Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial

PREVAX: A Phase I Clinical Trial of an EGF-Based Vaccine in Moderate-to-Severe COPD Patients

BACKGROUND

EGFR has been suggested to contribute to COPD development and progression. Excessive ligand activation of the receptor leads to epithelial hyperproliferation and increased production of mucus, together with alterations in the primary cilia. The present study was designed to evaluate the safety and effect of depleting EGF in moderate-to-severe COPD patients, with an EGF-based vaccine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A phase I trial was conducted in subjects with moderate or severe COPD. The anti-EGF vaccine schedule consisted of 4 biweekly doses followed by 4 monthly boosters. The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine, together with the change in FEV1 and physical function at week 24.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients with moderate or severe COPD were included in the trial. The vaccine was well tolerated and no serious related adverse events were reported. Ninety percent of the individuals developed a protective antibody response. The specific anti-EGF antibodies had high avidity and were able to inhibit EGFR phosphorylation. At the end of vaccination, serum EGF became undetectable. At week 24, there was a clinically significant improvement in lung function, with a mean change in trough FEV1 of 106 mL. Patients also increased their physical functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

The EGF-based vaccine was immunogenic and provoked an EGF exhaustion in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Depleting EGF might result in a meaningful increase in FEV1, with good tolerability. The current results provide new avenues to treat chronic inflammatory lung diseases associated with EGFR aberrant signaling.

Triple Therapy and Clinical Control in B+ COPD Patients: A Pragmatic, Prospective, Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with LABA/LAMA is recommended in GOLD B patients. We hypothesized that triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) will be superior to LABA/LAMA in achieving and maintaining clinical control (CC), a composite outcome that considers both impact and disease stability in a subgroup of GOLD B patients (here termed GOLD B+ patients) characterized by: (1) remaining symptomatic (CAT≥10) despite regular LABA/LAMA therapy; (2) having suffered one moderate exacerbation in the previous year; and (3) having blood eosinophil counts (BEC) ≥150cells/μL.

METHODS

The ANTES B+ study is a prospective, multicenter, open label, randomized, pragmatic, controlled trial designed to test this hypothesis. It will randomize 1028 B+ patients to continue with their usual LABA/LAMA combination prescribed by their attending physician or to begin fluticasone furoate (FF) 92μg/umeclidinium (UMEC) 55μg/vilanterol (VI) 22μg in a single inhaler q.d. for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome will be the level of CC achieved. Secondary outcomes include the clinical important deterioration index (CID), annual rate of exacerbations, and FEV1. Exploratory objectives include the interaction of BEC and smoking status, all-cause mortality and proportion of patients on LABA/LAMA arm that switch therapy arms. Safety analysis include adverse events and incidence of pneumonia.

RESULTS

The first patient was recruited on February 29, 2024; results are expected in the first quarter of 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

The ANTES B+ study is the first to: (1) explore the efficacy and safety of triple therapy in a population of B+ COPD patients and (2) use a composite index (CC) as the primary result of a COPD trial.

[Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): eosinophilia and novel drug therapies]

BACKGROUND

The phenotyping of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has increasingly gained attention in recent years, as it leads to new and individualized therapeutic concepts.

OBJECTIVE

The aim is to provide an overview of the heterogeneity of COPD and to summarize current drug therapy concepts, particularly in the context of eosinophilic airway inflammation.

DATA

Several prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled studies have shown a reduction in exacerbations and overall mortality with inhaled triple therapy using an inhaled corticosteroid and dual bronchodilation. The higher the eosinophils in the blood, the greater the expected effect. In addition, a reduction in exacerbations with biologics in COPD with eosinophilia has been demonstrated for dupilumab. Eosinophil-guided therapy for acute exacerbations is the subject of current research.

CONCLUSION

For COPD without exacerbations, dual bronchodilation forms the basis of inhaled therapy. With exacerbations, inhaled triple therapy is indicated for patients with a blood eosinophil count of ≥ 300/µl. This type of treatment may also be useful when eosinophils are between 100 and 300/µl. Therapy with dupilumab is a possible option for the eosinophilic phenotype in the near future.

Prescription patterns and effectiveness of medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A retrospective study of real-world settings

This study aimed to define real-world prescription patterns in Korea and compare the effectiveness of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) medications. We used national claims data provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service in Korea and examined patients who were first diagnosed with COPD and started treatment between May 1, 2017, and April 30, 2018, with no change in drug regimen. Among 30,784 patients with COPD, long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combined with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) (32.7%), inhaled corticosteroid-LABA (ICS-LABA) (25.6%), LAMA (18.3%), ICS (5.8%), or LABA (4.6%) were prescribed as the first-choice inhalers. The use of LABA-LAMA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.248-0.584), LAMA (HR, 0.320-0.641), ICS-LABA (HR, 0.325-0.643), and xanthine (HR, 0.563-0.828) significantly reduced the total and severe exacerbation rates compared with no use of each medication. However, the use of ICS or LABA individually did not yield such effects. The continued use of LABA-LAMA, LAMA, and ICS-LABA showed a significant effect on exacerbation rate, whereas the long-term use of ICS, LABA, and xanthine did not. Moreover, some high doses of ICS-LABA did not show significant effects. This real-world study revealed that LAMA and/or LABA could be the first choice of therapy, as recommended by recent guidelines. However, ICS, xanthine, and high-dose ICS-LABA are still being prescribed frequently as first-line drugs in Korea.

Immune Dysregulation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease whose incidence increase with age and is characterised by chronic inflammation and significant immune dysregulation. Inhalation of toxic substances cause oxidative stress in the lung tissue as well as airway inflammation, under the recruitment of chemokines, immune cells gathered and are activated to play a defensive role. However, persistent inflammation damages the immune system and leads to immune dysregulation, which is mainly manifested in the reduction of the body's immune response to antigens, and immune cells function are impaired, further destroy the respiratory defensive system, leading to recurrent lower respiratory infections and progressive exacerbation of the disease, thus immune dysregulation play an important role in the pathogenesis of COPD. This review summarizes the changes of innate and adaptive immune-related cells during the pathogenesis of COPD, aiming to control COPD airway inflammation and improve lung tissue remodelling by regulating immune dysregulation, for further reducing the risk of COPD progression and opening new avenues of therapeutic intervention in COPD.

GOLD COPD DOCUMENT 2023: a brief update for practicing cardiologists

Many patients seen by cardiologists suffer chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in addition to their primary cardiovascular problem. Yet, quite often COPD has not been diagnosed and, consequently, patients have not been treated of their pulmonary disease. Recognizing and treating COPD in patients with CVDs is important because optimal treatment of the COPD carries important benefits on cardiovascular outcomes. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) publishes an annual report that serves as a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of COPD around the world and has very recently released the 2023 annual report. Here, we provide a summary of the GOLD 2023 recommendations that highlights those aspects of more interest for practicing cardiologists dealing with patients with CVD who may suffer COPD.

