Randomized trial compares the effect of ICS/formoterol on exacerbations and mortality in asthma patients, suggesting a preferred treatment strategy.
INTRODUCTION: -AR) agonists (SABA) such as salbutamol for as-needed relief, often without concurrent anti-inflammatory therapy. Emerging data link frequent SABA use to higher exacerbation rates and mortality. Current recommendations organize asthma treatment into Track 1, with as-needed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol used also as maintenance-and-reliever therapy, and Track 2, with SABA or ICS/SABA reliever plus separate maintenance; Track 1 is identified as the preferred option. AREAS COVERED: -AR agonist use within the Track 1/Track 2 context. Randomized trials show as-needed ICS/formoterol reduces severe exacerbations more than SABA-based regimens, without a detectable mortality signal. Large observational evidence indicates that 3-5 SABA canisters per year already associates with increased mortality, with higher risk at 6-10 and ≥11 canisters per year. Contemporary trials and real-world studies reveal many patients on SABA-centered or fluticasone furoate/vilanterol regimens may reach these exposure levels, whereas ICS/formoterol regimens produce lower reliever use and fewer exacerbations. EXPERT OPINION: Where ICS/formoterol is accessible, Track 1 should be the default strategy. Clinicians should minimize SABA overuse, prioritize ICS/formoterol regimens, and advocate policies improving access to reduce preventable morbidity and mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calzetta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: