Anti-Asthmatic Agents

抗哮喘药
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    过敏性哮喘对生活质量有相当大的负担。很大一部分中度至重度过敏性哮喘患者需要奥马珠单抗,抗免疫球蛋白E单克隆抗体,作为一种附加疗法。在这项III期临床试验P043(泽拉非®,CinnaGen,伊朗)功效,安全,和免疫原性与Xolair®(鼻祖奥马珠单抗)进行比较。主要结局是方案定义的哮喘加重率。
    恶化率,哮喘控制测试(ACT)结果,肺活量测定,免疫原性,并对安全性进行了评估。基于治疗前血清总IgE水平(IU/mL)和体重(kg),每个受试者每2或4周接受150至375mg剂量的药物,持续28周。
    P043组的加重率为0.150(CI:0.079-0.220),奥马珠单抗组(按方案)为0.190(CI:0.110-0.270)。预测第一秒用力呼气量(FEV1)的最小二乘均值分别为-2.51%(CI:-7.17-2.15,P=0.29)和-3.87%(CI:-8.79-1.04,P=0.12),前和后支气管扩张剂的使用。筛查和最后一次就诊时的ACT评分的平均±SD在P043中为10.62±2.93和20.93±4.26,在奥马珠单抗组中为11.09±2.75和20.46±5.11。256名参与者共报告了288起不良事件。其中,“呼吸困难”和“头痛”是报告最多的。不良事件(P=0.62)和严重不良事件(P=0.07)的总发生率两组间差异无统计学意义。没有样品的抗药物抗体是阳性的。
    P043与奥马珠单抗在哮喘发作减少方面的疗效相当。其他疗效和安全性参数无显著差异。
    www.clinicaltrials.gov(NCT05813470)和www。IRCT。红外光谱(IRCT20150303021315N20)。
    UNASSIGNED: Allergic asthma has a considerable burden on the quality of life. A significant portion of moderate-to-severe allergic asthma patients need omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin-E monoclonal antibody, as an add-on therapy. In this phase III clinical trial P043 (Zerafil®, CinnaGen, Iran) efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were compared with Xolair® (the originator omalizumab). The primary outcome was the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations.
    UNASSIGNED: Exacerbation rates, Asthma Control Test (ACT) results, spirometry measurements, immunogenicity, and safety were evaluated. Each subject received either medication with a dose ranging from 150 to 375 mg based on pre-treatment serum total IgE level (IU/mL) and body weight (kg) every two or four weeks for a duration of 28 weeks.
    UNASSIGNED: Exacerbation rates were 0.150 (CI: 0.079-0.220) in the P043 group, and 0.190 (CI: 0.110-0.270) in the omalizumab group (per-protocol). The least squares mean differences of predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in the First second (FEV1) were -2.51% (CI: -7.17-2.15, P=0.29) and -3.87% (CI: -8.79-1.04, P=0.12), pre- and post-bronchodilator use. The mean ± SD of ACT scores at the screening and the last visit were 10.62 ± 2.93 and 20.93 ± 4.26 in P043 and 11.09 ± 2.75 and 20.46 ± 5.11 in the omalizumab group. A total of 288 adverse events were reported for the 256 enrolled participants. Among all, \"dyspnea\" and \"headache\" were the most reported ones. The overall incidence of adverse events (P=0.62) and serious adverse events (P=0.07) had no significant differences between the two groups. None of the samples were positive for anti-drug antibodies.
    UNASSIGNED: P043 was equivalent to omalizumab in the management of asthma in reduction of exacerbations. There was no significant difference in other efficacy and safety parameters.
    UNASSIGNED: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05813470) and www.IRCT.ir (IRCT20150303021315N20).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本回顾性纵向队列研究旨在探索儿童咳嗽变异性哮喘(CVA)的最佳治疗方案和治疗持续时间。
    方法:将314例CVA患儿分为吸入性糖皮质激素(ICS)联合长效β2激动剂(LABA)组,ICS联合白三烯受体拮抗剂(LTRA)组,ICS单药治疗组和LTRA单药治疗组。对所有临床资料进行统计学分析。采用Logistic回归模型比较不同治疗方案在各随访时间点的优缺点及最佳治疗方案。采用基于逆概率加权的Cox比例风险回归模型,以哮喘复发或进展为终点,比较不同用药方案对不良结局的影响。
    结果:(1)经过综合分析,ICS+LABA组是8周内CVA的首选对照方案。经过8周的诊断,ICS组或LTRA组的疗效与ICS+LABA组和ICS+LTRA组相当.(2)ICS+LABA组早期咳嗽有明显改善,特别是在第4周时;ICS+LTRA和ICS组的症状在第36周时显著改善.单独的LTRA组在20周时显示出显著的改善。
    结论:ICS+LABA,ICS+LTRA,单独ICS和单独LTRA可以有效治疗CVA。ICS+LABA可以在CVA诊断后8周内最快改善症状,其次是ICS+LATR组。8周后,基于儿童症状的缓解,可将其减少至单独ICS以控制CVA至少36周.
