Exploring Clinical Remission in Moderate Asthma - Perspectives from Asia, the Middle East, and South America.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical remission is a relatively new concept in asthma but recent research initiatives suggest it could be an ambitious and achievable therapeutic target for patients with asthma. METHODS: In this modified Delphi study (comprising two online surveys, completed either side of a virtual scientific workshop), the opinions of a panel of respiratory physicians were evaluated to summarize perspective statements on key therapeutic outcomes and criteria for on-treatment clinical remission in patients with moderate asthma. An agreement threshold was pre-defined as agreement by ≥ 75% of participants. RESULTS: Surveys 1 and 2 were completed by 20 and 18 participants, respectively. Most participants (95%) agreed with the concept of clinical remission in moderate asthma and that this should be a desirable treatment goal (90%). Based on a composite measure of 4-6 desirable therapeutic outcomes, current understanding of clinical remission was considered as 12 months with no exacerbations, no oral corticosteroids, no daytime or night-time asthma symptoms (Asthma Control Test score ≥ 20 or Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 0.75), stable lung function, and no treatment-related adverse events. No agreement was reached on the role of relievers in defining therapeutic outcomes or on the wider use of biomarkers and airway hyperresponsiveness for defining asthma remission in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: In line with recent consensus statements from the United States and Europe, there was a high level of agreement on the elements of clinical remission among a panel of respiratory physicians from Asia, the Middle East, and South America. Extension of the concept of clinical remission to patients with moderate asthma was considered aligned with the potential of clinical remission as a goal of therapy.

APPaRENT 3: Asthma Patients' and Physicians' Perspectives on the Burden and Management of Asthma in Seven Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma management is strongly dependent on physician and patient beliefs and perceptions about the disease and its long-term treatment. The APPaRENT 3 study was conducted to explore factors influencing treatment choice and to understand patients' and physicians' attitudes and perspectives on the use of controller inhalers in regular versus flexible dosing for asthma management. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey of patients with asthma and treating physicians was conducted in seven countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam (patient survey only), Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Assessment was carried out through an online/face-to-face questionnaire, where patients' viewpoints were focused on their attitudes and beliefs about asthma and treatment adherence, whereas physicians' viewpoints were gathered on their attitudes and beliefs about asthma management, knowledge of and adherence to asthma treatment guidelines, and asthma treatment regimens. RESULTS: Overall, 1400 patients (mean age, 34 years) and 599 physicians (mean age, 43 years) were included in the survey. Physicians similarly prioritised symptom control (39%) and exacerbation reduction (40%) in moderate asthma, whereas patients prioritised symptom control (41%) over exacerbation reduction (22%). Although both groups (physicians, 86%; patients, 84%) perceived asthma as well-controlled, poor management was evident based on Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores (mean, 15.7; standard deviation, 4.14; 82% had an ACT score < 20) and high symptom burden (39% reported nighttime awakenings or early mornings ≥ 2 nights/week). Most patients (76%) with moderate asthma were prescribed regular dosing, with the most common treatment being inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) with as-needed inhaled short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA; 20%). Among patients on maintenance and reliever therapy, 93% of patients received a separate inhaled reliever. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high symptom burden, patients overestimated their level of asthma control. Physicians prioritised controlling symptoms and reducing exacerbations as treatment goals for moderate asthma, often prescribing regular dosing with ICS/LABA with as-needed inhaled SABA.

Managing asthma depends a lot on what doctors and patients think about the illness and its long-term treatment. This study looked into what influences treatment decisions and what patients and doctors think about using inhalers regularly or on an as-needed basis to manage asthma across seven countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam [patient survey only], Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates). In this study, patients with asthma and doctors managing asthma completed an online/face-to-face questionnaire. The study aimed to understand what patients think about asthma and their treatment plan. Meanwhile, the doctors were asked what they think about managing asthma and how much they apply clinical guidelines for treating patients with asthma. Doctors believed it is equally important to control symptoms and prevent worsening of symptoms in patients with moderate asthma, while patients cared more about controlling symptoms than preventing worsening of symptoms. While doctors and patients both regarded asthma as well-controlled, many patients had low Asthma Control Test scores and experienced a lot of symptoms, suggesting that they are poor perceivers of asthma control. Most patients with moderate asthma were given regular treatment, usually with inhaled corticosteroid combined with long-acting ß₂-agonist along with as-needed short-acting ß₂-agonist as a reliever. Most patients who were prescribed the same inhaler for regular use and as a reliever also had a separate inhaler for quick relief of symptoms. This study shows the need for patients and doctors to have better conversations about asthma, its treatments, and what to expect from them.

Association between Increased Risk of Pneumonia with ICS in COPD: A Continuous Variable Analysis of Patient Factors from the IMPACT Study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the proven benefits of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), clinicians limit patient exposure to ICS due to the risk of pneumonia. However, there are multiple factors associated with the risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD. This post hoc analysis of IMPACT trial data aims to set the risks associated with ICS into a context of specific patient-related factors that contribute to the risk of pneumonia. METHODS: The 52-week, double-blind IMPACT trial randomized patients with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 exacerbation in the prior year 2:2:1 to once-daily fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI), FF/VI or UMEC/VI. Annual rate of on-treatment pneumonias in the intent-to-treat population associated with age, body mass index (BMI), percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and blood eosinophil count (BEC) was evaluated. RESULTS: This analysis revealed that the annual rate of pneumonia showed the lowest risk at the age of 50 years. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) between ICS-containing and non-ICS containing treatments diverged in ages > 63 years, suggesting a significantly increased ICS-related risk in older patients. In contrast, the annual rate of pneumonia rose in both groups below BMI of 22.5 kg/m2, but above that, there was no relationship to pneumonia rate and no differential effect between the two groups. The relationship between BEC and pneumonia was flat up to > 300/µL cells with ICS-containing treatment and then rose. In contrast, the rate of pneumonia with non-ICS containing treatment appeared to increase at a lower level of BEC (~ 200/µL). CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence of a differential effect of older age, lower BMI, lower FEV1 and BEC on the pneumonia rate between ICS-containing and non-ICS containing treatments. This analysis points to the need for a balanced approach to risk versus benefit in the use of ICS-containing treatments in COPD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: IMPACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02164513.

Delphi Consensus on Clinical Applications of GOLD 2023 Recommendations in COPD Management: How Aligned are Recommendations with Clinical Practice?

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this Delphi study was to understand and assess the level of consensus among respiratory experts on the clinical application of GOLD 2023 recommendations in management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: The study comprised two online surveys and a participant meeting with 34 respiratory experts from 16 countries. Responses of 73 questions were recorded using a Likert scale ranging from 0 (disagreement) to 9 (agreement). The consensus threshold was 75%. RESULTS: Survey 1 and survey 2 had 34 and 32 participants, respectively; and 25 attended the participant meeting. Consensus was reached on survey 1: 28/42; survey 2: 18/30 close-ended questions. A consensus was reached on the clinical relevance of most updates in definitions and diagnosis of COPD. Mixed results for the treatment recommendations by GOLD were noted: 74% agreed with the recommendation to initiate treatment with dual bronchodilators for group E patients; 63% agreed for including inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/long-acting ß2 agonist(LABA)/ Long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA) as a treatment option for GOLD B patients. Also, consensus lacked on removing ICS + LABA as an initial therapeutic option, in countries with challenges in access to other treatment option;. 88% agreed that they use GOLD recommendations in their daily clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study demonstrated a high level of consensus regarding key concepts of GOLD 2023 report, with most participants favoring recent updates in definitions, diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD. More evidence on the etiotype based management and treatment options for group B and E are required which could further strengthen clinical application of the GOLD report.

