Fluticasone-Salmeterol Drug Combination

氟替卡松 - 沙美特罗联合用药
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:从社会角度评估布地奈德/福莫特罗缓解剂和维持治疗与沙美特罗/氟替卡松联合沙丁胺醇缓解治疗≥12年哮喘患者的成本-效果。方法:建立了具有三种健康状况(非恶化,恶化,和死亡)与一生的地平线。急性加重率来自对中国哮喘患者进行的前瞻性队列研究。根据当前的临床哮喘管理指南估计医疗资源利用数据。哮喘相关死亡率,成本投入和效用值来自公共数据库和文献。通过单向灵敏度和概率灵敏度分析评估模型的稳健性。结果:与沙美特罗/氟替卡松+沙丁胺醇相比,布地奈德/福莫特罗缓解剂和维持治疗导致急性加重事件减少(13.6vs.15.9)和0.0077质量调整寿命年(QALY)收益,整个寿命期间的额外成本为196.38日元。基本情况增量成本效益比(ICER)为每QALY25,409.98日元。对模型输出影响最大的变量包括药物成本和药物依从性。支付意愿门槛为257,094日元/QALY(2022年为中国人均国内生产总值的3倍),布地奈德/福莫特罗维持和缓解治疗与沙美特罗/氟替卡松加视需要沙丁胺醇相比具有成本效益的概率为83.00%.结论:从社会的角度来看,对于≥12岁的中国哮喘患者,与沙美特罗/氟替卡松加按需沙丁胺醇相比,布地奈德/福莫特罗缓解剂和维持治疗可能是一种具有成本效益的选择.
    UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol reliever and maintenance therapy compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus salbutamol as reliever therapy for asthma patients ≥12 years from the societal perspective in China.
    UNASSIGNED: A Markov model was developed with three health states (non-exacerbation, exacerbation, and death) with a lifetime horizon. The exacerbation rates were obtained from a prospective cohort study conducted in Chinese asthma patients. Healthcare resources utilization data were estimated based on current clinical asthma management guidelines. Asthma-related mortality, cost input and utility values were derived from public database and literature. Model robustness was assessed with one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
    UNASSIGNED: Compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus salbutamol, budesonide/formoterol reliever and maintenance therapy led to fewer exacerbation events (13.6 vs. 15.9) and 0.0077 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gain at an additional cost of ¥196.38 over lifetime. The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was ¥25,409.98 per QALY gained. The variables that had most impact on the model output included drug costs and medication adherence. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥257,094/QALY (3 times of gross domestic product per capita in China in 2022), the probability of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy being cost-effective versus salmeterol/fluticasone plus as-needed salbutamol was 83.00%.
    UNASSIGNED: From the societal perspective, budesonide/formoterol reliever and maintenance therapy is likely to be a cost-effective option compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus as-needed salbutamol for Chinese asthma patients ≥12 years.
    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:慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是一种异质性的进行性肺部疾病,其特征是长期的呼吸道症状和气流受限。适当的支气管扩张是COPD治疗的基石,导致更好的健康状况以及对预后和死亡率的益处。
    方法:在当前打开时,非干预性,观察性研究,通过Elpenhaler®装置,对716名诊断为不同严重程度的COPD患者给予丙酸氟替卡松和沙美特罗(500+50mcg)的固定剂量组合(FDC)。在研究开始时和3个月随访期结束时评估患者对治疗的依从性(基于MMAS-8[8项Morisky药物依从性量表])和健康状况(基于CCQ[临床COPD问卷])。
    结果:1个月和3个月时的平均±SDMMAS-8评分分别为6.12±1.89和6.45±1.80,表明总体依从性中等;然而,随访结束时MMAS-8评分有0.33个单位的统计学显著增加(配对t检验p<0.0001),提示在整个研究中依从性的改善。更高的依从性与基线时更好的健康状况相关,到后续行动结束时,情况进一步改善。此外,我们观察到,直至研究结束(CCQ评分=1.13±0.67),平均CCQ总分从基线(CCQ评分=2.2±1.00)开始有统计学显著下降1.07分(p<0.0001).在症状(得分等于1.36±0.72,减少1.18)以及功能和精神状态(得分分别等于0.86±0.73和1.20±0.88,减少1.04和1.00的平均领域得分中也得出了类似的结论,p<0.0001)。同样,当患者被分为有和没有合并症的亚组时,在研究过程中,前一组中至高依从性的患者增加了7%.在同一患者亚组中,研究期间CCQ评分显著下降1.18分(p<0.0001)。
    结论:FDC丙酸氟替卡松和沙美特罗,(500+50mcg)通过用于COPD的Elpenhaler®设备,导致治疗依从性维持良好或略有增加,随后对健康状况有益,治疗3个月后进一步持续。
    BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous progressive lung condition characterized by long-term respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation. Appropriate bronchodilation is the cornerstone of COPD treatment, leading to better health status as well as benefits in prognosis and mortality.