    OBJECTIVE: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study aimed to explore the best therapeutic regimen and treatment duration of cough variant asthma (CVA) in children.
    METHODS: A total of 314 children with CVA were divided into receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) combined with long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) group, ICS combined with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) group, ICS monotherapy group and LTRA monotherapy group. All clinical data were statistically analyzed. Logistic regression model was used to compare the advantages and disadvantages of different treatment schemes at each follow-up time point and the best treatment scheme. The Cox proportional hazard regression model based on inverse probability weighting was used to compare the effects of different medication regimens on adverse outcomes with asthma recurrence or progression as the end point.
    RESULTS: (1) After comprehensive analysis, ICS + LABA group was the preferred control regimen for CVA within 8 weeks. After 8 weeks of diagnosis, the efficacy of ICS group or LTRA group was comparable to that of ICS + LABA group and ICS + LTRA group. (2) The ICS + LABA group showed a significant improvement in cough at an early stage, particularly at 4 weeks; the symptoms of ICS + LTRA and ICS groups were significantly improved at 36 weeks. The LTRA group alone showed significant improvement at 20 weeks.
    CONCLUSIONS: ICS + LABA, ICS + LTRA, ICS alone and LTRA alone can effectively treat CVA. ICS + LABA could improve the symptoms most quickly within 8 weeks after CVA diagnosis, followed by ICS + LATR group. After 8 weeks, it can be reduced to ICS alone to control CVA for at least 36 weeks based on the remission of symptoms in children.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:以前的研究报道,使用吸入糖皮质激素加福莫特罗维持和缓解治疗(MART)的哮喘患者可降低急性加重率并改善症状控制。糠酸氟替卡松(FF)和维兰特罗(VIL)也提供快速支气管扩张和持续的抗炎作用,然而,没有研究调查FF/VIL作为哮喘控制的MART。
    方法:从2021年10月1日至2023年9月30日,这项回顾性研究纳入了根据全球哮喘倡议指南分类为第3步或第4步的哮喘患者,然后被分成两组。一组以MART的身份接受BUD/FOR,而另一个收到FF/VIL作为MART。肺功能检查,恶化率,哮喘控制测试(ACT),呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)水平,治疗前和治疗12个月后测定血嗜酸性粒细胞计数。
    结果:共纳入161例患者,其中36人每天两次作为MART接受BUD/FOR,125人每天接受一次FF/VIL作为MART。经过12个月的治疗,FF/VIL组ACT评分显著增加1.57(p<0.001),而BUD/FOR组增加了0.88(p=0.11)。在FeNO水平方面,BUD/FOR组下降了-0.2ppb(p=0.98),而FF/VIL组轻度增加+0.8ppb(p=0.7)。值得注意的是,两组之间的FeNO变化有显着差异(ΔFeNO:BUD/FOR-0.2ppb;FF/VIL-0.8ppb,p<0.001)。FEV1、血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数无明显改变,或两组急性加重下降。
    结论:在当前的研究中,接受FF/VIL作为MART治疗的患者ACT评分改善,而用BUD/FOR作为MART治疗的患者表现出FeNO水平的降低。然而,两个治疗组之间的差异未达到临床意义。因此,作为MART的FF/VIL显示出与作为MART的BUD/FOR相似的有效性。
    BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported reduced acute exacerbation rates and improved symptom control in asthma patients treated using inhaled corticosteroids plus formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (MART). Fluticasone furoate (FF) and vilanterol (VIL) also provide rapid bronchodilation and sustained anti-inflammatory effects, however no studies have investigated FF/VIL as MART for asthma control.
    METHODS: From October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2023, this retrospective study included asthma patients classified as step 3 or 4 according to the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines, who were then divided into two groups. One group received BUD/FOR as MART, while the other received FF/VIL as MART. Pulmonary function tests, exacerbation rates, Asthma Control Test (ACT), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels, and blood eosinophil counts were measured before and after 12 months of treatment.
    RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were included, of whom 36 received BUD/FOR twice daily as MART, and 125 received FF/VIL once daily as MART. After 12 months of treatment, the FF/VIL group showed a significant increase in ACT scores by 1.57 (p < 0.001), while the BUD/FOR group had an increase of 0.88 (p = 0.11). In terms of FeNO levels, the BUD/FOR group experienced a decline of -0.2 ppb (p = 0.98), whereas the FF/VIL group had a mild increase of + 0.8 ppb (p = 0.7). Notably, there was a significant difference in the change of FeNO between the two groups (∆ FeNO: -0.2 ppb in BUD/FOR; + 0.8 ppb in FF/VIL, p < 0.001). There were no significant alterations observed in FEV1, blood eosinophil count, or acute exacerbation decline in either group.
    CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, patients treated with FF/VIL as MART showed improvements in ACT scores, while those treated with BUD/FOR as MART exhibited a reduction in FeNO levels. However, the difference between the two treatment groups did not reach clinical significance. Thus, FF/VIL as MART showed similar effectiveness to BUD/FOR as MART.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    使用数字传感器技术(iPREDICT)开发了个性化预测疾病控制计划,用于使用数字技术进行哮喘管理。将设备集成到患者的日常生活中,以最小的设备负担通过测量基线健康状况的变化来建立哮喘控制的预测模型。
    为了建立研究参与者的基线疾病特征,检测与哮喘事件相关的基线变化,并评估能够从基线数据识别触发因素和预测哮喘控制变化的算法。还探索了患者的经验和对设备的依从性。
    这是一个多中心,观察,24周,在美国进行的概念验证研究。
    患者(12年)患有严重,不受控制的哮喘与肺活量计有关,生命体征监测仪,睡眠监视器,连接的吸入器装置,和两个带有嵌入式患者报告结果(PRO)问卷的移动应用程序。将预期数据与电子健康记录中的数据相关联,并传输到安全平台以开发预测算法。主要终点是哮喘事件:患者症状恶化(PRO);呼气峰值流量(PEF)<65%或1s内用力呼气量<80%;短效β2激动剂(SABA)使用增加(>8次/24小时或>4次/天/48小时)。对于每个端点,预测模型是在人群中构建的,子组,和个人水平。
    总的来说,选择了108例患者:66例(61.1%)完成,42例(38.9%)因未能响应/数据缺失而被排除。预测准确性取决于终点选择。人口水平模型在预测终点如PEF<65%方面的准确性较低。与特定过敏相关的亚组,哮喘触发因素,哮喘类型,加重治疗显示出很高的准确性,用最准确的,预测终点>4SABA抽吸/天/48小时。个体模型,为具有高终点重叠的患者构建,表现出显著的预测准确性,特别是对于PEF<65%和>4SABA粉扑/天/48小时。
    此多维数据集启用了population-,子组-,和个人层面的分析,为哮喘波动控制预测模型的发展提供概念验证证据.
    UNASSIGNED: The individualized PREdiction of DIsease Control using digital sensor Technology (iPREDICT) program was developed for asthma management using digital technology. Devices were integrated into daily lives of patients to establish a predictive model of asthma control by measuring changes from baseline health status with minimal device burden.
    UNASSIGNED: To establish baseline disease characteristics of the study participants, detect changes from baseline associated with asthma events, and evaluate algorithms capable of identifying triggers and predicting asthma control changes from baseline data. Patient experience and compliance with the devices were also explored.
    UNASSIGNED: This was a multicenter, observational, 24-week, proof-of-concept study conducted in the United States.
    UNASSIGNED: Patients (⩾12 years) with severe, uncontrolled asthma engaged with a spirometer, vital sign monitor, sleep monitor, connected inhaler devices, and two mobile applications with embedded patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires. Prospective data were linked to data from electronic health records and transmitted to a secure platform to develop predictive algorithms. The primary endpoint was an asthma event: symptom worsening logged by patients (PRO); peak expiratory flow (PEF) < 65% or forced expiratory volume in 1 s < 80%; increased short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) use (>8 puffs/24 h or >4 puffs/day/48 h). For each endpoint, predictive models were constructed at population, subgroup, and individual levels.
    UNASSIGNED: Overall, 108 patients were selected: 66 (61.1%) completed and 42 (38.9%) were excluded for failure to respond/missing data. Predictive accuracy depended on endpoint selection. Population-level models achieved low accuracy in predicting endpoints such as PEF < 65%. Subgroups related to specific allergies, asthma triggers, asthma types, and exacerbation treatments demonstrated high accuracy, with the most accurate, predictive endpoint being >4 SABA puffs/day/48 h. Individual models, constructed for patients with high endpoint overlap, exhibited significant predictive accuracy, especially for PEF < 65% and >4 SABA puffs/day/48 h.
