Statistical treatment of exacerbations in therapeutic trials of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Effect of high-dose N-acetylcysteine on exacerbations and lung function in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD: a double-blind, parallel group, multicentre randomised clinical trial

Evidence for the treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. The efficacy of N-acetylcysteine (an antioxidant and mucolytic agent) for patients with mild-to-moderate COPD is uncertain. In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 968 patients with mild-to-moderate COPD to treatment with N-acetylcysteine (600 mg, twice daily) or matched placebo for two years. Eligible participants were 40-80 years of age and had mild-to-moderate COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] to forced vital capacity ratio <0.70 and an FEV1 ≥ 50% predicted value after bronchodilator use). The coprimary outcomes were the annual rate of total exacerbations and the between-group difference in the change from baseline to 24 months in FEV1 before bronchodilator use. COPD exacerbation was defined as the appearance or worsening of at least two major symptoms (cough, expectoration, purulent sputum, wheezing, or dyspnoea) persisting for at least 48 hours. Assessment of exacerbations was conducted every three months, and lung function was performed annually after enrolment. The difference between the N-acetylcysteine group and the placebo group in the annual rate of total exacerbation were not significant (0.65 vs. 0.72 per patient-year; relative risk [RR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-1.02; P = 0.10). There was no significant difference in FEV1 before bronchodilator use at 24 months. Long-term treatment with high-dose N-acetylcysteine neither significantly reduced the annual rate of total exacerbations nor improved lung function in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD. Chinese Clinical Trial Registration: ChiCTR-IIR-17012604.

Clinical features and 1-year outcomes of variable obstruction in participants with preserved spirometry: results from the ECOPD study in China

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the clinical features and longitudinal prognosis of variable obstruction, particularly among never smokers and different variable obstruction types. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics of the participants with variable obstruction and determine the relationship between variable obstruction and the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and the decline of lung function in a community-dwelling study of Chinese, especially among never smokers and different variable obstruction subtypes.

METHODS

Participants with preserved spirometry (postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ≥0.70) at baseline from the Early COPD cohort were included in our analysis. Participants with variable obstruction (prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70) were compared with those without variable obstruction (prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC ≥0.70). We performed subgroup analyses in never smokers, former and current smokers, and different variable obstruction types (postbronchodilator FVC

RESULTS

The final analysis included 1140 participants with preserved spirometry (169 in the variable obstruction group) at baseline. Participants with variable obstruction were older, had lower lung function and had greater severe emphysema and computed tomography-defined air trapping than participants without variable obstruction. Participants with variable obstruction had a significantly increased risk of incident spirometry-defined COPD (relative risk: 3.22, 95% confidence interval 2.23 to 4.64, p <0.001) than those without variable obstruction after adjustment for covariates. These findings remained consistent among both former and current smokers, never smokers, and different variable obstruction types. Additionally, participants with variable obstruction had a faster decline in postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC (2.3±0.5%/year vs 0.9±0.4%/year, mean difference: 1.4 (95% confidence interval 0.5 to 2.3), p=0.002) than participants without variable obstruction after adjustment for covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study revealed that variable obstruction can identify individuals who are at risk for the development of COPD and accelerated postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC decline in preserved spirometry.

Collapse

Key Words

• COPD epidemiology
• Respiratory Function Test

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Humans
• Male
• Spirometry
• Female
• Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/physiopathology
• Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology
• Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis
• Middle Aged
• China/epidemiology
• Aged
• Forced Expiratory Volume
• Vital Capacity
• Smoking/epidemiology
• Smoking/adverse effects
• Lung/physiopathology
• Prognosis

Collapse

Grants

• the Local Innovative and Research Teams Project of Guangdong Pearl River Talents Programme
• the National Key Research and Development Programme

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Fan Wu State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Haiqing Li State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Zhishan Deng State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Huajing Yang State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Youlan Zheng State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Ningning Zhao State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Cuiqiong Dai State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Jieqi Peng State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Lifei Lu State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Zihui Wang State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Xiang Wen State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Shan Xiao State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Kunning Zhou State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Xiaohui Wu State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Gaoying Tang State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Qi Wan State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Ruiting Sun State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Jiangyu Cui State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Changli Yang Wengyuan County People's Hospital, Shaoguan, Guangdong, China
Shengtang Chen Wengyuan County People's Hospital, Shaoguan, Guangdong, China
Jianhui Huang Lianping County People's Hospital, Heyuan, Guangdong, China
Shuqing Yu Lianping County People's Hospital, Heyuan, Guangdong, China
Yumin Zhou State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Pixin Ran State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease & National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease & National Center for Respiratory Medicine & Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China Guangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

Collapse

Collaborators Collapse

Effects of Adherence to an mHealth Tool for Self-Management of COPD Exacerbations

Purpose

Poor adherence to COPD mobile health (mHealth) has been reported, but its association with exacerbation-related outcomes is unknown. We explored the effects of mHealth adherence on exacerbation-free weeks and self-management behavior. We also explored differences in self-efficacy and stages of grief between adherent and non-adherent COPD patients.

Patients and Methods

We conducted secondary analyses using data from a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared the effects of mHealth (intervention) with a paper action plan (comparator) for COPD exacerbation self-management. We used data from the intervention group only to assess differences in exacerbation-free weeks (primary outcome) between patients who were adherent and non-adherent to the mHealth tool. We also assessed differences in the type and timing of self-management actions and scores on self-efficacy and stages of grief (secondary outcomes). We used generalized negative binomial regression analyses with correction for follow-up length to analyze exacerbation-free weeks and multilevel logistic regression analyses with correction for clustering for secondary outcomes.

Results

We included data of 38 patients of whom 13 (34.2%) (mean (SD) age 69.2 (11.2) years) were adherent and 25 (65.8%) (mean (SD) age 68.7 (7.8) years) were non-adherent. Adherent patients did not differ from non-adherent patients in exacerbation-free weeks (mean (SD) 31.5 (14.5) versus 33.5 (10.2); p=0.63). Although statistically not significant, adherent patients increased their bronchodilator use more often and more timely, contacted a healthcare professional and/or initiated prednisolone and/or antibiotics more often, and showed at baseline higher scores of self-efficacy and disease acceptance and lower scores of denial, resistance, and sorrow, compared with non-adherent patients.

Conclusion

Adherence to mHealth may be positively associated with COPD exacerbation self-management behavior, self-efficacy and disease acceptance, but its association with exacerbation-free weeks remains unclear. Our results should be interpreted with caution by this pilot study's explorative nature and small sample size.

Ten Commandments for Randomized Trials of Pharmacological Therapy for COPD and Other Lung Diseases

The randomized controlled trial is the quintessential scientific tool to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medications. While early trials of drugs used for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and other respiratory diseases were generally unambiguous, more recent studies have been controversial. It has become evident that the conduct, design and analysis of these trials were highly variable and may have been responsible for incoherencies in results and interpretation. With the advent of new studies, the need for guiding principles for the conduct of future randomized trials has become manifest. We describe the concept of the counterfactual principle as it applies to the treatment of patients and to the randomized trial. We then present ten methodological tenets for the design and statistical aspects of randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of drugs used in the treatment of several respiratory diseases. They include eight study design and two statistical analysis principles: 1) Study question; 2) Intervention; 3) Study population; 4) Blinding; 5) Run-in period; 6) Follow-up; 7) Outcome; 8) Safety; 9) Intent-to-treat; 10) Covariate adjustment. These tenets are described using mainly examples from trials of pharmacological treatments for COPD, as well as some from asthma and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, conducted over the last 30 years. The careful application of these principles in the conduct of randomized trials will provide rigorous studies and improve the validity of results. The ensuing clearer interpretation of findings will permit their well-founded contribution to treatment guidelines and optimal clinical management.

