轻度哮喘成人按需吸入皮质类固醇/福莫特罗的实际使用情况:PRIME 研究

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Guy Brusselle, Francesco Blasi, Christian Gessner, Piotr Kuna, Peter Wark, G. Cappellini, Emilie Oosterom, Marielle Van Der Deijl, Enrica Bucchioni, Eva Topole
{"title":"轻度哮喘成人按需吸入皮质类固醇/福莫特罗的实际使用情况:PRIME 研究","authors":"Guy Brusselle, Francesco Blasi, Christian Gessner, Piotr Kuna, Peter Wark, G. Cappellini, Emilie Oosterom, Marielle Van Der Deijl, Enrica Bucchioni, Eva Topole","doi":"10.1183/23120541.00174-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol fumarate (ICS/FF) as-needed is recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma as sole therapy in adults with mild asthma, with low-dose maintenance ICS plus short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) as an alternative. SABA alone is no longer recommended. Given these changes in recommendations, the observational PRIME study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns in mild asthma in Europe.Adults with asthma receiving low-dose maintenance ICS, or as-needed ICS/FF or SABA were followed for 6 months. Data collected included Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 item (ACQ-5), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and asthma exacerbations.The study was conducted in Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain, in 883 patients; 833 (94.3%) completed follow-up. At enrolment, 32.2% received maintenance ICS, 56.3% ICS/FF as-needed, and 11.6% SABA as-needed; 57.4%, 61.3%, and 54.9%, respectively, had well controlled asthma (ACQ-5/ACT definition). After 6 months, changes in mean FEV1were small in the maintenance ICS and ICS/FF as-needed groups, whereas there was a decline in FEV1in the SABA as-needed group. ACQ-5 total score improved from baseline in all three groups; 0.4%, 0.4% and 2.0% patients, respectively, had a severe exacerbation during the study.More patients received ICS/FF as-needed than SABA as-needed, suggesting that physicians are aware of the latest treatment recommendations. This real-world study provides additional support to the use of ICS/FF as-needed as preferred treatment for patients with mild asthma, whereas SABA as-needed was associated with a fall in lung function and more severe exacerbations.","PeriodicalId":11739,"journal":{"name":"ERJ Open Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-world use of inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol as-needed in adults with mild asthma: The PRIME study\",\"authors\":\"Guy Brusselle, Francesco Blasi, Christian Gessner, Piotr Kuna, Peter Wark, G. Cappellini, Emilie Oosterom, Marielle Van Der Deijl, Enrica Bucchioni, Eva Topole\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/23120541.00174-2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol fumarate (ICS/FF) as-needed is recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma as sole therapy in adults with mild asthma, with low-dose maintenance ICS plus short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) as an alternative. SABA alone is no longer recommended. Given these changes in recommendations, the observational PRIME study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns in mild asthma in Europe.Adults with asthma receiving low-dose maintenance ICS, or as-needed ICS/FF or SABA were followed for 6 months. Data collected included Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 item (ACQ-5), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and asthma exacerbations.The study was conducted in Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain, in 883 patients; 833 (94.3%) completed follow-up. At enrolment, 32.2% received maintenance ICS, 56.3% ICS/FF as-needed, and 11.6% SABA as-needed; 57.4%, 61.3%, and 54.9%, respectively, had well controlled asthma (ACQ-5/ACT definition). After 6 months, changes in mean FEV1were small in the maintenance ICS and ICS/FF as-needed groups, whereas there was a decline in FEV1in the SABA as-needed group. ACQ-5 total score improved from baseline in all three groups; 0.4%, 0.4% and 2.0% patients, respectively, had a severe exacerbation during the study.More patients received ICS/FF as-needed than SABA as-needed, suggesting that physicians are aware of the latest treatment recommendations. This real-world study provides additional support to the use of ICS/FF as-needed as preferred treatment for patients with mild asthma, whereas SABA as-needed was associated with a fall in lung function and more severe exacerbations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11739,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERJ Open Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERJ Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00174-2024\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERJ Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00174-2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

哮喘全球倡议组织推荐将按需吸入皮质类固醇/富马酸福莫特罗(ICS/FF)作为轻度哮喘成人患者的唯一治疗方法,并以小剂量维持性 ICS 加短效 β2-激动剂(SABA)作为替代疗法。不再推荐单独使用 SABA。鉴于建议中的这些变化,PRIME 观察性研究旨在描述欧洲轻度哮喘患者的实际治疗模式。对接受低剂量 ICS 维持治疗或按需 ICS/FF 或 SABA 治疗的成人哮喘患者进行了为期 6 个月的随访。收集的数据包括哮喘控制测试(ACT)、哮喘控制问卷 5 项(ACQ-5)、1 秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)和哮喘加重。入组时,32.2%的患者接受了ICS维持治疗,56.3%的患者按需接受ICS/FF治疗,11.6%的患者按需接受SABA治疗;分别有57.4%、61.3%和54.9%的患者哮喘控制良好(ACQ-5/ACT定义)。6 个月后,维持 ICS 组和按需 ICS/FF 组的平均 FEV1 变化不大,而按需 SABA 组的 FEV1 有所下降。三组患者的 ACQ-5 总分均较基线有所提高;研究期间分别有 0.4%、0.4% 和 2.0% 的患者出现严重病情加重。这项真实世界的研究为轻度哮喘患者首选ICS/FF治疗提供了更多支持,而SABA治疗与肺功能下降和更严重的病情加重有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Real-world use of inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol as-needed in adults with mild asthma: The PRIME study
Inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol fumarate (ICS/FF) as-needed is recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma as sole therapy in adults with mild asthma, with low-dose maintenance ICS plus short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) as an alternative. SABA alone is no longer recommended. Given these changes in recommendations, the observational PRIME study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns in mild asthma in Europe.Adults with asthma receiving low-dose maintenance ICS, or as-needed ICS/FF or SABA were followed for 6 months. Data collected included Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Control Questionnaire 5 item (ACQ-5), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and asthma exacerbations.The study was conducted in Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain, in 883 patients; 833 (94.3%) completed follow-up. At enrolment, 32.2% received maintenance ICS, 56.3% ICS/FF as-needed, and 11.6% SABA as-needed; 57.4%, 61.3%, and 54.9%, respectively, had well controlled asthma (ACQ-5/ACT definition). After 6 months, changes in mean FEV1were small in the maintenance ICS and ICS/FF as-needed groups, whereas there was a decline in FEV1in the SABA as-needed group. ACQ-5 total score improved from baseline in all three groups; 0.4%, 0.4% and 2.0% patients, respectively, had a severe exacerbation during the study.More patients received ICS/FF as-needed than SABA as-needed, suggesting that physicians are aware of the latest treatment recommendations. This real-world study provides additional support to the use of ICS/FF as-needed as preferred treatment for patients with mild asthma, whereas SABA as-needed was associated with a fall in lung function and more severe exacerbations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ERJ Open Research
ERJ Open Research Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
273
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: ERJ Open Research is a fully open access original research journal, published online by the European Respiratory Society. The journal aims to publish high-quality work in all fields of respiratory science and medicine, covering basic science, clinical translational science and clinical medicine. The journal was created to help fulfil the ERS objective to disseminate scientific and educational material to its members and to the medical community, but also to provide researchers with an affordable open access specialty journal in which to publish their work.
×
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