The goal of this Delphi study was to understand and assess the level of alignment among the respiratory experts on the application of key changes and recommendations proposed by the GOLD 2023 report in their routine clinical practice for the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There were two online surveys in this study, and experts from 16 countries (primarily focused on developing countries) were invited to participate. Using the Delphi method, expert representatives shared their insights with the aim of optimizing patient care. The alignment was assessed in six well-defined themes: 1) Overall view on GOLD/other recommendations; 2) Assessing patients with COPD; 3) Initial pharmacological treatment in patients with COPD; 4) Vaccination for patients with COPD; 5) Follow-up pharmacological treatment in patients with COPD; and 6) Survival evidence in patients with COPD. Participants expressed a high level of agreement regarding key concepts of the GOLD 2023 report, with most of them agreeing with recent updates in definitions, diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD. The results also highlighted the need to publish GOLD reports in multiple languages and in a shorter, pocket-sized format to increase awareness and adaptation among healthcare providers.

Clinical Concepts for Triple Therapy Use in Patients with COPD: A Delphi Consensus.

Purpose: Role of triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management is supported by growing evidence, but consensus is lacking on various aspects. We conducted a Delphi survey in respiratory experts on the effects of triple therapy on exacerbation reduction, early optimization, pneumonia risk, and mortality benefits in COPD management. Methods: The study comprised 2-round online surveys and a participant meeting with 21 respiratory experts from 10 countries. The 31-statement questionnaire was prepared using Decipher software after literature review. Responses were recorded using Likert scale ranging from 1 (disagreement) to 9 (agreement) with a consensus threshold of 75%. Results: All experts participated in both surveys and 14/21 attended participant meeting. Consensus was reached on 13/31 questions in first survey and 4/14 in second survey on: mortality benefits of triple therapy; comparable pneumonia risk between single inhaler triple therapy (SITT) and multiple inhaler triple therapy (81%); preference of SITT for patients with high eosinophil count (95%); exacerbation risk reduction and healthcare cost benefits with early initiation of SITT post exacerbation-related hospitalization (<30 days) (86%). No consensus was reached on first line SITT use after first exacerbation resulting in COPD diagnosis (62%). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that there is consensus among experts regarding many of the key concepts about appropriate clinical use and benefits of triple therapy in COPD. More evidence is required for evaluating the benefits of early optimisation of triple therapy.

SABAs as Reliever Medications in Asthma Management: Evidence-Based Science.

The role of as-needed inhaled short-acting ß2-agonists (SABAs) in the management of asthma has become a subject of debate due to differing opinions in the professional community relating to the use of SABAs. In this article, we summarize the current position of SABAs when used as reliever medications and examine the challenges to appropriate use including a critique of the data that have led to the condemnation of SABA used as a reliever. We consider the evidence for the appropriate use of SABA as a reliever together with practical solutions to ensure such use, including identifying patients at risk of misusing their SABA relievers and managing issues of inhaler technique and treatment adherence. We conclude that inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-based maintenance treatment with SABA used as-needed as a reliever is an effective and safe treatment for patients with asthma, with no scientific evidence of a causal link between SABA use as a reliever and mortality or serious adverse events (including exacerbations). Increased SABA use warns of a deterioration in asthma control, and patients at risk of misusing their ICS and SABA medication should be rapidly identified to ensure they are receiving adequate ICS-based controller therapy. Appropriate use of ICS-based controller therapy and as-needed SABA should be encouraged and promoted with educational activities.

The role of modeling studies in asthma management and clinical decision-making: a Delphi survey of physician knowledge and perceptions.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the knowledge and perceptions of physicians on the role of modeling studies in asthma, using a modified Delphi procedure. METHODS: Group opinions among a panel of respiratory experts were obtained using two online questionnaires and a virtual scientific workshop. A consensus was pre-defined as agreement by >75% of participants. RESULTS: From 26 experts who agreed to participate, 22 completed both surveys. At the end of the process, the panel rated their own understanding of modeling as good (77%) but that among physicians in general as poor (77%). Participants agreed that data from modeling studies should be used, at least sometimes, to inform treatment guidelines (91%) and could be useful for guiding clinical decisions (100%). Perceived barriers to using modeling studies were 'A lack of understanding' (81%) and 'A lack of standardized methodology' (82%). Based on data from two modeling studies, no consensus was reached on physicians recommending regular inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) versus as-needed therapy for patients with mild asthma, whereas 77% agreed that they would recommend regular ICS over maintenance and reliever therapy for ≥80% of their patients with moderate asthma. No consensus was reached on the value of modeling data in relation to empirical data. CONCLUSION: There is overall support among respiratory experts for the usefulness of modeling data to guide asthma treatment guidelines and clinical decision making. More publications on modeling data using robust models and accessible terminology will aid the understanding of physicians in general and help clarify the evidence-based value of modeling studies.