Assessment of Poor Inhaler Technique in Older Patients with Asthma or COPD: A Predictive Tool for Clinical Risk and Inhaler Performance

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Older patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are particularly susceptible to inhaler technique errors and poor clinical outcomes. Several factors may influence their risk, but most studies are inconsistent and contradictory. We developed a tool for the major predictors of individual risk in these patients.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

In this multicentre, cross-sectional study, several demographic, socioeconomic and clinical characteristics were collected as potential predictors. Clinical features and inhaler technique performance were the main outcomes. Linear and logistic regression models were set up to identify significant variables. Subgroup analysis was performed according to age, cognitive performance and different types of inhalers.

RESULTS

We included 130 participants, mean age of 74.4 (± 6.4) years. Mean years of device use were 5.8 (± 7.3). Inhaler errors affected 71.6% (95% CI 64-78.5) and critical mistakes 31.1% (95% CI 24-38.8). There were respiratory comorbidities in 82.3% of participants, and 56.2% had moderate to severe disease. A predictive score of misuse probability was developed for clinical practice, including points attributable to cognitive score, adherence and having received previous education on a placebo device. Other significant variables of individual risk were having respiratory allergies or comorbidities, smoking status, depression and educational level. Worse performance was detected in cognitively impaired patients older than 75 years who were using dry powder inhalers (DPI). Lung function was associated with smoking load, incorrect dose activation and absent end pause after inhalation.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual risk assessment in older individuals should focus on inhaler technique performance (mainly on dose activation and end pause) and adherence, smoking, respiratory comorbidities and cognitive impairment. Placebo device training provided by doctors seems to best suit these patients.

Decline of COPD exacerbations in clinical trials over two decades - a systematic review and meta-regression

Background

An important goal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment is to reduce the frequency of exacerbations. Some observations suggest a decline in exacerbation rates in clinical trials over time. A more systematic understanding would help to improve the design and interpretation of COPD trials.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-regression of the placebo groups in published randomized controlled trials reporting exacerbations as an outcome. A Bayesian negative binomial model was developed to accommodate results that are reported in different formats; results are reported with credible intervals (CI) and posterior tail probabilities (p_B).

Results

Of 1114 studies identified by our search, 55 were ultimately included. Exacerbation rates decreased by 6.7% (95% CI (4.4, 9.0); p_B <  0.001) per year, or 50% (95% CI (36, 61)) per decade. Adjusting for available study and baseline characteristics such as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) did not alter the observed trend considerably. Two subsets of studies, one using a true placebo group and the other allowing inhaled corticosteroids in the “placebo” group, also yielded consistent results.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this meta-regression indicates that the rate of COPD exacerbations decreased over the past two decades to a clinically relevant extent independent of important prognostic factors. This suggests that care is needed in the design of new trials or when comparing results from older trials with more recent ones. Also a considerable effect of adjunct therapy on COPD exacerbations can be assumed.

Registration

PROSPERO 2018 CRD4218118823.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-019-1163-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

New therapeutic targets for the prevention of infectious acute exacerbations of COPD: role of epithelial adhesion molecules and inflammatory pathways

Chronic respiratory diseases are among the leading causes of mortality worldwide, with the major contributor, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) accounting for approximately 3 million deaths annually. Frequent acute exacerbations (AEs) of COPD (AECOPD) drive clinical and functional decline in COPD and are associated with accelerated loss of lung function, increased mortality, decreased health-related quality of life and significant economic costs. Infections with a small subgroup of pathogens precipitate the majority of AEs and consequently constitute a significant comorbidity in COPD. However, current pharmacological interventions are ineffective in preventing infectious exacerbations and their treatment is compromised by the rapid development of antibiotic resistance. Thus, alternative preventative therapies need to be considered. Pathogen adherence to the pulmonary epithelium through host receptors is the prerequisite step for invasion and subsequent infection of surrounding structures. Thus, disruption of bacterial-host cell interactions with receptor antagonists or modulation of the ensuing inflammatory profile present attractive avenues for therapeutic development. This review explores key mediators of pathogen-host interactions that may offer new therapeutic targets with the potential to prevent viral/bacterial-mediated AECOPD. There are several conceptual and methodological hurdles hampering the development of new therapies that require further research and resolution.

Inhaler technique education in elderly patients with asthma or COPD: impact on disease exacerbations-a protocol for a single-blinded randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)and asthma affect more than 10% of the population. Most patients use their inhaler incorrectly, mainly the elderly, thereby becoming more susceptible to poor clinical control and exacerbations. Placebo device training is regarded as one of the best teaching methods, but there is scarce evidence to support it as the most effective one to improve major clinical outcomes. Our objective is to perform a single-blinded RCT to assess the impact of this education tool in these patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A multicentre single-blinded Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) will be set up, comparing an inhaler education programme with a teach-to-goal placebo-device training versus usual care, with a 1-year follow-up, in patients above 65 years of age with asthma or COPD. Intervention will be provided at baseline, and after 3 and 6 months, with interim analysis at an intermediate time point. Exacerbation rates were set as primary outcomes, and quality of life, adherence rates, clinical control and respiratory function were chosen as secondary outcomes. A sample size of 146 participants (73 in each arm) was estimated as adequate to detect a 50% reduction in event rates. Two-sample proportions χ² test will be used to study primary outcome and subgroup analysis will be carried out according to major baseline characteristics.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Every participant will sign a written consent form. A Data Safety Monitoring Board will be set up to evaluate data throughout the study and to monitor early stopping criteria. Identity of all participants will be protected. This protocol was approved on 22 November 2017 by the local Ethics Committee of University of Beira Interior, with the reference number CE-UBI-Pj-2017-025. Results will be presented in scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03449316; Pre-Results.

Observational Studies of Inhaled Corticosteroid Effectiveness in COPD: Lessons Learned

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials at times investigate findings suggested by observational studies. For example, the Towards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) trial, which did not show a mortality reduction with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in COPD, was motivated by some observational studies that suggested considerable reductions in mortality with these drugs. Reasons for these discrepancies are unclear.

METHODS

The literature was searched to identify all observational studies, including cohort and case-control studies, investigating the effectiveness of ICS on major outcomes in patients with COPD; these outcomes included death and hospitalization for COPD.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were identified. Nine studies were affected by immortal time bias, five by immeasurable time bias, and seven by the "asthma factor" bias; some studies were affected by more than one bias. These studies found important reductions in the rates of major COPD outcomes with ICS use, with pooled rate ratios of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.67-0.76), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70-0.83), and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.87), respectively, for the three sources of bias. In contrast, the five studies unaffected by these major biases did not find an association (pooled rate ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.88-1.17]).

