Acute effects of indacaterol on lung hyperinflation in moderate COPD: a comparison with tiotropium

Plethysmographic assessment of tidal expiratory flow limitation

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients often experience tidal expiratory flow-limitation (tEFL), a condition causing respiratory and cardiovascular detrimental effects. As the appearance of tEFL should increase expiratory (Rexp) relative to inspiratory (Rins) resistance, we hypothesized that Rexp/Rins can be used to detect tEFL. Rexp/Rins was measured with a commercial plethysmograph in 109 healthy subjects and, before and after bronchodilation (BD), in 64 COPD patients, 36 with and 28 without tEFL according to the NEP technique. Before BD, the median (interquartile range) of Rexp/Rins was significantly greater (P < 0.001) in COPD patients with tEFL (2.47(3.06;7.07)) than in COPD patients without tEFL (1.63(1.44;1.82)) and in healthy subjects (1.52(1.35;1.62)). In COPD patients Rexp/Rins above 1.98 predicted the presence of tEFL with 96 % specificity and 92 % sensitivity, Rexp²/Rins performing even better. After BD the predictive ability of Rexp/Rins slightly declined, but remained elevated. The non-invasive measurement of Rexp/Rins is an easy, inexpensive, routinely usable method to detect tEFL in spontaneously breathing COPD subjects.

Eosinophil Inflammation and Hyperresponsiveness in the Airways as Phenotypes of COPD, and Usefulness of Inhaled Glucocorticosteroids

Background: The differential diagnosis in persistent airway limitation is sometimes not so clear in older adults. Airway eosinophilia and airway hyperresponsiveness may develop in some cases with chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), independent of asthma. However, little is known about clinical significance of these phenotypes of COPD in detail. Aims and objectives: This clinical study was designed to examine prevalence of airway eosinophilia and airway hyperresponsiveness in COPD who have no symptom and no past history of asthma, and to examine involvement of these pathophysiological features of asthma in the management and therapy for COPD. Methods: Sputum examination via qualitative and quantitative procedures was performed in stable COPD (GOLD 1-3). When sputum eosinophils were qualitatively (≥+) or quantitatively assessed (≥3%), ciclesonide (inhaled glucocorticosteroids) was added on bronchodilators. In cases with FEV₁ ≥ 70% of predicted values, acetylcholine provocation test was examined for assessment of airway hyperresponsiveness. Therapeutic effect was evaluated using spirometry and COPD assessment test (CAT). Results: Sputum eosinophils were observed in 65 (50.4%) of 129 subjects using qualitative analysis; in contrast, lower grade (>0%) and higher grade (≥3%) were observed in 15 (20.3%) and 25 (33.8%) of 74 subjects using quantitative analysis. Airway hyperresponsiveness developed in 46.9% of these subjects with sputum eosinophils. Exacerbations occurred much more frequently in lower-grade airway eosinophilia without ciclesonide than in higher-grade airway eosinophilia with ciclesonide. Airway hyperresponsiveness significantly increased frequency of exacerbations in COPD with both lower and higher grade in airway eosinophilia. Addition of ciclesonide to indacaterol markedly improved lung function (FEV₁, IC), CAT score, and reliever use in these subjects with airway eosinophilia determined by qualitative analysis. However, ciclesonide was less effective in improving these values in subjects with airway hyperresponsiveness than in those without airway hyperresponsiveness. Conclusions: Airway eosinophilia and airway hyperresponsiveness are complicated with 25-50% of COPD that have no symptom and history for asthma. These phenotypes of COPD are closely related to symptom stability and reactivity to glucocorticosteroids. These phenotypes may play key roles for advancement of the management and therapy of this disease.

Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators such as long-acting β-agonist (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combinations have been used in people with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to control symptoms such as dyspnoea and cough, and prevent exacerbations. A number of LABA/LAMA combinations are now available for clinical use in COPD. However, it is not clear which group of above mentioned inhalers is most effective or if any specific formulation works better than the others within the same group or class.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of available formulations from four different groups of inhalers (i.e. LABA/LAMA combination, LABA/ICS combination, LAMA and LABA) in people with moderate to severe COPD. The review will update previous systematic reviews on dual combination inhalers and long-acting bronchodilators to answer the questions described above using the strength of a network meta-analysis (NMA).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register, which contains several databases. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites. The most recent searches were conducted on 6 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited people aged 35 years or older with a diagnosis of COPD and a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of less than 80% of predicted. We included studies of at least 12 weeks' duration including at least two active comparators from one of the four inhaler groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted NMAs using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo method. We considered a study as high risk if recruited participants had at least one COPD exacerbation within the 12 months before study entry and as low risk otherwise. Primary outcomes were COPD exacerbations (moderate to severe and severe), and secondary outcomes included symptom and quality-of-life scores, safety outcomes, and lung function. We collected data only for active comparators and did not consider placebo was not considered. We assumed a class/group effect when a fixed-class model fitted well. Otherwise we used a random-class model to assess intraclass/group differences. We supplemented the NMAs with pairwise meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 101,311 participants from 99 studies (26 studies with 32,265 participants in the high-risk population and 73 studies with 69,046 participants in the low-risk population) in our systematic review. The median duration of studies was 52 weeks in the high-risk population and 26 weeks in the low-risk population (range 12 to 156 for both populations). We considered the quality of included studies generally to be good.The NMAs suggested that the LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations followed by LAMA in the both populations.There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination, LAMA, and LABA in the high-risk population (network hazard ratios (HRs) 0.86 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.76 to 0.99), 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.99), and 0.70 (95% CrI 0.61 to 0.8) respectively), and that LAMA decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA in the high- and low-risk populations (network HR 0.80 (95% CrI 0.71 to 0.88) and 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.97), respectively). There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination reduces severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination and LABA in the high-risk population (network HR 0.78 (95% CrI 0.64 to 0.93) and 0.64 (95% CrI 0.51 to 0.81), respectively).There was a general trend towards a greater improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores with the combination therapies compared to monotherapies, and the combination therapies were generally ranked higher than monotherapies.The LABA/ICS combination was the lowest ranked in pneumonia serious adverse events (SAEs) in both populations. There is evidence that the LABA/ICS combination increases the odds of pneumonia compared to LAMA/LABA combination, LAMA and LABA (network ORs: 1.69 (95% CrI 1.20 to 2.44), 1.78 (95% CrI 1.33 to 2.39), and 1.50 (95% CrI 1.17 to 1.92) in the high-risk population and network or pairwise OR: 2.33 (95% CI 1.03 to 5.26), 2.02 (95% CrI 1.16 to 3.72), and 1.93 (95% CrI 1.29 to 3.22) in the low-risk population respectively). There were significant overlaps in the rank statistics in the other safety outcomes including mortality, total, COPD, and cardiac SAEs, and dropouts due to adverse events.None of the differences in lung function met a minimal clinically important difference criterion except for LABA/LAMA combination versus LABA in the high-risk population (network mean difference 0.13 L (95% CrI 0.10 to 0.15). The results of pairwise meta-analyses generally agreed with those of the NMAs. There is no evidence to suggest intraclass/group differences except for lung function at 12 months in the high-risk population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations although there was some uncertainty in the results. LAMA containing inhalers may have an advantage over those without a LAMA for preventing COPD exacerbations based on the rank statistics. Combination therapies appear more effective than monotherapies for improving symptom and quality-of-life scores. ICS-containing inhalers are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.Our most comprehensive review including intraclass/group comparisons, free combination therapies, 99 studies, and 20 outcomes for each high- and low-risk population summarises the current literature and could help with updating existing COPD guidelines.

Indacaterol and glycopyrronium versus indacaterol on body plethysmography measurements in COPD-a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Dual bronchodilator therapy is recommended for symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are limited data on effects of a combination of two long-acting bronchodilators on lung function including body plethysmography.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, single-dose, cross-over, placebo-controlled study evaluated efficacy and safety of the free combination of indacaterol maleate (IND) and glycopyrronium bromide (GLY) versus IND alone on spirometric and body plethysmography parameters, including inspiratory capacity (IC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), forced vital capacity (FVC), total lung capacity (TLC) and airway resistance (Raw) in moderate-to-severe COPD patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients with FEV₁ % pred. (mean ± SD) 56 ± 13% were randomised. The combination of IND + GLY versus IND presented a numerically higher peak-IC (Δ = 0.076 L, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.010 - 0.161 L; p = 0.083), with a statistically significant difference in mean IC over 4 h (Δ = 0.054 L, 95%CI 0.022 - 0.086 L; p = 0.001). FEV₁, FVC and Raw, but not TLC, were consistently significantly improved by IND + GLY compared to IND alone. Safety profiles of both treatments were comparable.

