Search

BACKGROUND: Validated questionnaires are used to assess asthma control over the past 1-4 weeks from reporting. However, they do not adequately capture asthma control in patients with fluctuating symptoms. Using the Mobile Airways Sentinel Network for airway diseases (MASK-air) app, we developed and validated an electronic daily asthma control score (e-DASTHMA).METHODS: We used MASK-air data (freely available to users in 27 countries) to develop and assess different daily control scores for asthma. Data-driven control scores were developed based on asthma symptoms reported by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and self-reported asthma medication use. We included the daily monitoring data from all MASK-air users aged 16-90 years (or older than 13 years to 90 years in countries with a lower age of digital consent) who had used the app in at least 3 different calendar months and had reported at least 1 day of asthma medication use. For each score, we assessed construct validity, test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and accuracy. We used VASs on dyspnoea and work disturbance, EQ-5D-VAS, Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT), CARAT asthma, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific (WPAI:AS) questionnaires as comparators. We performed an internal validation using MASK-air data from Jan 1 to Oct 12, 2022, and an external validation using a cohort of patients with physician-diagnosed asthma (the INSPIRERS cohort) who had had their diagnosis and control (Global Initiative for Asthma [GINA] classification) of asthma ascertained by a physician.FINDINGS: We studied 135 635 days of MASK-air data from 1662 users from May 21, 2015, to Dec 31, 2021. The scores were strongly correlated with VAS dyspnoea (Spearman correlation coefficient range 0·68-0·82) and moderately correlated with work comparators and quality-of-life-related comparators (for WPAI:AS work, we observed Spearman correlation coefficients of 0·59-0·68). They also displayed high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients range 0·79-0·95) and moderate-to-high responsiveness (correlation coefficient range 0·69-0·79; effect size measures range 0·57-0·99 in the comparison with VAS dyspnoea). The best-performing score displayed a strong correlation with the effect of asthma on work and school activities in the INSPIRERS cohort (Spearman correlation coefficients 0·70; 95% CI 0·61-0·78) and good accuracy for the identification of patients with uncontrolled or partly controlled asthma according to GINA (area under the receiver operating curve 0·73; 95% CI 0·68-0·78).INTERPRETATION: e-DASTHMA is a good tool for the daily assessment of asthma control. This tool can be used as an endpoint in clinical trials as well as in clinical practice to assess fluctuations in asthma control and guide treatment optimisation.FUNDING: None.

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the center of the health system and is likely to optimize the practice of allergy. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomized controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, was embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of-life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed.

Seit mehr als 50 Jahren gilt die Erkrankung der kleinen Atemwege als ein Hauptmerkmal der chronisch-obstruktiven Lungenerkrankung (COPD) und als eine der Hauptursachen für die Obstruktion der Atemwege. Erkrankungen der kleinen Atemwege sind sowohl vermeidbar als auch behandelbar und haben schwerwiegende klinische Folgen, wenn sie nicht kontrolliert werden. Die Erkrankung der kleinen Atemwege geht mit schlechten Spirometriewerten, erhöhter Lungenhyperinflation und schlechtem Gesundheitszustand einher, so dass die kleinen Atemwege ein wichtiges Behandlungsziel bei COPD darstellen. Die frühzeitige Erkennung von Erkrankungen der kleinen Atemwege ist nach wie vor das Haupthindernis. Wenn sie frühzeitig erkannt werden, können Behandlungen, die auf die kleinen Atemwege abzielen, dazu beitragen, die Symptome zu lindern und es den Patienten zu ermöglichen, ihren Aktivitäten nachzugehen. Es sind Studien erforderlich, um die mögliche Rolle neuer Medikamente und neuartiger Medikamentenformulierungen, Inhalatoren und Inhalationsgeräte bei der Behandlung von Erkrankungen der kleinen Atemwege zu bewerten. Diese Entwicklungen werden dazu beitragen, unsere Behandlung von Erkrankungen der kleinen Atemwege bei Patienten mit COPD zu verbessern.