    UNASSIGNED: This multidimensional dataset enabled population-, subgroup-, and individual-level analyses, providing proof-of-concept evidence for development of predictive models of fluctuating asthma control.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:尽管最佳的标准治疗,严重哮喘(SA)仍存在相当大的医疗保健挑战。Dupilumab,对2型(T2)SA患者有效,演示变量响应,将患者归类为无应答者,部分响应者,或那些实现临床缓解的人。然而,现实世界的反应率仍然不足。此外,了解获得临床缓解的患者的特征对于预测dupilumab的有利反应至关重要.
    目的:在真实世界的SA患者队列中,调查应答者类型并确定dupilumab诱导的临床缓解和无反应的预测因子。
    方法:我们分析了在FranciscusGathuis&Vlietland医院进行的一项研究中接受dupilumab治疗的SA患者的回顾性数据。在基线和12至24个月随访时收集数据(T=12)。在T=12时评估反应率。使用多变量逻辑回归分析和逐步前向变量选择方法研究了无反应和临床缓解的预测因素。
    结果:在筛查的175名患者中,136符合纳入标准。T=12时,31.6%达到临床缓解,47.1%为部分反应者,21.3%为无反应者。与临床缓解相关的预测因素包括高基线血嗜酸性粒细胞计数(BEC)和男性。相反,基线时年龄较小,低基线总免疫球蛋白E(IgE)水平和低基线呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)水平被确定为无应答的预测因子.
    结论:Dupilumab在1/3的治疗患者中导致临床疾病缓解。高BEC和男性预测临床缓解,而总IgE低,低FeNO和年龄较小表明反应的可能性较低。
    BACKGROUND: Severe asthma (SA) presents a considerable healthcare challenge despite optimal standard treatment. Dupilumab, which is effective in type 2 (T2) SA patients, demonstrates variable responses, categorizing patients as non-responders, partial responders, or those achieving clinical remission. However, real-world response rates remain underexplored. Additionally, understanding the characteristics of patients achieving clinical remission is crucial for predicting favourable responses to dupilumab.
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate responder types and identify predictors of clinical remission and non-response induced by dupilumab in a real-world cohort of SA patients.
    METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from SA patients undergoing dupilumab treatment in a study conducted at Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland hospital. Data were collected at baseline and at a 12 to 24-months follow-up (T = 12). Response rates were evaluated at T = 12. Predictors of non-response and clinical remission were investigated using multivariate logistic regression analysis with a stepwise forward variable selection approach.
    RESULTS: Among the 175 patients screened, 136 met the inclusion criteria. At T = 12, 31.6 % achieved clinical remission, 47.1 % were partial responders and 21.3 % were non-responders. Predictors associated with clinical remission included high baseline blood eosinophil counts (BEC) and male sex. Conversely, younger age at baseline, low baseline total immunoglobin E (IgE) and low baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels were identified as predictors of non-response.
    CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab results in clinical disease remission in one-third of the treated patients. Clinical remission is predicted by high BEC and male sex, whereas low total IgE, low FeNO and younger age indicate a lower likelihood of response.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:射干麻黄汤(SMD)是一种经典的配方,已用于有效治疗寒冷诱发的哮喘(CA)1800年。气道平滑肌细胞(ASMC)在CA的气道重塑中起着至关重要的作用,并且可以通过苦味感应2型受体(TAS2R)进行调节。鉴于SMD含有许多苦味草药,ASMC中的TAS2R10表达始终很高,探讨SMD是否通过TAS2R10调节ASMC以发挥其CA机制。
    目的:本研究探讨了SMD在CA中的疗效和潜在机制。
    方法:在本研究中,使用卵清蛋白(OVA)诱导的CA大鼠模型进行体内实验。使用以下方法评估CA大鼠SMD和TAS2R10表达的影响:临床症状,重量,病理染色,免疫荧光染色(IF),酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA),实时定量聚合酶链反应(RT-qPCR)和蛋白质印迹(WB)。体外检测包括细胞计数试剂盒-8(CCK-8),ELISA,流式细胞术,TUNEL染色,通过RT-qPCR和WB研究SMD通过上调TAS2R10对ASMC增殖和凋亡的潜在机制。
    结果:使用SMD可显著改善症状,体重趋势,在TAS2R10上调的CA大鼠中观察到的气道炎症和气道重塑。机械上,我们进一步证实SMD通过上调TAS2R10抑制p70S6K/CyclinD1通路。SMD还阻断了G0/G1相,抑制血小板源性生长因子-BB(PDGF-BB)诱导的ASMCs增殖和诱导凋亡。红霉素(EM),一种TAS2R10激动剂,可以加强这些影响。
    结论:SMD通过上调TAS2R10和抑制p70S6K/CyclinD1通路显著改善CA,从而调节ASMC的增殖和凋亡。受中医五味理论的启发,本研究为CA的治疗提供了一个更新的治疗视角.
