Diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia diagnosed by transbronchial lung cryobiopsy: a case report

BACKGROUND

Micronodular lesions are common findings in lung imaging. As an important differential diagnosis, we describe a case of diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia; it is notable that the diagnosis of diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia is often delayed. This case provides supporting evidence to establish lung biopsy by cryotechnique as the option of first choice when considering a diagnostic strategy for micronodular lung lesions.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report a case of a 65-year-old white woman who presented with obstructive symptoms of chronic coughing and dyspnea confirmed by conventional lung function tests. A computed tomography scan presented disseminated micronodules in all the lobes of her lungs. With the help of bronchoscopic cryobiopsy it was possible to obtain a high yield sample of lung parenchyma. On histologic examination, the micronodules correlated with a diffuse neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia. In the context of clinical symptoms, radiological aspects, and histomorphological aspects we made the diagnosis of a diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia. Obstructive symptoms were treated with inhaled steroids and beta-2-mimetics continuously. A comparison between current computed tomography scans of our patient and scans of 2014 revealed no significant changes. Last ambulatory checks occurred in January and May of 2016. The course of disease and the extent of limitation of lung function have remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia is best made in a multidisciplinary review including clinical presentation, lung imaging, and histomorphological aspects. This report and current literature indicate that transbronchial lung cryobiopsy can be used as a safe and practicable tool to obtain high quality biopsies of lung parenchyma in order to diagnose micronodular lesions of the lung.

External Validation of Health Economic Decision Models for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Report of the Third COPD Modeling Meeting

OBJECTIVES

To validate outcomes of presently available chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cost-effectiveness models against results of two large COPD trials-the 3-year TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) trial and the 4-year Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT) trial.

METHODS

Participating COPD modeling groups simulated the outcomes for the placebo-treated groups of the TORCH and UPLIFT trials using baseline characteristics of the trial populations as input. Groups then simulated treatment effectiveness by using relative reductions in annual decline in lung function and exacerbation frequency observed in the most intensively treated group compared with placebo as input for the models. Main outcomes were (change in) total/severe exacerbations and mortality. Furthermore, the absolute differences in total exacerbations and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to approximate the cost per exacerbation avoided and the cost per QALY gained.

RESULT

Of the six participating models, three models reported higher total exacerbation rates than observed in the TORCH trial (1.13/patient-year) (models: 1.22-1.48). Four models reported higher rates than observed in the UPLIFT trial (0.85/patient-year) (models: 1.13-1.52). Two models reported higher mortality rates than in the TORCH trial (15.2%) (models: 20.0% and 30.6%) and the UPLIFT trial (16.3%) (models: 24.8% and 36.0%), whereas one model reported lower rates (9.8% and 12.1%, respectively). Simulation of treatment effectiveness showed that the absolute reduction in total exacerbations, the gain in QALYs, and the cost-effectiveness ratios did not differ from the trials, except for one model.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most of the participating COPD cost-effectiveness models reported higher total exacerbation rates than observed in the trials, estimates of the absolute treatment effect and cost-effectiveness ratios do not seem different from the trials in most models.

A phase III randomized controlled trial of tiotropium add-on therapy in children with severe symptomatic asthma

BACKGROUND

Studies in adults and adolescents have demonstrated that tiotropium is efficacious as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with or without other maintenance therapies in patients with moderate or severe symptomatic asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium Respimat add-on therapy to high-dose ICS with 1 or more controller medications, or medium-dose ICS with 2 or more controller medications, in the first phase III trial of tiotropium in children with severe symptomatic asthma.

METHODS

In this 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 401 participants aged 6 to 11 years were randomized to receive once-daily tiotropium 5 μg (2 puffs of 2.5 μg) or 2.5 μg (2 puffs of 1.25 μg), or placebo (2 puffs), administered through the Respimat device as add-on to background therapy.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, tiotropium 5 μg, but not 2.5 μg, add-on therapy improved the primary end point, peak FEV₁ within 3 hours after dosing (5 μg, 139 mL [95% CI, 75-203; P < .001]; 2.5 μg, 35 mL [95% CI, -28 to 99; P = .27]), and the key secondary end point, trough FEV₁ (5 μg, 87 mL [95% CI, 19-154; P = .01]; 2.5 μg, 18 mL [95% CI, -48 to 85; P = .59]). The safety and tolerability of tiotropium were comparable with those of placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily tiotropium Respimat 5 μg improved lung function and was well tolerated as add-on therapy to ICS with other maintenance therapies in children with severe symptomatic asthma.

Assessing Short-term Deterioration in Maintenance-naïve Patients with COPD Receiving Umeclidinium/Vilanterol and Tiotropium: A Pooled Analysis of Three Randomized Trials

Introduction

Dual bronchodilator therapy is reserved as a second-line treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and provides benefits in lung function and health status versus monotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine whether early initiation of a dual bronchodilator versus monotherapy reduced the risk of deterioration in COPD.

Methods

This post hoc pooled analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) 62.5/25 mcg/day compared with tiotropium (TIO) 18 mcg/day in a maintenance-naïve (MN) subgroup of patients relative to the intent-to-treat (ITT) population from three 6-month active comparator studies (n = 1747). Other treatment arms (UMEC/VI 125/25, VI 25 and UMEC 125) comprised 850 patients in total but were not included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁). St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, rescue medication use, and a novel composite endpoint of short-term clinically important deterioration (CID; ≥100 ml decrease in trough FEV₁, ≥4-unit increase in SGRQ score, or a COPD exacerbation) were also assessed.

Results

UMEC/VI improved trough FEV₁ versus TIO at day 169 [least squares mean (95% confidence interval): MN: 146 ml (102–189) and ITT: 95 ml (71–118); both P < 0.001]. Both UMEC/VI and TIO improved SGRQ and rescue use in the two populations, with greater improvements in rescue use with UMEC/VI versus TIO. UMEC/VI reduced the risk of short-term clinically important deterioration versus TIO [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval: MN: 0.66 (0.51–0.85); ITT: 0.62 (0.54–0.71), both P ≤ 0.001]. Adverse events were similar across both populations and treatments.