CONCLUSION

The free combination of IND + GLY improved lung function parameters as evaluated by spirometry and body plethysmography, with a similar safety profile compared to IND alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01699685.

The differential effects of inspiratory, expiratory, and combined resistive breathing on healthy lung

Combined resistive breathing (CRB) is the hallmark of obstructive airway disease pathophysiology. We have previously shown that severe inspiratory resistive breathing (IRB) induces acute lung injury in healthy rats. The role of expiratory resistance is unknown. The possibility of a load-dependent type of resistive breathing-induced lung injury also remains elusive. Our aim was to investigate the differential effects of IRB, expiratory resistive breathing (ERB), and CRB on healthy rat lung and establish the lowest loads required to induce injury. Anesthetized tracheostomized rats breathed through a two-way valve. Varying resistances were connected to the inspiratory, expiratory, or both ports, so that the peak inspiratory pressure (IRB) was 20%-40% or peak expiratory (ERB) was 40%-70% of maximum. CRB was assessed in inspiratory/expiratory pressures of 30%/50%, 40%/50%, and 40%/60% of maximum. Quietly breathing animals served as controls. At 6 hours, respiratory system mechanics were measured, and bronchoalveolar lavage was performed for measurement of cell and protein concentration. Lung tissue interleukin-6 and interleukin-1β levels were estimated, and a lung injury histological score was determined. ERB produced significant, load-independent neutrophilia, without mechanical or permeability derangements. IRB 30% was the lowest inspiratory load that provoked lung injury. CRB increased tissue elasticity, bronchoalveolar lavage total cell, macrophage and neutrophil counts, protein and cytokine levels, and lung injury score in a dose-dependent manner. In conclusion, CRB load dependently deranges mechanics, increases permeability, and induces inflammation in healthy rats. ERB is a putative inflammatory stimulus for the lung.

Faster reduction in hyperinflation and improvement in lung ventilation inhomogeneity promoted by aclidinium compared to glycopyrronium in severe stable COPD patients. A randomized crossover study

Standard spyrometric assessment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) only evaluates bronchial obstruction. However, airflow limitation and hyperinflation are the main pathophysiological factors responsible for dyspnoea and reduced exercise tolerance in patients with COPD. This study evaluated the effects of aclidinium bromide 400 μg and glycopyrronium bromide 50 μg on these parameters. Patients with stable severe/very severe COPD were randomized in this double-blind, double-dummy, crossover, Phase IV study. Patients received single doses of each drug on separate days. Primary endpoints were changes in residual volume (RV) and intra-thoracic gas volume (ITGV), assessed by full-body plethysmography. Other endpoints included changes variations in lung ventilation inhomogeneity (Phase III slope of single-breath nitrogen washout test, SBN2), dyspnoea visual analogue scale, and pulmonary specific total airway resistances. Assessments were performed at baseline and 5, 15, 30, 60, and 180 min post-administration. Thirty-seven patients were randomized (31 male; mean age 71 years). Aclidinium and glycopyrronium significantly improved ITGV versus baseline at all-time points (p < 0.05). Significant improvements in RV were observed after 5 min with aclidinium and after 60 min with glycopyrronium. RV improvements were significantly greater with aclidinium than glycopyrronium from 5 to 60 min post-administration (p < 0.05). Both treatments improved dyspnoea versus baseline at all-time points (p < 0.05). Aclidinium significantly improved ventilation inhomogeneity versus baseline at all-time points; no significant changes were observed for glycopyrronium. For the first time two long-acting muscarinic antagonists have been compared in acute conditions with body plethysmography and SBN2 test. We demonstrated that both aclidinium and glycopyrronium significantly reduce hyperinflation and dyspnoea in severe and very severe COPD patients. Aclidinium however promoted a faster reduction in RV and was the only able to reduce lung ventilation inhomogeneity. Trial Registration numbers available on Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02181023.

