Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

Effect of traditional Chinese medicine combined with conventional Western medicine for patients with severe/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled study

BACKGROUND

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of comprehensive therapy based on TCM patterns for patients with stable, severe to very severe COPD.

METHODS

A multicenter, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Eligible patients were randomly allocated in equal proportions to two groups: the trial group, which received TCM-based therapy with Bu-Fei Jian-Pi, and Bu-Fei Yi-Shen, and Yi-Qi Zi-Shen granules tailored to TCM syndromes, and the control group, which received a placebo resembling Chinese medicine. Both groups also received conventional Western medicine as part of their treatment. Acute exacerbations (AEs), lung function, dyspnea scores, the 6-min walking test (6MWT), and the COPD assessment test (CAT) were assessed over 12 months of treatment, with an additional 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 467 patients were included in the analysis with 228 in the experimental group and 239 in the control group. The Chinese herbal granules group significantly reduced AEs (0.63 vs. 1.03 events, P = 0.002), improved mMRC scores (-0.17 points, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.03; P = 0.015), 6MWT (29.24 m, 95% CI 10.71-47.77; P = 0.002), and CAT (-3.11 points, 95% CI -4.13 to -2.09, P < 0.001), compared with the control group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of FVC (l) and FEV1 (both in litres and as percentage).

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive therapy based on TCM patterns demonstrated efficacy in patients with severe to very severe COPD, reducing the frequency of AEs, improving dyspnea and exercise capacity, and alleviating symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270424. Registered 17 October 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02270424?id=NCT02270424&rank=1 .

Emulating randomized trials by observational database studies: the RCT-DUPLICATE initiative in COPD and asthma

Observational studies are increasingly used to provide real-world evidence in regulatory decision-making. The RCT-DUPLICATE initiative conducted observational studies emulating 2 published randomized trials in patients with asthma and 3 in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). For each trial, new-user cohorts were constructed from 2 US healthcare claims databases, comparing initiators of the study and comparator drugs, matched on propensity scores. Proportional hazards models were used to compare the treatments on study outcomes. The observational studies involved more subjects than the corresponding trials, with treatment arms well-matched on baseline characteristics. An asthma example involved emulation of the 26-week FDA-mandated D5896 trial. With 6494 asthma patients per arm, the hazard ratio (HR) of a serious asthma-related event with budesonide-formoterol vs budesonide was 1.29 (95% CI, 0.63-2.65) compared with 1.07 (95% CI, 0.70-1.65) in the trial. A COPD example is the emulation of the one-year IMPACT trial. With 4365 COPD patients per arm, the HR of a COPD exacerbation with triple therapy vs dual bronchodilators was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.00-1.17) compared with 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.91) in the trial. We found mainly discordant results between observational analyses and their emulated randomized trials, likely from the forced discontinuation of treatments prior to randomization in the trials, not mimicable in the observational analyses. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Clinical and Economic Evaluation of Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Tiotropium/Olodaterol Therapy in Maintenance Treatment-Naive Patients with COPD in the US

Purpose

Long-acting bronchodilator (LABD) therapy is recommended for maintenance treatment in most patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, triple therapy (TT; dual LABDs + inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]) is often used as first-line maintenance treatment. The benefits of TT versus dual LABDs as first-line treatments are unknown, necessitating an evaluation of its effectiveness and costs versus non-ICS alternatives.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective study assessed administrative claims of maintenance treatment-naive patients in the United States with COPD aged ≥40 years initiating single-inhaler fluticasone furoate+umeclidinium+vilanterol (FF+UMEC+VI) or tiotropium+olodaterol (TIO+OLO). Patients were propensity score-matched (1:1) and followed for up to 12 months. The primary outcome was time to first COPD exacerbation. Secondary outcomes included time to first pneumonia diagnosis, pneumonia-related hospitalization, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs. COPD exacerbation and pneumonia risk were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