Consensus on mild asthma management: results of a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: In order to understand the role of regular controller inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) versus as-needed ICS-formoterol in managing mild asthma, we performed a modified Delphi procedure. METHODS: Opinions from 16 respiratory experts to three surveys and during a virtual scientific workshop helped to develop final consensus statements (pre-defined as 70% agreement). RESULTS: Thirteen participants completed all rounds (response rate 81%). At the end of the procedure, there was final consensus on: regular daily ICS being the recommended treatment approach in mild persistent asthma, with better symptom control and robust long-term clinical data compared with as-needed ICS-formoterol (85%); to avoid noncompliance, frequently seen in mild asthma patients, regular ICS dosing should be accompanied by ongoing education on treatment adherence (100%); treatment aims should be targeting asthma control (92%) and reduction of exacerbation risk (85%). No consensus was reached on whether GINA or national guidelines most influence prescribing decisions. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to encourage patients to be adherent and to target both asthma control and exacerbation risk reduction. There is robust clinical evidence to support proactive regular dosing with ICS controller therapy plus as-needed short-acting beta-agonists for the management of patients with mild asthma.

Safety of SABA Monotherapy in Asthma Management: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) reliever overuse is common in asthma, despite availability of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-based maintenance therapies, and may be associated with increased risk of adverse events (AEs). This systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the safety and tolerability of SABA reliever monotherapy for adults and adolescents with asthma, through analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence. METHODS: An SLR of English-language publications between January 1996 and December 2021 included RCTs and observational studies of patients aged ≥ 12 years treated with inhaled SABA reliever monotherapy (fixed dose or as needed) for ≥ 4 weeks. Studies of terbutaline and fenoterol were excluded. Meta-analysis feasibility was dependent on cross-trial data comparability. A random-effects model estimated rates of mortality, serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuation due to AEs (DAEs) for as-needed and fixed-dose SABA treatment groups. ICS monotherapy and SABA therapy were compared using a fixed-effects model. RESULTS: Forty-two studies were identified by the SLR for assessment of feasibility. Final meta-analysis included 24 RCTs. Too few observational studies (n = 2) were available for inclusion in the meta-analysis. One death unrelated to treatment was reported in each of the ICS, ICS + LABA, and fixed-dose SABA groups. No other treatment-related deaths were reported. SAE and DAE rates were < 4%. DAEs were reported more frequently in the SABA treatment groups than with ICS, potentially owing to worsening asthma symptoms being classified as an AE. SAE risk was comparable between SABA and ICS treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of data from RCTs showed that deaths were rare with SABA reliever monotherapy, and rates of SAEs and DAEs were comparable between SABA reliever and ICS treatment groups. When used appropriately within prescribed limits as reliever therapy, SABA does not contribute to excess rates of mortality, SAEs, or DAEs.

Asthma severity in four countries of Latin America.

BACKGROUND: In Latin America, there is scarce information about severe asthma (SA) according to the ERS/ATS 2014 criteria. This study aimed to compare the demographic, socio, clinical characteristics, treatment, and use of healthcare resources between SA and non-severe asthma (NSA) patients in Argentina, Colombia, Chile and Mexico. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted including 594 asthma patients from outpatient specialized sites. A descriptive analysis was performed comparing SA patients and NSA. Chi-square and Mann Whitney tests were used to assess associations between asthma severity and outcome variables. RESULTS: Using ERS/ATS 2014 criteria, 31.0% of the patients were identified as SA. SA patients were older at diagnosis (mean age 31.64 years vs 24.71 years, p < 0.001) and had higher proportion of uncontrolled asthma than the NSA patients (64.1% vs 53.2%, p < 0.001). SA patients reported a significantly higher proportion of both hospital admission and emergency room (ER) visits due to asthma in the last year, compared with NSA patients, 8.7% vs. 3.7% (p = 0.011) and 37.0% vs. 21.7% (p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SA patients were older, had greater proportions in some comorbidities and experienced increased healthcare utilization. Also, our results showed that even in patients using the last steps of treatment (GINA step 4 or 5), there was still a higher proportion of uncontrolled disease.

Cumplimiento con las guías nacionales en pacientes hospitalizados con neumonía adquirida en la comunidad: resultados del Estudio Capo en Venezuela / Adherence With National Guidelines in Hospitalized Patients With Community-acquired Pneumonia: Results From the CAPO Study in Venezuela

Introducción: La Organización de Neumonía adquirida en la Comunidad (CAPO, siglas en inglés: Community Acquired Pneumonia Organization) es un estudio observacional internacional en 130 hospitales de un total de 31 países, para evaluar la gestión actual de los pacientes hospitalizados con neumonía adquirida en la comunidad (NAC). Utilizando la base de datos centralizada de CAPO, se realizó este subestudio con el objetivo de evaluar el grado de cumplimiento con las guías nacionales en Venezuela, para definir en qué áreas se puede intervenir para mejorar la atención del paciente hospitalizado con NAC. Métodos: En este estudio retrospectivo observacional, se usaron indicadores de calidad para evaluar la atención de pacientes hospitalizados con NAC en 8 centros de Venezuela. El nivel de cumplimiento fue clasificado como óptimo (> 90%), intermedio (60-90%), y bajo (< 60%). Resultados: Se enrolaron 454 pacientes con NAC. El tratamiento empírico administrado dentro de las 8 horas de la admisión fue óptimo (96%), el resto de los indicadores mostraron un bajo nivel de cumplimiento (< 60%). Conclusiones: Podemos decir que existen muchas áreas en el manejo de las NAC en Venezuela que no se efectúan de acuerdo a las guías nacionales de la SOVETHORAX1. En todo proceso de mejora de calidad la primera etapa es la evaluación de la diferencia entre lo recomendado y lo que se efectúa en la práctica clínica diaria. Este estudio cumple con este primer paso, pero el desafío a futuro es implementar los procesos necesarios para mejorar el manejo de la NAC en Venezuela

Introduction: The Community-Acquired Pneumonia Organization (CAPO) is an international observational study in 130 hospitals, with a total of 31 countries, to assess the current management of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). 2 Using the centralized database of CAPO was decided to conduct this study with the aim of evaluate the level of adherence with national guidelines in Venezuela, to define in which areas an intervention may be necessary to improve the quality of care of hospitalized patients with CAP. Methods: In this observational retrospective study quality indicators were used to evaluate the management of hospitalized patients with CAP in 8Venezuelan’s centers. The care ofthe patients was evaluated in the areas of: hospitalization, oxygen therapy, empiric antibiotic therapy, switch therapy, etiological studies, blood cultures indication, and prevention. The compliance was rated as good (> 90%), intermediate (60% to 90%), or low (< 60%). Results: Atotal of 454 patients withCAP were enrolled. The empiric treatment administered within8 hours of the patient arrival to the hospital was good (96%), but the rest of the indicators showed a low level of adherence (< 60%). Conclusion: We can say that there are many areas in the management of CAP in Venezuela that are not performed according to the national guidelines of SOVETHORAX.1 In any quality improvement processthe first step is to evaluate the difference between what is recommended and what is done in clinical practice. While this study meets this first step, the challenge for the future is to implement the processes necessary to improve the management of CAP in Venezuela

Adherence with national guidelines in hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia: results from the CAPO study in Venezuela.