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of different inhaled therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with frequent cough

BACKGROUND

Cough is a common symptom in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients with cough may exhibit various clinical characteristics and experience varying outcomes based on inhaled therapies they receive.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the clinical characteristics and outcomes of various inhaled therapies in COPD patients with frequent cough.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Of these patients, the median cough score in COPD assessment test (CAT) was two. Patients were classified into frequent cough group if they scored two or over in the first item of CAT and infrequent cough group otherwise. Patients with frequent cough were then divided into long-acting antimuscarinic (LAMA), long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA)/LAMA, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/LABA and ICS/LABA/LAMA groups. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) (CAT scores decreased ≥2 from baseline) and the improvement of cough (cough score decreased ≥1 from baseline) were collected in the six-month follow-up. Frequent exacerbations (experiencing at least two exacerbations) were collected in the one-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 906 patients, 581 (64.1%) patients reported frequent cough at the initial visit. Frequent cough was associated with the current smokers and CAT scores (p < 0.05). The MCID showed no significant difference between frequent cough and infrequent cough groups in the follow-up. More patients with frequent cough experienced future frequent exacerbations compared to those with infrequent cough. After receiving inhaled therapies, 62% of patients with frequent cough got the cough improved. More patients with frequent cough treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA attained MCID and fewer experienced exacerbations than those treated with LAMA or ICS/LABA (p < 0.05). The change in cough score showed no difference among various inhaled therapies in patients with frequent cough.

CONCLUSION

COPD patients with frequent cough were related to current smokers and higher CAT scores. These patients had a higher incidence of frequent exacerbations than those with infrequent cough. Patients with frequent cough who were treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA were more likely to attain MCID and at a lower risk of exacerbation than those treated with LAMA or ICS/LABA.

2023 Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline on Pharmacotherapy in Patients With Stable COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the reality that airflow obstruction assessed by spirometry only partially reflects disease severity, a thorough clinical evaluation of the patient should include assessment of symptom burden and risk of exacerbations that permits the implementation of evidence-informed pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions. This guideline provides recommendations from a comprehensive systematic review with a meta-analysis and expert-informed clinical remarks to optimize maintenance pharmacologic therapy for individuals with stable COPD, and a revised and practical treatment pathway based on new evidence since the 2019 update of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Guideline. The key clinical questions were developed using the Patients/Population (P), Intervention(s) (I), Comparison/Comparator (C), and Outcome (O) model for three questions that focuses on the outcomes of symptoms (dyspnea)/health status, acute exacerbations, and mortality. The evidence from this systematic review and meta-analysis leads to the recommendation that all symptomatic patients with spirometry-confirmed COPD should receive long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy. Those with moderate to severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ≥ 2) and/or impaired health status (COPD Assessment Test ≥ 10) and a low risk of exacerbations should receive combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ẞ2-agonist (LAMA/LABA). For those with a moderate/severe dyspnea and/or impaired health status and a high risk of exacerbations should be prescribed triple combination therapy (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroids) azithromycin, roflumilast or N-acetylcysteine is recommended for specific populations; a recommendation against the use of theophylline, maintenance systemic oral corticosteroids such as prednisone and inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy is made for all COPD patients.

Clinically Important Deterioration (CID) and Ageing in COPD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis According to PRISMA Statement

Purpose

Clinically important deterioration (CID) is a composite endpoint developed to quantify the impact of pharmacological treatment in clinical trials for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), also showing a prognostic value. CID is defined as any of the following condition: forced expiratory volume in 1 s decrease ≥100 mL from baseline, and/or St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score increase ≥4-unit from baseline, and/or the occurrence of a moderate-to-severe exacerbation of COPD. Although most COPD patients experience a clinical worsening as they get older, to date, no specific studies assessed the correlation between ageing and CID in COPD. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of ageing on CID in COPD patients.

Patients and Methods

Data obtained from 55219 COPD patients were extracted from 17 papers, mostly post-hoc analyses. A pairwise meta-analysis and a meta-regression analysis were performed according to PRISMA-P guidelines to quantify the impact of pharmacological therapy on CID and to determine whether ageing might modulate the risk of CID in COPD patients.

Results

Inhaled treatments resulted generally effective in reducing the risk of CID in COPD (relative risk: 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.79-0.84; P < 0.001). The meta-regression analysis indicated a trend toward significance (P = 0.063) in the linear relationship between age and the risk of CID. Of note, age significantly (P < 0.05) increased the risk of CID when associated with lower post-bronchodilator FEV1. These results were not affected by a significant risk of bias.

Conclusion

This quantitative synthesis suggests that inhaled therapy is effective in reducing the risk of CID in COPD, although such a protective effect may be affected in older patients with impaired lung function. Further studies specifically designed on CID in COPD are needed to confirm these results.

COPD treatment - a conceptual review based on critical endpoints

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the main causes of death and disability worldwide. Many treatment options are now available, but criteria for choosing inhaled bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids have been under discussion. New trials have highlighted the role of patient`s characteristics, such as eosinophil count and exacerbation history, in selecting the most effective personalised treatment option.

METHODS

In this conceptual review, an in-depth rationale is developed with an integrative approach to COPD treatment, gathering data from the main clinical trials performed so far and that may provide support for actual GOLD 2023 recommendations.

RESULTS

According to the patient's characteristics and profile, different treatment options, including mono, dual and triple therapies, are presented in a diagram matrix, comparing their efficacy in terms of reduction of exacerbations and mortality risk.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Eosinophil counts and past exacerbation profile may play equally relevant roles to predict the individual risk and the potential response to inhaled corticosteroids. Thus, a comprehensive approach considering these two predictors is needed to aid clinicians decide preventative actions and choice of a first-line or step-up treatment.

Cost-Effectiveness of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus Tiotropium Monotherapy in Patients with Symptomatic Moderate-to-Very Severe COPD in the UK

Purpose

For patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who remain symptomatic despite maintenance treatment, clinical management guidelines recommend a stepwise escalation from monotherapy to dual therapy, and from dual therapy to triple therapy. However, in clinical practice, patients are often escalated directly from monotherapy to triple therapy based on disease severity. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of once-daily, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy compared with long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapy with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) in patients with symptomatic moderate-to-very severe COPD, from a UK National Health Service perspective.

Patients and Methods

The validated GALAXY-COPD disease progression model was populated with patient baseline characteristics and treatment effect data from the 12-week GSK Study 207626 comparing FF/UMEC/VI with TIO in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. UK unit costs and drug costs (British Pound, 2021) were applied to healthcare resource utilization and treatments. The base case analysis was conducted over a lifetime horizon, and costs and health outcomes (except for life years [LYs]) were discounted at 3.5% per year. Model outputs included exacerbation rates, healthcare costs, LYs, quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

Results

Overall, treatment with FF/UMEC/VI resulted in increased clinical benefit (reduction in total exacerbations and increased overall survival and QALYs), coupled with cost savings (derived from lower maintenance and exacerbation healthcare costs) compared with TIO monotherapy. In the base case analysis, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.393 LYs (95% range: 0.176, 0.655) and 0.443 QALYs (0.246, 0.648), at a cost saving of £880 (£54, £1608) versus TIO. FF/UMEC/VI remained the cost-effective (dominant) treatment option across sensitivity and scenario analyses.