A total of 5,121 and 3,996 patients met the eligibility criteria for the FF+UMEC+VI and TIO+OLO groups, respectively. Outcomes were assessed among 2,951 matched pairs. The risk of moderate or severe COPD exacerbation was not significantly different between FF+UMEC+VI and TIO+OLO groups (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 1.13 [0.99-1.29]; P=0.064). The risks of pneumonia (HR [95% CI]: 1.04 [0.85-1.27]; P=0.723) and pneumonia-related hospitalization (HR [95% CI]: 1.18 [0.78-1.79]; P=0.429) were also not significantly different between the groups. There were no significant differences in HCRU events or all-cause costs; however, FF+UMEC+VI initiators incurred greater COPD- and/or pneumonia-related pharmacy costs than TIO+OLO initiators (FF+UMEC+VI: $2,934 [$2,827-$3,041], TIO+OLO: $1,994 [$1,915-$2,073]; P<0.001).

Conclusion

In maintenance treatment-naive patients, FF+UMEC+VI offered no reduction in COPD exacerbation risk over TIO+OLO and resulted in higher pharmacy costs related to COPD and/or pneumonia treatment. These results support treatment recommendations for LAMA+LABA as initial maintenance therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier - NCT05169424.

Triple inhaled therapy of formoterol/glycopyrrolate/budesonide reduces the use of oral corticosteroids and antibiotics during COPD exacerbations in real-world conditions

INTRODUCTION

Triple inhaled therapy (TT) in one device has been shown in clinical trials to reduce exacerbations and in some cases mortality compared to dual inhaled therapy (DT) in one device in the population of moderate to very severe COPD patients and previous exacerbations. This evidence must be contrasted in real-world conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Non-intervention retrospective cohort study comparing the incidence of moderate and severe exacerbations in COPD patients treated with TT (formoterol, glycopyrrolate and budesonide, 5mcg/72mcg/320mcg, n=112) and DT (LAMA/LABA/ or LABA/inhaled glucocorticoid, n=107) for 26 weeks under clinical practice conditions. Moderate exacerbations were evaluated by the use of oral corticosteroids and/or courses of oral antibiotics and/or attendance at the emergency room (<24h) without hospitalization. Severe exacerbations were analyzed for hospitalizations for all causes, respiratory causes, cardiovascular causes, and pneumonia. Descriptive statistics for qualitative and quantitative variables, Chi square, Student's t-test and multivariate analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Both cohorts were homogeneous except for age (71.46 vs 66.65 TT vs DT, p<0.01). TT reduced the use of oral corticosteroids by 42% (HR 0.58; 95%CI 0.41-0.82, p<0.01) and the use of antibiotics by 25% (HR 0.75; 95%CI 0.60-0.94, p<0.01). Hospitalizations due to respiratory causes were 11% lower in the TT cohort (HR 0.89; 95%CI 0.79-0.99, p=0.044) with no difference in the incidence of pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple inhaled therapy in one device reduces the use of oral corticosteroids and antibiotics during COPD period of exacerbations and reduces respiratory hospitalizations without increasing the incidence of pneumonia in comparision with dual inhaled therapy.

Real-World Effectiveness of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for COPD: Impact of Diabetes Comorbidity

Type 2 diabetes is a frequent comorbidity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, with the GOLD treatment recommendations asserting that the presence of diabetes be disregarded in the choice of treatment.

In a cohort of COPD patients with frequent exacerbations, initiators of single-inhaler triple therapy or dual bronchodilators were compared on the incidence of COPD exacerbation and pneumonia over one year, adjusted by propensity score weighting and stratified by type 2 diabetes.

The COPD cohort included 1,114 initiators of triple inhalers and 4,233 of dual bronchodilators (28% with type 2 diabetes). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation with triple therapy was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.86-1.25) among COPD patients with type 2 diabetes and 0.74 (0.65-0.85) in those without. The incidence of severe pneumonia was elevated with triple therapy among patients with type 2 diabetes (HR 1.77; 1.14-2.75).

