Acute care costs of patients admitted for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: contribution of disease severity, infection and chronic heart failure

Healthcare utilisation and costing for decompensated chronic liver disease hospitalisations at a Victorian network

BACKGROUND

The economic burden of decompensated chronic liver disease (CLD) on Australian healthcare services is poorly characterised.

AIMS

To evaluate the in-patient healthcare utilisation costs associated with decompensated CLD at Monash Health, an Australian tertiary healthcare service.

METHODS

The current retrospective cost analysis examined patients with decompensated CLD admitted between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2018. Hospitalisations were identified using CLD-specific International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes. Cost measures were estimated using the Victorian Weighted Inlier Equivalent Separation funding data based on the Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups cost weights.

RESULTS

There were 707 hospitalisations in 435 adult patients. The mean age was 56.7 ± 11.7 years and the mean length of stay was 10.28 ± 11.2 days. Median survival was 31 months (interquartile range, 2-94 months) and 177 (40.8%) patients died within 1 year of admission. The cost of admission varied according to decompensation: hepatorenal syndrome ($20 162 AUD), variceal bleed ($16 630 AUD), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis ($12 664 AUD), hepatic encephalopathy ($9973 AUD) and ascites ($9001 AUD). There was no significant difference in the admissions or 30-day readmission rate from 2012 to 2018 financial year (FY). The total adjusted cost of cirrhotic admissions per year increased by 78% from FY2012 to FY2018.

CONCLUSION

Hospital admission and readmission for decompensated CLD is common and associated with 40.8% 1-year mortality and high costs. Clearer delineation of goals of care and alternative ambulatory care models for decompensated CLD are urgently required to reduce the high costs and burden on health services.

Proteomic Network Analysis of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid in Ex-Smokers to Discover Implicated Protein Targets and Novel Drug Treatments for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Bronchoalveolar lavage of the epithelial lining fluid (BALF) can sample the profound changes in the airway lumen milieu prevalent in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We compared the BALF proteome of ex-smokers with moderate COPD who are not in exacerbation status to non-smoking healthy control subjects and applied proteome-scale translational bioinformatics approaches to identify potential therapeutic protein targets and drugs that modulate these proteins for the treatment of COPD. Proteomic profiles of BALF were obtained from (1) never-smoker control subjects with normal lung function (n = 10) or (2) individuals with stable moderate (GOLD stage 2, FEV1 50−80% predicted, FEV1/FVC < 0.70) COPD who were ex-smokers for at least 1 year (n = 10). After identifying potential crucial hub proteins, drug−proteome interaction signatures were ranked by the computational analysis of novel drug opportunities (CANDO) platform for multiscale therapeutic discovery to identify potentially repurposable drugs. Subsequently, a literature-based knowledge graph was utilized to rank combinations of drugs that most likely ameliorate inflammatory processes. Proteomic network analysis demonstrated that 233 of the >1800 proteins identified in the BALF were significantly differentially expressed in COPD versus control. Functional annotation of the differentially expressed proteins was used to detail canonical pathways containing the differential expressed proteins. Topological network analysis demonstrated that four putative proteins act as central node proteins in COPD. The drugs with the most similar interaction signatures to approved COPD drugs were extracted with the CANDO platform. The drugs identified using CANDO were subsequently analyzed using a knowledge-based technique to determine an optimal two-drug combination that had the most appropriate effect on the central node proteins. Network analysis of the BALF proteome identified critical targets that have critical roles in modulating COPD pathogenesis, for which we identified several drugs that could be repurposed to treat COPD using a multiscale shotgun drug discovery approach.

Comparative efficacy of single-inhaler triple therapies for COPD: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

2021 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Reports recommends that patients with clinically significant symptoms and exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should escalate to triple therapy, a combined use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) and long-acting b2-agonists (LABA)(ICS/LAMA/LABA). Triple therapy in fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), i.e., combining ICS, LABA with LAMA and administrating by a single inhalation device, has appeared in recent years. This study aims to compare the efficacy of triple therapy in FDCs in treating patients with moderate to severe COPD.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

Literature search will be conducted on PubMed, Embase and Web of science, according to pre-specified and corresponding search strategies, for relevant reports published since the inception dates of the databases. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) which compared the triple therapy in FDCs with other pharmacological therapies will be included. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool (RoB 2) will be used to assess the RCT quality. The outcomes will be analyzed as rate ratios and mean differences under a random-effects model in a frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA). Additional statistical analyses including subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis will be performed to assess the evidential heterogeneity and robustness. The strength of evidence from the NMA will be evaluated with the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval is required as this systematic review and network meta-analysis do not collect confidential personal data and do not carry out interventions in treating patients.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021240823.

Inhaled high molecular weight hyaluronan ameliorates respiratory failure in acute COPD exacerbation: a pilot study

Background

Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) carry significant morbidity and mortality. AECOPD treatment remains limited. High molecular weight hyaluronan (HMW-HA) is a glycosaminoglycan sugar, which is a physiological constituent of the lung extracellular matrix and has notable anti-inflammatory and hydrating properties.

