Symptom variability and control in COPD: Advantages of dual bronchodilation therapy

High 24-Hour Respiratory Symptoms and Low Physical Activity in the Stable COPD Romanian Cohort of SPACE Study

Objective

This study assessed the characteristics and the relationship between symptoms in any part of the 24-hour (24-h) day, physical activity level (PAL), and other clinical and functional outcomes in stable COPD patients.

Patients and Methods

Out of the 2162 patients enrolled in the SPACE study (The Symptoms and Physical Activity in COPD patients in Europe, clinicaltrials.gov NCT03031769), 406 (18.8%) were recruited from Romania. Here, we present the Romanian cohort results. Eligible patients were adults with age at least 40 years, confirmed diagnosis of stable COPD, current or former smokers with a smoking history of minimum 10 pack-years. The 24-h respiratory symptoms were assessed using Early Morning Symptoms of COPD Instrument (EMSCI), Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS™: COPD) and Nighttime Symptoms of COPD Instrument (NiSCI). During clinical interview, patients self-evaluated PAL through Exercise as Vital Sign (EVS) and Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS). Physicians assessed PAL through their clinical judgment.

Results

For each combination of 2 between the early morning (EM), daytime (DT) and night-time (NT) symptoms of the 24-h day, there was a significant association (p < 0.001 for each). All symptoms significantly correlated with exacerbation history (p < 0.001 for EM and NT, p=0.002 for DT), and number of severe exacerbations (p < 0.001 for DT, p=0.001 for EM and p=0.026 for NT, respectively). The 24-h symptoms correlated negatively and significantly with PAL (p < 0.001), irrespective of the assessment used. Self-reported PAL negatively correlated with dyspnea, symptom burden, severity of disease and number of exacerbations (p < 0.001). Patients spent an average (standard deviation) of 25.8 (21.0) hours/week performing physical activity. Physicians overestimated their patients' daily PAL.

Conclusion

A negative and significant correlation between the 24-h day symptoms and PAL was identified in stable COPD patients. Physicians need to routinely assess PAL using adequate tools and start educating inactive COPD patients to optimize their disease outcomes.

Once-daily single-inhaler versus twice-daily multiple-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD: lung function and health status results from two replicate randomized controlled trials

Background

The comparative efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy administered via single or multiple inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been evaluated comprehensively. We conducted two replicate trials comparing single- with multiple-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA combination in COPD.

Methods

207608 and 207609 were Phase IV, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy non-inferiority trials comparing once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg via Ellipta inhaler, with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400/12 μg via metered-dose inhaler plus once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg via HandiHaler. Patients had symptomatic COPD and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) < 50% predicted, or FEV₁ < 80% predicted and ≥ 2 moderate or 1 severe exacerbations in the prior year. The primary endpoint in both trials was weighted mean change from baseline (wmCFB) in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12. Secondary endpoints included CFB in trough FEV₁ at Day 84 and 85. Other endpoints included serial FEV₁ and health status outcomes at Week 12. Safety was evaluated descriptively.

Results

The modified per-protocol population included 720 and 711 patients in studies 207608 and 207609 (intent-to-treat population: 728 and 732). FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12 (Study 207608 treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: 15 mL [− 13, 43]; Study 207609: 11 mL [− 20, 41]). FF/UMEC/VI improved trough FEV₁ CFB versus BUD/FOR+TIO at Day 84 and 85 (Day 85 treatment difference: Study 207608: 38 mL [10, 66]; Study 207609: 51 mL [21, 82]) and FEV₁ at 12 and 24 h post-morning dose at Week 12 in both studies. No treatment differences were seen in health status outcomes. Safety profiles were similar between treatments; pneumonia occurred in 7 (< 1%) patients with FF/UMEC/VI and 9 (1%) patients with BUD/FOR+TIO, across both studies.

Conclusions

FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12 in patients with COPD. Greater improvements in trough and serial FEV₁ measurements at Week 12 with FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR+TIO, together with similar health status improvements and safety outcomes including the incidence of pneumonia, suggest that once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI triple therapy is a viable option for patients looking to simplify their treatment regimen.

