Expert Consensus on Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for the Treatment of Asthma in Adult Patients

Q4 Medicine
Carolina Cisneros Serrano , Eva Martínez Moragón , Alicia Padilla-Galo , Cleofé Fernández Aracil , Andrea Trisán Alonso , Gerardo Pérez Chica , Ana Pueyo Bastida , Auxiliadora Romero Falcón , José Ángel Carretero-Gracia , José Gregorio Soto-Campos , Members of the Validation Task Force
{"title":"Expert Consensus on Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for the Treatment of Asthma in Adult Patients","authors":"Carolina Cisneros Serrano ,&nbsp;Eva Martínez Moragón ,&nbsp;Alicia Padilla-Galo ,&nbsp;Cleofé Fernández Aracil ,&nbsp;Andrea Trisán Alonso ,&nbsp;Gerardo Pérez Chica ,&nbsp;Ana Pueyo Bastida ,&nbsp;Auxiliadora Romero Falcón ,&nbsp;José Ángel Carretero-Gracia ,&nbsp;José Gregorio Soto-Campos ,&nbsp;Members of the Validation Task Force","doi":"10.1016/j.opresp.2025.100442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Despite existing guidelines, many patients with asthma do not achieve adequate control of their disease. This is largely due to low adherence to inhaled therapy. Single-inhaler administration may improve this and other aspects of asthma therapy, such as cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study is to gather the opinions of a panel of experts on single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) for the treatment of asthma in adult patients.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>A recommendation task force reviewed the available evidence and formulated 45 statements divided into 5 sections: efficacy, cost-effectiveness, therapeutic adherence, safety, and patient satisfaction. A validation task force of 71 experts evaluated these recommendations using the 2-round Delphi technique. Panellists rated their agreement with each statement on a 9-point scale.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Consensus was achieved in 42 of the 45 statements. Panellists broadly agreed that SITT improves lung function, reduces exacerbations, is cost-effective, and promotes therapeutic adherence. The safety of TT was considered favourable, even in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. The panellists also agreed on the importance of evaluating patient satisfaction with the inhaler. However, no consensus was reached regarding the suitability of TT as a first-line treatment, nor on whether TT is more beneficial than up-dosing ICS in patients with a low inflammatory profile currently receiving dual therapy. Additionally, panellists did not agree on whether sick leave due to respiratory causes was associated with greater adherence to TT.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The consensus indicates that SITT is considered an effective, safe option for the treatment of asthma that improves therapeutic adherence and patient satisfaction. Further real-world studies are needed to evaluate its implementation in different clinical contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34317,"journal":{"name":"Open Respiratory Archives","volume":"7 3","pages":"Article 100442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Respiratory Archives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2659663625000463","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Despite existing guidelines, many patients with asthma do not achieve adequate control of their disease. This is largely due to low adherence to inhaled therapy. Single-inhaler administration may improve this and other aspects of asthma therapy, such as cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study is to gather the opinions of a panel of experts on single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) for the treatment of asthma in adult patients.

Material and methods

A recommendation task force reviewed the available evidence and formulated 45 statements divided into 5 sections: efficacy, cost-effectiveness, therapeutic adherence, safety, and patient satisfaction. A validation task force of 71 experts evaluated these recommendations using the 2-round Delphi technique. Panellists rated their agreement with each statement on a 9-point scale.

Results

Consensus was achieved in 42 of the 45 statements. Panellists broadly agreed that SITT improves lung function, reduces exacerbations, is cost-effective, and promotes therapeutic adherence. The safety of TT was considered favourable, even in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. The panellists also agreed on the importance of evaluating patient satisfaction with the inhaler. However, no consensus was reached regarding the suitability of TT as a first-line treatment, nor on whether TT is more beneficial than up-dosing ICS in patients with a low inflammatory profile currently receiving dual therapy. Additionally, panellists did not agree on whether sick leave due to respiratory causes was associated with greater adherence to TT.

Conclusions

The consensus indicates that SITT is considered an effective, safe option for the treatment of asthma that improves therapeutic adherence and patient satisfaction. Further real-world studies are needed to evaluate its implementation in different clinical contexts.
成人哮喘单吸入器三联疗法的专家共识
尽管有现有的指导方针,但许多哮喘患者未能充分控制病情。这主要是由于吸入治疗的依从性较低。单吸入器管理可能改善这方面和其他方面的哮喘治疗,如成本效益。本研究的目的是收集专家小组对单吸入器三联疗法(SITT)治疗成人哮喘患者的意见。材料和方法一个推荐工作组回顾了现有的证据,并制定了45项声明,分为5部分:疗效、成本效益、治疗依从性、安全性和患者满意度。一个由71名专家组成的验证工作组使用两轮德尔菲法对这些建议进行了评估。小组成员对他们对每个陈述的同意程度进行了9分的评分。结果45份声明中有42份达成共识。小组成员普遍同意SITT改善肺功能,减少恶化,具有成本效益,并促进治疗依从性。TT的安全性被认为是有利的,即使对有心血管合并症的患者也是如此。小组成员还同意评估患者对吸入器的满意度的重要性。然而,对于TT作为一线治疗的适用性,以及对于目前接受双重治疗的低炎症患者,TT是否比增加剂量的ICS更有益,尚未达成共识。此外,小组成员在呼吸系统原因引起的病假是否与更大程度上坚持TT有关的问题上意见不一。结论SITT被认为是一种有效、安全的治疗哮喘的选择,可以提高治疗依从性和患者满意度。需要进一步的现实世界研究来评估其在不同临床背景下的实施。
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
Open Respiratory Archives
Open Respiratory Archives Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
51 days
×
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