Effect of indacaterol on lung deflation improves cardiac performance in hyperinflated COPD patients: an interventional, randomized, double-blind clinical trial

Background

COPD is often associated with cardiovascular comorbidity. Treatment guidelines recommend therapy with bronchodilators as first choice. We investigated the acute effect of single-dose indacaterol on lung hyperinflation in COPD subjects, for the first time evaluating the potential effects on right heart performance.

Methods

In this Phase IV, randomized, interventional, double-blind, crossover clinical study, we recruited 40 patients (50–85 years of age) with stable COPD. Patients were treated with 150 μg indacaterol or placebo and after 60 minutes (T60) and 180 minutes (T180) the following tests were performed: trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE), plethysmography, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, saturation of peripheral oxygen, and visual analog scale dyspnea score. Patients underwent a crossover re-challenge after a further 72 hours of pharmacological washout. All TTE measurements were conducted blindly by the same operator and further interpreted by two different blinded operators. Consensus decisions were taken on every value and parameter. The primary outcome was the effect of the reduction of residual volume and functional residual capacity on right heart systolic and diastolic function indexes evaluated by TTE in patients treated with indacaterol, as compared to placebo.

Results

Vital capacity, inspiratory capacity, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second were significantly increased by indacaterol, when compared with placebo, while residual volume, intrathoracic gas volume, and specific airway resistance were significantly reduced in patients treated with indacaterol. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion was significantly increased versus placebo, paralleled by an increase of tricuspid E-wave deceleration time. The cardiac frequency was also significantly reduced in indacaterol-treated patients.

Conclusion

Indacaterol significantly reduces lung hyperinflation in acute conditions, with a clinically relevant improvement of dyspnea. These modifications are associated with a significant increase of the right ventricular compliance indexes and may have a role in improving left ventricular preload leading to a reduction in cardiac frequency.

Clinical role of dual bronchodilation with an indacaterol-glycopyrronium combination in the management of COPD: its impact on patient-related outcomes and quality of life

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the result of persistent and progressive pathologic abnormalities in the small airways, most often associated with alveolar loss. Smoking cessation is the most effective intervention to slow down the progression of COPD. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators are prescribed for the symptomatic relief at any stage of disease severity. For patients whose COPD cannot be not sufficiently controlled with long-acting bronchodilator monotherapy, international guidelines suggest the possibility of associating a long-acting beta₂ agonist (LABA) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), ie, dual bronchodilation. This is not a new concept as the combination of short-acting agents has been popular in the past. In recent years, several fixed-dose combinations containing a LAMA and a LABA in a single inhaler have been approved by regulatory authorities in several countries. Among the new LAMA/LABA combinations, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg (QVA149) has been shown in a series of clinical trials to be as safe as the single components and placebo, and more effective than placebo and the single components with regard to lung function, symptoms, and patient-oriented outcomes. Furthermore, QVA149 achieved better bronchodilation than salmeterol 50 µg/fluticasone 500 µg twice daily. Compared with tiotropium, a well-recognized treatment for COPD, the percentage of patients that exceed the minimal clinical important difference for dyspnea and health-related quality of life measurements was superior with QVA149. Other patient-oriented outcomes, such as daily symptoms, night-time awakening, and use of rescue medication consistently favored QVA149. Finally, QVA149 was significantly superior to LAMAs for reducing all types of exacerbation. In conclusion, several years after introduction of dual bronchodilation, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg in a single inhaler for once-daily administration via the Breezhaler^® device (QVA149) has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective treatment for COPD patients.

