Efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (50/25 mcg; 100/25 mcg; 200/25 mcg) in Asian patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

Bronchodilator responsiveness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: prevalence, significance, and clinical implications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is often considered a key feature distinguishing asthma from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, recent evidence suggests that BDR alone may not be a reliable discriminator between these conditions. There is still no consensus on BDR definitions and testing protocols. Additionally, it remains unclear whether BDR is linked to a specific COPD phenotype or influences treatment responses. Our review of recent literature attempts to clarify some of these issues.

RECENT FINDINGS

A significant proportion of COPD patients demonstrate BDR, but the variability in testing procedures and definitions makes it challenging to draw any definite conclusion. There is no evident association between BDR and specific COPD characteristics. A few studies suggest that BDR may be associated with marginally better treatment response and disease outcomes in COPD. The impact of recent changes in BDR definitions on clinical practice remains to be fully understood.

SUMMARY

There is still no clear, clinically relevant threshold to define BDR. BDR is an unreliable discriminator to differentiate asthma from COPD and is not consistently linked to any specific COPD phenotype, treatment response, or disease outcomes. Further research is needed to refine the definitions and implications of BDR in COPD.

Intraclass comparison of inhaled corticosteroids for the risk of pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary airway disorder: a network meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Inhalational corticosteroids (ICS) were observed to increase the pneumonia risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary airway disorder (COPD). However, it is unknown whether any differences exist between the drugs within the ICS class.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the risk of pneumonia associated with different ICS and identify factors that predict pneumonia in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD using a network meta-analysis.

METHOD

Electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google Scholar) were searched for trials comparing ICS in COPD patients. The outcomes were pneumonia and serious pneumonia. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were estimated. Meta-regression was used to identify the predictors. The strength of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies (103,347 participants) were included. Fluticasone (OR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.26, 1.7), mometasone (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.05, 4.6), and beclometasone (OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6) were observed with an increased pneumonia risk compared to placebo. Fluticasone (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3, 1.7) was observed with an increased risk of serious pneumonia. High doses (OR: 1.2; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.4), BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.2), and history of exacerbations in the preceding year predicted the pneumonia risk. Evidence strength was moderate.

CONCLUSION

ICS class differences in pneumonia risk were observed in terms of pooled effect estimates but it is unlikely that any clinically relevant differences exist. Risk-benefit analysis supports ICS use in moderate-severe COPD.

Risk of adverse reactions associated with inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the majority of current therapeutic regimens for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bronchodilators are coupled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to lower the inflammatory response and improve symptoms. This study aims to evaluate the safety of ICS in the treatment of COPD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials related to ICS for COPD that were eligible up to 1 June 2023 were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. We searched and screened eligible studies for the occurrence of total adverse events, cardiovascular events, upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders, and finally analyzed them by Review Manager 5.4.1.

RESULTS

The results showed that ICS increased the incidence of adverse reactions in COPD patients (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.10, P = .0004); ICS treatment did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in COPD patients (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.88-1.02, P = .14); ICS increased the incidence of URTI in COPD patients (RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.02-1.62, P = .03); ICS increased the incidence of pneumonia in patients with COPD (RR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.63-2.69, P < .00001); ICS treatment significantly increased the incidence of oral Candida in patients with COPD (RR = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.99-4.41, P < .00001); ICS increased the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.51-5.45, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

ICS does not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with COPD, but it does increase the risk of URTI, pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD.

Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of Fluticasone Furoate/Vilanterol in Patients with Asthma and/or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Post-Marketing Study in Korea

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI; RELVAR ELLIPTA) is approved in Korea for patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of FF/VI in Korean patients with asthma and/or COPD over a 6-year period.

METHODS

This was an open-label, multicentre, observational, post-marketing surveillance study in patients newly treated with FF/VI (100 or 200 μg/25 μg once daily). Safety endpoints were the incidence of adverse events (AEs), including unexpected AEs/adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and serious AEs/ADRs. Effectiveness was assessed after 24 weeks by Global Physician Assessment (logistic regression) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1; paired t-tests).

