Combined salmeterol and fluticasone in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomised controlled trial

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hospital admissions and drugs--unexpected positive associations: a retrospective general practice cohort study

BACKGROUND

Increased prescribing of inhaled long-acting anti-muscarinic (LAMA) and combined inhaled long-acting β2-agonist and corticosteroid (LABA+ICS) drugs for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has led to hopes of reduced hospital admissions from this disease.

AIMS

To investigate the impact of rising primary care prescribing of LAMA and LABA+ICS drugs on COPD admissions.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of general practice COPD admission and prescribing data between 2007 and 2010 comprised a representative group of 806 English general practices (population 5,264,506). Outcome measures were practice rates of COPD patient admissions and prescription costs of LAMA and LABA+ICS. General practice characteristics were based on the UK quality and outcomes framework.

RESULTS

Rates of COPD admissions remained stable from 2001 to 2010. Practice-prescribing volumes of LAMA per practice patient and LABA+ICS per practice patient increased by 61 and 26%, respectively, between 2007 and 2010. Correlation between costs of LAMA and those of LABA+ICS increased year on year, and was the highest in 2010 (Pearson's r=0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 0.72). Practice COPD admission rates were positively predicted by practice-prescribing volumes of LAMA (2010: B=1.23, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.85) and of LABA+ICS (2010: B=0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.52) when controlling for practice list size, COPD prevalence and deprivation.

CONCLUSION

The increase in the prescribing of LAMA and LABA+ICS inhalers was not associated with the predicted fall in hospital admission rates for COPD patients. The positive correlation between high practice COPD prescribing and high practice COPD admissions was not explained.

Comparative efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta agonist combinations in preventing COPD exacerbations: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting beta agonist (LABA) is recommended in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients experiencing frequent exacerbations. Currently, there are five ICS/LABA combination products available on the market. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the efficacy of various ICS/LABA combinations with a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Several databases and manufacturer's websites were searched for relevant clinical trials. Randomized control trials, at least 12 weeks duration, comparing an ICS/LABA combination with active control or placebo were included. Moderate and severe exacerbations were chosen as the outcome assessment criteria. The primary analyses were conducted with a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo method.

RESULTS

Most of the ICS/LABA combinations reduced moderate-to-severe exacerbations as compared with placebo and LABA, but none of them reduced severe exacerbations. However, many studies excluded patients receiving long-term oxygen therapy. Moderate-dose ICS was as effective as high-dose ICS in reducing exacerbations when combined with LABA.

CONCLUSION

ICS/LABA combinations had a class effect with regard to the prevention of COPD exacerbations. Moderate-dose ICS/LABA combination therapy would be sufficient for COPD patients when indicated. The efficacy of ICS/LABA combination therapy appeared modest and had no impact in reducing severe exacerbations. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of ICS/LABA combination therapy in severely affected COPD patients requiring long-term oxygen therapy.

Recent advances in COPD disease management with fixed-dose long-acting combination therapies

Combinations of two long-acting bronchodilators and long-acting bronchodilators with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended therapies in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Three fixed-dose combination products have recently been approved for the treatment of COPD (the long-acting β2-agonist plus long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LABA/LAMA] combinations glycopyrronium/indacaterol [QVA149] and umeclidinium/vilanterol, and the LABA/ICS fluticasone furoate/vilanterol), with others currently in late-stage development. LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS combination therapies demonstrate positive effects on both lung function and patient-reported outcomes, with significant improvements observed with LABA/LAMA combinations compared with placebo, each component alone and other comparators in current use. No new safety concerns have been observed with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators. Combinations of two long-acting bronchodilators represent a new and convenient treatment option in COPD. This review summarizes published efficacy and safety data from clinical trials of both LABA/LAMA and novel LABA/ICS combinations in patients with COPD.

Cyclic nucleotide-based therapeutics for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) defines a group of chronic inflammatory disorders of the airways that are characterised by a progressive and largely irreversible decline in expiratory airflow. Drugs used to treat COPD through actions mediated by cyclic AMP (cAMP) are restricted to long-acting and short-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists and, in a subset of patients with chronic bronchitis, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, roflumilast. These agents relax airway smooth muscle and suppress inflammation. At the molecular level, these effects in the airways are mediated by two cAMP effectors, cAMP-dependent protein kinase and exchange proteins activated by cAMP. The pharmacology of newer agents, acting through these systems, is discussed here with an emphasis on their potential to interact and increase therapeutic effectiveness.

Predictors of exacerbation frequency in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are sporadic, acute worsening of symptoms. Identifying predictors of exacerbation frequency may facilitate medical interventions that reduce exacerbation frequency and severity. The objective of this study was to determine predictors of exacerbation frequency and mortality.

Methods

A total of 227 COPD patients were enrolled in a prospective clinical study between January 2000 and December 2011. Reported exacerbations were recorded for the year preceding enrollment and annually thereafter, and patients were grouped by median annual exacerbation frequency into those experiencing infrequent exacerbations (less than one exacerbation annually) and frequent exacerbations (one or more exacerbation annually). Patients experiencing frequent exacerbations were further divided into those experiencing moderately frequent exacerbations (fewer than two exacerbations per year) and severely frequent exacerbations (two or more exacerbations per year). The rate of clinical relapse and survival was recorded over a 10-year period. The mean of follow-up time was 5.15 years per patient.