Conclusions

Early use of dual-bronchodilator therapy has superior efficacy on lung function and may reduce the risk of short-term deterioration compared to monotherapy in symptomatic patients with COPD.

Clinical trial registration: GSK analysis 202066 (NCT01316900/DB2113360, NCT01316913/DB2113374, NCT01777334/ZEP117115).

Funding: This study was funded by GSK.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-016-0430-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of COPD Treatments: A Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Aclidinium and Tiotropium in the United States

BACKGROUND

Comparisons of the use of aclidinium bromide and tiotropium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease often concentrate on key end points (exacerbations) at the expense of other benefits and risks. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) can help overcome this by using stakeholder preferences to combine multiple end points into an overall value estimate.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of aclidinium bromide twice daily via Pressair™ (AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Wilmington, DE) and of tiotropium once daily via HandiHaler^® (Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT) from the perspective of patients using MCDA.

METHODS

Literature reviews and clinician engagement were used to identify value criteria. Performance of criteria was estimated from a clinical trial and clinician opinion. Scores and swing weights came from six clinicians who, during a 2-day workshop, reflected their patients' preferences. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were used to explore uncertainty in model designs and inputs.

RESULTS

Fourteen criteria, covering clinical effectiveness, safety, and convenience of the treatments of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were identified. Exacerbations and device preloading were identified as the most important to patients; the least important was rescue medication use. Tiotropium's higher overall clinical effectiveness score was offset by aclidinium's better performance on safety and convenience outcomes. The MCDA generated a -42 (worst performance) to 100 (best performance) scale. The net impact of benefits over risks of aclidinium (38.5) exceeded that of tiotropium (13.2), and patients preferred aclidinium 79.7% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering clinical benefits and risks, aclidinium and tiotropium generate similar value to patients, but when convenience criteria are considered, aclidinium may be preferred. Further work is required to replicate these results, including eliciting preferences directly from patients.

Effects of tiotropium on lung function in current smokers and never smokers with bronchial asthma

The effects of tiotropium, an inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist, on lung function were investigated in current smokers and nonsmokers with asthma treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and other asthma controllers: inhaled long-acting β₂ agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and/or theophylline. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of an inhaled single dose of tiotropium in 9 asthmatics currently smoking and 9 asthmatics who have never smoked in a crossover manner. Lung function was measured before and 1, 3, and 24 h after inhalation of 18 μg of tiotropium or a placebo. The primary outcome was a change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) from the baseline, and the secondary outcomes were changes in peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), V˙₅₀, and V˙₂₅. At baseline, asthmatics with and without a smoking history had a mean FEV₁ of 2590 ml and 2220 ml and were taking a mean dose of ICSs of 1208 and 1000 μg/day, respectively. The increase from the baseline FEV₁ was 169 ml and 105 ml higher at 3 h after tiotropium than after the placebo in current smokers and nonsmokers, respectively. PEFR, V˙₅₀, and V˙₂₅ were also significantly increased after tiotropium as compared with the placebo in both study groups. Changes in FEV₁ and PEFR tended to be greater in asthmatics currently smoking than in subjects who have never smoked, although there were no statistical differences at any time points. Tiotropium resulted in improved lung function and symptoms both in current smoker and nonsmoker asthmatics. These findings suggest that tiotropium will provide a new strategy for the treatment of bronchial asthma.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Useful medications for patients with recurrent symptoms

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory disorder characterised by largely irreversible changes in air flow due to irritants such as tobacco smoke. Patients with COPD experience acute exacerbations. Severe disease may progress to chronic respiratory failure. We reviewed the literature on basic medications available for COPD, using the standard Prescrire methodology. There are few clinical data on treatment of mild COPD. Regular medication is not necessary for patients who do not have recurrent symptoms. Eliminating exposure to cigarette smoke and other irritants such as workplace irritants, is the only measure known to improve the outcome of COPD. Evaluation of inhaled short-acting beta-2 agonists is based mainly on short-term trials. These drugs have been shown to improve dyspnoea. Salmeterol and formoterol, two long-acting beta-2 agonists, have been extensively evaluated in symptomatic patients. Compared with no treatment, these drugs reduce breathlessness and acute exacerbations, preventing about two hospital admissions per 100 patients with moderate to severe COPD treated for 7 months. Indacaterol and olodateroldo not have a better harm-benefit balance. Inhaled beta-2 agonists occasionally provoke cardiovascular disorders. No excess mortality has been reported among the thousands of COPD patients included in clinical trials. There Is little evidence that ipratropium, an inhaled short-acting anti-muscarinic bronchodilator, improves COPD symptoms. A risk of Increased mortality among COPD patients treated with ipratroplum cannot be ruled out. Tiotroplum, an inhaled long-acting antimuscarinic bronchodilator, has been extensively evaluated In COPD. Tiotroplum has symptomatic efficacy in COPD, reducing dyspnoea and acute exacerbations. Tiotroplum had no tangible advantages over long-acting beta-2 agonists in seven randomised trials including more than 12 000 patients. Glycopyrronium and aclidinium, two other Inhaled long-acting antimuscarinics, do not appear to be more effective. Tiotroplum, like other inhaled anti-muscarinics, has antimuscarinic adverse effects including cardiac, visual and buccal disorders. Glycopyronium may carry a higher risk of serious cardiovascular effects. Combination of an antimuscarinic with an inhaled beta-2 agonist improves symptoms in 7% to 10% of patients. In patients with one or two COPD exacerbations per year, adding an Inhaled corticosterold (beclometa- sone, budesonide or fluticasone) to a long-acting beta-2 agonist prevents about 1 exacerbation during 3 to 4 years of treatment. Inhaled corticosteroids can cause pneumonia, candidiasis, dysphonia and adrenal Insufficiency. Fluticasone seems to have more adverse effects than other inhaled corticosterolds. Theophylline has uncertain efficacy on symptoms of COPD. This drug has a narrow therapeutic index and carries a risk of serious adverse effects. It should not be used in COPD. Long-term treatment with roflumilast or oral corticosteroids has an unfavourable harm-benefit balance in COPD. In practice, in 2016, the first measure in COPD is to eliminate exposure to the irritant, most often tobacco. Drugs used in COPD have only modest, mainly symptomatic efficacy. Treatment should be adapted to symptoms and the frequency of exacerbations: a short-acting beta-2 agonist should be tried first, then replaced by an inhaled long-acting bronchodilator, or possibly tiotropium, when its effect is too short-lived. An inhaled corticosteroid can be added if symptoms persist or exacerbations are frequent.