CONCLUSIONS

Observational studies are important to provide evidence from real-world data on medication effects. However, appropriate study design and analysis are essential to avoid biases and ensure randomized trials with greater chances of success. The observational studies suggesting potential beneficial effects of nonrespiratory drugs to treat COPD, such as statins and beta-blockers, will also need careful review before long and expensive randomized trials are conducted.

Reduced COPD Exacerbation Risk Correlates With Improved FEV1: A Meta-Regression Analysis

BACKGROUND

The mechanism by which various classes of medication reduce COPD exacerbation risk remains unknown. We hypothesized a correlation between reduced exacerbation risk and improvement in airway patency as measured according to FEV1.

METHODS

By systematic review, COPD trials were identified that reported therapeutic changes in predose FEV1 (dFEV1) and occurrence of moderate to severe exacerbations. Using meta-regression analysis, a model was generated with dFEV1 as the moderator variable and the absolute difference in exacerbation rate (RD), ratio of exacerbation rates (RRs), or hazard ratio (HR) as dependent variables.

RESULTS

The analysis of RD and RR included 119,227 patients, and the HR analysis included 73,475 patients. For every 100-mL change in predose FEV1, the HR decreased by 21% (95% CI, 17-26; P < .001; R2 = 0.85) and the absolute exacerbation rate decreased by 0.06 per patient per year (95% CI, 0.02-0.11; P = .009; R2 = 0.05), which corresponded to an RR of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.81-0.91; P < .001; R2 = 0.20). The relationship with exacerbation risk remained statistically significant across multiple subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant correlation between increased FEV1 and lower COPD exacerbation risk suggests that airway patency is an important mechanism responsible for this effect.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists vs. long-acting β 2 agonists in COPD exacerbations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) provide superior therapeutic effects over long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) for preventing COPD exacerbations.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials involving patients with stable, moderate to severe COPD according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease criteria, treated with a LAMA (i.e., tiotropium bromide, aclidinium, or glycopyrronium), followed for at least 12 weeks and compared with controls using a LABA in isolation or in combination with a corticosteroid.

RESULTS

A total of 2,622 studies were analyzed for possible inclusion on the basis of their title and abstract; 9 studies (17,120 participants) were included in the analysis. In comparison with LABAs, LAMAs led to a greater decrease in the exacerbation rate ratio (relative risk [RR] = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.84-0.93]; a lower proportion of patients who experienced at least one exacerbation (RR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.87-0.94; p < 0.00001); a lower risk of exacerbation-related hospitalizations (RR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.69-0.87; p < 0.0001); and a lower number of serious adverse events (RR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67-0.96; p = 0.0002). The overall quality of evidence was moderate for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The major findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis were that LAMAs significantly reduced the exacerbation rate (exacerbation episodes/year), as well as the number of exacerbation episodes, of hospitalizations, and of serious adverse events.

Misspecification of at-risk periods and distributional assumptions in estimating COPD exacerbation rates: The resultant bias in treatment effect estimation

In trials comparing the rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation between treatment arms, the rate is typically calculated on the basis of the whole of each patient's follow-up period. However, the true time a patient is at risk should exclude periods in which an exacerbation episode is occurring, because a patient cannot be at risk of another exacerbation episode until recovered. We used data from two chronic obstructive pulmonary disease randomized controlled trials and compared treatment effect estimates and confidence intervals when using two different definitions of the at-risk period. Using a simulation study we examined the bias in the estimated treatment effect and the coverage of the confidence interval, using these two definitions of the at-risk period. We investigated how the sample size required for a given power changes on the basis of the definition of at-risk period used. Our results showed that treatment efficacy is underestimated when the at-risk period does not take account of exacerbation duration, and the power to detect a statistically significant result is slightly diminished. Correspondingly, using the correct at-risk period, some modest savings in required sample size can be achieved. Using the proposed at-risk period that excludes recovery times requires formal definitions of the beginning and end of an exacerbation episode, and we recommend these be always predefined in a trial protocol.

Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Risk of Pneumonia: A Nested Case-Control Population-based Study in Lazio (Italy)-The OUTPUL Study

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients is associated with a reduction of exacerbations and a potential risk of pneumonia. The objective was to determine if ICS use, with or without long-acting β₂-agonist, increases pneumonia risk in COPD patients. A cohort study was performed using linked hospital and drug prescription databases in the Lazio region. Patients (45+) discharged with COPD in 2006-2009 were enrolled and followed from cohort entry until first admission for pneumonia, death or study end, 31 December, 2012. A nested case-control approach was used to estimate the rate ratio (RR) associated with current or past use of ICS adjusted for age, gender, number of exacerbations in the previous year and co-morbidities. Current users were defined as patients with their last ICS prescribed in the 60 days prior to the event. Past users were those with the last prescription between 61 and 365 days before the event. Current use was classified into three levels (high, medium, low) according to the medication possession ratio. Among the cohort of 19288 patients, 3141 had an event of pneumonia (incidence rate for current use 87/1000py, past use 32/1000py). After adjustment, patients with current use were 2.29 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.99-2.63) times more likely to be hospitalised for pneumonia with respect to no use; for past use RR was 1.23 (95% CI: 1.07-1.42). For older patients (80+), the rate was higher than that for younger patients. ICS use was associated with an excess risk of pneumonia. The effect was greatest for higher doses and in the very elderly.

Bias away from the null due to miscounted outcomes? A case study on the TORCH trial

Count outcomes occur in virtually all disciplines, such as medicine, epidemiology or biology, but they often contain error. Recently, it has been shown that self-reported numbers of exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients can be considerably miscounted. Motivated by this result, we reanalysed data from the Towards a Revolution in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Health trial, a large randomized controlled trial with the self-reported number of exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients as outcome. To adjust for miscounting error in the response of Poisson and (zero-inflated) negative binomial models, we introduce novel, general methodology. The key idea is to formulate a zero-inflated negative binomial model to capture the error mechanism. This parametric approach automatically circumvents drawbacks of previously suggested methodology that treats miscounted outcomes in the misclassification framework. Prior information for the response error model parameters was elicited from validation data of an external study and adaptively weighted to account for potential prior-data conflict. The results of the Bayesian hierarchical modelling approach indicated that the treatment effect has been overestimated in the original study. However, closer inspection revealed that this unexpected result was an artefact of an unaccounted time dependency of the treatment effect.

Pharmacological treatment optimization for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Proposals from the Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française

The Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française proposes a decision algorithm on long-term pharmacological COPD treatment. A working group reviewed the literature published between January 2009 and May 2016. This document lays out proposals and not guidelines. It only focuses on pharmacological treatments except vaccinations, smoking cessation treatments and oxygen therapy. Any COPD diagnosis, based on pulmonary function tests, should lead to recommend smoking cessation, vaccinations, physical activity, pulmonary rehabilitation in case of activity limitation, and short-acting bronchodilators. Symptoms like dyspnea and exacerbations determine the therapeutic choices. In case of daily dyspnea and/or exacerbations, a long-acting bronchodilator should be suggested (beta-2 agonist, LABA or anticholinergics, LAMA). A clinical and lung function reevaluation is suggested 1 to 3 months after any treatment modification and every 3-12 months according to the severity of the disease. In case of persisting dyspnea, a fixed dose LABA+LAMA combination improves pulmonary function (FEV1), quality of life, dyspnea and decreases exacerbations without increasing side effects. In case of frequent exacerbations and a FEV1≤70%, a fixed dose long-acting bronchodilator combination or a LABA+ inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) combination can be proposed. A triple combination (LABA+LAMA+ICS) is indicated when exacerbations persist despite one of these combinations. Dyspnea in spite of a bronchodilator combination or exacerbations in spite of a triple combination should lead to consider other pharmacological treatments (theophylline if dyspnea, macrolides if exacerbations, low-dose opioids if refractory dyspnea).

