Profile of mild/moderate asthma patients: Baseline data from the MANI cohort

Although 90% of asthmatic patients suffer from mild and moderate disease, little is known about the burden on health status and quality of life, the long-term trajectory of disease severity, and the socio-economic impact. The Mild Moderated Asthma Network of Italy (MANI) is a real-world, cross-sectional, prospective, observational cohort study designed to explore these issues. Here we aimed to provide an identikit of asthmatic patients receiving treatment according to GINA steps 1–4, and enrolled in the centers of excellence participating in the MANI. Among 679 analyzed patients, 63% were female, and the mean age was 50 ± 16 years. Asthma was mild in 15.8% of patients (GINA steps 1–2) and moderate in 84.2% (GINA steps 3–4). The mean age of asthma diagnosis was 34.3 ± 17.7 years, 50% of patients were suffering from allergic rhinitis, and 13% from nasal polyposis. Mean FEV1% was 91.4 ± 19.4%, predicted with a FEV1/FVC ratio of 74.7 ± 11.9. The mean asthma control test value was 21.2 ± 3.73, and AQLQ score was 5.74 ± 1.07. Among the included patients, 17.2% had at least one asthma exacerbation in the previous year, with 14.2% requiring systemic steroids; 6.2% were referred to an emergency room in the year prior to enrollment; 2.2% required an asthma-related hospitalization; and 0.6% had been admitted to an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Unscheduled visits were necessary for 3.8% of patients, 6.5% reported ≥5 lost work days due to asthma, and 11.5% declared ≥10 lost days of spare time. About 70% of patients were receiving treatment according to GINA Track 1. Uncontrolled cases constituted 16.7% of patients treated according to GINA steps 1–2, and 26.3% of patients treated according to GINA steps 3-4 were uncontrolled. Compared to patients with mild asthma, those with moderate asthma had more impaired lung function (FEV1% 88.5 ± 18.4 vs 94.4 ± 17.9, p = 0.05; FEV1/FVC 73.0 ± 9.76 vs 79.6 ± 9.56, p > 0.001), exhibited greater need for systemic corticosteroids for treating exacerbations (13.8% vs 2.3%, p = 0.032), and showed greater adherence to therapy (TAI score 50.0 ± 5.66 vs 45.7 ± 8.42, p < 0.001). Overall, mild/moderate asthma exhibited a substantial clinical and care impact. Patients treated with GINA steps 3–4 constituted the vast majority of patients attending specialist centers. A quarter of these patients were uncontrolled, and therefore need re-evaluation or treatment upgrade. Expanding recruitment of the MANI study will allow further phenotyping of these patients.