Inhaler combination formulations consisting of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) (fluticasone propionate) and a long-acting β2 agonist (salmeterol xinafoate) are indicated as maintenance treatments for patients with asthma and/or for selected patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The emergence of generic equivalents to branded inhalers is expected to offer economic edge/savings; however, some may argue that cost advantages offered by generic inhalers may be offset by worsening outcomes due to improper inhaler use, reduced adherence, and consequently worse disease control. To understand how unsupervised and unconsented switch of dry-powder inhalers and/or metered-dose inhalers affects clinical and humanistic outcomes in asthma, comprehensive searches of Embase and MEDLINE were conducted to identify research articles published in the English language since 2011. Patients with asthma of any age who underwent an unsupervised and unconsented switch from an ICS/long-acting β2 agonist to another (brand-to-generic or brand-to-brand) for non-medical reasons were the target of this research. Relevant outcomes included asthma control, medication adherence, and healthcare resource utilization. In total, 11 studies were identified for review (ten non-interventional and one post hoc); cohorts ranged from 19 to 42,553 patients. Six studies indicated that unsupervised and unconsented inhaler switch had a negative impact on asthma control; six studies indicated reduced medication adherence post-switching; and five studies reporting healthcare resource utilization showed it was unchanged or increased post-switching. Findings from this targeted review support concerns that unsupervised and unconsented inhaler switch has a largely negative impact on asthma-associated outcomes. Additional studies are warranted to further explore unsupervised and unconsented switch in asthma.

UNASSIGNED: Suboptimal adherence to maintenance medication has been associated with poor outcomes in asthma. This study examined single-inhaler inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) adherence and asthma-related outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective observational study of patients with asthma initiating ICS/LABA used data from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus (1 January 2014-31 March 2019). Patients included were ⩾18 years old and had ⩾12 months continuous eligibility before, and ⩾180 days follow-up after, the index date. Adherence was measured as proportion of days covered ([PDC] adherent ⩾ 0.8; non-adherent <0.8) each quarter, with outcomes measured each subsequent quarter. Endpoints were asthma-related overall and severe (inpatient/emergency department [ED] visit) exacerbations, rescue medication use, and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization and costs. Regression models evaluated associations between adherence and outcomes, controlling for repeated measures and differences in baseline characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, 50,037 patients were included (mean age 45.3 years; mean follow-up 23.3 months). Adherent patients were less likely to experience asthma-related overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.942 [0.890, 0.998]; p = 0.041), or severe exacerbations (aOR [95% CI]: 0.778 [0.691, 0.877]; p < 0.001) per quarter versus non-adherent patients. Adherent patients had lower severe exacerbation rates (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] [95% CI]: 0.792 [0.702, 0.893]; p < 0.001) but similar overall exacerbation rates (aRR [95% CI]: 0.993 [0.945, 1.044]; p = 0.783) versus non-adherent patients. The odds of rescue medication use were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI] short-acting β2 agonist: 0.991 [0.985, 0.996]; p = 0.001; oral corticosteroid: 0.988 [0.982, 0.995]; p < 0.001). Adherent patients were less likely to visit EDs per quarter (aOR [95% CI]: 0.775 [0.680, 0.883]; p < 0.001) and odds of hospitalization were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI]: 0.930 [0.881, 0.982]; p = 0.009). Across most measures, adherent patients incurred lower costs.
UNASSIGNED: This real-world study highlights the short-term clinical and economic benefits of ICS/LABA adherence in asthma, particularly in reducing severe exacerbations.

