The economic burden of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the impact of poor inhalation technique with commonly prescribed dry powder inhalers in three European countries

Contains fulltext : 171713.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are common chronic inflammatory respiratory diseases, which impose a substantial burden on healthcare systems and society. Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta2 agonists (LABA), often administered using dry powder inhalers (DPIs), are frequently prescribed to control persistent asthma and COPD. Use of DPIs has been associated with poor inhalation technique, which can lead to increased healthcare resource use and costs. METHODS: A model was developed to estimate the healthcare resource use and costs associated with asthma and COPD management in people using commonly prescribed DPIs (budesonide + formoterol Turbuhaler((R)) or fluticasone + salmeterol Accuhaler((R))) over 1 year in Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom (UK). The model considered direct costs (inhaler acquisition costs and scheduled and unscheduled healthcare costs), indirect costs (productive days lost), and estimated the contribution of poor inhalation technique to the burden of illness. RESULTS: The direct cost burden of managing asthma and COPD for people using budesonide + formoterol Turbuhaler((R)) or fluticasone + salmeterol Accuhaler((R)) in 2015 was estimated at euro813 million, euro560 million, and euro774 million for Spain, Sweden and the UK, respectively. Poor inhalation technique comprised 2.2-7.7 % of direct costs, totalling euro105 million across the three countries. When lost productivity costs were included, total expenditure increased to euro1.4 billion, euro1.7 billion and euro3.3 billion in Spain, Sweden and the UK, respectively, with euro782 million attributable to poor inhalation technique across the three countries. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model results were most sensitive to changes in the proportion of patients prescribed ICS and LABA FDCs, and least sensitive to differences in the number of antimicrobials and oral corticosteroids prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of managing asthma and COPD using commonly prescribed DPIs is considerable. A substantial, and avoidable, contributor to this burden is poor inhalation technique. Measures that can improve inhalation technique with current DPIs, such as easier-to-use inhalers or better patient training, could offer benefits to patients and healthcare providers through improving disease outcomes and lowering costs

Prescription of inhalers in asthma and COPD : Towards a rational, rapid and effective approach

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Formación de imagen por microondas mediante agrupamientos lineales ortogonales

Capabilities of a microwave imaging system working in the air by using two crossed linear arrays are described. The analytic expressions of the focalization procedures are derived and resolution and available volume of reconstruction are discussed. Finally, some experimental images corresponding to two dielectric objects are also shown.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Evaluation of inhaler technique and achievement and maintenance of mastery of budesonide/formoterol Spiromax® compared with budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler® in adult patients with asthma: the Easy Low Instruction Over Time (ELIOT) study

Background: Incorrect inhaler technique is a common cause of poor asthma control. This two-phase pragmatic study evaluated inhaler technique mastery and maintenance of mastery with DuoResp® (budesonide-formoterol [BF]) Spiromax® compared with Symbicort® (BF) Turbuhaler® in patients with asthma who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists. Methods: In the initial cross-sectional phase, patients were randomized to a 6-step training protocol with empty Spiromax and Turbuhaler devices. Patients initially demonstrating ≥1 error with their current device, and then achieving mastery with both Spiromax and Turbuhaler (absence of healthcare professional [HCP]-observed errors), were eligible for the longitudinal phase. In the longitudinal phase, patients were randomized to BF Spiromax or BF Turbuhaler. Co-primary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving device mastery after three training steps and maintaining device mastery (defined as the absence of HCP-observed errors after 12 weeks of use). Secondary endpoints included device preference, handling error frequency, asthma control, and safety. Exploratory endpoints included assessment of device mastery by an independent external expert reviewing video recordings of a subset of patients. Results: Four hundred ninety-three patients participated in the cross-sectional phase, and 395 patients in the longitudinal phase. In the cross-sectional phase, more patients achieved device mastery after three training steps with Spiromax (94%) versus Turbuhaler (87%) (odds ratio [OR] 3.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05–6.95], p < 0.001). Longitudinal phase data indicated that the odds of maintaining inhaler mastery at 12 weeks were not statistically significantly different (OR 1.26 [95% CI 0.80–1.98], p = 0.316). Asthma control improved in both groups with no significant difference between groups (OR 0.11 [95% CI -0.09–0.30]). An exploratory analysis indicated that the odds of maintaining independent expert-verified device mastery were significantly higher for patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.25–3.54]). Conclusions: In the cross-sectional phase, a significantly greater proportion of patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler achieved device mastery; in the longitudinal phase, the proportion of patients maintaining device mastery with Spiromax versus Turbuhaler was similar. An exploratory independent expert-verified analysis found Spiromax was associated with higher levels of device mastery after 12 weeks. Asthma control was improved by treatment with both BF Spiromax and BF Turbuhaler

Inhibition of Aldose Reductase Prevents Experimental Allergic Airway Inflammation in Mice

The bronchial asthma, a clinical complication of persistent inflammation of the airway and subsequent airway hyper-responsiveness, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Several studies have shown that oxidative stress plays a key role in initiation as well as amplification of inflammation in airways. However, still there are no good anti-oxidant strategies available for therapeutic intervention in asthma pathogenesis. Most recent studies suggest that polyol pathway enzyme, aldose reductase (AR), contributes to the pathogenesis of oxidative stress-induced inflammation by affecting the NF-kappaB-dependent expression of cytokines and chemokines and therefore inhibitors of AR could be anti-inflammatory. Since inhibitors of AR have already gone through phase-III clinical studies for diabetic complications and found to be safe, our hypothesis is that AR inhibitors could be novel therapeutic drugs for the prevention and treatment of asthma. Hence, we investigated the efficacy of AR inhibition in the prevention of allergic responses to a common natural airborne allergen, ragweed pollen that leads to airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness in a murine model of asthma.Primary Human Small Airway Epithelial Cells (SAEC) were used to investigate the in vitro effects of AR inhibition on ragweed pollen extract (RWE)-induced cytotoxic and inflammatory signals. Our results indicate that inhibition of AR prevents RWE -induced apoptotic cell death as measured by annexin-v staining, increase in the activation of NF-kappaB and expression of inflammatory markers such as inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), cycloxygenase (COX)-2, Prostaglandin (PG) E(2), IL-6 and IL-8. Further, BALB/c mice were sensitized with endotoxin-free RWE in the absence and presence of AR inhibitor and followed by evaluation of perivascular and peribronchial inflammation, mucin production, eosinophils infiltration and airway hyperresponsiveness. Our results indicate that inhibition of AR prevents airway inflammation and production of inflammatory cytokines, accumulation of eosinophils in airways and sub-epithelial regions, mucin production in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and airway hyperresponsiveness in mice.These results suggest that airway inflammation due to allergic response to RWE, which subsequently activates oxidative stress-induced expression of inflammatory cytokines via NF-kappaB-dependent mechanism, could be prevented by AR inhibitors. Therefore, inhibition of AR could have clinical implications, especially for the treatment of airway inflammation, a major cause of asthma pathogenesis