Trial registration

GSK (207608/207609; NCT03478683/NCT03478696).

A Cross-Sectional Study in Patients with Severe COPD to Assess the Perception of Symptom Variability (COPVAR) in the Middle East and Africa

Purpose

This study was performed to assess symptom variability and its impact on morning activities in stable patients with severe COPD in the Middle East and Africa (MEA) countries.

Patients and methods

Non-interventional, cross-sectional study (NCT03425760) in patients with severe COPD (GOLD 2015, C, or D categories). Symptom variability was assessed directly by interviewing the patient and using the Global Chest Symptoms Questionnaire (GCSQ). The impact on morning activities was assessed using the Capacity of Daily Living during the Morning (CDLM) and the Morning Activities and Symptoms Questionnaire (MASQ).

Results

A total of 3253 patients (mean±SD age: 64.1±9.5 years, 90.3% males) were enrolled. Overall, 81.6% and 83.4% of patients reported weekly and daily symptom variability, respectively. The number of exacerbations in the previous year, smoking cessation, and COPD GOLD D were the most consistent factors associated with symptom variability. The GCSQ score was significantly higher (p<0.001) in GOLD D than in GOLD C patients at each time during the day. In GOLD D, the mean (±SD) GCSQ score was higher at night (1.6±1.2, p<0.001) and in the morning (1.5±1.0, p<0.001) than in the afternoon (1.3±0.9), suggesting daytime variability of breathlessness and chest tightness. Overall, 60.0% of GOLD D patients (versus 13.6% GOLD C, p<0.0001) had difficulty getting out of bed due to COPD. Patients with symptom variability had significantly more difficulty to get out of bed, especially patients with chest tightness variability (p<0.0001) and wheezing variability (p<0.0001). The CDLM global score was significantly lower (p<0.0001) in GOLD D than in GOLD C patients (3.5±1.1 and 4.6 ± 3.5, respectively). Daily variability in chest tightness and wheezing was also significantly associated with CDLM scores (p<0.0001).

Conclusion

In MEA countries, patients with severe stable COPD reported significant daily and weekly symptom variability which affects morning activities, particularly in GOLD D patients.

The Airways' Mechanical Stress in Lung Disease: Implications for COPD Pathophysiology and Treatment Evaluation

The airway epithelium stretches and relaxes during the normal respiratory cycle, and hyperventilation exaggerates this effect, resulting in changes in lung physiology. In fact, stretching of the airways influences lung function and the secretion of airway mediators, which in turn may cause a potentially injurious inflammatory response. This aim of the present narrative review was to illustrate the current evidence on the importance of mechanical stress in the pathophysiology of lung diseases with a particular focus on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to discuss how this may influence pharmacological treatment strategies. Overall, treatment selection should be tailored to counterpart the effects of mechanical stress, which influences inflammation both in asthma and COPD. The most suitable treatment approach between a long-acting β2-agonists/long-acting antimuscarinic-agonist (LABA/LAMA) alone or with the addition of inhaled corticosteroids should be determined based on the underlying mechanism of inflammation. Noteworthy, the anti-inflammatory effects of the glycopyrronium/indacaterol combination on hyperinflation and mucociliary clearance may decrease the rate of COPD exacerbations, and it may synergistically improve bronchodilation with a double action on both the cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and the acetylcholine pathways.

Efficacy of aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg, analyzed by airflow obstruction severity, age, sex, and exacerbation history: pooled analysis of ACLIFORM and AUGMENT

BACKGROUND

Aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg is a twice-daily maintenance bronchodilator for COPD. This post hoc study evaluated aclidinium/formoterol vs aclidinium 400 µg, formoterol 12 µg, or placebo in patient subgroups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were pooled from two 24-week Phase III clinical trials (ACLIFORM and AUGMENT). Patients (N=3,394) were analyzed by baseline airflow obstruction severity (moderate/severe), age (<65/≥65 years), sex, and exacerbation history (0/≥1 exacerbation in the previous 12 months). Changes from baseline vs placebo and mono-therapies were evaluated: morning pre-dose (trough) and morning 1-hour post-dose FEV1, Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI), and moderate/severe exacerbation rates (healthcare resource utilization [HCRU] and EXAcerbations of Chronic pulmonary disease Tool [EXACT] criteria).