Large trials, new knowledge: the changing face of COPD management

Large, well-designed, drug-treatment trials have allowed useful advances to be made in the treatment and diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The two main clinical trial designs that provide evidence of effectiveness are randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. RCTs are generally considered to provide more robust evidence than that obtained from observational studies and can generate informative secondary analyses in addition to the primary research query. In COPD, however, well-designed comparator-controlled RCTs, although successful, have been shown to have some limitations, such as a lack of generalisability. The findings of observational studies, whilst prone to bias, can generate valuable data and have also provided useful information relating to the efficacy of treatments in the current COPD management guidelines. This review focuses on major COPD studies published since 2007 (including UPLIFT, TIOSPIR, ECLIPSE and COPDGene), and assesses the influence such RCTs and large observational studies have had on our knowledge of COPD, and how these may impact future trial designs.

Treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by dual bronchodilation with coformulation of indacaterol/glycopyrronium

Bronchodilators are the cornerstone of the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In particular, the most commonly used drugs are inhaled long-acting agents, including long-acting β2-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs). The combination of a LABA with a LAMA, i.e. of molecules characterized by different mechanisms of action, results in a synergistic enhancement of their clinical and functional effects. Therefore, this combined treatment can be implemented in a number of cases in which disease control is not adequately achieved by a single active agent such as a LABA or a LAMA. Several LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations, mainly made up of newly developed compounds, are currently in advanced phases of experimental evaluation. Within such a context, the aim of this review is to outline the pharmacological basis of dual bronchodilation as well as to discuss the results of the main trials carried out using the drug combination consisting of indacaterol and glycopyrronium, a LABA and a LAMA recently introduced in the treatment of COPD.

Indacaterol for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

The need for a rapid onset of action and a long duration of the broncholytic effect is the likely reason for the development of new long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) that are fast acting and have true 24 h duration of action. Indacaterol is the archetype of once-daily LABAs and already marketed as a maintenance therapy in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

AREAS COVERED

Meta-analyses of published data or pooled analyses of primary data provide good insight into the clinical role of indacaterol in COPD.

EXPERT OPINION

The choice of the once-daily bronchodilator to start treatment in a patient with COPD mainly depends on the outcome of interest. Indacaterol is more effective than tiotropium if we consider symptoms or health-related quality of life as the primary outcome. Moreover, in symptomatic patient indacaterol should be preferred to tiotropium because of its rapid onset of action. By contrast, tiotropium appears to be more effective than indacaterol if exacerbations are the expected primary outcome. However, as indacaterol/glycopyrronium fixed-dose combination (QVA149) shows superior efficacy compared to glycopyrronium and tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD, a fundamental question regarding the use of indacaterol that requires clarification is whether it is preferable to start immediately with QVA149 rather than using indacaterol alone.

COPD: maximization of bronchodilation

The most recent guidelines define COPD in a multidimensional way, nevertheless the diagnosis is still linked to the limitation of airflow, usually measured by the reduction in the FEV1/FVC ratio below 70%. However, the severity of obstruction is not directly correlated to symptoms or to invalidity determined by COPD. Thus, besides respiratory function, COPD should be evaluated based on symptoms, frequency and severity of exacerbations, patient's functional status and health related quality of life (HRQoL). Therapy is mainly aimed at increasing exercise tolerance and reducing dyspnea, with improvement of daily activities and HRQoL. This can be accomplished by a drug-induced reduction of pulmonary hyperinflation and exacerbations frequency and severity. All guidelines recommend bronchodilators as baseline therapy for all stages of COPD, and long-acting inhaled bronchodilators, both beta-2 agonist (LABA) and antimuscarinic (LAMA) drugs, are the most effective in regular treatment in the clinically stable phase. The effectiveness of bronchodilators should be evaluated in terms of functional (relief of bronchial obstruction and pulmonary hyperinflation), symptomatic (exercise tolerance and HRQoL), and clinical improvement (reduction in number or severity of exacerbations), while the absence of a spirometric response is not a reason for interrupting treatment, if there is subjective improvement in symptoms. Because LABA and LAMA act via different mechanisms of action, when administered in combination they can exert additional effects, thus optimizing (i.e. maximizing) sustained bronchodilation in COPD patients with severe airflow limitation, who cannot benefit (or can get only partial benefit) by therapy with a single bronchodilator. Recently, a fixed combination of ultra LABA/LAMA (indacaterol/glycopyrronium) has shown that it is possible to get a stable and persistent bronchodilation, which can help in avoiding undesirable fluctuations of bronchial calibre.