INTRODUCTION: The Community-Acquired Pneumonia Organization (CAPO) is an international observational study in 130 hospitals, with a total of 31 countries, to assess the current management of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). 2 Using the centralized database of CAPO was decided to conduct this study with the aim of evaluate the level of adherence with national guidelines in Venezuela, to define in which areas an intervention may be necessary to improve the quality of care of hospitalized patients with CAP. METHODS: In this observational retrospective study quality indicators were used to evaluate the management of hospitalized patients with CAP in 8 Venezuelan's centers. The care of the patients was evaluated in the areas of: hospitalization, oxygen therapy, empiric antibiotic therapy, switch therapy, etiological studies, blood cultures indication, and prevention. The compliance was rated as good (>90%), intermediate (60% to 90%), or low (<60%). RESULTS: A total of 454 patients with CAP were enrolled. The empiric treatment administered within 8 hours of the patient arrival to the hospital was good (96%), but the rest of the indicators showed a low level of adherence (<60%). CONCLUSION: We can say that there are many areas in the management of CAP in Venezuela that are not performed according to the national guidelines of SOVETHORAX.1 In any quality improvement process the first step is to evaluate the difference between what is recommended and what is done in clinical practice. While this study meets this first step, the challenge for the future is to implement the processes necessary to improve the management of CAP in Venezuela.

Predicting Mycobacterium tuberculosis in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

The 22 risk factors suggested by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to predict patients at risk for Mycobacterium tuberculosis have not been evaluated in hospitalised patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We evaluated which of the CDC risk factors best predict M. tuberculosis in these patients. To our knowledge, this is the first time a score has been developed assessing these risk factors. This was a secondary analysis of 6976 patients hospitalised with CAP enrolled in the Community-Acquired Pneumonia Organization International Cohort Study. Using Poisson regression, we selected the subset of risk factors that best predicted the presence of CAP due to M. tuberculosis. This subset was compared to the CDC risk factors using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Five risk factors were found to best predict CAP due to M. tuberculosis: night sweats, haemoptysis, weight loss, M. tuberculosis exposure and upper lobe infiltrate. The area under the ROC curve for all CDC risk factors was 71% and 89% for the subset of five risk factors. The CDC-suggested risk factors are poor at predicting the presence of M. tuberculosis in hospitalised patients with CAP. With a subset of five risk factors identified in this study, we developed a new score, which will improve our capacity to isolate patients at risk of CAP due to M. tuberculosis at the time of hospitalisation.

Estudio piloto de marcadores inflamatorios en el sindrome de apnea obstructiva del sueño / Pilot study of inflammatory markers in the syndrome of obstructive sleep apnea

El síndrome de Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño (SAOS), consiste en la aparición repetida de episodios de obstrucción faríngea durante el sueño como consecuencia de un colapso de la vía respiratoria. La respuesta fisiológica a la hipoxia intermitente crónica es la generación de una respuesta inflamatoria local y sistémica. Se han evidenciado cambios importantes a nivel cardiovascular en pacientes con SAOS; sin embargo, se desconocen cuáles marcadores séricos y genéticos pudieran ser de utilidad. En el presente estudio, se presentan 15 marcadores séricos y 3 genéticos (IL-6, IL-1β y TNF-α) en un grupo de cinco pacientes para determinar cuáles pueden ser los marcadores de interés en la aparición y en el desarrollo de esta patología respiratoria. Se proponen como marcadores los niveles séricos: proteína C reactiva, TNFα, IL-6, el receptor soluble de TNF I, sCD62, sCD154, nitrotirosina y anti-oxLDL. Los niveles de IL-1 β, el receptor de TNF soluble II, sCD25, sCD54, nitritos y nitratos no parecieran ser buenos marcadores en SAOS. Los estudios genéticos no fueron concluyentes.