Research question

We hypothesized that inhaled HMW-HA will improve outcomes in AECOPD.

Methods

We conducted a single center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study to investigate the effect of inhaled HMW-HA in patients with severe AECOPD necessitating non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV). Primary endpoint was time until liberation from NIPPV.

Results

Out of 44 screened patients, 41 were included in the study (21 for placebo and 20 for HMW-HA). Patients treated with HMW-HA had significantly shorter duration of NIPPV. HMW-HA treated patients also had lower measured peak airway pressures on the ventilator and lower systemic inflammation markers after liberation from NIPPV. In vitro testing showed that HMW-HA significantly improved mucociliary transport in air–liquid interface cultures of primary bronchial cells from COPD patients and healthy primary cells exposed to cigarette smoke extract.

Interpretation

Inhaled HMW-HA shortens the duration of respiratory failure and need for non-invasive ventilation in patients with AECOPD. Beneficial effects of HMW-HA on mucociliary clearance and inflammation may account for some of the effects (NCT02674880, www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Hospitalisation and mortality in patients with comorbid COPD and heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Discrepancy exists amongst studies investigating the effect of comorbid heart failure (HF) on the morbidity and mortality of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched using a pre-specified search strategy for studies comparing hospitalisation, rehospitalisation, and mortality of COPD patients with and without HF. Studies must have reported crude and/or adjusted rate ratios, risk ratios, odds ratios (OR), or hazard ratios (HR).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight publications, reporting 55 effect estimates, were identified that compared COPD patients with HF with those without HF. One study reported on all-cause hospitalisation (1 rate ratio). Two studies reported on COPD-related hospitalisation (1 rate ratio, 2 OR). One study reported on COPD- or cardiovascular-related hospitalisation (4 HR). One study reported on 90-day all-cause rehospitalisation (1 risk ratio). One study reported on 3-year all-cause rehospitalisation (2 HR). Four studies reported on 30-day COPD-related rehospitalisation (1 risk ratio; 5 OR). Two studies reported on 1-year COPD-related rehospitalisation (1 risk ratio; 1 HR). One study reported on 3-year COPD-related rehospitalisation (2 HR). Eighteen studies reported on all-cause mortality (1 risk ratio; 4 OR; 24 HR). Five studies reported on all-cause inpatient mortality (1 risk ratio; 4 OR). Meta-analyses of hospitalisation and rehospitalisation were not possible due to insufficient data for all individual effect measures. Meta-analysis of studies requiring spirometry for the diagnosis of COPD found that risk of all-cause mortality was 1.61 (pooled HR; 95%CI: 1.38, 1.83) higher in patients with HF than in those without HF.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we investigated the effect of HF comorbidity on hospitalisation and mortality of COPD patients. There is substantial evidence that HF comorbidity increases COPD-related rehospitalisation and all-cause mortality of COPD patients. The effect of HF comorbidity may differ depending on COPD phenotype, HF type, or HF severity and should be the topic of future research.

Triple versus dual inhaler therapy in moderate-to-severe COPD: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is evolving specially with triple inhaler therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a meta-analysis to ascertain the safety and efficacy of triple inhaler therapy consisting of an inhaled-glucocorticoid (ICS), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) when compared with dual therapy (ICS-LABA or LAMA-LABA).

METHODS

We performed an electronic database search to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing between triple and dual inhalers. Pooled rate-ratio (RR) or odds-ratio (OR) for dichotomous data and weighted mean difference (MD) for continuous data were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Our study included 12 RCTs totaling 19,322 patients, mean age of 65 ± 8.2 years and 68.2% were male. Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations with triple therapy (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.69-0.83; P < 0.01). Additionally, triple therapy caused significant increase in trough FEV1 (MD 0.09 L; 95% CI 0.07-0.12; P < 0.01), significant reduction in the mean St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (MD -1.67; 95% CI -2.02- -1.31; P < 0.01), and more patients experienced ≥ 4 points reduction of SGRQ score (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19-1.35; P < 0.01). Triple therapy was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia when compared to LABA/LAMA (OR 1.25; 95% 1.03-1.97; P = 0.03) but there were no significant differences in other adverse events between triple and dual inhalers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, triple inhaler therapy was associated with a reduction of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations, improved lung function and improved quality of life when compared to dual inhaler therapy but with an increased pneumonia risk.

Indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate provides sustained improvements in lung function compared with salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD: results from a Phase II randomized, double-blind 12-week study

Background and purpose

Fixed-dose combinations of a long-acting beta agonist and an inhaled corticosteroid are more effective than the individual components in COPD. The primary study objective was to demonstrate that the combination indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate (IND/MF [QMF149]) was non-inferior to the twice-daily combination salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate (Sal/Flu) in terms of trough FEV₁ at week 12 (day 85). Secondary objectives were to compare the efficacy of IND/MF (QMF149) vs Sal/Flu with respect to other lung function parameters, COPD exacerbations, symptoms and dyspnea, health status/health-related quality of life, and rescue medication use.