The present study compared the effectiveness of asthma control test (ACT)-guided treatment vs. usual care (UC) in patients with asthma from China.
This prospective, phase IV, multicenter, cluster-randomized, open-label 24-week study was conducted in China; patients were randomized to either ACT-guided treatment or UC group. The patients recorded peak expiratory flow, symptoms, and medication in a diary card every day and completed ACT at every clinic visit. For the UC group, patients completed ACT after the physician\'s treatment decision.
In total, 83.6% patients (n = 443/530; ACT: n = 209, UC: n = 234) completed the study. A significantly higher proportion of patients (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 7.87 (1.29, 48.11; p = 0.027) responded to the treatment and had ACT total score ≥20 or demonstrated an improvement of >3 points in ACT total score in ≥1 post-baseline assessment in the ACT-guided treatment vs. UC group. A higher proportion of patients had an ACT total score ≥20 and an improvement of >3 points in ACT total score at Week 24 in the ACT-guided treatment vs. the UC group (adjusted OR (95% CI):2.28 (1.07, 4.85; p = 0.036). A significant difference (p = 0.005) in change from baseline in ACT total score was observed in ACT-guided treatment vs. UC group at Week 24. The mean annual exacerbation rate was similar in both the groups.
ACT-guided treatment was more effective in achieving ACT total score ≥20 or showing an improvement of >3 points in the ACT total score and well tolerated compared with UC treatment in the 24-week treatment period.
Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT02868281, https://clinicaltrials.gov/; GlaxoSmithKline study ID: 201097, https://www.gsk-studyregister.com/.

Triple therapy versus dual therapy for chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD) can reduce symptoms, limit the risk of acute exacerbations (AEs) as well as improve lung function. Currently, studies that feature clinically important deterioration (CID) as a composite endpoint to assess the need for treatment intensification for patients maintained on dual therapy remained to be scarce.
This study is a retrospective analysis (January 2014 to January 2018) of COPD patients that presented with moderate to severe AEs during the previous year with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 100 cells/μL. The first line of therapy included a combination of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA). Composite CID was used in assessing the response to treatment after 24 weeks of therapy.
This study included 110 patients, of which 49 patients reportedly experienced CID. The most common events of CID include a decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥ 100 mL from baseline (25/49, 51%) and an increase in COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores ≥ 2 (13/49, 26.5%); many of these patients respond to the addition of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA). Seven patients (7/110, 6.3%) experienced moderate to severe exacerbations while undergoing treatment with ICS/LABA. Univariate and multivariate analyses have identified low baseline FEV1 (OR = 0.81, p = 0.004), high CAT score (OR = 1.89, p = 0.004), and the frequency of AE (OR = 19.86, p = 0.021) as independent predictors of CID. A baseline FEV1 of ≤42%, an initial CAT score ≥ 18, and AE ≥ 2 last year were considered the optimal cut-off values, which were identified via receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis.
Triple therapy (ICS/LABAs/LAMAs) may be considered as first-line treatment in patients experiencing more than 2 times moderate to severe AEs of COPD in the previous year and who have blood eosinophil counts ≥100 cells/μL, reduced lung function (FEV1 ≤ 42%), and more symptoms (CAT score ≥ 18).

Rationale: There is uncertainty on the optimal first-line therapy for symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Long-acting β2-receptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have long been mainstays of treatment, though it is still not clear if dual therapy with LABA/LAMA is superior to monotherapy for symptomatic COPD.Objectives: To clarify the evidence landscape, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following question: in patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, is LABA/LAMA combination therapy more effective and equally safe compared with LABA or LAMA monotherapy?Methods: A search of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted by a medical librarian for randomized controlled trials enrolling patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance that compare LABA/LAMA combination therapy to LABA or LAMA monotherapy. A systematic approach was used to screen, abstract, and critically appraise the emerging study evidence. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method was applied to rate the certainty and quality of the evidence.Results: A total of 24 studies were eligible for inclusion (n = 45,441). Pairwise random-effects meta-analysis revealed reductions in hospital admissions (11% reduction; P < 0.01) and acute exacerbations of COPD (20% reduction; P < 0.002), all in favor of LABA/LAMA dual therapy. Although there is reduced dyspnea (0.10 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001) and improved health-related quality of life (-0.13 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001), both values did not meet a clinical meaningful difference threshold. LABA/LAMA combination therapy showed no difference in treatment-emergent adverse effects (risk ratio, 0.99; P = 0.34) when compared with either LAMA or LABA monotherapy.Conclusions: Based on the reviewed evidence, in patients with symptomatic COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, dual LABA/LAMA therapy is superior to either LABA or LAMA monotherapy based on the reduced risk of exacerbations and hospitalizations.

