Effect of tiotropium on health-related quality of life as a primary efficacy endpoint in COPD

Treatment efficacy of LAMA versus placebo for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Four long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), tiotropium, glycopyrronium, aclidinium, and umeclidinium, are currently available for the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, no integrated analysis has sought to determine the effectiveness of these LAMAs. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAMA versus placebo in patients with stable COPD.

METHODS

A literature search of relevant randomized control trials that administered LAMA to stable COPD patients was conducted, and the exacerbations, quality of life (QoL), dyspnea score, lung function, and adverse event of patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies were included in this meta-analysis. LAMA significantly decreased the frequency of exacerbations compared to the placebo (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.85; P < 0.001). The mean changes in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (mean difference, -3.61; 95% CI, -4.27 to -2.95; P < 0.00001), transitional dyspnea index score (mean difference 1.00; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.17; P < 0.00001), and trough FEV₁ (mean difference 0.12; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.13; P < 0.0001) indicated significantly greater improvement in the LAMA group than the placebo group. The number of withdrawals due to adverse events in the LAMA group was significantly fewer than that in the placebo group (OR -0.02; 95% CI -0.03 to -0.01; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

LAMA is superior to placebo due to lower frequency of exacerbations and adverse events, as well as higher trough FEV₁, QoL, and dyspnea score for stable COPD.

What conservative interventions can improve the long-term quality of life, depression, and anxiety of individuals with stable COPD? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Many conservative interventions are used in the management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It could be helpful for the prescribers to know what the evidence suggests about the effects of these interventions on the long-term quality of life (QoL), depression, and anxiety. This study aimed to summarize the rationale for the use of conservative interventions to improve the long-term QoL, depression, and anxiety in patients with stable COPD.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from database inception to December 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the long-term effects of conservative interventions on three parameters, including QoL, depression, and anxiety in patients with COPD were eligible for further analysis. To improve methodological rigor, only RCTs examining these parameters as primary outcomes were included. The standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects models. Quality of evidence was rated using the updated version of Van Tulder's criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight RCTs were identified. Regarding long-term depression, there was moderate evidence supporting cognitive behavioral therapy compared with usual care in patients with COPD; regarding the long-term QoL of patients with COPD, there was limited evidence supporting walking programs, supplementary sugarcane bagasse dietary fiber, roflumilast, and tiotropium.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive behavioral therapy is effective in alleviating the long-term depression of patients with COPD. Evidence for other interventions was insufficient, making it difficult to draw conclusions in terms of their effectiveness on the long-term QoL, depression, and anxiety.

Reducing and managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations with tiotropium + olodaterol

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review clinical evidence supporting the use of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA), respectively, as the initial and follow-up treatment choice in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as per Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2020 recommendations-the impact of this treatment strategy on the reduction in the risk of exacerbations-and the importance of early therapeutic interventions.

METHODS

For this narrative review, the available literature was searched to identify studies including patients with COPD receiving tiotropium and olodaterol as either monotherapy or combination therapy and studies including patients with COPD receiving inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in addition to long-acting bronchodilators. Relevant studies were included in the review.

RESULTS

Patients with COPD are often prescribed ICS therapy, which, when used over a long term, can be associated with local and systemic adverse effects. The GOLD 2020 report recommends dual bronchodilator therapy as both an initial and follow-up treatment option. A LABA + LAMA combination is mechanistically synergistic, and cumulative evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol supports therapeutic advantages over monotherapy in most patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The early stages of COPD may represent a "window of therapeutic opportunity" during which initiation of tiotropium and olodaterol dual bronchodilator therapy may improve lung function and quality of life and reduce exacerbations in patients with COPD.

Tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a review of clinical development

Background

Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment for Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) groups B, C, and D.

Main body

Tiotropium bromide was the first LAMA available for COPD in clinical practice and, because of its long duration of action, is administered once daily. Tiotropium was initially available as an inhalation powder delivered via a dry-powder inhaler (DPI). Later, tiotropium also became available as an inhalation spray delivered via a soft mist inhaler (SMI). The SMI was designed to overcome or minimize some of the issues associated with other inhaler types (eg, the need for strong inspiratory airflow with DPIs). Results of short- and long-term randomized, controlled clinical trials of tiotropium in patients with COPD indicated tiotropium was safe and significantly improved lung function, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance, and reduced dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, exacerbations, and use of rescue medication compared with placebo or active comparators. These positive efficacy findings triggered the evaluation of tiotropium in fixed-dose combination with olodaterol (a long-acting β₂-agonist). In this review, we provide an overview of studies of tiotropium for the treatment of COPD, with a focus on pivotal studies.

Conclusion

Tiotropium is safe and efficacious as a long-term, once-daily LAMA for the maintenance treatment of COPD and for reducing COPD exacerbations. The SMI generates a low-velocity, long-duration aerosol spray with a high fine-particle fraction, which results in marked lung drug deposition. In addition, high inspiratory flow rates are not required.

Correlation of Inhaled Long-Acting Bronchodilators With Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Stable COPD: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

A majority of existing studies have focused on the efficacy of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators (ILABs), such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), and LABAs combined with LAMAs in treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The current meta-analysis aimed to investigate the correlation of ILABs with specific cardiovascular adverse events (CAEs). Five electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically retrieved. Finally, 16 randomized controlled trials were enrolled into the current meta-analysis. Typically, the efficacy of 3 major classes of drugs (LABAs, LAMAs, and LABAs combined with LAMAs), and 7 specific drugs (including formoterol, glycopyrrolate, indacaterol, olodaterol, Salmeterol, tiotropium, and vilanterol) for 4 CAEs, including myocardial infarction, cardiac failure (CF), ischemic heart disease (IHD), and stroke in stable COPD patients, was examined. All the pooled results were analyzed through the odds ratios (ORs) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The direct meta-analysis results suggested that LABAs could increase the risk of CF in patients with stable COPD compared with placebo controls (OR 1.70, 95% CI, 1.00-2.90). In addition, network meta-analysis results indicated that LAMAs combined with LABAs would result in an increased risk of CF in patients with stable COPD (OR 2.31, 95% CI, 1.10-5.09). According to the ILABs specific drug analysis, formoterol may potentially have protective effects on IHD compared with placebo controls (OR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.18-1.00). In conclusion, among these 3 kinds of ILABs, including LAMAs, LABAs, and LABAs/LAMAs, for stable COPD patients, LAMAs and LABAs are associated with the least possibility to induce myocardial infarction and stroke, respectively. However, the application of LABAs will probably increase the risk of CF; they should be used with caution for stable COPD patients with CF. In addition, in specific-drug analysis, the use of formoterol can reduce the risk of treatment-related IHD. Nevertheless, more studies on different drug doses are needed in the future to further validate this conclusion.

Convergent Validity and Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Maugeri Foundation Respiratory Failure Questionnaire (MRF-28) and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire (VQ11)

Purpose

Short and easy questionnaires have been developed to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), such as the Maugeri Foundation Respiratory Failure Questionnaire (MRF-28) and the COPD-specific HRQoL Questionnaire (VQ11). Both are valid, reliable, and sensitive, but their minimal clinically important differences (MCID) are unknown. Consequently, this study aimed to confirm the convergent validities of the MRF-28 and VQ11 and establish their MCID. A retrospective design was used to evaluate the effect of individual home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in 400 COPD patients.

Patients and methods

Exercise tolerance, anxiety and depression based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and HRQoL using three questionnaires (MRF-28, VQ11, and the Visual Simplified Respiratory Questionnaire: VSRQ) were assessed before and after an individualized home-based PR program (5 sessions of 30-45 mins/week for 8 weeks, including a weekly session supervised by a team member).

Results

PR improved all measured variables (p < 0.0001). The correlations were significant (p < 0.0001) between VSRQ and MRF-28 (r = -0.685 at baseline and r = -0.686 after the PR program), and between VSRQ and VQ11 (r = -0.691 at baseline and r = -0.753 after the PR program). Moreover, changes in score (delta between after and before PR program) of VSRQ were also significantly correlated (p < 0.0001) to changes in score of MRF-28 (r = -0.372) and VQ11 (r = -0.423). Last, we calculated MCID of -5.2 and -2.0 units for MRF-28 and VQ11, respectively.

Conclusion

The MRF-28 and VQ11 can be used in routine practice to evaluate the effects of PR on the HRQoL of COPD patients, with MCID of -5.2 and -2.0, respectively.

Relationship of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators with cardiovascular outcomes among patients with stable COPD: a meta-analysis and systematic review of 43 randomized trials

Background: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2–agonists (LABAs) are the mainstay of maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although previous studies have supported inhaled long-acting bronchodilators (ILABs) for overall cardiovascular safety, the risk of specific cardiovascular outcomes such as arrhythmia, heart failure and stroke is still unknown.