Background: An extrafine formulation triple therapy combination of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), formoterol fumarate (FF), and glycopyrronium bromide (GB) has been developed for the maintenance treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This study used gamma scintigraphy to evaluate the intrapulmonary and extrapulmonary in vivo deposition of BDP/FF/GB, and the intrapulmonary regional distribution of the deposited formulation.Methods: This open-label uncontrolled nonrandomized single-dose study recruited 10 healthy volunteers and 9 patients with asthma. After a krypton-81m (Kr-81m) ventilation scan was conducted, subjects inhaled study drug (four inhalations of BDP/FF/GB 100/6/12.5 mu g radiolabeled using technetium-99 m [Tc-99m]) through pressurized metered-dose inhaler, and a series of scintigraphic images were taken. The primary objective was to evaluate intrapulmonary drug deposition of BDP/FF/GB, determined as the percentage of nominal (i.e., metered) dose. Secondary endpoints included central/peripheral deposition ratio (C/P), and the standardized central/peripheral ratio (sC/P; Tc-99m aerosol C/P/Kr-81m gas C/P).Results: All participants completed the study, with all scintigraphy procedures performed at one site. In patients with asthma, mean +/- standard deviation intrapulmonary deposition was 25.50% +/- 6.81%, not significantly different to that in healthy volunteers (22.74% +/- 9.19%; p = 0.4715). Approximately half of the lung dose was deposited in the peripheral region of the lung (fraction deposited 0.52 +/- 0.07 and 0.49 +/- 0.06 in healthy volunteers and patients with asthma, respectively), resulting in C/P ratios of 0.94 +/- 0.25 and 1.06 +/- 0.25, respectively, with sC/P ratios of 1.80 +/- 0.40 and 1.94 +/- 0.38. Deposition patterns were similar in the two populations. BDP/FF/GB was well tolerated.Conclusions: This study confirmed that the extrafine particles delivered by BDP/FF/GB penetrate the peripheral areas of the lungs, with a similar proportion of particles deposited in the central and peripheral regions. Importantly, the deposition patterns were similar in healthy volunteers and patients with asthma, suggesting that disease characteristics are unlikely to impact drug deposition.Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03795350.

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are breath actuated, and patients using DPIs need to generate an optimal inspiratory flow during the inhalation maneuver for effective drug delivery to the lungs. However, practical and standardized recommendations for measuring peak inspiratory flow (PIF)—a potential indicator for effective DPI use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)—are lacking. To evaluate recommended PIF assessment approaches, we reviewed the Instructions for Use of the In-Check™ DIAL and the prescribing information for eight DPIs approved for use in the treatment of COPD in the United States. To evaluate applied PIF assessment approaches, we conducted a PubMed search from inception to August 31, 2021, for reports of clinical and real-life studies where PIF was measured using the In-Check™ DIAL or through a DPI in patients with COPD. Evaluation of collective sources, including 47 applicable studies, showed that instructions related to the positioning of the patient with their DPI, instructions for exhalation before the inhalation maneuver, the inhalation maneuver itself, and post-inhalation breath-hold times varied, and in many instances, appeared vague and/or incomplete. We observed considerable variation in how PIF was measured in clinical and real-life studies, underscoring the need for a standardized method of PIF measurement. Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Based on these findings and our clinical and research experience, we propose specific recommendations for PIF measurement to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Domiciliary measurements of airflow obstruction and inflammation may assist healthcare teams and patients in determining asthma control and facilitate self-management.OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate parameters derived from domiciliary spirometry and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) in monitoring asthma exacerbations and control.METHODS: Patients with asthma were provided with hand-held spirometry and FeNO devices in addition to their usual asthma care. Patients were instructed to perform twice-daily measurements for one month. Daily symptoms and medication change were reported through a mobile health system. The Asthma Control Questionnaire was completed at the end of the monitoring period.RESULTS: One hundred patients had spirometry, of which 60 were given additional FeNO devices. Compliance rates for twice-daily measurements were poor (median [IQR]: 43 (25-62)% for spirometry; 30 [3-48]% for FeNO); at least 15% of patients took little or no spirometry measurements and 40% rarely measured FeNO. The coefficient of variation (CV) in FEV 1 and FeNO were higher, and the mean % personal best FEV 1 lower in those who had major exacerbations compared to those without (pCONCLUSION: Compliance with domiciliary spirometry and FeNO varied widely amongst patients even in the setting of a research study. However, despite significant missing data, FeNO and FEV 1 were associated with asthma exacerbations and control, making these measurements potentially clinically valuable if used.

