Pharmacological treatment optimisation for stable COPD: an endless story? Proposals from the Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française

Diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Serbia: an expert group position statement

In recent years, several national chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines have been issued. In Serbia, the burden of COPD is high and most of the patients are diagnosed at late stages. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy is poorly implemented in real-life practice, as many patients are still prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-containing regimens and slow-release theophylline. In this document, we propose an algorithm for treating COPD patients in Serbia based on national experts’ opinion, taking into account global recommendations and recent findings from clinical trials that are tailored according to local needs. We identified four major components of COPD treatment based on country specifics: active case finding and early diagnosis in high-risk population, therapeutic algorithm for initiation and escalation of therapy that is simple and easy to use in real-life practice, de-escalation of ICS in low-risk non-exacerbators, and individual choice of inhaler device based on patients' ability and preferences. With this approach we aim to facilitate implementation of the recommendation, initiate the treatment in early stages, improve cost-effectiveness, reduce possible side effects, and ensure efficient treatment.

Are there specific clinical characteristics associated with physician's treatment choices in COPD?

Background

The number of pharmacological agents and guidelines available for COPD has increased markedly but guidelines remain poorly followed. Understanding underlying clinical reasoning is challenging and could be informed by clinical characteristics associated with treatment prescriptions.

Methods

To determine whether COPD treatment choices by respiratory physicians correspond to specific patients’ features, this study was performed in 1171 patients who had complete treatment and clinical characterisation data. Multiple statistical models were applied to explain five treatment categories: A: no COPD treatment or short-acting bronchodilator(s) only; B: one long-acting bronchodilator (beta2 agonist, LABA or anticholinergic agent, LAMA); C: LABA+LAMA; D: a LABA or LAMA + inhaled corticosteroid (ICS); E: triple therapy (LABA+LAMA+ICS).

Results

Mean FEV1 was 60% predicted. Triple therapy was prescribed to 32.9% (treatment category E) of patients and 29.8% received a combination of two treatments (treatment categories C or D); ICS-containing regimen were present for 44% of patients altogether. Single or dual bronchodilation were less frequently used (treatment categories B and C: 19% each). While lung function was associated with all treatment decisions, exacerbation history, scores of clinical impact and gender were associated with the prescription of > 1 maintenance treatment. Statistical models could predict treatment decisions with a < 35% error rate.

Conclusion

In COPD, contrary to what has been previously reported in some studies, treatment choices by respiratory physicians appear rather rational since they can be largely explained by the patients’ characteristics proposed to guide them in most recommendations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-019-1156-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Efficacy and safety profile of xanthines in COPD: a network meta-analysis

Theophylline can still have a role in the management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its use remains controversial, mainly due to its narrow therapeutic window. Doxofylline, another xanthine, is an effective bronchodilator and displays a better safety profile than theophylline. Therefore, we performed a quantitative synthesis to compare the efficacy and safety profile of different xanthines in COPD.The primary end-point of this meta-analysis was the impact of xanthines on lung function. In addition, we assessed the risk of adverse events by normalising data on safety as a function of person-weeks. Data obtained from 998 COPD patients were selected from 14 studies and meta-analysed using a network approach.The combined surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis of efficacy (change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s) and safety (risk of adverse events) showed that doxofylline was superior to aminophylline (comparable efficacy and significantly better safety), bamiphylline (significantly better efficacy and comparable safety), and theophylline (comparable efficacy and significantly better safety).Considering the overall efficacy/safety profile of the investigated agents, the results of this quantitative synthesis suggest that doxofylline seems to be the best xanthine for the treatment of COPD.

Stable COPD Treatment: Where are We?

The number of pharmacological treatments available for COPD has increased markedly in the last years, mostly corresponding to new agents, combinations and devices within know pharmacological classes. Hierarchizing these options is not straightforward since expected effects are limited by the intrinsically fixed character of the underlying lung damage. In addition, all options have not been directly compared face-to-face. Therefore, guidelines derive from some level of subjective interpretation of the available evidence. Determining which magnitude of change can be taken as clinically relevant is complex although crucial to define long-term strategies. Similarly, estimating not only the possible benefits but also the risks of treatments at the individual level is of major importance to guide choices. In the future biomarkers may be of help in that respect. They will hopefully emerge from progresses in systems biology and medicine. Before then, prescriptions should be restricted to the appropriate treatment indications, as established by high level studies and formalized by guidelines.