    BACKGROUND: Shegan-Mahuang Decoction (SMD) is a classical formula that has been used to effectively treat cold-induced asthma (CA) for 1800 years. Airway smooth muscle cells (ASMCs) play a crucial role in airway remodeling of CA and can be modulated through bitter taste-sensing type 2 receptors (TAS2Rs). Given that SMD contains numerous bitter herbs and TAS2R10 expression in ASMCs remains consistently high, it is pertinent to explore whether SMD regulates ASMCs via TAS2R10 to exert its CA mechanism.
    OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the efficacy as well as the potential mechanism of SMD in CA.
    METHODS: In this study, experiments in vivo were conducted using the CA rat model induced by ovalbumin (OVA) along with cold stimulation. The effects of SMD and TAS2R10 expression in CA rats were evaluated using the following methods: clinical symptoms, weights, pathological staining, immunofluorescence staining (IF), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and Western blot (WB). Assays in vitro including cell counting Kit-8 (CCK-8), ELISA, flow cytometry, TUNEL staining, RT-qPCR and WB were performed to investigate potential mechanism of SMD on the proliferation and apoptosis of ASMCs through upregulation of TAS2R10.
    RESULTS: The administration of SMD resulted in a notable improvement in the symptoms, trends in weight, airway inflammation and airway remodeling observed in CA rats with upregulated TAS2R10. Mechanistically, we furtherly confirmed that SMD inhibits p70S6K/CyclinD1 pathway by upregulating TAS2R10. SMD furthermore blocked the G0/G1 phase, suppressed the proliferation and inducted apoptosis in ASMCs induced by platelet-derived growth factor-BB (PDGF-BB). Erythromycin (EM), a TAS2R10 agonist, can intensify these effects.
    CONCLUSIONS: SMD significantly ameliorates CA by upregulating TAS2R10 and inhibiting the p70S6K/CyclinD1 pathway, thereby modulating ASMCs\' proliferation and apoptosis. Inspired by the Five Flavors Theory of Traditional Chinese Medicine, this study provides an updated treatment perspective for treating CA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:立即症状控制之间的关系,尚未以综合方式评估缓解药物的使用和治疗反应的恶化风险以及改变其的因素。在这里,我们应用模拟方案来评估个体基线特征对中重度哮喘患者治疗反应的影响,这些患者使用丙酸氟替卡松(FP)常规维持剂量单药或丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗(FP/SAL)或布地奈德/福莫特罗(BUD/FOR)联合治疗。
    方法:减少缓解药物使用(抽吸/24小时),症状控制评分的变化(ACQ-5),在一组具有不同基线特征的患者中模拟了超过12个月的年度恶化率(例如,自诊断以来的时间,哮喘控制问卷(ACQ-5)症状评分,吸烟状况,体重指数(BMI)和性别)使用来自大型III/IV期临床研究的药物-疾病模型。
    结果:模拟场景表明,作为一名吸烟者,具有较高的基线ACQ-5和BMI,长期哮喘病史与使用缓解药物有关(p<0.01)。在治疗过程中,这种增加与更高的恶化风险和更高的ACQ-5评分相关。不管潜在的维持治疗。3个月后将无应答者转换为ICS单一疗法至联合疗法可立即减少缓解药物的使用(即1.3vs.FP/SAL和BUD/FOR为1.0抽吸/24小时,分别)。此外,将基线时ACQ-5>1.5的患者转换为FP/SAL导致的恶化比接受常规给药BUD/FOR的患者减少34%(p<0.01).
    结论:我们已经确定了中度至重度哮喘患者的基线特征,这些特征与使用更多的缓解药物有关。症状控制不佳,加重风险较高。此外,考虑到长期治疗效果,不同吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)/长效β受体激动剂(LABA)组合的效果差异显著.在临床实践中应考虑这些因素,作为对中重度哮喘症状患者进行个性化管理的基础。
    在这项研究中,我们观察了不同的因素如何影响那些经常服用药物的中度至重度哮喘患者对哮喘治疗的反应。具体来说,我们想量化哮喘持续时间,症状控制程度和肺功能的差异,以及吸烟习惯,体重,性影响一个人对定期维持治疗的反应。使用基于从大量中重度哮喘患者中获得的模型的计算机模拟,我们探讨了在12个月内,在接受吸入型糖皮质激素单独或联合长效β受体激动剂治疗的患者的实际生活管理情况.我们看了他们用了多少缓解吸入器,他们对哮喘控制的评价有多好,以及他们哮喘发作的频率。把这些结果放在一起考虑,我们评估了治疗对持续症状和/或降低未来哮喘发作风险的效果.我们的模拟显示吸烟者,哮喘症状评分较高的人,肥胖的人,并且有更长的哮喘病史倾向于更频繁地使用他们的缓解吸入器。这与哮喘发作的风险较高和症状控制较差有关。将那些对皮质类固醇的初始治疗反应不佳的患者转换为联合治疗,可以减少他们需要的缓解吸入器的数量。此外,丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗联合治疗的效果大于布地奈德/福莫特罗.总之,我们的研究发现,某些患者特征可以预测患者对哮喘治疗的反应。
    BACKGROUND: The relationship between immediate symptom control, reliever medication use and exacerbation risk on treatment response and factors that modify it have not been assessed in an integrated manner. Here we apply simulation scenarios to evaluate the effect of individual baseline characteristics on treatment response in patients with moderate-severe asthma on regular maintenance dosing monotherapy with fluticasone propionate (FP) or combination therapy with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR).