Materials and methods: We systematically searched from PubMed, the Embase database and the Cochrane Library for published studies on ILABs and COPD, from its inception to November 10, 2018, with no language restrictions. The RRs and corresponding 95% CIs were pooled to evaluate ILAB/placebo.

Results: Finally, 43 randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with placebo, ILABs do not increase the risk of overall and specific cardiovascular adverse events (AEs); on the contrary, they can reduce the incidence of hypertension (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55–0.98;I²19.9%; P= 0.221). However, when stratified according to the specific agents of ILABs, olodaterol might reduce the risk of overall cardiovascular adverse events (OCAEs) (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.49–0.88;I²27.5%; P= 0.000), and the protective effect of lowing blood pressure disappeared. Similarly, the use of inhaled LABA might increase the risk of cardiac failure (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04–2.84;I²0%; P= 0.538), but this risk disappeared when stratified according to the specific agents of LABA. Besides, formoterol might decrease the risk of cardiac ischemia (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.91; I²0%; P= 0.676).

Conclusions: Overall, the use of ILABs was not associated with overall cardiovascular AEs in patients with stable COPD. When stratified according to the specific agents of LABA, olodaterol might reduce the risk of OCAE; and formoterol might decrease the risk of cardiac ischemia. LABA might reduce the incidence of hypertension, but might increase the risk of heart failure. Therefore, COPD patients with a history of heart failure should use it with caution.

The pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and tolerability of PUR0200, a novel tiotropium formulation, in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

AIMS

PUR0200 is a tiotropium bromide formulation engineered with the iSPERSE dry powder delivery technology. PUR0200 is being developed as a bioequivalent alternative to tiotropium bromide, delivered using Spiriva® HandiHaler® (HH). We investigated the bronchodilator effects, pharmacokinetics and safety of PUR0200 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study using different PUR0200 doses and the comparator tiotropium HH. In vitro aerodynamic particle size distribution (aPSD) characterization of PUR0200 and tiotropium HH are presented. The main endpoints included forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁ ) trough and (0-24 h) and pharmacokinetic parameters.

RESULTS

The increased fine-particle fraction of PUR0200 demonstrated by testing using the next-generation impactor increased the proportion of drug available for lung deposition compared with the tiotropium HH. There was a numerical dose-response effect for PUR0200 on FEV₁ , with 3 μg demonstrating a lower effect than higher doses. The placebo-adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) increases from baseline at 24 h postdose were 150 ml (100-200), 210 ml (160-270) and 200 ml (140-250) for 3 μg, 6 μg and 9 μg doses of PUR0200, respectively. Tiotropium HH (18 μg) caused a mean 169 ml (standard deviation 157ml) improvement in trough FEV₁ , which was not significantly different to the PUR0200 effects at any of the tested doses.

CONCLUSIONS

PUR0200 treatment caused bronchodilation in COPD patients that was similar in magnitude to that caused by tiotropium HH. This enabled a similar clinical effect on lung function to be achieved with PUR0200 using a lower metered dose of tiotropium compared with tiotropium HH.

Optimizing bronchodilation in the prevention of COPD exacerbations

The natural disease course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often punctuated by exacerbations: acute events of symptom worsening associated with significant morbidity and healthcare resource utilization; reduced quality of life; and increased risk of hospitalization and death. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommend that patients at risk of exacerbations (GOLD Groups C and D) receive a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/LAMA combination, respectively, as preferred initial treatments. The latter recommendation is based on recent trial evidence demonstrating the superior efficacy of a fixed-dose LABA/LAMA over an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA in exacerbation prevention. ICS in combination with a LABA is also indicated for prevention of exacerbations, but the use of ICS is associated with an increased risk of adverse events such as pneumonia, and offers limited benefits beyond those provided by LABA or LAMA monotherapy. In this review, we examine evidence from a number of pivotal studies of LABAs and LAMAs, administered as monotherapy or as part of dual or triple combination therapy, with a specific focus on their effect on exacerbations. We also discuss a new proposed treatment paradigm for the management of COPD that takes into account this recent evidence and adopts a more cautious approach to the use of ICS. In alignment with GOLD 2017, we suggest that ICS should be reserved for patients with concomitant asthma or in whom exacerbations persist despite treatment with LABA/LAMA.

Greater dyspnea is associated with lower health-related quality of life among European patients with COPD

OBJECTIVE

Dyspnea is a defining symptom in the classification and treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the degree of variation in burden among symptomatic COPD patients and the possible correlates of burden remain unclear. This study was conducted to characterize patients in Europe currently being treated for COPD according to the level of dyspnea in terms of sociodemographics, health-related quality of life, work productivity impairment, and health care resource use assessed by patient reports.

METHODS

Data were derived from the 5-EU 2013 National Health and Wellness Survey (N=62,000). Respondents aged ≥40 years who reported currently using a prescription for COPD were grouped according to their level of dyspnea as per the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines and compared on health status (revised Short Form 36 [SF-36]v2), work impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire), and number of health care visits in the past 6 months using generalized linear models with appropriate distributions and link functions.

RESULTS

Of the 768 respondents who met the inclusion criteria, 245 (32%) were considered to have higher dyspnea (equivalent to modified Medical Research Council score ≥2). Higher dyspnea was associated with decrements ranging from 3.9 to 8.2 points in all eight domains of the SF-36 health profile after adjustment for sociodemographics, general health characteristics, and length of COPD diagnosis; mental component summary scores and Short Form-6D health utility scores were lower by 3.5 and 0.06 points, respectively. Adjusted mean activity impairment (55% vs 37%, P<0.001) and number of emergency room visits (0.61 vs 0.40, P=0.030) were higher in patients with greater dyspnea.

CONCLUSION

Many European patients with COPD continue to experience dyspnea despite treatment and at levels associated with notable impairments in the patients' ability to function across a multitude of domains. These patients may benefit from more intense treatment of their symptoms.

Tiotropium formulations and safety: a network meta-analysis

Tiotropium is now delivered via two different inhaler devices: the original Handihaler 18 μg once daily, which uses a powder formulation; and the newer Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) 5 μg once daily. It has been questioned whether the two devices can be assumed to have the same safety profile, although the TIOSPIR trial showed that tiotropium when administered via Respimat SMI 5 μg is not less safe than Handihaler 18 μg. Therefore, we have carried out a safety evaluation of tiotropium Handihaler 18 µg versus tiotropium Respimat SMI 5 µg and 2.5 µg, via systematic review and network meta-analysis of the currently available clinical evidence. The results of our meta-analysis with an extremely large number of patients analysed demonstrate that the safety profile of tiotropium HandiHaler is generally superior to that of tiotropium Respimat SMI, although no statistical difference was detected between these two devices. However, the SUCRA analysis favoured tiotropium Respimat SMI with regards to serious adverse events (AEs). We do not believe that using Respimat SMI rather that HandiHaler exposes patients to higher risks of real AEs. Rather, we believe that there may be a different cardiovascular (CV) response to muscarinic receptors blockage in individual patients. Therefore, it will be essential to make all possible efforts to proactively identify patients at increased risk of CV AEs when treated with tiotropium or another antimuscarinic drug.

What is asthma-COPD overlap syndrome? Towards a consensus definition from a round table discussion

Patients with asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS) have been largely excluded from pivotal therapeutic trials and, as a result, its treatment remains poorly defined and lacking firm evidence. To date, there is no universally accepted definition of ACOS, which has made it difficult to understand its epidemiology or pathophysiology. Despite many uncertainties, there is emerging agreement that some of the key features of ACOS include persistent airflow limitation in symptomatic individuals 40 years of age and older, a well-documented history of asthma in childhood or early adulthood and a significant exposure history to cigarette or biomass smoke. In this perspective, we propose a case definition of ACOS that incorporates these key features in a parsimonious algorithm that may enable clinicians to better diagnose patients with ACOS and most importantly enable researchers to design therapeutic and clinical studies to elucidate its epidemiology and pathophysiology and to ascertain its optimal management strategies.

Long-term outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: exploring the effects of inhalatory devices and their influence on the outcome

PURPOSE

Numerous systematic reviews have examined the outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease managed with different therapeutic strategies. However, no such studies have specifically focused on the effect of inhalation devices.