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium in Japanese patients with COPD: Pooled analysis of SHINE and ARISE

BACKGROUND

To better evaluate the efficacy and safety of the indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) fixed-dose combination versus tiotropium in Japanese patients, a pooled data analysis was conducted from the SHINE and ARISE studies, which were part of the IND/GLY clinical trial program.

METHODS

Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were included in the analysis. Efficacy in terms of pre-dose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) at Week 12 and Week 24/26 (ARISE/SHINE) and FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose at Day 1, Week 12, and Week 24/26 was evaluated. Health status using the St. George׳s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, rescue medication use (number of puffs/day), safety, and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 340 patients (IND/GLY, n=161; IND, n=41; GLY, n=40; tiotropium, n=79; and placebo, n=19) were included in the analysis that focused on comparing IND/GLY versus tiotropium since they were included in both studies. At Week 12 and Week 24/26, pre-dose FEV₁ was significantly improved with IND/GLY compared with tiotropium (treatment differences=70mL and 80mL, respectively; both P≤0.001). FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose, the SGRQ total score, and rescue medication use were more statistically significant with IND/GLY than with tiotropium for all assessed time-points. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs was similar between the IND/GLY- and tiotropium-treated groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to tiotropium, IND/GLY provided significant improvements in lung function, health status, and rescue medication use, while having a good safety profile in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Impact of Long-Term Tiotropium Bromide Therapy on Annual Lung Function Decline in Adult Patients with Cystic Fibrosis

Background

Chronic lung disease is the leading cause of death in patients with Cystic Fibrosis (CF) and is often treated with bronchodilators. It is not known whether long-term tiotropium bromide treatment may have a positive impact on lung function.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study estimated annual lung function decline utilizing longitudinal data for forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1).

Results

A total of 160 adult patients with CF were analyzed. The subjects treated for 24 months with tiotropium bromide had a significantly slower decline of mean annual change of FEV1 (treated: -0.3±4.0%; control: -2.3±5.0%; p = 0.0130). In patients with FEV1 ≥70% predicted, long-term tiotropium bromide treatment was associated with greater improvements in annual lung function decline (FEV1 ≥70% predicted: treated: +0.5±4.7%; control: -4.0±6.3%; p = 0.0132; FEV1 50–69% predicted: treated: -0.5±4.4%; control: -0.8±3.8%; p = 0.7142; FEV1 ≤49% predicted: treated: -0.6±3.4%; control: -2.4±4.8%; p = 0.0898).

Conclusion

This study suggests that long-term tiotropium bromide treatment may be associated with reduced annual decline of FEV1 in patients with CF, particularly in adults with a mild degree of severity.

Effects of tiotropium + olodaterol versus tiotropium or placebo by COPD disease severity and previous treatment history in the OTEMTO® studies

BACKGROUND

As lung function declines rapidly in the early stages of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the effects of bronchodilators in patients with moderate disease and those who have not previously received maintenance therapy are of interest. OTEMTO® 1 and 2 were two replicate, 12-week, Phase III studies investigating the benefit of tiotropium + olodaterol on lung function and quality of life in patients with moderate to severe disease. Post hoc analyses were performed to assess the benefits for patients according to disease severity and treatment history.

METHODS

Four subgroup analyses were performed: Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2/3, GOLD A/B/C/D, treatment naive/not treatment naive and receiving inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at baseline/not receiving ICS at baseline. Primary end points were change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 3 h response, change in trough FEV1 and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score. Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score was a secondary end point, and SGRQ and TDI responder analyses were further end points; all were assessed at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

In all subgroups, patients receiving tiotropium + olodaterol responded better overall than those receiving tiotropium monotherapy. Improvements with tiotropium + olodaterol over placebo or tiotropium monotherapy were noted across GOLD 2/3 and GOLD A/B/C/D; however, improvements in SGRQ total score were most evident in the GOLD B subgroup. Moreover, lung-function outcomes were generally greater in those patients who had been receiving previous long-acting bronchodilator and/or ICS maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that tiotropium + olodaterol should be considered as a treatment option in patients with moderate COPD who are initiating maintenance therapy, as well as those with more severe disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01964352 and NCT02006732 .

Tiotropium – what role in asthma?

Tiotropium solution for inhalation (Spiriva Respimat - Boehringer Ingelheim) is the first long-acting muscarinic antagonist to be marketed in the UK for the management of asthma. It is licensed as add-on maintenance bronchodilator treatment in adults with asthma who are using an inhaled corticosteroid (≥800μg budesonide/day or equivalent) and a long-acting beta2 agonist, and who have had one or more severe exacerbations in the previous year. This corresponds to use at step 4 of both the British asthma guideline and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) strategy for the treatment of asthma in adults. Here we consider the evidence for tiotropium in the management of asthma and whether it offers any advantages over existing therapeutic options at step 4.

[Spiolto Respimat® : tiotropium-olodaterol fixed combination for therapy of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)]

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a chronic airway disease that can be prevented and treated. The recommendations for therapy include bronchodilators from two classes (LAMA (Long Acting Muscarinic Antagonists) and LABA (Long Acting Beta2 Agonists)). Spiolto Respimat® is a LAMA/LABA combination therapy and comprises tiotropium (Spiriva®) and olodaterol (a LABA). Clinical studies show that Spiolto Respimat® is able to improve lung function tests (Increased FEV1, decreased hyperinflation and residual volume) and quality of life as compared to tiotropium or olodaterol. Studies also suggest that COPD exacerbations are decreased in patients treated by Spiolto Respimat® as compared to those treated with olodaterol (results of studies with exacerbations as primary outcome are not available yet). Safety of Spiolto Respimat® appears similar to tiotropium or olodaterol. Spiolto Respimat® indications is maintenance therapy for COPD. Reimbursement in Belgium requires that patients still display symptoms although already treated and that he/she has been previously treated by a LAMA.

