Budesonide/formoterol: in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Drug-based therapeutic strategies for COVID-19-infected patients and their challenges

Emerging epidemic-prone diseases have introduced numerous health and economic challenges in recent years. Given current knowledge of COVID-19, herd immunity through vaccines alone is unlikely. In addition, vaccination of the global population is an ongoing challenge. Besides, the questions regarding the prevalence and the timing of immunization are still under investigation. Therefore, medical treatment remains essential in the management of COVID-19. Herein, recent advances from beginning observations of COVID-19 outbreak to an understanding of the essential factors contributing to the spread and transmission of COVID-19 and its treatment are reviewed. Furthermore, an in-depth discussion on the epidemiological aspects, clinical symptoms and most efficient medical treatment strategies to mitigate the mortality and spread rates of COVID-19 is presented.

Equivalent Lung Dose and Systemic Exposure of Budesonide/Formoterol Combination via Easyhaler and Turbuhaler

BACKGROUND

Easyhaler(®) device-metered dry powder inhaler containing budesonide and formoterol fumarate dihydrate (hereafter formoterol) for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has been developed. The current approvals of the product in Europe were based on several pharmacokinetic (PK) bioequivalence (BE) studies, and in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) modeling.

METHODS

Four PK studies were performed to compare the lung deposition and total systemic exposure of budesonide and formoterol after administration of budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler and the reference product, Symbicort Turbuhaler. The products were administered concomitantly with oral charcoal (lung deposition) and in two of the studies also without charcoal (total systemic exposure). Demonstration of BE for lung deposition (surrogate marker for efficacy) and non-inferiority for systemic exposure (surrogate marker for safety) were considered a proof of therapeutic equivalence. In addition, IVIVC models were constructed to predict study outcomes with different reference product fine particle doses (FPDs).

RESULTS

In the first pivotal study, the exposure and lung dose via Easyhaler were higher compared to the reference product (mean comparison estimates between 1.07 and 1.28) as the FPDs of the reference product batch were low. In the following studies, reference product batches with higher FPDs were utilized. In the second pivotal study, non-inferiority of Easyhaler compared to Turbuhaler was shown in safety and BE in efficacy for all other parameters except the formoterol AUCt. In the fourth study where two reference batches were compared to each other and Easyhaler, budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler was bioequivalent with one reference batch but not with the other having the highest FPDs amongst the 28 reference batches studied. In the IVIVC based study outcome predictions, the test product was bioequivalent with great proportion of the reference batches. For the test product and the median FPD reference product BE was predicted.

CONCLUSIONS

Equivalence regarding both safety and efficacy between budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler and Symbicort Turbuhaler was shown based on totality of evidence from the PK studies and IVIVC analyses, and therefore, therapeutic equivalence between the products can be concluded. The results of the PK studies are likely dependent on the variability of FPDs of the reference product batches.