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is a repeated sequences of pharynx obstruction during sleep as a consequence of airway collapse. The physiological response to the desaturation is the generation of a local and systemic inflammatory immune response. Important changes at cardiovascular levels in patients with OSAS have been observed; however, it is not know which serum or genetic parameters could be useful. In the present study, we present 15 serum and 3 genetic (IL-6, IL-1β y TNF-α) markers in a group of five patients in order to determine which marker could be useful to study the genesis and progression of this respiratory pathology. The proposed serum markers are C reactive proteín, TNFα, IL-6, soluble de TNF receptor I, sCD62, sCD154, nitrotirosine and anti-oxLDL. The levels of IL-1 β, soluble TNF receptor II, sCD25, sCD54, nitrite y nitrate do not seem to be good markers for OSAS. The genetic studies were not conclusive.

The study of severe asthma in Latin America and Spain (1994-2004): characteristics of patients hospitalized with acute severe asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Studies assessing the characteristics and management of patients hospitalized with asthma have been limited to a small number of facilities and have evaluated short time periods. The present study evaluated long-term changes among hospitalized asthma patients at a large number of facilities. METHODS: This was a retrospective, hospital-based observational case series, designated the Study of Severe Asthma in Latin America and Spain, which was conducted in Spain and in eight Latin-American countries. We reviewed the hospital records of 3,038 patients (age range, 15-69 years) hospitalized with acute severe asthma at one of nineteen tertiary-care hospitals in 1994, 1999 and 2004. RESULTS: Over time, the use of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2 agonists increased significantly, whereas the use of theophylline as a controller medication decreased. The utilization of pulmonary function tests also increased. There was a significant reduction in the mean hospital stay (8.5 days, 7.4 days and 7.1 days in 1994, 1999 and 2004, respectively, p = 0.0001) and a significant increase in the mean of the lowest arterial pH at hospital admission. In contrast, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of cases in which PEF was determined in the emergency room (48.6% in 1994 vs. 43.5% in 2004, p = 0.0001). We found the quality of asthma management and care to be generally better in Spain than in Latin America. CONCLUSIONS: Although there have been certain improvements in the management of asthma between severe exacerbations and during hospitalization, asthma management remains suboptimal in Spain and, especially, in Latin America.

The study of severe asthma in Latin America and Spain (1994-2004): characteristics of patients hospitalized with acute severe asthma / Estudo sobre Asma Grave na América Latina e Espanha (1994-2004): características dos pacientes hospitalizados com asma aguda grave

Objective: Studies assessing the characteristics and management of patients hospitalized with asthma have been limited to a small number of facilities and have evaluated short time periods. The present study evaluated long-term changes among hospitalized asthma patients at a large number of facilities. Methods: This was a retrospective, hospital-based observational case series, designated the Study of Severe Asthma in Latin America and Spain, which was conducted in Spain and in eight Latin-American countries. We reviewed the hospital records of 3,038 patients (age range, 15-69 years) hospitalized with acute severe asthma at one of nineteen tertiary-care hospitals in 1994, 1999 and 2004. Results: Over time, the use of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2 agonists increased significantly, whereas the use of theophylline as a controller medication decreased. The utilization of pulmonary function tests also increased. There was a significant reduction in the mean hospital stay (8.5 days, 7.4 days and 7.1 days in 1994, 1999 and 2004, respectively, p = 0.0001) and a significant increase in the mean of the lowest arterial pH at hospital admission. In contrast, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of cases in which PEF was determined in the emergency room (48.6% in 1994 vs. 43.5% in 2004, p = 0.0001). We found the quality of asthma management and care to be generally better in Spain than in Latin America. Conclusions: Although there have been certain improvements in the management of asthma between severe exacerbations and during hospitalization, asthma management remains suboptimal in Spain and, especially, in Latin America.