Indacaterol improves lung hyperinflation and physical activity in patients with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease--a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Indacaterol is a long-acting beta-2 agonist for once-daily treatment of COPD. We evaluated the effects of indacaterol 150 μg on lung hyperinflation compared with placebo and open-label tiotropium 18 μg. We measured physical activity during treatment with indacaterol 150 μg and matched placebo.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, three-period, cross-over study (21 days of treatment separated by two wash-out periods of 13 days) with indacaterol 150 μg or matching placebo and tiotropium 18 μg. Lung function was assessed by body plethysmography and spirometry. Physical activity was measured for one week by a multisensory armband at the end of both treatment periods with indacaterol/matched placebo. The primary endpoint was peak inspiratory capacity at the end of each treatment period.

RESULTS

129 patients (mean age, 61 years; mean post-bronchodilator FEV1, 64%), were randomized and 110 patients completed the study. Peak inspiratory capacity was 0.22 L greater with Indacaterol at day 21 compared to placebo (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for tiotropium. Both bronchodilators also significantly improved other parameters of lung hyperinflation compared with placebo. All parameters of physical activity were significantly increased during treatment with indacaterol versus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Indacaterol 150 μg improved lung hyperinflation in patients with moderate COPD, which was associated with an increase of physical activity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01012765.

Assessment of acute bronchodilator effects from specific airway resistance changes in stable COPD patients

BACKGROUND

In COPD patients, reversibility is currently evaluated from the changes of forced expiratory volume at 1s (ΔFEV1) and forced vital capacity (ΔFVC). By lowering peripheral airway smooth muscle tone, bronchodilators should decrease dynamic hyperinflation, gas trapping, and possibly dyspnea at rest. Hence, we hypothesize that specific airway resistance changes (ΔsRAW) should better characterize the acute response to bronchodilators.

METHODS

On two days, 60 COPD patients underwent dyspnea evaluation (VAS score) and pulmonary function testing at baseline and one hour after placebo or 300μg indacaterol administration.

RESULTS

Spirographic and ΔsRAW-based criteria identified as responders 24 and 45 patients, respectively. ΔsRAW correlated with changes of intrathoracic gas volume (ΔITGV) (r=0.61; p<0.001), residual volume (ΔRV) (r=0.60; p<0.001), ΔFVC (r=0.44; p=0.001), and ΔVAS (r=0.73; p<0.001), while ΔFEV1 correlated only with ΔFVC (r=0.34; p=0.008). Significant differences in terms of ΔITGV (p=0.002), ΔRV (p=0.023), and ΔVAS (p<0.001) occurred only if patients were stratified according to ΔsRAW.

CONCLUSIONS

In assessing the acute functional effect of bronchodilators, ΔsRAW-based criterion is preferable to FEV1-FVC-based criteria, being more closely related to bronchodilator-induced improvements of lung mechanics and dyspnea at rest.

The lungs need to be deflated: effects of glycopyrronium on lung hyperinflation in COPD patients

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent airflow limitation caused by bronchial alterations, small airways disease and parenchymal destruction. In patients with COPD the structural and functional lung alterations can progress more or less rapidly from the initial small airways disease to an overt COPD where a severe expiratory flow limitation takes place. In these conditions, lung hyperinflation develops characterized by increase in functional residual capacity (FRC) and decrease in inspiratory capacity (IC). Thus, IC is an easy and reliable index to monitor lung hyperinflation and to assess the efficacy of bronchodilator drugs. When FRC increases, tidal volume (VT) is located in a more flatted upper part of the P -V curve of the respiratory system and respiratory muscles must sustain a greater elastic workload. Furthermore, due to inadequate time for expiration, there is a positive alveolar pressure at the end of expiration (PEEPi). This represents a further elastic workload for the inspiratory muscles. This impairment of ventilatory mechanics generates dyspnea that in most severely compromised patients occurs also for small efforts causing activity limitation and worst health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Due to these respiratory alterations, bronchodilators are the cornerstone of the long-term treatment of COPD in order to decrease airways resistances, lung hyperinflation and exacerbation rate, and improve patient's symptoms, exercise tolerance and health status. Long-acting antimuscarinic bronchodilators (LAMAs) have proven to be very useful in terms of lung deflation and exercise tolerance. Recently, new LAMAs with several positive characteristics have been introduced into clinical use among which glycopyrronium bromide has shown to be particularly effective. Glycopyrronium has a longer-lasting effect compared to other anticholinergic drugs, therefore it allows a single daily administration and facilitates the therapy of a disease that needs a chronic bronchodilation by decreasing the mechanic stress of the airways determined by repeated bronchoconstriction and increasing patient's adherence to treatment plan with better clinical results. Several studies demonstrated that glycopyrronium is able to positively and significantly decrease lung hyperinflation, symptoms, and improve psycho-physical status of COPD patients, with a low rate of adverse events, similar to that of placebo.

