Clinical predictors of treatment response to tiotropium add-on therapy in adult asthmatic patients: From multicenter real-world cohort data in Korea

Background: Tiotropium, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, is recommended for add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-long-acting beta 2 agonists (LABA) for severe asthma. However, real-world studies on the predictors of response to tiotropium are limited. We investigated the real-world use of tiotropium in asthmatic adult patients in Korea and we identified predictors of positive response to tiotropium add-on. Methods: We performed a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study using data from the Cohort for Reality and Evolution of Adult Asthma in Korea (COREA). We enrolled asthmatic participants who took ICS-LABA with at least 2 consecutive lung function tests at 3-month intervals. We compared tiotropium users and non-users, as well as tiotropium responders and non-responders to predict positive responses to tiotropium, defined as 1) increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ≥ 10% or 100 mL; and 2) increase in asthma control test (ACT) score ≥3 after 3 months of treatment. Results: The study included 413 tiotropium users and 1756 tiotropium non-users. Tiotropium users had low baseline lung function and high exacerbation rate, suggesting more severe asthma. Clinical predictors for positive response to tiotropium add-on were 1) positive bronchodilator response (BDR) [odds ratio (OR) = 6.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.6–47.4, P = 0.021] for FEV1 responders; 2) doctor-diagnosed asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO) [OR = 12.6, 95% CI: 1.8–161.5, P = 0.024], and 3) initial ACT score <20 [OR = 24.1, 95% CI: 5.45–158.8, P < 0.001] for ACT responders. FEV1 responders also showed a longer exacerbation-free period than those with no FEV1 increase (P = 0.014), yielding a hazard ratio for the first asthma exacerbation of 0.5 (95% CI: 0.3–0.9, P = 0.016). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that tiotropium add-on for uncontrolled asthma with ICS-LABA would be more effective in patients with positive BDR or ACO. Additionally, an increase in FEV1 following tiotropium may predict a lower risk of asthma exacerbation

A comparison of treatment response to biologics in asthma-COPD overlap and pure asthma: Findings from the PRISM study

Background: Despite the increasing use of biologics in severe asthma, there is limited research on their use in asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO). We compared real-world treatment responses to biologics in ACO and asthma. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study using data from the Precision Medicine Intervention in Severe Asthma (PRISM). ACO was defined as post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) 10 pack-years. Physicians selected biologics (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab) based on each United States Food &amp; Drug Administration (FDA) approval criteria. Results: After six-month treatment with biologics, both patients with ACO (N = 13) and asthma (N = 81) showed positive responses in FEV1 (10.69 ± 17.17 vs. 11.25 ± 12.87 %, P = 0.652), Asthma Control Test score (3.33 ± 5.47 vs. 5.39 ± 5.42, P = 0.290), oral corticosteroid use (−117.50 ± 94.38 vs. −115.06 ± 456.85 mg, P = 0.688), fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels (−18.62 ± 24.68 vs. −14.66 ± 45.35 ppb, P = 0.415), sputum eosinophils (−3.40 ± 10.60 vs. −14.48 ± 24.01 %, P = 0.065), blood eosinophils (−36.47 ± 517.02 vs. −363.22 ± 1294.59, P = 0.013), and exacerbation frequency (−3.07 ± 4.42 vs. −3.19 ± 5.11, P = 0.943). The odds ratio for exacerbation and time-to-first exacerbation showed no significant difference after full adjustments, and subgroup analysis according to biologic type was also showed similar results. Conclusions: Biologics treatment response patterns in patients with ACO and asthma were comparable, suggesting that biologics should be actively considered for ACO patients as well