Dual Bronchodilator Therapy with Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Tiotropium plus Indacaterol in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

The fixed-dose, long-acting bronchodilator combination of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) has not previously been compared with a combination of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist and long-acting β2-agonist in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This 12-week, randomized, blinded, triple-dummy, parallel-group, non-inferiority study compared once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 mcg + indacaterol (IND) 150 mcg in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD. The primary endpoint was the trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) on day 85 (predefined non-inferiority margin -50 mL), and the secondary endpoint was the 0- to 6-h weighted mean (WM) FEV1 on day 84. Other efficacy endpoints [including rescue medication use, the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score, and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score] and safety endpoints [adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and COPD exacerbations] were also assessed.

RESULTS

Trough FEV1 improvements were comparable between treatment groups [least squares (LS) mean changes from baseline to day 85: UMEC/VI 172 mL; TIO + IND 171 mL; treatment difference 1 mL; 95 % confidence interval (CI) -29 to 30 mL], demonstrating non-inferiority between UMEC/VI and TIO + IND. The treatments produced similar improvements in the trough FEV1 at other study visits and the 0- to 6-h WM FEV1 (LS mean changes at day 84: UMEC/VI 235 mL; TIO + IND 258 mL; treatment difference -23 mL; 95 % CI -54 to 8 mL). The results for patient-reported measures (rescue medication use, TDI focal score, and SGRQ score) were comparable; both treatments produced clinically meaningful improvements in TDI and SGRQ scores. The incidence of AEs and COPD exacerbations, and changes in vital signs were similar for the two treatments.

CONCLUSION

UMEC/VI and TIO + IND, given once daily, provided similar improvements in lung function and patient-reported outcomes over 12 weeks in patients with COPD, with comparable tolerability and safety profiles.

TRIAL NUMBERS

ClinicalTrials.gov study ID NCT02257385; GSK study no. 116961.

Tiotropium Attenuates Virus-Induced Pulmonary Inflammation in Cigarette Smoke-Exposed Mice

Viral infections trigger exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and tiotropium, a M3 receptor antagonist, reduces exacerbations in patients by unknown mechanisms. In this report, we investigated whether tiotropium has anti-inflammatory effects in mice exposed to cigarette smoke (CS) and infected with influenza virus A/PR/8/34 (H1N1) or respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and compared these effects with those of steroid fluticasone and PDE4-inhibitor roflumilast. Mice were exposed to CS; infected with H1N1 or RSV; and treated with tiotropium, fluticasone, or roflumilast. The amount of cells and cytokine levels in the airways, lung function, and viral load was determined. NCI-H292 cells were infected with H1N1 or RSV and treated with the drugs. In CS/H1N1-exposed mice, tiotropium reduced neutrophil and macrophage numbers and levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) in the airways and improved lung function. In contrast, fluticasone increased the loss of body weight; failed to reduce neutrophil or macrophage numbers; increased IL-6, KC, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) in the lungs; and worsened lung function. Treatment with roflumilast reduced macrophage numbers, IL-6, and KC in the lungs but had no effect on neutrophil numbers or lung function. In CS/RSV-exposed mice, treatment with tiotropium, but not fluticasone or roflumilast, reduced neutrophil numbers and IL-6 and TNF-α levels in the lungs. Viral load of H1N1 and RSV was significantly elevated in CS/virus-exposed mice and NCI-H292 cells after fluticasone treatment, whereas tiotropium and roflumilast had no effect. In conclusion, tiotropium has anti-inflammatory effects on CS/virus-induced inflammation in mice that are superior to the effects of roflumilast and fluticasone. This finding might help to explain the observed reduction of exacerbation rates in COPD patients.

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review literature on the accuracy of screening questionnaires and office-based screening pulmonary function testing and the efficacy and harms of treatment of screen-detected COPD.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant English-language studies published through January 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and studies. The search yielded 13,141 unique citations; 465 full-text articles were reviewed, and 33 studies met the inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers rated the quality of each study using USPSTF criteria.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]; treatment efficacy (COPD exacerbations, all-cause mortality, quality of life, and dyspnea); and treatment harms.

RESULTS

All screening questionnaires were based on symptoms as well as risk factors such as age and smoking history. The COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire was the most extensively studied (5 studies, n = 3048), with moderate overall performance for COPD detection: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), 0.65 to 0.72; sensitivity, 80% to 93%; and specificity, 24% to 49%, at a threshold of greater than 16.5. Positive predictive value and NPV ranged from 17% to 45% and 76% to 98%, respectively. For pulmonary function-based screening tools, FEV1/FEV6 was the best studied (3 studies, n = 1587), with AUC ranging from 0.84 to 0.85. Sensitivity ranged from 51% to 80%. Specificity (range, 90%-95%) and PPV (range, 63%-75%) appeared better than questionnaires. There was not strong evidence to support that screening and supplying smokers with spirometry results improves smoking cessation rates. Treatment trials were unavailable for screen-detected patients. Trials that reported outcomes in patients with mild to moderate COPD included 2 trials of long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) (n = 3174), 1 RCT of LABAs and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (n = 1097), 5 RCTs of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium (n = 4592), and 6 RCTs of ICS (n = 3983). They suggested no benefit in all-cause mortality, but a decrease in annual rates of exacerbations with pharmacologic treatments. Few trials reported harms for any individual drug class. Adverse effects were generally mild (eg, dry mouth and cough).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There was no direct evidence available to determine the benefits and harms of screening asymptomatic adults for COPD using questionnaires or office-based screening pulmonary function testing or to determine the benefits of treatment in screen-detected populations. Indirect evidence suggests that the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire has moderate overall performance for COPD detection. Among patients with mild to moderate COPD, the benefit of pharmacotherapy for reducing exacerbations was modest.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) added to combination long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) versus LABA/ICS for adults with asthma

