| 1. |
- van Bragt, JJMH, et al.
(författare)
-
Characteristics and treatment regimens across ERS SHARP severe asthma registries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 55:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Little is known about the characteristics and treatments of patients with severe asthma across Europe, but both are likely to vary. This is the first study in the European Respiratory Society Severe Heterogeneous Asthma Research collaboration, Patient-centred (SHARP) Clinical Research Collaboration and it is designed to explore these variations. Therefore, we aimed to compare characteristics of patients in European severe asthma registries and treatments before starting biologicals.This was a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of aggregated data from 11 national severe asthma registries that joined SHARP with established patient databases.Analysis of data from 3236 patients showed many differences in characteristics and lifestyle factors. Current smokers ranged from 0% (Poland and Sweden) to 9.5% (Belgium), mean body mass index ranged from 26.2 (Italy) to 30.6 kg·m−2 (the UK) and the largest difference in mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted was 20.9% (the Netherlands versus Hungary). Before starting biologicals patients were treated differently between countries: mean inhaled corticosteroid dose ranged from 700 to 1335 µg·day−1 between those from Slovenia versus Poland when starting anti-interleukin (IL)-5 antibody and from 772 to 1344 µg·day−1 in those starting anti-IgE (Slovenia versus Spain). Maintenance oral corticosteroid use ranged from 21.0% (Belgium) to 63.0% (Sweden) and from 9.1% (Denmark) to 56.1% (the UK) in patients starting anti-IL-5 and anti-IgE, respectively.The severe asthmatic population in Europe is heterogeneous and differs in both clinical characteristics and treatment, often appearing not to comply with the current European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guidelines definition of severe asthma. Treatment regimens before starting biologicals were different from inclusion criteria in clinical trials and varied between countries.
|
|
| 2. |
- Loza, M. J., et al.
(författare)
-
Validated and longitudinally stable asthma phenotypes based on cluster analysis of the ADEPT study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Respiratory Research. - : Springer Nature. - 1465-9921 .- 1465-993X. ; 17:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Asthma is a disease of varying severity and differing disease mechanisms. To date, studies aimed at stratifying asthma into clinically useful phenotypes have produced a number of phenotypes that have yet to be assessed for stability and to be validated in independent cohorts. The aim of this study was to define and validate, for the first time ever, clinically driven asthma phenotypes using two independent, severe asthma cohorts: ADEPT and U-BIOPRED. Methods: Fuzzy partition-around-medoid clustering was performed on pre-specified data from the ADEPT participants (n = 156) and independently on data from a subset of U-BIOPRED asthma participants (n = 82) for whom the same variables were available. Models for cluster classification probabilities were derived and applied to the 12-month longitudinal ADEPT data and to a larger subset of the U-BIOPRED asthma dataset (n = 397). High and low type-2 inflammation phenotypes were defined as high or low Th2 activity, indicated by endobronchial biopsies gene expression changes downstream of IL-4 or IL-13. Results: Four phenotypes were identified in the ADEPT (training) cohort, with distinct clinical and biomarker profiles. Phenotype 1 was "mild, good lung function, early onset", with a low-inflammatory, predominantly Type-2, phenotype. Phenotype 2 had a "moderate, hyper-responsive, eosinophilic" phenotype, with moderate asthma control, mild airflow obstruction and predominant Type-2 inflammation. Phenotype 3 had a "mixed severity, predominantly fixed obstructive, non-eosinophilic and neutrophilic" phenotype, with moderate asthma control and low Type-2 inflammation. Phenotype 4 had a "severe uncontrolled, severe reversible obstruction, mixed granulocytic" phenotype, with moderate Type-2 inflammation. These phenotypes had good longitudinal stability in the ADEPT cohort. They were reproduced and demonstrated high classification probability in two subsets of the U-BIOPRED asthma cohort. Conclusions: Focusing on the biology of the four clinical independently-validated easy-to-assess ADEPT asthma phenotypes will help understanding the unmet need and will aid in developing tailored therapies. Trial registration:NCT01274507(ADEPT), registered October 28, 2010 and NCT01982162(U-BIOPRED), registered October 30, 2013.