Introduction Dry powder inhalers (DPIs), a commonly prescribed inhaler type for respiratory diseases, require patients to generate sufficient peak inspiratory flow (PIF) to ensure optimal drug delivery to the airways. Effectiveness of therapy also requires a good inhalation technique and adequate medication adherence. For patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), recent studies conducted in tertiary care suggest that DPI users with suboptimal PIF have poorer COPD-related health status and increased exacerbation risk versus those with optimal PIF. The PIFotal study will investigate the impact of PIF, inhalation technique and medication adherence on patient-reported outcomes in patients with COPD in primary care using a DPI for their maintenance therapy. Methods and Analysis This cross-sectional observational study will assess 1200 patients (aged ≥ 40 years, diagnosed with COPD and using a DPI for COPD maintenance therapy for ≥ 3 months) from the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Greece and Australia. Assessments will consist of (1) PIF measurements (usual patient inhalation manoeuvre, maximal PIF against resistance of own inhaler, and maximal PIF against low resistance); (2) Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), COPD Assessment Test and Test of Adherence to Inhalers scores; and (3) video recordings of patient inhalation technique. Dependent variables include health status (CCQ score), number of self-reported exacerbations in previous 12 months, and healthcare resource utilisation in previous 6 months. Independent variables include PIF values, inhalation technique errors, medication adherence, and demographic and clinical characteristics. In the primary analysis, the mean difference in CCQ score between patients (1) with optimal/suboptimal PIF, (2) exhibiting/not exhibiting inhalation technique errors, and (3) adhering/not adhering to medication will be examined in a multivariable linear mixed model. Ethics The study protocol was approved by ethics committees/institutional review boards of all participating sites prior to enrolment; written informed consent was obtained from all study participants. Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04532853. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41030-021-00172-7.

Background: Inhaled medications are central to treating asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), yet critical inhaler technique errors are made by up to 90% of patients. In the clinical research setting, recruitment of subjects with poor inhaler technique may give a false impression of both the benefits and the necessity of add-on treatments such as biologic therapies.Objective: To assess the frequency with which inhaler technique is assessed and reliably optimized before and during patient enrollment into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of topical therapy, and the escalation of therapy for asthma and COPD.Methods: Systematic searches were conducted of PubMed and Embase for RCTs published in the past 10 years involving patients with a diagnosis of asthma or COPD undergoing escalation of baseline inhaled therapy (stepping up, changing, adding, switching, increasing, etc) or the introduction of biologic agents.Results: Searches highlighted 1,014 studies, 118 of which were eligible after the removal of duplicates as well as screening and full text review. Of these, only 14 (11.9%) included accessible information in the methods section or referred to such information in online supplements or protocols concerning assessment of participants’ inhaler technique. We therefore developed the proposed Best Practice Inhaler Technique Assessment and Reporting Checklist.Conclusions: Our study identifies a concerning lack of checking and correcting inhaler technique, or at least reporting that this was undertaken, before enrollment in asthma and COPD RCTs, which may affect the conclusions drawn. Mandating the use of a standardized checklist in RCT protocols and ensuring all published RCTs report checking and correcting inhaler technique before enrollment are important next steps.

Mohammed A Almeshari,1,2 Nowaf Y Alobaidi,1,3 Elizabeth Sapey,1,4 Omar Usmani,5 Robert A Stockley,6 James A Stockley7 1Birmingham Acute Care Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK; 2Rehabilitation Health Sciences Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 3Respiratory Therapy Department, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Alahsa, Saudi Arabia; 4Acute Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, B15 2GW, UK; 5Imperial College of London, London, UK; 6Department of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK; 7Lung Function & Sleep Department, Respiratory Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UKCorrespondence: Mohammed A AlmeshariRehabilitation Health Science Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, P. Box 145111,, Riyadh, ZIP 4545, Saudi ArabiaTel +966 50 8033 880Email malmeshari@ksu.edu.saBackground: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is commonly used in the diagnosis of lung disease. Although small airways dysfunction is a feature of asthma and COPD, physiological tests of small airways are not included in guidelines for BDR testing. This systematic review assessed the current evidence of BDR using small airways function in asthma and COPD.Methods: The systematic review used standard methodology with the protocol prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020164140). Electronic medical databases (EMBASE and Medline) were searched using related keywords. Abstracts and full texts were screened independently by two reviewers. Studies that reported the change of physiological small airways function and FEV1 were included in the review. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCT and NIH quality assessment tool for cohort and cross-sectional studies were used to evaluate the studies.Results: A total of 934 articles were identified, with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. Ten studies included asthma patients, 1 study included COPD patients and 1 study included both asthma and COPD. A total of 1104 participants were included, of whom 941 were asthmatic, 64 had COPD and 109 were healthy controls. Studies were heterogeneous in design including the device, dose and time intervals for BDR assessment. A small airway BDR was seen for most tests in asthma and COPD, including oscillometry (R5-20, reactance (X5), area of reactance (AX) and resonant frequency (Fres)) and Maximal Mid Expiratory Flow.Conclusion: There is a measurable BDR in the small airways. However, with no consensus on how to assess BDR, studies were heterogeneous. Further research is needed to inform how BDR should be assessed, its clinical impact and place in routine clinical practice.Keywords: asthma, COPD, bronchodilator, reversibility, small airways function