METHODS

A standard PubMed search was carried out in which we identified all randomized placebo-controlled trials conducted in patients with moderate-to-severe or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The clinical end points were exacerbations rate, incidence of pneumonia, and mortality. Meta-regression was employed to assess the effect of the device. For the incidence of exacerbations, an equivalence analysis was also carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies were analyzed. Four different devices were used across these trials (Respimat(®), HandiHaler(®), Diskus, and Turbuhaler(®)). Our meta-regression analysis failed to show any significant difference between devices with regard to exacerbation rate. Equivalence was shown for some comparisons (HandiHaler(®) vs Respimat(®)), but not for others. In analyzing mortality, Respimat(®) was shown to worsen this end point in comparison with Turbuhaler(®) and HandiHaler(®). Moreover, Turbuhaler(®) showed a protective effect over Diskus in the incidence of pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

The results of our analysis represent the first attempt to explore the effect of the type of device on long-term outcomes. One important limitation was that most drugs were associated with one particular device, and so the effects of drugs and devices could not be reliably differentiated from one another.

Comparative efficacy of fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β2-agonists: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A number of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for treatment of moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have recently become available, but none have been directly compared in head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The purpose of this study was to assess the relative clinical benefit of all currently available LAMA/LABA FDCs using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified RCTs investigating the efficacy, safety and quality of life associated with licensed LAMA/LABA FDCs for the treatment of moderate-to-very severe COPD. RCTs were screened for inclusion in the NMA using prespecified eligibility criteria. Data were extracted for outcomes of interest, including change in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (tFEV1) from baseline, St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) percentage of responders, Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) percentage of responders, change in SGRQ score from baseline, change in TDI focal score from baseline, moderate-to-severe exacerbations, all-cause discontinuation, and discontinuation due to adverse events.

RESULTS

Following screening, a total of 27 trials from 26 publications with 30,361 subjects were eligible for inclusion in the NMA. Nonsignificant results were seen in most analyses comparing efficacy, exacerbations and discontinuation rates of included LAMA/LABA FDCs (i.e. aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg, glycopyrronium/indacaterol 110/50 µg, tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg, umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg). Meta-regression controlling for post-bronchodilator percentage of tFEV1 predicted at baseline as well as meta-regression adjusting for concomitant use of inhaled corticosteroids at baseline was performed to assess the magnitude of effect modification and produced similar results as observed in the base case analysis.

CONCLUSION

All LAMA/LABA FDCs were found to have similar efficacy and safety. Definitive assessment of the relative efficacy of different treatments can only be performed through direct comparison in head-to-head RCTs. In the absence of such data, this indirect comparison may be of value in clinical and health economic decision-making.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Inhaled bronchodilators are the mainstay of COPD pharmacological treatment. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a major class of inhaled bronchodilators. Some LAMA/device systems with different characteristics and dosing schedules are currently approved for maintenance therapy of COPD and a range of other products are being developed. They improve lung function and patient-reported outcomes and reduce acute bronchial exacerbations with good safety. LAMAs are used either alone or associated with long-acting β₂-agonists, eventually in fixed dose combinations. Long-acting β₂-agonist/LAMA combinations assure additional benefits over the individual components alone. The reader will obtain a view of the safety and efficacy of the different LAMA/device systems in COPD patients.

Relationship Between FEV1 and Patient-Reported Outcomes Changes: Results of a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials in Stable COPD

Background: This meta-analysis assessed the relationship between change from baseline (CFB) in spirometric measurements (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁] and FEV₁ area under the curve [AUC]) and patient-reported outcomes (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score [SGRQ] CFB, Transition Dyspnea Index [TDI] and exacerbation rates) after 6-12 months' follow-up, using study treatment-group level data. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials of ≥24 weeks duration in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Studies reporting ≥1 spirometric measurement and ≥1 patient-reported outcome (PRO) at baseline and at study endpoint were selected. The relationships between PROs and spirometric endpoints were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficient and meta-regression. Results: Fifty-two studies (62,385 patients) were included. Primary weighted analysis conducted at the last assessment showed a large significant negative correlation (r, -0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI); -0.77, -0.57]) between trough FEV₁ and SGRQ. Improvement of 100 mL in trough FEV₁ corresponded to a 5.9 point reduction in SGRQ. Similarly, a reduction of 4 points on SGRQ corresponded to 40 mL improvement in trough FEV₁ (p<0.001). The weighted correlation coefficients of trough FEV₁ with TDI, exacerbation rate (all) and exacerbation rate (moderate/severe) at last assessment point were 0.57, -0.69 and -0.57, respectively (all p<0.05). For the analyses excluding placebo groups, the correlations of FEV₁ with SGRQ and TDI were lower but significant. Conclusions: A strong association exists between changes in spirometric measurements and changes in PROs.

Effect of tiotropium on COPD exacerbations: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Exacerbation frequency is related to disease progression, quality of life, and prognosis in COPD. Earlier diagnosis, along with interventions aimed at preventing exacerbations and delaying progression, may help reduce the global burden of disease. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators are effective at maintaining symptom relief and are recommended as first-choice therapy for more symptomatic patients and those at risk of exacerbation.

METHODS

As prevention of exacerbations is a priority goal in COPD management and a number of different long-acting bronchodilators are available, we conducted a systematic review of exacerbation data from randomized controlled trials (published January 2000 to May 2014) comparing the effect of tiotropium versus placebo and/or other maintenance therapies.

RESULTS

Exacerbations were a primary endpoint in 12 publications (five studies: four comparing tiotropium with placebo; one with active comparator) and a secondary endpoint in 17 publications (seven studies: six comparing tiotropium with placebo; one with active comparator). Overall, tiotropium was associated with a longer time to first exacerbation event and fewer exacerbations (including severe exacerbations/hospitalizations) compared with placebo and long-acting β2-agonists. Tiotropium also showed similar efficacy to glycopyrronium and a fixed long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist combination (glycopyrronium/indacaterol), although not all studies were powered to demonstrate differences in exacerbation outcomes. Exacerbation outcomes were comparable with both formulations of tiotropium (HandiHaler(®) 18 μg/Respimat(®) 5 μg).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this comprehensive systematic review demonstrate tiotropium is beneficial in reducing exacerbation risk versus placebo or other maintenance treatments.

Efficacy and Safety of Aclidinium/Formoterol versus Tiotropium in COPD: Results of an Indirect Treatment Comparison

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 μg twice daily compared to tiotropium 18 μg once daily in adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

A systematic literature review performed in March 2014, using a predefined search strategy in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, identified 17 randomized placebo-controlled trials, (tiotropium n = 15; aclidinium/formoterol n = 2). Outcomes of interest were: bronchodilation (peak and trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)), COPD symptoms [Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and % of responders (>1 unit improvement)] and Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) [St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and % responders (>4 unit improvement)], % of patients with ≥1 exacerbations, adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), hospitalization and mortality, all at 24 weeks. In the absence of head-to-head trials between aclidinium/formoterol and tiotropium, a Bayesian indirect treatment comparison (ITC) was used with placebo as common control.

RESULTS

Regarding bronchodilation, aclidinium/formoterol was found to be more efficacious than tiotropium at peak FEV1, with mean difference in change from baseline (DCFB) 143 mL [95% credible interval (CrI): 112, 174] and at trough FEV1 [DCFB 26 mL (95% CrI -2, 55)]. Aclidinium/formoterol is expected to be more efficacious than tiotropium in improving dyspnea symptoms measured by TDI [DCFB 0.54 points (95% CrI 0.09, 0.99); odds ratio (OR) of responders 1.51 (95% CrI 1.11, 2.06)]. SGRQ results are comparable for aclidinium/formoterol versus tiotropium [DCFB -0.52 (95% CrI -2.21, 1.17); OR of responders 1.16 (95% CrI 0.47, 2.87)]. The ITC results suggest similar safety profiles regarding AEs, SAEs and hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Based on the ITC, aclidinium/formoterol is expected to be more efficacious than tiotropium in terms of lung function and symptom control while providing comparable HRQoL results and safety profile.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Comparative efficacy of long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapies in COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Randomized, controlled trials comparing long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) efficacy in COPD are limited. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the relative efficacy of tiotropium 18 µg once-daily (OD) and newer agents (aclidinium 400 µg twice-daily, glycopyrronium 50 µg OD, and umeclidinium 62.5 µg OD).

Methods

A systematic literature review identified randomized, controlled trials of adult COPD patients receiving LAMAs. A NMA within a Bayesian framework examined change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), transitional dyspnea index focal score, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score, and rescue medication use.