Triple therapy in COPD is effective among those without, but not those with, type 2 diabetes. Future therapeutic trials in COPD should consider diabetes comorbidity.

CHF6523 data suggest that the phosphoinositide 3-kinase delta isoform is not a suitable target for the management of COPD

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic inflammatory condition. Given patients with COPD continue to experience exacerbations despite the availability of effective therapies, anti-inflammatory treatments targeting novel pathways are needed. Kinases, notably the phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K), are thought to be involved in chronic airway inflammation, with this pathway proposed as a critical regulator of inflammation and oxidative stress response in COPD. CHF6523 is an inhaled PI3Kδ inhibitor that has shown positive preclinical results. This manuscript reports the results of a study of CHF6523 in patients with stable COPD (chronic bronchitis phenotype), and who had evidence of type-2 inflammation.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover study comprised two 28-day treatment periods separated by a 28-day washout. Patients (N = 44) inhaled CHF6523 in one period, and placebo in the other, both twice daily. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of CHF6523; the secondary objective was to assess CHF6523 pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints included target engagement (the relative reduction in phosphatidylinositol (3,4,5)-trisphosphate [PIP3]), pharmacodynamic evaluations such as airflow obstruction, and hyperinflation, and to identify biomarker(s) of drug response using proteomics and transcriptomics.

RESULTS

CHF6523 plasma pharmacokinetics were characterised by an early maximum concentration (Cmax), reached 15 and 10 min after dosing on Days 1 and 28, respectively, followed by a rapid decline. Systemic exposure on Day 28 showed limited accumulation, with ratios < 1.6 for Cmax and area under the curve from 0 to 12 h post-dose, and with steady state achieved on Day 20. Target engagement was confirmed by a significant 29.7% reduction from baseline in induced sputum PIP3 (29.5% reduction vs. placebo; adjusted ratio 0.705 [0.580, 0.856]; p = 0.001), but this did not translate into an anti-inflammatory pharmacodynamic effect, as assessed through measures including biomarkers and multi-omics. Additionally, although CHF6523 was generally well-tolerated, 95.2% of patients reported cough as an adverse event, most mild to moderate and resolving within one-hour post-dose.

CONCLUSIONS

These data, together with those from other PI3K inhibitors, suggest that PI3Kδ is not a suitable pathway for the management of COPD, as the achieved target engagement did not translate into any pharmacodynamic anti-inflammatory effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04032535); posted 23rd July 2019.

Triple Therapy De-Escalation and Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids to Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Objectives: The interpretation of evidence on the de-escalation of triple therapy with the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) to dual bronchodilator therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is conflicting. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ICS discontinuation from LABA-LAMA-ICS triple therapy compared to its continuation. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web Of Science, clinicaltrial.gov, and CENTRAL for RCTs and observational studies from inception to 22 March 2024, investigating the effect of triple therapy de-escalation with the withdrawal of ICSs to dual therapy on the risk of COPD exacerbation, pneumonia, and lung function. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024527942. Results: A total of 3335 studies was screened; 3 RCTs and 3 real-world non-interventional studies were identified as eligible. The analysis of the time to the first moderate or severe exacerbation showed a pooled HR of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.80-1.15; I2 = 77%) for ICS withdrawal compared to triple therapy continuation. The analysis according eosinophil levels showed that COPD subjects with ≥300 eosinophils/µL had a significant increase in the incidence of moderate or severe exacerbations when de-escalated to LABA/LAMA (pooled HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.00-1.82; I2: 56%). ICS withdrawal did not significantly affect the risk of mortality and pneumonia. Conclusions: The de-escalation of triple therapy with ICS withdrawal does not affect the main outcomes evaluated (moderate or severe exacerbations, change in trough FEV1). COPD patients with high blood eosinophils (≥2% or ≥300 cells/µL) are most likely to benefit from continuing triple therapy.