BACKGROUND

Maintenance treatment with long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) can relieve asthma symptoms and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, but there are limited treatment options for people who do not gain control on combination LABA/ICS. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) are a class of inhaled drug which have been effective for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and are now becoming available for people with asthma to take alongside their LABA/ICS inhaler.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) to combination long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adults whose asthma is not well controlled by LABA/ICS.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Review Group Specialised Register (CAGR) up to January 2016. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO trials portal, and reference lists of other reviews, and we contacted trial authors for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies met the inclusion criteria if they compared LAMA as an add-on to LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICS alone for adults with asthma. We included studies reported as full text, those published as abstract only, and unpublished data. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (OCS), validated measures of asthma control, and serious adverse events (including mortality).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened searches and independently extracted details on risk of bias and numerical data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) using a random-effects model. We rated all outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four double-blind, double-dummy trials comparing LAMA to placebo, including 1197 people with asthma taking combination LABA/ICS. One of the trials was designed to study glycopyrronium bromide but was withdrawn prior to enrolment, and the other three all studied tiotropium bromide (mostly 5 µg once daily via Respimat) over 48 to 52 weeks. People in the trials had a mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of 55% of their predicted value, indicating severe asthma.People randomised to take tiotropium add-on had fewer exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids than those continuing to take LABA/ICS alone, but the confidence intervals did not rule out no difference (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02; moderate quality evidence). Over 48 weeks, 328 out of 1000 people taking their usual LABA/ICS would have to take oral corticosteroids for an exacerbation compared with 271 if they took tiotropium as well (95% CI 218 to 333 per 1000). Analyses comparing the number of exacerbations per patient in each group (rate ratio) and the time until first exacerbation (hazard ratio) were in keeping with the main result. Quality of life, as measured by the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) was no better for those taking tiotropium add-on than for those taking LABA/ICS alone when considered in light of the 0.5 minimal clinically important difference on the scale (MD 0.09, 95% CI - 0.03 to 0.20), and evidence for whether tiotropium increased or decreased serious adverse events in this population was inconsistent (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47; I(2) = 76%).Within the secondary outcomes, exacerbations requiring hospital admission were too rare to tell whether tiotropium was beneficial over LABA/ICS alone. There was high quality evidence showing benefits to lung function (trough FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC)) and potentially small benefits to asthma control. People taking tiotropium add-on were less likely to experience non-serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium add-on may have additional benefits over LABA/ICS alone in reducing the need for rescue oral steroids in people with severe asthma. The effect was imprecise, and there was no evidence for other LAMA preparations. Possible benefits on quality of life were negligible, and evidence for the effect on serious adverse events was inconsistent. There are likely to be small added benefits for tiotropium Respimat 5 µg daily on lung function and asthma control over LABA/ICS alone and fewer non-serious adverse events. The benefit of tiotropium add-on on the frequency of hospital admission is still unknown, despite year-long trials.Ongoing and future trials should clearly describe participants' background medications to help clinicians judge how the findings relate to stepwise care. If studies test LAMAs other than tiotropium Respimat for asthma, they should be at least six months long and use accepted and validated outcomes to allow comparisons of the safety and effectiveness between different preparations.

Cost-effectiveness of combination therapy umeclidinium/vilanterol versus tiotropium in symptomatic COPD Spanish patients

PURPOSE

Umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is a novel fixed dose combination of a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting beta 2 receptor antagonist (LABA) agent. This analysis evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of UMEC/VI compared with tiotropium (TIO), from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective.

METHODS

A previously published linked equations cohort model based on the epidemiological longitudinal study ECLIPSE (Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate End-points) was used. Patients included were COPD patients with a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≤70% and the presence of respiratory symptoms measured with the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (modified Medical Research Council ≥2). Treatment effect, expressed as change in FEV1 from baseline, was estimated from a 24-week head-to-head phase III clinical trial comparing once-daily UMEC/VI with once-daily TIO and was assumed to last 52 weeks following treatment initiation (maximum duration of UMEC/VI clinical trials). Spanish utility values were derived from a published local observational study. Unitary health care costs (€2015) were obtained from local sources. A 3-year time horizon was selected, and 3% discount was applied to effects and costs. Results were expressed as cost/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed.

RESULTS

UMEC/VI produced additional 0.03 QALY and €590 vs TIO, leading to an ICER of €21,475/QALY. According to PSA, the probability of UMEC/VI being cost-effective was 80.3% at a willingness-to-pay of €30,000/QALY.

CONCLUSION

UMEC/VI could be considered as a cost-effective treatment alternative compared with TIO in symptomatic COPD patients from the Spanish NHS perspective.

[Current position of new fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol - its role in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the Czech Republic]

COPD is a serious pulmonary disease with rising global socioeconomic impact. From the perspective of the Czech Republic COPD was responsible for 21 000 acute hospitalizations and 3 500 deaths, mortality reaches 33/100 000 in 2015. Early stages of disease may be associated with a significant reduction of exercise capacity and the reduction of activities of daily living. Moreover early stages of bronchial obstruction are associated with the fastest lung function decline. Finally, early elimination of the risk of inhalation exposure is able to influence the course of the disease and to reduce its mortality. Most current treatment strategies and national recommendations attributed central role to bronchodilator drugs. Long-acting bronchodilators (LAMA and LABA) creates an essential component of the treatment of symptomatic individuals in the Czech COPD guidelines as well. Actual version of this document constitutes as standard therapy: long-lasting inhaled bronchodilators, targeted efforts to eliminate inhalation risk, vaccination, regular exercise, repeated inhalation technique training, identification, and treatment of relevant comorbidities. All other drugs (inhaled-corticosteroids, mucoactive medication, roflumilast, antibiotics), and non-pharmacological (lung volume reductions, nutrition support, long-term oxygen, home non-invasive ventilation, lung transplantation, palliative care) procedures are intended for a specific subgroups of patients only. The newest type of bronchodilator therapy is represented by a fixed dual bronchodilation. Currently we can use four original drug combinations: titropium + olodaterol, glycopyrronium + indacaterol, umeklidinium + vilanterol and aclidinium + formoterol in the Czech Republic. This area is an enterprising research. For example comprehensive scientific program covering eight studies on 15 000 COPD patients (TOviTO) assess the therapeutic benefits of tiotropium + olodaterolu in terms of lung function, quality of life, exercise tolerance, daily physical activity and the incidence of acute exacerbations. Meanwhile the published results of analyzed studies TONADO, OTEMTO, VIVACITO, and the first results of the study DYNAGITO have showed that fixed dual bronchodilation should be a mandatory treatment to all the symptomatic COPD patients. Unfortunately "face to face" comparison of different drug combinations is still missing. However, the treatment with tiotropium + olodaterol combination has been demonstrated to significantly (35 %) reduce the occurrence of clinically significant deterioration, which may lead to the stabilization of this multicomponent disease.Key words: COPD - hospitalizations - inhaled bronchodilators - mortality - treatment.