Materials and methods

This was a 12-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, Phase II study in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, who were randomized (1:1) to IND/MF (QMF149) (150/160 µg once daily; n=316) or Sal/Flu (50/500 µg twice daily; n=313).

Results

Over 90% of patients completed the study: 94.6% in the IND/MF (QMF149) group and 92.0% in the Sal/Flu group. The primary objective of non-inferiority of IND/MF (QMF149) to Sal/Flu for trough FEV₁ at week 12 (day 85) was met: the lower limit of the CI (95% CI: 27.7, 83.3 mL) was greater than −60 mL. The analysis for superiority of IND/MF (QMF149) to Sal/Flu demonstrated superiority of IND/MF (QMF149), with a difference of 56 mL (P<0.001). In addition, IND/MF (QMF149) treatment significantly improved COPD exacerbation-related parameters during the 12-week period. Other significant improvements with IND/MF (QMF 149) vs Sal/Flu were noted for dyspnea at week 12 and other COPD symptoms and COPD rescue medication use over the 12 weeks. The safety and tolerability profiles of both the treatments were similar.

Conclusion

IND/MF (QMF149) (150/160 µg once daily) offered superior lung function and symptom efficacy and a favorable safety profile compared with Sal/Flu (50/500 µg twice daily) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.

Factors contributing to hospitalization costs for patients with COPD in China: a retrospective analysis of medical record data

Purpose

Hospitalization brings considerable economic pressure on COPD patients in China. A clear understanding of hospitalization costs for patients with COPD is warranted to improve treatment strategies and to control costs. Currently, investigation on factors contributing to hospitalization costs for patients with COPD in China is limited. This study aimed to measure the hospitalization costs of COPD and to determine the contributing factors.

Patients and methods

Medical record data from the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2016 to December 2016 were used for a retrospective analysis. Patients who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of COPD were included. Patient characteristics, medical treatment, and hospitalization costs were analyzed by descriptive statistics and multivariable regression.

Results

Among the 1,943 patients included in this study, 87.85% patients were male; the mean (SD) age was 71.15 (9.79) years; 94.49% patients had comorbidities; and 82.30% patients had health insurance. Regarding medical treatment, the mean (SD) length of stay was 9.38 (7.65) days; 11.12% patients underwent surgery; 87.91% used antibiotics; and 4.53% underwent emergency treatment. For hospitalization costs, the mean (SD) of the total costs per COPD patient per admission was 24,372.75 (44,173.87) CNY (3,669.33 [6,650.38] USD), in which Western medicine fee was the biggest contributor (45.53%) followed by diagnosis fee (27.00%) and comprehensive medical fee (12.04%). Regression found that reimbursement (-0.032; 95% CI -0.046 to 0.007), length of stay (0.738; 95% CI 0.832-0.892), comorbidity (0.044; 95% CI 0.029-0.093), surgery (0.145; 95% CI 0.120-0.170), antibiotic use (0.086; 95% CI 0.060-0.107), and emergency treatment (0.121; 95% CI 0.147-0.219) were significantly (P<0.01) associated with total hospitalization costs.

Conclusion

To control hospitalization costs for COPD patients in China, the significance of comorbidity, length of stay, antibiotic use, surgery, and emergency treatment suggests the importance of controlling the COPD progression and following clinical guidelines for inpatients. Interventions such as examination of pulmonary function for early detection, quality control of medical treatment, and patient education warrant further investigation.

Single-inhaler triple therapy utilizing the once-daily combination of fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium and vilanterol in the management of COPD: the current evidence base and future prospects

Maintenance pharmacological treatment for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on inhaled drugs, including long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA), long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Inhaled pharmacological treatment can improve patients' daily symptoms and reduce decline of pulmonary function and acute exacerbation rate. Treatment with all three inhaled drug classes is reserved for selected, more severe, patients with COPD when symptoms are not sufficiently controlled by dual LABA/LAMA therapy and exacerbations are frequent. This review focuses on the role of single-inhaler triple therapy with once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol fixed-dose combination, which is in phase III clinical development for maintenance treatment of severe-to-very severe COPD. In this review, we summarize evidence providing the rationale for its use in COPD and discuss the gaps to be filled in this pharmacotherapeutic area.

Classification of Exacerbation Frequency in the COPDGene Cohort Using Deep Learning With Deep Belief Networks

This study aims to develop an automatic classifier based on deep learning for exacerbation frequency in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A three-layer deep belief network (DBN) with two hidden layers and one visible layer was employed to develop classification models and the models' robustness to exacerbation was analyzed. Subjects from the COPDGene cohort were labeled with exacerbation frequency, defined as the number of exacerbation events per year. A total of 10 300 subjects with 361 features each were included in the analysis. After feature selection and parameter optimization, the proposed classification method achieved an accuracy of 91.99%, using a ten-fold cross validation experiment. The analysis of DBN weights showed that there was a good visual spatial relationship between the underlying critical features of different layers. Our findings show that the most sensitive features obtained from the DBN weights are consistent with the consensus showed by clinical rules and standards for COPD diagnostics. We, thus, demonstrate that DBN is a competitive tool for exacerbation risk assessment for patients suffering from COPD.

