The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository
Warning ePrints Soton is experiencing an issue with some file downloads not being available. We are working hard to fix this. Please bear with us.

Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial

Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial
Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend increasing corticosteroid dose to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. This approach is potentially flawed because symptomatic asthma can occur without corticosteroid responsive type-2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation, and inappropriately high-dose corticosteroid treatment might have little therapeutic benefit with increased risk of side-effects. We compared a biomarker strategy to adjust corticosteroid dose using a composite score of T2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FENO], blood eosinophils, and serum periostin) with a standardised symptom-risk-based algorithm (control).

METHODS: We did a single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in adults (18-80 years of age) with severe asthma (at treatment steps 4 and 5 of the Global Initiative for Asthma) and FENO of less than 45 parts per billion at 12 specialist severe asthma centres across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomly assigned (4:1) to either the biomarker strategy group or the control group by an online electronic case-report form, in blocks of ten, stratified by asthma control and use of rescue systemic steroids in the previous year. Patients were masked to study group allocation throughout the entirety of the study. Patients attended clinic every 8 weeks, with treatment adjustment following automated treatment-group-specific algorithms: those in the biomarker strategy group received a default advisory to maintain treatment and those in the control group had their treatment adjusted according to the steps indicated by the trial algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with corticosteroid dose reduction at week 48, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary outcomes were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at the end of the study; cumulative dose of ICS during the study; proportion of patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) at study end; rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient year; time to first severe exacerbation; number of hospital admissions for asthma; changes in lung function, Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and T2 biomarkers from baseline to week 48; and whether patients declined to progress to OCS. A secondary aim of our study was to establish the proportion of patients with severe asthma in whom T2 biomarkers remained low when corticosteroid therapy was decreased to a minimum ICS dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 and has been completed.

FINDINGS: Patients were recruited from Jan 8, 2016, to July 12, 2018. Of 549 patients assessed, 301 patients were included in the ITT population and were randomly assigned to the biomarker strategy group (n=240) or to the control group (n=61). 28·4% of patients in the biomarker strategy group were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 compared with 18·5% of patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·71 [95% CI 0·80-3·63]; p=0·17). In the per-protocol (PP) population (n=121), a significantly greater proportion of patients were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 in the biomarker strategy group (30·7% of patients) compared with the control group (5·0% of patients; aOR 11·48 [95% CI 1·35-97·83]; p=0·026). Patient choice to not follow treatment advice was the principle reason for loss to PP analysis. There was no difference in secondary outcomes between study groups and no loss of asthma control among patients in the biomarker strategy group who reduced their corticosteroid dose.

INTERPRETATION: Biomarker-based corticosteroid adjustment did not result in a greater proportion of patients reducing corticosteroid dose versus control. Understanding the reasons for patients not following treatment advice in both treatment strategies is an important area for future research. The prevalence of T2 biomarker-low severe asthma was low.

FUNDING: This study was funded, in part, by the Medical Research Council UK.