Appropriate use of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: the candidates for safe withdrawal

International guidance on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management recommends the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in those patients at increased likelihood of exacerbation. In spite of this guidance, ICS are prescribed in a large number of patients who are unlikely to benefit. Given the evidence of the risks associated with ICS and the limited indications for their use, there is interest in understanding the effects of withdrawing ICS when prescribed inappropriately. In this review, we discuss the findings of large ICS withdrawal trials, with primary focus on the more recent trials using active comparators. Data from these trials indicate that ICS may be withdrawn without adverse impact on exacerbation risk and patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate COPD and no history of frequent exacerbations. Considering the safety concerns associated with ICS use, these medications should be withdrawn in patients for whom they are not recommended, while maintaining adequate bronchodilator therapy.

β-Blockers for the prevention of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (βLOCK COPD): a randomised controlled study protocol

INTRODUCTION

A substantial majority of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)-related morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs are due to acute exacerbations, but existing medications have only a modest effect on reducing their frequency, even when used in combination. Observational studies suggest β-blockers may reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations; thus, we will conduct a randomised, placebo-controlled trial to definitively assess the impact of metoprolol succinate on the rate of COPD exacerbations.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

This is a multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, prospective randomised trial that will enrol 1028 patients with at least moderately severe COPD over a 3-year period. Participants with at least moderate COPD will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to receive metoprolol or placebo; the cohort will be enriched for patients at high risk for exacerbations. Patients will be screened and then randomised over a 2-week period and will then undergo a dose titration period for the following 6 weeks. Thereafter, patients will be followed for 42 additional weeks on their target dose of metoprolol or placebo followed by a 4-week washout period. The primary end point is time to first occurrence of an acute exacerbation during the treatment period. Secondary end points include rates and severity of COPD exacerbations; rate of major cardiovascular events; all-cause mortality; lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)); dyspnoea; quality of life; exercise capacity; markers of cardiac stretch (pro-NT brain natriuretic peptide) and systemic inflammation (high-sensitivity C reactive protein and fibrinogen). Analyses will be performed on an intent-to-treat basis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by the Department of Defense Human Protection Research Office and will be approved by the institutional review board of all participating centres. Study findings will be disseminated through presentations at national and international conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02587351; Pre-results.

Prevention of COPD exacerbations: medications and other controversies

Exacerbations have significant impact on the morbidity and mortality of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Most guidelines emphasise prevention of exacerbations by treatment with long-acting bronchodilators and/or anti-inflammatory drugs. Whereas most of this treatment is evidence-based, it is clear that patients differ regarding the nature of exacerbations and are likely to benefit differently from different types of treatment. In this short review, we wish to highlight this, suggest a first step in differentiating pharmacological exacerbation prevention and call for more studies in this area. Finally, we wish to highlight that there are perhaps easier ways of achieving similar success in exacerbation prevention using nonpharmacological tools.

Inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a pro-con perspective

Current guidelines limit regular use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to a specific subgroup of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in whom the forced expiratory volume in 1 s is <60% of predicted and who have frequent exacerbations. In these patients, there is evidence that ICS reduce the frequency of exacerbations and improve lung function and quality of life. However, a review of the literature suggests that the evidence available may be interpreted to favour or contradict these observations. It becomes apparent that COPD is a heterogeneous condition. Clinicians therefore need to be aware of the heterogeneity as well as having an understanding of how ICS may be used in the context of the specific subgroups of patients with COPD. This review argues for and against the use of ICS in COPD by providing an in-depth analysis of the currently available evidence.

Vitamin D, vitamin D binding protein, and longitudinal outcomes in COPD

Background

Associations between Vitamin D₃ [25(OH)D], vitamin D binding protein (VDBP) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are previously reported. We aimed to further investigate these associations on longitudinal outcomes.

Methods

426 COPD patients from western Norway, GOLD stage II-IV, aged 40–76, were followed every six-month from 2006 through 2009 with spirometry, bioelectrical impedance measurements and registration of exacerbation frequency. Serum 25(OH)D and VDBP levels were determined at study-entry by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry and enzyme immunoassays respectively. Yearly change in lung function and body composition was assessed by generalized estimating equations (GEE), yearly exacerbation rate by negative binomial regression models, and 5 years all-cause mortality by Cox proportional-hazard regression.

Results

1/3 of the patients had vitamin D deficiency (<20ng/mL) and a greater decline in both FEV1 and FVC, compared to patients with normal levels; for FEV1 this difference only reached statistical significance in the 28 patients with the lowest levels (<10ng/mL, p = 0.01). Neither 25(OH)D nor VDBP levels predicted exacerbation rate, change in fat free mass index or risk of death.

Conclusion

Severe vitamin D deficiency may affect decline in lung function parameters in COPD. Neither 25(OH)D nor VDBP levels did otherwise predict markers of disease progression.

Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: the clinical evidence

In this article, we focus on the scientific evidence from randomised trials supporting treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including treatment with combinations of long-acting β-agonist (LABA) bronchodilators and ICS. Our emphasis is on the methodological strengths and limitations that guide the conclusions that may be drawn. The evidence of benefit of ICS and, therefore, of the LABA/ICS combinations in COPD is limited by major methodological problems. From the data reviewed herein, we conclude that there is no survival benefit independent of the effect of long-acting bronchodilation and no effect on FEV1 decline, and that the possible benefit on reducing severe exacerbations is unclear. Our interpretation of the data is that there are substantial adverse effects from the use of ICS in patients with COPD, most notably severe pneumonia resulting in excess deaths. Currently, the most reliable predictor of response to ICS in COPD is the presence of eosinophilic inflammation in the sputum. There is an urgent need for better markers of benefit and risk that can be tested in randomised trials for use in routine specialist practice. Given the overall safety and effectiveness of long-acting bronchodilators in subjects without an asthma component to their COPD, we believe use of such agents without an associated ICS should be favoured.

Tailoring of corticosteroids in COPD management

This literature review updates the reader on the new studies regarding steroid therapy over the last year in stable COPD and in exacerbations. In stable COPD, we critique the 2011 update and 2013 revision of the GOLD guidelines, discuss why combining inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) (ICS/LABA) is preferable over LABA alone and review the literature for intraclass differences, finding that the evidence does not clearly support superiority of any particular ICS/LABA. We also address other comparisons against ICS/LABA, including triple therapy. We briefly review which type of inhaler should be chosen. For exacerbations, we report the REDUCE trial findings favouring a 5-day course of systemic steroids, and other trials addressing which steroid and route to use, including in an intensive care setting. Lastly, the future lies in new anti-inflammatories and re-phenotyping the heterogeneous amalgamation of COPD. A Spanish guideline recommends distinguishing steroid-responsive eosinophilic exacerbators from other phenotypes.