RESULTS

Aclidinium/formoterol improved the post-dose FEV1 vs placebo and monotherapy in all subgroups (all P<0.01) and trough FEV1 vs placebo (P<0.001) and formoterol (P<0.05) across all subgroups. Improvements in trough FEV1 were observed vs aclidinium in patients with severe airflow obstruction, patients aged <65 years, males, and patients with exacerbation history (P<0.05). Improvements in TDI were observed vs placebo in all subgroups (all P<0.001), monotherapies for patients with moderate (formoterol P<0.05) or severe airflow obstruction (aclidinium P<0.05), patients aged <65 years (aclidinium P<0.01, formoterol P<0.05), males (formoterol P<0.05), and patients with no exacerbation history (formoterol P<0.05). HCRU exacerbation rates were lower for aclidinium/formoterol vs placebo in patients with no exacerbation history (P<0.01). EXACT exacerbation rates were lower for aclidinium/formoterol in patients with moderate airflow obstruction vs placebo and aclidinium, patients aged <65 years vs placebo and ≥65 years vs formoterol, males vs placebo, and patients with no exacerbation history vs placebo (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Aclidinium/formoterol significantly improved post-dose FEV1, trough FEV1, and TDI vs placebo across all subgroups and vs monotherapy in many subgroups. These findings further support the benefits of aclidinium/formoterol for all patients with COPD.

Combined aclidinium bromide and long-acting beta2-agonist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Several dual bronchodilator combinations of long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) have been approved for treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The current GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) recommendations suggest the use of LABA/LAMA combinations in people with group B COPD with persistent symptoms, group C COPD with further exacerbations on LAMA therapy alone and group D COPD with or without inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Fixed-dose combination (FDC) of aclidinium/formoterol is one of the approved LABA/LAMA therapies for people with stable COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of combined aclidinium bromide and long-acting beta2-agonists in stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and manufacturers' websites as well as the reference list of published trials up to 12 October 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing combined aclidinium bromide and LABAs in people with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for data collection and analysis. The primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring a short course of an oral steroid or antibiotic, or both; quality of life measured by a validated scale and non-fatal serious adverse events (SAEs). Where the outcome or study details were not reported, we contacted the study investigators or pharmaceutical company trial co-ordinators (or both) for missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified RCTs comparing aclidinium/formoterol FDC versus aclidinium, formoterol or placebo only. We included seven multicentre trials of four to 52 weeks' duration conducted in outpatient settings. There were 5921 participants, whose mean age ranged from 60.7 to 64.7 years, mostly men with a mean smoking pack-years of 46.4 to 61.3 of which 43.9% to 63.4% were current smokers. They had a moderate-to-severe degree of COPD with a mean postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) between 50.5% and 61% of predicted normal and the baseline mean FEV1 of 1.23 L to 1.43 L. We assessed performance and detection biases as low for all studies whereas selection, attrition and reporting biases were either low or unclear.FDC versus aclidiniumThere was no evidence of a difference between FDC and aclidinium for exacerbations requiring steroids or antibiotics, or both (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.27; 2 trials, 2156 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); quality of life measured by St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (MD -0.92, 95% CI -2.15 to 0.30); participants with significant improvement in SGRQ score (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.41; 2 trials, 2002 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); non-fatal SAE (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.80; 3 trials, 2473 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); hospital admissions due to severe exacerbations (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.29; 2 trials, 2156 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or adverse events (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18; 3 trials, 2473 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared with aclidinium, FDC improved symptoms (Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score: MD 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.68; 2 trials, 2013 participants) with a higher chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of at least one unit improvement (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.62; high-certainty evidence); the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) being 14 (95% CI 9 to 39).FDC versus formoterolWhen compared to formoterol, combination therapy reduced exacerbations requiring steroids or antibiotics, or both (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.99; 3 trials, 2694 participants; high-certainty evidence); may decrease SGRQ total score (MD -1.88, 95% CI -3.10 to -0.65; 2 trials, 2002 participants; low-certainty evidence; MCID for SGRQ is 4 units); increased TDI focal score (MD 0.42, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; 2 trials, 2010 participants) with more participants attaining an MCID (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.56; high-certainty evidence) and an NNTB of 16 (95% CI 10 to 60). FDC lowered the risk of adverse events compared to formoterol (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.93; 5 trials, 3140 participants; high-certainty evidence; NNTB 22). However, there was no difference between FDC and formoterol for hospital admissions, all-cause mortality and non-fatal SAEs.FDC versus placeboCompared with placebo, FDC demonstrated no evidence of a difference in exacerbations requiring steroids or antibiotics, or both (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.12; 2 trials, 1960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or hospital admissions due to severe exacerbations (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.18; 2 trials, 1960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), although estimates were uncertain. Quality of life measure by SGRQ total score was significantly better with FDC compared to placebo (MD -2.91, 95% CI -4.33 to -1.50; 2 trials, 1823 participants) resulting in a corresponding increase in SGRQ responders who achieved at least four units decrease in SGRQ total score (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.13; high-certainty evidence) with an NNTB of 7 (95% CI 5 to 12). FDC also improved symptoms measured by TDI focal score (MD 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.69; 2 studies, 1832 participants) with more participants attaining at least one unit improvement in TDI focal score (OR 2.51, 95% CI 2.02 to 3.11; high-certainty evidence; NNTB 4). There were no differences in non-fatal SAEs, adverse events and all-cause mortality between FDC and placebo.Combination therapy significantly improved trough FEV1 compared to aclidinium, formoterol or placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

