Vanessa M. Mcdonald

Background Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should engage in self-management strategies targeting behavioural traits and lifestyle risk-factors for optimal outcomes. Aim To evaluate the impact of credentialed pharmacist-led home medicines review (HMR) targeting treatable traits (TTs) on health outcomes in COPD in primary care. Method A pre- and post-intervention study was nested within a cluster-randomised controlled trial. A total of 81 participants with COPD from 21 Australian general practices received an HMR with a credentialed pharmacist targeting TTs. Changes in health outcomes at 6 and 12 months from baseline were assessed. Results Ten TTs were assessed and targeted during the HMR. At baseline, no-one had a written action plan for managing exacerbations, and medication adherence was sub-optimal in 85% of patients. Additionally, 53% of participants demonstrated inadequate inhaler device technique, while 52% were current smokers. At 6-months follow-up, significant improvements were observed in health-related quality of life (St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score = 34.6 versus 39.1 at baseline, p = 0.006), health status (COPD Assessment Test score = 12 versus 16, p = 0.002), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)–Anxiety score = 2.0 versus 5.0, p < 0.001), depression (HADS-Depression score = 1.0 versus 5.0, p < 0.001), self-reported smoking (47% versus 51.9%, p = 0.031) and treatment adherence (Tool for Adherence Behaviour Screening score = 12.5 versus 10.0, p = 0.002). At 12-months: health status, anxiety, depression, smoking abstinence and adherence to treatment, continued to show statistically significant improvements compared to baseline measurements. Conclusion HMRs targeting TTs improved health outcomes in people with COPD. Credentialed pharmacists in primary care can work alongside general practitioners to optimise COPD management.

Treatment targets in severe asthma have evolved towards a remission-focused paradigm guided by precision medicine. This novel concept requires a shift from evaluating the efficacy of therapies based on a single outcome at a single time point to an outcome that captures the complexity of asthma remission involving several domains assessed over a sustained period. Since the concept is still emerging, multiple definitions have been proposed, ranging from symptom control and exacerbation-free to resolution of underlying pathobiology, with varying rigour in each parameter. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the current construct is needed to progress further. We conducted a roundtable discussion with 27 asthma experts to address this issue, and discussions were narratively synthesised and summarised. The participants observed that between one in three and one in five people treated with targeted biological therapies or macrolides experience low disease activity over a sustained period. They unanimously agreed that labelling the attained clinical state as clinical remission is useful as a clinical (e.g., facilitating a treat-to-target approach), policy (e.g., widening eligibility criteria for biologics), and scientific (e.g., a path to understanding cure) tool. Current remission rates vary significantly due to definition variability. When assessing remission, it is essential to consider confounding factors (e.g., steroid use for adrenal insufficiency). More research is required to reach an acceptable definition, and including the patient's voice in such research is essential. In conclusion, the concept of treatment-induced clinical remission is possible and valuable in asthma. However, further refinement of the definition is required.

Exercise is an important treatment for people with asthma and should be considered alongside pharmacological therapy when developing personalised asthma management plans. Despite this, there remains limited guidance concerning the practicalities of asthma-specific exercise prescription. This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology task force was therefore established to achieve three fundamental Aims: first, to provide an up-to-date perspective concerning the role of exercise for asthma management (i.e., describe the disease modifying potential of exercise and associated impact on asthma-related extrapulmonary comorbidities); second, to develop pragmatic recommendations to facilitate safe and effective exercise prescription; and third, to identify key unmet needs and provide focused direction for future research. The position paper is structured as a practically focused document, with recommendations formulated according to best available scientific evidence and expert opinion, with an emphasis on providing healthcare providers with pragmatic advice that can be implemented during routine asthma review.

In recent years, the significant impact of disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs has provided a chance to re-evaluate goals in asthma treatment and consider remission as a more ambitious and achievable target. Clinical remission in asthma, both on- and off-treatment, has been characterized by the absence of asthma-related symptoms, attacks, and systemic corticosteroids, and the improvement or stabilization of lung function, all maintained over a minimum period of twelve months. Targeting 'treatable traits' has emerged as a promising strategy for the personalized treatment of chronic airway diseases, both in primary and specialist care. This multidimensional approach involves the initial identification and tailored treatment of clinically essential characteristics in individual patients, called 'super-traits'. Considering the heterogeneous and multifaceted nature of asthma and associated comorbidities, the novelty of this review is the proposal to use pulmonary, extrapulmonary, and behavioral treatable traits as a tool to reach remission.

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are an effective treatment for severe uncontrolled asthma or asthma exacerbations, but frequent bursts or long-term use carry serious and sometimes irreversible adverse effects, or complications such as adrenal insufficiency upon discontinuation. Our aim was to survey people with asthma on their experiences of, and attitudes towards, using OCS. This study was a national descriptive cross-sectional survey of people with asthma in Australia. An anonymous survey was hosted online with invitations to participate distributed by national consumer peak bodies. Survey free-text responses were coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to elicit determinants of OCS use. 1808 people with asthma participated between 3 and 16 May 2022. Most common reasons for using OCS were severe asthma symptoms (40%), doctor prescription (38%) or asthma action plan recommendations (20%). Approximately 55% of people had experienced adverse effects from OCS use. Commonly reported adverse effects were trouble sleeping (69%), weight gain (56%) and mood problems (41%). Of people who had OCS at home or an OCS script, 44% did not have an action plan that described when and how they should take them. People (33%) did not feel well informed about OCS adverse effects from their healthcare team. People had varied awareness (3-65%) of current available strategies to reduce OCS use. 'Knowledge', 'Environmental context and resources' and 'Social influences' were the most coded TDF domains influencing OCS use. Adverse effects of OCS use are common. People with asthma are not adequately informed about optimal OCS use or strategies to reduce overuse. These findings can help guide the implementation of OCS stewardship initiatives.