RESULTS

Of the 3426 patients enrolled across 45 hospitals between July 2014 and June 2020, 3216 were included in the safety analysis (50.5% female; mean age ± standard deviation [SD]: 58.6 ± 16.3 years). Overall incidence of AEs was 30.9% (n = 992); 4.1% (n = 132) were ADRs. Serious AEs were reported in 4.1% (n = 132) of patients; 0.1% (n = 4) were ADRs. Of 1543 patients analysed for symptomatic improvement, 89.2% (n = 1377) improved, 9.4% (n = 145) were unchanged, and 1.4% (n = 21) worsened. Mean FEV1 (difference ± SD) increased significantly in patients with asthma (0.09 ± 0.29 L; p < 0.0001), COPD (0.11 ± 0.24 L; p = 0.0011), or both (0.05 ± 0.18 L; p = 0.0399), indicating improved lung function.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world study, FF/VI administered to Korean patients was well tolerated and effective for the treatment of asthma and COPD. These results were consistent with other studies in Asian and global populations.

Effect of fracture risk in inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The fracture risk of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with inhaled corticosteroids is controversial. And some large-scale randomized controlled trials have not solved this problem. The purpose of our systematic review and meta-analysis including 44 RCTs is to reveal the effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the fracture risk of COPD patients.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently retrieved randomized controlled trials of inhaled corticosteroids or combinations of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of COPD from PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary outcome was a fracture event. This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022366778).

RESULTS

Forty-four RCTs were performed in 87,594 patients. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.37; P = 0.010), especially ICS/LABA (RR, 1.30; 95%CI, 1.10-1.53; P = 0.002) and triple therapy (RR, 1.49; 95%CI, 1.03-2.17; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture in COPD patients when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses showed that treatment duration ≥ 12 months (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.38; P = 0.01), budesonide therapy (RR, 1.64; 95%CI., 1.07-2.51; P = 0.02), fluticasone furoate therapy (RR, 1.37; 95%CI, 1.05-1.78; P = 0.02), mean age of study participants ≥ 65 (RR, 1.27; 95%CI, 1.01-1.61; P = 0.04), and GOLD stage III(RR, 1.18; 95%CI, 1.00-1.38; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with an increased risk of fracture. In addition, budesonide ≥ 320 ug bid via MDI (RR, 1.75; 95%CI, 1.07-2.87; P = 0.03) was significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture.

CONCLUSION

Inhalation therapy with ICSs, especially ICS/LABA or triple therapy, increased the risk of fracture in patients with COPD compared with inhaled therapy without ICS. Treatment duration, mean age of participants, GOLD stage, drug dosage form, and drug dose participated in this association. Moreover, different inhalation devices of the same drug also had differences in risk of fracture.

Association of Inhaled Corticosteroids With All-Cause Mortality Risk in Patients With COPD: A Meta-analysis of 60 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have been used widely in the maintenance therapy of COPD. However, whether inhaled therapy containing ICSs can reduce the all-cause mortality risk and the possible benefited patient subgroups is unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does inhaled therapy containing ICSs reduce the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD compared with other inhaled therapies not containing ICSs?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Pooled results were calculated using Peto ORs with corresponding 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Sixty RCTs enrolling 103,034 patients were analyzed. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97), especially triple therapy (Peto OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91), was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk among patients with COPD when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses revealed that treatment duration of > 6 months (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), medium-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91), low-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97), and budesonide (Peto OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94) were involved in this association. The predictors of this association included eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL or percentage of ≥ 2%, documented history of ≥ 2 moderate and severe exacerbations in the previous year, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stages III or IV, age younger than 65 years, and BMI of ≥ 25 kg/m2, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL (Peto OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95) were the strongest predictor.

INTERPRETATION

Inhaled therapy containing ICSs, especially triple therapy, of longer than 6 months was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD. The predictors of this association included medication factors and patient characteristics, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL were the strongest predictor.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42022304725; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

High versus Medium Dose of Inhaled Corticosteroid in Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) combined with bronchodilators have been identified to improve outcomes in COPD but also to be associated with certain adverse effects.

Objective

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compile and summarize data on the efficacy and safety of dosing levels (high versus medium/low) of ICS alongside ancillary bronchodilators following PRISMA guidelines.

Data Sources

Medline and Embase were systematically searched until December 2021. Randomized, clinical trials (RCTs) that met predefined inclusion criteria were included.

Data Extraction

Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted. Any acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) risk was chosen as the primary efficacy outcome, mortality rate as the primary safety outcome, moderate/severe AECOPD risk as the secondary efficacy outcome and pneumonia risk as the secondary safety outcome. Subgroup analyses of individual ICS agents, of patients with baseline moderate/severe/very severe COPD and of patients with recent COPD exacerbation history were also performed. A random-effects model was used.