Results

Twenty-four studies (n=21,311) compared LAMAs with placebo/each other. Aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, and umeclidinium, respectively, demonstrated favorable results versus placebo, for change from baseline (95% credible interval) in 12-week trough FEV₁ (primary endpoint: 101.40 mL [77.06–125.60]; 117.20 mL [104.50–129.90]; 114.10 mL [103.10–125.20]; 136.70 mL [104.20–169.20]); 24-week trough FEV₁ (128.10 mL [84.10–172.00]; 135.80 mL [123.10–148.30]; 106.40 mL [95.45–117.30]; 115.00 mL [74.51–155.30]); 24-week St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score (−4.60 [−6.76 to −2.54]; −3.14 [−3.83 to −2.45]; −2.43 [−2.92 to −1.93]; −4.69 [−7.05 to −2.31]); 24-week transitional dyspnea index score (1.00 [0.41–1.59]; 1.01 [0.79–1.22]; 0.82 [0.62–1.02]; 1.00 [0.49–1.51]); and 24-week rescue medication use (data not available; −0.41 puffs/day [−0.62 to −0.20]; −0.52 puffs/day [−0.74 to −0.30]; −0.30 puffs/day [−0.81 to 0.21]). For 12-week trough FEV₁, differences in change from baseline (95% credible interval) were −12.8 mL (−39.39 to 13.93), aclidinium versus tiotropium; 3.08 mL (−7.58 to 13.69), glycopyrronium versus tiotropium; 22.58 mL (−11.58 to 56.97), umeclidinium versus tiotropium; 15.90 mL (−11.60 to 43.15), glycopyrronium versus aclidinium; 35.40 mL (−5.06 to 76.07), umeclidinium versus aclidinium; and 19.50 mL (−15.30 to 54.38), umeclidinium versus glycopyrronium. Limitations included inhaler-related factors and safety; longer-term outcomes were not considered.

Conclusion

The new LAMAs studied had at least comparable efficacy to tiotropium, the established class standard. Choice should depend on physician’s and patient’s preference.

Mortality and drug therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence suggests pharmacological treatments may impact on overall survival in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients. Individual clinical trials are rarely powered to detect mortality differences between treatments and may not include all treatment options relevant to healthcare decision makers.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify RCTs of COPD treatments reporting mortality; evidence was synthesised using network meta-analysis (NMA). The analysis included 40 RCTs; a quantitative indirect comparison between 14 treatments using data from 55,220 patients was conducted.

RESULTS

The analysis reported two treatments reducing all-cause mortality; salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination (SFC) was associated with a reduction in mortality versus placebo in the fixed effects (HR 0.79; 95 % Crl 0.67, 0.94) but not the random effects model (0.79; 0.56, 1.09). Indacaterol was associated with a reduction in mortality versus placebo in fixed (0.28; 0.08 to 0.85) and random effects (0.29; 0.08, 0.89) models. Mean estimates and credible intervals for hazard ratios for indacaterol versus placebo are based on a small number of events; estimates may change when the results of future studies are included. These results were maintained across a variety of assumptions and provide evidence that SFC and indacaterol may lead to improved survival in COPD patients.

CONCLUSION

Results of an NMA of COPD treatments suggest that SFC and indacaterol may reduce mortality. Further research is warranted to strengthen this conclusion.

Comparative efficacy of combination bronchodilator therapies in COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several new fixed-dose combination bronchodilators have been recently launched, and assessing their efficacy relative to each other, and with open dual combinations is desirable. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the efficacy of umeclidinium and vilanterol (UMEC/VI) with that of available dual bronchodilators in single/separate inhalers.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified randomized controlled trials of ≥10 weeks among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients (≥40 years), assessing the efficacy of combination bronchodilators in single or separate inhalers. Comparative assessment was conducted on change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores, transitional dyspnea index (TDI) focal scores, and rescue medication use at 12 weeks and 24 weeks using an NMA within a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

A systematic literature review identified 77 articles of 26 trials comparing UMEC/VI, indacaterol/glycopyrronium (QVA149), formoterol plus tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg, salmeterol plus TIO, or indacaterol plus TIO, with TIO and placebo as common comparators at 12 weeks and approximately 24 weeks. The NMA showed that at 24 weeks, efficacy of UMEC/VI was not significantly different compared with QVA149 on trough FEV1 (14.1 mL [95% credible interval: -14.2, 42.3]), SGRQ total score (0.18 [-1.28, 1.63]), TDI focal score (-0.30 [-0.73, 0.13]), and rescue medication use (0.02 [-0.27, 0.32]); compared with salmeterol plus TIO on trough FEV1 (67.4 mL [-25.3, 159.4]), SGRQ total score (-0.11 [-1.84, 1.61]), and TDI focal score (0.58 [-0.33, 1.50]); and compared with formoterol plus TIO 18 μg on SGRQ total score (-0.68 [-1.77, 0.39]). Results at week 12 were consistent with week 24 outcomes. Due to lack of availability of evidence, no comparison was made with formoterol plus TIO on FEV1 or TDI at 24 weeks.

CONCLUSION

UMEC/VI has comparable efficacy to other dual-bronchodilator combinations on available efficacy endpoints.

Early impact of treatment with tiotropium, long-acting anticholinergic preparation, in patients with COPD - real-life experience from an observational study

Background

Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators, including anticholinergic tiotropium, are recommended for the maintenance therapy of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It has been shown in a number of studies that treatment with tiotropium alleviates symptoms, improves exercise tolerance, health status, and reduces exacerbations in patients with moderate to very severe stage COPD.

Aim

The aim of this noninterventional study was to observe the early effects of the maintenance treatment with tiotropium in patients with COPD of different severities, who had been previously treated on a regular basis, or as required, with at least one short-acting bronchodilator, in a real-life setting in Poland. The effect of the treatment was assessed through the collection of COPD Assessment Test (CAT) data.

Patients and methods

The MATHS clinical study was an observational, noninterventional, open-label, prospective, uncontrolled, single-arm, postmarketing, surveillance, real-life study conducted with the involvement of 236 pulmonology clinics based in Poland. The tiotropium observational period was 3 months. The health and COPD status was measured with the CAT questionnaire. The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from the baseline in the total CAT score at the end of the 3-month observational period.

Results

Patients treated with 18 μg of tiotropium once daily for 3 months showed a statistically significant result, with a clinically meaningful mean reduction (improvement) of 7.0 points in the total CAT score. The improvement was slightly greater in patients with more severe COPD; the mean change in the total CAT score was 7.6 in the subgroup of patients with more severe COPD and 6.7 points in the subgroup of patients with moderate COPD.

Conclusion

Results of this real-life study provide further support for the use of tiotropium as a first-line maintenance treatment for patients with COPD of different severities in Poland.

Comorbidities of patients in tiotropium clinical trials: comparison with observational studies of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate on whether patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) seen in real-life clinical settings are represented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of COPD. It is thought that the stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria of RCTs may prevent the participation of patients with specific characteristics or risk factors.

METHODS

We surveyed a database of patients recruited into 35 placebo-controlled tiotropium RCTs and also conducted a systematic literature review of large-scale observational studies conducted in patients with a documented diagnosis of COPD between 1990 and 2013. Patient demographics and comorbidities with a high prevalence in patients with COPD were compared between the two patient populations at baseline. Using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA; v 14.0), patient comorbidities in the pooled tiotropium RCTs were classified according to system organ class, pharmacovigilance (PV) endpoints, and Standardised MedDRA Queries to enable comparison with the observational studies.

RESULTS

We identified 24,555 patients in the pooled tiotropium RCTs and 61,361 patients among the 13 observational studies that met our search criteria. The Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) staging of patients in the RCTs differed from that in observational studies: the proportion of patients with GOLD stages I+II disease ranged from 40.0% to 51.5% in the RCTs but 24.5% to 44.1% in the observational studies; for GOLD stage III or IV disease these ranges were 7.2%-45.8% (RCTs) and 13.7-42.1% (observational studies). The comorbidities with the highest prevalence reported in the RCTs and observational studies were: hypertension (39.4%-40.0% vs 40.1%-60.6%), other ischemic heart disease (12.3%-14.2% vs 12.5%-41.0%), diabetes (10.3%-10.9% vs 4.0%-38.9%), depression (8.5%-9.5% vs 17.0%-20.6%), and cardiac arrhythmia (7.8%-11.4% vs 11.3%-15.8%).

CONCLUSION

The clinical profile of COPD patients treated in the tiotropium trial program appears to be largely in the range of clinical characteristics, including cardiovascular comorbidities, reported for "real-life patients." The tiotropium RCTs tended to include patients with more severe disease than the observational studies.

Tiotropium HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) in COPD: a pooled safety analysis

INTRODUCTION

Tiotropium is prescribed for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) or Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ inhaler (5 μg once daily). The recent TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat(®) (TIOSPIR™) study demonstrated that both exhibit similar safety profiles. This analysis provides an updated comprehensive safety evaluation of tiotropium(®) using data from placebo-controlled HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials.

