BACKGROUND: Asthma guidelines suggest reducing controller medications when asthma is stable. METHODS: The purpose of the study is to estimate the risk of asthma exacerbation in stable asthmatics who reduce inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to those who maintain a stable ICS dose. We identified articles from a systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (inception to May 25, 2013). We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a stable asthma run-in period of 4 weeks or more, an intervention to reduce ICS, and a follow-up period of at least 3 months. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 2253 potential articles, of which 206 were reviewed at the full-text level and 6 met criteria for inclusion. The relative risk of an asthma exacerbation in individuals who reduced ICS compared to those who maintained the same ICS dose was 1.25 (95% CI 0.96, 1.62; P = 0.10; I(2) = 0%) in studies with a mean follow-up of 22 weeks. Individuals who reduced ICS had a decreased% predicted FEV1 of 0.87% (95% CI -1.58%,3.33%; P = 0.49, I(2) = 58%) and a decreased mean morning peak expiratory flow of 9.57 l/min (95% CI 1.25, 17.90; P = 0.02; I(2) = 74%) compared to those individuals who maintained a stable ICS dose. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma exacerbations were statistically no more likely among individuals who reduced ICS compared to those who maintained their ICS dose, supporting current guidelines which recommend decreasing ICS by 50% after a period of asthma stability.
BACKGROUND:Asthma guidelines suggest reducing controller medications when asthma is stable. METHODS: The purpose of the study is to estimate the risk of asthma exacerbation in stable asthmatics who reduce inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to those who maintain a stable ICS dose. We identified articles from a systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (inception to May 25, 2013). We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a stable asthma run-in period of 4 weeks or more, an intervention to reduce ICS, and a follow-up period of at least 3 months. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 2253 potential articles, of which 206 were reviewed at the full-text level and 6 met criteria for inclusion. The relative risk of an asthma exacerbation in individuals who reduced ICS compared to those who maintained the same ICS dose was 1.25 (95% CI 0.96, 1.62; P = 0.10; I(2) = 0%) in studies with a mean follow-up of 22 weeks. Individuals who reduced ICS had a decreased% predicted FEV1 of 0.87% (95% CI -1.58%,3.33%; P = 0.49, I(2) = 58%) and a decreased mean morning peak expiratory flow of 9.57 l/min (95% CI 1.25, 17.90; P = 0.02; I(2) = 74%) compared to those individuals who maintained a stable ICS dose. CONCLUSIONS:Asthma exacerbations were statistically no more likely among individuals who reduced ICS compared to those who maintained their ICS dose, supporting current guidelines which recommend decreasing ICS by 50% after a period of asthma stability.
Authors: Matthew A Rank; Michael R Gionfriddo; Thanai Pongdee; Gerald W Volcheck; James T Li; Christina R Hagan; Patricia J Erwin; John B Hagan Journal: Allergy Asthma Proc Date: 2015 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.587
Authors: Matthew A Rank; Ryan Johnson; Megan Branda; Jeph Herrin; Holly van Houten; Michael R Gionfriddo; Nilay D Shah Journal: Chest Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Laura Smy; Kaitlyn Shaw; Anne Smith; Evan Russell; Stan Van Uum; Michael Rieder; Bruce Carleton; Gideon Koren Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Michael R Gionfriddo; John B Hagan; Christina R Hagan; Gerald W Volcheck; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Matthew A Rank Journal: Allergy Asthma Proc Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.587