Dataset Information

Stepped treatment algorithm using budesonide-formoterol for chronic respiratory diseases: A single arm interventional study

ABSTRACT:

Background

While the safety and efficacy of inhaled budesonide-formoterol, used as-needed for symptoms, has been established for patients with asthma, it has not been trialed in undifferentiated patients with chronic respiratory diseases. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a pragmatic intervention that entails a stepped algorithm using inhaled budesonide-formoterol (dry powder inhaler, 160μg/4.5μg per dose) for patients presenting with chronic respiratory diseases to three rural district hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam.

Methods

We recruited patients with evidence of airflow obstruction on spirometry and/or symptoms consistent with asthma. The algorithm consisted of three steps: 1. as-needed inhaled budesonide-formoterol for symptoms, 2. maintenance plus as-needed inhaled budesonide-formoterol, and 3. referral to a higher-level healthcare facility. All participants started at step 1, with escalation to the next step at review visits if there had been exacerbation(s) or inadequate symptom control. Patients were followed for 12 months.

Results

Among 313 participants who started the treatment algorithm, 47.2% had ≥ 1 episode of acute respiratory symptoms requiring a visit to hospital or clinic and 35.4% were diagnosed with an exacerbation. Twelve months after enrolment, 50.7% still adhered to inhaled budesonide-formoterol at the recommended treatment step. The mean and median number of doses per day was 1.5 (standard deviation 1.2) doses and 1.3 (interquartile range 0.7–2.3) doses, respectively. The proportion of patients taking more than 800μg budesonide per day was 3.8%.

Conclusion

This novel therapeutic algorithm is feasible for patients with chronic respiratory diseases in a rural setting in Vietnam. Further studies are required to establish the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of similar approaches in different settings.

Trial registration

ACTRN12619000554167.

SUBMITTER: Huang W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9273083 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In real-life practice, asthma remains poorly controlled, with a considerable burden on patients' quality of life. Budesonide/formoterol (B/F) Easyhaler® has demonstrated similar dose consistency, therapeutic equivalence, and equivalent bronchodilator efficacy to B/F Turbuhaler®, but no real-life comparisons are yet available in patients switching from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. METHODS:The primary objective of this real-life, non-interventional, observational study was to show non-inferiority of asthma control when adult patients in Swedish primary care with persistent asthma switched from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. At visit 1, baseline demographic and endpoint data were recorded, and eligible patients switched to B/F Easyhaler®. The study comprised a control visit (visit 2) and a concluding examination (visit 3) after 12 weeks. Asthma control was assessed using the Asthma Control Test (ACT). The mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and lung function test were performed, and participants and investigators answered questionnaires about ease-of-use and teaching. RESULTS:A total of 117 patients were enrolled in the on-treatment population; 81 (64.8%) were female. At visit 3, B/F Easyhaler® demonstrated non-inferiority to B/F Turbuhaler®; the mean difference in change from baseline ACT was statistically significant (18.9 vs. 20.7, respectively; p < 0.0001) and met the non-inferiority criteria of B/F Easyhaler® being greater than - 1.5 points versus the reference product. Asthma was well controlled in 62 (53.0%) patients at baseline, increasing to 83 patients (70.9%) at visit 3. Patients experienced statistically significant improvements in mini-AQLQ score after B/F Easyhaler® treatment and lung function remained stable across the treatment period. B/F Easyhaler® was easy to learn and prepare for use. CONCLUSION:This real-life, non-interventional, non-inferiority study in adults with persist asthma demonstrates equivalent or better disease control when patients switch from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. A further study with direct comparison between treatments could add to the understanding of inhaler switch. FUNDING:Orion Corporation, Orion Pharma.

Project description:BackgroundFor patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), greater improvements in lung function have been demonstrated for triple versus dual inhaled therapies in traditional spirometry studies. This study was the first to use functional respiratory imaging (FRI), known for increased sensitivity to airway changes versus spirometry, to assess the effect of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) component (budesonide) on lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and a blood eosinophil count > 150 cells/mm3.MethodsPatients in this Phase IIIb (NCT03836677), randomized, double-blind, crossover study received twice-daily budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF) 320/18/9.6 μg fixed-dose triple therapy and glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) 18/9.6 μg fixed-dose dual therapy over 4 weeks, each delivered via a single metered dose Aerosphere inhaler. Primary endpoints were the improvements from baseline for each treatment in specific (i.e. corrected for lobar volume) image-based airway volume (siVaw) and resistance (siRaw) measured via FRI taken at total lung capacity (Day 29). Secondary outcomes included spirometry and body plethysmography. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study.ResultsA total of 23 patients were randomized and included in the intent-to-treat analysis (mean age 64.9 years, 78.3% males, 43.5% current smokers, mean predicted post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 63.6%). BGF and GFF both statistically significantly increased siVaw from baseline at Day 29 (geometric mean ratio [GM], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.72 [1.38, 2.13] and 1.53 [1.28, 1.83], respectively, both p < 0.0001), with a greater increase observed for BGF versus GFF (GM, 95% CI 1.09 [1.03, 1.16], p = 0.0061). Statistically significant reductions in siRaw were also observed with both BGF and GFF (GM, 95% CI 0.50 [0.39, 0.63] and 0.52 [0.40, 0.67], respectively, both p < 0.0001). Additionally, significant improvements from baseline in post-dose FEV1 were observed with BGF and GFF (mean 346 mL, p = 0.0003 and 273 mL, p = 0.0004, respectively). Safety findings were consistent with the known profiles of BGF and GFF.ConclusionsAs observed using FRI, triple therapy with BGF resulted in greater increases in airway volume, and reductions in airway resistance versus long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy with GFF, reflecting the ICS component's contribution in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03836677. Registered 11 February 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03836677.