Marika T Leving,1 Job FM van Boven,2– 4 Sinthia Z Bosnic-Anticevich,5,6 Joyce van Cooten,1 Jaime Correia de Sousa,7 Biljana Cvetkovski,5 Richard Dekhuijzen,8 Lars Dijk,1 Marina García Pardo,9 Asparuh Gardev,10 Rados&lstrok;aw Gawlik,11 Iris van der Ham,1 Elisabeth Sophia Hartgers-Gubbels,10 Ymke Janse,1 Federico Lavorini,12 Tiago Maricoto,13 Jiska Meijer,1 Boyd Metz,1 David B Price,14,15 Miguel Roman-Rodríguez,9 Kirsten Schuttel,1 Nilouq Stoker,1 Ioanna Tsiligianni,16 Omar S Usmani,17 Janwillem H Kocks1,2,15,18 1General Practitioners Research Institute, Groningen, the Netherlands; 2University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; 3University Medical Centre Groningen, Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; 4Medication Adherence Expertise Centre of the Northern Netherlands (MAECON), Groningen, the Netherlands; 5Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; 6Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia; 7Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), PT Government Associate Laboratory, School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 8Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands; 9Primary Care Respiratory Research Unit, Instituto De Investigación Sanitaria De Baleares (IdISBa), Palma de Mallorca, Spain; 10Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany; 11Department of Internal Medicine, Allergology, Clinical Immunology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland; 12Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy; 13Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilha, Portugal; 14Centre of Academic Primary Care, Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; 15Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore; 16Department of Social Medicine, Health Planning Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, Rethymno, Greece; 17Airway Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute (NHLI), Imperial College London and Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK; 18Department of Pulmonology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the NetherlandsCorrespondence: Janwillem H Kocks, General Practitioners Research Institute, Professor Enno Dirk Wiersmastraat 5, Groningen, 9713 GH, the Netherlands, Tel +31 50 211 3898, Email janwillem@gpri.nlPurpose: To assess the relationship between suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow (sPIF), inhalation technique errors, and non-adherence, with Healthcare Resource Utilisation (HCRU) in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients receiving maintenance therapy via a Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods: The cross-sectional, multi-country PIFotal study included 1434 COPD patients (≥ 40 years) using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured with the In-Check DIAL G16, and sPIF was defined as a typical PIF lower than required for the device. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings and grouped into 10 steps. Patients completed the “Test of Adherence to Inhalers” questionnaire. HCRU was operationalised as COPD-related costs for primary healthcare, secondary healthcare, medication, and total COPD-related costs in a 1-year period.Results: Participants with sPIF had higher medication costs compared with those with optimal PIF (cost ratio [CR]: 1.07, 95% CI [1.01, 1.14]). Multiple inhalation technique errors were associated with increased HCRU. Specifically, “insufficient inspiratory effort” with higher secondary healthcare costs (CR: 2.20, 95% CI [1.37, 3.54]) and higher total COPD-related costs (CR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.03– 1.31). “no breath-hold following the inhalation manoeuvre (< 6 s)” with higher medication costs (CR: 1.08, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15]) and total COPD-related costs (CR 1.17, 95% CI [1.07, 1.28]), and “not breathing out calmly after inhalation” with higher medication costs (CR: 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.37]). Non-adherence was not significantly associated with HCRU.Conclusion: sPIF and inhalation technique errors were associated with higher COPD-related healthcare utilisation and costs in COPD patients on DPI maintenance therapy.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Dry Powder Inhaler, health economics, cost analysis, healthcare resource utilisation