|
|
| 3. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Development of Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma (COMSA)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Effectiveness studies with biological therapies for asthma lack standardised outcome measures. The COMSA (Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma) working group sought to develop Core Outcome Measures (COM) sets to facilitate better synthesis of data and appraisal of biologics in paediatric and adult asthma clinical studies.MethodsCOMSA utilised a multi-stakeholder consensus process among patients with severe asthma, adult, and paediatric clinicians, pharmaceutical representatives and health regulators from across Europe. Evidence included a systematic review of development, validity, and reliability of selected outcome measures plus a narrative review and a pan-European survey to better understand patients’ and carers’ views about outcome measures. It was discussed using a modified GRADE Evidence to Decision framework. Anonymous voting was conducted using predefined consensus criteria.ResultsBoth adult and paediatric COM sets include forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as z scores, annual frequency of severe exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid use. Additionally, the paediatric COM set includes the Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) or Childhood-ACT while the adult COM includes the Severe Asthma Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (symptoms and rescue medication use reported separately).ConclusionsThis patient-centred collaboration has produced two COM sets for paediatric and adult severe asthma. It is expected that they will inform the methodology of future clinical trials, enhance comparability of efficacy and effectiveness of biological therapies, and help assess their socioeconomic value. COMSA will inform definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma.
|
|
| 4. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Development of Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma (COMSA)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Effectiveness studies with biological therapies for asthma lack standardised outcome measures. The COMSA (Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma) working group sought to develop Core Outcome Measures (COM) sets to facilitate better synthesis of data and appraisal of biologics in paediatric and adult asthma clinical studies.MethodsCOMSA utilised a multi-stakeholder consensus process among patients with severe asthma, adult, and paediatric clinicians, pharmaceutical representatives and health regulators from across Europe. Evidence included a systematic review of development, validity, and reliability of selected outcome measures plus a narrative review and a pan-European survey to better understand patients’ and carers’ views about outcome measures. It was discussed using a modified GRADE Evidence to Decision framework. Anonymous voting was conducted using predefined consensus criteria.ResultsBoth adult and paediatric COM sets include forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as z scores, annual frequency of severe exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid use. Additionally, the paediatric COM set includes the Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) or Childhood-ACT while the adult COM includes the Severe Asthma Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (symptoms and rescue medication use reported separately).ConclusionsThis patient-centred collaboration has produced two COM sets for paediatric and adult severe asthma. It is expected that they will inform the methodology of future clinical trials, enhance comparability of efficacy and effectiveness of biological therapies, and help assess their socioeconomic value. COMSA will inform definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 7. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: ERJ open research. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 2312-0541. ; 9:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Biologics have proven efficacy for patients with severe asthma but there is lack of consensus on defining response. We systematically reviewed and appraised methodologically developed, defined, and evaluated definitions of non-response and response to biologics for severe asthma.MethodsWe searched four bibliographic databases from inception to 15th March 2021 (PROSPERO: CRD42021211249).Two reviewers screened references, extracted data, assessed methodological quality of development, measurement properties of outcome measures and definitions of response based on COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Modified GRADE approach and narrative synthesis were undertaken.ResultsThirteen studies reported three composite outcome measures, three measures of asthma symptoms, one asthma control and one quality of life. Only four were developed with patient input; none were composite measures. Studies utilised 17 definitions of response: 10/17 (58.8%) were based on Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) or Minimal Important Difference (MID) and 16/17 (94.1%) had high quality evidence. Results were limited by poor methodology for development process and incomplete reporting of psychometric properties. Most measures rated “very low” to “low” for quality of measurement properties and none met all quality standards.ConclusionThis is the first review to synthesize evidence about definitions of response to biologics for severe asthma. While high quality definitions are available, most are MCIDs or MIDs which may be insufficient to justify continuation of biologics in terms of cost-effectiveness. There remains an unmet need for universally accepted, patient-centred, composite definitions to aid clinical decision making and comparability of responses to biologics.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