Comparative effectiveness of long term drug treatment strategies to prevent asthma exacerbations: network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of current maintenance strategies in preventing exacerbations of asthma.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis using Bayesian statistics.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane systematic reviews on chronic asthma, complemented by an updated search when appropriate. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA TRIALS OF Adults with asthma randomised to maintenance treatments of at least 24 weeks duration and that reported on asthma exacerbations in full text. Low dose inhaled corticosteroid treatment was the comparator strategy. The primary effectiveness outcome was the rate of severe exacerbations. The secondary outcome was the composite of moderate or severe exacerbations. The rate of withdrawal was analysed as a safety outcome.

RESULTS

64 trials with 59,622 patient years of follow-up comparing 15 strategies and placebo were included. For prevention of severe exacerbations, combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β agonists as maintenance and reliever treatment and combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β agonists in a fixed daily dose performed equally well and were ranked first for effectiveness. The rate ratios compared with low dose inhaled corticosteroids were 0.44 (95% credible interval 0.29 to 0.66) and 0.51 (0.35 to 0.77), respectively. Other combined strategies were not superior to inhaled corticosteroids and all single drug treatments were inferior to single low dose inhaled corticosteroids. Safety was best for conventional best (guideline based) practice and combined maintenance and reliever therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies with combined inhaled corticosteroids and long acting β agonists are most effective and safe in preventing severe exacerbations of asthma, although some heterogeneity was observed in this network meta-analysis of full text reports.

Effectiveness of pharmaceutical care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (PHARMACOP): a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Few well-designed randomized controlled trials have been conducted regarding the impact of community pharmacist interventions on pharmacotherapeutic monitoring of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We assessed the effectiveness of a pharmaceutical care programme for patients with COPD.

METHODS

The pharmaceutical care for patients with COPD (PHARMACOP) trial is a single-blind 3 month randomized controlled trial, conducted in 170 community pharmacies in Belgium, enrolling patients prescribed daily COPD medication, aged ≥ 50 years and with a smoking history of ≥ 10 pack-years. A computer-generated randomization sequence allocated patients to an intervention group (n = 371), receiving protocol-defined pharmacist care, or a control group (n = 363), receiving usual pharmacist care (1:1 ratio, stratified by centre). Interventions focusing on inhalation technique and adherence to maintenance therapy were carried out at start of the trial and at 1 month follow-up. Primary outcomes were inhalation technique and medication adherence. Secondary outcomes were exacerbation rate, dyspnoea, COPD-specific and generic health status and smoking behaviour.

RESULTS

From December 2010 to April 2011, 734 patients were enrolled. Forty-two patients (5.7%) were lost to follow-up. At the end of the trial, inhalation score [mean estimated difference (Δ),13.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10.8-16.1; P < 0.0001] and medication adherence (Δ, 8.51%; 95% CI, 4.63-12.4; P < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. In the intervention group, a significantly lower hospitalization rate was observed (9 vs. 35; rate ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.64; P = 0.003). No other significant between-group differences were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Pragmatic pharmacist care programmes improve the pharmacotherapeutic regimen in patients with COPD and could reduce hospitalization rates.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist in one inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Both long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their coadministration in a combination inhaler may facilitate adherence to medication regimens and improve efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of combined ICS and LABA for stable COPD in comparison with placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, reference lists of included studies and manufacturers' trial registries. The date of the most recent search was June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and double-blind studies of at least four weeks' duration. Eligible studies compared combined ICS and LABA preparations with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed-effect odds ratios (OR) or rate ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and continuous data as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria (with 10,400 participants randomly assigned, lasting between 4 and 156 weeks, mean 42 weeks). Studies used three different combined preparations (fluticasone/salmeterol, budesonide/formoterol or mometasone/formoterol). The studies were generally at low risk of bias for blinding but at unclear or high risk for attrition bias because of participant dropouts. Compared with placebo, both fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol reduced the rate of exacerbations. Mometasone/formoterol reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbation. Pooled analysis of the combined therapies indicated that exacerbations were less frequent when compared with placebo (Rate Ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.78, 7 studies, 7495 participants); the quality of this evidence when GRADE criteria were applied was rated as moderate. Participants included in these trials had on average one or two exacerbations per year, which means that treatment with combined therapy would lead to a reduction of one exacerbation every two to four years in these individuals. An overall reduction in mortality was seen, but this outcome was dominated by the results of one study (TORCH) of fluticasone/salmeterol. Generally, deaths in the smaller, shorter studies were too few to contribute to the overall estimate. Further longer studies on budesonide/formoterol and mometasone/formoterol are required to clarify whether this is seen more widely. When a baseline risk of death of 15.2% from the placebo arm of TORCH was used, the three-year number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with fluticasone/salmeterol to prevent one extra death was 42 (95% CI 24 to 775). All three combined treatments led to statistically significant improvement in health status measurements, although the mean differences observed are relatively small in relation to the minimum clinically important difference. Furthermore, symptoms and lung function assessments favoured combined treatments. An increase in the risk of pneumonia was noted with combined inhalers compared with placebo treatment (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.94), and the quality of this evidence was rated as moderate, but no dose effect was seen. The three-year NNTH for one extra case of pneumonia was 17, based on a 12.3% risk of pneumonia in the placebo arm of TORCH. Fewer participants withdrew from the combined treatment arms for adverse events or lack of efficacy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combined inhaler therapy led to around a quarter fewer COPD exacerbations than were seen with placebo. A significant reduction in all-cause mortality was noted, but this outcome was dominated by one trial (TORCH), emphasising the need for further trials of longer duration. Increased risk of pneumonia is a concern; however, this did not translate into increased exacerbations, hospitalisations or deaths. Current evidence does not suggest any major differences between inhalers in terms of effects, but nor is the evidence strong enough to demonstrate that all are equivalent. To permit firmer conclusions about the effects of combined therapy, more data are needed, particularly in relation to the profile of adverse events and benefits in relation to different formulations and doses of inhaled ICS. Head-to-head comparisons are necessary to determine whether one combined inhaler is better than the others.

Putting health status guided COPD management to the test: protocol of the MARCH study

BACKGROUND

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a disease state characterized by airflow limitation that is not fully reversible and usually progressive. Current guidelines, among which the Dutch, have so far based their management strategy mainly on lung function impairment as measured by FEV1, while it is well known that FEV1 has a poor correlation with almost all features of COPD that matter to patients. Based on this discrepancy the GOLD 2011 update included symptoms and impact in their treatment algorithm proposal. Health status measures capture both symptoms and impact and could therefore be used as a standardized way to capture the information a doctor could otherwise only collect by careful history taking and recording. We hypothesize that a treatment algorithm that is based on a simple validated 10 item health status questionnaire, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), improves health status (as measured by SGRQ) and classical COPD outcomes like exacerbation frequency, patient satisfaction and health care utilization compared to usual care based on guidelines.

METHODS/DESIGN

This hypothesis will be tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) following 330 patients for two years. During this period general practitioners will receive treatment advices every four months that are based on the patient's health status (in half of the patients, intervention group) or on lung function (the remaining half of the patients, usual care group).

DISCUSSION

During the design process, the selection of outcomes and the development of the treatment algorithm were challenging. This is discussed in detail in the manuscript to facilitate researchers in designing future studies in this changing field of implementation research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2643.

