usage. These findings have implications for aiding clinicians with selecting the most suitable treatment option for asthma management, and subsequent implications for the advice clinicians give their patients.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02092-7.

Recent Advances in Long-Term Management of Asthma.

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases of childhood with significant morbidity. Management of asthma has evolved from inhaled corticosteroids to personalized therapy in recent years. This article summarizes the recent advances in the management of asthma. The severity of asthma is assessed retrospectively by the level of treatment required to control asthma symptoms.Recently, there has been an emphasis on not to use short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) alone, even for intermittent or mild asthma. Single maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) is increasingly being recommended. Asthma therapy should be personalized based on phenotype (clinical presentations) and endotypes (distinct mechanistic pathways) of asthma and by a continuous cycle of assessment of asthma control and risk assessment, treatment, and reviewing the response in children on treatment. Various add-on therapy like tiotropium and biological monoclonal antibodies have been approved for use in a subset of children with severe asthma. Before considering biologicals, it is vital to have a proper diagnosis, good compliance and inhaler technique, and treatment of comorbidities.

The environmental impact of inhalers for asthma: A green challenge and a golden opportunity.

The propellants in metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) are powerful greenhouse gases, which account for approximately 13% of the NHS's carbon footprint related to the delivery of care. Most MDI use is in salbutamol relievers in patients with poorly controlled disease. The UK lags behind Europe in this regard, with greater reliance on salbutamol MDI and correspondingly greater greenhouse gas emissions, roughly treble that of our European neighbours. There has been a broad switch towards MDIs in asthma treatment in the UK over the last 20 years to reduce financial costs, such that the treatment for two-thirds of asthma patients in the UK is dominated by salbutamol MDI. Strategies that replace overuse of reliever MDIs with regimes emphasising inhaled corticosteroids have the potential to improve asthma control alongside significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Real-world evidence shows that once-daily long-acting combination dry-powder inhalers (DPIs) can improve compliance and asthma control, and reduce the carbon footprint of care. Similarly, maintenance and reliever therapy (MART), which uses combination reliever and inhaled steroids in one device (usually a DPI), can simplify therapy, improve asthma control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Both treatment strategies are popular with patients, most of whom would be willing to change treatment to reduce their carbon footprint. By focussing on patients who are currently using high amounts of salbutamol MDI and prioritising inhaled steroids via DPIs, there are golden opportunities to make asthma care in the UK more effective, safer and greener.

Effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonists combinations in real clinical practice: results of a multicenter cross-sectional study in Russian patients with asthma

Asthma management approaches are improving yearly, but the problem of asthma control is still acute. Combinations of inhaled glucocorticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) play a crucial role in asthma therapy, but their effectiveness in real practice can be insufficient, and asthma control level in the population remains low. Optimizing the use of these drugs, changing the usual therapy regimens, and implementing upgraded inhalers can improve adherence to treatment and inhalation technique, which affects the effectiveness of the therapy.The study aimed to describe the key characteristics of the patient population getting asthma treatment in real clinical practice and assess factors influencing asthma control, including adherence to therapy.Methods. A single-stage cross-sectional observational study in 124 primary health care centers in 22 cities of the Russian Federation included 3,214 patients &gt; 18 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of asthma for at least 1 year, who were able to perform a spirometry test and fill out the ACQ-5 and TAI-12 questionnaires.Results. Assessment of asthma control with the ACQ-5 questionnaire showed that most patients had uncontrolled asthma (56%). Controlled and partially controlled asthma was diagnosed in 21 and 19% of patients, respectively. 4% of patients had severe uncontrolled asthma. The TAI questionnaire revealed low adherence to therapy in more than half of the patients (53.6%). The rate of patients with controlled asthma and the average annual frequency of exacerbations were significantly lower in subgroups of patients who received therapy with extrafine ICS/LABA and ICS/formoterol in single inhaler regimen, compared with controller therapy using fixed and free combinations of ICS and LABA.Conclusion. The main causes of insufficient asthma control are low adherence to treatment, inhalation errors, monotherapy with ICS, asthma with small airways dysfunction, and adverse events associated with ICS. Prescribing the combinations of ICS/LABA in the form of extra-fine aerosol and using it in the Maintenance and Reliever Therapy (MART) regimen can significantly increase asthma control, reduce the risk of adverse events, and increase patient adherence to treatment. A potential alternative to improve asthma control is administering ICS-LABA combinations once daily.