Background: Airway clearance techniques (ACTs) are integral to cystic fibrosis (CF) management. However, there is no consensus as to which outcome measures (OMs) are best for assessing ACT efficacy. Objectives: To summarise OMs that have been assessed for their clinimetric properties (including validity, feasibility, reliability, and reproducibility) within the context of ACT research in CF. Design and Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) standards. Any parallel or cross-over randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating outcome measures for ACT in the CF population were eligible for inclusion. The search was performed in five medical databases, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts from international CF conferences. The authors planned to independently assess study quality and risk of bias using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement InstrumeNts (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist with external validity assessment based upon study details (participants and study intervention). Two review authors (GS and MJ) independently screened search results against inclusion criteria, and further data extraction were planned but not required. Results: No completed RCTs from the 187 studies identified met inclusion criteria for the primary or post hoc secondary objective. Two ongoing trials were identified. Discussion and conclusion: This empty systematic review highlights that high-quality RCTs are urgently needed to investigate and validate the clinimetric properties of OMs used to assess ACT efficacy. With the changing demographics of CF combined with the introduction of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies, an accurate assessment of the current benefit of ACT or the effect of ACT withdrawal is a high priority for clinical practice and future research; OMs which have been validated for this purpose are essential. Registration: This systematic review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020206033).

Identification of pathologic changes in early and mild obstructive lung disease has shown the importance of the small airways and their contribution to symptoms. Indeed, significant small airways dysfunction has been found prior to any overt airway obstruction being detectable by conventional spirometry techniques. However, most therapies for the treatment of obstructive lung disease target the physiological changes and associated symptoms that result from chronic lung disease, rather than directly targeting the specific underlying causes of airflow disruption or the drivers of disease progression. In addition, although spirometry is the current standard for diagnosis and monitoring of response to therapy, the most widely used measure, FEV1 , does not align with the pathologic changes in early or mild disease and may not align with symptoms or exacerbation frequency in the individual patient. Newer functional and imaging techniques allow more effective assessment of small airways dysfunction; however, significant gaps in our understanding remain. Improving our knowledge of the role of small airways dysfunction in early disease in the airways, along with the identification of novel end points to measure subclinical changes in this region (ie, those not captured as symptoms or identified through standard FEV1), may lead to the development of novel therapies that directly combat early airways disease processes with a view to slowing disease progression and reversing damage. This expert opinion paper discusses small airways disease in the context of asthma and COPD and highlights gaps in current knowledge that impede earlier identification of obstructive lung disease and the development and standardization of novel small airways-specific end points for use in clinical trials.

Tuberculosis (TB) is caused by a bacterial infection that affects a number of human organs, primarily the lungs, but also the liver, spleen, and spine, causing key symptoms of fever, fatigue, and persistent cough, and if not treated properly, can be fatal. Every year, 10 million individuals become ill with active TB resulting with a mortality approximating 1.5 million. Current treatment guidelines recommend oral administration of a combination of first-line anti-TB drugs for at least 6 months. While efficacious under optimum conditions, ‘Directly Observed Therapy Short-course’ (DOTS) is not without problems. The long treatment time and poor pharmacokinetics, alongside drug side effects lead to poor patient compliance and has accelerated the emergence of multi-drug resistant (MDR) organisms. All this, combined with the limited number of newly discovered TB drugs to treat MDR-TB and shorten standard therapy time, has highlighted the need for new targeted drug delivery systems. In this respect, there has been recent focus on micro- and nano-particle technologies to prepare organic or/and metal particles loaded with TB drugs to enhance their efficacy by targeted delivery via the inhaled route. In this review, we provide a brief overview of the current epidemiology of TB, and risk factors for progression of latent stage tuberculosis (LTBI) to the active TB. We identify current TB treatment regimens, newly discovered TB drugs, and identify studies that have used micro- or nano-particles technologies to design a reliable inhalation drug delivery system to treat TB more effectively.