    METHODS: In the current open, noninterventional, observational study, 716 patients diagnosed with COPD of variable severity were administered a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol (500 + 50 mcg) through the Elpenhaler® device. The patients\' adherence to treatment (based on the MMAS-8 [8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale]) and health status (based on the CCQ [Clinical COPD Questionnaire]) were assessed at the beginning of the study and at the end of the 3-month follow-up period.
    RESULTS: The mean ± SD MMAS-8 score at 1 and 3 months was 6.12 ± 1.89 and 6.45 ± 1.80, respectively, indicating medium adherence overall; however, there was a statistically significant increase of 0.33 units in the MMAS-8 score at the end of the follow-up (paired t-test p < 0.0001), suggestive of an improvement in adherence throughout the study. Higher adherence was associated with better health status at baseline, which further improved by the end of the follow-up. Moreover, we observed a statistically significant decrease of 1.07 points (p < 0.0001) in the mean CCQ total score from the baseline (CCQ score = 2.2 ± 1.00) until the end of the study follow-up (CCQ score = 1.13 ± 0.67). Similar conclusions were also drawn in the mean domain scores regarding symptoms (score equal to 1.36 ± 0.72, decrease by 1.18) as well as functional and mental state (scores equal to 0.86 ± 0.73 and 1.20 ± 0.88, decrease by 1.04 and 1.00, respectively, p < 0.0001). Similarly, when patients were stratified into subgroups with and without comorbidities, the former group showed an increase of 7% in the patients with medium to high adherence during the course of the study. In the same patient subgroup, there was a notable decrease in CCQ score by 1.18 points (p < 0.0001) during the study.
    CONCLUSIONS: The administration of FDC of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol, (500 + 50 mcg) via the Elpenhaler® device for COPD, resulted in a well-maintained or slight increase in treatment adherence and a subsequent benefit in health status, which further persisted after 3 months of 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
    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
    AdvairDiskus是哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病的重要治疗方法。它是一种干粉吸入器,含有丙酸氟替卡松(FP)和xinafoate沙美特罗(SX)的组合。然而,参考上市药物(RLD)的药代动力学(PK)批次间差异阻碍了其仿制药的开发.这项工作开发了吸入FP和SX的PK模型,可以代表潜在的批次变化。在4个周期内,对60名健康受试者分别给予两批参考和测试产品(R1,R2,T1,T2)的AdvairDiskus(100μgFP/50μgSX吸入),4序列交叉研究。R1和R2之间的生物等效性(BE)的失败证实了RLD的高批次间变异性。非线性混合效应模型用于估计每个批次的群体平均PK参数。对于FP,具有连续双零级吸收的2室模型最好地描述了PK曲线。对于SX,具有一阶吸收模型的2室模型最适合数据。两种模型都能够捕获血浆浓度,最大浓度,和每个批次的总暴露量(AUCinf),这可以用来模拟未来的BE研究。还测量了每批的体外特性,和具有较高比例的细颗粒(直径<1µm,<2μm)具有较高的AUCinf。FP和SX两者的这种正相关性可能潜在地有助于PKBE研究的批次选择。
    Advair Diskus is an essential treatment for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is a dry powder inhaler with a combination of fluticasone propionate (FP) and salmeterol xinafoate (SX). However, the pharmacokinetics (PK) batch-to-batch variability of the reference-listed drug (RLD) hindered its generic product development. This work developed the PK models for inhaled FP and SX that could represent potential batch variability. Two batches each of the reference and the test product (R1, R2, T1, T2) of Advair Diskus (100 μg FP/50 μg SX inhalation) were administered to 60 healthy subjects in a 4-period, 4-sequence crossover study. The failure of the bioequivalence (BE) between R1 and R2 confirmed the high between-batch variability of the RLD. Non-linear mixed effect modeling was used to estimate the population mean PK parameters for each batch. For FP, a 2-compartment model with a sequential dual zero-order absorption best described the PK profile. For SX, a 2-compartment model with a first-order absorption model best fit the data. Both models were able to capture the plasma concentration, the maximum concentration, and the total exposure (AUCinf) adequately for each batch, which could be used to simulate the BE study in the future. In vitro properties were also measured for each batch, and the batch with a higher fraction of the fine particle (diameter < 1 µm, < 2 µm) had a higher AUCinf. This positive correlation for both FP and SX could potentially assist the batch selection for the PK BE study.
