The proposed criteria of control were only fulfilled by 21% of patients. The suggested cut offs and their predictive value for poor outcomes need to be refined in prospective studies.

Omalizumab treatment resulted in an improved asthma control, with a significant reduction in asthma exacerbations and systemic steroid courses required and improvement on ACT score. Adverse events were infrequent and the drug was well tolerated.

Rationale: Adults may exhibit characteristics of both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a situation recently described as asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). There is a paucity of information about ACO in primary care.Objectives: To estimate the prevalence and describe characteristics of individuals with ACO in primary care practices among patients currently diagnosed with asthma, COPD, or both; and to compare the prevalence and characteristics of ACO among the three source populations. Methods:The Respiratory Effectiveness Group conducted a crosssectional study of individuals >40 years old and with >2 outpatient primary care visits over a 2-year period in the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Patients were classified into one of three source populations based on diagnostic codes: 1) COPD only, 2) both asthma and COPD, or 3) asthma only. ACO was defined as the presence of all of the following 1) age >40 years, 2) current or former smoking, 3) postbronchodilator airflow limitation (forced expiratory volume in 1 second/ forced vital capacity ,0.7), and 4) >12% and >200 ml reversibility in post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second.Results: Among 2,165 individuals (1,015 COPD only, 395 with both asthma and COPD, and 755 asthma only), the overall prevalence of ACO was 20% (95% confidence interval, 18-23%). Patients with ACO had a mean age of 70 years (standard deviation, 11 yr), 60% were men, 73% were former smokers (the rest were current smokers), and 66% were overweight or obese. Comorbid conditions were common in patients with ACO, including diabetes (53%), cardiovascular disease (36%), hypertension (30%), eczema (23%), and rhinitis (21%). The prevalence of ACO was higher in patients with a diagnosis of both asthma and COPD (32%) compared with a diagnosis of COPD only (20%; P , 0.001) or asthma only (14%; P , 0.001). Demographic and clinical characteristics of ACO varied across these three source populations.Conclusions: One in five individuals with a diagnosis of COPD, asthma, or both asthma and COPD in primary care settings have ACO based on the Respiratory Effectiveness Group ACO Working group criteria. The prevalence and characteristics of patients with ACO varies across the three source populations.

The Strategic Implementation Plan of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) proposed six Action Groups. After almost three years of activity, many achievements have been obtained through commitments or collaborative work of the Action Groups. However, they have often worked in silos and, consequently, synergies between Action Groups have been proposed to strengthen the triple win of the EIP on AHA. The paper presents the methodology and current status of the Task Force on EIP on AHA synergies. Synergies are in line with the Action Groups' new Renovated Action Plan (2016-2018) to ensure that their future objectives are coherent and fully connected. The outcomes and impact of synergies are using the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the EIP on AHA (MAFEIP). Eight proposals for synergies have been approved by the Task Force: Five cross-cutting synergies which can be used for all current and future synergies as they consider overarching domains (appropriate polypharmacy, citizen empowerment, teaching and coaching on AHA, deployment of synergies to EU regions, Responsible Research and Innovation), and three cross-cutting synergies focussing on current Action Group activities (falls, frailty, integrated care and chronic respiratory diseases).

The world-wide use of fireworks with their consequent detrimental effect on the air quality is widely recognized with elevated ambient air levels of particulate matter and its several metallic components and gases identified in several studies carried out during such events. Exposed individuals may be at risk following inhalation of such produced pollutants. This review focuses on the impact of fireworks on air quality and the potential effect of fireworks on the respiratory system of healthy individuals as well as those suffering from underlying respiratory diseases, particularly asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This applies not only to spectators including children but also to pyrotechnicians themselves. An extensive Medline search revealed that a strong evidence of the impact of fireworks on respiratory health is lacking in susceptible as well as healthy individuals with no formal studies on COPD or asthma, other than a few case reports in the latter. The implementation of global strategies to control the use of fireworks and hence improve air quality could possibly reduce their likely detrimental effect on human respiratory health in exposed individuals, but clearly a more targeted research is needed.

Background and objective: The concept of clinical control in COPD has been developed to help in treatment decisions, but it requires validation in prospective studies. Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective study aimed to validate the concept of control in COPD. Patients with COPD were classified as controlled/uncontrolled by clinical criteria or CAT scores at baseline and followed up for 18 months. The main outcome was the difference in rate of a composite endpoint of moderate and severe exacerbations or death over the 18-month follow-up period. Results: A total of 307 patients were analysed (mean age = 68.6 years and mean FEV 1 % = 52.5%). Up to 65% and 37.9% of patients were classified as controlled by clinical criteria or CAT, respectively. Controlled patients had significantly less exacerbations during follow-up (by clinical criteria: 1.1 vs 2.6, P < 0.001; by CAT: 1.1 vs 1.9, P = 0.014). Time to first exacerbation was significantly prolonged for patients controlled by clinical criteria only (median: 93 days, IQR: 63; 242 vs 274 days, IQR: 221; 497 days; P < 0.001). Control status by clinical criteria was a better predictor of exacerbations compared to CAT criteria (AUC: 0.67 vs 0.57). Conclusion: Control status, defined by easy-to-obtain clinical criteria, is predictive of future exacerbation risk and time to the next exacerbation. The concept of control can be used in clinical practice at each clinical visit as a complement to the current recommendations of initial treatment proposed by guidelines.

This meta-analysis demonstrates that extrafine ICSs have significantly higher odds of achieving asthma control with lower exacerbation rates at significantly lower prescribed doses than fine-particle ICSs.

The study was designed and coordinated by the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG; www.effectivenessevaluation.org; Cambridge, UK) and delivered by Optimum Patient Care (OPC; www.optimumpatientcare.org). Funding: The study was funded by an unrestricted grant from Novartis AG.