METHODS

Pooled analysis of adverse event (AE) data from tiotropium HandiHaler(®) 18 μg and Respimat(®) 5 μg randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, clinical trials in patients with COPD (treatment duration ≥4 weeks). Incidence rates, rate ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials, both together and separately.

RESULTS

In the 28 HandiHaler(®) and 7 Respimat(®) trials included in this analysis, 11,626 patients were treated with placebo and 12,929 with tiotropium, totaling 14,909 (12,469 with HandiHaler(®); 2,440 with Respimat(®)) patient-years of tiotropium exposure. Mean age was 65 years, and mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 1.16 L (41% predicted). The risk (RR [95% CI]) of AEs (0.90 [0.87, 0.93]) and of serious AEs (SAEs) (0.94 [0.89, 0.99]) was significantly lower in the tiotropium than in the placebo group (HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) pooled results), and there was a numerically lower risk of fatal AEs (FAEs) (0.90 [0.79, 1.01]). The risk of cardiac AEs (0.93 [0.85, 1.02]) was numerically lower in the tiotropium group. Incidences of typical anticholinergic AEs, but not SAEs, were higher with tiotropium. Analyzed separately by inhaler, the risks of AE and SAE in the tiotropium groups remained lower than in placebo and similarly for FAEs.

CONCLUSION

This analysis indicates that tiotropium is associated with lower rates of AEs, SAEs, and similar rates of FAEs than placebo when delivered via HandiHaler(®) or Respimat(®) (overall and separately) in patients with COPD.

Comparative efficacy of long-acting muscarinic antagonists in preventing COPD exacerbations: a network meta-analysis and meta-regression

Background:

We hypothesized a class effect of currently available long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; i.e. tiotropium as a dry powder inhaler or a soft mist inhaler, aclidinium bromide, and glycopyrronium) in preventing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. The hypothesis was tested with a network meta-analysis.

Methods:

Several databases and manufacturer’s websites were searched for relevant clinical trials. Randomized, controlled trials, of at least 12 weeks duration, comparing a LAMA with placebo or another LAMA were included. Moderate-to-severe and severe exacerbations were chosen as the outcome assessment criteria. The data were pooled using network meta-analysis.

Results:

A total of 27 studies with 48,140 subjects were included. All LAMAs reduced moderate-to-severe exacerbations compared with placebo. However, there were no statistically significant differences in preventing moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbations among LABAs. In a subgroup analysis restricting studies to those that had a minimum of 6 months of treatment, glycopyrronium was associated with the least-effective strategy and aclidinium was associated with the greatest probability of being the best therapy in preventing severe exacerbations. Our meta-regression analysis suggested that the prevention of COPD exacerbations were less effective in studies which allowed concomitant use of a long-acting beta agonist (LABA).

Conclusion:

All LAMAs were equally effective in preventing moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Aclidinium was associated with the lowest risk for severe exacerbations when treatment duration was 6 months or longer. The concomitant use of LABA may not enhance the efficacy of LAMAs in preventing COPD exacerbations. More studies are needed to further examine above findings.

Information for physicians and pharmacists about drugs that might cause dry mouth: a study of monographs and published literature

BACKGROUND

Over three-quarters of the older population take medications that can potentially cause dry mouth. Physicians or pharmacists rarely inform patients about this adverse effect and its potentially severe damage to the teeth, mouth and general health.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to (1) identify warnings in the literature about dry mouth associated with the most frequently prescribed pharmaceutical products in Canada; and (2) consider how this information might be obtained by physicians, pharmacists and patients.

METHODS

Monographs on the 72 most frequently prescribed medications during 2010 were retrieved from the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS, a standard drug information reference for physicians and pharmacists), the National Library of Medicine's 'DailyMed' database, directly from the manufacturers, and from a systematic search of biomedical journals.

RESULTS

The CPS provided monographs for 43% of the medications, and requests to manufacturers produced the remaining monographs. Mentions of dry mouth were identified in 61% of the products (43% amongst CPS monographs; an additional 43% amongst manufacturers' monographs; 7% in the DailyMed database and 7% from biomedical journals); five medications had contradictory reports in different monographs.

CONCLUSION

Nearly two-thirds (61%) of the most commonly prescribed medications can cause dry mouth, yet warnings about this adverse effect and its potentially serious consequences are not readily available to physicians, pharmacists, dentists or patients.

Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.2.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) -2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.35 to -2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one-year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The trials included in this review showed a difference in the risk of mortality when compared with placebo depending on the type of tiotropium delivery device used. However, these results have not been confirmed in a recent trial when 2.5 mcg or 5 mcg of tiotropium via Respimat was used in a direct comparison to the 18 mcg Handihaler.

Long-acting inhaled therapy (beta-agonists, anticholinergics and steroids) for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving quality of life and preventing or treating exacerbations.Treatment tends to begin with one inhaler, and additional therapies are introduced as necessary. For persistent or worsening symptoms, long-acting inhaled therapies taken once or twice daily are preferred over short-acting inhalers. Several Cochrane reviews have looked at the risks and benefits of specific long-acting inhaled therapies compared with placebo or other treatments. However for patients and clinicians, it is important to understand the merits of these treatments relative to each other, and whether a particular class of inhaled therapies is more beneficial than the others.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of treatment options for patients whose chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cannot be controlled by short-acting therapies alone. The review will not look at combination therapies usually considered later in the course of the disease.As part of this network meta-analysis, we will address the following issues.1. How does long-term efficacy compare between different pharmacological treatments for COPD?2. Are there limitations in the current evidence base that may compromise the conclusions drawn by this network meta-analysis? If so, what are the implications for future research?

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in existing Cochrane reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). In addition, we ran a comprehensive citation search on the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials (CAGR) and checked manufacturer websites and reference lists of other reviews. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group RCTs of at least 6 months' duration recruiting people with COPD. Studies were included if they compared any of the following treatments versus any other: long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs; formoterol, indacaterol, salmeterol); long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium); inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs; budesonide, fluticasone, mometasone); combination long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) (formoterol/budesonide, formoterol/mometasone, salmeterol/fluticasone); and placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a network meta-analysis using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for two efficacy outcomes: St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). We modelled the relative effectiveness of any two treatments as a function of each treatment relative to the reference treatment (placebo). We assumed that treatment effects were similar within treatment classes (LAMA, LABA, ICS, LABA/ICS). We present estimates of class effects, variability between treatments within each class and individual treatment effects compared with every other.To justify the analyses, we assessed the trials for clinical and methodological transitivity across comparisons. We tested the robustness of our analyses by performing sensitivity analyses for lack of blinding and by considering six- and 12-month data separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 71 RCTs randomly assigning 73,062 people with COPD to 184 treatment arms of interest. Trials were similar with regards to methodology, inclusion and exclusion criteria and key baseline characteristics. Participants were more often male, aged in their mid sixties, with FEV1 predicted normal between 40% and 50% and with substantial smoking histories (40+ pack-years). The risk of bias was generally low, although missing information made it hard to judge risk of selection bias and selective outcome reporting. Fixed effects were used for SGRQ analyses, and random effects for Trough FEV1 analyses, based on model fit statistics and deviance information criteria (DIC). SGRQ SGRQ data were available in 42 studies (n = 54,613). At six months, 39 pairwise comparisons were made between 18 treatments in 25 studies (n = 27,024). Combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked intervention, with a mean improvement over placebo of -3.89 units at six months (95% credible interval (CrI) -4.70 to -2.97) and -3.60 at 12 months (95% CrI -4.63 to -2.34). LAMAs and LABAs were ranked second and third at six months, with mean differences of -2.63 (95% CrI -3.53 to -1.97) and -2.29 (95% CrI -3.18 to -1.53), respectively. Inhaled corticosteroids were ranked fourth (MD -2.00, 95% CrI -3.06 to -0.87). Class differences between LABA, LAMA and ICS were less prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and aclidinium were ranked somewhat higher than other members of their classes, and formoterol 12 mcg, budesonide 400 mcg and formoterol/mometasone combination were ranked lower within their classes. There was considerable overlap in credible intervals and rankings for both classes and individual treatments. Trough FEV1 Trough FEV1 data were available in 46 studies (n = 47,409). At six months, 41 pairwise comparisons were made between 20 treatments in 31 studies (n = 29,271). As for SGRQ, combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked class, with a mean improvement over placebo of 133.3 mL at six months (95% CrI 100.6 to 164.0) and slightly less at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 100, 95% CrI 55.5 to 140.1). LAMAs (MD 103.5, 95% CrI 81.8 to 124.9) and LABAs (MD 99.4, 95% CrI 72.0 to 127.8) showed roughly equivalent results at six months, and ICSs were the fourth ranked class (MD 65.4, 95% CrI 33.1 to 96.9). As with SGRQ, initial differences between classes were not so prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and salmeterol/fluticasone were ranked slightly better than others in their class, and formoterol 12, aclidinium, budesonide and formoterol/budesonide combination were ranked lower within their classes. All credible intervals for individual rankings were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis compares four different classes of long-acting inhalers for people with COPD who need more than short-acting bronchodilators. Quality of life and lung function were improved most on combination inhalers (LABA and ICS) and least on ICS alone at 6 and at 12 months. Overall LAMA and LABA inhalers had similar effects, particularly at 12 months. The network has demonstrated the benefit of ICS when added to LABA for these outcomes in participants who largely had an FEV1 that was less than 50% predicted, but the additional expense of combination inhalers and any potential for increased adverse events (which has been established by other reviews) require consideration. Our findings are in keeping with current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

