Search

Summary: Background: The Single combination budesonide–formoterol inhaler Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (SMART) regimen reduces severe asthma exacerbations in patients, but whether the high doses of corticosteroid and β agonist increase the risk of adverse effects with both short-term and cumulative exposure is not certain. Our aim was to investigate whether the SMART regimen would reduce the risk of overuse of β agonist, reduce the likelihood of patients to seek medical review when such episodes occurred, and if any reduction in severe asthma exacerbations would be at the cost of a higher burden of systemic corticosteroid. Methods: In this 24-week trial undertaken at four primary health-care practices and one hospital in New Zealand, patients (aged 16–65 years) with a recent asthma exacerbation were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SMART or standard fixed-dose regimen. Treatment in the SMART group consisted of two actuations of budesonide–formoterol (200 μg and 6 μg, respectively, per actuation) twice daily, delivered through a combination metered dose inhaler (MDI), with one extra actuation as needed for relief of symptoms; treatment in the standard group consisted of two actuations of budesonide–formoterol (200 μg and 6 μg, respectively, per actuation) twice daily through a combination MDI with one to two actuations of salbutamol (100 μg per actuation) by MDI as needed for relief of symptoms. MDIs were monitored electronically to measure actual use of medication. The allocation sequence for randomisation was computer generated, with a block size of eight per site. Participants, investigators, and the statistician were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one high-use episode of β agonist (more than eight actuations per day of budesonide–formoterol in addition to the four maintenance doses in the SMART group or more than 16 actuations per day of salbutamol in the standard group). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12610000515099. Findings: 303 patients were randomly assigned to the SMART (n=151) or standard group (n=152). No significant difference was noted between the SMART and standard groups in the proportion of participants with at least one high-use episode of β agonist (84 [56%] vs 68 [45%], respectively, relative risk 1·24 [95% CI 0·99–1·56]; p=0·058). There were fewer days of high use in the SMART group (mean 5·1 days [SD 14·3] vs 8·9 days [20·9], relative rate 0·58 [0·39–0·88]; p=0·01). Of the patients who had at least one high-use episode, those in the SMART group had fewer days of high use without medical review (8·5 days [17·8] vs 18·3 days [24·8], 0·49 [0·31–0·75]; p=0·001). The SMART regimen resulted in higher inhaled corticosteroid exposure (943·5 μg budesonide per day [1502·5] vs 684·3 μg budesonide per day [390·5], respectively; ratio of means 1·22 [1·06–1·41]; p=0·006), but reduced oral corticosteroid exposure (77·5 mg prednisone [240·5] vs 126·6 mg prednisone [382·1], respectively; p=0·011), with no significant difference in composite systemic corticosteroid exposure (793·7 mg prednisone equivalent per year [893·1] vs 772·1 mg prednisone equivalent per year [1062·7], respectively; 1·03 [0·86–1·22]; p=0·76). Participants in the SMART group had fewer severe asthma exacerbations (35 [weighted mean rate per year 0·53] vs 66 [0·97]; relative rate 0·54 [0·36–0·82]; p=0·004). Interpretation: The SMART regimen has a favourable risk-to-benefit profile and can be recommended for use in adults at risk of severe asthma exacerbations. Funding: Health Research Council of New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People with cancer have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Risk prediction equations developed in New Zealand accurately predict 5-year cardiovascular disease risk in a general primary care population in the country. We assessed the performance of these equations for survivors of cancer in New Zealand. For this validation study, patients aged 30–74 years from the PREDICT open cohort study, which was used to develop the New Zealand cardiovascular disease risk prediction equations, were included in the analysis if they had a primary diagnosis of invasive cancer at least 2 years before the date of the first cardiovascular disease risk assessment. The risk prediction equations are sex-specific and include the following predictors: age, ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation index, family history of cardiovascular disease, smoking status, history of atrial fibrillation and diabetes, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol ratio, and preventive pharmacotherapy (blood-pressure-lowering, lipid-lowering, and antithrombotic drugs). Calibration was assessed by comparing the mean predicted 5-year cardiovascular disease risk, estimated using the risk prediction equations, with the observed risk across deciles of risk, for men and women, and according to the three clinical 5-year cardiovascular disease risk groups in New Zealand guidelines (<5%, 5% to <15%, and ≥15%). Discrimination was assessed by Harrell's C statistic. 