    METHODS: Reduction in reliever medication use (puffs/24 h), change in symptom control scores (ACQ-5), and annualised exacerbation rate over 12 months were simulated in a cohort of patients with different baseline characteristics (e.g. time since diagnosis, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ-5) symptom score, smoking status, body mass index (BMI) and sex) using drug-disease models derived from large phase III/IV clinical studies.
    RESULTS: Simulation scenarios show that being a smoker, having higher baseline ACQ-5 and BMI, and long asthma history is associated with increased reliever medication use (p < 0.01). This increase correlates with a higher exacerbation risk and higher ACQ-5 scores over the course of treatment, irrespective of the underlying maintenance therapy. Switching non-responders to ICS monotherapy to combination therapy after 3 months resulted in immediate reduction in reliever medication use (i.e. 1.3 vs. 1.0 puffs/24 h for FP/SAL and BUD/FOR, respectively). In addition, switching patients with ACQ-5 > 1.5 at baseline to FP/SAL resulted in 34% less exacerbations than those receiving regular dosing BUD/FOR (p < 0.01).
    CONCLUSIONS: We have identified baseline characteristics of patients with moderate to severe asthma that are associated with greater reliever medication use, poor symptom control and higher exacerbation risk. Moreover, the effects of different inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta agonist (LABA) combinations vary significantly when considering long-term treatment performance. These factors should be considered in clinical practice as a basis for personalised management of patients with moderate-severe asthma symptoms.
    In this study we looked at how different factors affect the response to asthma treatment in people with moderate to severe asthma who are taking regular medication. Specifically, we wanted to quantify how much asthma duration, differences in the degree of symptom control and lung function, as well as smoking habit, body weight, and sex influence how well someone responds to regular maintenance therapy. Using computer simulations based on models obtained from data in a large patient population with moderate–severe asthma, we explored scenarios that reflect real-life management of patients undergoing treatment with inhaled corticosteroids alone or in combination with long-acting beta agonists over a 12-month period. We looked at how much reliever inhaler they use, how well they rate their asthma control, and how often they have asthma attacks. By considering these results together, we evaluated how well the treatments work on ongoing symptoms and/or reduce the risk of future asthma attacks. Our simulations showed that smokers, people with higher asthma symptom scores, who are obese, and have a longer history of asthma tend to use their reliever inhalers more often. This was linked to a higher risk of having asthma attacks and worse symptom control. Switching those patients who do not respond well to their initial treatment with corticosteroid to combination therapy reduced how much reliever inhaler they need. Also, the effects of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination therapy were greater than budesonide/formoterol. In conclusion, our study found that certain patient characteristics can predict how well someone responds to asthma treatment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估哮喘的特点和治疗模式,包括短效β2激动剂(SABA)处方,在SABA在哮喘中使用(SABINAIII)研究的新加坡队列中的初级和专科护理。
    方法:横截面,观察性研究。
    方法:在新加坡的五个地点进行的多中心研究。
    方法:哮喘患者(年龄≥12岁),人口统计数据,使用电子病例报告表收集疾病特征和哮喘治疗处方。患者根据研究者定义的哮喘严重程度(2017年全球哮喘倡议建议指导)和实践类型(初级/专科护理)进行分类。
    结果:在分析的205例患者中(平均(SD)年龄,53.6(16.8)岁;女性,62%),55.9%由专科医生登记,44.1%由初级保健医生登记。大多数研究患者(80.5%)患有中度至重度哮喘(86.0%为专科护理,74.4%为初级护理)。在入学前的12个月里,18.0%的患者经历了≥1次严重加重。78.0%的患者哮喘得到良好或部分控制。总的来说,在过去的12个月中,所有患者中有17.1%的患者被处方超过SABA(≥3SABA罐/年),与初级保健相比,专科护理中的过度处方更大(26.3%vs5.6%).只有2.9%的患者接受SABA单药治疗,而41.0%的人除了维持治疗外还接受SABA治疗。在后者中,40.5%的人被过量使用SABA。总的来说,在研究访视期间,处方≥3个SABA罐(vs0-2个SABA罐)的患者被评估为哮喘未控制的比例较高(42.9%vs17.6%).14.1%和84.9%的患者采用吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)或ICS/长效β2激动剂固定剂量组合形式的维持治疗,分别,在入学前的12个月。
    结论:在这个新加坡队列中,除了维持治疗外,〜17%的所有患者和超过40%的患者都处方SABA过量。这些发现强调需要将临床实践与最新的循证治疗建议保持一致。
    背景:NCT03857178。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate asthma characteristics and treatment patterns, including short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) prescriptions, in primary and specialist care in the Singapore cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA III) study.
