Respiratory medicine
-
Respiratory medicine · Apr 2019
ReviewOmalizumab as alternative to chronic use of oral corticosteroids in severe asthma.
Systemic/oral corticosteroids (OCS) have been used for decades in the management of acute asthma exacerbations and chronically in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. However, while OCS are effective at treating acute exacerbations, there is only empirical evidence regarding the efficacy of OCS at reducing the rate of exacerbations. Evidence, although scarce, is suggestive of high exacerbation rates in severe asthma patients even when receiving maintenance treatment with OCS. ⋯ Anti-IL-5/IL-5R biologics are indicated in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and repetitive exacerbations, irrespective of the presence or absence of allergy. Recently, an anti-IL4Rα biologic has been approved by the FDA for eosinophilic phenotype or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. Finally, physicians should consider using biologics as an alternative to chronic OCS therapy.
-
Respiratory medicine · Apr 2019
Comparative StudyAssessment of COPD-related outcomes in patients initiating a once daily or twice daily ICS/LABA.
Use of inhaled corticosteroids and long acting beta agonist (ICS/LABA) combination therapy has been shown to decrease the frequency of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this population, adherence to treatment is associated with better disease control and lower risk of COPD-related exacerbations in the future. Using a treatment with a more convenient regimen or easier-to-use device could improve patient adherence, improve disease control, decrease the frequency of exacerbations and minimize the COPD-related economic burden. Real-world information on the impact on healthcare costs and exacerbation risk of initiating once-daily or twice daily ICS/LABA in this patient population is limited. The objective of this study was to assess COPD-related healthcare costs, adherence, and exacerbations in COPD patients initiating treatment with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 (FF/VI) or budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 (BUD/F) using a large managed care database in the US. ⋯ Patients initiating once-daily FF/VI were more adherent, and were associated with a lower risk of subsequent COPD-related exacerbations compared with twice-daily BUD/F, however this was not associated with a significant difference in costs. (GSK Study HO1617333/206702).
-
Respiratory medicine · Feb 2019
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyBenefit and safety of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol in the Salford Lung Study in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (SLS COPD) according to baseline patient characteristics and treatment subgroups.
SLS COPD was the first open-label randomised controlled trial demonstrating a reduction in moderate/severe COPD exacerbations with once-daily inhaled fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) in everyday clinical practice. Here we report FF/VI effectiveness and safety in predefined patient subgroups. ⋯ Initiating FF/VI versus continuing UC reduced exacerbation rates without increased pneumonia SAESI risk compared to other ICS-containing regimens and in various patient subgroups, consistent with primary study findings. FF/VI may be a therapeutic option for a broad population of COPD patients, including those with more severe disease.
-
Respiratory medicine · Jan 2019
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyLung function outcomes in the INPULSIS® trials of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.
In the INPULSIS® trials, nintedanib reduced the annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) versus placebo, consistent with slowing of disease progression. We characterised the effects of nintedanib on physiologic outcomes using pooled data from the INPULSIS® trials. ⋯ A range of physiologic outcome measures in the INPULSIS® trials support the effect of nintedanib on reducing disease progression in patients with IPF.
-
Respiratory medicine · Jan 2019
Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema as a clinicoradiologic entity: Characterization of presenting lung fibrosis and implications for survival.
The prevalence of classifiable and unclassifiable causes of lung fibrosis and its implications for survival are mostly unknown in combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). ⋯ Our findings suggest only about a third of CPFE patients represent suspected UIP/IPF; the majority were clinically and radiologically unclassifiable ILD whose survival was comparatively better. Identifiable or secondary causes of lung fibrosis in CPFE occurred in about a fifth of presenting patients.