Combination inhaled steroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus tiotropium or combination alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The long-acting bronchodilator tiotropium and single-inhaler combination therapy of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonists (ICS/LABA) are commonly used for maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than administering the individual components.

OBJECTIVES

To assess relative effects of the following treatments on markers of exacerbations, symptoms, quality of life and lung function in patients with COPD.• Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus tiotropium.• Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (April 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) lasting three months or longer conducted to compare ICS and LABA combination therapy in addition to inhaled tiotropium versus tiotropium alone or combination therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed trials for inclusion, then extracted data on trial quality and outcome results. We contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected trial information on adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus tiotropiumWe included six studies (1902 participants) with low risk of bias that compared tiotropium in addition to inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-agonist combination therapy versus tiotropium alone. Investigators found no statistically significant differences in mortality between treatments (odds ratio (OR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 5.91; two studies; 961 participants), a reduction in all-cause hospitalisations with the use of combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.92; two studies; 961 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 19.7, 95% CI 10.75 to 123.41). The effect on exacerbations was heterogeneous among trials and was not meta-analysed. Health-related quality of life measured by St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) showed a statistically significant improvement in total scores with use of tiotropium + LABA/ICS compared with tiotropium alone (mean difference (MD) -3.46, 95% CI -5.05 to -1.87; four studies; 1446 participants). Lung function was significantly different in the combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) group, although average benefit with this therapy was small. None of the included studies included exercise tolerance as an outcome.A pooled estimate of these studies did not show a statistically significant difference in adverse events (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.47; four studies; 1363 participants), serious adverse events (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.30; four studies; 1758 participants) and pneumonia (Peto OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.54 to 4.82; four studies; 1758 participants). Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICSOne of the six studies (60 participants) also compared combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) versus LABA/ICS therapy alone. This study was affected by lack of power; therefore results did not allow us to draw conclusions for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this update, we found new moderate-quality evidence that combined tiotropium + LABA/ICS therapy compared with tiotropium plus placebo decreases hospital admission. Low-quality evidence suggests an improvement in disease-specific quality of life with combined therapy. However, evidence is insufficient to support the benefit of tiotropium + LABA/ICS for mortality and exacerbations (moderate- and low-quality evidence, respectively). Of note, not all participants enrolled in the included studies would be candidates for triple therapy according to current international guidance.Compared with the use of tiotropium plus placebo, tiotropium + LABA/ICS-based therapy does not increase undesirable effects such as adverse events or serious non-fatal adverse events.

Long-acting beta2-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta2-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators, comprising long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and long-acting anti-muscarinic agents (LAMA, principally tiotropium), are commonly used for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of combining tiotropium and LABAs for the treatment of COPD are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative effects on markers of quality of life, exacerbations, symptoms, lung function and serious adverse events in people with COPD randomised to LABA plus tiotropium versus tiotropium alone; or LABA plus tiotropium versus LABA alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and ClinicalTrials.gov up to July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium in addition to LABA against tiotropium or LABA alone for people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 10 trials on 10,894 participants, mostly recruiting participants with moderate or severe COPD. All of the trials compared tiotropium in addition to LABA to tiotropium alone, and four trials additionally compared LAMA plus LABA with LABA alone. Four studies used the LABA olodaterol, three used indacaterol, two used formoterol, and one used salmeterol.Compared to tiotropium alone, treatment with tiotropium plus LABA resulted in a slightly larger improvement in mean health-related quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (mean difference (MD) -1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.87 to -0.80; 6709 participants; 5 studies). The MD was smaller than the four units that is considered clinically important, but a responder analysis indicated that 7% more participants receiving tiotropium plus LABA had a noticeable benefit (greater than four units) from treatment in comparison to tiotropium alone. In the control arm in one study, which was tiotropium alone, the SGRQ improved by falling 4.5 units from baseline and with tiotropium plus LABA the improvement was a fall of a further 1.3 units (on average). Most of the data came from studies using olodaterol. High withdrawal rates in the trials increased the uncertainty in this result, and the GRADE assessment for this outcome was therefore moderate. There were no significant differences in the other primary outcomes (hospital admission or mortality).The secondary outcome of pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) showed a small mean increase with the addition of LABA over the control arm (MD 0.06, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.07; 9573 participants; 10 studies), which showed a change from baseline ranging from 0.03 L to 0.13 L with tiotropium alone. None of the other secondary outcomes (exacerbations, symptom scores, serious adverse events, and withdrawals) showed any statistically significant differences between the groups. There was moderate heterogeneity for both exacerbations and withdrawals.This review included data on four LABAs: two administered twice daily (salmeterol, formoterol) and two once daily (indacaterol, olodaterol). The results were largely from studies of olodaterol and there was insufficient information to assess whether the other LABAs were equivalent to olodaterol or each other.Comparing LABA plus tiotropium treatment with LABA alone, there was a small but significant improvement in SGRQ (MD -1.25, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.37; 3378 participants; 4 studies). The data came mostly from studies using olodaterol and, although the difference was smaller than four units, this still represented an increase of 10 people with a clinically important improvement for 100 treated. There was also an improvement in FEV1 (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.09; 3513 participants; 4 studies), and in addition an improvement in exacerbation rates (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93; 3514 participants; 3 studies).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results from this review indicated a small mean improvement in health-related quality of life and FEV1 for participants on a combination of tiotropium and LABA compared to either agent alone, and this translated into a small increase in the number of responders on combination treatment. In addition, adding tiotropium to LABA reduced exacerbations, although adding LABA to tiotropium did not. Hospital admission and mortality were not altered by adding LABA to tiotropium, although there may not be enough data. While it is possible that this is affected by higher attrition in the tiotropium group, one would expect that participants withdrawn from the study would have had less favourable outcomes; this means that the expected direction of attrition bias would be to reduce the estimated benefit of the combination treatment. The results were largely from studies of olodaterol and there was insufficient information to assess whether the other LABAs were equivalent to olodaterol or each other.

Systematic review of humanistic and economic burden of symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

An understanding of the humanistic and economic burden of individuals with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is required to inform payers and healthcare professionals about the disease burden.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to identify and present humanistic [health-related quality of life (HRQoL)] and economic burdens of symptomatic COPD.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of online databases (reimbursement or claims databases/other databases), abstracts from conference proceedings, published literature, clinical trials, medical records, health ministries, financial reports, registries, and other sources was conducted. Adult patients of any race or gender with symptomatic COPD were included. Humanistic and economic burdens included studies evaluating HRQoL and cost and resource use, respectively, associated with symptomatic COPD.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies reporting humanistic burden and 74 economic studies were identified. Symptomatic COPD led to impairment in the health state of patients, as assessed by HRQoL instruments. It was also associated with high economic burden across all countries. The overall, direct, and indirect costs per patient increased with an increase in symptoms, dyspnoea severity, and duration of disease. Across countries, the annual societal costs associated with symptomatic COPD were higher among patients with comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic COPD is associated with a substantial economic burden. The HRQoL of patients with symptomatic COPD is, in general, low and influenced by dyspnoea.

Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.2.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) -2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.35 to -2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one-year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The trials included in this review showed a difference in the risk of mortality when compared with placebo depending on the type of tiotropium delivery device used. However, these results have not been confirmed in a recent trial when 2.5 mcg or 5 mcg of tiotropium via Respimat was used in a direct comparison to the 18 mcg Handihaler.

Long-acting inhaled therapy (beta-agonists, anticholinergics and steroids) for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving quality of life and preventing or treating exacerbations.Treatment tends to begin with one inhaler, and additional therapies are introduced as necessary. For persistent or worsening symptoms, long-acting inhaled therapies taken once or twice daily are preferred over short-acting inhalers. Several Cochrane reviews have looked at the risks and benefits of specific long-acting inhaled therapies compared with placebo or other treatments. However for patients and clinicians, it is important to understand the merits of these treatments relative to each other, and whether a particular class of inhaled therapies is more beneficial than the others.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of treatment options for patients whose chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cannot be controlled by short-acting therapies alone. The review will not look at combination therapies usually considered later in the course of the disease.As part of this network meta-analysis, we will address the following issues.1. How does long-term efficacy compare between different pharmacological treatments for COPD?2. Are there limitations in the current evidence base that may compromise the conclusions drawn by this network meta-analysis? If so, what are the implications for future research?

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in existing Cochrane reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). In addition, we ran a comprehensive citation search on the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials (CAGR) and checked manufacturer websites and reference lists of other reviews. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group RCTs of at least 6 months' duration recruiting people with COPD. Studies were included if they compared any of the following treatments versus any other: long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs; formoterol, indacaterol, salmeterol); long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium); inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs; budesonide, fluticasone, mometasone); combination long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) (formoterol/budesonide, formoterol/mometasone, salmeterol/fluticasone); and placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a network meta-analysis using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for two efficacy outcomes: St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). We modelled the relative effectiveness of any two treatments as a function of each treatment relative to the reference treatment (placebo). We assumed that treatment effects were similar within treatment classes (LAMA, LABA, ICS, LABA/ICS). We present estimates of class effects, variability between treatments within each class and individual treatment effects compared with every other.To justify the analyses, we assessed the trials for clinical and methodological transitivity across comparisons. We tested the robustness of our analyses by performing sensitivity analyses for lack of blinding and by considering six- and 12-month data separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 71 RCTs randomly assigning 73,062 people with COPD to 184 treatment arms of interest. Trials were similar with regards to methodology, inclusion and exclusion criteria and key baseline characteristics. Participants were more often male, aged in their mid sixties, with FEV1 predicted normal between 40% and 50% and with substantial smoking histories (40+ pack-years). The risk of bias was generally low, although missing information made it hard to judge risk of selection bias and selective outcome reporting. Fixed effects were used for SGRQ analyses, and random effects for Trough FEV1 analyses, based on model fit statistics and deviance information criteria (DIC). SGRQ SGRQ data were available in 42 studies (n = 54,613). At six months, 39 pairwise comparisons were made between 18 treatments in 25 studies (n = 27,024). Combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked intervention, with a mean improvement over placebo of -3.89 units at six months (95% credible interval (CrI) -4.70 to -2.97) and -3.60 at 12 months (95% CrI -4.63 to -2.34). LAMAs and LABAs were ranked second and third at six months, with mean differences of -2.63 (95% CrI -3.53 to -1.97) and -2.29 (95% CrI -3.18 to -1.53), respectively. Inhaled corticosteroids were ranked fourth (MD -2.00, 95% CrI -3.06 to -0.87). Class differences between LABA, LAMA and ICS were less prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and aclidinium were ranked somewhat higher than other members of their classes, and formoterol 12 mcg, budesonide 400 mcg and formoterol/mometasone combination were ranked lower within their classes. There was considerable overlap in credible intervals and rankings for both classes and individual treatments. Trough FEV1 Trough FEV1 data were available in 46 studies (n = 47,409). At six months, 41 pairwise comparisons were made between 20 treatments in 31 studies (n = 29,271). As for SGRQ, combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked class, with a mean improvement over placebo of 133.3 mL at six months (95% CrI 100.6 to 164.0) and slightly less at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 100, 95% CrI 55.5 to 140.1). LAMAs (MD 103.5, 95% CrI 81.8 to 124.9) and LABAs (MD 99.4, 95% CrI 72.0 to 127.8) showed roughly equivalent results at six months, and ICSs were the fourth ranked class (MD 65.4, 95% CrI 33.1 to 96.9). As with SGRQ, initial differences between classes were not so prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and salmeterol/fluticasone were ranked slightly better than others in their class, and formoterol 12, aclidinium, budesonide and formoterol/budesonide combination were ranked lower within their classes. All credible intervals for individual rankings were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis compares four different classes of long-acting inhalers for people with COPD who need more than short-acting bronchodilators. Quality of life and lung function were improved most on combination inhalers (LABA and ICS) and least on ICS alone at 6 and at 12 months. Overall LAMA and LABA inhalers had similar effects, particularly at 12 months. The network has demonstrated the benefit of ICS when added to LABA for these outcomes in participants who largely had an FEV1 that was less than 50% predicted, but the additional expense of combination inhalers and any potential for increased adverse events (which has been established by other reviews) require consideration. Our findings are in keeping with current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

Long-acting beta2-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory disease that causes progressive symptoms of breathlessness, cough and mucus build-up. It is the fourth or fifth most common cause of death worldwide and is associated with significant healthcare costs.Inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) are widely prescribed to manage the symptoms of COPD when short-acting agents alone are no longer sufficient. Twice-daily treatment with an inhaled LABA is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving exercise tolerance and quality of life, slowing decline and even improving lung function and preventing and treating exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of twice-daily long-acting beta2-agonists compared with placebo for patients with COPD on the basis of clinically important endpoints, primarily quality of life and COPD exacerbations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites in June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting populations of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Studies were required to be at least 12 weeks in duration and designed to assess the safety and efficacy of a long-acting beta2-agonist against placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data and characteristics were extracted independently by two review authors, and each study was assessed for potential sources of bias. Data for all outcomes were pooled and subgrouped by LABA agent (formoterol 12 μg, formoterol 24 μg and salmeterol 50 μg) and then were separately analysed by LABA agent and subgrouped by trial duration. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for the proportion of participants taking inhaled corticosteroids and for studies with high or uneven rates of attrition.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs met the inclusion criteria, randomly assigning 14,939 people with COPD to receive twice-daily LABA or placebo. Study duration ranged from three months to three years; the median duration was six months. Participants were more often male with moderate to severe symptoms at randomisation; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was between 33% and 55% predicted normal in the studies, and mean St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ) ranged from 44 to 55 when reported.Moderate-quality evidence showed that LABA treatment improved quality of life on the SGRQ (mean difference (MD) -2.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.09 to -1.54; I(2) = 50%; 17 trials including 11,397 people) and reduced the number of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation (odds ratio (OR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; I(2) = 10%; seven trials including 3804 people). In absolute terms, 18 fewer people per 1000 were hospitalised as the result of an exacerbation while receiving LABA therapy over a weighted mean of 7 months (95% CI 3 to 31 fewer). Scores were also improved on the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), and more people receiving LABA treatment showed clinically important improvement of at least four points on the SGRQ.The number of people who had exacerbations requiring a course of oral steroids or antibiotics was also lower among those taking LABA (52 fewer per 1000 treated over 8 months; 95% CI 24 to 78 fewer, moderate quality evidence).Mortality was low, and combined findings of all studies showed that LABA therapy did not significantly affect mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.08; I(2) = 21%; 23 trials including 14,079 people, moderate quality evidence). LABA therapy did not affect the rate of serious adverse events (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; I(2) = 34%, moderate quality evidence), although there was significant unexplained heterogeneity, especially between the two formoterol doses.LABA therapy improved predose FEV1 by 73 mL more than placebo (95% CI 48 to 98; I(2) = 71%, low quality evidence), and people were more likely to withdraw from placebo than from LABA therapy (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; I(2) = 0%). Higher rates of withdrawal in the placebo arm may reduce our confidence in some results, but the disparity is more likely to reduce the magnitude of difference between LABA and placebo than inflate the true effect; removing studies at highest risk of bias on the basis of high and unbalanced attrition did not change conclusions for the primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence from 26 studies showed that inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists are effective over the medium and long term for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Their use is associated with improved quality of life and reduced exacerbations, including those requiring hospitalisation. Overall, findings showed that inhaled LABAs did not significantly reduce mortality or serious adverse events.

Mosaic segmentation, COPD and CHF multimorbidity and hospital admission costs: a clinical linkage study

BACKGROUND

How multimorbidity and socio-economic factors influence healthcare costs is unknown. Geo-demographic profiling system, Mosaic, which adds to socio-economic factors, provides the potential for an investigation of the relationship with multimorbidity, and their influence on healthcare costs.

METHODS

Using chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) registers from 53 general practices for a population aged 40 years and over in Stoke-on-Trent, England (N = 10,113), were linked to hospital admissions data and Healthcare Resource Groups as a measure of hospital cost (2007-09). Eleven Mosaic groups were linked on the basis of individual patients' post codes.

RESULTS

The COPD and CHF multimorbid group (n = 763) had the highest proportion with at least one hospital admission in the 3-year time period (n = 550, 72%), compared with the index COPD (56%) and CHF (66%) groups. Multimorbid patients had significantly higher mean costs for hospital admission (£4896) compared with the index COPD (£2769) or CHF (£3876). The associations between multimorbid groups and hospital admission costs compared with index groups varied by different Mosaic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

CHF and COPD multimorbidity is associated with high costs, and average hospital admission costs vary by Mosaic segmentation. Multimorbidity and Mosaic provide an innovative basis for developing and targeting healthcare interventions in high-hospital-cost patients.

Heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the challenges facing physicians and health services

Pulmonary disease is common in patients with heart failure, through shared risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms. Adverse pulmonary vascular remodelling and chronic systemic inflammation characterize both diseases. Concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease presents diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The cornerstones of therapy are beta-blockers and beta-agonists, whose pharmacological properties are diametrically opposed. Each disease is implicated in exacerbations of the other condition, greatly increasing hospitalizations and associated health care costs. Such multimorbidity is a key challenge for health-care systems oriented towards the treatment of individual diseases. Early identification and treatment of cardiopulmonary disease may alleviate this burden. However, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies require further validation in patients with both conditions.

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.

Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 μg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 μg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) -2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.35 to -2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one-year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The review however, shows that tiotropium delivered via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality compared with placebo, which calls for caution with this device whilst awaiting the results of an ongoing head-to-head trial comparing tiotropium delivery devices and doses.

Long-acting beta(2)-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators comprising long-acting beta(2)-agonists and the anticholinergic agent tiotropium are commonly used for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of combining tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary (COPD) disease are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects of treatment with tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and clinicaltrials.gov up to January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist against tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials were included in this review, mostly recruiting participants with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. All of them compared tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist to tiotropium alone, but only one trial additionally compared a combination of the two types of bronchodilator with long-acting beta(2)-agonist (formoterol) alone. Two studies used the long-acting beta(2)-agonist indacaterol, two used formoterol and one used salmeterol.Compared to tiotropium alone (3263 patients), treatment with tiotropium plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist resulted in a slightly larger improvement in the mean health-related quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -1.61; 95% CI -2.93 to -0.29). In the control arm, tiotropium alone, the SGRQ improved by falling 4.5 units from baseline and with both treatments the improvement was a fall of 6.1 units from baseline (on average). High withdrawal rates in the trials increased the uncertainty in this result, and the GRADE assessment for this outcome was therefore moderate. There were no significant differences in the other primary outcomes (hospital admission or mortality).The secondary outcome of pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) showed a small mean increase with the addition of long-acting beta(2)-agonist (MD 0.07 L; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.09) over the control arm, which showed a change from baseline ranging from 0.03 L to 0.13 L on tiotropium alone. None of the other secondary outcomes (exacerbations, symptom scores, serious adverse events, and withdrawals) showed any statistically significant differences between the groups. There were wide confidence intervals around these outcomes and moderate heterogeneity for both exacerbations and withdrawals.The results from the one trial comparing the combination of tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonist to long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone (417 participants) were insufficient to draw firm conclusions for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results from this review indicate a small mean improvement in health-related quality of life for patients on a combination of tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to tiotropium alone, but it is not clear how clinically important this mean difference may be. Hospital admission and mortality have not been shown to be altered by adding long-acting beta(2)-agonists to tiotropium. There were not enough data to determine the relative efficacy and safety of tiotropium plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone. There were insufficient data to make comparisons between the different long-acting beta(2)-agonists when used in addition to tiotropium.