Results

We included 13 RCTs in our study. No data on low doses were included in the analysis. High dose ICS was not associated with a statistically significant difference in any AECOPD risk (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.05, I²: 41.3%), mortality rate (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.75-1.32, I²: 0.0%), moderate/severe AECOPD risk (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96-1.06, I²: 0.0%) or pneumonia risk (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.86 -1.33, I²: 9.3%) compared to medium dose ICS. The same trend was identified with the several subgroup analyses.

Conclusion

Our study collected RCTs investigating the optimal dosing level of ICS prescribed alongside ancillary bronchodilators to patients with COPD. We identified that the high ICS dose neither reduces AECOPD risk and mortality rates nor increases pneumonia risk relative to the medium dose.

Discordant diagnostic criteria for pneumonia in COPD trials: a review

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a class effect of increasing pneumonia risk in patients with COPD. However, pneumonia incidence varies widely across clinical trials of ICS use in COPD. This review clarifies methodological differences in defining and recording pneumonia events in these trials and discusses factors that could contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. Literature searches and screening yielded 40 relevant references for inclusion. Methods used to capture pneumonia events in these studies included investigator-reported pneumonia adverse events, standardised list of signs or symptoms, radiographic confirmation of suspected cases and/or confirmation by an independent clinical end-point committee. In general, more stringent pneumonia diagnosis criteria led to lower reported pneumonia incidence rates. In addition, studies varied in design and population characteristics, including exacerbation history and lung function, factors that probably contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. As such, cross-trial comparisons are problematic. A minimal set of standardised criteria for diagnosis and reporting of pneumonia should be used in COPD studies, as well as reporting of patients’ pneumonia history at baseline, to allow comparison of pneumonia rates between trials. Currently, within-trial comparison of ICS-containing versus non-ICS-containing treatments is the appropriate method to assess the influence of ICS on pneumonia incidence.

Trials of ICS in COPD use varying methods of reporting pneumonia incidence, which influence the interpretation of results. A minimal set of standardised criteria for pneumonia diagnosis would allow comparison of pneumonia incidence between trials.https://bit.ly/3nbkdoL

Association between ICS use and risk of hyperglycemia in COPD patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on risk of hyperglycemia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains ambiguous. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between ICS use and the incidence of hyperglycemia related adverse effects in COPD patients.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 25 May 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS versus control (non-ICS) treatment for COPD patients reporting on risk of hyperglycemia were included. The Mantel-Haenszel method with fixed-effects modeling was used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs with 43,430 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled results suggested that there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of hyperglycemia between the ICS group and the control group (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90-1.16, P = 0.76). In addition, no significant difference was noted in the effect on glucose level (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79-1.82, P = 0.40), risk of diabetes progression (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.20-3.51, P = 0.81) and new onset diabetes mellitus (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.88-1.15, P = 0.95) between the ICS group and the control group. These findings also were consistent across all subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ICS does not have an effect on the blood glucose and is not associated with the risk of new onset diabetes mellitus and diabetes progression in patients with COPD. Further RCTs exploring the association between ICS use and risk of hyperglycemia in COPD patients are still needed to verify our results of this analysis.

Inhaled Corticosteroids and the Pneumonia Risk in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Whether all types of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) would increase the pneumonia risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the association between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk in COPD patients, and the impact of medication details and baseline characteristics of patients on the association.

Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov) were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ICSs treatment with non-ICSs treatment on the pneumonia risk in COPD patients. Pooled results were calculated using Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: A total of 59 RCTs enrolling 103,477 patients were analyzed. All types of ICSs significantly increased the pneumonia risk (Peto OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.34–1.53). Subgroup analysis showed that there was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk (low-dose: Peto OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.22–1.45; medium-dose: Peto OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28–1.76; and high-dose: Peto OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.45–1.85). Subgroup analyses based on treatment durations and baseline characteristics (severity, age, and body mass index) of patients were consistant with the above results. Subgroup analysis based on severity of pneumonia showed that fluticasone (Peto OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.44–2.14) increased the risk of serious pneumonia, while budesonide and beclomethasone did not.

Conclusions: ICSs treatment significantly increased the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients. There was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk. The pneumonia risk was related with COPD severity.

Single inhaler triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with COPD: subgroup analysis of the China cohort in the IMPACT trial

OBJECTIVES

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is becoming a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in China. In the IMPACT trial, fluticasone furoate[FF]/umeclidinium[UMEC]/vilanterol[VI] single-inhaler triple therapy demonstrated lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations than dual therapy with FF/VI or UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations. This analysis investigates the China cohort and its consistency with the overall ITT population.

METHODS

10,355 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg, FF/VI 100/25 µg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg for 52 weeks. Endpoints included: annual rates of exacerbations, time-to-first on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation and change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) at Week-52. Clinical trial registration is NCT02164513 (CTT116855).

RESULTS

535 patients (5.2%) were from China. Annual on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rate was 0.81 with FF/UMEC/VI versus 0.96 with FF/VI (rate ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 1.11; p = .227) and 0.80 with UMEC/VI (rate ratio: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.44; p = .929). Hazard ratio for time-to-first moderate/severe exacerbation was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.11; p = .218) for FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.27; p = .516) versus UMEC/VI. Significant improvements in mean change from baseline in trough FEV₁ were observed for FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI (treatment difference 137 mL; 95% CI: 86, 188; p < .001) and UMEC/VI (63 mL; 0, 125; p = .050). Health status was improved with FF/UMEC/VI versus both dual therapies. Results were similar to the overall ITT population. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-inhaler triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI reduced the rate and risk of exacerbations, and improved lung function and health status in the China cohort similar to the overall ITT population. No new safety signals were identified.

Advances in targeted therapy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the most lethal cancers in the world, and its morbidity and mortality rates rank among the top ten in China. Currently, surgical resection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are the primary clinical treatments for esophageal cancer. However, outcomes are still unsatisfactory due to the limited efficacy and severe adverse effects of conventional treatments. As a new type of approach, targeted therapies have been confirmed to play an important role in the treatment of esophageal cancer; these include cetuximab and bevacizumab, which target epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), respectively. In addition, other drugs targeting surface antigens and signaling pathways or acting on immune checkpoints have been continuously developed. For example, trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2), has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a first-line treatment of HER-2-positive cancer. Moreover, the PD-L1 inhibitor pembrolizumab has been approved as a highly efficient drug for patients with PD-L1-positive or advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). These novel drugs can be used alone or in combination with other treatment strategies to further improve the treatment efficacy and prognosis of cancer patients. Nevertheless, adverse events, optimal dosages and effective combinations still need further investigation. In this review, we expound an outline of the latest advances in targeted therapies of esophageal cancer and the mechanisms of relevant drugs, discuss their efficacy and safety, and provide a clinical rationale for precision medicine in esophageal cancer.

Risk of Pneumonia with Different Inhaled Corticosteroids in COPD Patients: A Meta-Analysis

ICS are anti-inflammatory agents which have been suggested to benefit people with worsening symptoms of COPD, by improving lung function, reducing exacerbation of disease, and enhancing overall quality of life. This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the association of the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients that were undergoing treatment using ICS alone or together with LABAs or LAMAs. PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE were systematically searched through August 1, 2019; only double-blinded randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Eighteen randomized controlled trials were included. ICS treatment was linked to increased pneumonia incidence (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71; p < 0.001; I2 = 39.6%). Patients treated with salmeterol/fluticasone were more likely to have experience pneumonia-related adverse events than those treated using budesonide/formoterol or beclomethasone/formoterol. In subgroup analyses, pneumonia risk was found to be higher in the subgroups: >65 years old, lowest baseline forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration (FEV1) < 50% of the predicted value, highest ICS dose, and long duration of ICS use. Furthermore, we compared fluticasone propionate with fluticasone furoate and determined that pneumonia incidence was higher in the former group and pneumonia incidence rose as doses rose in these two groups. However, no difference was observed between the budesonide and beclomethasone groups. ICS treatment was linked to an elevated pneumonia risk, different kinds of ICS lead to different rates of pneumonia.

The Efficacy and Safety of Once-daily Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Twice-daily Budesonide/Formoterol in a Subgroup of Patients from China with Symptomatic COPD at Risk of Exacerbations (FULFIL Trial)

