Centre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre, Westburn Road, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Respir Med. 2011 Oct;105(10):1457-66. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.04.010. Epub 2011 May 25.
Selection of inhaler device type appears to influence real-world effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), but data are lacking on the role of inhaler device in ICS and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combination therapy for asthma.
This retrospective matched cohort study compared 1-year asthma outcomes for UK patients initiating fixed-dose combination (FDC) fluticasone-salmeterol delivered by pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus dry powder inhaler (DPI). Patients with asthma aged 4-80 years receiving a first prescription for FDC fluticasone-salmeterol by pMDI or DPI were matched on baseline demographic and asthma severity measures. Co-primary outcomes were asthma control (a composite measure comprising no recorded hospital attendance for asthma, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection) and exacerbation rate.
Compared with the DPI cohort (n = 1567), patients in the pMDI cohort (n = 1567) had significantly greater odds of achieving asthma control during the outcome year (odds ratio [OR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 1.40). Exacerbation rate was lower but not significantly in the pMDI cohort (adjusted rate ratio for pMDI cohort, 0.82; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.00). The odds of treatment success (defined as no exacerbations and no change in asthma therapy) was significantly greater in the pMDI cohort (OR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.42).
For UK primary care patients, pMDIs appear to achieve better asthma control outcomes than DPIs for delivery of FDC fluticasone-salmeterol. Pragmatic trials are needed to further investigate real-world outcomes with different inhaler devices for combination therapy.
吸入器装置类型的选择似乎会影响吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)的实际疗效,但关于吸入器装置在 ICS 和长效β2-激动剂(LABA)联合治疗哮喘中的作用的数据尚缺乏。
本回顾性匹配队列研究比较了英国患者起始固定剂量组合(FDC)氟替卡松-沙美特罗经压力定量气雾剂(pMDI)与干粉吸入器(DPI)给药的 1 年哮喘结局。年龄在 4-80 岁之间、接受首次 FDC 氟替卡松-沙美特罗 pMDI 或 DPI 处方的哮喘患者,根据基线人口统计学和哮喘严重程度指标进行匹配。主要结局为哮喘控制(包括无哮喘、口服皮质类固醇或下呼吸道感染抗生素记录的住院)和加重率。
与 DPI 队列(n=1567)相比,pMDI 队列(n=1567)患者在结局年度达到哮喘控制的可能性显著更高(比值比[OR]1.19;95%置信区间[CI]1.01 至 1.40)。pMDI 队列的加重率较低,但无统计学意义(pMDI 队列调整后的率比,0.82;95%CI0.66 至 1.00)。pMDI 队列的治疗成功(定义为无加重且哮喘治疗无变化)的可能性显著更高(OR1.23;95%CI1.07 至 1.42)。
对于英国初级保健患者,pMDI 似乎比 DPI 更能实现 FDC 氟替卡松-沙美特罗的更好哮喘控制结局。需要进行实用性试验以进一步研究不同吸入器装置在联合治疗中的实际结局。