Objetivo: Estudos que avaliem as características e o gerenciamento de pacientes asmáticos hospitalizados têm sido limitados a um número pequeno de serviços e a curtos períodos de duração. O presente estudo avaliou alteraçõesde longo prazo de pacientes asmáticos hospitalizados em um grande número de serviços. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo,observacional, de base hospitalar, denominado Estudo sobre Asma Grave na América Latina e Espanha, realizado na Espanha e em oito países da América Latina. Foi realizada uma revisão dos registros hospitalares de 3.038 pacientes (variação de idade, 15-69 anos) hospitalizados com asma aguda grave em um dos 19 hospitais terciários em 1994, 1999 e 2004. Resultados: Ao longo do tempo, o uso de corticosteroides inalatórios e de β2-agonistas aumentou significativamente, ao passo que o uso de teofilina, como medicação de controle, decaiu. A utilização de testes de função pulmonar também aumentou. Houve uma redução significativa da média do tempo de internação (8,5 dias, 7,4 dias e 7,1 dias em 1994, 1999 e 2004, respectivamente; p = 0,0001) e um aumento significativo da média do menor pH arterial na admissão. Em contrapartida, houve uma diminuição significativa na proporção de casos submetidos ao PFE no pronto-socorro (48,6% em 1994 vs. 43,5% em 2004; p = 0,0001). O tratamento e o gerenciamento da asma foram, de forma geral, melhores na Espanha que na América Latina. Conclusões: Embora tenha havido avanços no gerenciamento da asma entre exacerbações graves e durante a hospitalização, esse gerenciamento continua subotimizado na Espanha e, em especial, na América Latina.

Geographic differences in clinical characteristics and management of COPD: the EPOCA study.

AIMS: Data on differences in clinical characteristics and management of COPD in different countries and settings are limited. We aimed to characterize the profile of patients with COPD in a number of countries and their treatment in order to evaluate adherence to recommendations of international guidelines. METHOD: This was an observational, international, cross-sectional study on patients with physician-diagnosed COPD. Demographic and clinical characteristics, risk factors, and treatment were collected by their physician via an internet web-based questionnaire developed for the study. RESULTS: A total of 77 investigators from 17 countries provided data on 833 patients. The countries with the highest number of patients included were: Argentina (128), Ecuador (134), Spain (162), and Hong Kong (153). Overall, 79.3% were men and 81% former smokers, with a mean FEV1 = 42.7%, ranging from 34.3% in Hong Kong to 58.8% in Ecuador. Patients reported a mean of 1.6 exacerbations the previous year, with this frequency being significantly and negatively correlated with FEV1 (%) (r = -0.256; p < 0.0001). Treatment with short-acting bronchodilators and theophyllines was more frequent in Ecuador and Hong Kong compared with Spain and Argentina, and in patients belonging to lower socioeconomic levels (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). Inadequacy of treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and theophyllines was high, with significant differences among countries. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the clinical characteristics and management of COPD were significant across countries. Adherence to international guidelines appears to be low. Efforts should be made to disseminate and adapt guidelines to the socioeconomic reality of different settings.

Asthma control in Latin America: the Asthma Insights and Reality in Latin America (AIRLA) survey.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this survey were (1) to assess the quality of asthma treatment and control in Latin America, (2) to determine how closely asthma management guidelines are being followed, and (3) to assess perception, knowledge and attitudes related to asthma in Latin America. METHODS: We surveyed a household sample of 2,184 adults or parents of children with asthma in 2003 in 11 countries in Latin America. Respondents were asked about healthcare utilization, symptom severity, activity limitations and medication use. RESULTS: Daytime asthma symptoms were reported by 56% of the respondents, and 51% reported being awakened by their asthma at night. More than half of those surveyed had been hospitalized, attended a hospital emergency service or made unscheduled emergency visits to other healthcare facilities for asthma during the previous year. Patient perception of asthma control did not match symptom severity, even in patients with severe persistent asthma, 44.7% of whom regarded their disease as being well or completely controlled. Only 2.4% (2.3% adults and 2.6% children) met all criteria for asthma control. Although 37% reported treatment with prescription medications, only 6% were using inhaled corticosteroids. Most adults (79%) and children (68%) in this survey reported that asthma symptoms limited their activities. Absence from school and work was reported by 58% of the children and 31% of adults, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma control in Latin America falls short of goals in international guidelines, and in many aspects asthma care and control in Latin America suffer from the same shortcomings as in other areas of the world.