Benefits of budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate on lung function and exacerbations of COPD: a post-hoc analysis of the KRONOS study by blood eosinophil level and exacerbation history

BACKGROUND

Japanese guidelines recommend triple inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and no concurrent asthma diagnosis who experience frequent exacerbations and have blood eosinophil (EOS) count ≥ 300 cells/mm3, and in patients with COPD and asthma with continuing/worsening symptoms despite receiving dual ICS/LABA therapy. These post-hoc analyses of the KRONOS study in patients with COPD and without an asthma diagnosis, examine the effects of fixed-dose triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) versus dual therapies on lung function and exacerbations based on blood EOS count - focusing on blood EOS count 100 to < 300 cells/mm3 - as a function of exacerbation history and COPD severity.

METHODS

In KRONOS, patients were randomized to receive treatments that included BGF 320/14.4/10 µg, glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (GFF) 14.4/10 µg, or budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BFF) 320/10 µg via metered dose inhaler (two inhalations twice-daily for 24 weeks). These post-hoc analyses assessed changes from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) over 12-24 weeks and moderate or severe COPD exacerbations rates over 24 weeks. The KRONOS study was not prospectively powered for these subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Among patients with blood EOS count 100 to < 300 cells/mm3, least squares mean treatment differences for lung function improvement favored BGF over BFF in patients without an exacerbation history in the past year and in patients with moderate and severe COPD, with observed differences ranging from 62 ml to 73 ml across populations. In this same blood EOS population, moderate or severe exacerbation rates were reduced for BGF relative to GFF by 56% in patients without an exacerbation history in the past year, by 47% in patients with moderate COPD, and by 50% in patients with severe COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

These post-hoc analyses of patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD from the KRONOS study seem to indicate clinicians may want to consider a step-up to triple therapy in patients with persistent/worsening symptoms with blood EOS count > 100 cells/mm3, even if disease severity is moderate and there is no recent history of exacerbations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT02497001 (registration date, 13 July 2015).

Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids from Patients with COPD; Effect on Exacerbation Frequency and Lung Function: A Systematic Review

Background

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy has been demonstrated to reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations. It should only be prescribed to COPD patients who are not adequately controlled by dual long-acting bronchodilator therapy and who have ≥2 exacerbations per year and a blood eosinophil count ≥300cells/µL. ICS therapy is widely prescribed outside guidelines to COPD patients, making ICS withdrawal an important consideration. This systematic review aims to provide an up-to-date analysis of the effect of ICS withdrawal on exacerbation frequency, change in lung function (FEV1) and to determine the proportion of COPD patients who resume ICS therapy following withdrawal.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies which compared ICS withdrawal with ICS continuation treatment were included. Cochrane Central, Web of Science, CINHAL, Embase and OVID Medline were searched. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quality assessment of RCTs was conducted using GRADE. Meta-analysis of post-hoc analyses of RCTs of ICS withdrawal, stratified by blood eosinophil count (BEC), was undertaken.

Results

Ten RCTs (6642 patients randomised) and 6 observational studies (160,029 patients) were included in the results. When ICS was withdrawn and long-acting bronchodilator therapy was maintained, there was no consistent difference in exacerbation frequency or lung function change between the ICS withdrawal and continuation trial arms. The evidence for these effects was of moderate quality. There was insufficient evidence to draw a firm conclusion on the proportion of patients who resumed ICS therapy following withdrawal (estimated range 12-93% of the participants).

Discussion

Withdrawal of ICS therapy from patients with COPD is safe and feasible but should be accompanied by maintenance of bronchodilation therapy for optimal outcomes.

Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol for the Management of COPD in a UK Primary Care Population: Real-World Use and Early Medication Success

Purpose

Real-life research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol (BGF) in routine COPD primary care management. We assessed the frequency of medication success among patients with COPD who initiated BGF using real-world data.

