Characteristics of Users and New Initiators of Single- and Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Germany

Purpose

To assess patient characteristics of users and new initiators of triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Germany.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients with COPD and ≥1 prescription for single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT; fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI] or beclomethasone dipropionate/glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol [BDP/GLY/FOR]) or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), using data from the AOK PLUS German sickness fund (1 January 2015-31 December 2019). The index date was the first date of prescription for FF/UMEC/VI or BDP/GLY/FOR (SITT users), or the first date of overlap of inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting β2-agonist, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (MITT users). Two cohorts were defined: the prevalent cohort included all identified triple therapy users; the incident cohort included patients newly initiating triple therapy for the first time (no prior use of MITT or SITT in the last 2 years). Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were assessed on the index date and during the 24-month pre-index period.

Results

In total, 18,630 patients were identified as prevalent triple therapy users (MITT: 17,945; FF/UMEC/VI: 700; BDP/GLY/FOR: 908; non-mutually exclusive) and 2932 patients were identified as incident triple therapy initiators (MITT: 2246; FF/UMEC/VI: 311; BDP/GLY/FOR: 395; non-mutually exclusive). For both the prevalent and incident cohorts, more than two-thirds of patients experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the preceding 24 months; in both cohorts more BDP/GLY/FOR users experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation, compared with FF/UMEC/VI and MITT users. Overall, 97.9% of prevalent triple therapy users and 86.4% of incident triple therapy initiators received maintenance treatment in the 24-month pre-index period.

Conclusion

In a real-world setting in Germany, triple therapy was most frequently used after maintenance therapy in patients with recent exacerbations, in line with current treatment recommendations.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparative effectiveness and safety of inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combinations vs. long-acting muscarinic antagonist in bronchiectasis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in bronchiectasis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic medical records of bronchiectasis patients initiating ICS/LABA FDC or LAMA between 2007 and 2021. All bronchiectasis diagnoses were made by radiologists using high-resolution computed tomography.

RESULTS

Of the 1,736 patients, 1,281 took ICS/LABA FDC and 455 LAMA. Among the 694 propensity score matched patients, ICS/LABA FDC had comparable outcomes to LAMA, with HRs of 1.22 (95% CI 0.81-1.83) for hospitalized respiratory infection, 1.06 (95% CI 0.84-1.33) for acute exacerbation, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.66-1.02) for all-cause hospitalization. Beclomethasone/formoterol (BEC/FOR) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) led to a lower risk of acute exacerbation compared to fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL) (BEC/FOR HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; BUD/FOR HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.93). BEC/FOR resulted in lower risks of hospitalized respiratory infection (HR 0.48, 95% 0.26-0.86) and all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.55, 95% 0.37-0.80) compared to FLU/SAL.

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide important evidence on the effectiveness and safety of ICS/LABA FDC compared with LAMA for bronchiectasis. BEC/FOR and BUD/FOR were associated with better outcomes than FLU/SAL.

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium/formoterol versus monotherapies and aclidinium versus placebo in Chinese and other Asian patients with moderate-to-severe COPD: The AVANT Phase 3 study

AVANT was a Phase 3, 24-week, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium/formoterol 400 μg/12 μg combination vs monotherapies and aclidinium vs placebo (1:1:1:1) in Asian patients (∼70% of whom were Chinese) with moderate-to-severe stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Endpoints were analyzed hierarchically to incorporate type I error control. At Week 24, aclidinium/formoterol demonstrated improvements from baseline in 1-h morning post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) vs aclidinium (least squares [LS] mean 92 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] 60, 124 mL; p < 0.001), and in trough FEV1 vs formoterol (LS mean 85 mL; 95% CI 53, 117 mL; p < 0.001). Furthermore, aclidinium provided improvements in trough FEV1 vs placebo (LS mean 134 mL; 95% CI 103, 166 mL; p < 0.001). There was an improvement in transition dyspnea index focal score at Week 24 for aclidinium/formoterol vs placebo (LS mean 0.8; 95% CI 0.2, 1.3; p = 0.005) but not for aclidinium vs placebo (LS mean 0.4; 95% CI -0.1, 1.0; p = 0.132). Improvements in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total scores occurred for aclidinium/formoterol vs placebo (LS mean -4.0; 95% CI -6.7, -1.4; p = 0.003) and aclidinium vs placebo (LS mean -2.9; 95% CI -5.5, -0.3; p = 0.031). Aclidinium/formoterol and aclidinium were well tolerated and safety findings were consistent with known profiles; rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) (aclidinium/formoterol: 54.8%; aclidinium: 47.4%; placebo: 53.9%), serious AEs (7.2, 7.9, and 7.8%, respectively), and AEs leading to discontinuation of study medication (2.3, 1.5, and 2.2%, respectively) were similar between groups.

Elevated blood lactate in COPD exacerbations associates with adverse clinical outcomes and signals excessive treatment with β2 -agonists

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Raised blood lactate secondary to high dose β2 -agonist treatment has been reported in asthma exacerbations but has not been investigated during acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). We explored associations of blood lactate measurements with disease outcomes and β2 -agonist treatments during AECOPD.

METHODS

Retrospective (n = 199) and prospective studies (n = 142) of patients hospitalized with AECOPD were conducted. The retrospective cohort was identified via medical records and the prospective cohort was recruited during hospitalization for AECOPD. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, β2 -agonist treatment, biochemical measurements and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with normal (≤2.0 mmol/L) versus elevated lactate (>2.0 mmol/L). Regression analyses examined associations of lactate measurements with β2 -agonist dosages.

RESULTS

Demographic data and comorbidities were similar between high versus normal lactate groups in both cohorts. The populations were elderly (mean >70 years), predominantly male (>60%) with reduced FEV1 (%) 48.2 ± 19 (prospective cohort). Lactate was elevated in approximately 50% of patients during AECOPD and not related to evidence of sepsis. In the prospective cohort, patients with high lactate had more tachypnoea, tachycardia, acidosis and hyperglycaemia (p < 0.05) and received more non-invasive ventilation (37% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001, prospective cohort). There was a trend to longer hospitalization (6 vs. 5 days, p = 0.06, prospective cohort). Higher cumulative β2 -agonist dosages were linked to elevated lactate levels (OR 1.04, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Elevated lactate during AECOPD was common, unrelated to sepsis and correlated with high cumulative doses of β2 -agonists. Raised lactate may indicate excessive β2 -agonist treatment and should now be investigated as a possible biomarker.

Patterns and Trends in the Use of Medications for COPD Control in a Cohort of 9476 Colombian Patients, 2017-2019

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) affects approximately 174 million people worldwide. The objective was to determine the trends of COPD medication use in a group of Colombian patients.

Patients and Methods

This was a retrospective study on prescription patterns of bronchodilators and other medications used in COPD from a population database with follow-up at 12 and 24 months. Patients older than 18 years of age of any sex with a COPD diagnostic code between 2017 and 2019 were included. Sociodemographic variables, medications, treatment schedules for COPD, comorbidities, comedications, and the specialty of the prescriber were considered.

Results

Data from 9476 people with COPD was evaluated. The mean age was 75.9 ± 10.7 years, 50.1% were male, and 86.8% were prescribed by a general practitioner. A total of 57.9% had comorbidities, most often hypertension (44.4%). At the baseline measurement, on average, they received 1.6 medications/patient, mainly short-acting antimuscarinics (3784; 39.9%), followed by short-acting β-agonists (2997, 31.6%) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (2239, 23.6%); more than half (5083, 53.6%) received a long-acting bronchodilator. Prescription of triple therapy (antimuscarinic, β-agonist, and ICS) went from 645 (6.8%) at baseline to 1388 (20.6%) at the 12-month mark.

Conclusion

This group of patients with COPD treated in Colombia frequently received short-acting bronchodilators and ICS, but a growing proportion are undergoing controlled therapy with long-acting bronchodilators, a situation that can improve the indicators of morbidity, exacerbations, and hospitalization.

Risk Assessment of Acute Myocardial Infarction and Stroke Associated with Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists, Alone or in Combination, versus Long-Acting beta2-Agonists

Background

The long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) aclidinium was approved in Europe in 2012 to relieve symptoms in adult patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A post-authorization safety study was initiated to assess potential cardiovascular risks associated with LAMAs versus long-acting beta2-agonists.

Purpose

To estimate incidence rates and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in new users of aclidinium, aclidinium/formoterol, tiotropium, other LAMA, long-acting beta-agonists/inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS), and LAMA/LABA compared with initiators of LABA.

Patients and Methods

This population-based cohort study included patients with COPD aged ≥40 years initiating COPD medications in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum database from 2012 to 2019. Poisson regression models were used to estimate the IRR for AMI, stroke, and MACE in users of COPD medications versus LABA, adjusting for clinically relevant covariables.

Results

The study included 11,121 new users of aclidinium, 4804 of aclidinium/formoterol, 56,198 of tiotropium, 23,856 of other LAMA, 17,450 of LAMA/LABA, 70,289 of LABA/ICS, and 13,716 of LABA. During periods of continuous medication use after initiation (current use), crude incidence rates per 1000 person-years for AMI ranged from 8.7 (aclidinium/formoterol) to 12.4 (LAMA/LABA), for stroke ranged from 4.8 (aclidinium/formoterol) to 7.2 (LAMA/LABA), and for MACE ranged from 13.5 (aclidinium/formoterol) to 19.3 (LAMA/LABA). Using LABA as reference, adjusted IRRs [95% confidence intervals] were close to 1 for all study drugs for AMI (lowest for aclidinium/formoterol, 0.95 [0.60–1.52], and highest for LAMA/LABA, 1.23 [0.91–1.67]), stroke (lowest for aclidinium/formoterol, 0.64 [0.39–1.06], and highest for tiotropium, 1.02 [0.81–1.27] for tiotropium) and for MACE (lowest for aclidinium, 0.93 [0.75–1.16], and highest for LAMA/LABA, 1.24 [0.97–1.59]).

Conclusion

Risks of AMI, stroke, and MACE in current users of aclidinium, aclidinium/formoterol, tiotropium, other LAMA, LAMA/LABA, or LABA/ICS were similar to the risks among current users of LABA.

Association between Inhaled β2-agonists Initiation and Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Population-based Nested Case-Control Study

Purpose

Despite ample evidence underpinning the efficacy of β₂-agonists in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the occurrence of β₁- and β₂-adrenoceptors in the heart suggests that β₂-agonists may have deleterious cardiac effects. We investigated the association between new users of long-or short-acting β₂-agonists (LABA or SABA) or ICS (inhaled corticosteroids)/LABA and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

Methods

A nested case–control analysis was conducted using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink of patients with asthma, COPD or asthma–COPD overlap with initial treatment of LABA, SABA, ICS/LABA, ICS, long-or short-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA or SAMA) between 01 January 1998 and 31 July 2018. The primary outcome was MACE, defined as the first occurrence of stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, or cardiovascular death. Each case was matched with up to 10 controls on age, sex, date of cohort-entry, and duration of follow-up. The risk of MACE associated with β₂-agonists was estimated using conditional logistic regression after controlling for potential confounders.

Results

The cohort included 180,567 new users of β₂-agonists, ICS, SAMA, or LAMA. Among asthmatics, β₂-agonists were not associated with the risk of MACE (SABA vs ICS: HR 1.29 [0.96–1.73]; ICS/LABA vs ICS, HR 0.75 [0.33–1.73]). In contrast, among COPD patients, LABA (HR, 2.38 [1.04–5.47]), SABA (HR, 2.02 [1.13–3.59]) and ICS/LABA (HR, 2.08 [1.04–4.16]) users had an increased risk of MACE compared with SAMA users. Among patients with asthma–COPD overlap, SABA (HR, 2.57 [1.26–5.24]) was associated with an increased risk of MACE compared with ICS.

Conclusion

In conclusion, initiation of LABA, SABA, or ICS/LABA in COPD or SABA in asthma–COPD overlap is associated with increased risk of MACE. No associations were observed among patients with asthma.

Real-world Safety and Efficacy of Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium in Japanese Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A 52-week Post-marketing Surveillance

Objective To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmorary disease (COPD) in a real-world setting in Japan. Methods This 52-week, multicentre, post-marketing surveillance conducted in Japan between December 2013 and August 2019 included patients using IND/GLY for the first time to relieve airway obstructive disorder-related symptoms. Safety outcomes included the incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and serious ADRs during the 52-week period. The incidence of priority variables, including cardiovascular/cerebrovascular (CCV) AEs, β-adrenergic-related or anticholinergic AEs and cough, was also assessed. Safety outcomes were also evaluated in elderly patients. Efficacy outcomes included a physician's global assessment, COPD assessment test (CAT) and lung function test. Results Of the 1,167 patients registered, 1,108 were included in the safety and efficacy analysis. In the safety analysis population, the incidence of AEs was 13.54%, that of SAEs was 4.69%, that of ADR was 3.61%, and that of serious ADRs was 0.36% over 52 weeks. CCV AEs, β-adrenergic-related and anticholinergic AEs and cough were reported as 2.62%, 1.99% and 0.63%, respectively. The physician's global assessment showed that the overall response rate at the last assessment was 74.19%. The mean (95% confidence interval) CAT scores decreased from the start of treatment to Week 52 with IND/GLY [-6.9 (-7.8 to -6.1)]. The lung function (FEV₁ and FVC) improved over time from the start of IND/GLY to Week 52. Conclusion IND/GLY demonstrated a good long-term safety profile in a real-world setting in Japanese patients with COPD, with beneficial effects in terms of the lung function and symptoms in clinical use.

PRIMUS – Prompt Initiation of Maintenance Therapy in the US: A Real-World Analysis of Clinical and Economic Outcomes Among Patients Initiating Triple Therapy Following a COPD Exacerbation

Purpose

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may experience moderate (requiring outpatient care) or severe (requiring hospitalization) disease exacerbations. Guidelines recommend escalation from dual to triple therapy (inhaled corticosteroid + long-acting beta agonist + long-acting muscarinic antagonist) after two moderate or one severe exacerbation in a year. This study examined whether prompt initiation of triple therapy lowers risk of future exacerbations and reduces healthcare costs, compared to delayed/very delayed triple therapy after an exacerbation.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective observational study of US healthcare claims included patients ≥40 years old with COPD who initiated triple therapy (1/1/2011–3/31/2020) after ≥2 moderate or ≥1 severe exacerbation in the prior year. The earliest of the second moderate or first severe exacerbation was the index date. Patients were stratified by triple therapy timing: prompt (≤30 days post-index), delayed (31–180 days), very delayed (181–365 days). COPD exacerbations, all-cause and COPD-related healthcare utilization and costs were assessed during 12 months post-index (follow-up). Multivariable regression estimated the effect of each 30-day delay in triple therapy on the odds of exacerbations, number of exacerbations, and costs during follow-up, controlling for patient characteristics.

Results

A total of 24,770 patients were included: 7577 prompt, 9676 delayed, 7517 very delayed. Each 30-day delay of triple therapy was associated with 11% and 7% increases in the odds of any exacerbation and a severe exacerbation, respectively (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.11 [1.10–1.13] and 1.07 [1.05–1.08]), a 4.3% (95% CI: 3.9–4.6%) increase in the number of exacerbations, a 1.8% (95% CI: 1.3–2.3%) increase in all-cause costs, and a 2.1% (95% CI: 1.6–2.6%) increase in COPD-related costs during follow-up.

Conclusion

Promptly initiating triple therapy after two moderate or one severe exacerbation is associated with decreased morbidity and economic burden in COPD. Proactive disease management may be warranted to prevent future exacerbations and lower costs among patients with COPD.

A scintigraphy study of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Triple therapy with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting muscarinic antagonists/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LAMA/LABA) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with continued symptoms or exacerbations, despite treatment with LAMA/LABA or ICS/LABA. The pulmonary, extrathoracic, and regional lung deposition patterns of a radiolabeled ICS/LAMA/LABA triple fixed-dose combination budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF 320/18/9.6 μg), delivered via a single Aerosphere metered dose inhaler (MDI) were previously assessed in healthy volunteers and showed good deposition to the central and peripheral airways (whole lung deposition: 37.7%). Here, we report the findings assessing BGF in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.

METHODS

This phase I, single-dose, open-label gamma scintigraphy imaging study (NCT03906045) was conducted in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Patients received two actuations of BGF MDI (160/9/4.8 μg per actuation) radiolabeled with technetium‑99‑pertechnetate, not exceeding 5 MBq per actuation. Immediately following each inhalation, patients performed a breath-hold of up to 10 s, then exhaled into an exhalation filter. Gamma scintigraphy imaging of the anterior and posterior views of the lungs and stomach, and a lateral head and neck view, were performed immediately after exhalation. The primary objective of the study was to assess the pulmonary deposition of BGF. Secondary objectives assessed the deposited dose of radiolabeled BGF in the oropharyngeal and stomach regions, on the actuator, and on the exhalation filter in addition to regional airway deposition patterns in the lungs.

RESULTS

The mean BGF emitted dose deposited in the lungs was 32.1% (standard deviation [SD] 15.6) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, 35.2% (SD 12.8) in patients with moderate COPD, and 28.7% (SD 18.4) in patients with severe/very severe COPD. Overall, the mean normalized outer/inner ratio was 0.55 (SD 0.19), while the standardized central/peripheral ratio was 2.21 (SD 1.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiolabeled BGF 320/18/9.6 μg was efficiently delivered and deposited throughout the entire lung, including large and small airways, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with similar deposition in patients with moderate COPD and patients with severe/very severe COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03906045. Registered 8 April 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03906045.

Extrafine HFA-beclomethasone-formoterol vs. nonextrafine combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long acting β2-agonist in patients with persistent asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Airway inflammation in asthma involves not only the central airways but extends to peripheral airways. Lung deposition may be key for an appropriate treatment of asthma. We compared the clinical effects of extrafine hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone-formoterol (BDP-F) versus equipotent doses of nonextrafine combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long acting β2-agonist (ICS-LABA) in asthma.

Methods

We identified eligible studies by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Data analysis was performed with the Review Manager 5.3.5 software (Cochrane IMS, 2014).

Results

A total of 2326 patients with asthma from ten published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled for analysis. Change from baseline in morning pre-dose peak expiratory flow (PEF), evening pre-dose PEF and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) were detected no significant differences between extrafine HFA-BDP-F and nonextrafine ICS-LABAs (p = 0.23, p = 0.99 and p = 0.23, respectively). Extrafine HFA-BDP-F did not show any greater benefit in forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of forced vital capacity (FEF25-75%), the parameter concerning peripheral airways (MD 0.03L/s, p = 0.65; n = 877). There were no substantial differences between interventions in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels or in its alveolar fraction. The overall analysis showed no significant benefit of extrafine HFA-BDP-F over nonextrafine ICS-LABA in improving Asthma Control Test (ACT) score (p = 0.30) or decreasing the number of puffs of rescue medication use (p = 0.16). Extrafine HFA-BDP-F did not lead to less exacerbations than nonextrafine ICS-LABA (RR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.20; I² = 0; p = 0.15).

Conclusion

Enrolled RCTs of extrafine HFA-BDP-F have demonstrated no significant advantages over the equivalent combination of nonextrafine ICS-LABA in improving pulmonary function concerning central airways or peripheral airways, improving asthma symptom control or reducing exacerbation rate.

Paradoxical bronchospasm in U.S. military veterans with COPD or asthma at a tertiary VA medical center in Chicago, Illinois

Inhaled short-acting β₂-adrenergic agonists can rarely elicit paradoxical bronchospasm (PB), which may be fatal. The purpose to this study was to determine whether post-bronchodilator PB is reported in spirometry test results of veterans with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) or asthma followed at the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center in Chicago between 2017-2020. Eighteen of 1,150 test reports reviewed were identified with post-bronchodilator PB (1.5%).12 out of the 18 identified patients with PB had COPD, 4 hadasthma and 2 had asthma/COPD. No report alluded to post-bronchodilator PB. Among the identified PB patients, there were 17 males and one female, 14 African Americans, 3 Caucasian and one Latinx, aged 67±8 years (mean±SD) with BMI 28±5 kg/m². Thirteen were ex-tobacco smokers, 4 current smokers and one never smoked. Most recent chest CT revealed emphysema in 8 veterans with COPD and bronchial wall thickening in 3. Chest radiographs of 4 veterans with asthma were unremarkable. All veterans were treated with inhaled β₂-adrenergic agonists. Five were treated with cardio selective beta₁ blockers and 10 for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Eleven veterans were diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea. In 12 veterans, inhaled albuterol (4 actuations)-induced decrease in FEV₁ was 22±8% and 367±167 mL from baseline. In 6 veterans, only FVC decreased significantly from baseline (14±3% and 448±179 mL). No veteran reported respiratory symptoms during or after spirometry testing. Two veterans died during follow-up. Based on spirometry test reports, inhaled β₂-adrenergic agonists were discontinued in 2 veterans with COPD and asthma. We propose that post-bronchodilator PB observed during spirometry testing of veterans should be recognized and reported, and its possible clinical implications addressed accordingly.

Real-world Safety and Efficacy of Indacaterol Maleate in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Evidence from the Long-term Post-marketing Surveillance in Japan

Objective Evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of indacaterol maleate in a real-life setting is limited. The objective of this post-marketing surveillance was to evaluate the real-life safety and efficacy of indacaterol maleate in Japanese patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods This was a 52-week post-marketing surveillance conducted between April 2012 and December 2018. The safety endpoints included the incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The efficacy endpoints included the physician-reported global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE), change from baseline in the COPD assessment test (CAT) results, forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and %FEV1 following 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks of indacaterol administration. Results Of the 1,846 enrolled patients, 1,726 were included in the safety and efficacy analyses. The mean age of the patients was 72.5 years old. Cough, pneumonia and COPD worsening were the most common AEs reported, while pneumonia (1.04%) was the most common SAE, and cough (1.68%) was the most common ADR. GETE showed that 69.70% of patients achieved an excellent/good/moderate response following indacaterol treatment. The CAT score decreased, and lung function parameters (FVC, FEV1 and %FEV1) improved across all the COPD stages following treatment with indacaterol. Conclusion Indacaterol showed a favorable safety and tolerability profile in Japanese patients with COPD without new safety signals observed in real-life settings. These findings demonstrated that indacaterol is an effective maintenance treatment in real-life practice for Japanese patients with COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroids do not adversely impact outcomes in COVID-19 positive patients with COPD: An analysis of Cleveland Clinic's COVID-19 registry

Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS) are commonly prescribed to patients with severe COPD and recurrent exacerbations. It is not known what impact ICS cause in terms of COVID-19 positivity or disease severity in COPD. This study examined 27,810 patients with COPD from the Cleveland Clinic COVID-19 registry between March 8th and September 16th, 2020. Electronic health records were used to determine diagnosis of COPD, ICS use, and clinical outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for demographics, month of COVID-19 testing, and comorbidities known to be associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease. Amongst the COPD patients who were tested for COVID-19, 44.1% of those taking an ICS-containing inhaler tested positive for COVID-19 versus 47.2% who tested negative for COVID-19 (p = 0.033). Of those who tested positive for COVID-19 (n = 1288), 371 (28.8%) required hospitalization. In-hospital outcomes were not significantly different when comparing ICS versus no ICS in terms of ICU admission (36.8% [74/201] vs 31.2% [53/170], p = 0.30), endotracheal intubation (21.9% [44/201] vs 16.5% [28/170], p = 0.24), or mortality (18.4% [37/201] vs 20.0% [34/170], p = 0.80). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated no significant differences in hospitalization (adj OR 1.12, CI: 0.90-1.38), ICU admission (adj OR: 1.31, CI: 0.82-2.10), need for mechanical ventilation (adj OR 1.65, CI: 0.69-4.02), or mortality (OR: 0.80, CI: 0.43-1.49). In conclusion, ICS therapy did not increase COVID-19 related healthcare utilization or mortality outcome in patients with COPD followed at the Cleveland Clinic health system. These findings should encourage clinicians to continue ICS therapy for COPD patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Cohort Study to Evaluate the Risk of Hospitalisation for Congestive Heart Failure Associated with the Use of Aclidinium and Other Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Medications in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink

BACKGROUND

The long-acting anticholinergic (LAMA) aclidinium was approved in Europe in 2012 to relieve symptoms in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A Post-Authorisation Safety Study (PASS) was initiated to assess potential cardiovascular safety concerns for aclidinium.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) for hospitalisation for heart failure in patients with COPD who were new users of aclidinium, tiotropium, other LAMA, long-acting beta-agonists/inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS), and LAMA/LABA were compared with initiators of LABA.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study included patients with COPD aged ≥40 years initiating COPD medications in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD in the United Kingdom from 2012 to 2017. Medications were identified via general practice prescriptions. The first-ever hospitalisations for heart failure were identified in the Hospital Episode Statistics, and general practitioner records from the CPRD. Poisson regression models were used to estimate the IRR for hospitalisation for heart failure in users of COPD medications versus LABA, adjusting for clinically relevant covariates.

RESULTS

The study included 4350 new users of aclidinium, 23,405 of tiotropium, 6977 of other LAMAs, 3122 of LAMA/LABA, 26,093 of LABA/ICS, and 5678 of LABA. Mean age was 69-70 years across medication groups. Aclidinium users had the highest proportion of severe COPD, and LABA users had the lowest (35% vs 19%, respectively). Crude incidence rates per 1000 person-years for the first-ever hospitalisation for heart failure ranged from 6.9 in LABA to 9.5 in aclidinium. Using LABA as reference, adjusted IRRs (95% confidence interval) for first-ever hospitalisation for heart failure were 0.90 (0.53-1.53) for aclidinium, 1.02 (0.69-1.51) for tiotropium, 0.86 (0.50-1.47) for other LAMAs, 1.09 (0.41-2.92) for LAMA/LABA, and 1.01 (0.69, 1.48) for LABA/ICS.

CONCLUSION

The study did not find increased risks of hospitalisations for heart failure in new users of aclidinium, tiotropium, other LAMAs, LAMA/LABA, and LABA/ICS compared with LABA.

Benefit/Risk Profile of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with major healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. International consortia recommend a personalized approach to treatment and management that aims to reduce both symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Recent clinical trials have investigated single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for patients with symptomatic COPD. Here, we review evidence from randomized controlled trials showing the benefits of SITT and weigh these against the reported risk of pneumonia with ICS use. We highlight the challenges associated with cross-trial comparisons of benefit/risk, discuss blood eosinophils as a marker of ICS responsiveness, and summarize current treatment recommendations and the position of SITT in the management of COPD, including potential advantages in terms of improving patient adherence. Evidence from trials of SITT versus dual therapies in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and increased risk of exacerbations shows benefits in lung function and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, the key benefits reported with SITT are significant reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations, with data also suggesting reduced all-cause mortality. These benefits outweigh the ICS-class effect of higher incidence of study-reported pneumonia compared with LAMA/LABA. Important differences in trial design, baseline population characteristics, such as exacerbation history, and assessment of outcomes, have significant implications for interpreting data from cross-trial comparisons. Current understanding interprets the blood eosinophil count as a continuum that can help predict response to ICS and has utility alongside other clinical factors to aid treatment decision-making. We conclude that treatment decisions in COPD should be guided by an approach that considers benefit versus risk, with early optimization of treatment essential for maximizing long-term benefits and patient outcomes.

Is the use of two versus one long-acting bronchodilator by patients with COPD associated with a higher risk of acute coronary syndrome in real-world clinical practice?

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular comorbidity is common among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and there is concern that long-acting bronchodilators (long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting beta₂ agonists (LABAs)) may further increase the risk of acute coronary events. Information about the impact of treatment intensification on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) risk in real-world settings is limited. We undertook a nationwide nested case-control study to estimate the risk of ACS in users of both a LAMA and a LABA relative to users of a LAMA.

METHODS

We used routinely collected national health and pharmaceutical dispensing data to establish a cohort of patients aged >45 years who initiated long-acting bronchodilator therapy for COPD between 1 February 2006 and 30 December 2013. Fatal and non-fatal ACS events during follow-up were identified using hospital discharge and mortality records. For each case we used risk set sampling to randomly select up to 10 controls, matched by date of birth, sex, date of cohort entry (first LAMA and/or LABA dispensing), and COPD severity.

RESULTS

From the cohort (n=83 417), we identified 5399 ACS cases during 281 292 person-years of follow-up. Compared with current use of LAMA therapy, current use of LAMA and LABA dual therapy was associated with a higher risk of ACS (OR 1.28 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.44)). The OR in an analysis restricted to fatal cases was 1.46 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.91).

CONCLUSION

In real-world clinical practice, use of two versus one long-acting bronchodilator by people with COPD is associated with a higher risk of ACS.

Prescribing Pathways to Triple Therapy: A Retrospective Observational Study of Adults with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the UK

Purpose

Treatment guidance for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommends inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)+long-acting muscarinic antagonist+long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) triple therapy for patients who experience recurrent exacerbations, persistent breathlessness, or exercise limitation on dual therapy. However, information is limited on pathways to triple therapy in the UK.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using de-identified patient-level data from UK primary care electronic medical records from January 1, 2005 to May 1, 2016. Data were included from patients who had their first triple therapy regimen (index date) recorded during the study period and a minimum of 12 months' pre-index data. Treatment pathways to triple therapy were recorded, and the proportion of patients on triple therapy before their COPD diagnosis was determined. Adherence to triple therapy was estimated using the proportion of days covered (PDC).

Results

After applying eligibility criteria, 82,300 patients were included, with a mean age at COPD diagnosis of 64.7 years. The major treatment pathway (27.9%) was the first initiation of ICS+LABA prior to triple therapy. Following COPD diagnosis, the median time to triple therapy was approximately 3.5 years. The estimated mean adherence to triple therapy was 81.8% PDC. Multivariate analysis showed that the following groups were more likely to have received previous therapy prior to triple therapy: females (versus males), patients with asthma (versus those without asthma), severe COPD (versus those with non-severe COPD), or fewer exacerbations (versus those with more exacerbations).

Conclusion

Treatment pathways to triple therapy in the UK are diverse, highlighting the need to better understand factors involved in clinical decision-making.

Triple Inhaled Therapy at Two Glucocorticoid Doses in Moderate-to-Very-Severe COPD

BACKGROUND

Triple fixed-dose regimens of an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been studied at single dose levels of inhaled glucocorticoid, but studies at two dose levels are lacking.

METHODS

In a 52-week, phase 3, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple therapy at two dose levels of inhaled glucocorticoid in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD and at least one exacerbation in the past year, we assigned patients in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive twice-daily inhaled doses of triple therapy (inhaled glucocorticoid [320 μg or 160 μg of budesonide], a LAMA [18 μg of glycopyrrolate], and a LABA [9.6 μg of formoterol]) or one of two dual therapies (18 μg of glycopyrrolate plus 9.6 μg of formoterol or 320 μg of budesonide plus 9.6 μg of formoterol). The primary end point was the annual rate (the estimated mean number per patient per year) of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations, as analyzed in the modified intention-to-treat population with the use of on-treatment data only.

RESULTS

The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 8509 patients. The annual rates of moderate or severe exacerbations were 1.08 in the 320-μg-budesonide triple-therapy group (2137 patients), 1.07 in the 160-μg-budesonide triple-therapy group (2121 patients), 1.42 in the glycopyrrolate-formoterol group (2120 patients), and 1.24 in the budesonide-formoterol group (2131 patients). The rate was significantly lower with 320-μg-budesonide triple therapy than with glycopyrrolate-formoterol (24% lower: rate ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.83; P<0.001) or budesonide-formoterol (13% lower: rate ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95; P = 0.003). Similarly, the rate was significantly lower with 160-μg-budesonide triple therapy than with glycopyrrolate-formoterol (25% lower: rate ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.83; P<0.001) or budesonide-formoterol (14% lower: rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95; P = 0.002). The incidence of any adverse event was similar across the treatment groups (range, 61.7 to 64.5%); the incidence of confirmed pneumonia ranged from 3.5 to 4.5% in the groups that included inhaled glucocorticoid use and was 2.3% in the glycopyrrolate-formoterol group.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy with twice-daily budesonide (at either the 160-μg or 320-μg dose), glycopyrrolate, and formoterol resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations than glycopyrrolate-formoterol or budesonide-formoterol. (Funded by AstraZeneca, ETHOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02465567.).

Triple Therapy with Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Improves Inspiratory Capacity in Patients with Asthma-Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Overlap

Purpose

Asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO), characterized by airway limitation, is an important condition with high incidence and mortality. Although some guidelines recommend triple therapy with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting muscarinic antagonists/long-acting β2 agonists, this treatment approach is based on the extrapolation of data from studies of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) alone.

Methods

A 12-week, randomized, open-label cross-over pilot study was conducted in 19 patients with ACO to investigate the effect of triple therapy with glycopyrrolate (GLY) 50 µg/day on budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BUD/FORM) 640/18 µg/day. The study period included a 4-week wash-out, 4-week run-in, and 4-week treatment period. Respiratory function tests, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), a COPD assessment test (CAT) and an asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) were carried out 0, 4, and 8 weeks after randomization.

Results

A total of 19 patients with stable ACO (19 males and no females) with a mean age of 70.7 ± 7.6 years (± standard deviation, SD; range 55-83 years) participated in this study. All patients were ex-smokers with a smoking history of 63.1 ± 41.1 pack-years (± SD). Mean values for inspiratory capacity (IC), an index of hyperinflation of the lung that causes exertional dyspnea and reduced exercise, were 1.93 L (± 0.47 L) after the run-in, 1.85 L (± 0.51 L) after the BUD/FORM dual therapy period and 2.11 L (± 0.58 L) after the BUD/GLY/FORM triple therapy period. IC values after the BUD/GLY/FORM triple therapy were significantly higher than those after the run-in (p < 0.02). FeNO values, ACQ, and CAT scores were not significantly different among the run-in, wash-out, and triple-therapy periods.

Conclusion

The present pilot study showed that triple therapy with BUD/GLY/FORM results in an improvement in lung function parameters including IC, indicating the potential value of triple therapy as standard treatment for ACO.

Comparative Effects of LAMA-LABA-ICS vs LAMA-LABA for COPD: Cohort Study in Real-World Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Triple therapy combinations of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), a long-acting beta₂-agonist (LABA), and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for COPD were studied in randomized trials and observational studies, with variable results. We compared the effectiveness and safety of triple therapy with a LAMA-LABA combination in a real-world clinical practice setting.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of patients with COPD during 2002 through 2015, ≥ 55 years of age, from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients initiating LAMA-LABA-ICS were matched 4:1 on time-conditional propensity scores with patients initiating LAMA-LABA, and followed for 1 year for the occurrence of a moderate or severe COPD exacerbation and severe pneumonia.

RESULTS

The cohort included 6,921 initiators of LAMA-LABA-ICS matched to 1,932 initiators of LAMA-LABA. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of a COPD exacerbation associated with LAMA-LABA-ICS initiation compared with LAMA-LABA initiation was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.87-1.08). For patients with blood eosinophil counts > 6%, the HR was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.46-0.94). For patients with two or more prior exacerbations, it was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.70-0.98). The incidence of severe pneumonia requiring hospitalization was increased with LAMA-LABA-ICS initiation (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.03-2.06).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, the triple combination of LAMA, LABA, and ICS inhalers is generally as effective as combining LAMA and LABA inhalers in preventing COPD exacerbations. However, with the possible exception of patients with significant eosinophilia or frequent exacerbators, a LAMA-LABA combination without ICS may be preferable because it is associated with fewer severe cases of pneumonia.

Inhaled steroids with and without regular formoterol for asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta₂-agonists and increases in asthma mortality. There has been much debate about whether regular (daily) long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA) are safe when used in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). This updated Cochrane Review includes results from two large trials that recruited 23,422 adolescents and adults mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events (SAEs) in trials that randomly assign participants with chronic asthma to regular formoterol and inhaled corticosteroids versus the same dose of inhaled corticosteroid alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data as well as FDA submissions in relation to formoterol. The date of the most recent search was February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with a parallel design involving adults, children, or both with asthma of any severity who received regular formoterol and ICS (separate or combined) treatment versus the same dose of ICS for at least 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and SAEs from the sponsors of the studies. We assessed our confidence in the evidence using GRADE recommendations. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 42 studies eligible for inclusion and included 39 studies in the analyses: 29 studies included 35,751 adults, and 10 studies included 4035 children and adolescents. Inhaled corticosteroids included beclomethasone (daily metered dosage 200 to 800 µg), budesonide (200 to 1600 µg), fluticasone (200 to 250 µg), and mometasone (200 to 800 µg). Formoterol metered dosage ranged from 12 to 48 µg daily. Fixed combination ICS was used in most of the studies. We judged the risk of selection bias, performance bias, and attrition bias as low, however most studies did not report independent assessment of causation of SAEs.DeathsSeventeen of 18,645 adults taking formoterol and ICS and 13 of 17,106 adults taking regular ICS died of any cause. The pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) was 1.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.56, moderate-certainty evidence), which equated to one death occurring for every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks; the corresponding risk amongst adults taking formoterol and ICS was also one death (95% CI 0 to 2 deaths). No deaths were reported in the trials on children and adolescents (4035 participants) (low-certainty evidence).In terms of asthma-related deaths, no children and adolescents died from asthma, but three of 12,777 adults in the formoterol and ICS treatment group died of asthma (both low-certainty evidence).Non-fatal serious adverse eventsA total of 401 adults experienced a non-fatal SAE of any cause on formoterol with ICS, compared to 369 adults who received regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.16, high-certainty evidence, 29 studies, 35,751 adults). For every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks, 22 adults had an SAE; the corresponding risk for those on formoterol and ICS was also 22 adults (95% CI 19 to 25).Thirty of 2491 children and adolescents experienced an SAE of any cause when receiving formoterol with ICS, compared to 13 of 1544 children and adolescents receiving ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 1.33 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.49, moderate-certainty evidence, 10 studies, 4035 children and adolescents). For every 1000 children and adolescents treated with ICS alone for 12.5 weeks, 8 had an non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk amongst those on formoterol and ICS was 11 children and adolescents (95% CI 6 to 21).Asthma-related serious adverse eventsNinety adults experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE with formoterol and ICS, compared to 102 with ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 0.86 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.14, moderate-certainty evidence, 28 studies, 35,158 adults). For every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks, 6 adults had an asthma-related non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk for those on formoterol and ICS was 5 adults (95% CI 4 to 7).Amongst children and adolescents, 9 experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE with formoterol and ICS, compared to 5 on ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 1.18 (95% CI 0.40 to 3.51, very low-certainty evidence, 10 studies, 4035 children and adolescents). For every 1000 children and adolescents treated with ICS alone for 12.5 weeks, 3 had an asthma-related non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk on formoterol and ICS was 4 (95% CI 1 to 11).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a difference in the risk of death (all-cause or asthma-related) in adults taking combined formoterol and ICS versus ICS alone (moderate- to low-certainty evidence). No deaths were reported in children and adolescents. The risk of dying when taking either treatment was very low, but we cannot be certain if there is a difference in mortality when taking additional formoterol to ICS (low-certainty evidence).We did not find a difference in the risk of non-fatal SAEs of any cause in adults (high-certainty evidence). A previous version of the review had shown a lower risk of asthma-related SAEs in adults taking combined formoterol and ICS; however, inclusion of new studies no longer shows a difference between treatments (moderate-certainty evidence).The reported number of children and adolescents with SAEs was small, so uncertainty remains in this age group.We included results from large studies mandated by the FDA. Clinical decisions and information provided to patients regarding regular use of formoterol and ICS need to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of formoterol and ICS versus the remaining degree of uncertainty associated with its potential harmful effects.

Evaluation of rescue medication use and medication adherence receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol versus tiotropium bromide/olodaterol

Background

This was the first real-world head-to-head study comparing inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combination treatments as maintenance therapy.

Methods

Retrospective observational study including commercial, Medicare Advantage with Part D or Part D-only enrollees aged ≥40 years from the Optum Research Database. Patients initiated umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) or tiotropium bromide/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) between June 1, 2015 and November 30, 2016 (index date) with 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous enrollment. Outcomes were modeled following the inverse probability of treatment weighting. The primary endpoint, rescue medication use, was modeled using weighted ordinary least squares regression with bootstrapped variance estimation. Intent-to-treat analysis evaluated non-inferiority and superiority of UMEC/VI to TIO/OLO with thresholds of 0.30 and 0 units, respectively. On-treatment sensitivity analysis evaluated the superiority of UMEC/VI to TIO/OLO for rescue medication use. The secondary endpoint, medication adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]≥80%), was evaluated using weighted logistic regression. Post hoc weighted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis evaluated escalation to multiple inhaler triple therapy (MITT).

Results

The study population included 14,324 patients; 9549 initiated UMEC/VI and 4775 initiated TIO/OLO. During the 12-month post-index period, UMEC/VI initiators used 0.16 fewer adjusted mean units of rescue medication than TIO/OLO initiators (95% CI: -0.28, -0.04), meeting pre-specified non-inferiority (P<0.001) and superiority (P=0.005) criteria; the on-treatment sensitivity analysis for superiority was not statistically significant. Significantly more UMEC/VI than TIO/OLO initiators (28.6% vs 22.7%; P<0.001) achieved a clinically meaningful level (PDC≥80%) of medication adherence. The adjusted risk of escalation to MITT was similar between treatment groups (HR=0.93; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.06; P=0.268).

Conclusion

UMEC/VI was superior to TIO/OLO for rescue medication use and UMEC/VI initiators had better medication adherence than TIO/OLO initiators. This study supports findings from a head-to-head trial that demonstrated significant, clinically meaningful improvements in lung function with UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO.

Pulmonary and cardiac drugs: clinically relevant interactions

Chronic heart and lung diseases are very common in the elderly population. The combination of chronic heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is also common and, according to current guidelines, these patients should be treated for both diseases. In patients with heart failure, beta-blockers are very important drugs because their use is associated with significantly improved morbidity and mortality. These beneficial effects were documented in patients with and without COPD, although theoretically there is a risk for bronchoconstriction, particularly with non-beta1 selective blockers. In COPD patients, long-acting sympathomimetics (LABA) improve lung function, dyspnea, and quality of life and their combination with a beta-blocker makes sense from a pharmacological and a clinical point of view, because any potential arrhythmogenic effects of the LABA will be ameliorated by the beta-blocker. Inhaled tiotropium, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), has been extensively investigated and no safety concerns were reported in terms of cardiac adverse effects. The same applies for the other approved LAMA preparations and LAMA-LABA combinations. Severe COPD causes air-trapping with increasing pressures in the thorax, leading to limitations in blood return into the thorax from the periphery of the body. This causes a decrease in stroke volume and cardiac index and is associated with dyspnea. All these adverse effects can be ameliorated by potent anti-obstructive therapy as recently shown by means of a LABA-LAMA combination.

Evidence-based review of data on the combination inhaler umeclidinium/vilanterol in patients with COPD

The use of inhaled, fixed-dose, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) combined with long-acting, beta2-adrenergic receptor agonists (LABA) has become a mainstay in the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). One of the fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combinations is the dry powder inhaler (DPI) of umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) and vilanterol trifenatate (VI) (62.5 µg/25 µg) approved for once-a-day maintenance treatment of COPD. This paper reviews the use of fixed-dose combination LAMA/LABA agents focusing on the UMEC/VI DPI inhaler in the maintenance treatment of COPD. The fixed-dose combination LAMA/LABA inhaler offers a step beyond a single inhaled maintenance agent but is still a single device for the COPD patient having frequent COPD exacerbations and persistent symptoms not well controlled on one agent. Currently available clinical trials suggest that the once-a-day DPI of UMEC/VI is well-tolerated, safe and non-inferior or better than other currently available inhaled fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combinations for COPD.

Controlled Trial of Budesonide-Formoterol as Needed for Mild Asthma

BACKGROUND

In double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, budesonide-formoterol used on an as-needed basis resulted in a lower risk of severe exacerbation of asthma than as-needed use of a short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA); the risk was similar to that of budesonide maintenance therapy plus as-needed SABA. The availability of data from clinical trials designed to better reflect clinical practice would be beneficial.

METHODS

We conducted a 52-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial involving adults with mild asthma. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: albuterol (100 μg, two inhalations from a pressurized metered-dose inhaler as needed for asthma symptoms) (albuterol group); budesonide (200 μg, one inhalation through a Turbuhaler twice daily) plus as-needed albuterol (budesonide maintenance group); or budesonide-formoterol (200 μg of budesonide and 6 μg of formoterol, one inhalation through a Turbuhaler as needed) (budesonide-formoterol group). Electronic monitoring of inhalers was used to measure medication use. The primary outcome was the annualized rate of asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS

The analysis included 668 of 675 patients who underwent randomization. The annualized exacerbation rate in the budesonide-formoterol group was lower than that in the albuterol group (absolute rate, 0.195 vs. 0.400; relative rate, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.72; P<0.001) and did not differ significantly from the rate in the budesonide maintenance group (absolute rate, 0.195 in the budesonide-formoterol group vs. 0.175 in the budesonide maintenance group; relative rate, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.79; P = 0.65). The number of severe exacerbations was lower in the budesonide-formoterol group than in both the albuterol group (9 vs. 23; relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.86) and the budesonide maintenance group (9 vs. 21; relative risk, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.96). The mean (±SD) dose of inhaled budesonide was 107±109 μg per day in the budesonide-formoterol group and 222±113 μg per day in the budesonide maintenance group. The incidence and type of adverse events reported were consistent with those in previous trials and with reports in clinical use.

CONCLUSIONS

In an open-label trial involving adults with mild asthma, budesonide-formoterol used as needed was superior to albuterol used as needed for the prevention of asthma exacerbations. (Funded by AstraZeneca and the Health Research Council of New Zealand; Novel START Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12615000999538.).

Once daily long-acting beta2-agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists in a combined inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory condition causing accumulation of mucus in the airways, cough, and breathlessness; the disease is progressive and is the fourth most common cause of death worldwide. Current treatment strategies for COPD are multi-modal and aim to reduce morbidity and mortality and increase patients' quality of life by slowing disease progression and preventing exacerbations. Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of a long-acting beta₂-agonist (LABA) plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) delivered via a single inhaler are approved by regulatory authorities in the USA, Europe, and Japan for the treatment of COPD. Several LABA/LAMA FDCs are available and recent meta-analyses have clarified their utility versus their mono-components in COPD. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of once-daily LABA/LAMA FDCs versus placebo will facilitate the comparison of different FDCs in future network meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the evidence for once-daily LABA/LAMA combinations (delivered in a single inhaler) versus placebo on clinically meaningful outcomes in patients with stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from Cochrane Airways' Specialised Register (CASR) and also conducted a search of the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch). We searched CASR and trial registries from their inception to 3 December 2018; we imposed no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group and cross-over randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing once-daily LABA/LAMA FDC versus placebo. We included studies reported as full-text, those published as abstract only, and unpublished data. We excluded very short-term trials with a duration of less than 3 weeks. We included adults (≥ 40 years old) with a diagnosis of stable COPD. We included studies that allowed participants to continue using their ICS during the trial as long as the ICS was not part of the randomised treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results to determine included studies, extracted data on prespecified outcomes of interest, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies; we resolved disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Where possible, we used a random-effects model to meta-analyse extracted data. We rated all outcomes using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system and presented results in 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified and included 22 RCTs randomly assigning 8641 people with COPD to either once-daily LABA/LAMA FDC (6252 participants) or placebo (3819 participants); nine studies had a cross-over design. Studies had a duration of between three and 52 weeks (median 12 weeks). The mean age of participants across the included studies ranged from 59 to 65 years and in 21 of 22 studies, participants had GOLD stage II or III COPD. Concomitant inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use was permitted in all of the included studies (where stated); across the included studies, between 28% to 58% of participants were using ICS at baseline. Six studies evaluated the once-daily combination of IND/GLY (110/50 μg), seven studies evaluated TIO/OLO (2.5/5 or 5/5 μg), eight studies evaluated UMEC/VI (62.5/5, 125/25 or 500/25 μg) and one study evaluated ACD/FOR (200/6, 200/12 or 200/18 μg); all LABA/LAMA combinations were compared with placebo.The risk of bias was generally considered to be low or unknown (insufficient detail provided), with only one study per domain considered to have a high risk of bias except for the domain 'other bias' which was determined to be at high risk of bias in four studies (in three studies, disease severity was greater at baseline in participants receiving LABA/LAMA compared with participants receiving placebo, which would be expected to shift the treatment effect in favour of placebo).Compared to the placebo, the pooled results for the primary outcomes for the once-daily LABA/LAMA arm were as follows: all-cause mortality, OR 1.88 (95% CI 0.81 to 4.36, low-certainty evidence); all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs), OR 1.06 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.28, high-certainty evidence); acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD), OR 0.53 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.78, moderate-certainty evidence); adjusted St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, MD -4.08 (95% CI -4.80 to -3.36, high-certainty evidence); proportion of SGRQ responders, OR 1.75 (95% CI 1.54 to 1.99). Compared with placebo, the pooled results for the secondary outcomes for the once-daily LABA/LAMA arm were as follows: adjusted trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), MD 0.20 L (95% CI 0.19 to 0.21, moderate-certainty evidence); adjusted peak FEV1, MD 0.31 L (95% CI 0.29 to 0.32, moderate-certainty evidence); and all-cause AEs, OR 0.95 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.04; high-certainty evidence). No studies reported data for the 6-minute walk test. The results were generally consistent across subgroups for different LABA/LAMA combinations and doses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, once-daily LABA/LAMA (either IND/GLY, UMEC/VI or TIO/OLO) via a combination inhaler is associated with a clinically significant improvement in lung function and health-related quality of life in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD; UMEC/VI appears to reduce the rate of exacerbations in this population. These conclusions are supported by moderate or high certainty evidence based on studies with an observation period of up to one year.

Improving usability and maintaining performance: human-factor and aerosol-performance studies evaluating the new reusable Respimat inhaler

PURPOSE

The Respimat is a handheld, propellant-free, soft-mist inhaler. Observations by patients and physicians prompted development of an improved second-generation Respimat inhaler. Human-factor studies assessing the usability of the new inhaler and in vitro assessment of aerosol performance are important to demonstrate functionality of the updated inhaler.

METHODS

Studies were performed to assess any possible impact of the reusable Respimat inhaler design on aerosol performance (delivered dose [DD] and fine-particle dose [FPD]) and iteratively assess and improve usability of the new design. The tiotropium-olodaterol inhalation solution for Respimat was used as a model. The DD and FPD of the reusable Respimat inhaler (across multiple cartridges) and the disposable Respimat inhaler were determined by laser diffraction and with an alternative Andersen cascade impactor. Usability was measured across three studies involving health care professionals and patients with diagnoses of COPD, asthma, or combined disease (with and without experience with the Respimat inhaler). These studies measured performance of handling tasks and collected subjective feedback directly related to the inhaler's new or altered features, which fed into optimization of the inhaler.

RESULTS

DDs of tiotropium and olodaterol were stable up to 15 cartridges and consistently within the upper and lower limits of the disposable Respimat inhaler. The FPD was also found to be batch-consistent over the cartridges and comparable with the reference. The usability of the reusable Respimat inhaler compared with the disposable inhaler was improved in terms of assembly and daily use. Cartridge exchange was rated as intuitive and easy to very easy.

CONCLUSION

The new reusable Respimat is a medical inhaler developed with enhanced features that meets health care professionals' and patients' needs. Drug delivery across multiple cartridges is not affected by the design. Compared with the original disposable inhaler, the usability of the reusable inhaler has been improved, and cartridge exchange was rated as easy to perform. The reusable Respimat provides greater convenience for patients vs the disposable inhaler, with reduced environmental impact.

Fixed-Dose Combinations of Long-Acting Bronchodilators for the Management of COPD: Global and Asian Perspectives

Maintenance bronchodilator therapy with long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) is the cornerstone treatment for patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of LABA/LAMA are recommended for the majority of symptomatic COPD patients by global guidelines; regional guidelines such as the Japanese and Korean guidelines also provide similar recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA FDCs. This review comprehensively describes the latest clinical evidence from key studies on the efficacy and safety of four approved LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations: indacaterol/glycopyrronium, vilanterol/umeclidinium, formoterol/aclidinium, and olodaterol/tiotropium. Additionally, in this review we describe the rationale behind the use of LABA/LAMA FDC therapy, key findings from the preclinical and clinical trial evaluation of respective LABA and LAMA monocomponents, and the efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA FDCs. Special emphasis is placed on the clinical evidence for the monocomponents and LABA/LAMA FDCs from the Asian population. This detailed overview of the efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA FDCs in global and Asian COPD patients is envisaged to provide a better understanding of the benefits of these therapies and to inform healthcare providers and patients on their appropriate use.Funding: Novartis Pharma K.K.

Alignment of Inhaled Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Therapies with Published Strategies. Analysis of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease Recommendations in SPIROMICS

RATIONALE

Despite awareness of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment recommendations, uptake is poor. The Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) spans 2010-2016, providing an opportunity to assess integration of 2011 Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) treatment strategies over time in a large observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how COPD treatment aligns with 2011 GOLD strategies and determine factors associated with failure to align with recommendations.

METHODS

Information on inhaled medication use collected via questionnaire annually for 4 years was compiled into therapeutic classes (long-acting antimuscarinic agent, long-acting β-agonist, inhaled corticosteroids [ICS], and combinations thereof). Medications were not modified by SPIROMICS investigators. 2011 GOLD COPD categories A, B, C, and D were assigned. Alignment of inhaler regimen with first-/second-line GOLD recommendations was determined, stratifying into recommendation aligned or nonaligned. Recommendation-nonaligned participants were further stratified into overuse and underuse categories.

RESULTS

Of 1,721 participants with COPD, at baseline, 52% of regimens aligned with GOLD recommendations. Among participants with nonaligned regimens, 46% reported underuse, predominately owing to lack of long-acting inhalers in GOLD category D. Of the 54% reporting overuse, 95% were treated with nonindicated ICS-containing regimens. Among 431 participants with 4 years of follow-up data, recommendation alignment did not change over time. When we compared 2011 and 2017 recommendations, we found that 47% did not align with either set of recommendations, whereas 35% were in alignment with both recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Among SPIROMICS participants with COPD, nearly 50% reported inhaler regimens that did not align with GOLD recommendations. Nonalignment was driven largely by overuse of ICS regimens in milder disease and lack of long-acting inhalers in severe disease.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in comparison with other long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combinations in COPD

BACKGROUND

Dual bronchodilation with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) fixed-dose combination (FDC) is an established treatment strategy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The relative efficacy and safety of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (GFF MDI 18/9.6 μg) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, compared with other licensed LAMA/LABA FDCs, was investigated using an integrated Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review and subsequent screening process identified randomized controlled trials of ⩾10 weeks' duration that enrolled patients aged ⩾40 years with moderate-to-very severe COPD and included at least one LAMA/LABA FDC or open LAMA + LABA treatment arm. NMAs were conducted for outcomes including change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and transition dyspnea index (TDI) parameters, annualized rate of exacerbations, use of rescue medication, adverse events, and all-cause withdrawals. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses accounted for heterogeneity across studies.

RESULTS

In total, 29 studies including 34,617 patients contributed to the NMA for efficacy or safety outcomes at week 24 or exacerbations. For all LAMA/LABA FDCs with data available, significantly greater improvements in FEV1 [trough, peak, and area under the curve (AUC)0-4], SGRQ total score and TDI focal score at week 24, and annualized rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations, were observed versus placebo. Where indirect comparisons were possible, differences between GFF MDI and other LAMA/LABA FDCs were small relative to established margins of clinical relevance, and not statistically significant. The safety and tolerability profile of GFF MDI was consistent with other LAMA/LABA FDCs and placebo. The results of the meta-regression were generally similar to the base case.

CONCLUSIONS

GFF MDI demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety outcomes to other LAMA/LABA FDCs. Personalization of treatment choice within the class on the basis of other factors such as patient preference may be appropriate.

Inhaled steroids with and without regular salmeterol for asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between use of beta₂-agonists and increased asthma mortality. Much debate has surrounded possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABAs) are safe, particularly when used in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). This is an update of a Cochrane Review that now includes data from two large trials including 11,679 adults and 6208 children; both were mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  OBJECTIVES: To assess risks of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events (SAEs) in trials that randomised participants with chronic asthma to regular salmeterol and ICS versus the same dose of ICS.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trials registers for unpublished trial data. We also checked FDA submissions in relation to salmeterol. The date of the most recent search was 10 October 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-design randomised trials involving adults, children, or both with asthma of any severity who were randomised to treatment with regular salmeterol and ICS (in separate or combined inhalers) versus the same dose of ICS of at least 12 weeks in duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted the review according to standard procedures expected by Cochrane. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and SAEs from the sponsors, from ClinicalTrials.gov, and from FDA submissions. We assessed our confidence in the evidence according to current GRADE recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included in this review 41 studies (27,951 participants) in adults and adolescents, along with eight studies (8453 participants) in children. We judged that the overall risk of bias was low for all-cause events, and we obtained data on SAEs from all study authors. All except 542 adults (and none of the children) were given salmeterol and fluticasone in the same (combination) inhaler.DeathsEleven of a total of 14,233 adults taking regular salmeterol and ICS died, as did 13 of 13,718 taking regular ICS at the same dose. The pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) was 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.78; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). In other words, for every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, one death occurred among those on ICS alone, and the corresponding risk among those taking salmeterol and ICS was also one death (95% CI 0 to 2 deaths).No children died, and no adults or children died of asthma, so we remain uncertain about mortality in children and about asthma mortality in any age group.Non-fatal serious adverse eventsA total of 332 adults receiving regular salmeterol with ICS experienced a non-fatal SAE of any cause, compared to 282 adults receiving regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.14 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.33; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, 21 adults on ICS alone had an SAE, and the corresponding risk for those on salmeterol and ICS was 23 adults (95% CI 20 to 27).Sixty-five of 4229 children given regular salmeterol with ICS suffered an SAE of any cause, compared to 62 of 4224 children given regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.48; participants = 8453; studies = 8; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 children treated for 23 weeks, 15 children on ICS alone had an SAE, and the corresponding risk for those on salmeterol and ICS was 15 children (95% CI 11 to 22).Asthma-related serious adverse eventsEighty and 67 adults in each group, respectively, experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE. The pooled Peto OR was 1.15 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.59; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). For every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, five receiving ICS alone had an asthma-related SAE, and the corresponding risk among those on salmeterol and ICS was six adults (95% CI 4 to 8).Twenty-nine children taking salmeterol and ICS and 23 children taking ICS alone reported asthma-related events. The pooled Peto OR was 1.25 (95% CI 0.72 to 2.16; participants = 8453; studies = 8; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 children treated for 23 weeks, five receiving an ICS alone had an asthma-related SAE, and the corresponding risk among those receiving salmeterol and ICS was seven children (95% CI 4 to 12).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a difference in the risk of death or serious adverse events in either adults or children. However, trial authors reported no asthma deaths among 27,951 adults or 8453 children randomised to regular salmeterol and ICS or ICS alone over an average of six months. Therefore, the risk of dying from asthma on either treatment was very low, but we remain uncertain about whether the risk of dying from asthma is altered by adding salmeterol to ICS.Inclusion of new trials has increased the precision of the estimates for non-fatal SAEs of any cause. We can now say that the worst-case estimate is that at least 152 adults and 139 children must be treated with combination salmeterol and ICS for six months for one additional person to be admitted to the hospital (compared to treatment with ICS alone). These possible risks still have to be weighed against the benefits experienced by people who take combination treatment.However more than 90% of prescribed treatment was taken in the new trials, so the effects observed may be different from those seen with salmeterol in combination with ICS in daily practice.

Effects of a single long-acting muscarinic antagonist agent and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonist combination on lung function and symptoms in untreated COPD patients in Japan

BACKGROUND

A large body of evidence suggests that long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) combinations induce a strong synergistic bronchodilatory effect in human isolated airways. Moreover, a recent post hoc analysis demonstrated clinical synergism between LABAs and LAMAs, which induces a synergistic improvement not only in lung function but also in dyspnea in COPD patients.

AIM

The aim of this study is to examine the baseline factors related to improvement in lung function or clinical symptoms that results from the administration of LAMA or LAMA/LABA and to compare the differences in improvement in lung function or clinical symptoms between LAMA and LAMA/LABA.

METHODS

Among 829 patients with COPD who were treated with LAMA or LAMA/LABA in our hospital, 112 patients (aged 40-89 years) matched the criteria. Of these 112 patients, 71 received LAMA (LAMA group) and 41 received LAMA/LABA (LAMA/LABA group) as the initial treatment. Various examination results such as lung function test values, symptom change, and frequency of exacerbations were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Compared with the monotherapy, the combination therapy significantly improved the FEV1, inspiratory capacity (IC), and total COPD assessment test (CAT) scores. Comparing the improvement in each domain of the CAT produced by the combination therapy with that of the monotherapy, larger improvements were found for the domains of going out and sleeping. The frequency of exacerbations during the 24 weeks was significantly lower in the combination therapy group than in the LAMA monotherapy group (P=0.034). Although no relationship was found between improvement in FEV1 and any pretreatment factors in the LAMA/LABA group, the improvement in the CAT score was strongly related to the baseline CAT score, smoking index, and air trapping index (P-value <1×10-4).

CONCLUSION

In this study of clinical practice, we found that LAMA/LABA combination therapy improved the clinical symptoms of COPD and IC and that the effects of the combination therapy were consistent with those observed in previous clinical trials.

Medications that relax the lower oesophageal sphincter and risk of oesophageal cancer: An analysis of two independent population-based databases

Excessive lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation increases gastro-oesophageal acid reflux, an oesophageal adenocarcinoma risk factor. Medications that relax this sphincter (benzodiazepines, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, β2 agonists and xanthines) could promote cancer. These medications were investigated in two independent datasets. In the Scottish Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit (PCCIU) database, a nested case-control study of oesophageal cancer was performed using GP prescription records. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for medication use and oesophageal cancer. In UK Biobank, a cohort study was conducted using self-reported medication use. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for medication use and oesophageal cancer, and by tumour subtype. Overall, 1,979 oesophageal cancer patients were matched to 9,543 controls in PCCIU, and 355 of 475,768 participants developed oesophageal cancer in UK Biobank. None of the medications investigated were significantly associated with oesophageal cancer risk apart from β2 agonists, which were associated with increased oesophageal cancer risk in PCCIU (adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12, 1.70) but not in UK Biobank (adjusted HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.70, 2.08). Medications that relax the lower oesophageal sphincter were not associated with oesophageal cancer, apart from β2 agonists. This increased cancer risk in β2 agonist users merits further investigation.

Efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol on lung volume, exercise capacity, and physical activity

Purpose

This study evaluated the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium on lung function, exercise capacity, and physical activity in patients with COPD.

Patients and methods

A total of 184 patients aged ≥40 years with COPD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage II-IV) received tiotropium/olodaterol for 6 weeks, then tiotropium for 6 weeks, or vice versa. The primary endpoint was inspiratory capacity (IC) at peak post-dose.

Results

Adjusted mean IC after 6-week treatment was 1.990 L with tiotropium/olodaterol vs 1.875 L with tiotropium (difference: 115 mL; 95% CI: 77, 153; p<0.0001). Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (difference: 105 mL; 95% CI: 88, 123), forced vital capacity (difference: 163 mL; 95% CI: 130, 197), and slow vital capacity (difference: 134 mL; 95% CI: 91, 176) improved with tiotropium/olodaterol (all p<0.0001). Adjusted mean 6-min walk distance was similar between treatments in the overall population but was significantly increased with tiotropium/olodaterol in the subgroup with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage III/IV at baseline (difference: 18.1 m; 95% CI: 2.3, 33.9; p=0.0254). In a post hoc analysis, tiotropium/olodaterol improved the values for ≥2.0 metabolic equivalents (difference: 5.0 min; 95% CI: 0.4, 9.7; p=0.0337).

Conclusion

Tiotropium/olodaterol significantly improved IC compared with tiotropium and potentially enhanced the exercise capacity in COPD patients. A slight improvement in physical activity of relatively more than moderate intensity was also seen with tiotropium/olodaterol.

Long-term health-related quality-of-life and symptom response profiles with arformoterol in COPD: results from a 52-week trial

Background

Symptom severity is the largest factor in determining subjective health in COPD. Symptoms (eg, chronic cough, dyspnea) are associated with decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We evaluated the impact of arformoterol on HRQoL in COPD patients, measured by St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Post hoc growth mixture model (GMM) analysis examined symptom response profiles.

Methods

We examined data from a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12-month safety trial of twice-daily nebulized arformoterol 15 µg (n=420) versus placebo (n=421). COPD severity was assessed by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) status. GMM analysis identified previously unknown patient subgroups and examined the heterogeneity in response to SGRQ Symptoms scores.

Results

SGRQ Total score improved by 4.24 points with arformoterol and 2.02 points with placebo (P=0.006). Significantly greater improvements occurred for arformoterol versus placebo in SGRQ Symptoms (6.34 vs 4.25, P=0.031) and Impacts (3.91 vs 0.97, P=0.001) scores, but not in Activity score (3.57 vs 1.75, P=0.057). GMM identified responders and nonresponders based on the SGRQ Symptoms score. End-of-study mean difference in SGRQ Symptoms scores between these latent classes was 20.7 points (P<0.001; 95% confidence interval: 17.6-23.9). Compared with nonresponders, responders were more likely current smokers (55.52% vs 44.02%, P=0.0021) and had more severe COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]: 1.16 vs 1.23 L, P=0.0419), more exacerbations (0.96 vs 0.69, P=0.0018), and worse mean SGRQ Total (59.81 vs 40.57, P<0.0001), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (3.29 vs 2.05, P<0.0001), and Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (3.13 vs 2.75, P<0.0001) scores. Arformoterol-receiving responders exhibited significantly greater improvements in FEV1 (0.09 vs 0.008, P=0.03) and fewer hospitalizations (0.13 vs 0.24, P=0.02) than those receiving placebo.

Conclusion

In this study, arformoterol treatment significantly improved HRQoL reflected by SGRQ. For the analysis performed on these data, arformoterol may be particularly effective in improving lung function and reducing hospitalizations among patients who are unable to quit smoking or present with more severe symptoms.

Thyrotoxic periodic paralysis triggered by β2-adrenergic bronchodilators

Hypokalemic periodic paralysis is the most common form of periodic paralysis and is characterized by attacks of muscle paralysis associated with a low serum potassium (K+) level due to an acute intracellular shifting. Thyrotoxic periodic paralysis (TPP), characterized by the triad of muscle paralysis, acute hypokalemia, and hyperthyroidism, is one cause of hypokalemic periodic paralysis. The triggering of an attack of undiagnosed TPP by β2-adrenergic bronchodilators has, to our knowledge, not been reported previously. We describe two young men who presented to the emergency department with the sudden onset of muscle paralysis after administration of inhaled β2-adrenergic bronchodilators for asthma. In both cases, the physical examination revealed an enlarged thyroid gland and symmetrical flaccid paralysis with areflexia of lower extremities. Hypokalemia with low urine K+ excretion and normal blood acid-base status was found on laboratory testing, suggestive of an intracellular shift of K+, and the patients' muscle strength recovered at serum K+ concentrations of 3.0 and 3.3 mmol/L. One patient developed hyperkalemia after a total potassium chloride supplementation of 110 mmol. Thyroid function testing was diagnostic of primary hyperthyroidism due to Graves disease in both cases. These cases illustrate that β2-adrenergic bronchodilators should be considered a potential precipitant of TPP.

Real-life effectiveness and safety of salbutamol Steri-Neb™ vs. Ventolin Nebules® for exacerbations in patients with COPD: Historical cohort study

Introduction

Ventolin Nebules^® (reference product; GlaxoSmithKline) was the first licensed nebulizer solution containing the rapid-onset, short-acting β₂-agonist salbutamol. Salbutamol Steri-Neb^™ (comparator; Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) has the same chemical composition as the reference product. This study evaluated whether the effectiveness of the comparator is non-inferior to the reference product alongside concomitant medications during real-life clinical management of COPD exacerbations. Safety in terms of adverse events (AEs) was also examined.

Methods

This matched (1:1) historical cohort study evaluated data from 2 UK primary care databases on patients prescribed the salbutamol comparator or reference. The study included a 1-year baseline period, starting 1 year before the index prescription date, and 1-year outcome period. Cohorts were matched for baseline COPD respiratory medications. The primary outcome was analysis of non-inferiority for the comparator versus reference product for the rate of moderate and severe COPD exacerbations. Non-inferiority was satisfied if the 95% confidence interval (CI) upper limit for mean differences in proportions between treatments was <15%. Secondary outcomes were examined through rate ratios (RR) of severe exacerbations and AEs.

Results

After matching, 1191 patients were included in each cohort. Adjusted upper 95% CI for the difference in proportion of patients experiencing moderate or severe exacerbations between comparator and reference groups was 0.032 (3.2%), demonstrating non-inferiority. No significant differences were observed in rates of moderate and severe exacerbations (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.10), severe exacerbations (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.49, 1.17), or AEs (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.78, 1.22) after adjusting for baseline confounders. No significant differences across cohorts were observed for rates of any AE or death.

Conclusion

This matched cohort study of real-life management of COPD patients supports the salbutamol comparator as non-inferior to the reference product, providing an effective treatment alternative for COPD exacerbations. Comparator and reference safety profiles were similar.

Efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate in pediatric asthma patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) (fluticasone/formoterol; Flutiform®; 100/10 µg b.i.d.) was compared with fluticasone propionate (Flixotide® Evohaler® pMDI; 100 µg b.i.d.) and fluticasone/salmeterol (Seretide® Evohaler® pMDI; 100/50 µg b.i.d.) in a pediatric asthma population (EudraCT number: 2010-024635-16).

METHODS

A double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, multicenter study. Patients, aged 5-<12 years with persistent asthma ⩾ 6 months and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ⩽ 90% predicted were randomized 1:1:1 to 12 weeks' treatment. The study objectives were to demonstrate superiority of fluticasone/formoterol to fluticasone and non-inferiority to fluticasone/salmeterol.

RESULTS

A total of 512 patients were randomized: fluticasone/formoterol, 169; fluticasone, 173; fluticasone/salmeterol, 170. Fluticasone/formoterol was superior to fluticasone for the primary endpoint: change from predose FEV1 at baseline to 2 h postdose FEV1 over 12 weeks [least squares (LS) mean difference 0.07 l; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03, 0.11; p < 0.001] and the first key secondary endpoint, FEV1 area under the curve over 4 hours (AUC0-4 h) at week 12 (LS mean difference 0.09 l; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.13; p < 0.001). Per a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -0.1 l, fluticasone/formoterol was non-inferior to fluticasone/salmeterol for the primary endpoint (LS mean difference 0.00 l; 95% CI -0.04, 0.04; p < 0.001) and first key secondary endpoint (LS mean difference 0.01; 95% CI -0.03, 0.06; p < 0.001). Fluticasone/formoterol was non-inferior to fluticasone/salmeterol for the second key secondary endpoint, change from predose FEV1 over 12 weeks (treatment difference -0.02 l; 95% CI -0.06, 0.02; p < 0.001), but was not superior to fluticasone for this endpoint (LS mean difference 0.03 l; 95% CI -0.01, 0.07; p = 0.091). All treatments elicited large improvements from baseline to week 12 for the Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (LS mean change 0.76 to 0.85 units) and Asthma Control Questionnaire (LS mean change -1.03 to -1.13 units). Few severe exacerbations were seen (fluticasone/formoterol: two; fluticasone/salmeterol: two). All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the efficacy and safety of fluticasone/formoterol in a pediatric asthma population and its superiority to fluticasone.

Single-inhaler triple therapy utilizing the once-daily combination of fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium and vilanterol in the management of COPD: the current evidence base and future prospects

Maintenance pharmacological treatment for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on inhaled drugs, including long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA), long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Inhaled pharmacological treatment can improve patients' daily symptoms and reduce decline of pulmonary function and acute exacerbation rate. Treatment with all three inhaled drug classes is reserved for selected, more severe, patients with COPD when symptoms are not sufficiently controlled by dual LABA/LAMA therapy and exacerbations are frequent. This review focuses on the role of single-inhaler triple therapy with once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol fixed-dose combination, which is in phase III clinical development for maintenance treatment of severe-to-very severe COPD. In this review, we summarize evidence providing the rationale for its use in COPD and discuss the gaps to be filled in this pharmacotherapeutic area.

The impact of indacaterol/glycopyrronium fixed-dose combination versus tiotropium monotherapy on lung function and treatment preference: a randomized crossover study - the FAVOR study

Background

The objective of the FAVOR study was to evaluate the effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) versus tiotropium on peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and also to investigate patient satisfaction and treatment preference.

Methods

Patients with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation (FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio of <0.70), those with a COPD assessment test score of ≥10, and those who were maintained on tiotropium HandiHaler® therapy prior to enrollment were recruited for the study, and randomized (1:1) to receive either 4 weeks open-label IND/GLY (110/50 μg) once daily followed by 4 weeks of tiotropium (18 μg) once daily or vice versa. The primary endpoint was FEV1 1 h post-inhalation after 4 weeks of treatment. Other endpoints included patient's and physician's preference for treatment, patient's satisfaction evaluated using a study-specific questionnaire and the abbreviated Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication, and safety and tolerability.

Results

Eighty-seven out of 88 randomized patients completed the study and showed significantly higher FEV1 1 h post-inhalation after 4 weeks of treatment with IND/GLY versus tiotropium (treatment difference =0.081 L; p=0.0017). IND/GLY was preferred over tiotropium among the patients (69.4% versus 30.6%, p=0.0004) and the physicians (81.6% versus 18.4%, p<0.0001). A higher proportion of the patients stated they were very satisfied or satisfied with IND/GLY versus tiotropium with regard to dyspnea reduction (79.3% versus 58.0%, respectively) and reduction of dyspnea on exertion (72.4% versus 43.2%, respectively). Patients treated with IND/GLY showed significant improvement in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication domain scores versus tiotropium. IND/GLY demonstrated a good safety and tolerability profile.

Conclusion

This study indicated that, beyond FEV1, important patient-reported outcomes improved with the open-label dual bronchodilator IND/GLY when compared with tiotropium. This study suggests that individual patients felt the lung function benefits with IND/GLY compared with tiotropium, which, in turn, may also have contributed to the preference for IND/GLY.

Inhaled therapies in patients with moderate COPD in clinical practice: current thinking

COPD is a complex, heterogeneous condition. Even in the early clinical stages, COPD carries a significant burden, with breathlessness frequently leading to a reduction in exercise capacity and changes that correlate with long-term patient outcomes and mortality. Implementation of an effective management strategy is required to reduce symptoms, preserve lung function, quality of life, and exercise capacity, and prevent exacerbations. However, current clinical practice frequently differs from published guidelines on the management of COPD. This review focuses on the current scientific evidence and expert opinion on the management of moderate COPD: the symptoms arising from moderate airflow obstruction and the burden these symptoms impose, how physical activity can improve disease outcomes, the benefits of dual bronchodilation in COPD, and the limited evidence for the benefits of inhaled corticosteroids in this disease. We emphasize the importance of maximizing bronchodilation in COPD with inhaled dual-bronchodilator treatment, enhancing patient-related outcomes, and enabling the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD in well-defined patient groups.

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium: a dual bronchodilator for COPD

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50mcg was the first once-daily, long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination (FDC) approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Development of IND/GLY was driven by the need to improve the standard of care for patients with this disease, in terms of symptom control and exacerbation frequency. IGNITE, an adaptive, comprehensive, and innovative Phase 3 development program, demonstrated the efficacy of IND/GLY in optimising bronchodilation, reducing symptoms, and reducing exacerbations in patients with COPD. IGNITE challenged contemporary thinking about the pharmacological treatment and management of patients with this disease.