Conclusion

FF/UMEC/VI offers greater clinical benefits and is a cost-effective treatment option compared with TIO for the treatment of adult patients with COPD with persistent symptoms and/or who are at risk of exacerbation in the UK.

The Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Non-Frequent Exacerbation Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the Chinese Population

Background

We analyzed the clinical characteristics and outcomes in non-frequent exacerbation patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients with stable COPD from 12 hospitals. Non-frequent exacerbation was defined as less than two times of exacerbations in the past year. The non-frequent exacerbation patients were classified into less and more symptomatic groups based on the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC). Finally, the non-frequent exacerbation patients with less and more symptomatic were classified into the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)+inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LABA+LAMA, and LABA+LAMA+ICS groups. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a CAT score decrease of ≥ 2 during six months of follow-up. We recorded the number of exacerbations and mortality during one year of follow-up.

Results

A total of 834 (67.5%) non-frequent exacerbation patients with COPD were included in this study. The non-frequent exacerbation patients had a higher education level and body mass index (BMI), and lower CAT and mMRC scores (P<0.05). In addition, the non-frequent exacerbation patients had lower mortality and risk of future exacerbation, and were more likely to attain MCID (P<0.05). Furthermore, the non-frequent exacerbation patients with more symptomatic COPD treated with LABA+LAMA or LABA+LAMA+ICS were more likely to attain MCID and had a lower risk of future exacerbation (P<0.05). However, there were no significant differences among the different inhalation therapies in non-frequent exacerbation patients with less symptomatic COPD.

Conclusion

The non-frequent exacerbation patients with COPD had a higher education level and BMI, a lower symptom burden, and better outcomes. In addition, LABA+LAMA should be recommended to non-frequent exacerbation patients with more symptomatic COPD, while mono-LAMA should be recommended to non-frequent exacerbation patients with less symptomatic COPD as the initial inhalation therapy.

An Update on Outcomes for COPD Pharmacological Trials: A COPD Investigators Report - Reassessment of the 2008 American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Statement on Outcomes for COPD Pharmacological Trials

Background: In 2008, a dedicated American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society task force published a paper on the possible use and limitations of clinical outcomes and biomarkers to evaluate the impact of pharmacological therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Since then, our scientific understanding of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has increased considerably; there has been a progressive shift from a one-size-fits-all diagnostic and therapeutic approach to a personalized approach; and many new treatments currently in development will require new endpoints to evaluate their efficacy adequately. Objectives: The emergence of several new relevant outcome measures motivated the authors to review advances in the field and highlight the need to update the content of the original report. Methods: The authors separately created search strategies for the literature, primarily based on their opinions and assessments supported by carefully chosen references. No centralized examination of the literature or uniform criteria for including or excluding evidence were used. Measurements and Main Results: Endpoints, outcomes, and biomarkers have been revisited. The limitations of some of those reported in the American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society task force document have been highlighted. In addition, new tools that may be useful, especially in evaluating personalized therapy, have been described. Conclusions: Because the "label-free" treatable traits approach is becoming an important step toward precision medicine, future clinical trials should focus on highly prevalent treatable traits, and this will influence the choice of outcomes and markers to be considered. The use of the new tools, particularly combination endpoints, could help better identify the right patients to be treated with the new drugs.

[COPD - what has changed in GOLD 2023 and is relevant for clinical practice?]

The annual report of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) is one of the most relevant documents covering prevention, diagnosis and treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The 2023 edition contains a number of changes with impact on clinical practice. For assessment and categorization, a new patient group termed E based on individual exacerbation history has been introduced. The basis of pharmacological management for most patients is the use of combinations containing a long acting β2-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting anticholinergic (LAMA). Combinations of LABA and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are no longer recommended. When there is an indication for ICS therapy, a combination of LABA, LAMA and ICS should be used. For these triple combinations, a significant reduction of mortality could be demonstrated in selected patient populations. GOLD proposes a new definition and assessment of COPD exacerbations focussing on objectively assessible parameters and relevant differential diagnoses.

Pharmacological therapy for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

In recent years, emphasis has shifted from preventing and treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to early prevention, early treatment, and disease stabilization, with the main goal of improving patients' quality of life and reducing the frequency of acute exacerbations. This review summarizes pharmacological therapies for stable COPD.

Clinical and Functional Effects of Inhaled Dual Therapy Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Real-Life Study

Background

The pharmacological association umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) allows to implement a very effective dual bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), thus optimizing bronchodilating therapy.

Methods

The main purpose of our real-world observational study was to evaluate in COPD patients the effects of UMEC/VI on lung function and respiratory symptoms. Functional and clinical parameters were assessed at baseline, and after 52 weeks of treatment with this combined double inhaled therapy.

Results

We enrolled 110 subjects suffering from COPD. A 12-month UMEC/VI treatment induced significant improvements in total lung capacity (TLC) (p < 0.05), and residual volume (RV) (p < 0.0001). Pulmonary deflation was paralleled by significant increases of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (p < 0.0001), forced vital capacity (FVC) (p < 0.01), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF_25-75) (p < 0.0001) and diffusion capacity of the lung (DLCOcSB) (p < 0.05). In addition, in the same period, we also observed significant reductions of airway resistance including total resistance (R_tot) (p < 0.0001) and specific effective resistance (sR_eff) (p < 0.0001). Other improvements were detected with regard to modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire score (p < 0.0001), COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score (p < 0.0001), and COPD exacerbation rate (p < 0.0001). In particular, the reported changes of mMRC/CAT scores and COPD exacerbation numbers were significantly correlated with UMEC/VI-induced modifications of TLC, RV, FVC and FEV₁.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our study corroborates in a real-life context the effectiveness of UMEC/VI in COPD treatment. Indeed, our broad investigational strategy has allowed to better characterize the functional mechanisms underpinning the therapeutic properties of UMEC/VI association.

Combination therapy with long-acting bronchodilators and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves clinical symptoms and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and reduces exacerbation risk. However, there is a growing concern that LAMA/LABA therapy may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the use of LAMA/LABA combination therapy modifies the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs of LAMA/LABA or LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the management of patients with COPD that reported on cardiovascular end-points. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 51 RCTs enrolling 91 021 subjects were analysed. Both dual LAMA/LABA (1.6% versus 1.3%; relative risk 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81) and triple therapy (1.6% versus 1.4%; relative risk 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) significantly increased the risk of MACE compared with ICS/LABA. The excess risk was most evident in RCTs in which the average underlying baseline risk for MACE was >1% per year. Compared with LAMA only, LABA only or placebo, dual LAMA/LABA therapy did not significantly increase the risk of MACE, though these comparisons may have lacked sufficient statistical power.

