Search

Background: Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) is a rare neuromuscular disorder characterized by progressive degeneration of motor neurons and muscle weakness resulting in premature death or severe motor disability. Over the last decade, SMA has dramatically changed thanks to new advances in care and the emergence of disease-specific treatments. RegistrAME is a self-reported specific disease registry with an accurate curation system. It has collected data on SMA patients in Spain since 2015, gathering demographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome data, all of which are patient-relevant. RegistrAME is part of the TREAT NMD network. This study aims to describe the advantages and disadvantages of a self–reported SMA registry, as well as the different variables of interest in the health status of RegistrAME patients. Results: In total, 295 living patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SMA-5q were included (aged 1 to 77 years; mean 20.28). Half of the patients (50.2%) were ≥ 16 years old; 22.03% were type 1, 48.47% were type 2, 28.82% were type 3, and 0.7% were type 4. All functional statuses (non-sitter, sitter, and walkers) could be observed in each SMA type. Adult patients harbored the least aggressive SMA types, however, they presented the greatest level of disability. Patients with SMA type 1 had scoliosis surgery about five years earlier than patients with SMA type 2. None of the type 1 patients who achieved ambulation were wheelchair-free outdoors. This was also evident in 62.5% of type 2 walker patients and 44% of type 3 walker patients. Of the SMA type 1 patients, 40% had a gastrostomy (of which 84% had two SMN2 copies). One in five children with SMA type 1 (one to seven years of age) were ventilation-free. Conclusions: The information provided by RegistrAME in a "real-world" setting allows better management of family expectations, an adequate approach to the disease and patients' needs, as well as a better understanding of the impact of the disease. It also helps monitor the evolution of care, which will result in the need for updated guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Availability of clinically effective and cost-effective treatments for severe asthma would be beneficial to patients and national healthcare systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and healthcare expenditure after incorporating benralizumab into the standard treatment of refractory eosinophilic asthma.Methods: This was a cross-sectional multicentre study of consecutive patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma who received treatment with benralizumab during at least 12 months. Patient follow-up was performed in specialised severe asthma units. The main effectiveness parameters measured were: the avoidance of one asthma exacerbation, a 3-point increase in the asthma control test (ACT) score, and the difference in utility scores (health-related quality of life) between a 1-year baseline treatment and 1-year benralizumab treatment. The health economic evaluation included direct costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).Results: After 1 year of treatment with benralizumab, patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma showed an improvement in all the effectiveness parameters analysed: improvement of asthma control and lung function, and decrease in the number of exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (both as corticosteroid courses and maintenance therapy), and inhaled corticosteroid use. The total annual cost per patient for the baseline and benralizumab treatment periods were €11,544 and €14,043, respectively, reflecting an increase in costs due to the price of the biological agent but a decrease in costs for the remaining parameters. The ICER was €602 per avoided exacerbation and €983.86 for every 3-point increase in the ACT score.Conclusions: All the pharmacoeconomic parameters analysed show that treatment with benralizumab is a cost-effective option as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Available guidelines for asthma management represent an important and suitable tool to make the entire medical process evidence-based, effective, and safe for patients. Their purpose is to help doctors and patients formulate the best decisions in regard to asthma management by choosing the most appropriate strategies in each specific clinical situation. The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) document, together with other national and international recommendations, is one of the main documents used for asthma prevention and management in Italy, but several studies reported that these recommendations are often not applied in real-life clinical practice, which consequently results in inadequate asthma control. In this context, a substantial simplification of the GINA document and asthma guidelines may represent a feasible strategy to be pursued to ameliorate the knowledge among GPs, primary care pediatricians, and specialists taking care of children and adults with asthma. On the other hand, another critical factor that may explain unsatisfactory control of asthma is the limited importance that all recommendations place on asthma heterogeneity. In the era of personalized medicine and target therapies, phenotype-driven asthma management may become a desirable approach for optimizing the management of asthmatic patients. In addition, digital health strategies have been investigated in the literature to improve asthma monitoring and may represent a promising tool in the future from this point of view. Relevant stakeholders should continue to investigate how to optimize real-life asthma control to propose novel solutions to translate into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Benralizumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to the human interleukin-5 (IL-5) receptor (IL-5R), thereby preventing IL-5 from binding to its receptor and inhibiting differentiation and maturation of eosinophils in the bone marrow. Because of its recent marketing approval, sufficient real-life evidence is lacking to confirm the efficacy and safety data from clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of benralizumab for the treatment of severe refractory eosinophilic asthma in a real-world cohort of patients.Methods: This was a cross-sectional multicentre study of consecutive patients with severe refractory eosinophilic asthma who received treatment with benralizumab during at least 6 months. Patient follow-up was performed in specialised severe asthma units.Results: A total of 42 patients were enrolled and treated with benralizumab. Asthma control, as measured by the asthma control test (ACT), improved in all patients both at 3 months of treatment compared with baseline (13.9 ± 4 vs 20.1 ± 3.7, p < 0.001) and at 6 months of treatment compared with the results obtained at 3 months (20.1 ± 3.7 vs 21 ± 2.7, p = 0.037). Similarly, the number of emergency department visits decreased both at 3 months compared with baseline (1 [IR:0.7] vs 0 [IR:0.75], p < 0.001) and at 6 months compared with the results at 3 months (0 [IR:0.75] vs 0 [IR:0], p = 0.012). Reductions in the number of oral corticosteroid cycles, percentage of corticosteroid-dependent patients, and mean daily dose of oral or inhaled corticosteroid were also evidenced. Finally, mean lung function improvement was 291 mL (p < 0.001), and FEV1% improved both at 3 months compared with baseline (64.4 ± 9.3 vs 73.1 ± 9.1, p < 0.001) and at 6 months compared to 3 months (73.1 ± 9.1 vs 76.1 ± 12, p = 0.002). Side effects were mild and did not lead to treatment discontinuation.Conclusions: This study confirms the efficacy and safety of benralizumab in a real-life setting with improved asthma control and lung function, and a reduced oral and inhaled corticosteroid use as well as fewer emergency department visits. In addition to a rapid initial improvement, it appears that patients continue to improve during the first 6 months of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]