Faculty Opinions recommendation of Pharmacogenetic studies of long-acting beta agonist and inhaled corticosteroid responsiveness in randomised controlled trials of individuals of African descent with asthma.

Author(s):  
Gerard H Koppelman ◽  
Elin Kersten
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Joanna Hardy

<p>Background Inhaled corticosteroids taken regularly reduce exacerbation risk in patients with mild asthma. In clinical practice however, adherence to inhaled corticosteroids is poor and the burden of disease from exacerbations is substantive. In this thesis I explore an alternative approach, that of an inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol combination used as sole reliever therapy, that potentially overcomes the problem of poor adherence. I report the results of my research, known as the PeRsonalised Asthma Combination Therapy: with Inhaled Corticosteroid And fast-onset Long acting beta agonist (PRACTICAL) study.   Research aims To investigate the efficacy and safety of as-needed budesonide/formoterol, an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/fast-onset long-acting beta agonist (LABA) combination, as compared with maintenance budesonide (ICS) plus as-needed terbutaline, a short-acting beta-agonist (SABA), in adult patients with mild-moderate asthma.  Methods This research was performed as a 52-week, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, phase III randomised controlled trial of adults aged 18-75 with mild to moderate asthma using SABA for symptom relief, with or without low to moderate doses of maintenance ICS in the previous 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either: (i) budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler, an ICS/fast-onset LABA, 200/6 micrograms (μg), one inhalation as needed for relief of symptoms, or (ii) budesonide Turbuhaler, an ICS, 200µg, one inhalation twice daily, plus terbutaline Turbuhaler, a SABA, 250µg, two inhalations as needed. Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment. Participants were seen for six study visits: randomisation, and at weeks 4, 16, 28, 40 and 52. The primary outcome was rate of severe exacerbations per patient per year, with severe exacerbations defined as the use of systemic glucocorticoids for at least three days because of asthma, or a hospitalisation or emergency department visit because of asthma requiring systemic glucocorticoids.   Findings Between May 4, 2016 and Dec 22, 2017, 890 participants were assigned to treatment. The analysis included 885 of 890 randomised participants; 437 assigned to budesonide/formoterol as needed and 448 to budesonide maintenance plus terbutaline as needed. 70% of participants were using ICS at entry. The annualised severe exacerbation rate was lower with as-needed budesonide/formoterol than with maintenance budesonide (absolute rate 0.119 vs 0.172; relative rate, 0.69 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 1.00]; p=0.049). The Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score with budesonide/formoterol was not significantly different from budesonide maintenance (mean difference, 0.06; 95% CI -0.005 to 0.12).   Conclusion This research has demonstrated that in adults with mild to moderate asthma in the real-world setting, budesonide/formoterol reliever therapy was more effective at preventing severe exacerbations than maintenance low-dose budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline without a clinically important worsening in asthma control.   The evidence presented in this thesis supports the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendation that inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol reliever therapy is an alternative regimen to maintenance low-dose inhaled corticosteroid and SABA reliever for the prevention of severe exacerbations for patients with mild to moderate asthma.</p>


BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k4388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yayuan Zheng ◽  
Jianhong Zhu ◽  
Yuyu Liu ◽  
Weiguang Lai ◽  
Chunyu Lin ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations between triple therapy and dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and clinical trial registries searched from inception to April 2018.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials comparing triple therapy with dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with COPD were eligible. Efficacy and safety outcomes of interest were also available.Data extraction and synthesisData were collected independently. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate rate ratios, hazard ratios, risk ratios, and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methodology (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation).Results21 trials (19 publications) were included. Triple therapy consisted of a long acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long acting β agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). Triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced rate of moderate or severe exacerbations compared with LAMA monotherapy (rate ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.85), LAMA and LABA (0.78, 0.70 to 0.88), and ICS and LABA (0.77, 0.66 to 0.91). Trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and quality of life were favourable with triple therapy. The overall safety profile of triple therapy is reassuring, but pneumonia was significantly higher with triple therapy than with dual therapy of LAMA and LABA (relative risk 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 1.87).ConclusionsUse of triple therapy resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe exacerbations of COPD, better lung function, and better health related quality of life than dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with advanced COPD.Study registrationProspero CRD42018077033.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Joanna Hardy