Background: Iron deficiency is a cause of anemia in many hemodialysis patients. It remains under diagnosed in patients with kidney diseas and it leads to inappropriate response to erythropoietin. Early diagnosis of this anemia before usage of erythropoietin is important, to prevent prescription of expensive erythropoietin and unnecessary costs to the patient and the health care system. This study was conducted to determine prevalence of iron deficiency anemia in hemodialysis patients. Methods: This study was cross-sectional comparative study and was conducted at National Institute of Kidney Disease. Sheikh Zayed hospital nephrology department after taking permission from concerned department. Informed consent was taken from patients also. We measured serum ferritin, serum iron, Total iron binding capacity, complete blood count, hemoglobin in 140 hemodialysis patients. Serum samples were taken, processed and assessed for ferritin levels using commercially available ELISA kits. P value less than ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Out of 140 hemodialysis patients, 34 had Iron deficiency anemia . (IDA). Conclusion: Iron deficiency anemia was observed in 24.2 % of hemodialysis patients

Omar S Usmani,1 Nicola Scichilone,2 Benjamin Mignot,3 Dennis Belmans,3 Cedric Van Holsbeke,3 Jan De Backer,3 Roberta De Maria,4 Erika Cuoghi,4 Eva Topole,4 George Georges4 1Airway Disease Section, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK; 2PROMISE Department of Medicine, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy; 3FLUIDDA, Kontich, Belgium; 4Chiesi Farmaceutici, SpA, Parma, ItalyCorrespondence: George GeorgesChiesi USA Inc., 175 Regency Woods Place, Ste. 600, Cary, NC 27518, USATel +1 (919) 678 6611 x1536Email george.georges@chiesi.comIntroduction: There is a clear correlation between small airways dysfunction and poor clinical outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and it is therefore important that inhalation therapy (both bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory) can deposit in the small airways. Two single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) combinations are currently approved for the maintenance treatment of COPD: extrafine formulation beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium bromide (BDP/FF/GB), and non-extrafine formulation fluticasone furoate/vilanterol/umeclidinium (FluF/VI/UMEC). This study evaluated the lung deposition of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) components of these two SITTs.Materials and Methods: Lung deposition was estimated in-silico using functional respiratory imaging, a validated technique that uses aerosol delivery performance profiles, patients’ high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) lung scans, and patient-derived inhalation profiles to simulate aerosol lung deposition.Results: HRCT scan data from 20 patients with COPD were included in these analyses, who had post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ranging from 19.3% to 66.0% predicted. For intrathoracic deposition (as a percentage of the emitted dose), deposition of the ICS component was higher from BDP/FF/GB than FluF/VI/UMEC; the two triple therapies had similar performance for both the LABA component and the LAMA component. Peripheral deposition of all three components was higher with BDP/FF/GB than FluF/VI/UMEC. Furthermore, the ratios of central to peripheral deposition for all three components of BDP/FF/GB were < 1, indicating greater peripheral than central deposition (0.48± 0.13, 0.48± 0.13 and 0.49± 0.13 for BDP, FF and GB, respectively; 1.96± 0.84, 0.97± 0.34 and 1.20± 0.48 for FluF, VI and UMEC, respectively).Conclusions: Peripheral (small airways) deposition of all three components (ICS, LABA, and LAMA) was higher from BDP/FF/GB than from FluF/VI/UMEC, based on profiles from patients with moderate to very severe COPD. This is consistent with the extrafine formulation of BDP/FF/GB.Keywords: tomography, X-ray computed, metered dose inhalers, dry powder inhalers, inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting beta2 agonist, long-acting muscarinic antagonist

Modern inhaled drug discovery programs assess dose delivery to proximal and distal airways using rudimentary imaging indices, where relative deposition is estimated by generically defined ‘central’ and ‘peripheral’ lung regions. Utilizing recent data linking the proximal airway topology to a characteristic pattern of aerosol lung deposition, we provide a direct measure of dose distribution between the proximal bronchi and the distal lung. We analyzed scintigraphic lung images of twelve asthma patients following inhalation of 1.5-, 3- and 6-µm monodisperse drug particles at breathing flows of 30- and 60-L/min. We explicitly used the central hot-spots associated with each patient’s specific bronchial topology to obtain a direct measure of aerosol deposition in the proximal bronchi, rather than applying standard templates of lung boundaries. Maximum deposition in the central bronchi (as % of lung deposition) was 52 ± 10(SD)% (6 µm;60 L/min). Minimum central deposition was 17 ± 2(SD)% (1.5 µm;30 L/min) where the 83% aerosol ‘escaping’ deposition in the central bronchi reached 75 ± 17(SD)% of the lung area that could be reached by Krypton gas. For all particle sizes, hot-spots appeared in the same patient-specific central airway location, with greatest intensity at 60 L/min. For a range of respirable aerosol sizes and breathing flows, we have quantified deposited dose in the proximal bronchi and their distal lung reach, constituting a platform to support therapeutic inhaled aerosol drug development.

Proper device selection is crucial for the clinical results of inhalation therapy. However, none of the available devices fully conforms to the requirements for delivering drug with increased patie...

Respiratory oscillometry is gaining global attention over traditional pulmonary function tests for its sensitivity in detecting small airway obstructions. However, its use in clinical settings as a diagnostic tool is limited because oscillometry lacks globally accepted reference values. In this scoping review, we systematically assessed the differences between selected oscillometric reference equations with the hypothesis that significant heterogeneity existed between them. We searched bibliographic databases, registries and references for studies that developed equations for healthy adult populations according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A widely used Caucasian model was used as the standard reference and compared against other models using Bland–Altman and Lin's concordance correlational analyses. We screened 1202 titles and abstracts, and after a full-text review of 67 studies, we included 10 in our analyses. Of these, three models had a low-to-moderate agreement with the reference model, particularly those developed from non-Caucasian populations. Although the other six models had a moderate-to-high agreement with the standard model, there were still significant sex-specific variations. This is the first systematic analysis of the heterogeneity between oscillometric reference models and warrants the validation of appropriate equations in clinical applications of oscillometry to avoid diagnostic errors.

Switching inhaler regimens can be driven by poor disease control but also by nonclinical factors, such as cost and environmental impact. The consequences of switching for nonclinical reasons are largely unclear.To systematically review the real-world consequences of switching inhaler regimens for nonclinical reasons in asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.Embase, MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, and EconLit were searched to November 21, 2020. Conference searches and reference checking were also performed. Real-world studies of asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients undergoing a switch in inhaler regimen for any reason apart from clinical need were included. Two reviewers screened and extracted data. Key outcomes included symptom control, exacerbations, and patient-doctor relationships.A total of 8,958 records were screened and 21 studies included. Higher-quality (matched comparative) studies were prioritized. Five matched studies (6 datasets) reported on symptom control: 5 datasets (n = 7,530) with unclear patient consent reported improved disease control following switching, and 1 dataset (n = 1,648) with non-consented patients reported significantly worsened disease control. Three matched studies (5 datasets, n = 10,084) reported on exacerbation rate ratios; results were heterogeneous depending on the definition used. Two studies (n = 137) reported that switching inhaler regimens could have a negative impact on the doctor-patient relationship, especially when the switches were non-consented. Study quality was generally low.Switching inhaler regimens is a complex issue that can have variable clinical consequences and can harm the patient-doctor relationship. Limited high-quality evidence was identified, and study designs were heterogeneous. A robust framework is needed to guide the personalized switching of inhalers.

Although asthma is very common, affecting 5–10% of the population, the diagnosis of asthma in adults remains a challenge in the real world, which results in both over- and under-diagnosis. A taskforce was set up by the European Respiratory Society to systematically review the literature on the diagnostic accuracy of tests used to diagnose asthma in adult patients and provide recommendations for clinical practice.The taskforce defined eight Population, Index, Comparator and Outcome questions that were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The taskforce utilised the outcomes to develop an evidence-based diagnostic algorithm, with recommendations for a pragmatic guideline for everyday practice that was directed by real-life patient experiences.The taskforce supports the initial use of spirometry followed by bronchodilator reversibility testing (if airway obstruction is present). If initial spirometry fails to show obstruction, further tests should be performed in the following order: exhaled nitric oxide fraction, peak expiratory flow variability, or, in secondary care, bronchial challenge. We present the thresholds for each test that are compatible with a diagnosis of asthma in the presence of current symptoms.The taskforce reinforces spirometry as a priority and recognises the value of measuring blood eosinophils and serum immunoglobulin E to phenotype the patient. Measuring gas trapping by body plethysmography in patients with preserved forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity ratio deserves further attention. The taskforce draws attention to the difficulty of making a correct diagnosis in patients already receiving inhaled corticosteroids; the comorbidities that may obscure diagnosis; the importance of phenotyping; and the necessity of considering the patient experience in the diagnostic process.