    METHODS: Cross-sectional, observational study.
    METHODS: Multicentre study conducted at five sites across Singapore.
    METHODS: In patients with asthma (aged ≥12 years), data on demographics, disease characteristics and asthma treatment prescriptions were collected using electronic case report forms. Patients were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity (guided by 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations) and practice type (primary/specialist care).
    RESULTS: Of the 205 patients analysed (mean (SD) age, 53.6 (16.8) years; female, 62%), 55.9% were enrolled by specialists and 44.1% by primary care physicians. Most study patients (80.5%) had moderate-to-severe asthma (86.0% in specialist care and 74.4% in primary care). In the 12 months before study enrolment, 18.0% of patients experienced ≥1 severe exacerbation. Asthma was well or partly controlled in 78.0% of patients. Overall, 17.1% of all patients were overprescribed SABA (≥3 SABA canisters/year) in the preceding 12 months, and overprescription was greater in specialist versus primary care (26.3% vs 5.6%). Only 2.9% of patients were prescribed SABA monotherapy, while 41.0% received SABA in addition to maintenance therapy. Among the latter, 40.5% were overprescribed SABA. Overall, a higher percentage of patients prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters (vs 0-2 SABA canisters) were assessed as having uncontrolled asthma during the study visit (42.9% vs 17.6%). Maintenance therapy in the form of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or ICS/long-acting β2 agonist fixed-dose combinations were prescribed to 14.1% and 84.9% of patients, respectively, in the 12 months before enrolment.
    CONCLUSIONS: In this Singapore cohort, ~17% of all patients and more than 40% of patients prescribed SABA in addition to maintenance therapy were overprescribed SABA. These findings emphasise the need to align clinical practices with the latest evidence-based treatment recommendations.
    BACKGROUND: NCT03857178.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    老年人群的哮喘特征尚不为人所知。本研究的目的是评估老年人群的哮喘,比较诊断年龄<60岁(老年哮喘)和≥60岁(老年哮喘)患者的疾病特征。
    这项研究是一项前瞻性研究,多中心,横截面类型。向60岁及以上的患者填写了一份问卷,已随访哮喘至少3个月。哮喘控制测试(ACT),填写了八个项目的Morisky药物依从性量表(MMAS-8),评估了吸入器装置技术。
    共有399名患者来自全国17个三级医疗中心。平均年龄为67.11岁,女性为331(83%)。146例(36.6%)患者的哮喘诊断年龄≥60岁。诊断≥60岁的患者年龄较大(p<0.001),具有较高的教育水平(p<0.001),更常见的是与哮喘有一级亲属(p=0.038),哮喘相关的合并症(p=0.009)和伴随的鼻炎/鼻窦炎(p=0.005),哮喘控制更好(p=0.001),使用较少的控制药物(p=0.014)。吸入器技术在37%的患者中是正确的,两组之间没有差异。老年哮喘患者治疗依从性较好(p<0.001)。在多变量逻辑回归分析中,哮喘控制良好(比值比=1.61,CI=1.04-2.51),高服药依从性(比值比=2.43,CI=1.48-4.0)与老年哮喘组相关.
    60岁及以上患者的哮喘特征不同,这似乎与哮喘的发病年龄有关。在我们的队列中,老年哮喘患者文化程度较高,治疗依从性和哮喘控制较好。诊断≥60岁的患者没有更严重的疾病。
    UNASSIGNED: Characteristics of asthma in the elderly population is not well-known. The aim of the present study was to evaluate asthma in the elderly population, to compare disease characteristics between patients diagnosed <60 (aged asthma) and ≥60 (elderly asthma) years of age.