FDC improved dyspnoea and lung function compared to aclidinium, formoterol or placebo, and this translated into an increase in the number of responders on combination treatment. Quality of life was better with combination compared to formoterol or placebo. There was no evidence of a difference between FDC and monotherapy or placebo for exacerbations, hospital admissions, mortality, non-fatal SAEs or adverse events. Studies reported a lower risk of moderate exacerbations and adverse events with FDC compared to formoterol; however, larger studies would yield a more precise estimate for these outcomes.

Recombinant club cell protein 16 (CC16) ameliorates cigarette smoke‑induced lung inflammation in a murine disease model of COPD

Club cell protein (CC16) is expressed primarily by club cells possesses anti-inflammatory properties and is located in the bronchiolar epithelium. Previous studies have demonstrated that CC16 deficiency is associated with the progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the present study, the therapeutic effects of recombinant rat CC16 protein in mice with COPD were examined and the underlying mechanisms investigated. A total of 30 adult male C57/BL6 mice were randomly divided into three groups (10 mice/group). A mouse COPD model was generated by exposing 20 mice to cigarette smoke (CS) for 24 weeks. A total of 10 mice were treated intranasally with rCC16 (2.5 µg/g body weight) and control mice were exposed to normal room air. Results indicated that rCC16 treatment ameliorated pathological damage in the lungs and reduced the production of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8, which were induced by CS exposure. After rCC16 administration, endogenous CC16 was upregulated and the body weight of COPD mice was increased, whereas the opposite was observed in CS-exposed mice. Additionally, rCC16 treatment inhibited the DNA binding of NF-κB/p65 in lung tissues and reduced nuclear translocation of NF-κB/p65 in BALF and epithelial cells. Moreover, rCC16 treatment lead to a decrease in the total number of BALF cells, including macrophages, which was elevated in COPD mice. In conclusion, the present results demonstrate that rCC16 has therapeutic effects on COPD by downregulating pro-inflammatory factors via the NF-κB pathway.