Serious asthma events with fluticasone plus salmeterol versus fluticasone alone

Background: the safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. Methods: in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. Results: of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). Conclusions: patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group. (AUSTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01475721)

Response to Mepolizumab Treatment in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma and Atopic Phenotypes

International audiencePurpose: Improved understanding of characteristics that may influence treatment response across phenotypes may help guide treatment decisions.Patients and methods: This was a post hoc analysis of MENSA, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT01691521). Patients aged ≥12 years with severe eosinophilic asthma received mepolizumab (75 mg intravenously or 100 mg subcutaneously) or placebo, plus standard of care, every 4 weeks for 32 weeks. Outcomes assessed were the annualized rate of clinically significant exacerbations and change from baseline in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score. Subgroup analyses were performed by baseline blood eosinophil count (17.5 kU/L]), and by house dust mite (HDM) sensitivity.Results: Of 576 patients analyzed, 272 were non-atopic, 181 were atopic and 94 were strongly atopic; 29 had missing atopy data. In patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/µL, mepolizumab versus placebo reduced clinically significant exacerbations by 74%, 43% and 25% in the non-atopic, atopic and strongly atopic subgroups. Similar reductions were observed in all atopic subgroups in other blood eosinophil count categories where there were sufficient patient numbers for analysis, except for non-atopic patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of <150 cells/μL. Improvements in ACQ-5 scores of -0.75, -0.73 and -0.78 with mepolizumab versus placebo were observed in non-atopic, atopic and strongly atopic patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/µL; consistent improvements in ACQ-5 were not observed in patients with blood eosinophil counts <150 or ≥150-300 cells/μL. Reductions in clinically significant exacerbations with mepolizumab versus placebo were also observed irrespective of sensitivity to HDMs.Conclusion: Mepolizumab was associated with a trend for reductions in clinically significant exacerbations and improved asthma control versus placebo in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, irrespective of atopic status or HDM sensitivity

Oral corticosteroid dose changes and impact on peripheral blood eosinophil counts in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma: A post hoc analysis

Background: An inverse relationship between oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose and peripheral blood eosinophil (PBE) count is widely recognized in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma; however, there are limited data available to quantify this relationship. This post hoc analysis of the SIRIUS study (NCT01691508) examined the impact of weekly incremental OCS dose reductions on PBE counts during the 3-8-week optimization phase of the study. Methods: SIRIUS was a randomized, double-blind study involving patients with severe asthma (≥12 years old), which included an initial OCS dose optimization phase prior to randomization. Regression analysis assuming a linear relationship between change in OCS dose and change in log (PBE count) during the optimization phase was used to estimate the changes in PBE count following specific decreases in OCS dose. Results: All 135 patients from the SIRIUS intent-to-treat population were included in this analysis. During the optimization period, 44% (60/135) of patients reduced their OCS dose, with an increase in geometric mean PBE count of 110 cells/μL (200 to 310 cells/μL; geometric mean ratio from beginning to end of the optimization phase: 1.52) recorded in these patients. The model estimated that reduction of daily OCS dose by 5 mg/day led to a 41% increase in PBE count (mean ratio to beginning of optimization phase: 1.41 [95% confidence interval (CI); 1.22, 1.63]). Conclusion: These data confirmed and quantified the inverse association between OCS dose and PBE count. These insights will help to inform clinicians when tapering OCS doses in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma

Evaluation of sputum eosinophil count as a predictor of treatment response to mepolizumab

In patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and sputum eosinophil counts of ≥3–<30%, sputum eosinophils may not represent a more useful biomarker than blood eosinophils for predicting clinical treatment response to mepolizumab https://bit.ly/3pOTw9

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

BACKGROUND The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, .12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of lifethreatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone.salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone.salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthmarelated event in the fluticasone.salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P = 0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthmarelated intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone.salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone.salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P&lt;0.001). CONCLUSIONS Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone.salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group. (AUSTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01475721.

Development of methodology for assessing steroid-tapering in clinical trials for biologics in asthma

BACKGROUND: Long-term use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) is associated with a risk of adverse events and comorbidities. As such, a goal in assessing the efficacy of biologics in severe asthma is often to monitor reduction in OCS usage. Importantly, however, OCS dose reductions must be conducted without loss of disease control. MAIN BODY: Herein, we describe the development of OCS-sparing study methodologies for biologic therapies in patients with asthma. In particular, we focus on four randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of varying sizes (key single-center study [n = 20], SIRIUS [n = 135], ZONDA [n = 220], VENTURE [n = 210]) and one open-label study (PONENTE [n = 598]), which assessed the effect of asthma biologics (mepolizumab, benralizumab or dupilumab) on OCS use using predefined OCS-tapering schedules. In particular, we discuss the evolution of study design elements in these studies, including patient eligibility criteria, the use of tailored OCS dose reduction schedules, monitoring of outcomes, the use of biomarkers and use of repetitive assessments of adrenal function during OCS tapering. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these developments have improved OCS-sparing asthma studies in recent years and the lessons learned may help with optimization of further OCS-sparing studies, and potentially clinical practice in the future