    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
    比较布地奈德/福莫特罗(BF)与氟替卡松/沙美特罗(FS)对中度至重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的疗效。
    PubMed,Embase,科克伦图书馆,我们在WebofScience数据库中搜索了从开始到2023年7月17日在COPD治疗中比较BF和FS的研究。结果,包括恶化,住院治疗,肺炎,COPD的急诊科(ED)就诊,住院时间,以及恶化的次数,使用风险比(RR)与相应的95%置信区间(CI)或加权平均差(WMD)与95%CI进行比较。所有统计分析均使用Stata版本12.0进行。
    包括总共136,369名参与者的10项研究。与FS治疗相比,接受BF治疗的COPD患者的加重次数减少(RR0.91[95%CI0.83-1.00];p=0.040),住院率(RR0.77[95%CI0.67-0.88];p<0.001),和肺炎频率(RR0.77[95%CI0.64-0.92];p=0.05)。然而,在COPD的ED访视方面,BF和FS之间没有观察到显着差异(RR0.87[95%CI0.69-1.10];p=0.243),住院时间(WMD-0.18[95%CI-0.62-0.27];p=0.437),和加重次数(WMD-0.06[95%CI-0.28-0.16];p=0.602)。值得注意的是,两组间住院时间无显著异质性,而在其他结局中观察到明显的异质性(I2>50%,p<0.05)。
    与FS相比,BF治疗似乎是中重度COPD患者更有希望的治疗策略;然而,这应该在进一步的高质量研究中得到验证.
    To compare the efficacy of budesonide/formoterol (BF) versus fluticasone/salmeterol (FS) in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
    The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies comparing BF versus FS in the treatment of COPD from inception to July 17, 2023. Outcomes, including exacerbations, hospitalizations, pneumonia, emergency department (ED) visits for COPD, length of hospitalization, and number of exacerbations, were compared using risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 12.0.
    Ten studies comprising a total of 136,369 participants were included. Compared with those treated with FS, patients with COPD treated with BF experienced a reduced number of exacerbations (RR 0.91 [95% CI 0.83-1.00]; p = 0.040), hospitalizations (RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.67-0.88]; p < 0.001), and frequency of pneumonia (RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.64-0.92]; p = 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between BF and FS in terms of ED visits for COPD (RR 0.87 [95% CI 0.69-1.10]; p = 0.243), length of hospitalization (WMD -0.18 [95% CI -0.62-0.27]; p = 0.437), and number of exacerbations (WMD -0.06 [95% CI -0.28-0.16]; p = 0.602). Notably, no significant heterogeneity was noted in length of hospitalization between the two groups, whereas clear heterogeneity was observed in other outcomes (I2 > 50%, p < 0.05).
    Compared with FS, BF therapy appears to be a more promising treatment strategy for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD; however, this should be verified in further high-quality studies.
    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: Letter
    这是对Ahmed等人的一篇文章的回复。,结论是与沙丁胺醇相比,氟替卡松/沙美特罗组合增加FEV1,FEV1%的预测,和FEV1/FVC比率,然而,它没有提供新颖的见解,因为这两种药物都符合12%和200毫升的可逆性基准,以及对合并包括吸入性皮质类固醇的联合药物的担忧,吸入性皮质类固醇通常与支气管扩张无关.
    This is a letter in response to an article by Ahmed et al., which concluded that in comparison to salbutamol, Fluticasone/salmeterol combination increases FEV1, FEV1% of predicted, and FEV1/FVC ratio, however it did not offer novel insights, as both agents met the 12%- and 200-mL reversibility benchmarks and Concerns about incorporating a combination medication that includes an inhaled corticosteroid, inhaled corticosteroids are not typically associated with bronchodilation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    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: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    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
    本研究旨在评估固定剂量组合(FDC)吸入皮质类固醇/长效β2-激动剂(ICS/LABA)在支气管扩张中的有效性和安全性。
    一项回顾性队列研究分析了2007年至2021年间开始使用ICS/LABAFDC或LAMA的支气管扩张患者的电子病历。所有支气管扩张诊断均由放射科医生使用高分辨率计算机断层扫描进行。
    在1,736名患者中,1,281人参加了ICS/LABAFDC和455LAMA。在694名倾向评分匹配的患者中,ICS/LABAFDC的结果与LAMA相当,住院呼吸道感染的HR为1.22(95%CI0.81-1.83),急性加重1.06(95%CI0.84-1.33),和1.06(95%CI0.66-1.02)为全因住院。与氟替卡松/沙美特罗(FLU/SAL)相比,倍氯米松/福莫特罗(BEC/FOR)或布地奈德/福莫特罗(BUD/FOR)导致急性加重的风险较低(BEC/FORHR0.59,95%CI0.43-0.81;BUD/FORHR0.68,95%CI0.50-0.93)。与FLU/SAL相比,BEC/FOR降低了住院呼吸道感染(HR0.48,95%0.26-0.86)和全因住院(HR0.55,95%0.37-0.80)的风险。
    我们的发现为ICS/LABAFDC与LAMA相比用于支气管扩张的有效性和安全性提供了重要证据。BEC/FOR和BUD/FOR的结局优于FLU/SAL。
    UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in bronchiectasis.