2213-2600
57-68
Heaney, Liam G
80e8956f-63cb-4637-b916-9b13f3420761
Busby, John
5e0b8623-b8be-4216-83e9-7c9854329844
Hanratty, Catherine E
46dd784d-3ac0-49bf-b930-339e6fc67762
Djukanovic, Ratko
d9a45ee7-6a80-4d84-a0ed-10962660a98d
Woodcock, Ashley
b13cf094-8318-42ef-b8ed-2f4b8d8770f3
Walker, Samantha M
3e36e242-74b3-4939-82d1-23bde73edbc8
Hardman, Timothy C
4c12fa35-968c-4271-b346-4ddfc61ebcc9
Arron, Joseph R
a8e52569-c899-4850-a403-25de475c790b
Choy, David F
e4fadd34-0408-4b0e-b0e5-ead03e7a9141
Bradding, Peter
9cbfd3d1-1bf2-484f-849f-0bf4ffbacc19
Brightling, Christopher E
b3f869e5-2e62-4a1f-868c-2de15875f55e
Chaudhuri, Rekha
25061dc1-b61f-40d5-a6b0-40840d701aea
Cowan, Douglas C
64e1e9ae-7ad5-4e6f-8ba3-928f15a6e9d2
Mansur, Adel H
041b5d7b-7822-4d58-a471-bacb21673fef
Fowler, Stephen J
86f201ee-cf09-4791-984a-e8f573e6b6f3
Niven, Robert M
152a28a5-dc88-40ed-acc9-0946bdf27916
Howarth, Peter H
ff19c8c4-86b0-4a88-8f76-b3d87f142a21
Lordan, James L
15a9bdfb-bf61-4aea-a0f4-d83868eb39d0
Menzies-Gow, Andrew
2ad51ccd-38dd-4916-b08a-cc7f6551d37a
Harrison, Tim W
71ca1c29-7c6c-4d54-bacd-97b8c26aa7ad
Robinson, Douglas S
2f36d263-61d6-4a57-b9e1-0a343f9aa0be
Holweg, Cecile T J
7f737327-58ef-4f15-aedd-8a165f1feb83
Matthews, John G
e0748ac4-76db-4607-9221-c9f07202345a
Pavord, Ian D
9718f25b-b28d-47d2-b19d-6c5ead4f1717
investigators for the MRC Refractory Asthma Stratification Programme
Heaney, Liam G
80e8956f-63cb-4637-b916-9b13f3420761
Busby, John
5e0b8623-b8be-4216-83e9-7c9854329844
Hanratty, Catherine E
46dd784d-3ac0-49bf-b930-339e6fc67762
Djukanovic, Ratko
d9a45ee7-6a80-4d84-a0ed-10962660a98d
Woodcock, Ashley
b13cf094-8318-42ef-b8ed-2f4b8d8770f3
Walker, Samantha M
3e36e242-74b3-4939-82d1-23bde73edbc8
Hardman, Timothy C
4c12fa35-968c-4271-b346-4ddfc61ebcc9
Arron, Joseph R
a8e52569-c899-4850-a403-25de475c790b
Choy, David F
e4fadd34-0408-4b0e-b0e5-ead03e7a9141
Bradding, Peter
9cbfd3d1-1bf2-484f-849f-0bf4ffbacc19
Brightling, Christopher E
b3f869e5-2e62-4a1f-868c-2de15875f55e
Chaudhuri, Rekha
25061dc1-b61f-40d5-a6b0-40840d701aea
Cowan, Douglas C
64e1e9ae-7ad5-4e6f-8ba3-928f15a6e9d2
Mansur, Adel H
041b5d7b-7822-4d58-a471-bacb21673fef
Fowler, Stephen J
86f201ee-cf09-4791-984a-e8f573e6b6f3
Niven, Robert M
152a28a5-dc88-40ed-acc9-0946bdf27916
Howarth, Peter H
ff19c8c4-86b0-4a88-8f76-b3d87f142a21
Lordan, James L
15a9bdfb-bf61-4aea-a0f4-d83868eb39d0
Menzies-Gow, Andrew
2ad51ccd-38dd-4916-b08a-cc7f6551d37a
Harrison, Tim W
71ca1c29-7c6c-4d54-bacd-97b8c26aa7ad
Robinson, Douglas S
2f36d263-61d6-4a57-b9e1-0a343f9aa0be
Holweg, Cecile T J
7f737327-58ef-4f15-aedd-8a165f1feb83
Matthews, John G
e0748ac4-76db-4607-9221-c9f07202345a
Pavord, Ian D
9718f25b-b28d-47d2-b19d-6c5ead4f1717

Heaney, Liam G, Busby, John, Hanratty, Catherine E, Djukanovic, Ratko, Woodcock, Ashley, Walker, Samantha M, Hardman, Timothy C, Arron, Joseph R, Choy, David F, Bradding, Peter, Brightling, Christopher E, Chaudhuri, Rekha, Cowan, Douglas C, Mansur, Adel H, Fowler, Stephen J, Niven, Robert M, Howarth, Peter H, Lordan, James L, Menzies-Gow, Andrew, Harrison, Tim W, Robinson, Douglas S, Holweg, Cecile T J, Matthews, John G and Pavord, Ian D , investigators for the MRC Refractory Asthma Stratification Programme (2021) Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 9 (1), 57-68. (doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30397-0).