<p>Background Inhaled corticosteroids taken regularly reduce exacerbation risk in patients with mild asthma. In clinical practice however, adherence to inhaled corticosteroids is poor and the burden of disease from exacerbations is substantive. In this thesis I explore an alternative approach, that of an inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol combination used as sole reliever therapy, that potentially overcomes the problem of poor adherence. I report the results of my research, known as the PeRsonalised Asthma Combination Therapy: with Inhaled Corticosteroid And fast-onset Long acting beta agonist (PRACTICAL) study.   Research aims To investigate the efficacy and safety of as-needed budesonide/formoterol, an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/fast-onset long-acting beta agonist (LABA) combination, as compared with maintenance budesonide (ICS) plus as-needed terbutaline, a short-acting beta-agonist (SABA), in adult patients with mild-moderate asthma.  Methods This research was performed as a 52-week, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, phase III randomised controlled trial of adults aged 18-75 with mild to moderate asthma using SABA for symptom relief, with or without low to moderate doses of maintenance ICS in the previous 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either: (i) budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler, an ICS/fast-onset LABA, 200/6 micrograms (μg), one inhalation as needed for relief of symptoms, or (ii) budesonide Turbuhaler, an ICS, 200µg, one inhalation twice daily, plus terbutaline Turbuhaler, a SABA, 250µg, two inhalations as needed. Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment. Participants were seen for six study visits: randomisation, and at weeks 4, 16, 28, 40 and 52. The primary outcome was rate of severe exacerbations per patient per year, with severe exacerbations defined as the use of systemic glucocorticoids for at least three days because of asthma, or a hospitalisation or emergency department visit because of asthma requiring systemic glucocorticoids.   Findings Between May 4, 2016 and Dec 22, 2017, 890 participants were assigned to treatment. The analysis included 885 of 890 randomised participants; 437 assigned to budesonide/formoterol as needed and 448 to budesonide maintenance plus terbutaline as needed. 70% of participants were using ICS at entry. The annualised severe exacerbation rate was lower with as-needed budesonide/formoterol than with maintenance budesonide (absolute rate 0.119 vs 0.172; relative rate, 0.69 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 1.00]; p=0.049). The Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score with budesonide/formoterol was not significantly different from budesonide maintenance (mean difference, 0.06; 95% CI -0.005 to 0.12).   Conclusion This research has demonstrated that in adults with mild to moderate asthma in the real-world setting, budesonide/formoterol reliever therapy was more effective at preventing severe exacerbations than maintenance low-dose budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline without a clinically important worsening in asthma control.   The evidence presented in this thesis supports the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendation that inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol reliever therapy is an alternative regimen to maintenance low-dose inhaled corticosteroid and SABA reliever for the prevention of severe exacerbations for patients with mild to moderate asthma.</p>


2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (S52) ◽  
pp. s20-s28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Haddad ◽  
Mark Taylor ◽  
Omair S. Niaz

BackgroundAntipsychotic long-acting injections (LAIs) are often used in an attempt to improve medication adherence in people with schizophrenia.AimsTo compare first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injections (FGA–LAIs) with first- and second-generation oral antipsychotics in terms of clinical outcome.MethodSystematic literature review.ResultsA meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed no difference in relapse or tolerability between oral antipsychotics and FGA–LAIs but global improvement was twice as likely with FGA–LAIs. Four prospective observational studies were identified; two studies reported lower discontinuation rates for FGA–LAIs compared with oral medication and two found that outcome was either no different or better with oral antipsychotics. Mirror-image studies consistently showed reduced in-patient days and admissions following a switch from oral antipsychotics to FGA–LAIs.ConclusionsThe results are variable and inconclusive. Some evidence suggests that FGA–LAIs may improve outcome compared with oral antipsychotics. Methodological issues may partly explain the variable results. Selective recruitment in RCTs and lack of randomisation in observational studies are biases against LAIs, whereas regression to the mean in mirror-image studies favours LAIs. In terms of future research, a long-term pragmatic RCT of an FGA–LAI against an oral antipsychotic, in patients with problematic adherence, would be of value.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document