New developments in the management of COPD: clinical utility of indacaterol 75 μg

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a global health challenge and a major cause of mortality worldwide. Bronchodilators, particularly long-acting β₂-agonists and long-acting antimuscarinic agents, used singly or in combination, aim to improve lung function, reduce symptoms, prevent exacerbations, and enhance quality of life of COPD patients. Indacaterol is a novel, inhaled, long-acting β₂-agonist, with rapid onset of action and once-daily dosing providing 24-hour bronchodilation. Currently, the recommended dose differs between Europe (150 μg; maximum 300 μg) and USA (75 μg), the latter is lower than that assessed in the majority of the conducted studies. This review summarises published evidence regarding the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of indacaterol at a dose of 75 μg. Indacaterol 75 μg was found to be superior than placebo regarding lung function, dyspnea, health status, use of rescue medication, and rate of exacerbations. Furthermore, indacaterol 75 μg was well tolerated, while the most frequent adverse effect was deterioration of COPD occurring at a frequency similar to placebo, without major cardiovascular adverse effects. In conclusion, indacaterol 75 μg, administered once daily, is efficacious and has an excellent tolerability and safety profile, and is therefore a valid alternative in the treatment of COPD patients.

The role of indacaterol for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

Indacaterol is the first long-acting β2-agonist (LABAs) approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that allows for once-daily (OD) administration. It is rapidly acting, with an onset of action in 5 minutes, like salbutamol and formoterol but with a sustained bronchodilator effect, that last for 24 hours, like tiotropium. In long-term clinical studies (12 weeks to 1 year) in patients with moderate to severe COPD, OD indacaterol 150 or 300 μg improved lung function (primary endpoint) significantly more than placebo, and improvements were significantly greater than twice-daily formoterol 12 μg or salmeterol 50 μg, and noninferior to OD tiotropium bromide 18 μg. Indacaterol was well tolerated at all doses and with a good overall safety profile. Cost-utility analyses show that indacaterol 150 μg has lower total costs and better outcomes than tiotropium and salmeterol. These findings suggest that indacaterol can be considered a first choice drug in the treatment of the patient with mild/moderate stable COPD. However, in people with COPD who remain symptomatic on treatment with indacaterol, adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) is the preferable option. In any case, it is advisable to combine indacaterol with a OD inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), such as mometasone furoate or ciclesonide, in patients with low FEV1, and, in those patients who have many symptoms and a high risk of exacerbations, to combine it with a LAMA and a OD ICS.

