Cargando…

Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma

INTRODUCTION: This study compared the bronchoprotective and benefit/risk profiles of various inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosing regimens in mild asthma. METHODS: A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model was developed and validated describing the relationship between ICS dose and time-course for airw...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Daley-Yates, Peter, Aggarwal, Bhumika, Lulic, Zrinka, Fulmali, Sourabh, Cruz, Alvaro A., Singh, Dave
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34873657
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01976-4
_version_ 1784642083026370560
author Daley-Yates, Peter
Aggarwal, Bhumika
Lulic, Zrinka
Fulmali, Sourabh
Cruz, Alvaro A.
Singh, Dave
author_facet Daley-Yates, Peter
Aggarwal, Bhumika
Lulic, Zrinka
Fulmali, Sourabh
Cruz, Alvaro A.
Singh, Dave
author_sort Daley-Yates, Peter
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This study compared the bronchoprotective and benefit/risk profiles of various inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosing regimens in mild asthma. METHODS: A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model was developed and validated describing the relationship between ICS dose and time-course for airway bronchoprotection, [provocative concentration of adenosine monophosphate (AMP) causing ≥ 20% decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) (AMP PC(20))], for fluticasone furoate (FF), fluticasone propionate (FP) and budesonide (BUD). For regular ICS maintenance therapy (100% and 50% adherence) and infrequent or as-needed use (dosing 3–4 times per week), treatment effectiveness was expressed as percent time during 28 days when bronchoprotection exceeded either the threshold for a treatment-related bronchoprotective effect (AMP PC(20) ≥ 0.25 doubling dose) or the threshold for a clinically significant bronchoprotective effect (AMP PC(20) ≥ 1.0 doubling dose). This value was divided by the total ICS dose administered expressed in prednisolone equivalents to give a therapeutic index (TI). RESULTS: The model-predicted time course of ICS-induced bronchoprotection with regular daily maintenance dosing and 100% adherence showed that all ICS at the highest recommended doses for mild asthma exceeded the threshold for clinically significant bronchoprotective effect for all or most of the 28-day dosing period, mean (90% CI); 100% (96.1–100), 99.9% (8.0–100) and 100% (58.2–100) with TI values of 16.9, 6.6 and 5.4 for FF 100 µg OD, FP 200 µg BID and BUD 200 µg BID, respectively. For simulated poor adherence (50%) to regular daily maintenance therapy, corresponding mean (90% CI) values were; 75.7% (39.4–89.1), 52.3% (0.7–69.2) and 51.3% (28.6–58.3) with TI values of 25.7, 6.9 and 5.6. For simulated infrequent/as needed use the corresponding values were; 77.0% (37.6–87.0), 25.5% (0.0–38.0) and 26.2% (14.3–31.5) with TI values of 26.1, 6.7 and 5.7. For all regimen/scenarios, FF had the most sustained efficacy and favourable TI followed by FP and BUD. CONCLUSIONS: At doses recommended for mild asthma, all ICS regimens provide sustained bronchoprotective efficacy when dosed regularly with high adherence. With poor adherence or use 3–4 times per week (infrequent/as needed), longer-acting ICS molecules will more likely provide sustained protection and a better TI versus shorter duration of action molecules (FF > FP ≥ BUD). These data highlight the benefits of using ICS as regular daily maintenance dosing in mild asthma and the potential risks of under-treatment with ICS (which may occur with ICS/formoterol as-needed approach in mild persistent asthma) associated with reduced levels of bronchoprotection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8799535
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87995352022-02-02 Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma Daley-Yates, Peter Aggarwal, Bhumika Lulic, Zrinka Fulmali, Sourabh Cruz, Alvaro A. Singh, Dave Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: This study compared the bronchoprotective and benefit/risk profiles of various inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dosing regimens in mild asthma. METHODS: A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model was developed and validated describing the relationship between ICS dose and time-course for airway bronchoprotection, [provocative concentration of adenosine monophosphate (AMP) causing ≥ 20% decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) (AMP PC(20))], for fluticasone furoate (FF), fluticasone propionate (FP) and budesonide (BUD). For regular ICS maintenance therapy (100% and 50% adherence) and infrequent or as-needed use (dosing 3–4 times per week), treatment effectiveness was expressed as percent time during 28 days when bronchoprotection exceeded either the threshold for a treatment-related bronchoprotective effect (AMP PC(20) ≥ 0.25 doubling dose) or the threshold for a clinically significant bronchoprotective effect (AMP PC(20) ≥ 1.0 doubling dose). This value was divided by the total ICS dose administered expressed in prednisolone equivalents to give a therapeutic index (TI). RESULTS: The model-predicted time course of ICS-induced bronchoprotection with regular daily maintenance dosing and 100% adherence showed that all ICS at the highest recommended doses for mild asthma exceeded the threshold for clinically significant bronchoprotective effect for all or most of the 28-day dosing period, mean (90% CI); 100% (96.1–100), 99.9% (8.0–100) and 100% (58.2–100) with TI values of 16.9, 6.6 and 5.4 for FF 100 µg OD, FP 200 µg BID and BUD 200 µg BID, respectively. For simulated poor adherence (50%) to regular daily maintenance therapy, corresponding mean (90% CI) values were; 75.7% (39.4–89.1), 52.3% (0.7–69.2) and 51.3% (28.6–58.3) with TI values of 25.7, 6.9 and 5.6. For simulated infrequent/as needed use the corresponding values were; 77.0% (37.6–87.0), 25.5% (0.0–38.0) and 26.2% (14.3–31.5) with TI values of 26.1, 6.7 and 5.7. For all regimen/scenarios, FF had the most sustained efficacy and favourable TI followed by FP and BUD. CONCLUSIONS: At doses recommended for mild asthma, all ICS regimens provide sustained bronchoprotective efficacy when dosed regularly with high adherence. With poor adherence or use 3–4 times per week (infrequent/as needed), longer-acting ICS molecules will more likely provide sustained protection and a better TI versus shorter duration of action molecules (FF > FP ≥ BUD). These data highlight the benefits of using ICS as regular daily maintenance dosing in mild asthma and the potential risks of under-treatment with ICS (which may occur with ICS/formoterol as-needed approach in mild persistent asthma) associated with reduced levels of bronchoprotection. Springer Healthcare 2021-12-07 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8799535/ /pubmed/34873657 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01976-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Daley-Yates, Peter
Aggarwal, Bhumika
Lulic, Zrinka
Fulmali, Sourabh
Cruz, Alvaro A.
Singh, Dave
Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title_full Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title_fullStr Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title_full_unstemmed Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title_short Pharmacology Versus Convenience: A Benefit/Risk Analysis of Regular Maintenance Versus Infrequent or As-Needed Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Mild Asthma
title_sort pharmacology versus convenience: a benefit/risk analysis of regular maintenance versus infrequent or as-needed inhaled corticosteroid use in mild asthma
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34873657
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01976-4
work_keys_str_mv AT daleyyatespeter pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma
AT aggarwalbhumika pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma
AT luliczrinka pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma
AT fulmalisourabh pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma
AT cruzalvaroa pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma
AT singhdave pharmacologyversusconvenienceabenefitriskanalysisofregularmaintenanceversusinfrequentorasneededinhaledcorticosteroiduseinmildasthma