Acute exacerbations of COPD in the United States: inpatient burden and predictors of costs and mortality

Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are a leading cause of hospitalizations in the United States and the major cost driver of COPD. This study determined the national inpatient burden of AECOPD and assessed the association of co-morbidities and hospital characteristics with inpatient costs and mortality. Discharge records from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample for 2006 was utilized. Outcomes of costs and mortality were assessed for AECOPD hospitalizations in cases ≥40 years of age. Multivariate regression analyses using a generalized linear model framework were conducted to determine predictors of inpatient costs and mortality controlling for patient demographics, primary payer, co-morbidity index, length of stay, hospital region, mechanical ventilation, and admission period. Overall, 1,254,703 hospitalizations for AECOPD were observed with mean costs of $9545(±12,700) and total costs of $11.9 billion. In-hospital mortality was 4.3% (N = 53,748). Discharges averaged 70.6 (±11.9) years of age. The majority were female (52.8%) and of white race (83.6% of reported race). Several co-morbidities were significantly associated with both costs and mortality (p < 0.001): acute myocardial infarction; congestive heart failure; cerebrovascular disease; lung cancer; cardiac arrhythmias; pulmonary circulation disorders; and weight loss. Significantly higher costs (p < 0.001) were associated with large and urban hospitals. The importance of co-morbidities in AECOPD is indicated in their association with prognosis and inpatient costs. Future research should determine if better management of these conditions can favorably impact the COPD disease burden.

The economic burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the elderly: results from a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a high prevalence condition with a significant clinical and economic burden. In elderly people, COPD is often associated with other chronic comorbidities (i.e. cardiovascular diseases), determining clinical complications and requiring frequent acute healthcare interventions. The aim of this article is to review the economic studies evaluating costs and healthcare resource utilization in elderly (≥ 65 years) COPD patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sixteen of the initial 359 articles retrieved through our research strategy were found to include relevant cost information on elderly COPD patients or to evaluate the effect of older age on healthcare expenditure. Most studies were carried out in the United States and used administrative database claims to determine resource consumption and direct costs (attributable and not). Very few studies focused exclusively on elderly patients.

SUMMARY

Results showed a certain variability of cost estimations, mainly due to the different methodologies and adopted cost approach. However, we found a trend of direct cost growth in the elderly population, which can be explained by a more frequent use of acute healthcare services, especially for managing COPD exacerbations. These results cannot be considered definitive and new studies, targeting elderly people, are required in order to confirm these preliminary findings.

The effect of adding inhaled corticosteroids to tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators comprising long-acting beta(2)-agonists and the anticholinergic agent tiotropium are commonly used, either on their own or in combination, for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who are symptomatic and who suffer repeated exacerbations are recommended to add inhaled corticosteroids to their bronchodilator treatment. However, the benefits and risks of adding inhaled corticosteroid to tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects of adding inhaled corticosteroids to tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (February 2011) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer comparing inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist combination therapy in addition to inhaled tiotropium against tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonist treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial (293 patients) was identified comparing tiotropium in addition to inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist combination therapy to tiotropium plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist. The study was of good methodological quality, however it suffered from high and uneven withdrawal rates between the treatment arms. There is currently insufficient evidence to know how much difference the addition of inhaled corticosteroids makes to people who are taking tiotropium and a long-acting beta(2)-agonist for COPD.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The relative efficacy and safety of adding inhaled corticosteroid to tiotropium and a long-acting beta(2)-agonist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients remains uncertain and additional trials are required to answer this question.

Combination inhaled steroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus tiotropium or combination alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The long-acting bronchodilator tiotropium and single inhaler combination therapy of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists are both commonly used for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of using tiotropium and combination therapy together for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist combination therapy in addition to tiotropium compared to tiotropium or combination therapy alone in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (July 2010) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer, comparing inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonists combination therapy in addition to inhaled tiotropium against tiotropium alone or combination therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials (1021 patients) were included comparing tiotropium in addition to inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist combination therapy to tiotropium alone. The duration, type of combination treatment and definition of outcomes varied. The limited data led to wide confidence intervals and there was no significant statistical difference in mortality, participants with one or more hospitalisations, episodes of pneumonia or adverse events. The results on exacerbations were heterogeneous and were not combined. The mean health-related quality of life and lung function were significantly different when combination therapy was added to tiotropium, although the size of the average benefits of additional combination therapy were small, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (MD -2.49; 95% CI -4.04 to -0.94) and forced expiratory volume in one second (MD 0.06 L; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.08).One trial (60 patients) compared tiotropium plus combination therapy to combination therapy alone. The results from the trial were insufficient to draw firm conclusions for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

To date there is uncertainty regarding the long-term benefits and risks of treatment with tiotropium in addition to inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist combination therapy on mortality, hospitalisation, exacerbations of COPD and pneumonia. The addition of combination treatment to tiotropium has shown improvements in average health-related quality of life and lung function.