With the help of a routine clinical case, we highlighted the difference between two of the best asthma guidelines available at the time regarding therapeutic suggestions for the so-called \"third step\" for school-age asthmatic children. We have analyzed the scientific evidence that each of the two guidelines brings to support their position. Finally, we have motivatedly solved the clinical scenario. However, the question of disagreement between two guidelines remains unresolved. This can lead to unjustified differences in the management of schoolchildren with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: The 12-week, multicentre, observational INITIAL study (NCT02143739) assessed asthma severity in newly diagnosed Chinese patients.
METHODS: Post hoc analysis of medication combinations prescribed per routine clinical practice at baseline, and the impact on control levels evaluated using 2012 vs 2018 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria.
RESULTS: In total, 4491 patients were included in the analysis. At baseline, intermittent, mild, moderate and severe asthma was reported in 3.9, 12.0, 22.6 and 61.6% of patients, respectively. Most patients (90.2%) were prescribed inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2 agonist (ICS/LABA). ICS/LABA plus ≥1 additional medication(s) was prescribed to 66.7% of patients, with leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA, 54.7%) being the most common additional medication. Distribution of ICS/LABA vs ICS/LABA+LTRA was comparable in patients with intermittent (3.2% vs 3.0%), mild (11.5% vs 9.7%), moderate (21.2% vs 19.9%) and severe asthma (64.1% vs 67.4%). Control levels among patients using ICS/LABA+LTRA vs ICS/LABA were comparable using GINA 2012 and lower using GINA 2018 criteria. The proportion of patients using ICS/LABA+LTRA vs ICS/LABA with intermittent, mild, moderate and severe asthma controlled at Week 12 (using GINA 2012) were 78.1% vs 80.0, 86.5% vs 85.8, 78.5% vs 71.3, and 59.6% vs 61.8%, respectively. Using GINA 2018 criteria proportions were 86.8% vs 95.9, 86.1% vs 93.2, 82.1% vs 85.3, and 71.9% vs 77.6%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Asthma control was not improved by adding LTRA to ICS/LABA and may have been unnecessary for some newly diagnosed patients. These findings were irrespective of the GINA criteria (2012 vs 2018) used and baseline severity.

Vilanterol trifenatate is a novel chiral long-acting β2-agonist developed. Vilanterol combined with inhaled corticosteroids can treat COPD and asthma. A simple liquid chromatographic method is developed for the quantitative determination of R-vilanterol and S-vilanterol (impurity S). HPLC separation was achieved on Chiralpak ID (250 × 4.6 mm; particle size 5 μm) column using hexane-ethanol-ethanolamine (75:25:0.1, v/v/v) as mobile phase at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. The resolution is greater than 3.3. Ethanolamine in the mobile phase is vital to enhance chromatographic efficiency and resolution between the isomers. The method was validated with respect to accuracy, specificity, precision, LOD, LOQ, linearity, and robustness as ICH guidelines.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been used to treat lung cancer. Several types of ICI-related interstitial lung diseases have been reported, including organizing pneumonia, non-specific interstitial pneumonia, and diffuse alveolar damage. However, pembrolizumab-associated bronchiolitis requiring treatment for persistent cough has not yet been reported. Here, we describe a patient who developed dry cough while being treated with pembrolizumab for lung adenocarcinoma. Radiography and lung biopsy findings indicated bronchiolitis. His cough improved after the discontinuation of pembrolizumab and treatment with erythromycin, an inhaled corticosteroid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and a long-acting β2 agonist.

The appropriate treatment for patients with coexistent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) remains unclear. Data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database was used for this retrospective cohort study. Patients diagnosed with both diseases between 1997 and 2012 were enrolled as the COPD-heart failure overlap cohort. Patients were categorized as non-users and users of specific COPD and HF medications. Medication prescriptions in each 3-month and 1-year period served as time-dependent covariates. The primary endpoint was cumulative survival. The validation study confirmed the accuracy of definitions of COPD (94.0% sensitivity) and HF (96.3% sensitivity).The study included 275,436 patients with COPD-heart failure overlap, with a mean follow-up period of 9.32 years. The COPD-heart failure overlap cohort had more medical service use and higher mortality than did the COPD alone cohort. Use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combinations, long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), β blockers, aldosterone antagonists, and statins reduced mortality risk compared with non-use. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed the consistency and robustness of results.ICS/LABA combinations, LAMA, ARBs, β blockers, aldosterone antagonists, and statins use was associated with a lower mortality risk in patients with COPD-heart failure overlap.