Indacaterol: a comprehensive review

At present there is no cure for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, some nonpharmacologic treatments, such as rehabilitation and lung volume reduction surgery, as well as pharmacologic intervention, can relieve some of the patient's symptoms and improve quality of life, while also reducing the rate of exacerbations and hospitalizations. There needs to be a paradigm shift away from the unjustified nihilistic approach to COPD towards considering it a preventable and treatable disease. After patients quit smoking and start to lead healthier lifestyles, long-acting bronchodilators, such as long-acting beta-adrenergic agents (LABA) and long-acting antimuscarinic agents (LAMA), are recommended as the cornerstone of treatment for COPD, either as monotherapy or in combination. COPD is characterized by a reduced maximum expiratory flow and slow forced emptying of the lungs, which progress over time and are not completely reversible. In this condition, gas gets trapped in the lungs and pulmonary hyperinflation occurs. LABA and LAMA improve airway patency and deflate the lungs. Indacaterol is the first once-daily LABA approved for treatment of COPD, and is administered by inhalation through the Breezhaler® device. The speed of bronchodilation is similar to that with salbutamol (ie, about five minutes) and longer (ie, 24 hours) than that with traditional LABA, with the same 12-hour effect as salmeterol and formoterol, both of which require twice-daily administration. This is why indacaterol has been called the "ultra-LABA". On the one hand, the fast onset of action provides immediate relief of symptoms, and on the other, its constant 24-hour bronchodilation provides "pharmacologic stenting" which facilitates lung emptying, thereby decreasing trapped gas and pulmonary hyperinflation. Once-daily administration of a fast and long-acting bronchodilator can improve patient adherence with therapy, which is known to be a major problem for many medical treatments. Dose-finding trials have shown that 75 μg is the minimum dose needed to achieve clinically important improvement. However, indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg achieve an even greater improvement in lung function and patient-oriented outcomes. Further, these two doses of indacaterol significantly reduce pulmonary hyperinflation, thereby improving exercise tolerance and ability to perform day-to-day activities. It is more effective on lung volumes at the 300 μg dose than formoterol, and better than salmeterol and tiotropium at the 150 μg dose, at least in the acute setting. It is noteworthy that few studies document these results in patients with COPD and moderate airflow obstruction. These are exactly the kind of patients our research should be concentrating on, in view of the accelerated decay in forced expiratory volume in one second at this stage of the disease. Finally, all the relevant studies show that indacaterol is consistently well tolerated by patients with COPD at every stage, and that it has a high safety profile.

Safety and efficacy of 12-week or longer indacaterol treatment in moderate-to-severe COPD patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This is a meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of indacaterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with treatment duration of ≥12 weeks.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in English (to September 30, 2012) were identified from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, websites, reference lists, and manual searches. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the trials and extracted information.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were eligible. Five involved indacaterol, two salmeterol, one formoterol, and one tiotropium. Four studies had placebos. Using trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s as a measure of therapeutic effect, indacaterol was superior to the other β2-agonists, tiotropium, and placebo at weeks 12, 26, and 52. Indacaterol had a greater effect on the transition dyspnoea index compared with placebo, formoterol, and salmeterol, but not open-label tiotropium. In reducing the as-needed use of salbutamol, indacaterol were superior to placebo, tiotropium, and formoterol, but not salmeterol (5, 95 % confidence interval (CI), -2.15, 12.15). Indacaterol improved St George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores more than placebo and open-label tiotropium, but not formoterol. Indacaterol seemed to cause more adverse events than placebo only at a dose of 600 μg daily and a duration of 52 weeks (risk ratio 1.15; 95 % CI, 1.04, 1.26). The total and serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were comparable with open-label tiotropium and the β2-agonists.

CONCLUSIONS

Indacaterol is effective and well-tolerated as a bronchodilator for the maintenance of moderate to severe COPD.

Indacaterol improves daily physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

The current mainstay of therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is long-acting bronchodilators. To date, the effect of indacaterol, a β2-agonist, on activities of daily living in COPD patients is not well understood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of indacaterol with regard to activities of daily living in patients with COPD.

Methods

In this nonrandomized open-label study, 23 patients with COPD were instructed to carry an accelerometer for 4 weeks without indacaterol therapy and then for another period of 4 weeks while receiving indacaterol therapy.

Results

The number of steps, duration of moderate or greater physical activity, and energy expenditure were significantly increased after treatment with indacaterol compared with baseline data in all patients with COPD; the metabolic equivalent of task was also significantly enhanced after treatment with indacaterol.

Conclusion

This study provides early evidence that indacaterol improves daily physical activity in patients with COPD.

Tiotropium versus long-acting beta-agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web-based clinical trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co-administration of standard COPD therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all-cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA-treated participants. There was a lower rate of non-fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost-effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease-related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long-acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost-effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.

Recent Publications on Medications and Pharmacy

Hospital Pharmacy presents this feature to keep pharmacists abreast of new publications in the medical/pharmacy literature. Articles of interest regarding a broad scope of topics are abstracted monthly.