CONCLUSION

Compared with ICS/LABA, dual LAMA/LABA or triple therapy increases cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD. This should be considered in the context of the incremental benefits of these therapies for symptoms and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD, especially in those with a MACE risk of >1% per year.

How can the findings of the EMAX trial on long-acting bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease be applied in the primary care setting?

This review addresses outstanding questions regarding initial pharmacological management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Optimizing initial treatment improves clinical outcomes in symptomatic patients, including those with low exacerbation risk. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy improves lung function versus LAMA or LABA monotherapy, although other treatment benefits have been less consistently observed. The benefits of dual bronchodilation in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk, and its duration of efficacy and cost effectiveness in this population, are not yet fully established. Questions remain on the impact of baseline symptom severity, prior treatment, degree of reversibility to bronchodilators, and smoking status on responses to dual bronchodilator treatment. Using evidence from EMAX (NCT03034915), a 6-month trial comparing the LAMA/LABA combination umeclidinium/vilanterol with umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapy in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk who were inhaled corticosteroid-naïve, we describe how these findings can be applied in primary care.

Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Utilization and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Initiating Single-Inhaler Long-Acting β2-Agonist/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Dual Therapy in Primary Care in England

Purpose

Selection of treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may impact clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs. We aimed to characterize these outcomes along with treatment patterns, for patients with COPD following initiation of single-inhaler long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy in the primary care setting in England.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic medical record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care administrative data (Hospital Episode Statistics) in England to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a prescription for one of four single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies between 1st June 2015-31st December 2018 (indexing period). Outcomes were assessed during a 12-month follow-up period from the index date (date of earliest prescription of a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA within the indexing period). Incident users were those without previous LAMA/LABA dual therapy prescriptions prior to index; this manuscript focuses on a subset of incident users: non-triple therapy users (patients without concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use at index).

Results

Of 10,991 incident users included, 9888 (90.0%) were non-triple therapy users, indexed on umeclidinium/vilanterol (n=4805), aclidinium/formoterol (n=2109), indacaterol/glycopyrronium (n=1785) and tiotropium/olodaterol (n=1189). At 3 months post-index, 63.3% of non-triple therapy users remained on a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA, and 22.1% had discontinued inhaled therapy. Most patients (86.9%) required general practitioner consultations in the first 3 months post-index. Inpatient stays were the biggest contributor to healthcare costs. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs), adherence, time-to-triple therapy, time-to-first on-treatment moderate-to-severe AECOPD, time-to-index treatment discontinuation, HCRU and healthcare costs were similar across indexed therapies.

Conclusion

Patients initiating treatment with single-inhaler LAMA/LABA in primary care in England were unlikely to switch treatments in the first three months following initiation, but some may discontinue respiratory medication. Outcomes were similar across indexed treatments.

Clinically important deterioration: a composite tool for managing patients with COPD

Clinically important deterioration (CID) is a composite tool developed to measure COPD's progression. It is a promising concept that can improve treatment choices for COPD patients because it provides a more holistic assessment of their status in everyday clinical practice. The post hoc analysis of several trials that were important for improving COPD treatment provides increasing evidence of the importance of assessing CID. These retrospective evaluations suggest that dual bronchodilation should be preferred over a single bronchodilator if treatment aims to reduce a possible clinical deterioration of COPD. Should dual bronchodilation prove ineffective, evidence shows that triple therapy, including an inhaled corticosteroid, is effective in preventing CID, especially in the presence of high blood eosinophil counts. CID initially included changes in FEV₁ ≥100 mL from baseline, an increase in total SGRQ score ≥4 units, or a moderate/severe exacerbation. These thresholds were chosen arbitrarily because they were considered clinically relevant. Therefore, this multidimensional tool is being improved by including outcomes and thresholds that consider the peculiarities of the COPD population and the duration of the assessment. However, at present, studies that have assessed the impact of CID on COPD are almost all retrospective. Therefore, prospective studies need to be conducted that allow the complete validation of this instrument and better define the most effective components in assessing the risk of deterioration of COPD.

LABA/LAMA as First-Line Therapy for COPD: A Summary of the Evidence and Guideline Recommendations

Inhaled bronchodilators (alone or in combination) are the cornerstone of treatment for symptomatic patients with COPD, either as initial/first-line treatment or for second-line/treatment escalation in patients who experience persistent symptoms or exacerbations on monotherapy. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2022 report recommends initial pharmacological treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) as monotherapy for most patients, or dual bronchodilator therapy (LABA/LAMA) in patients with more severe symptoms, regardless of exacerbation history. The recommendations for LABA/LAMA are broader in the American Thoracic Society treatment guidelines, which strongly recommend LABA/LAMA combination therapy over LAMA or LABA monotherapy in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. However, despite consistent guideline recommendations, real-world prescribing data indicate that LAMA and/or LABA without an inhaled corticosteroid are not the most widely prescribed therapies in COPD. This article reviews global and regional/national guideline recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA in COPD, examines the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of LABA/LAMA versus other therapies and offers a practical guide for clinicians to help ensure appropriate use of LABA/LAMA therapy.

Efficacy of salmeterol and magnesium isoglycyrrhizinate combination treatment in rats with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The most classic treatment recommended in the current chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines is glucocorticoid and β2 receptor agonist combination, such as salmeterol xinafoate and fluticasone propionate (Sal/Flu), causing many adverse reactions due to hormones. Magnesium isoglycyrrhizinate (MgIG) is an anti-inflammatory glycyrrhizic acid preparation for treating chronic inflammation, contributing to its structure is similar to steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In this study, we successfully established COPD rat model by endotracheal-atomized lipopolysaccharide exposure and cigarette smoke induction, as characterized by lung function decline. We discovered that salmeterol xinafoate/MgIG combination could alleviated lung inflammation infiltration, airway wall thickness (AWT) and the secretion of bronchial mucin MUC5AC of COPD rats more than salmeterol xinafoate, MgIG, or salmeterol xinafoate and fluticasone propionate treatment did, as well as reduced inflammatory cells (white blood cells, neutrophils and lymphocytes) accumulation in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and decreased TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-1β production in the serum of COPD rats. Finally, we found that Moreover, the mechanism involved might be related to the suppression of JAK/STAT signaling pathway. Overall, our studies suggested that MgIG might be a potential alternative adjuvant drug for fluticasone propionate for the clinical treatment of patients with COPD.

Characteristics of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treated with Long-Acting Bronchodilators in a Real-World Setting in Singapore: A Single-Center Observational Study

Introduction

There is limited real-world evidence regarding clinical practice for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Singapore. We compared baseline clinical characteristics and evaluated outcomes in patients with COPD who initiated treatment with either a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a LAMA and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA+LABA).