Cost-Effectiveness of Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Tiotropium in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Sweden

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of once-daily Seebri Breezhaler(®) (glycopyrronium bromide) 50 µg with Spiriva(®) (tiotropium bromide) 18 µg in the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Swedish setting.

METHODS

A previously published COPD Markov model accounting for disease progression and treatment discontinuation was used. Disease progression included the annual decline in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and occurrence of any exacerbations. Efficacy in the model consisted of FEV1 improvement between baseline and 12 weeks and the annual risk ratio of having an exacerbation compared to placebo. These clinical efficacy inputs were derived from a 1-year head-to-head trial comparing glycopyrronium 50 µg to tiotropium 18 µg. Utility values and cost estimates were obtained from the literature. The base-case analysis was performed for a 3-year time horizon. Cost and effects were discounted with 3% in accordance to Swedish guidelines. Uncertainty was assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Glycopyrronium was found to be less costly and more effective than tiotropium in moderate to severe COPD patients with cost savings of 5197 Swedish kronor (€570, US$725) per patient over a 3-year time horizon. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that over 99% of the iterations produced dominant results for glycopyrronium.

CONCLUSION

Glycopyrronium bromide 50 µg once daily can be considered a cost effective alternative to tiotropium bromide 18 µg once daily in the maintenance treatment of COPD patients in Sweden.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Current role of anticholinergic drugs in the treatment of asthma: key messages for clinical practice

Anticholinergic bronchodilators such as tiotropium, a potent long-acting drug, are central to the symptomatic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Its role in asthma treatment has been recently investigated. This review critically evaluates documented evidence of clinical trials and assesses the therapeutic implications of anticholinergic drugs in asthma management. So far, the results of 10 Phases II and III randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of adding tiotropium to the treatment of mild-to-moderate or severe asthma have been published. These trials had a duration of 4 to 52 weeks and involved 3368 subjects with mild-to-moderate asthma and 1019 subjects with severe asthma [corrected]. Also, 1 systematic review and 6 meta-analyses have appraised the results of published and unpublished trials investigating the role of tiotropium in asthma. The results of the trials in mild to moderate asthma showed that adding tiotropium to inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) was not inferior to adding long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs). In addition, the safety and efficacy of tiotropium were similar to those of salmeterol. The results of studies on severe asthma showed that adding tiotropium to a treatment with high doses of an ICS plus LABA results in further improvement in lung function, increases the time to the first severe exacerbation of asthma and to worsening of asthma, and improves asthma control. Except for dry mouth, the safety profile of tiotropium was similar to placebo both in moderate and in severe asthma. Adding tiotropium to an ICS or ICS plus LABA improves lung function, symptoms, and asthma control, and in severe asthma, it increases the time to exacerbations, with good safety profile. The effect seems independent of baseline characteristics such as age, level of bronchial obstruction, smoking status, allergic status, and bronchial reversibility.

Long-acting beta2-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta2-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators, comprising long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and long-acting anti-muscarinic agents (LAMA, principally tiotropium), are commonly used for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of combining tiotropium and LABAs for the treatment of COPD are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative effects on markers of quality of life, exacerbations, symptoms, lung function and serious adverse events in people with COPD randomised to LABA plus tiotropium versus tiotropium alone; or LABA plus tiotropium versus LABA alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and ClinicalTrials.gov up to July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium in addition to LABA against tiotropium or LABA alone for people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 10 trials on 10,894 participants, mostly recruiting participants with moderate or severe COPD. All of the trials compared tiotropium in addition to LABA to tiotropium alone, and four trials additionally compared LAMA plus LABA with LABA alone. Four studies used the LABA olodaterol, three used indacaterol, two used formoterol, and one used salmeterol.Compared to tiotropium alone, treatment with tiotropium plus LABA resulted in a slightly larger improvement in mean health-related quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (mean difference (MD) -1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.87 to -0.80; 6709 participants; 5 studies). The MD was smaller than the four units that is considered clinically important, but a responder analysis indicated that 7% more participants receiving tiotropium plus LABA had a noticeable benefit (greater than four units) from treatment in comparison to tiotropium alone. In the control arm in one study, which was tiotropium alone, the SGRQ improved by falling 4.5 units from baseline and with tiotropium plus LABA the improvement was a fall of a further 1.3 units (on average). Most of the data came from studies using olodaterol. High withdrawal rates in the trials increased the uncertainty in this result, and the GRADE assessment for this outcome was therefore moderate. There were no significant differences in the other primary outcomes (hospital admission or mortality).The secondary outcome of pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) showed a small mean increase with the addition of LABA over the control arm (MD 0.06, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.07; 9573 participants; 10 studies), which showed a change from baseline ranging from 0.03 L to 0.13 L with tiotropium alone. None of the other secondary outcomes (exacerbations, symptom scores, serious adverse events, and withdrawals) showed any statistically significant differences between the groups. There was moderate heterogeneity for both exacerbations and withdrawals.This review included data on four LABAs: two administered twice daily (salmeterol, formoterol) and two once daily (indacaterol, olodaterol). The results were largely from studies of olodaterol and there was insufficient information to assess whether the other LABAs were equivalent to olodaterol or each other.Comparing LABA plus tiotropium treatment with LABA alone, there was a small but significant improvement in SGRQ (MD -1.25, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.37; 3378 participants; 4 studies). The data came mostly from studies using olodaterol and, although the difference was smaller than four units, this still represented an increase of 10 people with a clinically important improvement for 100 treated. There was also an improvement in FEV1 (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.09; 3513 participants; 4 studies), and in addition an improvement in exacerbation rates (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93; 3514 participants; 3 studies).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results from this review indicated a small mean improvement in health-related quality of life and FEV1 for participants on a combination of tiotropium and LABA compared to either agent alone, and this translated into a small increase in the number of responders on combination treatment. In addition, adding tiotropium to LABA reduced exacerbations, although adding LABA to tiotropium did not. Hospital admission and mortality were not altered by adding LABA to tiotropium, although there may not be enough data. While it is possible that this is affected by higher attrition in the tiotropium group, one would expect that participants withdrawn from the study would have had less favourable outcomes; this means that the expected direction of attrition bias would be to reduce the estimated benefit of the combination treatment. The results were largely from studies of olodaterol and there was insufficient information to assess whether the other LABAs were equivalent to olodaterol or each other.

A real-world evaluation of indacaterol and other bronchodilators in COPD: the INFLOW study

AIM

INFLOW (INdacaterol eFfectiveness and utiLizatiOn in COPD: real World evaluation) was a prospective, noninterventional study assessing the effectiveness and safety of long-acting bronchodilators in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from the Middle East, Asia, and South Africa.

METHODS

Patients newly prescribed or switched to indacaterol or other long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), or tiotropium (monotherapy or in combination) were evaluated over 6 months. The primary endpoint was the clinical COPD questionnaire overall score at the end of the study.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from 1,710 patients (mean postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second, 59% predicted) who received indacaterol (n=1,179), other LABA (n=68), tiotropium (n=271), indacaterol plus tiotropium (n=167), or other LABA plus tiotropium (n=25). Across treatments, clinical COPD questionnaire overall score improved from baseline by 0.81-1.26 points (all P<0.0001), 63%-84% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied, and physicians rated effectiveness as good/very good in 63%-80% of cases. The indacaterol inhaler was rated easy/very easy to use by the majority of patients, and physicians considered its use clearly understood by most patients. All treatments had acceptable tolerability.

CONCLUSION

In real life clinical practice across a diverse region, indacaterol and other long-acting bronchodilators improved health status and were well regarded by patients and physicians.

Tiotropium versus ipratropium bromide for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium and ipratropium bromide are both recognised treatments in the management of people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with ipratropium bromide, making an update necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative effects of tiotropium to ipratropium bromide on markers of quality of life, exacerbations, symptoms, lung function and serious adverse events in patients with COPD using available randomised controlled trial (RCT) data.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified RCTs from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to August 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group RCTs of 12 weeks duration or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium with ipratropium bromide for patients with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and outcome results. We contacted trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included two studies of good methodological quality that enrolled 1073 participants with COPD. The studies used a similar design and inclusion criteria and were of at least 12 weeks duration; the participants had a mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of 40% predicted value at baseline. One study used tiotropium via the HandiHaler (18 µg) for 12 months and the other via the Respimat device (5 µg and 10 µg) for 12 weeks. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline but not all outcomes were reported for both studies. Overall the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.For primary outcomes this review found that at the three months trough (the lowest level measured before treatment) FEV1 significantly increased with tiotropium compared to ipratropium bromide (mean difference (MD) 109 mL; 95% confidence interval (CI) 81 to 137, moderate quality evidence, I(2) = 62%). There were fewer people experiencing one or more non-fatal serious adverse events on tiotropium compared to ipratropium (odds ratio (OR) 0.5; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73, high quality evidence). This represents an absolute reduction in risk from 176 to 97 per 1000 people over three to 12 months. Concerning disease specific adverse events, the tiotropium group were also less likely to experience a COPD-related serious adverse event when compared to ipratropium bromide (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.85, moderate quality evidence).For secondary outcomes, both studies reported fewer hospital admissions in the tiotropium group (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.70, moderate quality evidence); as well as fewer patients experiencing one or more exacerbations leading to hospitalisation in the people on tiotropium in both studies (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.99, moderate quality evidence). There was no significant difference in mortality between the treatments (OR 1.39; 95% CI 0.44 to 4.39, moderate quality evidence). One study measured quality of life using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ); the mean SGRQ score at 52 weeks was lower in the tiotropium group than the ipratropium group (lower on the scale is favourable) (MD -3.30; 95% CI -5.63 to -0.97, moderate quality evidence). There were fewer participants suffering one of more exacerbations in the tiotropium arm (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95, high quality evidence) and there was also a reported difference in the mean number of exacerbations per person per year which reached statistical significance (MD -0.23; 95% CI -0.39 to -0.07, P = 0.006, moderate quality evidence). From the 1073 participants there were significantly fewer withdrawals from the tiotropium group (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.83, high quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that tiotropium treatment, when compared with ipratropium bromide, was associated with improved lung function, fewer hospital admissions (including those for exacerbations of COPD), fewer exacerbations of COPD and improved quality of life. There were both fewer serious adverse events and disease specific events in the tiotropium group, but no significant difference in deaths with ipratropium bromide when compared to tiotropium. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice (instead of ipratropium bromide) for patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. A recent large double-blind trial of the two delivery devices found no substantial difference in mortality using 2.5 µg or 5 µg of tiotropium via Respimat in comparison to 18 µg via Handihaler.

