Comparing LAMA with LABA and LTRA as add-on therapies in primary care asthma management.

Family Physician Airways Group of Canada, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. for4kids@gmail.com. Centre for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Pulmonary Department, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany. Department of Pediatric Pulmonology and Allergy, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany. Klinik für Kinder und Jugendmedizin, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Bielefeld, Germany. Allergy Center of the Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.

NPJ primary care respiratory medicine. 2020;(1):50

Abstract

The Global Initiative for Asthma recommends a stepwise approach to adjust asthma treatment to the needs of individual patients; inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) remain the core pharmacological treatment. However, many patients remain poorly controlled, and evidence-based algorithms to decide on the best order and rationale for add-on therapies are lacking. We explore the challenges of asthma management in primary care and review outcomes from randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) or leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as add-on to ICS in patients with asthma. In adults, LAMAs and LABAs provide a greater improvement in lung function than LTRAs as add-on to ICS. In children, results were positive and comparable between therapies, but data are scarce. This information could aid decision-making in primary care, supporting the use of add-on therapy to ICS to help improve lung function, control asthma symptoms and prevent exacerbations.

Methodological quality

Publication Type : Comparative Study ; Review

Metadata

MeSH terms : Asthma ; Primary Health Care