SOSPES: SPIRIVA® observational study measuring SGRQ score in routine medical practice in Central and Eastern Europe

PURPOSE

The long-acting inhaled anticholinergic agent, tiotropium, is recommended as first-line maintenance therapy for moderate to very severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) to improve symptoms, exercise tolerance, health status, and to reduce exacerbations. Few studies have evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of tiotropium in patients in routine clinical conditions. The current study was designed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy of tiotropium delivered via the HandiHaler® device on the health status of patients with COPD with Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) disease classification 2-4 in six central and eastern European countries in a real-life clinical setting.

METHODS

The study was an open-label, prospective, uncontrolled, and single-arm surveillance study with three clinic visits during a 6-month observation period (baseline, and months 3 and 6). Health status was measured using the disease-specific St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from baseline in SGRQ total score at the end of the 6-month observational period.

RESULTS

Patients treated with tiotropium 18 μg once daily showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction (improvement) of 21.7 units in the SGRQ total score, regardless of smoking status or cardiac comorbidities at enrollment (P < 0.0001). The analysis also showed that age, treatment compliance, and GOLD disease classification were significant factors that impact the health status of patients with COPD differently.

CONCLUSION

These results provide further support for the use of the tiotropium HandiHaler® as first-line maintenance treatment of patients with COPD with a clinician-assessed disease.

Comparative efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are faced with an increasingly difficult choice regarding the optimal bronchodilator for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) given the number of new treatments. The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of indacaterol 75/150/300 μg once daily (OD), glycopyrronium bromide 50 μg OD, tiotropium bromide 18 μg/5 μg OD, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily (BID), formoterol 12 μg BID, and placebo for moderate to severe COPD.

METHODS

Forty randomized controlled trials were combined in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest were trough and post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and responders (≥4 points), and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score and responders (≥1 point) at 6 months.

RESULTS

Indacaterol was associated with a higher trough FEV1 than other active treatments (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: 152 mL (95% credible interval (CrI): 126, 179); 160 mL (95% CrI: 133, 187)) and the greatest improvement in SGRQ score (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: -3.9 (95% CrI -5.2, -2.6); -3.6 (95% CrI -4.8, -2.3)). Glycopyrronium and tiotropium 18 μg resulted in the next best estimates for both outcomes with minor differences (difference for glycopyrronium versus tiotropium for trough FEV1 and SGRQ: 18 mL (95% CrI: -16, 51); -0.55 (95% CrI: -2.04, 0.92).

CONCLUSION

In terms of trough FEV1 and SGRQ score indacaterol, glycopyrronium, and tiotropium are expected to be the most effective bronchodilators.

Comparative efficacy of aclidinium versus glycopyrronium and tiotropium, as maintenance treatment of moderate to severe COPD patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Aclidinium bromide is a new long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) indicated for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of aclidinium was compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium, using a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in moderate-to-severe COPD patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs evaluating aclidinium 400 μg twice daily (BID), glycopyrronium 50 μg once daily (OD), tiotropium 18 μg OD, or tiotropium 5 μg OD in adults with moderate-to-severe COPD. The outcomes of interest were: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1); St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and proportion of patients achieving ≥4 unit change; Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and proportion of patients achieving ≥1 point change. The results were synthesized by means of a Bayesian NMA.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (22,542 patients) were included: aclidinium 400 μg BID (three studies); tiotropium 5 μg OD (three studies); tiotropium 18 μg OD (13 studies); and glycopyrronium 50 μg OD (two studies). Regarding trough FEV1 at 24 weeks, aclidinium demonstrated comparable efficacy to tiotropium 5 μg (difference in change from baseline [CFB]), (0.02 L [95% credible interval CrI -0.05, 0.09]); tiotropium 18 μg (0.02 L [95% CrI -0.05, 0.08]); and glycopyrronium (0.00 L [95% CrI -0.07, 0.07]). Aclidinium resulted in higher improvement in SGRQ score at 24 weeks, compared to tiotropium 5 μg (difference in CFB, -2.44 [95% CrI -4.82, -0.05]); and comparable results to tiotropium 18 μg (-1.80 [95% CrI -4.52, 0.14]) and glycopyrronium (-1.52 [95% CrI -4.08, 1.03]). Improvements in TDI score were comparable for all treatments.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance treatment with aclidinium 400 μg BID is expected to produce similar improvements in lung function, health-related quality of life, and dyspnea compared to tiotropium 5 μg OD; tiotropium 18 μg OD; and glycopyrronium 50 μg OD.

Patient-reported outcome measures for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : the exclusion of people with low literacy skills and learning disabilities

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are intended to reflect outcomes relevant to patients. They are increasingly used for healthcare quality improvement. To produce valid measures, patients should be involved in the development process but it is unclear whether this usually includes people with low literacy skills or learning disabilities. This potential exclusion raises concerns about whether these groups will be able to use these measures and participate in quality improvement practices.

METHODS

Taking PROMs for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an exemplar condition, our review determined the inclusion of people with low literacy skills and learning disabilities in research developing, validating, and using 12 PROMs for COPD patients. The studies included in our review were based on those identified in two existing systematic reviews and our update of this search.

RESULTS

People with low literacy skills and/or learning disabilities were excluded from the development of PROMs in two ways: explicitly through the participant eligibility criteria and, more commonly, implicitly through recruitment or administration methods that would require high-level reading and cognitive abilities. None of the studies mentioned efforts to include people with low literacy skills or learning disabilities.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that people with low literacy skills or learning disabilities are left out of the development of PROMs. Given that implicit exclusion was most common, researchers and those who administer PROMs may not even be aware of this problem. Without effort to improve inclusion, unequal quality improvement practices may become embedded in the health system.

Emerging Therapeutic Options for the Management of COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death worldwide and is projected to be the third by 2020. COPD is characterized by chronic airflow limitation caused by airway inflammation and parenchymal destruction that is usually progressive. Inhaled bronchodilators continue to be the mainstay of the current management of COPD. Safety and efficacy data of the recently approved medications including aclidinium, glycopyrronium, roflumilast, and indacaterol are reviewed here.

Tiotropium HandiHaler improves the survival of patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium HandiHaler (TioH) has been shown to improve lung function, exacerbations, and quality of life when added to the pharmacotherapy of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to synthesize current evidence regarding the impact of TioH on the survival rate of these patients, which is still controversial.

METHODS

A systematic search in the electronic databases of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, PschINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science was conducted by two independent authors (December 2012). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing inhaled TioH versus control (placebo or open control) were included. Data on total mortality were extracted, and missing data were obtained from authors. Relative risk (RR) for total mortality was calculated for each study and pooled. Heterogeneity, the risk of bias, and the publication bias were assessed in accordance with Cochrane's guidance.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight RCTs, evaluating 33,538 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Data were nonheterogeneous, so fixed-effects model analysis was used. The effect of TioH versus placebo was assessed in 19 RCTs, with a total population of 19,826 patients (31,914 patient years), of whom 1,018 died during the study period. A statistically significant decrease in all-cause mortality was associated with the administration of TioH [RR 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.98]. The number needed to treat to prevent one fatality was estimated to be 64 (95% CI 56-110). Comparisons of tiotropium against six more comparators were identified, but the insufficient sample size did not allow robust comparisons with respect to mortality.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis of RCTs showed that TioH prolongs the survival of COPD patients compared with placebo. Further RCTs are needed to confirm the potential superiority of prescriptions with versus without TioH in mortality reduction.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of EPs 7630 in adults with COPD

BACKGROUND

Preventing and managing exacerbations is one major component in COPD treatment. We investigated whether EPs 7630, a herbal drug preparation from the roots of Pelargonium sidoides, could prolong time to acute exacerbation in patients with COPD stage II/III.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, patients were randomly allocated to oral 24-week add-on therapy with 3 × 30 drops/day EPs 7630 (n = 99) or placebo (n = 101) to a standardised baseline-treatment. Primary endpoint was time to first exacerbation of COPD. Secondary endpoints were number of exacerbations, consumption of antibiotics, quality of life, patient satisfaction, inability to work, and tolerability.