Methods

This was a single-center observational study at Changi General Hospital, Singapore. Routine clinical data (hospital visits, case management, lung function, laboratory/imaging results, medication orders) were collected and compiled into a data warehouse. Eligible patients with COPD were ≥40 years old and newly prescribed LAMA or LAMA+LABA during the enrollment period. Patient characteristics in the baseline period (6 months) were compared between treatments. Clinical worsening was measured as a composite endpoint, defined as the first of a change in maintenance treatment class or a moderate-to-severe exacerbation during follow-up (12 months).

Results

In total, 261 patients were included in the baseline period (LAMA: 73; LAMA+LABA: 188). In the baseline period, patients receiving LAMA+LABA versus LAMA had significantly lower body mass index, higher COPD Assessment Test score and worse lung function, and numerically higher exacerbation history. Prevalence of comorbidities was similar between treatment groups. In follow-up, high rates of clinical worsening were observed regardless of treatment regimen (LAMA: 38/73 [52%]; LAMA+LABA: 86/188 [46%]). Median time-to-clinical worsening was 340 days for the LAMA cohort and the raw median 154 days (interquartile range: 44–225) for the LAMA+LABA cohort. Median medication dispensation rate (0.86; interquartile range: 0.56–1.00) was similar between treatments.

Conclusion

Patients initiating treatment with LAMA+LABA had more severe COPD than patients prescribed LAMA. The proportion of patients experiencing clinical worsening was similarly high in both cohorts, suggesting that early identification and treatment optimization are necessary.

Lack of Association between Inhaled Corticosteroid Use and the Risk of Future Exacerbation in Patients with GOLD Group A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background: As most clinical trials have been performed in more symptomatic and higher-risk patients, evidence regarding treatment in patients with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group A chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. We assessed the distribution of inhaler treatment and sought to investigate the association between inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use and future exacerbation in GOLD group A COPD patients. Methods: Patients with GOLD group A COPD who received maintenance inhalers were identified from a multicentre, prospective cohort in South Korea. Patients were categorized as group A when they had fewer symptoms and did not experience severe exacerbation in the previous year. Development of moderate or severe exacerbation during the 1-year follow-up was analysed according to baseline inhaler treatment. Results: In 286 patients with GOLD group A COPD, mono-bronchodilator (37.8%), dual-bronchodilator (29.0%), triple therapy (17.5%), and ICS/long-acting beta-2 agonist (15.4%) were used. Compared to patients without ICS-containing inhalers (N = 191), those using ICS (N = 95) were more dyspnoeic, and more likely to have asthma history, lower lung function, and bronchodilator response. During the 1-year follow-up, moderate or severe exacerbations occurred in 66 of 286 (23.1%) patients. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, ICS-containing inhaler use was not associated with the development of exacerbation, even in the subgroup with a high probability of asthma–COPD overlap. Conclusion: Although about one-third of patients with GOLD group A COPD were using ICS-containing inhalers, use of ICS was not associated with a reduction in the future development of exacerbation.

[Take-home messages from the COPD 2021 biennial of the French Society of Respiratory Diseases. Understanding to so as to better innovate]

INTRODUCTION

The first COPD biennial organized by the French Society of Respiratory Diseases (SPLF) took place on 17 December 2021.

STATE OF THE ART

The objective of the biennial was to discuss current knowledge regarding COPD pathophysiology, current treatments, research development, and future therapeutic approaches.

PERSPECTIVES

The different lecturers laid emphasis on the complexity of pathophysiologic mechanisms including bronchial, bronchiolar and parenchymal alterations, and also dwelt on the role of microbiota composition in COPD pathenogenesis. They pointed out that addition to inhaled treatments, ventilatory support and endoscopic approaches have been increasingly optimized. The development of new therapeutic pathways such as biotherapy and cell therapy (stem cells…) call for further exploration.

CONCLUSIONS

The dynamism of COPD research was repeatedly underlined, and needs to be further reinforced, the objective being to "understand so as to better innovate" so as to develop effective new strategies for treatment and management of COPD.

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: Updated Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity.

Comparative Efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Other Bronchodilators for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual maintenance therapies for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus other dual and mono-bronchodilator therapies in symptomatic patients with COPD.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (October 2015-November 2020) was performed to identify RCTs ≥ 8 weeks long in adult patients with COPD that compared LAMA/LABA combinations against any long-acting bronchodilator-containing dual therapy or monotherapy. Data extracted on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, rescue medication use and moderate/severe exacerbation rate were analysed using an NMA in a frequentist framework. The primary comparison was at 24 weeks. Fixed effects model results are presented.

RESULTS

The NMA included 69 full-length publications (including 10 GSK clinical study reports) reporting 49 studies. At 24 weeks, UMEC/VI provided statistically significant greater improvements in FEV₁ versus all dual therapy and monotherapy comparators. UMEC/VI provided similar improvements in SGRQ total score compared with all other LAMA/LABAs, and significantly greater improvements versus UMEC 125 μg, glycopyrronium 50 μg, glycopyrronium 18 μg, tiotropium 18 μg and salmeterol 50 μg. UMEC/VI also provided significantly better outcomes versus some comparators for TDI focal score, rescue medication use, annualised moderate/severe exacerbation rate, and time to first moderate/severe exacerbation.

CONCLUSION

UMEC/VI provided generally better outcomes compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and consistent improvements in lung function (measured by change from baseline in trough FEV₁ at 24 weeks) versus dual therapies. Treatment with UMEC/VI may improve outcomes for symptomatic patients with COPD compared with alternative maintenance treatments.

Efficacy of tiotropium bromide combined with different doses of fluticasone plus salmeterol DPI in the treatment of stable COPD

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy of tiotropium bromide combined with different doses of fluticasone plus salmeterol DPI (dry powder for inhalation) in treating stable moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and its influence on pulmonary function.

METHODS

From August 2017 to November 2019, 105 patients with stable moderate to severe COPD in our hospital were enrolled and divided into three groups: group A (GA), group B (GB) and group C (GC). In GA, patients received tiotropium bromide combined with low dose of fluticasone plus salmeterol. In GB, patients received tiotropium bromide combined with medium dose of fluticasone plus salmeterol. In GC, patients received tiotropium bromide combined with high dose of fluticasone plus salmeterol. The baseline data and adverse reactions were observed in each group. After therapy, the improvement of clinical symptoms, quality of life, pulmonary function index and therapeutic effect were observed in each group.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the general data of patients among the groups (P>0.05). The improvement of clinical symptoms in GB was better than that in GA, and that in GC was better than that in GB (P<0.05). There was no difference in adverse reactions among the groups (P>0.05). After treatment, IL-8, MPO, LTB4 and the number of inflammatory cells in sputum in the three groups decreased; the four in GB group were dramatically lower than those in GA group, and those in GC group were dramatically lower than those in GB group. The lung function indexes of patients in GB were better than those in GA, and those in GC were better than those in GB (P<0.05). The efficacy in GB was better than that in GA, and that in GC was better than that in GB (P<0.05). The quality of life scores in GB were higher than those in GA, and those in GC were higher than those in GB (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Tiotropium bromide combined with high dose of salmeterol xinafoate (SX) and fluticasone propionate (FP) powder for inhalation can effectively improve the pulmonary function of patients with moderate to severe stable COPD.