Project description:BackgroundBudesonide and formoterol (BF) Spiromax® is a dry powder inhaler designed to deliver BF with maximum ease of use for patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.MethodsA phase 3b, 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled trial in patients (≥12 years) with persistent asthma.Primary objectiveto demonstrate non-inferiority of twice-daily BF Spiromax 160/4.5 mcg to BF Turbuhaler® 200/6 mcg in change from baseline in weekly average of daily trough morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Secondary endpoints included: Patient Satisfaction and Preference Questionnaire scores, change from baseline in evening PEF, trough forced expiratory volume in one second, percentage of symptom-free and rescue-free 24-hour periods, and safety.ResultsThe analysis was based on the per-protocol population (BF Spiromax, n = 290; BF Turbuhaler, n = 284). The least squares mean change from baseline to week 12 in morning PEF was: BF Spiromax, 18.8 L/min and BF Turbuhaler, 21.8 L/min. Non-inferiority of BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler was demonstrated (the lower limit of the 95% two-sided confidence interval was -9.02 L/min, which is greater than -15 L/min [the criteria specified for non-inferiority]). The mean difference in the total performance domains scores for BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler were 0.248 at baseline and 0.353 at week 12 (both, p <0.001), indicating statistical superiority for BF Spiromax. No statistical or numerical differences were recorded in the total convenience domain score between the two devices. Scores for 'device preference' and 'willingness to continue' supported BF Spiromax at baseline and at week 12 (p = 0.0005 vs BF Turbuhaler). No significant between-group differences were observed in the other secondary efficacy endpoints. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in adverse events or asthma exacerbations.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the non-inferiority of BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler in patients (≥12 years) with asthma. More patients preferred the Spiromax device over Turbuhaler for its performance, and were willing to continue therapy with BF Spiromax beyond the 12-week study period.Trial registrationNCT01803555; February 28, 2013.

Project description:BackgroundAcute musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is very common and associated with impaired productivity and high economic burden. Access to timely and personalized, evidence-based care is key to improve outcomes while reducing healthcare expenditure. Digital interventions can facilitate access and ensure care scalability.ObjectivePresent the feasibility and results of a fully remote digital care program (DCP) for acute MSK conditions affecting several body areas.MethodsInterventional single-arm study of individuals applying for digital care programs for acute MSK pain. Primary outcome was the mean change between baseline and end-of-program in self-reported Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) score and secondary outcomes were change in analgesic consumption, intention to undergo surgery, anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), fear-avoidance beliefs (FABQ-PA), work productivity (WPAI-GH) and engagement.ResultsThree hundred forty-three patients started the program, of which 300 (87.5%) completed the program. Latent growth curve analysis (LGCA) revealed that changes in NPRS between baseline and end-of-program were both statistically (p < 0.001) and clinically significant: 64.3% reduction (mean - 2.9 points). Marked improvements were also noted in all secondary outcomes: 82% reduction in medication intake, 63% reduction in surgery intent, 40% in fear-avoidance beliefs, 54% in anxiety, 58% in depression and 79% recovery in overall productivity. All outcomes had steeper improvements in the first 4 weeks, which paralleled higher engagement in this period (3.6 vs 3.2 overall weekly sessions, p < 0.001). Mean patient satisfaction score was 8.7/10 (SD 1.26).Strengths and limitationsThis is the first longitudinal study demonstrating the feasibility of a DCP for patients with acute MSK conditions involving several body areas. Major strengths of this study are the large sample size, the wide range of MSK conditions studied, the breadth of outcomes measured, and the very high retention rate and adherence level. The major limitation regards to the absence of a control group.ConclusionsWe observed very high completion and engagement rates, as well as clinically relevant changes in all health-related outcomes and productivity recovery. We believe this DCP holds great potential in the delivery of effective and scalable MSK care.Trial registrationNCT, NCT04092946 . Registered 17/09/2019.

Project description:Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airways disease in which respiratory viral infections frequently trigger exacerbations. Current treatment of asthma with combinations of inhaled corticosteroids and long acting beta2 agonists improves asthma control and reduces exacerbations but what impact this might have on innate anti-viral immunity is unclear. We investigated the in vitro effects of asthma drugs on innate anti-viral immunity. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from healthy and asthmatic donors were cultured for 24 hours with the Toll-like receptor 7 agonist, imiquimod, or rhinovirus 16 (RV16) in the presence of budesonide and/or formoterol. Production of proinflammatory cytokines and expression of anti-viral intracellular signalling molecules were measured by ELISA and RT-PCR respectively. In PBMC from healthy donors, budesonide alone inhibited IP-10 and IL-6 production induced by imiquimod in a concentration-dependent manner and the degree of inhibition was amplified when budesonide and formoterol were used in combination. Formoterol alone had little effect on these parameters, except at high concentrations (10?? M) when IL-6 production increased. In RV16 stimulated PBMC, the combination of budesonide and formoterol inhibited IFN? and IP-10 production in asthmatic as well as healthy donors. Combination of budesonide and formoterol also inhibited RV16-stimulated expression of the type I IFN induced genes myxovirus protein A and 2', 5' oligoadenylate synthetise. Notably, RV16 stimulated lower levels of type Myxovirus A and oligoadenylate synthase in PBMC of asthmatics than control donors. These in vitro studies demonstrate that combinations of drugs commonly used in asthma therapy inhibit both early pro-inflammatory cytokines and key aspects of the type I IFN pathway. These findings suggest that budesonide and formoterol curtail excessive inflammation induced by rhinovirus infections in patients with asthma, but whether this inhibits viral clearance in vivo remains to be determined.