Adherence, quality of life, and satisfaction with conventional fix combined therapy versus maintenance and reliever therapy in patients with asthma after inhaler training

Objective Treatment adherence, asthma control, inhaler satisfaction, and quality of life of patients with asthma were investigated to examine whether there were any differences between conventional fixed combined therapy and maintenance and reliever therapy after inhaler education. Methods Cross-sectional observational follow-up of 120 patients with asthma receiving third- and fourth-step treatment was completed at zero, three, and six months. Fifty-eight patients received long-acting beta-agonists or inhaler corticosteroids (ICS) as maintenance therapy and short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) as reliever therapy (CONV) with Diskus and Ellipta devices. Sixty-two patients received ICS/formoterol as maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) with metered-dose inhaler and Turbuhaler devices. The asthma control test (ACT), feeling of satisfaction with the inhaler (FSI-10) questionnaire, Morisky Green Levine (MGL) scale, and quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) were evaluated at each visit. Results Significant improvement was observed in the ACT, AQLQ, FSI-10, MGL scales, and inhaler technique in both groups over time (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the MGL scale between the groups at all visits. Nonadherence was highest in the Diskus device group (55%) and lowest in the Ellipta device group at the first visit (25%). While 36% of the patients had low adherence at the first visit, this decreased to 12% by the last visit. A significant correlation was found between ACT and MGL at all visits (p < 0.001). Conclusion Asthma control, adherence, inhaler satisfaction, and quality of life improved equally with regular follow-up and standard inhaler education in the CONV and MART groups.

Direct healthcare costs associated with management of asthma: comparison of two treatment regimens in Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam

Objective Daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta-2-agonist (LABA) combinations comprising either regular maintenance therapy with ICS/LABA plus as-needed short-acting beta-2-agonist (SABA) or ICS-formoterol combinations used as maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) are recommended for moderate asthma. This analysis compares the direct costs of twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/salm) and budesonide/formoterol MART in three Southeast Asian countries. Methods A literature review identified three randomized trials in patients with asthma (≥ 12 years) comparing regular twice-daily FP/salm with as-needed SABA versus MART in moderate asthma: AHEAD (NCT00242775/17 countries/2309 patients), COMPASS (AstraZeneca study SD-039-0735/16 countries/3335 patients), and COSMOS (AstraZeneca study SD-039-0691/16 countries/2143 patients). Economic analyses, conducted from a healthcare sector perspective (medication costs + healthcare utilization costs), applied unit costs from countries where healthcare costs are publicly available: Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam. Results are expressed in British pound sterling (GBP/patient/year). Results Annual exacerbation rates were low and differences between treatment strategies were small (range, FP/salm: 0.31–0.38, MART: 0.24–0.25) although statistically significant in favor of MART. Total average (minimum-maximum) direct costs (in GBP/patient/year) across the three studies were £187 (£137–£284), £158 (£125–£190), and £151 (£141–£164) for those who used FP/salm, and £242 (£217–£267), £284 (£237–£340) and £266 (£224–£315) for MART in Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, respectively. On average, total direct costs/patient/year with FP/salm were 22.8%, 44.6% and 43.0% lower than with MART for Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, respectively. Conclusions In the three countries evaluated, total treatment costs with regular twice-daily FP/salm were consistently lower than with budesonide/formoterol MART due to lower direct healthcare costs.

Direct healthcare cost comparison of Fluticasone propionate/Salmeterol vs Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance And Reliever Therapy for moderate/severe asthma: Results from Thailand.

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA) for moderate/severe asthma i.e. regular Fluticasone propionate/Salmeterol (FP/Salm) with as-needed short acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) or ICS/Formoterol Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (MART) are the recommended options. To compare healthcare cost between regular FP/Salm with as-needed SABA vs MART in Thailand. Direct healthcare cost data from 3 published randomized trials in asthma patients aged ≥12 years comparing regular twice-daily FP/Salm with as-needed SABA vs Budesonide/Formoterol (BUD/Form) MART in moderate/severe asthma were considered: AHEAD (NCT00242775/17 countries/2309 patients), COMPASS (AstraZeneca study SD-0390735/16 countries/3335 patients), and COSMOS (AstraZeneca study SD-039-0691/16 countries/2143 patients). Total direct treatment cost comparison/patient/year was calculated as a combination from 1) medication costs plus 2) healthcare utilization costs i.e. cost for health care visit, emergency room visit, and hospitalization. Unit costs referred from National drug information and Health Intervention and Technology Assessment (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health. Annual medication costs of FP/Salm + SABA were lower than MART in all studies with average cost as 182.01 vs 347.21 USD. Average annual healthcare utilization costs were 17.51 vs 13.01 USD in FP/Salm + SABA and MART, respectively. In overall, total direct treatment costs/patient/year with FP/Salm was 199.53 vs 360.22 USD of MART. Percent saving of total direct treatment costs by FP/Salm + SABA was 45% lower than with MART. In moderate/severe asthma patients, total direct treatment costs with regular twice-daily FP/Salm with as-needed SABA were lower than with BUD/Form MART primarily due to lower medication costs. Healthcare cost should be considered for asthma care in Thailand.