Documento de consenso de asma grave en adultos. Actualización 2022

Álvarez-Gutiérrez, Francisco Javier; Aparicio, Marina Blanco; Maldonado, Francisco Casas; Moral, Vicente Plaza; González‐Barcala, Francisco Javier; Carretero, José Ángel Calero; Martínez, Manuel Castilla; Serrano, Carolina Cisneros; Pérez, David Díaz; Ribas, Christian; Moragón, Eva Martínez; Gal, Xavier Muñoz; Galo, Alicia Padilla; Tordera, Miguel Perpiñá; Campos, Gregorio Soto

doi:10.1016/j.opresp.2022.100192

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 231 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A universally accepted consensus to define a complete response or super response is lacking. The response criteria used in our study were those recommended by the Spanish Consensus on Severe Asthma [36], which are more restrictive than those described by Kavanagh et al [24] (reduction of ≥ 50% in annualised exacerbation rate or in maintenance OCS dose after 48 weeks of treatment) as they include parameters such as asthma control and lung function. Thus, in our case, a patient with a complete response was defined as a patient with zero exacerbations during 1 year, an ACT score ≥ 20, an FEV 1 ≥ 80%, and no maintenance OCS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patients were classified according to their response at 12 months of benralizumab treatment as patients with complete response, patients with controlled asthma, patients with partial response, and patients with no response, based on the Spanish consensus for severe asthma in adults [36]. Response criteria are shown in Table 1.…”

Section: Clinical Analytical and Lung Function Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Healthcare resources considered were: tests (spirometry, bronchodilator test, FeNO, skin prick, haemogram, biochemistry, and chest CT) carried out at visits to the asthma unit during the year prior to the start of benralizumab treatment and the Table 1 Classification based on the response to a biologic treatment for severe asthma. Reproduced from [36] a Taking into account the number of exacerbations during the preceding year The costs of the healthcare resources used were obtained from the Andalusian Healthcare Service [38] and the costs of the medicines used were obtained from the Spanish Ministry of Health and from the Summary of Product Characteristics of each product [39,40]. Costs were determined and expressed in 2020 Euros (€) (Table 2).…”

Section: Cost Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We classified patients according to their response at 12 months of benralizumab treatment based on the Spanish Severe Asthma Consensus [36]. Results are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Parameters Assessedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Real-life cost-effectiveness of benralizumab in patients with severe asthma

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Availability of clinically effective and cost-effective treatments for severe asthma would be beneficial to patients and national healthcare systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and healthcare expenditure after incorporating benralizumab into the standard treatment of refractory eosinophilic asthma. Methods This was a cross-sectional multicentre study of consecutive patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma who received treatment with benralizumab during at least 12 months. Patient follow-up was performed in specialised severe asthma units. The main effectiveness parameters measured were: the avoidance of one asthma exacerbation, a 3-point increase in the asthma control test (ACT) score, and the difference in utility scores (health-related quality of life) between a 1-year baseline treatment and 1-year benralizumab treatment. The health economic evaluation included direct costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results After 1 year of treatment with benralizumab, patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma showed an improvement in all the effectiveness parameters analysed: improvement of asthma control and lung function, and decrease in the number of exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (both as corticosteroid courses and maintenance therapy), and inhaled corticosteroid use. The total annual cost per patient for the baseline and benralizumab treatment periods were €11,544 and €14,043, respectively, reflecting an increase in costs due to the price of the biological agent but a decrease in costs for the remaining parameters. The ICER was €602 per avoided exacerbation and €983.86 for every 3-point increase in the ACT score. Conclusions All the pharmacoeconomic parameters analysed show that treatment with benralizumab is a cost-effective option as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Analytical and Lung Function Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cost Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We classified patients according to their response at 12 months of benralizumab treatment based on the Spanish Severe Asthma Consensus [36]. Results are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Parameters Assessedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Real-life cost-effectiveness of benralizumab in patients with severe asthma

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Debería tenerse en cuenta otro aspecto del control del asma como es la reducción del riesgo futuro, evitando el descenso de la función pulmonar, la disminución del número de exacerbaciones y la reducción de las tandas de corticoides orales que producen los tan conocidos e indeseados efectos adversos 3,19 .…”

Section: Article In Pressunclassified