    UNASSIGNED: The study was a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional type. A questionnaire was filled out to patients 60 years of age and over, that have been followed for asthma for at least 3 months. Asthma Control Test (ACT), eight-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) was filled out, inhaler device technique was assessed.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 399 patients were included from 17 tertiary care centers across the country. Mean age was 67.11 years and 331 (83%) were female. The age at asthma diagnosis was ≥60 in 146 (36.6%) patients. Patients diagnosed ≥60 years were older (p < 0.001), had higher education level (p < 0.001), more commonly had first-degree relative with asthma (p = 0.038), asthma related comorbidities (p = 0.009) and accompanying rhinitis/rhinosinusitis (p = 0.005), had better asthma control (p = 0.001), were using less controller medications (p = 0.014). Inhaler technique was correct in 37% of the patients with no difference in between the groups. Treatment compliance was better in elderly asthma patients (p < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, having well-controlled asthma (odds ratio = 1.61, CI = 1.04-2.51), and high medication adherence rate (odds ratio = 2.43, CI = 1.48-4.0) were associated with being in the elderly asthma group.
    UNASSIGNED: The characteristics of asthma are different among patients aged 60 years and over which seems to be related to onset age of asthma. In our cohort, the elderly asthma patients had higher education level, and treatment adherence and asthma control was better. Patients diagnosed ≥60 years of age did not have more severe disease.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:尽管接受标准治疗,但许多重度哮喘患者仍出现症状和恶化。在第三阶段的NAVIGATOR研究中,在重度患者中,与安慰剂相比,tezepelumab在52周内显著减少了加重,不受控制的哮喘。该分析评估了在NAVIGATOR患者的各种临床相关亚组中,tezepelumab在减少哮喘加重方面的功效。
    方法:NAVIGATOR是阶段3,多中心,随机化,双盲,安慰剂对照研究。参与者(12-80岁)患有严重,不受控制的哮喘以1:1的比例随机分配,每4周皮下接受tezepelumab210mg或安慰剂,共52周。在基线患者特征定义的临床相关患者亚组中,进行了预先指定和事后分析,以评估52周内的年度哮喘加重率(AAER)。病史,加重触发因素,研究前和研究期间的用药资格和用药情况。
    结果:与安慰剂相比,Tezepelumab在52周内降低了AAER。根据基线患者特征定义的各个亚组的恶化减少情况相似,在按性别分析的亚组中,范围从48%(95%置信区间[CI]:21,65)到60%(95%CI:44,71),吸烟史和体重指数。在所调查的哮喘相关共病亚组中,与安慰剂组相比,对阿司匹林或NSAID敏感的患者使用tezepelumab组的AAER降低幅度最大(83%;95%CI:66,91).在有资格接受dupilumab的患者中,与安慰剂相比,tezepelumab减少了64%的急性加重(95%CI:54,71).与安慰剂相比,也观察到使用tezepelumab的AAER降低,而与恶化触发因素类别和患者在基线时接受的哮喘控制药物的数量无关。
    结论:这些发现进一步支持了替齐单抗对重症患者的益处,不受控制的哮喘,可以帮助告知医疗保健提供者的治疗决定。
    背景:NAVIGATOR(NCT03347279)。
    BACKGROUND: Many patients with severe asthma continue to experience symptoms and exacerbations despite treatment with standard-of-care therapy. In the phase 3 NAVIGATOR study, tezepelumab significantly reduced exacerbations over 52 weeks compared with placebo in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. This analysis assessed the efficacy of tezepelumab in reducing asthma exacerbations in various clinically relevant subgroups of patients in NAVIGATOR.
    METHODS: NAVIGATOR was a phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Participants (12-80 years old) with severe, uncontrolled asthma were randomized 1:1 to receive tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Pre-specified and post hoc analyses were performed to evaluate the annualized asthma exacerbation rate (AAER) over 52 weeks in clinically relevant subgroups of patients defined by baseline patient characteristics, medical history, exacerbation triggers, medication eligibility and medication use before and during the study.
    RESULTS: Tezepelumab reduced the AAER over 52 weeks compared with placebo across a wide range of patient subgroups assessed. Reductions in exacerbations were similar across subgroups defined by baseline patient characteristics, ranging from 48% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21, 65) to 60% (95% CI: 44, 71) in subgroups analysed by sex, smoking history and body mass index. Among the asthma-related comorbidity subgroups investigated, patients with aspirin or NSAID sensitivity had the greatest reductions in AAER with tezepelumab compared with placebo (83%; 95% CI: 66, 91). In patients eligible to receive dupilumab, tezepelumab reduced exacerbations compared with placebo by 64% (95% CI: 54, 71). Reductions in the AAER with tezepelumab compared with placebo were also observed irrespective of exacerbation trigger category and the number of asthma controller medications patients were receiving at baseline.
    CONCLUSIONS: These findings further support the benefits of tezepelumab in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma and can help to inform healthcare providers\' treatment decisions.
    BACKGROUND: NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号