Patients and Methods

Patients with a recorded diagnostic COPD code who started BGF with ≥2 prescriptions within 90-days were identified in the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database and followed from first prescription until censoring at the end of follow-up (180-days), death, leaving database or end of data at 24/10/2022. The primary outcome was medication success at 90-days post-BGF initiation, defined as no major cardiac or respiratory event (ie no complicated COPD exacerbation, hospitalization for any respiratory event, myocardial infarction, new/hospitalized heart failure, and death) and no incidence of pneumonia. Medication success was also assessed at 180-days post-BGF initiation. Overall real-life medication success was claimed if the lower 95% confidence interval (CI) for the proportion of patients meeting the primary outcome was ≥70% (defined a priori).

Results

Two hundred eighty-five patients were included. Prior to BGF initiation, these patients often had severe airflow obstruction (mean ppFEV1: 54.5%), were highly symptomatic (mMRC ≥2: 77.9% (n = 205/263); mean CAT score: 21.7 (SD 7.8)), with evidence of short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) over-use (≥3 inhalers/year: 62.1%, n=179/285), repeat OCS prescriptions (≥2 courses/year: 33.0%, n = 95/285) and multiple primary care consultations (≥2 visits/year: 61.1%, n = 174/285). Overall, 39.6% of patients (n = 113/285) switched from previous triple therapies. Real-life medication success was achieved by 96.5% of patients (n = 275/285 [95% CI: 93.6, 98.3]) during 90-days treatment with BGF and by 91.8% (n = 169/184 [95% CI: 86.9, 95.4]) of patients at 180-days. The prescribed daily dose of SABA remained stable over the study period.

Conclusion

The majority of patients initiating BGF experienced real-life medication success reflecting the absence of severe cardiopulmonary events. These benefits were apparent after 90-days of treatment and sustained over 180-days.

Monitoring COPD patients: systemic and bronchial eosinophilic inflammation in a 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

High blood eosinophils seem to predict exacerbations and response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of our study was to prospectively evaluate for 2 years, blood and sputum eosinophils in COPD patients treated with bronchodilators only at recruitment.

METHODS

COPD patients in stable condition treated with bronchodilators only underwent monitoring of lung function, blood and sputum eosinophils, exacerbations and comorbidities every 6 months for 2 years. ICS was added during follow-up when symptoms worsened.

RESULTS

63 COPD patients were enrolled: 53 were followed for 1 year, 41 for 2 years, 10 dropped-out. After 2 years, ICS was added in 12/41 patients (29%) without any statistically significant difference at time points considered. Blood and sputum eosinophils did not change during follow-up. Only FEV1/FVC at T0 was predictive of ICS addition during the 2 year-follow-up (OR:0.91; 95% CI: 0.83-0.99, p = 0.03). ICS addition did not impact on delta (T24-T0) FEV1, blood and sputum eosinophils and exacerbations. After 2 years, patients who received ICS had higher blood eosinophils than those in bronchodilator therapy (p = 0.042). Patients with history of ischemic heart disease increased blood eosinophils after 2 years [p = 0.03 for both percentage and counts].

CONCLUSIONS

Blood and sputum eosinophils remained stable during the 2 year follow-up and were not associated with worsened symptoms or exacerbations. Almost 30% of mild/moderate COPD patients in bronchodilator therapy at enrollment, received ICS for worsened symptoms in a 2 year-follow-up and only FEV1/FVC at T0 seems to predict this addition. History of ischemic heart disease seems to be associated with a progressive increase of blood eosinophils.

Observational studies to emulate randomized trials: Some real-world barriers

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) forms the basis for drug approval by regulatory agencies. Observational studies using existing data from healthcare databases now also provide real-world evidence (RWE) in regulatory decision-making. Several initiatives are assessing the value of RWE by conducting observational studies that emulate published RCTs. While many RCTs are straightforward to emulate, others are challenging. We describe three RCT design aspects that pose challenges for observational studies. First are trials that enrol already treated subjects who must discontinue these treatments at the time of randomization, which can distort the comparison with observational studies. Second is the inclusion of a run-in phase, especially to exclude non-compliant subjects from the trial. Third are trials that evaluate the effect of weaning off treatment. In conclusion, future randomized trials that aim to be emulated by observational studies could consider study designs that allow emulation and thus provide valid and complementary RWE.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of escalating to triple therapy versus switching to dual bronchodilators after discontinuing LABA/ICS in patients with COPD: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The latest guidelines discourage the use of long-acting beta2-agonists/inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the optimal subsequent treatment after discontinuing LABA/ICS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of switching from LABA/ICS to triple therapy (LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA)/ICS) or to dual bronchodilators (LABA/LAMA) in COPD patients.

DESIGN

This was a new-user, active-comparator, and propensity score-matched cohort study analyzing the Taiwanese nationwide healthcare insurance claims.

METHODS

We recruited COPD patients switching from LABA/ICS to triple therapy or to dual bronchodilators from 2015 to 2019. The primary effectiveness outcome was the annual rate of exacerbations, and safety outcomes included severe pneumonia and all-cause mortality. Stratification by prior exacerbations was conducted.

RESULTS

After matching, each group comprised 1892 patients, 55% of whom experienced no exacerbations in the prior year. Treatment with LABA/LAMA/ICS versus LABA/LAMA showed comparable annual rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations (incidence rate ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.91-1.19). However, switching to LABA/LAMA/ICS was associated with increased risks of severe pneumonia (hazard ratio (HR), 1.65; 95% CI, 1.30-2.09) and all-cause death (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.78). In patients with⩾2 prior exacerbations, LABA/LAMA/ICS versus LABA/LAMA was related to a 21% reduced rate of exacerbations but with a twofold increased pneumonia risk and a 49% elevated risk of all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Switching from LABA/ICS to triple therapy versus dual bronchodilators in COPD patients was associated with similar rates of annual exacerbations but was related to elevated risks of severe pneumonia and all-cause mortality. Among frequent exacerbators, triple therapy was associated with lower rates of exacerbation but was accompanied by increased risks of pneumonia and mortality compared to LABA/LAMA. Careful consideration of the examined safety events is necessary when switching from LABA/ICS to triple therapy in COPD management.

Bu-Fei Yi-Shen Granules Reduce Acute Exacerbations in Patients with GOLD 3-4 COPD: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease characterized by frequent acute exacerbations (AEs), especially in severe and very severe cases. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Bu-fei Yi-shen granules (BYGs) for COPD.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 348 COPD patients with GOLD 3-4 COPD. The patients were randomly assigned into experimental or control groups in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the experimental group were prescribed BYG, while those in the control group were administered a placebo, orally, twice daily, with 5 days on and 2 days off per week for 52 weeks. The outcomes included AEs, pulmonary function, clinical signs and symptoms, dyspnea scores (mMRC), quality of life scores, and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT).

Results

A total of 280 patients completed the trial, including 135 patients in the experimental group and 145 in the control group. Compared to the control group, significant differences were observed in frequencies of AEs (mean difference: -0.35; 95% CI: -0.61, -0.10; P = 0.006) and AE-related hospitalizations (-0.18; 95% CI: -0.36, -0.01; P = 0.04), 6MWD (40.93 m; 95% CI: 32.03, 49.83; P < 0.001), mMRC (-0.57; 95% CI: -0.76, -0.37; P < 0.001), total symptoms (-2.18; 95% CI: -2.84, -1.53; P < 0.001), SF-36 (11.60; 95% CI: 8.23, 14.97; P < 0.001), and mCOPD-PRO (-0.45; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.33; P < 0.001) after treatment. However, there were no significant differences in mortality, pulmonary function, and mESQ-PRO scores (P > 0.05). No obvious adverse events were observed.

