Evaluation of Budesonide-Formoterol for Maintenance and Reliever Therapy Among Patients With Poorly Controlled Asthma A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

For adults with moderate to severe asthma, use of a budesonide-formoterol inhaler for both maintenance and rescue (SMART protocol) appears to be more effective than usual step care with two or three different inhalers. (Once again, simpler is often better.) James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) recommends 2 alternative treatments for patients receiving treatment at steps 3 to 5: single inhaler combination inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol as both maintenance and reliever (SMART) or inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist as maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist as reliever.

Objective: To assess whether switching to SMART is associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever among patients with poorly controlled asthma.

Data sources: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the literature, internal study databases at AstraZeneca and the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, and references from a previous systematic review and meta-analysis on SMART were searched to identify randomized clinical trials published from January 1990 to February 2018, that compared budesonide-formoterol by SMART with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever.

Study selection: Trials of at least 24 weeks' duration were included if they reported baseline data on GINA treatment step, asthma control status, and efficacy measures of severe exacerbations. Included patients were adults and adolescents with asthma and baseline Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item version scores of 1.5 or higher.

Data extraction and synthesis: Patient-level data were identified by independent extraction, and analyses were performed using a fixed-effect model. Data analysis was performed from August 2018 to November 2021.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was time to first severe asthma exacerbation associated with each treatment, analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results: Overall, 4863 patients were included (3034 [62.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 39.8 [16.3] years). Switching patients with uncontrolled asthma at GINA step 3 (n = 1950) to SMART at either step 3 or 4 was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation, with a 29% reduced risk compared with stepping up to step 4 inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97). For patients with uncontrolled asthma at step 3 and step 4 (n = 2913), switching to SMART was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation and a 30% reduced risk compared with remaining at the same treatment step (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.85).

Conclusions and relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, for patients with poorly controlled asthma, SMART was associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever. These findings suggest that if an adult or adolescent receiving treatment at GINA step 3 or 4 has poorly controlled asthma, it is preferable to switch to the SMART regimen rather than to step up or continue the GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever therapy.

Author/s:

Beasley, R., Harrison, T., Peterson, S., Gustafson, P., Hamblin, A., Bengtsson, T., Fageras, M.

Controlled Trial of Budesonide–Formoterol as Needed for Mild Asthma

Tracy Ashby — Thu, 23 May 2019 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 23, 2019

Journal/Publication:

The New England Journal of Medicine

Publisher:

Massachusetts Medical Society

Publication Date:

May 23, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

380

Pages:

2020-2030

URL:

Controlled Trial of Budesonide-Formoterol as Needed for Mild Asthma.

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1056/NEJMoa1901963

Keywords

asthma

randomized control trial

PMID (1):

31112386

MeSH

nebulizers and vaporizers

metered dose inhalers

In this randomized clinical trial, budesonide–formoterol (e.g. Symbacort) used on an as-needed basis resulted in a lower risk of severe exacerbation of asthma than as-needed use of a short-acting SABA; the risk was similar to that of budesonide maintenance therapy plus as-needed SABA. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

BACKGROUND:

In double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, budesonide-formoterol used on an as-needed basis resulted in a lower risk of severe exacerbation of asthma than as-needed use of a short-acting β2-agonist (SABA); the risk was similar to that of budesonide maintenance therapy plus as-needed SABA. The availability of data from clinical trials designed to better reflect clinical practice would be beneficial.

METHODS:

We conducted a 52-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial involving adults with mild asthma. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: albuterol (100 μg, two inhalations from a pressurized metered-dose inhaler as needed for asthma symptoms) (albuterol group); budesonide (200 μg, one inhalation through a Turbuhaler twice daily) plus as-needed albuterol (budesonide maintenance group); or budesonide-formoterol (200 μg of budesonide and 6 μg of formoterol, one inhalation through a Turbuhaler as needed) (budesonide-formoterol group). Electronic monitoring of inhalers was used to measure medication use. The primary outcome was the annualized rate of asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS:

The analysis included 668 of 675 patients who underwent randomization. The annualized exacerbation rate in the budesonide-formoterol group was lower than that in the albuterol group (absolute rate, 0.195 vs. 0.400; relative rate, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.72; P<0.001) and did not differ significantly from the rate in the budesonide maintenance group (absolute rate, 0.195 in the budesonide-formoterol group vs. 0.175 in the budesonide maintenance group; relative rate, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.79; P = 0.65). The number of severe exacerbations was lower in the budesonide-formoterol group than in both the albuterol group (9 vs. 23; relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.86) and the budesonide maintenance group (9 vs. 21; relative risk, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.96). The mean (±SD) dose of inhaled budesonide was 107±109 μg per day in the budesonide-formoterol group and 222±113 μg per day in the budesonide maintenance group. The incidence and type of adverse events reported were consistent with those in previous trials and with reports in clinical use.

CONCLUSIONS:

In an open-label trial involving adults with mild asthma, budesonide-formoterol used as needed was superior to albuterol used as needed for the prevention of asthma exacerbations. (Funded by AstraZeneca and the Health Research Council of New Zealand; Novel START Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12615000999538.).

Author/s:

Beasley, Richard, Holliday, Mark, Reddel, Helen K., Braithwaite, Irene, Ebmeier, Stefan, Hancox, Robert J., Harrison, Tim, Houghton, Claire, Oldfield, Karen, Papi, Alberto, Pavord, Ian D., Williams, Mathew, Weatherall, Mark