Increasing Doses of Inhaled Corticosteroids Compared to Adding Long-Acting Inhaled β 2 -Agonists in Achieving Asthma Control

CHEST Journal ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 134 (6) ◽  
pp. 1192-1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. O'Byrne ◽  
Ian P. Naya ◽  
Anders Kallen ◽  
Dirkje S. Postma ◽  
Peter J. Barnes
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepak Talwar ◽  
Salil Bendre

BACKGROUND Bronchial asthma remains a clinical enigma with poorly controlled symptoms or exacerbations despite regular use of inhaled corticosteroids. Home nebulization offers a simplified solution for the delivery of rescue and maintenance bronchodilators, which is especially true for patients with frequent exacerbations during management of uncontrolled or difficult-to-treat asthma. OBJECTIVE We aimed to assess the clinical impact and outcomes associated with home nebulization—delivered long-acting bronchodilators for uncontrolled or difficult-to-treat asthma. METHODS This observational, concurrent study was conducted with 60 patients at 2 centers during November 2018. Statistical analyses for prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) asthma control score in patients on long-acting bronchodilators and corticosteroids were conducted, with two-tailed <i>P</i> values &lt;.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS Per protocol analyses (53/60) for consecutive cases receiving home nebulization with long-acting bronchodilators and corticosteroids were conducted. The baseline demographics included a male-to-female ratio of 30:23 and mean values of the following: age, 60.3 years (SD 11.8 years); weight, 64 kg (SD 16.8 kg); FEV1, 43% (SD 16%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 0.8 points); serum eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), 12.1 ppb (SD 6 ppb). Of the patients, 100% (53/53) had uncontrolled symptoms, 69.8% (37/53) had prior exacerbations, 100% (53/53) used formoterol/budesonide, and 75.5% (40/53) used glycopyrronium. The per protocol group (n=53) had significantly improved mean prebronchodilator FEV1 (23.7%, SD 29.8%; 0.46 L, SD 0.58 L; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) and GINA asthma control score (2.1 points, SD 0.8 points, <i>P</i>&lt;.001). At baseline, patients (n=40) receiving glycopyrronium/formoterol/budesonide (25/20/500 mcg) nebulization admixture had the following mean values: prebronchodilator FEV1, 38% (SD 15%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 0.8 points); reversibility, 12% (SD 6%); peripheral eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); FeNO, 12 ppb (SD 5.7 ppb). In the post hoc analyses, these patients had significantly improved mean prebronchodilator FEV1 of 27.7% (SD 26.2%; 0.54 L, SD 0.51 L; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) at 8 weeks compared with baseline. At baseline, patients (n=13) receiving formoterol/budesonide (20/500 mcg) nebulization had the following mean values: FEV1, 55% (SD 12%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 1.2 points); reversibility, 14% (SD 7%); serum eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); FeNO, 13.3 ppb (SD 6.8 ppb). In the post hoc analyses, these patients showed a significant improvement in prebronchodilator FEV1 of 11.2% (SD 13.1%; 0.22 L, SD 0.25 L; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) from baseline. Breathlessness of mild to moderate intensity was reported by 10 cases (10/53, 18.9%), with no other treatment-emergent adverse events or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Home nebulization remains a viable option for symptomatic difficult-to-treat asthma cases with frequent use of rescue medications. Glycopyrronium as add-on therapy offers a synergistic response in patients on corticosteroids with difficult-to-treat asthma. CLINICALTRIAL Clinical Trial Registry of India CTRI/2018/11/016319; https://tinyurl.com/y78cctm3


JAMA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 319 (14) ◽  
pp. 1473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana M. Sobieraj ◽  
William L. Baker ◽  
Elaine Nguyen ◽  
Erin R. Weeda ◽  
Craig I. Coleman ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hampus Persson ◽  
Anne Lindberg ◽  
Nikolai Stenfors

Background. Asthma is common in elite athletes. In this study, we examined the use of asthma medication and asthma control in endurance athletes in Sweden and compared the findings with those in a reference group of patients with asthma. Methods. The Asthma Control Test (ACT) and a questionnaire on asthma, respiratory symptoms, and medication use were posted to endurance athletes n=711 and the reference group of patients with asthma n=1026. Four hundred and sixty-nine athletes (66%) responded, of whom 141 (20%) reported physician-diagnosed asthma. In the reference group, 397 (39%) responded. Results. Seventy-seven percent of the athletes with asthma reported using asthma medication during the previous year; 39% used short/long-acting β2-agonists, 31% used inhaled corticosteroids, and 31% used both daily. According to the ACT scores, 19%, 24%, and 58% of athletes with asthma had uncontrolled, partially controlled, or well-controlled asthma, respectively. After adjustment, there was no difference in ACT scores or daily use of asthma medication between the study groups. Conclusions. Many endurance athletes had uncontrolled or partially controlled asthma, and one-third used inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2-agonists daily. Their adjusted ACT scores and use of asthma medication were similar to the values in the reference population.


2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 00022-2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tari Haahtela ◽  
Olof Selroos ◽  
Paul M. O'Byrne

The term “early intervention” with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in asthma is used in different ways, thereby causing confusion and misinterpretation of data. We propose that the term should be reserved for start of ICS therapy in patients with a diagnosis of asthma but within a short period of time after the first symptoms, not from the date of diagnosis. Prospective clinical studies suggest a time frame of 2 years for the term “early” from the onset of symptoms to starting anti-inflammatory treatment with ICS.The current literature supports early intervention with ICS for all patients with asthma including patients with mild disease, who often have normal or near-normal lung function. This approach reduces symptoms rapidly and allows patients to achieve early asthma control. Later introduction of ICS therapy may not reduce effectiveness in terms of lung function but delays asthma control and exposes patients to unnecessary morbidity. Results of nationwide intervention programmes support the early use of ICS, as it significantly minimises the disease burden.Acute asthma exacerbations are usually preceded by progressing symptoms and lung function decline over a period of 1–2 weeks. Treatment with an increased dose of ICS together with a rapid- and long-acting inhaled β2-agonist during this phase has reduced the risk of severe exacerbations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document