Conclusion

BYG, as compared to a placebo, could significantly reduce the frequencies of AEs and AE-related hospitalizations for GOLD 3-4 COPD patients. Clinical symptoms, treatment satisfaction, quality of life, and exercise capacity improved. There was no significant improvement in mortality and pulmonary function.

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

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

Real-world comparative effectiveness of three single-inhaler dual bronchodilators for the treatment of COPD

BACKGROUND

Single-inhaler dual bronchodilators are now recommended as initial treatment of COPD for patients with multiple exacerbations or with moderate or severe dyspnoea. It is unclear whether there are differences in effectiveness among commonly used dual bronchodilators.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of COPD patients, aged ≥40 years, treated during 2017-2020, from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a real-world practice setting. Inhaled corticosteroid-naïve patients initiating vilanterol-umeclidinium (VIL-UME) were compared with those initiating olodaterol-tiotropium (OLO-TIO) or indacaterol-glycopyrronium (IND-GLY) dual bronchodilators primarily on the incidence of moderate and severe COPD exacerbation over 1 year, and corresponding hazard ratios (HRs), after adjustment by propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

The cohort included 15 224 initiators of VIL-UME, 5536 initiators of OLO-TIO and 5059 initiators of IND-GLY. The HR of a moderate or severe exacerbation with VIL-UME was 0.91 (95% CI 0.85-0.97) compared with OLO-TIO and 0.96 (95% CI 0.89-1.03) compared with IND-GLY. The risk of severe exacerbation was not different for VIL-UME when compared with OLO-TIO (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86-1.26) and IND-GLY (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.28). All-cause mortality was lower with VIL-UME compared with IND-GLY (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98), but not compared with OLO-TIO (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.04).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, the three dual bronchodilator combinations were similarly effective on the risk of a severe exacerbation of COPD. However, the VIL-UME and IND-GLY combinations may confer slightly superior effectiveness than OLO-TIO on the risk of moderate or severe exacerbation. The potential lower mortality with VIL-UME warrants further investigation.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay of treatment for asthma, but their role in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is debated. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients with COPD and frequent or severe exacerbations demonstrated a significant reduction (~25%) in exacerbations with ICS in combination with dual bronchodilator therapy (triple therapy). However, the suggestion of a mortality benefit associated with ICS in these trials has since been rejected by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration. Observational evidence from routine clinical practice demonstrates that dual bronchodilation is associated with better clinical outcomes than triple therapy in a broad population of patients with COPD and infrequent exacerbations. This reinforces guideline recommendations that ICS-containing maintenance therapy should be reserved for patients with frequent or severe exacerbations and high blood eosinophils (~10% of the COPD population), or those with concomitant asthma. However, data from routine clinical practice indicate ICS overuse, with up to 50-80% of patients prescribed ICS. Prescription of ICS in patients not fulfilling guideline criteria puts patients at unnecessary risk of pneumonia and other long-term adverse events and also has cost implications, without any clear benefit in disease control. In this article, we review the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD, drawing on evidence from RCTs and observational studies conducted in primary care. We also provide a practical guide to prescribing ICS, based on the latest global treatment guidelines, to help primary care providers identify patients for whom the benefits of ICS outweigh the risks.