Economic Evaluation of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus Umeclidinium or Salmeterol in Symptomatic Non-Exacerbating Patients with COPD from a UK Perspective Using the GALAXY Model

INTRODUCTION

Dual bronchodilators are recommended as maintenance treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD in the UK; further evidence is needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness versus monotherapy. Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol from a UK healthcare perspective in patients without exacerbations in the previous year was assessed using post hoc EMAX trial data.

METHODS

The validated GALAXY model was populated with baseline characteristics and treatment effects from the non-exacerbating subgroup of the symptomatic EMAX population (COPD assessment test score ≥10) and 2020 UK healthcare and drug costs. Outputs included estimated exacerbation rates, costs, life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost/QALY gained. The base case (probabilistic model) used a 10-year time horizon, assumed no treatment discontinuation, and discounted future costs and QALYs by 3.5% annually. Sensitivity and scenario analyses assessed robustness of model results.

RESULTS

Umeclidinium/vilanterol treatment was dominant versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, providing an additional 0.090 LYs (95% range: 0.035, 0.158) and 0.055 QALYs (-0.059, 0.168) with total cost savings of £690 (£231, £1306) versus umeclidinium, and 0.174 LYs (0.076, 0.286) and 0.204 QALYs (0.079, 0.326) with savings of £1336 (£1006, £2032) versus salmeterol. In scenario and sensitivity analyses, umeclidinium/vilanterol was dominant versus umeclidinium except over a 5-year time horizon (more QALYs at higher total cost; ICER=£4/QALY gained) and at the lowest estimate of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire treatment effect (fewer QALYs at lower total cost; ICER=£12,284/QALY gained); umeclidinium/vilanterol was consistently dominant versus salmeterol. At willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY, probability that umeclidinium/vilanterol was cost-effective in this non-exacerbating subgroup was 95% versus umeclidinium and 100% versus salmeterol.

CONCLUSION

Based on model predictions from a UK perspective, symptomatic patients with COPD and no exacerbations in the prior year receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol are expected to have better outcomes at lower costs versus umeclidinium and salmeterol.

The novel bronchodilator navafenterol: a phase 2a, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in COPD

Background

Navafenterol (AZD8871) belongs to a new class of bronchodilator, the single-molecule muscarinic antagonist and β-agonist, developed for the treatment of COPD. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, pharmacokinetics and safety of navafenterol versus placebo and an active comparator treatment for moderate-to-severe COPD.

Methods

This phase 2a, randomised, multicentre (Germany and UK), double-blind, double-dummy, three-way complete crossover study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03645434) compared 2 weeks’ treatment of once-daily navafenterol 600 µg via inhalation with placebo and a fixed-dose combination bronchodilator (umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI); 62.5 µg/25 µg) in participants with moderate-to-severe COPD. The primary outcome was change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) on day 15. Secondary end-points included change from baseline in peak FEV₁; change from baseline in Breathlessness, Cough and Sputum Scale (BCSS); change from baseline in COPD Assessment Tool (CAT); adverse events; and pharmacokinetics.

Results

73 participants were randomised. After 14 days, trough FEV₁ was significantly improved with navafenterol compared with placebo (least-squares (LS) mean difference 0.202 L; p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in FEV₁ between navafenterol and UMEC/VI (LS mean difference −0.046 L; p=0.075). COPD symptoms (CAT and BCSS) showed significantly greater improvements with both active treatments versus placebo (all p<0.005). Novel objective monitoring (VitaloJAK) showed that cough was reduced with both active treatments compared with placebo. Safety profiles were similar across the treatment groups and no serious adverse events were reported in the navafenterol treatment period.

Conclusion

Once-daily navafenterol was well tolerated, improved lung function and reduced COPD-related symptoms, similar to an established once-daily fixed-dose combination bronchodilator.

Navafenterol, a novel dual-pharmacology bronchodilator for COPD, improved lung function, reduced COPD symptoms and decreased objective cough counts, to a similar extent to umeclidinium/vilanterolhttps://bit.ly/3lV886y

Assessing Adverse Drug Reactions Reported for New Respiratory Medications in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database

BACKGROUND

Between 2012 and 2017, 25 new medications or combination products were approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in treatment of chronic lower respiratory diseases (CLRDs). With limited data on post-marketing patient exposure to these drugs, their safety profiles remain unknown. This study aims to provide post-marketing surveillance of these medications.

METHODS

A list of new CLRD medications approved between 2012 and 2017 was generated through searches on Drugs.com (https://www.drugs.com), FDA.gov (https://www.fda.gov), and IBM Micromedex (https://www.micromedexsolutions.com/home/dispatch/ssl/true). Data describing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were collected from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System for analysis. Of the 25 identified medications, we selected 4 medications indicated for asthma or COPD with at least 500 reports. Only ADRs catalogued with these medications as the primary suspect were analyzed. Reporting odds ratios were calculated for the top 10 ADRs of each CLRD medication.

RESULTS

A total of 61,682 ADR reports were collected for newly approved CLRD medications (n = 27,190 older adults; n = 30,502 male). Reports of COPD medications (umeclidinium and umeclidinium/vilanterol) indicate that umeclidinium/vilanterol yielded a higher reporting odds ratio than umeclidinium alone for reports of pain. Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol had higher reporting odds ratios for cough, pain, and dizziness than budesonide/formoterol and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the incidence of different adverse events experienced by patients in post-marketing reports resembles the incidence reported in pre-marketing clinical trials for COPD medications, except for fluticasone furoate/vilanterol, which has several differences.

Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibility of airflow limitation in patients with COPD with a low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids.

METHODS

The double-blind, double-dummy EMAX trial randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg once daily, umeclidinium 62.5 µg once daily, or salmeterol 50 µg twice daily. Bronchodilator reversibility to salbutamol was measured once at screening and defined as an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL 10-30 min post salbutamol. Post hoc, fractional polynomial (FP) modelling was conducted using the degree of reversibility (mL) at screening as a continuous variable to investigate its relationship to mean change from baseline in trough FEV1 and self-administered computerised-Transition Dyspnoea Index (SAC-TDI) at Week 24, Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD (E-RS) at Weeks 21-24, and rescue medication use (puffs/day) over Weeks 1-24. Analyses were conducted across the full range of reversibility (-850-896 mL); however, results are presented for the range -100-400 mL because there were few participants with values outside this range.

RESULTS

The mean (standard deviation) reversibility was 130 mL (156) and the median was 113 mL; 625/2425 (26%) patients were reversible. There was a trend towards greater improvements in trough FEV1, SAC-TDI, E-RS and rescue medication use with umeclidinium/vilanterol with higher reversibility. Improvements in trough FEV1 and reductions in rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol compared with either monotherapy across the range of reversibility. Greater improvements in SAC-TDI and E-RS total scores were observed with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in the middle of the reversibility range.

