Search

Introduction: Dupilumab is approved for the treatment of severe type 2 (T2) asthma; however, the characteristics of patients receiving dupilumab in routine clinical practice are incompletely understood. This study describes the characteristics of patients with severe asthma before dupilumab treatment in a real-world setting. Methods: This interim analysis of an ongoing real-life study of dupilumab assessed baseline characteristics of the first patient cohort enrolled in the ProVENT study. Results: A total of 99 patients (59% females) were analyzed (17% received another biologic before dupilumab treatment and 15% were on maintenance oral corticosteroid treatment). Adult-onset asthma (>18 years) and an allergic phenotype were documented in 58% and 48% of patients, respectively. Median (interquartile range) age was 54 (40–61) years; the median number of exacerbations in the last 24 months was 1 (0–3); median fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) value was 38 (23–64) ppb; and median blood eosinophils (bEOS) count was 184 (8–505) cells/µL. According to the United Kingdom Severe Asthma Registry classification, 53% of patients had T2 intermediate asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL or FeNO ≥25 ppb), 17% had T2 high asthma (bEOS ≥150 cells/µL and FeNO ≥25 ppb), and 4% had T2 low asthma (bEOS <150 cells/µL and FeNO <25 ppb). At least one GINA criterion for T2 airway inflammation was documented in 70% of patients. T2 comorbidities were observed in 64% of patients. Conclusions: This analysis suggests that patients eligible for dupilumab treatment display various clinical and biochemical characteristics rather than one clear-cut phenotype. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to assess non-adherence (NA) and non-persistence (NP) to long-acting asthma medications in Germany by differentiating between measurement of NA in periods of therapy continuation and measurement of NP in therapy-naïve patients. We analyzed treatment adherence to long-acting asthma medication using German claims data for periods of treatment continuation based on the medication possession ratio (MPR) and the proportion of days covered. Persistence was assessed in treatment-naïve patients. Outcomes were observed from the date of the first to the last prescription within a 12-month period. Both NA and NP analyses considered prescription supply, using either defined daily dosages, or prescribed daily dosages derived from a medical chart review. We identified 52,508 asthma patients (mean age: 40.1, 58.4% female) who received at least two long-acting asthma prescriptions within 12 months; 50,660 treatment-naïve patients were included in the NP analysis (mean age: 39.7, 58.8% female). The mean 12-month MPR was 38.5% (89.4% NA according to MPR ≤ 80%) and the average proportion of days covered was 40.4% (85.9% NA). Agent-specific MPR and NA rates varied between 31.8% (91.8% NA) and 56.2% (71.6% NA). The average weighted-MPR increased to 53.1% when using the prescribed daily dosage. Based on a > 90-day gap definition, 86.7% of patients were considered non-persistent after 12 months (>180: 72.3%). When using prescribed daily dosages, NP rates ranged from 66.7 to 78.5%. High levels of treatment NA and NP indicate a substantial need to improve adherence and persistence to long-acting asthma medication in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asthma causes various clinical symptoms, including unpredictable severe exacerbations, and even though most patients can achieve a reasonable disease control due to adequate treatment, some patients do not. This study seeks to describe healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and treatment of asthma and severe asthma patients in Germany. A retrospective claims data analysis has been conducted on adult asthma patients and a subset of patients with severe asthma, identified during July 2017 – June 2018. A proxy was used to identify severe asthma patients based on therapy options recommended within the German treatment guideline for treating these patients. These include (i) biologics, (ii) medium/high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in conjunction with LABA/montelukast and antibiotics/oral corticosteroids (OCS), and (iii) long-term OCS therapy. HCRU and treatment of patients were observed during a 1-year follow-up period (July 2018 – June 2019). The study included 388 932 adult asthma patients (prevalence: 7.90%), with 2.51%-12.88% affected by severe asthma (depending on the definition). 22.60% of all asthma patients experienced hospitalizations (severe asthma: 36.11%). Furthermore, 13.59% received OCS (severe asthma: 39.91%), but only 0.18% (severe asthma: 1.25%) received biologics. Only 23.95% (severe asthma: 41.17%) visited a pulmonologist. A considerable proportion of severe asthma patients receive long-term OCS therapy. However, less than 50% have seen a pulmonologist who would typically seek a change in treatment to avoid the long-term consequences of OCS. To optimize the treatment of severe asthma in Germany, better referral of these patients to specialists is needed and considering potential treatment alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systemic allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare. In this study we assessed the management and outcome of suspected SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine hypersensitivity. Methods: Totally, 334 individuals underwent an allergy work up regarding SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination (group A: 115 individuals suspected to be at increased risk for vaccine‐related reactions before vaccination and group B: 219 patients with reactions after COVID vaccination). The large majority of the SPT/IDT with the vaccines were negative; however, we identified in 14.1% (n = 47) a possible sensitization to the SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine and/or its ingredients defined as one positive skin test. Of the 219 individuals (group B) who experienced symptoms suspicious for a hypersensitivity reaction after vaccination, 214 were reported after the first vaccination with a mRNA vaccine (157 mRNA (Comirnaty®, 38 Spikevax®) and 18 with a vector vaccine (Vaxzevria®), 5 cases were after the second vaccination. Results: The symptom profile in group B was as follows: skin symptoms occurred in 115 cases (n = 59 angioedema, n = 50 generalized urticaria and n = 23 erythema/flush. Seventy individuals had cardiovascular, 53 respiratory and 17 gastrointestinal symptoms. Of the overall 334 individuals, 78 patients tolerated (re)‐vaccination (out of skin test positive/negative 7/19 from group A and 17/35 from group B). Conclusion: Proven IgE‐mediated hypersensitivity to SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines is extremely rare and not increased in comparison with reported hypersensitivity to other vaccines. The value of skin tests is unclear and nonspecific reactions, in particular when intradermal testing is applied, should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]