Asthma and Airway Centre, University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital, 399 Bathurst Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Thorax. 2010 Aug;65(8):747-52. doi: 10.1136/thx.2009.128504. Epub 2010 Jun 27.
The use of a combination inhaler containing budesonide and formoterol as both maintenance and quick relief therapy (SMART) has been recommended as an improved method of using inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta agonist (ICS/LABA) therapy. Published double-blind trials show that budesonide/formoterol therapy delivered in SMART fashion achieves better asthma outcomes than budesonide monotherapy or lower doses of budesonide/formoterol therapy delivered in constant dosage. Attempts to compare budesonide/formoterol SMART therapy with regular combination ICS/LABA dosing using other compounds have been confounded by a lack of blinding and unspecified dose adjustment strategies. The asthma control outcomes in SMART-treated patients are poor; it has been reported that only 17.1% of SMART-treated patients are controlled. In seven trials of 6-12 months duration, patients using SMART have used quick reliever daily (weighted average 0.92 inhalations/day), have awakened with asthma symptoms once every 7-10 days (weighted average 11.5% of nights), have suffered asthma symptoms more than half of days (weighted average 54.0% of days) and have had a severe exacerbation rate of one in five patients per year (weighted average 0.22 severe exacerbations/patient/year). These poor outcomes may reflect the recruitment of a skewed patient population. Although improvement from baseline has been attributed to these patients receiving additional ICS therapy at pivotal times, electronic monitoring has not been used to test this hypothesis nor the equally plausible hypothesis that patients who are non-compliant with maintenance medication have used budesonide/formoterol as needed for self-treatment of exacerbations. Although the long-term consequences of SMART therapy have not been studied, its use over 1 year has been associated with significant increases in sputum and biopsy eosinophilia. At present, there is no evidence that better asthma treatment outcomes can be obtained by moment-to-moment symptom-driven use of ICS/LABA therapy than conventional physician-monitored and adjusted ICS/LABA therapy.
联合使用布地奈德和福莫特罗的复方吸入剂,同时作为维持治疗和缓解治疗(SMART),已被推荐为改善吸入性皮质类固醇/长效β激动剂(ICS/LABA)治疗的方法。已发表的双盲试验表明,以 SMART 方式给予布地奈德/福莫特罗治疗,比布地奈德单药治疗或以固定剂量给予较低剂量的布地奈德/福莫特罗治疗,能实现更好的哮喘结局。尝试以其他化合物比较布地奈德/福莫特罗 SMART 治疗与常规联合 ICS/LABA 给药,因缺乏盲法和未明确剂量调整策略而受到干扰。SMART 治疗患者的哮喘控制结局较差;据报道,只有 17.1%的 SMART 治疗患者得到了控制。在为期 6-12 个月的 7 项试验中,使用 SMART 的患者每天使用急救药物(加权平均 0.92 吸/天),每 7-10 天因哮喘症状而觉醒(加权平均 11.5%的夜晚),超过一半天数出现哮喘症状(加权平均 54.0%的天数),每年有 1/5 的患者发生严重恶化(加权平均 0.22 例/患者/年)。这些较差的结局可能反映了招募的患者人群存在偏倚。尽管从基线的改善归因于这些患者在关键时间点额外接受 ICS 治疗,但电子监测尚未用于检验这一假设,也未用于检验同样合理的假设,即不依从维持性药物治疗的患者使用布地奈德/福莫特罗按需治疗加重。尽管尚未研究 SMART 治疗的长期后果,但使用 1 年以上与痰和活检嗜酸性粒细胞显著增加有关。目前,没有证据表明通过时刻驱动的 ICS/LABA 治疗比传统的医生监测和调整 ICS/LABA 治疗,能获得更好的哮喘治疗结局。