P99 Table 1Changes in self-reported knowledge, training, and adherence regarding inhaled therapies during COVID-19. Pattern analysis of participants reporting change in adherence indicates the role of patient emotions, beliefs, and experiences. Six reasons inducing adherence-promoting or adherence-limiting behaviour were identified.Participant identifier Change in knowledge Change in training Change in adherence Reason(s) for change in adherence 2 No change No change Fear of contracting COVID-19 22 Decreased Decreased Worsening of symptoms during COVID-19 30 No change No change Fear of contracting COVID-19;Worsening of symptoms during COVID-19 38 No change No change Increased Motivation from awareness of COPD as a COVID-19 risk factor 49 Increased No change Perception of high therapeutic benefit from new prescription during COVID-19;Motivation from awareness of COPD as a COVID-19 risk factor 17 Decreased Decreased Social isolation/depression and neglectful of COPD treatment during COVID-19 23 No change No change Decreased Improvement in symptoms during COVID-19 28 No change Decreased Social isolation/depression and neglectful of COPD treatment during COVID-19 ConclusionsDisparities between patients’ perceived and actual knowledge, deficiencies in training delivered, and potential for more appropriate inhalation device selection exist. COVID-19 induces bidirectional change in adherence;the impacts of ‘shielding’ and disruption to routine care may limit positive change. Although a larger study is required to confirm statistical significance, these findings warrant improved patient education provision.

The benefits of inhaled medication for the treatment of respiratory diseases are immense. Inhalers are unquestionably the most important medical devices for the treatment of asthma and in Europe today there are more than 230 different device and drug combinations of inhaled therapies many of which are available for the treatment of asthma. They are designed to alleviate the symptoms of asthma by controlling inflammation and minimizing exacerbations and are intended to be simple enough to operate by all patients regardless of their age and education. However, it is still a huge challenge for patients to use their inhaler correctly and consistently and achieving asthma control continues to be an elusive goal for most patients worldwide. The reality is that despite advances in the diagnosis of asthma, the availability of comprehensive asthma management guidelines and potent asthma medications combined with efficient delivery systems, uncontrolled disease is still linked to substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite the enormous benefits of delivering topically acting medication directly to the site of disease in the lungs adherence to treatment still remains one of the biggest challenges in asthma control. This current review looks at why patients have difficulty in using their inhalers and why adherence is so poor and how this may be improved through the use of innovation in inhaler design.

Medication adherence and inhaler technique may confound, in both a positive and a negative manner, outcomes of pharmacogenetic asthma studies. The importance of understanding patient behaviour when interpreting their biology should be emphasised.https://bit.ly/3tQdh1p

Background Triple therapy with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting muscarinic antagonists/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LAMA/LABA) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with continued symptoms or exacerbations, despite treatment with LAMA/LABA or ICS/LABA. The pulmonary, extrathoracic, and regional lung deposition patterns of a radiolabeled ICS/LAMA/LABA triple fixed-dose combination budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF 320/18/9.6 μg), delivered via a single Aerosphere metered dose inhaler (MDI) were previously assessed in healthy volunteers and showed good deposition to the central and peripheral airways (whole lung deposition: 37.7%). Here, we report the findings assessing BGF in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Methods This phase I, single-dose, open-label gamma scintigraphy imaging study (NCT03906045) was conducted in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Patients received two actuations of BGF MDI (160/9/4.8 μg per actuation) radiolabeled with technetium‑99‑pertechnetate, not exceeding 5 MBq per actuation. Immediately following each inhalation, patients performed a breath-hold of up to 10 s, then exhaled into an exhalation filter. Gamma scintigraphy imaging of the anterior and posterior views of the lungs and stomach, and a lateral head and neck view, were performed immediately after exhalation. The primary objective of the study was to assess the pulmonary deposition of BGF. Secondary objectives assessed the deposited dose of radiolabeled BGF in the oropharyngeal and stomach regions, on the actuator, and on the exhalation filter in addition to regional airway deposition patterns in the lungs. Results The mean BGF emitted dose deposited in the lungs was 32.1% (standard deviation [SD] 15.6) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, 35.2% (SD 12.8) in patients with moderate COPD, and 28.7% (SD 18.4) in patients with severe/very severe COPD. Overall, the mean normalized outer/inner ratio was 0.55 (SD 0.19), while the standardized central/peripheral ratio was 2.21 (SD 1.64). Conclusions Radiolabeled BGF 320/18/9.6 μg was efficiently delivered and deposited throughout the entire lung, including large and small airways, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with similar deposition in patients with moderate COPD and patients with severe/very severe COPD. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03906045. Registered 8 April 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03906045