The FULFIL study evaluated once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100 µg/62.5 µg/25 µg versus twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400 µg/12 µg in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. FULFIL demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements at Week 24 in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total scores and reduced exacerbation frequency. Predefined analyses were performed to evaluate treatment effects in a subgroup of patients recruited in China (China subgroup; FF/UMEC/VI, n = 32; BUD/FOR, n = 29). Analyses included treatment by region (China versus non-China) to allow estimated treatment effects in patients from China to be compared with those of the non-China subgroup and the overall FULFIL intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In the China subgroup at Week 24: the mean change from baseline in trough FEV₁ was 125 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 36, 214) for FF/UMEC/VI and -70 mL (95% CI -163, 23) BUD/FOR (between-treatment difference: 195 mL [95% CI 67, 323]; p = 0.003) and in SGRQ Total score was -5.6 units (95% CI -10.5, -0.7) and -0.3 units (95% CI -5.4, 4.7), respectively (between-treatment difference: -5.3 [95% CI -12.3, 1.7]; p = 0.140). Fewer moderate/severe exacerbations occurred with FF/UMEC/VI than BUD/FOR (16% and 28%, respectively). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between arms (FF/UMEC/VI: 38%; BUD/FOR: 31%). This prespecified subgroup analysis of patients recruited in China to FULFIL demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to that observed in the non-China and in the overall ITT populations, for FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR.

Risk of Cardiovascular Events Associated with Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The cardiovascular (CV) safety of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is controversial because different studies have suggested that ICSs either increase or reduce the risk of CV events in COPD patients. In this meta-analysis, we assess the CV safety of ICS therapy in COPD.

Methods

A meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials of ICS treatment for COPD that include at least 4 weeks of follow-up was performed. A random-effects model was used to evaluate the effects of ICS treatment on CV events. CV events were documented in each trial, and the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ICSs were estimated.

Results

Thirty-one trials were included in this meta-analysis. The risk of CV events was not different between ICS-treated and control groups (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.06; P=0.801). In a subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in CV events between an ICS combined with long-acting β₂ agonist (LABA) (ICS + LABA) group and an LABA-only group (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.10; P=0.930), as well as between a combination group (ICS + LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) combined with LABA (LAMA + LABA) group (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.39 to 1.55; P=0.473). In addition, there was no difference in the risk of CV events between ICS treatment and control groups (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.09; P=0.872).

Conclusions

These results demonstrate that ICSs do not increase the risk of CV events in COPD patients.

Recent updates of precision therapy for gastric cancer: Towards optimal tailored management

Signaling pathways of gastric carcinogenesis and gastric cancer progression are being avidly studied to seek optimal treatment of gastric cancer. Among them, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/c-MET, phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and janus kinase 2/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (JAK2/STAT3) pathways have been widely investigated. Their aberrant expression or mutation has been significantly associated with advanced stage or poor prognosis of gastric cancer. Recently, aberrations of immune checkpoints including programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) have been suggested as an important step in the formation of a microenvironment favorable for gastric cancer. Accomplishments in basic research have led to the development of novel agents targeting these signaling pathways. However, phase III studies of selective anti-HGF/c-MET antibodies and mTOR inhibitor failed to show significant benefits in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival. Few agents directly targeting STAT3 have been developed. However, this target is still critical issue in terms of chemoresistance, and SH2-containing protein tyrosine phosphatase 1 might be a significant link to effectively inhibit STAT3 activity. Inhibition of PD-1/PD-L1 showed durable efficacy in phase I studies, and phase III evaluation is warranted. Therapeutic strategy to concurrently inhibit multiple tyrosine kinases is a reasonable option, however, lapatinib needs to be further evaluated to identify good responders. Regorafenib has shown promising effectiveness in prolonging progression-free survival in a phase II study. In this topic highlight, we review the biologic roles and outcomes of clinical studies targeting these signaling pathways.

Lapatinib in Combination With Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Advanced or Metastatic Gastric, Esophageal, or Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: TRIO-013/LOGiC--A Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of adding lapatinib to capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) in patients with previously untreated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -amplified advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with HER2-positive advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to CapeOx plus lapatinib 1,250 mg or placebo daily. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 amplification in the primary efficacy population.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients were randomly assigned, and 487 patients comprised the primary efficacy population. Median OS in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 12.2 (95% CI, 10.6 to 14.2) and 10.5 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 11.3), respectively, which was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12). Median progression-free survival in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 6.0 (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.0) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.7), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.00; P = .0381). Response rate was significantly higher in the lapatinib arm: 53% (95% CI, 46.4 to 58.8) compared with 39% (95% CI, 32.9 to 45.3) in the placebo arm (P = .0031). Preplanned exploratory subgroup analyses showed OS in the lapatinib arm was prolonged in Asian and younger patients. No correlation was observed between HER2 immunohistochemistry status and survival. There were increased toxicities in the lapatinib arm, particularly diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

Addition of lapatinib to CapeOx did not increase OS in patients with HER2-amplified gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. There were clear differences in the effect of lapatinib depending on region and age. Future studies could examine this correlation.