ERJ open research · 2024
Real-world use of inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol as needed in adults with mild asthma: the PRIME study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brusselle Guy, Blasi Francesco, Gessner Christian, Kuna Piotr, Wark Peter, Cappellini Glauco, Oosterom Emilie, Van Der Deijl Marielle, Bucchioni Enrica, Topole Eva
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol fumarate (ICS/FF) as needed is recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) as sole therapy in adults with mild asthma, with low-dose maintenance ICS plus short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) as an alternative. SABA alone is no longer recommended. Given these changes in recommendations, the observational PRIME study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns in mild asthma in Europe.
METHODS: Adults with asthma receiving low-dose maintenance ICS, or as needed ICS/FF or SABA were followed for 6 months. Data collected included Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item (ACQ-5), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and asthma exacerbations.
RESULTS: The study was conducted in 883 patients in Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain; 833 (94.3%) completed follow-up. At enrolment, 32.2% received maintenance ICS, 56.3% ICS/FF as needed and 11.6% SABA as needed; 57.4%, 61.2% and 54.9%, respectively, had well-controlled asthma (ACQ-5/ACT definition). After 6 months, changes in mean FEV1 were small in the maintenance ICS and ICS/FF as needed groups, whereas there was a decline in FEV1 in the SABA as needed group. ACQ-5 total score improved from baseline in all three groups; 0.4%, 0.4% and 2.0% patients, respectively, had a severe exacerbation during the study.
CONCLUSIONS: More patients received ICS/FF as needed than SABA as needed, suggesting that physicians are aware of the latest treatment recommendations. This real-world study provides additional support to the use of ICS/FF as needed as preferred treatment for patients with mild asthma, whereas SABA as needed was associated with a fall in lung function and more severe exacerbations.
METHODS: Adults with asthma receiving low-dose maintenance ICS, or as needed ICS/FF or SABA were followed for 6 months. Data collected included Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item (ACQ-5), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and asthma exacerbations.
RESULTS: The study was conducted in 883 patients in Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain; 833 (94.3%) completed follow-up. At enrolment, 32.2% received maintenance ICS, 56.3% ICS/FF as needed and 11.6% SABA as needed; 57.4%, 61.2% and 54.9%, respectively, had well-controlled asthma (ACQ-5/ACT definition). After 6 months, changes in mean FEV1 were small in the maintenance ICS and ICS/FF as needed groups, whereas there was a decline in FEV1 in the SABA as needed group. ACQ-5 total score improved from baseline in all three groups; 0.4%, 0.4% and 2.0% patients, respectively, had a severe exacerbation during the study.
CONCLUSIONS: More patients received ICS/FF as needed than SABA as needed, suggesting that physicians are aware of the latest treatment recommendations. This real-world study provides additional support to the use of ICS/FF as needed as preferred treatment for patients with mild asthma, whereas SABA as needed was associated with a fall in lung function and more severe exacerbations.