Triple therapy for all patients with severe symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations

Revealing the Mechanisms of Qilongtian Capsules in the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Based on Integrated Network Pharmacology, Molecular Docking, and In Vivo Experiments

The Qilongtian capsule (QLT) is a Chinese patent medicine that has been approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the precise pharmacodynamic material basis and molecular mechanism have not been well illustrated. In this study, we identified the effect of QLT on COPD through a cigarette smoke extract (CSE)/lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induced COPD mice model. The absorption of blood components in QLT were identified using ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF-MS). Network pharmacology was used to predict the potential targets and therapeutic mechanisms of QLT, which were further validated using in vivo experiments and molecular docking. Pharmacodynamic studies revealed that QLT could ameliorate pulmonary function and pulmonary pathology, reduce collagen fiber accumulation, and attenuate inflammatory responses in mice with CSE/LPS induced COPD. A total of 21 components of QLT absorbed in the blood were detected. Network pharmacology analysis indicated that TNF, IL-6, EGFR, and AKT1 may be the core targets, mainly involving the MAPK signaling pathway. Besides, Sachaloside II, Ginsenoside Rh1, Ginsenoside F1, Rosiridin, and Ginsenoside Rf were the key compounds. Molecular docking results showed that the key components could spontaneously bind to EGFR and MAPK to form a relatively stable conformation. In vivo experiments revealed that QLT could suppress the activation of the EGFR/MAPK signaling pathway, thereby improving lung injury in mice with COPD. Overall, these findings provide evidence for the treatment of COPD with QLT.

Risk of Pneumonia in Patients with COPD Initiating Fixed Dose Inhaled Corticosteroid (ICS) / Long-Acting Bronchodilator (LABD) Formulations Containing Extrafine Beclometasone Dipropionate versus Patients Initiating LABD Without ICS

Background

Combined ICS and long-acting bronchodilators (LABD) more effectively reduce COPD exacerbations than LABD therapy alone. Corticosteroid-related adverse effects, including pneumonia, limit ICS use. Previous data suggest this risk is lower for extrafine beclometasone (ef-BDP). We compared pneumonia risk among new users of fixed dose ICS/LABD formulations containing ef-BDP, versus patients initiating LABD without any ICS.

Methods

A propensity-matched historical cohort study design used data from OPCRD. COPD patients with ≥1 year of continuous data who initiated LABD or ICS/LABD formulations containing ef-BDP were matched. Primary outcome was time to pneumonia event, as treated, using either sensitive (physician diagnosed) or specific (physician diagnosed and x-ray or hospital admission confirmed) definitions, with non-inferiority boundary of 15%.

Results

23,898 COPD patients were matched, who were 68±11 years, 54.3% male and 56% current-smokers, while 43% were former-smokers. Initiation of ef-BDP/LABD was not associated with an increased risk of pneumonia versus LABD, for either a sensitive 0.89 (0.78-1.02), P = 0.08 or a specific 0.91 (0.78-1.05), P = 0.18 definition of pneumonia. The probability of remaining pneumonia free 1-year after ef-BDP/LABD was 98.4%, which was comparable to LABD at 97.7%, and was sustained up to 6 years of observation; non-inferiority criterion was met for both definitions. Initiation of ef-BDP/LABD was also associated with a reduced risk of developing LRTIs in the propensity matched cohort.

Conclusion

Risk of pneumonia when using ICS for the management of COPD reported in several randomised controlled trials may not be relevant with ef-BDP in a diverse real-world clinical population.

[COPD inhaled therapy narrative review]

Inhaled therapy with long-acting bronchodilators is the base of pharmacological treatment in COPD. In order to find out those that offer better control, a search was carried out in Medline (Pubmed). Comparative studies of inhaler therapy in COPD patients were analyzed. The comparison between the fixed combination LABA/LAMA versus LABA/CI in non-exacerbating patients, revealed a better control with LABA/LAMA. Within the LABA/CI combinations, budesonide/formoterol combination offered better control. LAMA inhalers revealed no great differences, but when compared to LABA, it offered a better control. Regarding triple therapy in a single device, was superior to double therapy and to triple therapy in two devices, with no relevant differences among the available combinations.

[Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the right treatment for the right patient]

In den vergangenen Jahren wurden auf dem Gebiet der chronisch-obstruktiven Lungenerkrankung (COPD) große Therapiestudien publiziert, die 2020 um mehrere Post-hoc-Analysen ergänzt wurden. Die neuen Erkenntnisse flossen in das Update des Global-Initiative-for-Chronic-Obstructive-Lung-Disease(GOLD)-Report 2021 ein. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden die aktualisierten Grundlagen und Empfehlungen zur Therapie der COPD beschrieben. Dabei wird auf die Indikationen von inhalativen Kortikosteroiden (ICS), lang wirksamen Muskarinantagonisten (LAMA) und/oder lang wirksamen β‑Mimetika (LABA) eingegangen. Die Therapie der COPD wird der des Asthma bronchiale gegenübergestellt. Diskutiert wird auch, wie sich eine gleichzeitig bestehende Asthmakomponente auf die Behandlungsstrategie bei COPD auswirkt. Ein Schwerpunkt des Beitrags liegt auf der Triple-Therapie mit LAMA, LABA und ICS. In diesem Zusammenhang werden die Studienlage und die Indikationen beschrieben. Die Bronchodilatation bleibt weiterhin die Grundlage der COPD-Therapie. Für Patienten mit gehäuften Exazerbationen bedeutet eine Triple-Therapie mit LAMA + LABA + ICS einen Mortalitätsvorteil. Weitere Analysen oder Studien sollen klären, ob dieser Effekt für spezifische Subgruppen stärker ausgeprägt ist.

Triple Therapy Versus Dual Bronchodilation and Inhaled Corticosteroids/Long-Acting β-Agonists in COPD: Accumulating Evidence from Network Meta-Analyses

Guidelines are mainly based on evidence of well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but there are limitations to the transferability of conclusions of RCTs to usual care mainly because the patients enrolled in RCTs are selected and not representative of the population encountered in daily practice; moreover, the research environment is substantially different from that of the real world. Because of the scarcity of data generated in large unselected populations in everyday clinical practice, the possibility of using meta-analyses can be considered. Recently, several meta-analyses have attempted to clarify the role of triple therapy containing a long-acting β-agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) delivered from a single inhaler in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also considering that there is a big difference in the use of triple therapy between what is recommended by COPD guidelines or strategies and the prescriptive behaviour of clinicians. Taking into account the results of the most recent meta-analyses, we believe that triple therapy provides modest clinical benefit in the general COPD population, but in patients on LABA/LAMA combination therapy, who still experience acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) and have blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells·μl⁻¹, it is of clinical relevance. On the contrary, adding a LAMA to an ICS/LABA combination elicits relevant clinical benefit in the general COPD population, supporting the role of dual bronchodilation therapy for the treatment of COPD. The quantitative synthesis of the currently available clinical evidence seems to suggest that, in patients with COPD already on ICS/LABA combination, the therapy can be improved without an increase of cardiovascular severe adverse events (SAEs) when a LAMA is added to the combination.

COPD from an everyday primary care point of view

Introduction:

The purpose of this study is to use real world evidence on treatment use to evaluate drug superiority within the same treatment group.

Methods:

Retrospective cohort analysis using the Spanish Database for Pharmacoepidemiological Research in Primary Care (BIFAP). Data includes longitudinal routine clinical data extracted from practice records of 7,890,485 patients. All subjects with an incident diagnosis of COPD in the database BIFAP between January 1 2010 and December 31 2012 were included in the cohort study. Cox regression analysis was performed to compare the hazard of COPD exacerbation outcome of the four principal cohorts (no therapy, monotherapy, double therapies with and without corticoids, and triple therapy) and within each principal cohort between the different treatment combinations.

Results:

27,739 patients with COPD were included in the analysis. The median age was 64 years, male proportion was 69% and 70% were smokers. 58,042.9 person--years of follow-up were obtained for the cohort with a mean follow-up of 2.09 years per subject. The strongest factor associated with an increased risk of exacerbation was suffering an exacerbation the previous year (HR = 1.82[1.76--1.87 95%CI]). No differences were found between the most frequent monotherapies, double therapies without corticoid, or triple therapy. When comparing the different combinations of double therapies with corticoid, salmeterol/fluticasone combination (HR = 1.16[1.08--1.24]) revealed a higher adjusted hazard of exacerbation when compared with formoterol/budesonide.

Conclusions:

Treatment with a combination of budesonide/formoterol was associated with lower exacerbations than the treatment with fluticasone/salmeterol. The analysis did not reveal any differences in terms of exacerbation in monotherapy, double therapy without corticoids, and triple therapy combinations.