14 263 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 61 years (SD 9) for men and 60 years (SD 8) for women, with a median follow-up of 5·8 years for men and 5·7 years for women. The observed cardiovascular disease risk was underpredicted by a maximum of 2·5% in male and 3·2% in female decile groups. When patients were grouped according to clinical risk groups, observed cardiovascular disease risk was underpredicted by less than 2% in the lower risk groups and overpredicted by 2·2% for men and 3·3% for women in the highest risk group. Harrell's C statistics were 0·67 (SE 0·01) for men and 0·73 (0·01) for women. The New Zealand cardiovascular disease risk prediction equations reasonably predicted the observed 5-year cardiovascular disease risk in survivors of cancer in the country, in whom risk prediction was considered clinically appropriate. Prediction could be improved by adding cancer-specific variables and considering competing risks. Our findings suggest that the equations are reasonable clinical tools for use in survivors of cancer in New Zealand. Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Health Research Council of New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Until recently, most patients with diabetes worldwide have been diagnosed when symptomatic and have high cardiovascular risk, meaning most should be prescribed cardiovascular preventive medications. However, in New Zealand, a world-first national programme led to approximately 90% of eligible adults being screened for diabetes by 2016, up from 50% in 2012, identifying many asymptomatic patients with recent-onset diabetes. We hypothesised that cardiovascular risk prediction equations derived before widespread screening would now significantly overestimate risk in screen-detected patients.Methods: New Zealanders aged 30-74 years with type 2 diabetes and without known cardiovascular disease, heart failure, or substantial renal impairment were identified from the 400 000-person PREDICT primary care cohort study between Oct 27, 2004, and Dec 30, 2016, covering the period before and after widespread screening. Sex-specific equations estimating 5-year risk of cardiovascular disease were developed using Cox regression models, with 18 prespecified predictors, including diabetes-related and renal function measures. Equation performance was compared with an equivalent equation derived in the New Zealand Diabetes Cohort Study (NZDCS), which recruited between 2000 and 2006, before widespread screening.Findings: 46 652 participants were included in the PREDICT-1° Diabetes subcohort, of whom 4114 experienced first cardiovascular events during follow-up (median 5·2 years, IQR 3·3-7·4). 14 829 (31·8%) were not taking oral hypoglycaemic medications or insulin at baseline. Median 5-year cardiovascular risk estimated by the new equations was 4·0% (IQR 2·3-6·8) in women and 7·1% (4·5-11·2) in men. The older NZDCS equation overestimated median cardiovascular risk by three times in women (median 14·2% [9·7-20·0]) and two times in men (17·1% [4·5-20·0]). Model and discrimination performance measures for PREDICT-1° Diabetse equations were also significantly better than for the NZDCS equation (eg, for women: R2=32% [95% CI 29-34], Harrell's C=0·73 [0·72-0·74], Royston's D=1·410 [1·330-1·490] vs R2=24% [21-26], C=0·69 [0·67-0·70], and D=1·147 [1·107-1·187]).Interpretation: International treatment guidelines still consider most people with diabetes to be at high cardiovascular risk; however, we show that recent widespread diabetes screening has radically changed the cardiovascular risk profile of people with diabetes in New Zealand. Many of these patients have normal renal function, are not dispensed glucose-lowering medications, and have low cardiovascular risk. These findings have clear international implications as increased diabetes screening is inevitable due to increasing obesity, simpler screening tests, and the introduction of new-generation glucose-lowering medications that prevent cardiovascular events. Cardiovascular risk prediction equations derived from contemporary diabetes populations, with multiple diabetes-related and renal function predictors, will be required to better differentiate between low-risk and high-risk patients in this increasingly heterogeneous population and to inform appropriate non-pharmacological management and cost-effective targeting of expensive new medications.Funding: Health Research Council of New Zealand, Heart Foundation of New Zealand, and Healthier Lives National Science Challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In adults with mild asthma, a combination of an inhaled corticosteroid with a fast-onset long-acting β-agonist (LABA) used as reliever monotherapy reduces severe exacerbations compared with short-acting β-agonist (SABA) reliever therapy. We investigated the efficacy of combination budesonide-formoterol reliever therapy compared with maintenance budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline.Methods: We did a 52-week, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial at 15 primary care or hospital-based clinical trials units and primary care practices in New Zealand. Participants were adults aged 18-75 years with a self-reported doctor's diagnosis of asthma who were using SABA for symptom relief with or without maintenance low to moderate doses of inhaled corticosteroids in the previous 12 weeks. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either reliever therapy with budesonide 200 μg-formoterol 6 μg Turbuhaler (one inhalation as needed for relief of symptoms) or maintenance budesonide 200 μg Turbuhaler (one inhalation twice daily) plus terbutaline 250 μg Turbuhaler (two inhalations as needed). Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment; the statistician was masked for analysis of the primary outcome. Six study visits were scheduled: randomisation, and weeks 4, 16, 28, 40, and 52. The primary outcome was the number of severe exacerbations per patient per year analysed by intention to treat (severe exacerbations defined as use of systemic corticosteroids for at least 3 days because of asthma, or admission to hospital or an emergency department visit because of asthma requiring systemic corticosteroids). Safety analyses included all participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12616000377437.Findings: Between May 4, 2016, and Dec 22, 2017, we assigned 890 participants to treatment and included 885 eligible participants in the analysis: 437 assigned to budesonide-formoterol as needed and 448 to budesonide maintenance plus terbutaline as needed. Severe exacerbations per patient per year were lower with as-needed budesonide-formoterol than with maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline as needed (absolute rate per patient per year 0·119 vs 0·172; relative rate 0·69, 95% CI 0·48-1·00; p=0·049). Nasopharyngitis was the most common adverse event in both groups, occurring in 154 (35%) of 440 patients receiving as-needed budesonide-formoterol and 144 (32%) of 448 receiving maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline as needed.Interpretation: In adults with mild to moderate asthma, budesonide-formoterol used as needed for symptom relief was more effective at preventing severe exacerbations than maintenance low-dose budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline. The findings support the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendation that inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol reliever therapy is an alternative regimen to daily low-dose inhaled corticosteroid for patients with mild asthma.Funding: Health Research Council of New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most cardiovascular disease risk prediction equations in use today were derived from cohorts established last century and with participants at higher risk but less socioeconomically and ethnically diverse than patients they are now applied to. We recruited a nationally representative cohort in New Zealand to develop equations relevant to patients in contemporary primary care and compared the performance of these new equations to equations that are recommended in the USA.Methods: The PREDICT study automatically recruits participants in routine primary care when general practitioners in New Zealand use PREDICT software to assess their patients' risk profiles for cardiovascular disease, which are prospectively linked to national ICD-coded hospitalisation and mortality databases. The study population included male and female patients in primary care who had no prior cardiovascular disease, renal disease, or congestive heart failure. New equations predicting total cardiovascular disease risk were developed using Cox regression models, which included clinical predictors plus an area-based deprivation index and self-identified ethnicity. Calibration and discrimination performance of the equations were assessed and compared with 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs). The additional predictors included in new PREDICT equations were also appended to the PCEs to determine whether they were independent predictors in the equations from the USA.Findings: Outcome events were derived for 401 752 people aged 30-74 years at the time of their first PREDICT risk assessment between Aug 27, 2002, and Oct 12, 2015, representing about 90% of the eligible population. The mean follow-up was 4·2 years, and a third of participants were followed for 5 years or more. 15 386 (4%) people had cardiovascular disease events (1507 [10%] were fatal, and 8549 [56%] met the PCEs definition of hard atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) during 1 685 521 person-years follow-up. The median 5-year risk of total cardiovascular disease events predicted by the new equations was 2·3% in women and 3·2% in men. Multivariable adjusted risk increased by about 10% per quintile of socioeconomic deprivation. Māori, Pacific, and Indian patients were at 13-48% higher risk of cardiovascular disease than Europeans, and Chinese or other Asians were at 25-33% lower risk of cardiovascular disease than Europeans. The PCEs overestimated of hard atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease by about 40% in men and by 60% in women, and the additional predictors in the new equations were also independent predictors in the PCEs. The new equations were significantly better than PCEs on all performance metrics.Interpretation: We constructed a large prospective cohort study representing typical patients in primary care in New Zealand who were recommended for cardiovascular disease risk assessment. Most patients are now at low risk of cardiovascular disease, which explains why the PCEs based mainly on old cohorts substantially overestimate risk. Although the PCEs and many other equations will need to be recalibrated to mitigate overtreatment of the healthy majority, they also need new predictors that include measures of socioeconomic deprivation and multiple ethnicities to identify vulnerable high-risk subpopulations that might otherwise be undertreated.Funding: Health Research Council of New Zealand, Heart Foundation of New Zealand, and Healthier Lives National Science Challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]