Triple inhaled therapy in asthma: Beliefs, behaviours and doubts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in association with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) plus long-acting beta-2 agonists (LABA) are recommended by the GINA report as further option in step 4 and first choice in step 5 treatment. Despite consistent evidence of its efficacy and safety, inhaled triple therapy (ITT) is still not largely used in patients with asthma. With the aim to explore belief and behaviours of asthma specialists, an ad hoc survey has been developed by a panel of Interasma Scientific Network (INESnet) experts and subsequently defined by two Delphi rounds among an international group of physicians. The questionnaire has been distributed through Interasma social media between June and September 2023. Besides a descriptive analysis, to assess the responses gathered from the questionnaire, Spearman's non-parametric statistical method was employed. Totally, three hundred fourteen questionnaires were completed. Clinicians' attitudes and behaviours toward timing and methodologies adopted in prescribing ITT, were analysed. 35.7 % specialists consider ITT as a relevant therapeutic option, 61.8 % that is second option after reaching high dose of ICS-LABA and 89.2 % agreed that optimization of inhaled therapy should be attempted before the use of biological drugs. Persistent flow limitation and high reversibility are considered predictive factors of response. Specialists consider ITT a resource in asthma management. Although its efficacy in decreasing exacerbation rate and improving lung function were well known, the survey revealed persistent uncertainties among clinicians in positioning it highlighting the need for further measures to effectively integrate research findings into day-to-day clinical practice. • Inhaled triple therapy (ITT) is still not widely used in asthmatic patients. • The Interasma Scientific Network explored the beliefs and behaviors of asthma specialists. • Specialists consider ITT particularly after high-dose ICS-LABA therapy and before biologics. • Stable flow limitation and high reversibility are considered predictive of response. • The survey revealed persistent uncertainties among clinicians regarding ITT.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".