Clinical and economic outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease initiating maintenance therapy with tiotropium bromide/olodaterol or fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend dual long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs)/long-acting β₂agonists (LABAs) as maintenance therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Escalation to triple therapy (TT) (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroid) is conditionally recommended for patients with continued exacerbations on dual LAMA/ LABA therapy. Despite this guidance, TT use is widespread across COPD severities, which could impact clinical and economic outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare COPD exacerbations, pneumonia events, and disease-related and all-cause health care resource utilization and costs (in 2020 US dollars) in patients initiating fixed-dose combinations of either LAMA/ LABA (tiotropium/olodaterol [TIO + OLO]) or TT (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF + UMEC + VI]). METHODS: This retrospective observational study of administrative claims included patients with COPD aged 40 years or older initiating TIO + OLO or FF + UMEC + VI from June 2015 to November 2019. TIO + OLO and FF + UMEC + VI cohorts in the overall and maintenance-naive populations were 1:1 propensity score matched on baseline demographics, comorbidities, COPD medications, health care resource utilization, and costs. Multivariable regression compared clinical and economic outcomes up to 12 months in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO postmatched cohorts. RESULTS: After matching, there were 5,658 and 3,025 pairs in the overall and maintenance-naive populations, respectively. In the overall population, the risk of any (moderate or severe) exacerbation was 7% lower in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO initiators (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.86-1.0; P = 0.047). There was no difference in the adjusted risk of any exacerbation in the maintenance-naive population (aHR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.88-1.10). Pneumonia risk was not statistically different between cohorts in the overall (aHR = 1.12; 95% CI = 0.98-1.27) and maintenance-naive (aHR = 1.13; 95% CI = 0.95-1.36) populations. COPD- and/or pneumonia-related adjusted total annualized costs (95% CI) were significantly greater for FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall ($17,633 [16,661-18,604] vs $14,558 [13,709-15,407]; P < 0.001; differences [% of relative increase] = $3,075 [21.1%]) and maintenancenaive ($19,032 [17,466-20,598] vs $15,004 [13,786-16,223]; P < 0.001; $4,028 [26.8%]) populations, with significantly higher pharmacy costs with FF + UMEC + VI (overall: $6,567 [6,503-6,632] vs $4,729 [4,676-4,783]; P < 0.001; $1,838 [38.9%]; maintenance-naive: $6,642 [6,560-6,724] vs $4,750 [4,676-4,825]; P < 0.001; $1,892 [39.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: A lower risk of exacerbation was observed with FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall population but not among the maintenance-naive population. Patients with COPD initiating TIO + OLO had lower annualized costs than FF + UMEC + VI initiators in the overall and maintenance-naive populations. Thus, in the maintenance-naive population, initiation with dual LAMA/LABA therapy per practice guidelines can improve real-world economic outcomes. Study registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05127304). DISCLOSURES: The study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc (BIPI). To ensure independent interpretation of clinical study results and enable authors to fulfill their role and obligations under the ICMJE criteria, BIPI grants all external authors access to relevant clinical study data. In adherence with the BIPI Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data, scientific and medical researchers can request access to clinical study data after publication of the primary manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal, regulatory activities are complete and other criteria are met. Dr Sethi has received honoraria/ fees for consulting/speaking from Astra-Zeneca, BIPI, and GlaxoSmithKline. He has received consulting fees for serving on data safety monitoring boards from Nuvaira and Pulmotect. He has received consulting fees from Apellis and Aerogen. His institution has received research funds for his participation in clinical trials from Regeneron and AstraZeneca. Ms Palli was an employee of BIPI at the time the study was conducted. Drs Clark and Shaikh are employees of BIPI. Ms Buysman and Mr Sargent are employees and Dr Bengtson was an employee of Optum, which was contracted by BIPI to conduct this study. Dr Ferguson reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; grants from Novartis, Altavant, and Knopp; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Verona, Theravance, Teva, and GlaxoSmithKline; and personal fees from Galderma, Orpheris, Dev.Pro, Syneos, and Ionis outside the submitted work. He was a paid consultant for BIPI for this study. The authors received no direct compensation related to the development of the manuscript. BIPI was given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations.

Triple therapy in COPD: understanding the data

Effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapy on exacerbation risk and mortality in COPD is exaggerated in IMPACT and ETHOS trials from confounding by prior ICS discontinuation: effectiveness fades in analyses and studies with no prior ICS discontinuation https://bit.ly/3tOgNdW.