Effects of indacaterol versus tiotropium on respiratory mechanics assessed by the forced oscillation technique in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The forced oscillation technique (FOT) can measure respiratory mechanics and has attracted attention in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to evaluate the effects of only indacaterol and tiotropium monotherapies on airflow limitation and respiratory impedance. Pulmonary function tests, COPD assessment test (CAT), and multifrequency FOT with MostGraph-01 were performed at the beginning and after 8 weeks of treatment with indacaterol or tiotropium. The resistance index, resistance at 5 Hz (R5), resistance at 20 Hz (R20), reactance index, reactance at 5 Hz (X5), resonant frequency (Fres), and low-frequency reactance area (ALX) were determined at whole-breath, inspiratory, and expiratory phases. Eighty-two patients (mean age: 73 years; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1): 61.6%±19.0% predicted) were randomized to indacaterol or tiotropium treatment. Both bronchodilators improved airflow limitation, with mean trough improvements in FEV1 of 165 mL and 80 mL in the indacaterol and tiotropium groups, respectively. The CAT score decreased in the indacaterol group (P<0.001; 11.2±6.6 to 7.5±5.6). Compared with tiotropium, indacaterol significantly improved FEV1, percent predicted FEV1, and CAT score (P=0.042, P=0.008, and P=0.027, respectively). For respiratory impedance, indacaterol and tiotropium changed R5, X5, Fres, and ALX at whole-breath, inspiratory, and expiratory phases. In the indacaterol group, the changes in R5, R5-R20, X5, Fres, and ALX were significantly correlated with the changes in FEV1. The use of the FOT may enable the evaluation of the effects of bronchodilators in addition to FEV1-indicated therapeutic effects in COPD.

Efficacy of Tiotropium + Olodaterol in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease by Initial Disease Severity and Treatment Intensity: A Post Hoc Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium and once-daily long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) olodaterol have been studied as a once-daily fixed-dose combination (FDC) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Two large, 52-week, double-blind, parallel-group studies in patients with moderate-very severe COPD demonstrated that tiotropium + olodaterol significantly improved lung function and symptoms versus the monocomponents. This post hoc analysis determined effects on lung function by prior LAMA or LABA maintenance treatment and initial disease severity.

METHODS

5162 patients were randomized and treated with olodaterol 5 µg, tiotropium 2.5 µg, tiotropium 5 µg, tiotropium + olodaterol 2.5/5 µg, or tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg (all once daily via Respimat(®) inhaler). Primary efficacy (lung-function) end points were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 3 h (AUC0-3) and trough FEV1 responses (i.e., change from baseline). Pooled data are presented for the following subgroups: prior maintenance treatment with LAMA or LABA, Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2 (predicted FEV1 50% to <80%) and 3 (30% to <50%)/4 (<30%), sex, age, and prior use of inhaled corticosteroids.

RESULTS

Tiotropium + olodaterol FDC improved lung function over the monocomponents in patients with GOLD 2 and 3-4 disease, irrespective of prior LAMA or LABA maintenance therapy; most comparisons between FDCs and their respective monocomponents were statistically significant (P < 0.05). FEV1 AUC0-3 and trough FEV1 responses for the individual treatments were generally greater in patients with less severe COPD at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg significantly improved FEV1 AUC0-3 and trough FEV1 in all GOLD severity groups compared to olodaterol 5 µg and tiotropium 5 µg alone, irrespective of whether patients had received prior LAMA or LABA maintenance treatment. Improvements from baseline in lung function were generally greater in patients with less severe disease.

FUNDING

Boehringer Ingelheim.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01431274 and NCT01431287.

Cardiac safety of tiotropium in patients with COPD: a combined analysis of Holter-ECG data from four randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is generally well tolerated; however, there has been debate whether antimuscarinics, particularly tiotropium administered via Respimat(®) Soft Mist(™) Inhaler, may induce cardiac arrhythmias in a vulnerable subpopulation with cardiovascular comorbidity. The aim of this study was to provide evidence of the cardiac safety of tiotropium maintenance therapy.

METHODS

Combined analysis of Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) data from clinical trials of tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Trials in the Boehringer Ingelheim clinical trials database conducted between 2003 and 2012, involving tiotropium HandiHaler(®) 18 μg and/or tiotropium Respimat(®) (1.25-, 2.5-, 5.0- and 10-μg doses) were reviewed. All trials involving Holter-ECG monitoring during this period were included in the analysis. Men and women aged ≥ 40 years with a smoking history of ≥ 10 pack-years, and a clinical diagnosis of COPD were included. Holter ECGs were evaluated for heart rate (HR), supraventricular premature beats (SVPBs), ventricular premature beats (VPBs) and pauses. Quantitative and categorical end-points were derived for each of the Holter monitoring days.

RESULTS

Four trials (n = 727) were included in the analysis. Respimat(®) (1.25-10 μg) or HandiHaler(®) (18 μg) was not associated with changes in HR, SVPBs, VPBs and pauses compared with placebo or the pretreatment baseline period. In terms of cardiac arrhythmia end-points, there was no evidence for an exposure-effect relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis, tiotropium maintenance therapy administered using Respimat(®) (1.25-10 μg) or HandiHaler(®) (18 μg) once daily for periods of up to 48 weeks was well tolerated with no increased risk of cardiac arrhythmia in patients with COPD.

Early intervention with tiotropium in Chinese patients with GOLD stages I-II chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Tie-COPD): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised, controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Owing to the high and increasing morbidity and mortality, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has become a major public health problem worldwide. Although the majority of patients with COPD are in the early stages, little attention has been paid to them, in particular regarding to early intervention. Tiotropium bromide can significantly relieve symptoms and reduce the incidence of acute exacerbations of COPD. Therefore, we hypothesise that therapy with tiotropium bromide will benefit patients with COPD with early-stage disease.

METHOD/ANALYSIS

A randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre clinical trial (Tiotropium In Early COPD study, Tie-COPD study) is being conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term intervention with tiotropium in patients with COPD with early-stage disease. A total of 839 patients with COPD who satisfied the eligibility criteria were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a once daily inhaled capsule of either tiotropium bromide (18 μg) or matching placebo for 2 years. Measurements will include forced expiratory volume in 1 s, health-related quality of life, grade degree of breathlessness related to activities, COPD exacerbations and pharmacoeconomic analysis.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University. Recruitment started in November 2011 and ended in October 2013, with 839 patients randomised. The treatment follow-up of participants with Tie-COPD is currently ongoing and is due to finish in November 2015. The authors will disseminate the findings in peer-reviewed publications, conferences and seminar presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01455129).