The impact of body mass index on inpatient- versus outpatient-treated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Increased body weight has been associated with worse prognoses for many chronic diseases; however, this relationship is less clear in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with underweight patients experiencing higher morbidity than normal or overweight patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the risk for COPD exacerbations.

METHODS

The present study included 115 patients with stable COPD (53% women; mean [± SD] age 67±8 years). Height and weight were measured to calculate BMI. Patients were followed for a mean of 1.8±0.8 years to assess the prospective risk of inpatient-treated exacerbations and outpatient-treated exacerbations, all of which were verified by chart review.

RESULTS

Cox regression models revealed that underweight patients were at greater risk for inhospital-treated exacerbations (RR 2.93 [95% CI 1.27 to 6.76) relative to normal weight patients. However, overweight (RR 0.59 [95% CI 0.33 to 1.57) and obese (RR 0.99 [95% CI 0.53 to 1.86]) patients did not differ from normal weight patients. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, length of diagnosis, smoking pack-years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, and time between recruitment and last exacerbation. BMI did not influence the risk of out-of-hospital exacerbations.

CONCLULSIONS

The present study showed that underweight patients were at greater risk for inhospital exacerbations. However, BMI did not appear to be a risk factor for out-of-hospital exacerbations. This suggests that the BMI-exacerbation link may differ according to the nature of the exacerbation, the mechanisms for which are not yet known.

Do we know the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for COPD exacerbations?

Frequent exacerbations of COPD are associated with accelerated loss of lung function, declining health status, increased mortality, and increased health care costs. Thus, a key objective in the management of COPD is preventing exacerbations or at least reducing their number and severity. When new interventions are examined, their value is sometimes assessed in reference to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), a theoretical construct that may be defined and estimated numerically in several different ways. There have been limited attempts to calculate the MCID for COPD exacerbations but a figure of 20% reduction in exacerbation frequency is occasionally cited as the "established" MCID from a single manuscript reviewing six clinical trials. Our review suggests that defining and calculating the MCID for COPD exacerbations is problematic, not only because the methodology around developing endpoints for MCIDs is inconsistent, but because the impact of exacerbation reduction is likely to be influenced dramatically by the definitions of exacerbation severity used and the population's baseline status. Reference to current literature shows that at least one other estimate for exacerbation MCID as low as 4%. MCID is sometimes estimated by expert consensus; a review of articles used to shape COPD guidelines shows frequent reference to articles in which interventions yielded exacerbation differences as low as 11%. We find no evidence of an established MCID but suggest that interventions reducing exacerbations by as little as 11% appear to be regarded widely as clinically important.

Comprehensive self management and routine monitoring in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in general practice: randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long term effects of two different modes of disease management (comprehensive self management and routine monitoring) on quality of life (primary objective), frequency and patients' management of exacerbations, and self efficacy (secondary objectives) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice.

DESIGN

24 month, multicentre, investigator blinded, three arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

15 general practices in the eastern part of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with COPD confirmed by spirometry and treated in general practice. Patients with very severe COPD or treated by a respiratory physician were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

A comprehensive self management programme as an adjunct to usual care, consisting of four tailored sessions with ongoing telephone support by a practice nurse; routine monitoring as an adjunct to usual care, consisting of 2-4 structured consultations a year with a practice nurse; or usual care alone (contacts with the general practitioner at the patients' own initiative).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the change in COPD specific quality of life at 24 months as measured with the chronic respiratory questionnaire total score. Secondary outcomes were chronic respiratory questionnaire domain scores, frequency and patients' management of exacerbations measured with the Nijmegen telephonic exacerbation assessment system, and self efficacy measured with the COPD self-efficacy scale.

RESULTS

165 patients were allocated to self management (n=55), routine monitoring (n=55), or usual care alone (n=55). At 24 months, adjusted treatment differences between the three groups in mean chronic respiratory questionnaire total score were not significant. Secondary outcomes did not differ, except for exacerbation management. Compared with usual care, more exacerbations in the self management group were managed with bronchodilators (odds ratio 2.81, 95% confidence interval 1.16 to 6.82) and with prednisolone, antibiotics, or both (3.98, 1.10 to 15.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive self management or routine monitoring did not show long term benefits in terms of quality of life or self efficacy over usual care alone in COPD patients in general practice. Patients in the self management group seemed to be more capable of appropriately managing exacerbations than did those in the usual care group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials NCT00128765.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist in one inhaler versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Both inhaled steroids (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) are used in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This updated review compared compound LABA plus ICS therapy (LABA/ICS) with the LABA component drug given alone.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of ICS and LABA in a single inhaler with mono-component LABA alone in adults with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. The date of the most recent search was November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind controlled trials. We included trials comparing compound ICS and LABA preparations with their component LABA preparations in people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia, while secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (measured by validated scales), lung function, withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, withdrawals due to adverse events and side-effects. Dichotomous data were analysed as random-effects model odds ratios or rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous data as mean differences and 95% CIs. We rated the quality of evidence for exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia according to recommendations made by the GRADE working group.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, randomising 11,794 people with severe COPD. We looked at any LABA plus ICS inhaler (LABA/ICS) versus the same LABA component alone, and then we looked at the 10 studies which assessed fluticasone plus salmeterol (FPS) and the four studies assessing budesonide plus formoterol (BDF) separately. The studies were well-designed with low risk of bias for randomisation and blinding but they had high rates of attrition, which reduced our confidence in the results for outcomes other than mortality.Primary outcomes There was low quality evidence that exacerbation rates in people using LABA/ICS inhalers were lower in comparison to those with LABA alone, from nine studies which randomised 9921 participants (rate ratio 0.76; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.84). This corresponds to one exacerbation per person per year on LABA and 0.76 exacerbations per person per year on ICS/LABA. Our confidence in this effect was limited by statistical heterogeneity between the results of the studies (I(2) = 68%) and a risk of bias from the high withdrawal rates across the studies. When analysed as the number of people experiencing one or more exacerbations over the course of the study, FPS lowered the odds of an exacerbation with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.83 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.98, 6 studies, 3357 participants). With a risk of an exacerbation of 47% in the LABA group over one year, 42% of people treated with LABA/ICS would be expected to experience an exacerbation. Concerns over the effect of reporting biases led us to downgrade the quality of evidence for this effect from high to moderate.There was no significant difference in the rate of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.79; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13, very low quality evidence due to risk of bias, statistical imprecision and inconsistency). There was no significant difference in mortality between people on combined inhalers and those on LABA, from 10 studies on 10,680 participants (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.11, downgraded to moderate quality evidence due to statistical imprecision). Pneumonia occurred more commonly in people randomised to combined inhalers, from 12 studies with 11,076 participants (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.01, moderate quality evidence due to risk of bias in relation to attrition) with an annual risk of around 3% on LABA alone compared to 4% on combination treatment. There were no significant differences between the results for either exacerbations or pneumonia from trials adding different doses or types of inhaled corticosteroid.Secondary outcomes ICS/LABA was more effective than LABA alone in improving health-related quality of life measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (1.58 units lower with FPS; 2.69 units lower with BDF), dyspnoea (0.09 units lower with FPS), symptoms (0.07 units lower with BDF), rescue medication (0.38 puffs per day fewer with FPS, 0.33 puffs per day fewer with BDF), and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) (70 mL higher with FPS, 50 mL higher with BDF). Candidiasis (OR 3.75) and upper respiratory infection (OR 1.32) occurred more frequently with FPS than SAL. We did not combine adverse event data relating to candidiasis for BDF studies as the results were very inconsistent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Concerns over the analysis and availability of data from the studies bring into question the superiority of ICS/LABA over LABA alone in preventing exacerbations. The effects on hospitalisations were inconsistent and require further exploration. There was moderate quality evidence of an increased risk of pneumonia with ICS/LABA. There was moderate quality evidence that treatments had similar effects on mortality. Quality of life, symptoms score, rescue medication use and FEV(1) improved more on ICS/LABA than on LABA, but the average differences were probably not clinically significant for these outcomes. To an individual patient the increased risk of pneumonia needs to be balanced against the possible reduction in exacerbations.More information would be useful on the relative benefits and adverse event rates with combination inhalers using different doses of inhaled corticosteroids. Evidence from head-to-head comparisons is needed to assess the comparative risks and benefits of the different combination inhalers.