CONCLUSIONS

FP analyses suggest that patients with higher levels of reversibility have greater improvements in lung function and symptoms in response to bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy across the full range of reversibility, suggesting that the dual bronchodilator umeclidinium/vilanterol may be an appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of their level of reversibility.

Evaluation of small airway function and its application in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Review)

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic airway inflammatory disease characterized by incomplete reversible airflow limitation. The diagnosis of COPD is mainly based on pulmonary function examination. In recent years, it has been indicated that small airway dysfunction occurs in patients with all stages of COPD, even in high-risk smoking groups who have not yet met the diagnostic criteria for COPD. Early recognition of small airway dysfunction and early initiation of small airway targeted therapy have become foci of research. In the present review, the methods of evaluating small airway function were summarized and their merits and shortcomings were discussed. Furthermore, the potential of targeted treatment of small airways in patients with COPD was outlined.

Real-World Effectiveness of Inhalation Therapy Among Patients With Symptomatic COPD in China: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Purpose: This real-world study evaluated the effectiveness of different inhalation therapies in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in China and also explored the relevant factors that influence the effectiveness of inhalation therapy.

Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective longitudinal study that was carried out in 12 hospitals in China from December 2016 to June 2021. A face-to-face interview was conducted to collect data. Baseline data were collected at the first visit. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as attaining a COPD assessment test (CAT) decrease ≥2. We mainly assessed the MCID and the incidence of exacerbations at the 6 months follow-up.

Results: In 695 patients, the mean age was 62.5 ± 8.2 years, with a mean CAT score of 15.1 ± 6.0. Overall, 341 (49.1%) patients attained the MCID of CAT and the incidence of exacerbation during follow-up was 22.3%. Females were significantly more likely to attain MCID than male in COPD patients (adjusted odd ratio (aOR) = 1.93, adjusted 95% confidence interval (a95%CI) = 1.09–3.42, p = 0.024). Patients treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA (ICS, inhaled corticosteroid; LABA, long-acting β2-agonist; LAMA, long-acting muscarinic antagonist) were more likely to attain MCID than patients treated with LAMA (aOR = 3.97, a95%CI = 2.48–6.35, p < 0.001; aOR = 3.17, a95%CI = 2.09–4.80, p < 0.001, respectively). Patients treated with LABA/LAMA had a higher incidence of severe exacerbation than patients treated with ICS/LABA/LAMA (aOR = 1.95, a95%CI = 1.04–3.66, p = 0.038).

Conclusion: The incidence of MCID in symptomatic COPD patients treated with inhalation therapy was nearly 50%. Patients treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA were more likely to attain MCID than patients treated with LAMA. Patients treated with LABA/LAMA had a higher incidence of severe exacerbations than with ICS/LABA/LAMA.

Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery System: The Magic Bullet for the Treatment of Chronic Pulmonary Diseases

Chronic pulmonary diseases encompass different persistent and lethal diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), cystic fibrosis (CF), asthma, and lung cancers that affect millions of people globally. Traditional pharmacotherapeutic treatment approaches (i.e., bronchodilators, corticosteroids, chemotherapeutics, peptide-based agents, etc.) are not satisfactory to cure or impede diseases. With the advent of nanotechnology, drug delivery to an intended site is still difficult, but the nanoparticle's physicochemical properties can accomplish targeted therapeutic delivery. Based on their surface, size, density, and physical-chemical properties, nanoparticles have demonstrated enhanced pharmacokinetics of actives, achieving the spotlight in the drug delivery research field. In this review, the authors have highlighted different nanoparticle-based therapeutic delivery approaches to treat chronic pulmonary diseases along with the preparation techniques. The authors have remarked the nanosuspension delivery via nebulization and dry powder carrier is further effective in the lung delivery system since the particles released from these systems are innumerable to composite nanoparticles. The authors have also outlined the inhaled particle's toxicity, patented nanoparticle-based pulmonary formulations, and commercial pulmonary drug delivery devices (PDD) in other sections. Recently advanced formulations employing nanoparticles as therapeutic carriers for the efficient treatment of chronic pulmonary diseases are also canvassed.

Update on guidelines for the treatment of COPD in Taiwan using evidence and GRADE system-based recommendations

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has significant contributions to morbidity and mortality world-wide. Early symptoms of COPD are not readily distinguishable, resulting in a low rate of diagnosis and intervention. Different guidelines and recommendatations for the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exist globally. The first edition of clinical practice guidelines for COPD was published in 2016 by the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan in collaboration with the Taiwan evidence-based medicine association and Cochrane Taiwan, and was revised in 2019 in order to update recent diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for COPD and its acute exacerbation. This revised guideline covered a range of topics highlighted in the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report, including strategies for the diagnosis, assessment, monitoring, and management of stable COPD and exacerbations, with particular focus on evidence from Taiwan. The recommendations included in the revised guideline were formed based on a comprehensive systematic review or meta-analysis of specific clinical issues identified by an expert panel that surveyed relevant scientific evidence in the literature and guidelines published by the clinical communities and organizations nationally and internationally. The guidelines and recommendations are applicable to the clinical settings in Taiwan. We expect this revised guideline to facilitate the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with COPD by physicians and health care professionals in Taiwan. Adaptations of the materials included herein for educational and training purposes is encouraged.

Efficacy and Safety of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Current and Former Smokers with COPD: A Prespecified Analysis of The EMAX Trial

Introduction

Smoking may reduce the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its impact on bronchodilator efficacy is unclear. This analysis of the EMAX trial explored efficacy and safety of dual- versus mono-bronchodilator therapy in current or former smokers with COPD.

Methods

The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated lung function, symptoms, health status, exacerbations, clinically important deterioration, and safety with umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, and salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving ICS. Current and former smoker subgroups were defined by smoking status at screening.

Results

The analysis included 1203 (50%) current smokers and 1221 (50%) former smokers. Both subgroups demonstrated greater improvements from baseline in trough FEV₁ at week 24 (primary endpoint) with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium (least squares [LS] mean difference, mL [95% CI]; current: 84 [50, 117]; former: 49 [18, 80]) and salmeterol (current: 165 [132, 198]; former: 117 [86, 148]) and larger reductions in rescue medication inhalations/day over 24 weeks versus umeclidinium (LS mean difference [95% CI]; current: − 0.42 [− 0.63, − 0.20]; former: − 0.25 − 0.44, − 0.05]) and salmeterol (current: − 0.28 [− 0.49, − 0.06]; former: − 0.29 [− 0.49, − 0.09]). Umeclidinium/vilanterol increased the odds (odds ratio [95% CI]) of clinically significant improvement at week 24 in Transition Dyspnea Index versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.16, 2.06]; former: 1.32 [0.99, 1.75]) and salmeterol (current: 1.37 (1.03, 1.82]; former: 1.60 [1.20, 2.13]) and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms–COPD versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.13, 2.09]; former: 1.50 [1.11, 2.04]) and salmeterol (current: 1.53 [1.13, 2.08]; former: 1.53 [1.12, 2.08]). All treatments were well tolerated in both subgroups.

