Nicola A Hanania, Richard Stanford, Adrian Rendon, Bilun Gemicioglu, Leandro Fritscher, Watchara Boonsawat, Anurita Mamjudar, Nnaemeka Odo, Mohamed Hamouda
{"title":"吸入丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗与布地奈德/福莫特罗固定剂量组合在哮喘控制中的比较效果——一项回顾性美国数据库分析。","authors":"Nicola A Hanania, Richard Stanford, Adrian Rendon, Bilun Gemicioglu, Leandro Fritscher, Watchara Boonsawat, Anurita Mamjudar, Nnaemeka Odo, Mohamed Hamouda","doi":"10.1016/j.rmed.2025.108172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Asthma affects over 260 million people globally, with significant health impacts. The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2024 report recommends inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β<sub>2</sub>-agonist (ICS/LABA) combinations, including fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR), for maintenance treatment. Both combinations have demonstrated clinical benefits, with previous clinical trials and real-world studies showing comparable asthma control with FP/SAL and BUD/FOR. This United States (US)-based study compares the real-world effectiveness of FP/SAL and BUD/FOR on asthma control and treatment adherence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the US Optum's Market Clarity database (July 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019), with integrated medical, pharmacy claims, and clinical electronic health records. Patients aged ≥18 years with asthma at GINA Steps 3-4, and ≥1 pharmacy claim for FP/SAL or BUD/FOR (index) were included. Patients on other ICS/LABA therapy ≥12 months prior to index were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for confounders. Outcomes were stratified by asthma severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 57,000 patients were included (FP/SAL: 28,639; BUD/FOR: 28,361). Baseline characteristics were balanced post-weighting. Asthma control was similar between cohorts, with no significant differences in Asthma Control Test scores or short-acting β<sub>2</sub>-agonist fills during the 12-month period following the index. Treatment adherence, assessed using proportion of days covered (≥0.8), was higher in the FP/SAL cohort (5.4%) versus the BUD/FOR cohort (4.4%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FP/SAL and BUD/FOR were similarly effective for asthma control in real-world settings, while FP/SAL was generally associated with greater medication adherence, a key factor for long-term control.</p>","PeriodicalId":21057,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"108172"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative effectiveness of inhaled fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol fixed-dose combinations in asthma control - a retrospective United States database analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Nicola A Hanania, Richard Stanford, Adrian Rendon, Bilun Gemicioglu, Leandro Fritscher, Watchara Boonsawat, Anurita Mamjudar, Nnaemeka Odo, Mohamed Hamouda\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rmed.2025.108172\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Asthma affects over 260 million people globally, with significant health impacts. The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2024 report recommends inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β<sub>2</sub>-agonist (ICS/LABA) combinations, including fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR), for maintenance treatment. Both combinations have demonstrated clinical benefits, with previous clinical trials and real-world studies showing comparable asthma control with FP/SAL and BUD/FOR. This United States (US)-based study compares the real-world effectiveness of FP/SAL and BUD/FOR on asthma control and treatment adherence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the US Optum's Market Clarity database (July 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019), with integrated medical, pharmacy claims, and clinical electronic health records. Patients aged ≥18 years with asthma at GINA Steps 3-4, and ≥1 pharmacy claim for FP/SAL or BUD/FOR (index) were included. Patients on other ICS/LABA therapy ≥12 months prior to index were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for confounders. Outcomes were stratified by asthma severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 57,000 patients were included (FP/SAL: 28,639; BUD/FOR: 28,361). Baseline characteristics were balanced post-weighting. Asthma control was similar between cohorts, with no significant differences in Asthma Control Test scores or short-acting β<sub>2</sub>-agonist fills during the 12-month period following the index. Treatment adherence, assessed using proportion of days covered (≥0.8), was higher in the FP/SAL cohort (5.4%) versus the BUD/FOR cohort (4.4%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FP/SAL and BUD/FOR were similarly effective for asthma control in real-world settings, while FP/SAL was generally associated with greater medication adherence, a key factor for long-term control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"108172\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2025.108172\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2025.108172","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative effectiveness of inhaled fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol fixed-dose combinations in asthma control - a retrospective United States database analysis.
Background: Asthma affects over 260 million people globally, with significant health impacts. The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2024 report recommends inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA) combinations, including fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR), for maintenance treatment. Both combinations have demonstrated clinical benefits, with previous clinical trials and real-world studies showing comparable asthma control with FP/SAL and BUD/FOR. This United States (US)-based study compares the real-world effectiveness of FP/SAL and BUD/FOR on asthma control and treatment adherence.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the US Optum's Market Clarity database (July 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019), with integrated medical, pharmacy claims, and clinical electronic health records. Patients aged ≥18 years with asthma at GINA Steps 3-4, and ≥1 pharmacy claim for FP/SAL or BUD/FOR (index) were included. Patients on other ICS/LABA therapy ≥12 months prior to index were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for confounders. Outcomes were stratified by asthma severity.
Results: A total of 57,000 patients were included (FP/SAL: 28,639; BUD/FOR: 28,361). Baseline characteristics were balanced post-weighting. Asthma control was similar between cohorts, with no significant differences in Asthma Control Test scores or short-acting β2-agonist fills during the 12-month period following the index. Treatment adherence, assessed using proportion of days covered (≥0.8), was higher in the FP/SAL cohort (5.4%) versus the BUD/FOR cohort (4.4%; p < 0.001).
Conclusions: FP/SAL and BUD/FOR were similarly effective for asthma control in real-world settings, while FP/SAL was generally associated with greater medication adherence, a key factor for long-term control.
期刊介绍：
Respiratory Medicine is an internationally-renowned journal devoted to the rapid publication of clinically-relevant respiratory medicine research. It combines cutting-edge original research with state-of-the-art reviews dealing with all aspects of respiratory diseases and therapeutic interventions. Topics include adult and paediatric medicine, epidemiology, immunology and cell biology, physiology, occupational disorders, and the role of allergens and pollutants.
Respiratory Medicine is increasingly the journal of choice for publication of phased trial work, commenting on effectiveness, dosage and methods of action.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