Inhaled corticosteroids for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been the subject of much controversy. Major international guidelines recommend selective use of ICS. Recently published meta-analyses have reported conflicting findings on the effects of inhaled steroid therapy in COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled corticosteroids in stable patients with COPD, in terms of objective and subjective outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

A pre-defined search strategy was used to search the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register for relevant literature. Searches are current as of July 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing any dose of any type of inhaled steroid with a placebo control in patients with COPD. Acute bronchodilator reversibility to short-term beta(2)-agonists and bronchial hyper-responsiveness were not exclusion criteria. The a priori primary outcome was change in lung function. We also analysed data on mortality, exacerbations, quality of life and symptoms, rescue bronchodilator use, exercise capacity, biomarkers and safety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five primary studies with 16,154 participants met the inclusion criteria. Long-term use of ICS (more than six months) did not consistently reduce the rate of decline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) in COPD patients (generic inverse variance analysis: mean difference (MD) 5.80 mL/year with ICS over placebo, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to 11.88, 2333 participants; pooled means analysis: 6.88 mL/year, 95% CI 1.80 to 11.96, 4823 participants), although one major trial demonstrated a statistically significant difference. There was no statistically significant effect on mortality in COPD patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16, 8390 participants). Long-term use of ICS reduced the mean rate of exacerbations in those studies where pooling of data was possible (generic inverse variance analysis: MD -0.26 exacerbations per patient per year, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14, 2586 participants; pooled means analysis: MD -0.19 exacerbations per patient per year, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.08, 2253 participants). ICS slowed the rate of decline in quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (MD -1.22 units/year, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.60, 2507 participants). Response to ICS was not predicted by oral steroid response, bronchodilator reversibility or bronchial hyper-responsiveness in COPD patients. There was an increased risk of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OR 2.65, 95% CI 2.03 to 3.46, 5586 participants) and hoarseness. In the long-term studies, the rate of pneumonia was increased in the ICS group compared to placebo, in studies that reported pneumonia as an adverse event (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.86, 6235 participants). The long-term studies that measured bone effects generally showed no major effect on fractures and bone mineral density over three years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians should balance the potential benefits of inhaled steroids in COPD (reduced rate of exacerbations, reduced rate of decline in quality of life and possibly reduced rate of decline in FEV(1)) against the potential side effects (oropharyngeal candidiasis and hoarseness, and risk of pneumonia).

Does roflumilast decrease exacerbations in severe COPD patients not controlled by inhaled combination therapy? The REACT study protocol

BACKGROUND

Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continue to suffer exacerbations, even when treated with maximum recommended therapy (eg, inhaled combinations of long-acting β2-agonist and high dose inhaled corticosteroids, with or without a long-acting anticholinergic [long-acting muscarinic antagonist]). Roflumilast is approved to treat severe COPD in patients with chronic bronchitis--and a history of frequent exacerbations--as an add-on to bronchodilators.

PURPOSE

The REACT (Roflumilast in the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations While Taking Appropriate Combination Treatment) study (identification number RO-2455-404-RD, clinicaltrials. gov identifier NCT01329029) will investigate whether roflumilast further reduces exacerbations when added to inhaled combination therapy in patients still suffering from frequent exacerbations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

REACT is a 1-year randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III/IV study of roflumilast 500 μg once daily or placebo on top of a fixed long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid combination. A concomitant long-acting muscarinic antagonist will be allowed at stable doses. The primary outcome is the rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations. Using a Poisson regression model with a two-sided significance level of 5%, a sample size of 967 patients per treatment group is needed for 90% power. COPD patients with severe to very severe airflow limitation, symptoms of chronic bronchitis, and at least two exacerbations in the previous year will be recruited.

CONCLUSION

It is hypothesized that because roflumilast (a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor) has a different mode of action to bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids, it may provide additional benefits when added to these treatments in frequent exacerbators. REACT will be important to determine the role of roflumilast in COPD management. Here, the design and rationale for this important study is described.

Asthma outcomes: exacerbations

BACKGROUND

The goals of asthma treatment include preventing recurrent exacerbations. Yet there is no consensus about the terminology for describing or defining "exacerbation" or about how to characterize an episode's severity.

OBJECTIVE

National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to propose how asthma exacerbation should be assessed as a standardized asthma outcome in future asthma clinical research studies.

METHODS

We used comprehensive literature reviews and expert opinion to compile a list of asthma exacerbation outcomes and classified them as either core (required in future studies), supplemental (used according to study aims and standardized), or emerging (requiring validation and standardization). This work was discussed at a National Institutes of Health-organized workshop in March 2010 and finalized in September 2011.

RESULTS

No dominant definition of "exacerbation" was found. The most widely used definitions included 3 components, all related to treatment, rather than symptoms: (1) systemic use of corticosteroids, (2) asthma-specific emergency department visits or hospitalizations, and (3) use of short-acting β-agonists as quick-relief (sometimes referred to as "rescue" or "reliever") medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The working group participants propose that the definition of "asthma exacerbation" be "a worsening of asthma requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids to prevent a serious outcome." As core outcomes, they propose inclusion and separate reporting of several essential variables of an exacerbation. Furthermore, they propose the development of a standardized, component-based definition of "exacerbation" with clear thresholds of severity for each component.

Vitamin D levels and risk of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective cohort study

RATIONALE

Low blood levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) have been associated with a higher risk of respiratory infections in general populations and higher risk of exacerbations of lung disease in people with asthma. We hypothesized that low blood levels of 25(OH)D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) would be associated with an increased risk of acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD).

OBJECTIVES

To determine if baseline 25(OH)D levels relate to subsequent AECOPD in a cohort of patients at high risk for AECOPD.

METHODS

Plasma 25(OH)D was measured at baseline in 973 participants on entry to a 1-year study designed to determine if daily azithromycin decreased the incidence of AECOPD. Relationships between baseline 25(OH)D and AECOPD over 1 year were analyzed with time to first AECOPD as the primary outcome and exacerbation rate as the secondary outcome.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In this largely white (85%) sample of North American patients with severe COPD (mean FEV(1) 1.12L; 40% of predicted), mean 25(OH)D was 25.7 ± 12.8 ng/ml. A total of 33.1% of participants were vitamin D insufficient (≥20 ng/ml but <30 ng/ml); 32% were vitamin D deficient (<20 ng/ml); and 8.4% had severe vitamin D deficiency (<10 ng/ml). Baseline 25(OH)D levels had no relationship to time to first AECOPD or AECOPD rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe COPD, baseline 25(OH)D levels are not predictive of subsequent AECOPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00119860).