RESULTS

Median time to exacerbation was significantly prolonged with EPs 7630 compared to placebo (57 versus 43 days, Kaplan-Maier-estimate; p = 0.005, one-sided centre-stratified log-rank test). The superiority of EPs 7630 was also confirmed in secondary endpoints, e.g., fewer exacerbations, less patients with antibiotic use, improved quality of life, higher patient satisfaction, and less days of inability to work. The incidence of minor gastrointestinal adverse events was higher in the EPs 7630 group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate a statistically significant and clinically relevant superiority of add-on therapy with EPs 7630 over placebo and a good long-term tolerability in the treatment of moderate to severe COPD. EPs 7630 prolonged time to exacerbations and reduced exacerbation frequency and antibiotic use. Trial Registration No.: ISRCTN01681733.

Efficacy and safety of NVA237 versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with COPD: the GLOW2 study

NVA237 (glycopyrronium bromide) is a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in development for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The GLycopyrronium bromide in COPD airWays clinical Study 2 (GLOW2) evaluated the efficacy and safety of NVA237 in moderate-to-severe COPD over 52 weeks. Patients were randomised 2:1:1 to NVA237 50 μg, placebo or open-label tiotropium 18 μg for 52 weeks. Primary end-point was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at 12 weeks. 1,066 patients were randomised, 810 completed the study. At week 12, trough FEV(1) increased significantly by 97 mL with NVA237 (95% CI 64.6-130.2; p<0.001) and 83 mL with tiotropium (95% CI 45.6-121.4; p<0.001). Compared with placebo, NVA237 produced significant improvements in dyspnoea (Transition Dyspnoea Index at week 26; p=0.002) and health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire at week 52; p<0.001). NVA237 significantly reduced the risk of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations by 34% (p=0.001) and the use of rescue medication (p=0.039), versus placebo. NVA237-placebo and tiotropium-placebo differences were comparable for all outcomes. Safety profiles were similar across groups. NVA237 50 μg provided significant improvements in lung function, dyspnoea, health status, exacerbations and rescue medication use, versus placebo, and was comparable to tiotropium. NVA237 can potentially be an alternative choice of LAMA for COPD patients.

Health-related quality of life and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in North Carolina

Background:

Comparisons of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) between persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and adults in the general population are not well described.

Aims:

To examine associations between COPD and four measures of HRQOL in a population-based sample.

Patients & Methods:

These relationships were examined using data from 13,887 adults aged >18 years who participated in the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) conducted in North Carolina (NC). Logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted relative odds (aOR).

Results:

The age-adjusted prevalence of COPD among NC adults was 5.4% (standard error 0.27). Nearly half of adults with COPD reported fair/poor health compared with 15% of those without the condition (age-aOR, 5.5; 95% confidence interval [ CI] , 4.4 to 6.8). On average, adults with COPD reported twice as many unhealthy days (physical/mental) as those without the condition. The age-adjusted prevalence of >14 unhealthy days during the prior 30 days was 45% for adults with COPD and 17% for those without. The aOR of >14 unhealthy days was 1.7 (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.2) times greater among adults with COPD compared with those without.

Conclusions:

These results suggest COPD is independently associated with lower levels of HRQOL and reinforce the importance of preventing COPD and its complications through health education messages stressing efforts to reduce total personal exposure to tobacco smoke, occupational dusts and chemicals, and other indoor and outdoor air pollutants linked to COPD and early disease recognition. Our findings represent one of the few statewide efforts in the US and provide guidance for disease management and policy decision making.

Modifying the course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: looking beyond the FEV1

COPD is defined by airflow limitation that is not fully reversible and is usually progressive. Thus, airflow obstruction (measured as FEV(1)) has traditionally been used as the benchmark defining disease modification with therapy. However, COPD exacerbations and extrapulmonary effects are common and burdensome and generally become more prominent as the disease progresses. Therefore, disease progression should be broader than FEV(1) alone. Interventions that reduce the frequency or severity of exacerbations or ameliorate extrapulmonary effects should also be considered disease modifiers. A narrow focus on FEV(1) will fail to capture all the beneficial effects of therapy on disease modification. Although smoking cessation has been unequivocally demonstrated to slow the rate of FEV(1) decline, inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting bronchodilator therapy may also have modest effects according to post hoc analysis. Maintenance pharmacotherapy with inhaled long-acting anti-muscarinic or β-adrenergic agents or combined β-adrenergic--inhaled corticosteroid reduces symptoms, improves lung function, reduces the frequency of exacerbations, and improves exercise capacity and HRQL. Pulmonary rehabilitation reduces symptom burden, increases exercise capacity, improves HRQL, and reduces health care utilization, probably through reducing the severity of exacerbations. Smoking cessation, lung volume reduction surgery, inhaled maintenance pharmacotherapy, and pulmonary rehabilitation administered in the post-exacerbation period may reduce mortality in COPD. These improvements over multiple outcome areas and over relatively long durations suggest that disease modification is indeed possible with existing therapies for COPD. Therefore, therapeutic nihilism in COPD is no longer warranted.

Tiotropium versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.1.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 μg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 μg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) -2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.35 to -2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one-year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The review however, shows that tiotropium delivered via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality compared with placebo, which calls for caution with this device whilst awaiting the results of an ongoing head-to-head trial comparing tiotropium delivery devices and doses.

Pharmacological treatment of COPD

Approximately seven million Brazilians over 40 years of age have COPD. In recent years, major advances have been made in the pharmacological treatment of this condition. We performed a systematic review including original articles on pharmacological treatments for COPD. We reviewed articles written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese; published between 2005 and 2009; and indexed in national and international databases. Articles with a sample size < 100 individuals were excluded. The outcome measures were symptoms, pulmonary function, quality of life, exacerbations, mortality, and adverse drug effects. Articles were classified in accordance with the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease criteria for the determination of the level of scientific evidence (grade of recommendation A, B, or C). Of the 84 articles selected, 40 (47.6%), 18 (21.4%), and 26 (31.0%) were classified as grades A, B, and C, respectively. Of the 420 analyses made in these articles, 236 were regarding the comparison between medications and placebos. Among these 236 analyses, the most commonly studied medications (in 66, 48, and 42 analyses, respectively) were long-acting anticholinergics; the combination of long-acting β(2) agonists and inhaled corticosteroids; and inhaled corticosteroids in isolation. Pulmonary function, adverse effects, and symptoms as outcomes generated 58, 54, and 35 analyses, respectively. The majority of the studies showed that the medications evaluated provided symptom relief; improved the quality of life and pulmonary function of patients; and prevented exacerbations. Few studies analyzed mortality as an outcome, and the role that pharmacological treatment plays in this outcome has yet to be fully defined. The medications studied are safe to use in the management of COPD and have few adverse effects.

Efficacy of once-daily indacaterol 75 μg relative to alternative bronchodilators in COPD: a study level and a patient level network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of indacaterol 75 μg once daily (OD), tiotropium 18 μg OD, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily (BID), formoterol 12 μg BID, and placebo for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) based on individual patient data (IPD) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the indacaterol trial program and aggregate data (AD) identified from a systematic review of RCTs.

METHODS

22 RCTs were included in the AD analysis that evaluated: indacaterol 75 μg (n = 2 studies), indacaterol 150 μg n = 5 (i.e. salmeterol 50 μg) (n = 5), indacaterol 300 μg (n = 2), tiotropium 18 μg (n = 10), salmeterol 50 μg (n = 7), and formoterol 12 μg (n = 4). All of the studies except for one head-to-head comparison (tiotropium vs. salmeterol) were placebo controlled. Outcomes of interest were trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at week 12. The AD from all trials was analysed simultaneously using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) and relative treatment effects between all regimens were obtained. In a separate analysis, the IPD available from the 6 indacaterol RCTs was analysed in a NMA. Treatment-by-covariate interactions were included in both analyses to improve similarity of the trials.

RESULTS

All interventions compared were more efficacious than placebo regarding FEV1 at 12 weeks. Indacaterol 75 μg is expected to result in a comparable FEV1 at 12 weeks to tiotropium and salmeterol based on both IPD and AD analyses. In comparison to formoterol, the IPD and AD results indicate indacaterol 75 μg is more efficacious (IPD = 0.07 L difference; 95%Credible Interval (CrI) 0.02 to 0.11; AD = 0.05 L difference; 95%CrI 0.01; 0.09). In terms of SGRQ total score at 12 weeks, indacaterol 75 μg and formoterol were more efficacious than placebo, whereas for tiotropium and salmeterol the credible intervals included zero for the AD results only (tiotropium: -2.99 points improvement versus placebo; 95%CrI -6.48 to 0.43; salmeterol:-2.52; 95%CrI: -5.34; 0.44). Both IPD and AD results suggest that indacaterol 75 μg is expected to be comparable to all active treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a synthesis of currently available AD RCT evidence as well as an IPD network meta-analysis of six RCTs, indacaterol 75 μg is expected to be at least as efficacious as formoterol and comparable to tiotropium and salmeterol regarding FEV1. Furthermore, indacaterol 75 μg shows comparable level of improvement in health-related quality of life to tiotropium, salmeterol, and formoterol, as measured by the SGRQ.

Clinical trial design in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: current perspectives and considerations with regard to blinding of tiotropium

Randomised, double-blind, controlled trials are considered the gold standard for evaluating a pharmacological agent, as they minimise any potential bias. However, it is not always possible to perform double-blind trials, particularly for medications delivered via specific devices, e.g. inhalers. In such cases, open-label studies can be employed instead. Methods used to minimise any potential bias introduced by open-label study design include randomisation, crossover study design, and objective measurements of primary efficacy and safety variables. Concise reviews analysing the effect of blinding procedures of comparator drugs on outcomes in respiratory trials are limited. Here, we compare data from different chronic obstructive pulmonary disease trials with once-daily indacaterol versus a blinded or non-blinded comparator. The clinical trial programme for indacaterol, a once-daily, long-acting β2-agonist, used tiotropium as a comparator either in an open-label or blinded fashion. Data from these studies showed that the effects of tiotropium were consistent for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, an objective measure, across blinded and non-blinded studies. The data were consistent with previous studies of double-blind tiotropium, suggesting that the open-label use of tiotropium did not introduce treatment bias. The effect of tiotropium on subjective measures (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire; transition dyspnoea index) varied slightly across blinded and non-blinded studies, indicating that minimal bias was introduced by using open-label tiotropium. Importantly, the studies used randomised, open-label tiotropium patients to treatment allocation, a method shown to minimise bias to a greater degree than blinding. In conclusion, it is important when reporting a clinical trial to be transparent about who was blinded and how the blinding was performed; if the design is open-label, additional efforts must be made to minimise risk of bias. If these recommendations are followed, and the data are considered in the full knowledge of any potential sources of bias, results with tiotropium suggest that data from open-label studies can provide valuable and credible evidence of the effects of therapy.

Tiotropium bromide inhalation powder: a review of its use in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The anticholinergic agent tiotropium bromide (Spiriva®) is a long-acting bronchodilator that is indicated for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This article reviews the clinical efficacy and tolerability of tiotropium bromide inhalation powder, administered using the HandiHaler® device, in patients with COPD, as well as reviewing its pharmacological properties and the results of pharmacoeconomic analyses. Shorter-term placebo-controlled trials in patients with COPD demonstrated significantly higher trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) responses with tiotropium bromide than with placebo, confirming it has a duration of action of ≥24 hours and is suitable for once-daily administration. Lung function improved to a greater extent with tiotropium bromide than with ipratropium bromide or, in most instances, salmeterol. Indacaterol was shown to be noninferior to tiotropium bromide in terms of the trough FEV(1) response. The large, 4-year UPLIFT® trial did not show a significant reduction in the annual rate of decline in FEV(1) with tiotropium bromide versus placebo in patients with COPD, although subgroup analyses demonstrated a significantly lower rate of decline with tiotropium bromide than with placebo in some patient groups (e.g. patients with moderate COPD, patients aged ≥50 years, patients not receiving maintenance therapy at baseline). Tiotropium bromide prevented exacerbations in patients with COPD, with a significantly lower exacerbation rate and a significantly longer time to first exacerbation seen with tiotropium bromide than with placebo or salmeterol. Exacerbation rates did not significantly differ between patients receiving tiotropium bromide and those receiving salmeterol/fluticasone propionate. Tiotropium bromide also had beneficial effects on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and other endpoints, such as dyspnoea and rescue medication use. Combination therapy with tiotropium bromide plus formoterol with or without budesonide improved lung function to a significantly greater extent than tiotropium bromide alone in patients with COPD. In addition, exacerbation rates were lower and HR-QOL was improved with tiotropium bromide plus budesonide/formoterol versus tiotropium bromide alone. Although the addition of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate to tiotropium bromide did not reduce the COPD exacerbation rate, it did improve lung function and HR-QOL. Tiotropium bromide inhalation powder is generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with anticholinergic adverse events (e.g. dry mouth, constipation, gastrointestinal obstruction, dysuria) among the most commonly reported adverse events. The UPLIFT® trial showed no significant difference between tiotropium bromide and placebo recipients in the risk of stroke, and the risk of serious cardiac adverse events (including congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction) was significantly lower with tiotropium bromide than with placebo. The absence of a detrimental effect on cardiovascular outcomes was supported by the results of a meta-analysis and pooled analyses. In addition, on-treatment mortality was lower with tiotropium bromide than with placebo in the UPLIFT® trial. Pooled analyses showed significantly lower cardiovascular mortality with tiotropium bromide than with placebo, with a meta-analysis demonstrating no significant difference between patients receiving tiotropium bromide and controls in cardiovascular mortality. Results of modelled pharmacoeconomic analyses conducted from a healthcare payer perspective in several developed countries suggest that tiotropium bromide is a cost-effective option in patients with COPD. In conclusion, tiotropium bromide inhalation powder is a useful option for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD.

Tiotropium: what came after the UPLIFT study

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by a progressive bronchial obstruction, and bronchodilators represent the maintenance therapeutic choice. Tiotropium is an anticholinergic drug that is proved to be safe, efficient and simple to handle; Respimat® technology was recently introduced as a new device for tiotropium administration.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews clinical trials and meta-analyses, with tiotropium efficacy as a primary end point, found in MedLine, the Cochrane trials database and Embase. Only the literature published after the UPLIFT study has been considered.

EXPERT OPINION

Data published after the UPLIFT study confirms the efficacy of tiotropium as maintenance COPD therapy and its capacity to reduce airflow obstruction, as well as lung hyperinflation. Nevertheless, there is a certain inhomogeneity in the definition and evaluation of COPD exacerbations, in lung functional parameters and quality-of-life assessment, and there has not always been a proper comparison between tiotropium and other long-acting bronchodilators. Respimat is comparable in efficacy to the HandiHaler®, using bioequivalent doses of tiotropium.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily NVA237 in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD: the GLOW1 trial

Background

NVA237 is a once-daily dry-powder formulation of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium bromide in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The glycopyrronium bromide in COPD airways clinical study 1 (GLOW1) evaluated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of NVA237 in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Methods

Patients with COPD with a smoking history of ≥ 10 pack-years, post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) < 80% and ≥ 30% predicted normal and FEV₁/forced vital capacity < 0.70 were enrolled. Patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with NVA237 50 μg once daily or placebo for 26 weeks with inhaled/intranasal corticosteroids or H₁ antagonists permitted in patients stabilized on them prior to study entry. The primary outcome measure was trough FEV₁ at Week 12.

Results

A total of 822 patients were randomized to NVA237 (n = 552) or placebo (n = 270). Least squares mean (± standard error) trough FEV₁ at Week 12 was significantly higher in patients receiving NVA237 (1.408 ± 0.0105 L), versus placebo (1.301 ± 0.0137 L; treatment difference 108 ± 14.8 mL, p < 0.001). Significant improvements in trough FEV₁ were apparent at the end of Day 1 and sustained through Week 26. FEV₁ was significantly improved in the NVA237 group versus placebo throughout the 24-hour periods on Day 1 and at Weeks 12 and 26, and at all other visits and timepoints. Transition dyspnoea index focal scores and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores were significantly improved with NVA237 versus placebo at Week 26, with treatment differences of 1.04 (p < 0.001) and-2.81 (p = 0.004), respectively. NVA237 significantly reduced the risk of first moderate/severe COPD exacerbation by 31% (p = 0.023) and use of rescue medication by 0.46 puffs per day (p = 0.005), versus placebo. NVA237 was well tolerated and had an acceptable safety profile, with a low frequency of cardiac and typical antimuscarinic adverse effects.

Conclusions

Once-daily NVA237 was safe and well tolerated and provided rapid, sustained improvements in lung function, improvements in dyspnoea, and health-related quality of life, and reduced the risk of exacerbations and the use of rescue medication.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01005901