    UNASSIGNED: A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic medical records of bronchiectasis patients initiating ICS/LABA FDC or LAMA between 2007 and 2021. All bronchiectasis diagnoses were made by radiologists using high-resolution computed tomography.
    UNASSIGNED: Of the 1,736 patients, 1,281 took ICS/LABA FDC and 455 LAMA. Among the 694 propensity score matched patients, ICS/LABA FDC had comparable outcomes to LAMA, with HRs of 1.22 (95% CI 0.81-1.83) for hospitalized respiratory infection, 1.06 (95% CI 0.84-1.33) for acute exacerbation, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.66-1.02) for all-cause hospitalization. Beclomethasone/formoterol (BEC/FOR) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) led to a lower risk of acute exacerbation compared to fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL) (BEC/FOR HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; BUD/FOR HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.93). BEC/FOR resulted in lower risks of hospitalized respiratory infection (HR 0.48, 95% 0.26-0.86) and all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.55, 95% 0.37-0.80) compared to FLU/SAL.
    UNASSIGNED: Our findings provide important evidence on the effectiveness and safety of ICS/LABA FDC compared with LAMA for bronchiectasis. BEC/FOR and BUD/FOR were associated with better outcomes than FLU/SAL.
    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: Case Reports
    Dupilumab诱导的嗜酸性粒细胞增多是通过阻断IL-4/IL-13途径介导的,减少嗜酸性粒细胞从外周血的迁移。外周血嗜酸性粒细胞的增加可能导致慢性嗜酸性粒细胞肺炎(CEP)和/或嗜酸性肉芽肿伴多血管炎,但dupilumab与嗜酸性粒细胞性肺部疾病之间的直接因果关系尚未确定.一名33岁的日本女性自3岁起患有支气管哮喘,在17岁时多次哮喘发作后,每天两次接受丙酸氟替卡松加沙美特罗治疗。她的课程在33岁时因CEP而变得复杂,无需全身性类固醇即可解决。然而,在她的CEP解决后的四个月里,病人有三次哮喘发作,和CEP的复发,血液白细胞为8500/微升,其中25.0%为嗜酸性粒细胞。她用泼尼松龙50毫克/天治疗,但是由于肌痛的发作,她无法继续服用该剂量。然后她在三个月内两次复发CEP。她接受泼尼松龙15毫克/天的CEP治疗,但她的哮喘持续超过一个月;dupilumab的剂量为600毫克,然后每两周服用300毫克。在dupilumab治疗的第一个月,患者的哮喘症状完全缓解,她只有一次CEP复发。在12个月的随访中,她既没有哮喘加重,也没有CEP复发.Dupilumab可能是难治性哮喘患者的有希望的治疗方法,伴有反复的CEP和不良的类固醇副作用。
    Dupilumab-induced hypereosinophilia is mediated by blockade of the IL-4/IL-13 pathway, which reduces eosinophil migration from peripheral blood. The increase in peripheral blood eosinophils may lead to chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP) and/or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, but a direct causal connection between dupilumab and eosinophilic lung diseases has not been established. A 33-year-old Japanese woman with bronchial asthma since age three was treated with fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol twice daily after several asthma exacerbations at age 17. Her course was complicated by CEP at age 33 which resolved without the need for systemic steroids. However, in the four months following resolution of her CEP, the patient had three asthma exacerbations, and a recurrence of CEP, with blood leukocytes of 8500/µL, of which 25.0% were eosinophils. She was treated with prednisolone 50 mg/day, but she could not continue this dose due to the onset of myalgia. Then she had relapsing CEP twice within three months. She was treated with prednisolone 15 mg/day for CEP, but she had persistent asthma for more than one month; dupilumab was added at 600 mg, followed by 300 mg every two weeks. In the first month of treatment with dupilumab, the patient\'s asthma symptoms resolved completely, and she had only one relapse of CEP. In 12 months of follow-up, she had neither an asthma exacerbation nor another relapse of CEP. Dupilumab may be a promising treatment for patients with refractory asthma complicated by recurring CEP and undesirable steroid side effects.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号