Roflumilast, a Novel Phosphodiesterase 4 Inhibitor, for COPD Patients with a History of Exacerbations

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) are major clinical events. They are associated with a more rapid decline in lung function, poorer quality of life scores, and an increased risk of dying. Exacerbations that require hospitalization have particular significance. Approximately 40% of the AECOPD patients who require hospitalization will die in the subsequent year. Since many AECOPD require hospitalization, they account for most of the expense of caring for COPD patients. Treatment with long-acting bronchodilators and combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting bronchodilator inhalers reduces but does not eliminate AECOPD. Roflumilast, a selective phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitor, is an anti-inflammatory medication that improves lung function in patients with COPD. In patients with more severe airway obstruction, clinical features of chronic bronchitis, and a history of AECOPD, roflumilast reduces the frequency of AECOPD when given in combination with short-acting bronchodilators, long-acting bronchodilators, or inhaled corticosteroids. It is generally well tolerated but the most common adverse effects include diarrhea, nausea, weight loss, and headaches. In clinical trials, patients treated with roflumilast experienced weight loss that averaged just over 2 kg but was primarily due to the loss of fat tissue. Weight loss was least in underweight patients and obese patients experienced the greatest weight loss. An unexpected benefit of treatment with roflumilast was that fasting blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels improved in patients with comorbid type 2 diabetes mellitus. Roflumilast, the first selective PDE4 inhibitor to be marketed, is a promising drug for the management of COPD patients with more severe disease.

The future of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment--difficulties of and barriers to drug development

Although chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major global health problem with a rising incidence and morbidity, few pharmacotherapeutic advances have been made over the past several decades. The challenges of development of such agents are multifactorial and include rudimentary understanding of the biological genesis of human disease, inadequate in-vitro and in-vivo models, unvalidated biomarkers, inefficient physiological and clinical endpoints, and variable regulatory review worldwide. Blockade of various inflammatory pathways and mediators is a reasonable therapeutic strategy to alter the natural history of COPD. Substantial heterogeneity is evident with respect to clinical presentation, physiology, imaging, response to therapy, decline in lung function, and survival. Numerous endpoints have been proposed for clinical studies in COPD, with new approaches under study. The novel strategy that seems most promising is the use of biomarkers. We hope that with these approaches novel pharmacotherapies will be developed in the near future.

Pharmacotherapies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis

Background:

Most patients with moderate and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receive long-acting bronchodilators (LABA) for symptom control. It is, however, unclear if and what drug treatments should be added to LABAs to reduce exacerbations, which is an important goal of COPD management. Since current guidelines cannot make strong recommendations yet, our aim was to determine the relative efficacy of existing treatments and combinations to reduce the risk for COPD exacerbations.

Methods:

We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating long-acting β₂ agonists (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), inhaled glucocorticosterioids (ICS), and the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) inhibitor roflumilast, and combinations of these interventions in moderate to severe COPD populations. Our primary outcome was the event rate of exacerbations. We conducted a random-effects Bayesian mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) and applied several sensitivity analyses. In particular, we confirmed our findings using a binomial MTC analysis examining whether a patient experienced at least one exacerbation event or not during the trial. We also used an additive assumption to calculate the combined effects of treatments that were not included in the systematic review.

Results:

Twenty-six studies provided data on the total number of exacerbations and/or the mean annual rate of exacerbations among a combined 36,312 patients. There were a total of 10 treatment combinations in the MTC and 15 in the additive analysis. Compared with all other treatments, the combination of roflumilast plus LAMA exhibited the largest treatment effects, and had the highest probability (45%) of being the best first-line treatment. This was consistent whether applying the incidence rate analysis or the binomial analysis. When applying the additive assumption, most point estimates suggested that roflumilast may provide additional benefit by further reducing exacerbations.

Conclusions:

Using various meta-analytic approaches, our study demonstrates that depending on the choice of drug, combined treatments offer a therapeutic advantage.

The impact of psychological distress on exacerbation rates in COPD

BACKGROUND

exacerbations are common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and contribute significantly to COPD morbidity and mortality. COPD is also associated with high levels of psychological distress, which has been shown to be associated with higher exacerbation rates. However, the existing literature on the association between psychological distress and exacerbation risk remains largely misunderstood.

OBJECTIVES

to critically review the current literature on the association between psychological distress (defined as anxiety and depressive symptoms or anxiety and depressive disorders) and COPD exacerbations in COPD patients, to highlight the limitations of the existing literature, and to provide recommendations for future research.

METHODS

a critical review of English-language peer-reviewed longitudinal and retrospective studies was conducted. The Ovid portal to Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were accessed.

RESULTS

some acceptable evidence suggested that psychological distress confers greater risk for exacerbations, more specifically symptom-based exacerbations or those treated in the patient's own environment. However, most studies showed an absence of a positive association, especially with exacerbations leading to hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

methodological weaknesses and the use of a wide range of psychological tools mean that there is an inconsistent association between psychological distress and exacerbations in the current literature. However, psychological distress may confer greater risk for symptom-based rather than event-based defined exacerbations. Further studies are needed to more comprehensively assess the question, particularly in light of the high levels of both anxiety and depression in COPD patients.

A threshold regression model for recurrent exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVE

Respiratory exacerbations are a major source of morbidity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this article, we model COPD health status as a formal stochastic process. A successful model will provide a suitable statistical structure for analysis of the effects of medical interventions on a patient's health status, and, possibly, offer new insights into the underlying disease process.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Our approach uses a regression methodology for time-to-event data called threshold regression (TR). We test the methodology on COPD data from a randomized clinical trial. Two TR models are studied: one based on a Poisson process and the other, a Wiener diffusion process.

RESULTS

Both models provide reasonably accurate fits to the clinical trial data. The insights offered by the fitted models are interpreted. Analysis of the clinical trial data set using these TR models revealed that patients who experienced multiple exacerbations showed a progressive acceleration in rate of exacerbations, and successive shortening of stable intervals between exacerbations.

CONCLUSION

TR techniques allow for realistic modeling of the COPD health state. A hybrid Poisson/Wiener diffusion TR model that incorporates the causal determinants of disease operating in each patient may be preferable.

Pneumonia in elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

This article reviews the association between pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and the possible role of inhaled corticosteroids in increasing the risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD. An increased risk of pneumonia with inhaled corticosteroids was first reported from the Toward Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) study, a large randomized clinical trial comparing fluticasone, salmeterol, or a combination of the two medications with placebo. We carried out a large observational study using a health care administrative database of information on hospitalizations and medication use among patients older than 65 years of age in Quebec. We found an excess of pneumonia requiring hospitalization and an excess of pneumonia hospitalizations leading to death in relation to current use of inhaled corticosteroids, especially at high doses. Here, we explore the potential mechanisms of this association and try to weigh the benefits and risks of therapy with inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD.