Regional challenges to optimize the management of patients with severe asthma type 2 inflammation: a Delphi consensus in seven countries.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 ALLERGY
Journal of Asthma Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1080/02770903.2024.2449233
Liam G Heaney, Desiree Larenas-Linnemann, Riyad Al-Lehebi, Rodrigo Athanazio, Paulina Barria, Abraham Ali Munive, Daniel Colodenco, Anahi Yañez, Libardo Jimenez, Marcia M Pizzichini, Deepak Talwar, Emilio Pizzichini, Gur Levy, Maria E Laucho-Contreras
{"title":"Regional challenges to optimize the management of patients with severe asthma type 2 inflammation: a Delphi consensus in seven countries.","authors":"Liam G Heaney, Desiree Larenas-Linnemann, Riyad Al-Lehebi, Rodrigo Athanazio, Paulina Barria, Abraham Ali Munive, Daniel Colodenco, Anahi Yañez, Libardo Jimenez, Marcia M Pizzichini, Deepak Talwar, Emilio Pizzichini, Gur Levy, Maria E Laucho-Contreras","doi":"10.1080/02770903.2024.2449233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b>Severe asthma burdens patients and presents clinical management challenges for healthcare professionals. Biologics are crucial interventions for severe type two (T2) patients with high eosinophil counts. We conducted a Delphi consensus in seven developing or typically underrepresented countries to understand expert agreement on managing severe asthma with type two (T2) inflammation.</p><p><p><b>Methods:</b>The study comprised two online survey rounds and a participant meeting, involving 21 and 20 respiratory experts in the first and second survey, respectively. We developed a 70-statement questionnaire after literature review. Responses were recorded on a Likert scale (0-9) with 75% consensus threshold.</p><p><p><b>Results:</b>Consensus was reached on 37/60 closed-ended questions, including subtypes, in survey-1 and 20/47 closed-ended questions in survey-2. 95% of participants agreed on biomarker use for biologic treatment selection. 100% agreed timely biologic treatment leads to improvement in patients with severe asthma and an eosinophilic phenotype. 90% agreed to avoid maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) and start biologic therapy directly. Experts defined clinical remission on treatment as no exacerbations, no OCS use, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score < 1.5, and lung function optimization (forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV<sub>1</sub>] ≥ 80% of predicted or pre-bronchodilator FEV<sub>1</sub> increase ≥ 100 mL from baseline). In survey-1, 81% agreed these outcomes are achievable in practice. All referral statements achieved consensus.</p><p><p><b>Conclusions:</b>This Delphi study focused on understanding patients with severe asthma and T2 inflammation in developing/underrepresented countries. Appropriately utilizing biomarkers, timely treatment interventions for best outcomes, expert consensus on clinical remission, and referral are crucial for improving patient management.</p>","PeriodicalId":15076,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asthma","volume":" ","pages":"929-944"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asthma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2024.2449233","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective:Severe asthma burdens patients and presents clinical management challenges for healthcare professionals. Biologics are crucial interventions for severe type two (T2) patients with high eosinophil counts. We conducted a Delphi consensus in seven developing or typically underrepresented countries to understand expert agreement on managing severe asthma with type two (T2) inflammation.

Methods:The study comprised two online survey rounds and a participant meeting, involving 21 and 20 respiratory experts in the first and second survey, respectively. We developed a 70-statement questionnaire after literature review. Responses were recorded on a Likert scale (0-9) with 75% consensus threshold.

Results:Consensus was reached on 37/60 closed-ended questions, including subtypes, in survey-1 and 20/47 closed-ended questions in survey-2. 95% of participants agreed on biomarker use for biologic treatment selection. 100% agreed timely biologic treatment leads to improvement in patients with severe asthma and an eosinophilic phenotype. 90% agreed to avoid maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) and start biologic therapy directly. Experts defined clinical remission on treatment as no exacerbations, no OCS use, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score < 1.5, and lung function optimization (forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1] ≥ 80% of predicted or pre-bronchodilator FEV1 increase ≥ 100 mL from baseline). In survey-1, 81% agreed these outcomes are achievable in practice. All referral statements achieved consensus.

Conclusions:This Delphi study focused on understanding patients with severe asthma and T2 inflammation in developing/underrepresented countries. Appropriately utilizing biomarkers, timely treatment interventions for best outcomes, expert consensus on clinical remission, and referral are crucial for improving patient management.

优化严重哮喘2型炎症患者管理的区域性挑战:七个国家的德尔菲共识
目的:严重哮喘患者的负担,并提出临床管理的挑战,卫生保健专业人员。对于嗜酸性粒细胞计数高的严重2型(T2)患者,生物制剂是至关重要的干预措施。我们在七个发展中国家或代表性不足的国家进行了德尔菲共识,以了解专家对管理2型(T2)炎症的严重哮喘的共识。方法:该研究包括两轮在线调查和一次参与者会议,分别有21名和20名呼吸专家参加了第一轮和第二次调查。在查阅文献后,我们编制了一份70项问卷。回答以李克特量表(0-9)记录,75%的共识阈值。结果:调查1中有37/60个封闭式问题(包括子类型)达成共识,调查2中有20/47个封闭式问题达成共识。95%的参与者同意生物标志物用于生物治疗选择。100%同意及时的生物治疗可以改善严重哮喘和嗜酸性粒细胞表型的患者。90%的患者同意避免维持口服皮质激素(OCS),直接开始生物治疗。专家将治疗后的临床缓解定义为无加重,无OCS使用,哮喘控制问卷(ACQ)-5评分< 1.5,肺功能优化(1秒用力呼气量[FEV1]≥80%的预测或支气管扩张剂前FEV1较基线增加≥100ml)。在调查1中,81%的人认为这些结果在实践中是可以实现的。所有转诊声明达成共识。结论:本德尔菲研究的重点是了解发展中国家/代表性不足国家的严重哮喘和T2炎症患者。适当地利用生物标志物,及时的治疗干预以获得最佳结果,专家对临床缓解的共识,以及转诊对改善患者管理至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Asthma
Journal of Asthma 医学-过敏
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
158
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Providing an authoritative open forum on asthma and related conditions, Journal of Asthma publishes clinical research around such topics as asthma management, critical and long-term care, preventative measures, environmental counselling, and patient education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信