Conclusions

In current and former smokers, umeclidinium/vilanterol provided greater improvements in lung function and symptoms versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, supporting consideration of dual-bronchodilator therapy in symptomatic patients with COPD regardless of their smoking status.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01855-y.

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often require daily medication to control their COPD. Many patients with COPD are smokers, and smoking is one of the most common causes of COPD. This means that it is important to find out whether COPD medications are effective in both smokers and nonsmokers. We analyzed data from a clinical trial (EMAX) that investigated the use of a combination of two bronchodilators, which are inhaled medications that help to open the airways. We compared umeclidinium/vilanterol, a dual-bronchodilator combination, with a single bronchodilator (either umeclidinium or salmeterol) over 6 months. We found that both current and former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol had larger improvements in lung function than those receiving umeclidinium or salmeterol. Current or former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol used their reliever inhaler less than those treated with umeclidinium or salmeterol. Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol were generally less likely to experience disease worsening compared with umeclidinium or salmeterol if they were former smokers, or compared with salmeterol if they were current smokers. Our findings suggest that umeclidinium/vilanterol may be more effective than a single bronchodilator for daily treatment of patients with COPD who are current or former smokers. Physicians should consider prescribing a combination of two bronchodilators to patients who have symptoms, whether or not they currently smoke, as well as encouraging smoking cessation for all patients.

Pharmacist involvement in the inhaler choice improves lung function in patients with COPD: a prospective single-arm study

Background

Currently, in Japan, shifting tasks from physician to hospital pharmacist is being developed to reduce physician workload and improve the quality of pharmacotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the effects of pharmacist involvement in the choice of inhaler as the task on the clinical outcomes of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Methods

This prospective, single-center, single-arm study included 36 outpatients with newly diagnosed COPD indicating inhaler therapy. Eligible patients were immediately interviewed by pharmacist. Then, pharmacist assessed patient’s inhalation flow rate, physical function to handle an inhaler, comprehension, and value, and finally recommended a personalized inhaler based on originally developed inhaler choice protocol, and pulmonologist prescribed a pharmacist-selected inhaler. The primary endpoint was the improvement in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) between baseline and week 26. The secondary endpoints were safety, and improvements at week 26 in scores for the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), modified British Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (mMRC), and Adherence Starts with Knowledge-20 (ASK-20).

Results

The pneumonologists completely agreed with the pharmacist-recommended inhaler. Mean FEV₁ significantly increased from baseline to week 26 (1.60, SD 0.54 L vs. 1.98, SD 0.56 L; p < 0.0001). Significant improvements in CAT, mMRC, and ASK-20 scores were also observed. The prevalence of CAT responders as a negative predictor of acute exacerbation, defined as those with a decrease in CAT score of ≥2 points from baseline, was 86%. None of the patients experienced exacerbation during the study period.

Conclusions

Pharmacist involvement in the choice of inhaler for patients with newly diagnosed COPD was associated with improved lung function, health status, clinical symptoms, and adherence to inhaler therapy. Shifting task of choosing appropriate inhaler from physician to hospital pharmacist may be performed effectively and safely with an inhaler choice protocol.

Trial registration number

UMIN000039722, retrospectively registered on March 10, 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40780-021-00211-0.

Future concepts in bronchodilation for COPD: dual- versus monotherapy

Most patients with COPD are recommended to initiate maintenance therapy with a single long-acting bronchodilator, such as a long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting β₂-agonist. However, many patients receiving mono-bronchodilation continue to experience high symptom burden, suggesting that patients are frequently not receiving optimal treatment. Treatment goals for COPD are often broad and not individually tailored, making initial treatment response assessments difficult. A personalised approach to initial maintenance therapy, based upon an individual's symptom burden and exacerbation risk, may be more appropriate.An alternative approach would be to maximise bronchodilation early in the disease course of all patients with COPD. Evidence suggests that dual bronchodilation has greater and consistent efficacy for lung function and symptoms than mono-bronchodilation, whilst potentially reducing the risk of exacerbations and disease deterioration, with a similar safety profile to mono-bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and symptoms between dual- and mono-bronchodilation have also been demonstrated in maintenance-naïve patients, who are most likely to resemble those at first presentation in a clinical setting. Despite promising results, there are several evidence gaps that need to be addressed to allow decision makers to evaluate the merits of a widespread earlier introduction of dual bronchodilation.

Dual Bronchodilator Therapy as First-Line Treatment in Maintenance-Naïve Patients with Symptomatic COPD: A Pre-Specified Analysis of the EMAX Trial

Introduction

Limited prospective evidence is available to guide selection of first-line maintenance therapy in patients with COPD. This pre-specified analysis of the EMAX trial explored the efficacy and safety of dual- versus mono-bronchodilator therapy in maintenance-naïve and maintenance-treated patients.

Methods

The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated lung function, symptoms (including rescue medication use), exacerbations, and safety with umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, and salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Maintenance-naïve and maintenance-treated subgroups were defined by maintenance bronchodilator use 30 days before screening.

Results

The analysis included 749 (31%) maintenance-naïve and 1676 (69%) maintenance-treated patients. For both subgroups, improvements from baseline in trough FEV1 at Week 24 (primary endpoint) were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium (mean difference [95% CI]; maintenance-naïve: 44 mL [1, 87]; maintenance-treated: 77 mL [50, 104]), and salmeterol (maintenance-naïve: 128 mL [85, 171]; maintenance-treated: 145 mL [118, 172]), and in rescue medication inhalations/day over 24 weeks versus umeclidinium (maintenance-naïve: -0.44 [-0.73, -0.16]; maintenance-treated: -0.28 [-0.45, -0.12]) and salmeterol (maintenance-naïve: -0.37 [-0.66, -0.09]; maintenance-treated: -0.25 [-0.41, -0.08]). In maintenance-naïve patients, umeclidinium/vilanterol numerically improved scores at Week 24 for Transition Dyspnea Index versus umeclidinium (0.37 [-0.21, 0.96]) and versus salmeterol (0.47 [-0.10, 1.05]) and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD versus umeclidinium (-0.26 [-1.04, 0.53]) and versus salmeterol (-0.58 [-1.36, 0.20]), with similar improvements seen in maintenance-treated patients. All treatments were well tolerated across both subgroups.

Conclusion

Similar to maintenance-treated patients, maintenance-naïve patients receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol showed greater improvements in lung function and symptoms compared with patients receiving umeclidinium or salmeterol. These findings provide support for the consideration of dual bronchodilator treatment in symptomatic maintenance-naïve patients with COPD.