Dual-pharmacology muscarinic antagonist and β₂ agonist molecules for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death in the world today. Bronchodilators, particularly muscarinic antagonists and β(2) agonists, are recommended for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Dual-pharmacology muscarinic antagonist- β(2) agonist (MABA) molecules present an exciting new approach to the treatment of COPD by combining muscarinic antagonism and β(2) agonism in a single entity. They have the potential to demonstrate additive or synergistic bronchodilation over either pharmacology alone. Due to this enticing prospect, several companies have now reported MABA discovery efforts through a conjugated/linked strategy with one candidate (GSK-961081) demonstrating clinical proof of concept. Several MABA crystal forms have been identified, satisfying the requirements for inhaled dosing devices. There are significant challenges in designing MABAs, but the potential to achieve enhanced bronchoprotection in patients and facilitate 'triple therapy' makes this an extremely important and exciting area of pharmaceutical research.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) on clinical outcomes in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (latest search August 2011) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists in the treatment of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality, study outcomes and adverse events. We also contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised trials (5997 participants) of good quality with a duration of six months to three years. All of the trials compared ICS/LABA combination inhalers with LABA and ICS as individual components. Four of these trials included fluticasone and salmeterol monocomponents and the remaining three included budesonide and formoterol monocomponents. There was no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, the number of patients experiencing exacerbations (odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.67), or the rate of exacerbations per patient year (rate ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.02) between inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists. The incidence of pneumonia, our co-primary outcome, was significantly higher among patients on inhaled corticosteroids than on long-acting beta(2)-agonists whether classified as an adverse event (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.73) or serious adverse event (Peto OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.93). Results of the secondary outcomes analysis were as follows. Mortality was higher in patients on inhaled corticosteroids compared to patients on long-acting beta(2)-agonists (Peto OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.42), although the difference was not statistically significant. Patients treated with beta(2)-agonists showed greater improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) compared to those treated with inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference (MD) 18.99 mL; 95% CI 0.52 to 37.46), whilst greater improvements in health-related quality of life were observed in patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids compared to those receiving long-acting beta(2)-agonists (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -0.74; 95% CI -1.42 to -0.06). In both cases the differences were statistically significant but rather small in magnitude. There were no statistically significant differences between ICS and LABA in the number of hospitalisations due to exacerbations, number of mild exacerbations, peak expiratory flow, dyspnoea, symptoms scores, use of rescue medication, adverse events, all cause hospitalisations, or withdrawals from studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Placebo-controlled trials have established the benefits of both long-acting beta-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid therapy for COPD patients as individual therapies. This review, which included trials allowing comparisons between LABA and ICS, has shown that the two therapies confer similar benefits across the majority of outcomes, including the frequency of exacerbations and mortality. Use of long-acting beta-agonists appears to confer a small additional benefit in terms of improvements in lung function compared to inhaled corticosteroids. On the other hand, inhaled corticosteroid therapy shows a small advantage over long-acting beta-agonist therapy in terms of health-related quality of life, but inhaled corticosteroids also increase the risk of pneumonia. This review supports current guidelines advocating long-acting beta-agonists as frontline therapy for COPD, with regular inhaled corticosteroid therapy as an adjunct in patients experiencing frequent exacerbations.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) on clinical outcomes in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (latest search August 2011) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists in the treatment of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality, study outcomes and adverse events. We also contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised trials (5997 participants) of good quality with a duration of six months to three years. All of the trials compared ICS/LABA combination inhalers with LABA and ICS as individual components. Four of these trials included fluticasone and salmeterol monocomponents and the remaining three included budesonide and formoterol monocomponents. There was no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, the number of patients experiencing exacerbations (odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.67), or the rate of exacerbations per patient year (rate ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.02) between inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists. The incidence of pneumonia, our co-primary outcome, was significantly higher among patients on inhaled corticosteroids than on long-acting beta(2)-agonists whether classified as an adverse event (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.73) or serious adverse event (Peto OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.93). Results of the secondary outcomes analysis were as follows. Mortality was higher in patients on inhaled corticosteroids compared to patients on long-acting beta(2)-agonists (Peto OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.42), although the difference was not statistically significant. Patients treated with beta(2)-agonists showed greater improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) compared to those treated with inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference (MD) 18.99 mL; 95% CI 0.52 to 37.46), whilst greater improvements in health-related quality of life were observed in patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids compared to those receiving long-acting beta(2)-agonists (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -0.74; 95% CI -1.42 to -0.06). In both cases the differences were statistically significant but rather small in magnitude. There were no statistically significant differences between ICS and LABA in the number of hospitalisations due to exacerbations, number of mild exacerbations, peak expiratory flow, dyspnoea, symptoms scores, use of rescue medication, adverse events, all cause hospitalisations, or withdrawals from studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Placebo-controlled trials have established the benefits of both long-acting beta-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid therapy for COPD patients as individual therapies. This review, which included trials allowing comparisons between LABA and ICS, has shown that the two therapies confer similar benefits across the majority of outcomes, including the frequency of exacerbations and mortality. Use of long-acting beta-agonists appears to confer a small additional benefit in terms of improvements in lung function compared to inhaled corticosteroids. On the other hand, inhaled corticosteroid therapy shows a small advantage over long-acting beta-agonist therapy in terms of health-related quality of life, but inhaled corticosteroids also increase the risk of pneumonia. This review supports current guidelines advocating long-acting beta-agonists as frontline therapy for COPD, with regular inhaled corticosteroid therapy as an adjunct in patients experiencing frequent exacerbations.

Advances in asthma and COPD management: delivering CFC-free inhaled therapy using Modulite technology

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) are currently used in the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Localized targeted delivery of these drugs into the lungs is achieved by means of two types of inhalation devices; pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and dry powder-inhalers (DPIs). For environmental reasons, the chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants used in pMDIs are now being replaced by ozone friendly hydrofluoroalkanes (HFAs). These new generation HFA-based pMDIs, developed to provide effective lung deposition of the active moiety, have a favorable safety and tolerability profile. However, HFA-based re-formulation of LABAs and ICS for pMDIs presents particular technical difficulties, especially in terms of ensuring dose content uniformity. This review focuses on the technology and clinical efficacy of the HFA solution pMDIs using Modulite platform technology (Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A). Modulite technology allows the development of HFA solution formulations that can mimic the established CFC-based drug formulations on a microgram to microgram basis and provides formulations with novel particle size distributions that improve on existing delivery systems; by manipulation of aerosol clouds and particle size, the delivery of HFA-formulated drugs can be optimized to either achieve fine particle fractions and deposition patterns similar to established CFC-based drug formulations, thus facilitating the transition to new environment-friendly pMDIs in the clinical setting, or achieve finer drug particles able to penetrate deeper into the bronchi for targeted drug delivery as medical need may dictate. Long-term, multiple-dose clinical studies of Modulite formulations of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), budesonide and formoterol have been demonstrated to be therapeutically equivalent to their respective previously established CFC or DPI formulations. As a result, a number of Modulite pMDIs have either recently gained regulatory approval in several European countries, or have completed clinical trials and are in the regulatory submission phase. Availability, in pMDI form, of drugs like formoterol, ICSs, and ICS/LABA combinations, all central to the effective management of asthma and COPD, is therefore expected to impact positively in assuring the continued availability of vital treatment options to patients and physicians.

Budesonide-formoterol (inhalation powder) in the treatment of COPD

The budesonide-formoterol dry powder inhaler (Symbicort Turbuhaler 160/ 4.5-640/18 microg/day) contains the long-acting beta2-adrenoreceptor agonist formoterol and the inhaled corticosteroid budesonide. Two large, 12-month trials examined the effect of budesonide-formoterol 160/4.5 microg twice daily in COPD patients who met these criteria. The studies were identical, except one in which the patients had received oral prednisolone 30 mg/ day and had inhaled formoterol 4.5 microg twice daily for 2 weeks before randomization. In terms of the FEV1, budesonide-formoterol produced an effect greater than that of both budesonide alone and formoterol alone reported in previous studies. The combination was generally more effective than either of the components in terms of peak expiratory flow, symptoms, and exacerbations. These advantages of the combination over those of either budesonide alone or formoterol alone were quite consistent. Improving lung function and decreasing symptoms significantly, budesonide-formoterol combination therapy provides significant clinical improvements in COPD, despite the limited reversibility of impaired lung function in the disease.

Budesonide and formoterol combination for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Current guidelines recommend the addition of inhaled steroids to bronchodilators, which are central to the symptomatic management of COPD in patients with severe disease. Budesonide/formoterol is a combination inhaled steroid and long-acting bronchodilator delivered by a dry-powder inhaler, approved for use in COPD. Two large, randomised, double-blind, 12-month studies found that combination budesonide/formoterol is more effective than either component alone in addressing many important aspects of the disease, such as pulmonary function, symptoms, use of relief medication, health-related quality of life and exacerbation in patients suffering from severe COPD. This review discusses the pharmacological and clinical properties of the drug.