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend increasing corticosteroid dose to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. This approach is potentially flawed because symptomatic asthma can occur without corticosteroid responsive type-2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation, and inappropriately high-dose corticosteroid treatment might have little therapeutic benefit with increased risk of side-effects. We compared a biomarker strategy to adjust corticosteroid dose using a composite score of T2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FENO], blood eosinophils, and serum periostin) with a standardised symptom-risk-based algorithm (control).

METHODS: We did a single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in adults (18-80 years of age) with severe asthma (at treatment steps 4 and 5 of the Global Initiative for Asthma) and FENO of less than 45 parts per billion at 12 specialist severe asthma centres across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomly assigned (4:1) to either the biomarker strategy group or the control group by an online electronic case-report form, in blocks of ten, stratified by asthma control and use of rescue systemic steroids in the previous year. Patients were masked to study group allocation throughout the entirety of the study. Patients attended clinic every 8 weeks, with treatment adjustment following automated treatment-group-specific algorithms: those in the biomarker strategy group received a default advisory to maintain treatment and those in the control group had their treatment adjusted according to the steps indicated by the trial algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with corticosteroid dose reduction at week 48, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary outcomes were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at the end of the study; cumulative dose of ICS during the study; proportion of patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) at study end; rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient year; time to first severe exacerbation; number of hospital admissions for asthma; changes in lung function, Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and T2 biomarkers from baseline to week 48; and whether patients declined to progress to OCS. A secondary aim of our study was to establish the proportion of patients with severe asthma in whom T2 biomarkers remained low when corticosteroid therapy was decreased to a minimum ICS dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 and has been completed.

FINDINGS: Patients were recruited from Jan 8, 2016, to July 12, 2018. Of 549 patients assessed, 301 patients were included in the ITT population and were randomly assigned to the biomarker strategy group (n=240) or to the control group (n=61). 28·4% of patients in the biomarker strategy group were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 compared with 18·5% of patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·71 [95% CI 0·80-3·63]; p=0·17). In the per-protocol (PP) population (n=121), a significantly greater proportion of patients were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 in the biomarker strategy group (30·7% of patients) compared with the control group (5·0% of patients; aOR 11·48 [95% CI 1·35-97·83]; p=0·026). Patient choice to not follow treatment advice was the principle reason for loss to PP analysis. There was no difference in secondary outcomes between study groups and no loss of asthma control among patients in the biomarker strategy group who reduced their corticosteroid dose.

INTERPRETATION: Biomarker-based corticosteroid adjustment did not result in a greater proportion of patients reducing corticosteroid dose versus control. Understanding the reasons for patients not following treatment advice in both treatment strategies is an important area for future research. The prevalence of T2 biomarker-low severe asthma was low.

FUNDING: This study was funded, in part, by the Medical Research Council UK.

Text
1-s2.0-S2213260020303970-main - Proof
Download (734kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 1 January 2020
e-pub ahead of print date: 8 September 2020
Published date: January 2021

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 444766
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/444766
ISSN: 2213-2600
PURE UUID: 406f9238-1fc6-477f-a203-42f390463f53
ORCID for Ratko Djukanovic: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6039-5612

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 04 Nov 2020 17:30
Last modified: 13 Nov 2021 02:34

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Liam G Heaney
Author: John Busby
Author: Catherine E Hanratty
Author: Ashley Woodcock
Author: Samantha M Walker
Author: Timothy C Hardman
Author: Joseph R Arron
Author: David F Choy
Author: Peter Bradding
Author: Christopher E Brightling
Author: Rekha Chaudhuri
Author: Douglas C Cowan
Author: Adel H Mansur
Author: Stephen J Fowler
Author: Robert M Niven
Author: Peter H Howarth
Author: James L Lordan
Author: Andrew Menzies-Gow
Author: Tim W Harrison
Author: Douglas S Robinson
Author: Cecile T J Holweg
Author: John G Matthews
Author: Ian D Pavord
Corporate Author: investigators for the MRC Refractory Asthma Stratification Programme

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×