Results

For patients experiencing infrequent, moderately frequent, and severely frequent exacerbations, median exacerbations in the year preceding enrollment were 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, respectively, and more frequent exacerbations correlated with lower baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (0.81 L, 0.75 L, and 0.66 L, respectively), higher comorbidity (70.7%, 75.0%, and 89.4%, respectively), and greater NPPV use during hospitalization (16.4%, 35.9% and 51.1%, respectively). FEV₁ declined and mortality increased with increasing exacerbation frequency.

Conclusions

Exacerbation frequency can be used to generate discreet patient subpopulations, supporting the hypothesis that multiple COPD phenotypes exist and can be used in patient risk stratification.

Minimal clinically important differences in pharmacological trials

The concept of a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is well established. Here, we review the evidence base and methods used to define MCIDs as well as their strengths and limitations. Most MCIDs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are empirically derived estimates applying to populations of patients. Validated MCIDs are available for many commonly used outcomes in COPD, including lung function (100 ml for trough FEV1), dyspnea (improvement of ≥ 1 unit in the Transition Dyspnea Index total score or 5 units in the University of California, San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire), health status (reduction of 4 units in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score), and exercise capacity (47.5 m for the incremental shuttle walking test, 45-85 s for the endurance shuttle walking test, and 46-105 s for constant-load cycling endurance tests), but there is currently no validated MCID for exacerbations. In a clinical trial setting, many factors, including study duration, withdrawal rate, baseline severity, and Hawthorne effects, can influence the measured treatment effect and determine whether it reaches the MCID. We also address recent challenges presented by clinical trials that compare active treatments and suggest that MCIDs should be used to identify the additional proportion of patients who benefit, for example, when one drug is replaced by another or when a second drug is added to a first. We propose the term "minimum worthwhile incremental advantage" to describe this parameter.

Real-life use of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a French observational study

BACKGROUND

In Europe, administration of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combined with a long-acting β2 agonist is approved in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with a pre-bronchodilator FEV1 < 60% predicted normal, a history of repeated exacerbations, and who have significant symptoms despite regular bronchodilator therapy. Minimal data are available on the use of the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate combination (FSC) in the real-life COPD setting and prescription compliance with the licensed specifications.

METHODS

A French observational study was performed to describe the COPD population prescribed with FSC, prescription modalities, and the coherence of prescription practices with the market authorized population. Data were collected for patients initiating FSC treatment (500 μg fluticasone propionate, 50 μg salmeterol, dry powder inhaler) prescribed by a general practitioner (GP) or a pulmonologist, using physician and patient questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 710 patients were included, 352 by GPs and 358 by pulmonologists. Mean age was over 60 years, and 70% of patients were male. More than half were retired, and overweight or obese. Approximately half were current smokers and one-third had cardiovascular comorbidities. According to both physician evaluation and GOLD 2006 classification, the majority of patients (>75%) had moderate to very severe COPD. Strict compliance by prescribing physicians with the market-approved population for dry powder inhaler SFC in COPD was low, notably in ICS-naïve patients; all three conditions were fulfilled in less than a quarter of patients with prior ICS and less than 7% of ICS-naïve patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription of dry powder inhaler SFC by GPs and pulmonologists has very low conformity with the three conditions defining the licensed COPD population. Prescription practices need to be improved and systematic FEV1 evaluation for COPD diagnosis and treatment management should be emphasized.

The Saudi Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of COPD

The Saudi Thoracic Society (STS) launched the Saudi Initiative for Chronic Airway Diseases (SICAD) to develop a guideline for the diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This guideline is primarily aimed for internists and general practitioners. Though there is scanty epidemiological data related to COPD, the SICAD panel believes that COPD prevalence is increasing in Saudi Arabia due to increasing prevalence of tobacco smoking among men and women. To overcome the issue of underutilization of spirometry for diagnosing COPD, handheld spirometry is recommended to screen individuals at risk for COPD. A unique feature about this guideline is the simplified practical approach to classify COPD into three classes based on the symptoms as per COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and the risk of exacerbations and hospitalization. Those patients with low risk of exacerbation (<2 in the past year) can be classified as either Class I when they have less symptoms (CAT < 10) or Class II when they have more symptoms (CAT ≥ 10). High-risk COPD patients, as manifested with ≥2 exacerbation or hospitalization in the past year irrespective of the baseline symptoms, are classified as Class III. Class I and II patients require bronchodilators for symptom relief, while Class III patients are recommended to use medications that reduce the risks of exacerbations. The guideline recommends screening for co-morbidities and suggests a comprehensive management approach including pulmonary rehabilitation for those with a CAT score ≥10. The article also discusses the diagnosis and management of acute exacerbations in COPD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

COPD updates: what's new in pathophysiology and management?

The historic perspective that used to define chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has changed. As reviewed in this article, it is based on a better understanding of the underlying inflammatory airflow obstruction and a multidimensional classification, which mostly targets a subgroup called 'frequent exacerbators'. Clinical and radioimaging predictors are the stamina for an aggressive therapeutic approach. A simplified explanation of the updated Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines will ease the burden of treatment selection.

AIMAR survey on COPD phenotypes

BACKGROUND

COPD is characterized by considerable diversity in terms of clinical signs and symptoms, physiopathological mechanisms, response to treatment and disease progression. For this reason, the identification of different patient subgroups (or possible phenotypes) is important both for prognosis and for therapeutic objectives. Based on the foregoing, AIMAR has decided to conduct a survey on the perception of the prevalence of the different clinical COPD phenotypes/subtypes in the clinical practice of physicians who treat patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and on their therapeutic objectives.

METHODS

The survey consisted of 19 multiple-choice questions, compiled through a form published online. All the data and answers entered into the system were checked for consistency and completeness directly online at the time they were entered, and each respondent could only complete the questionnaire once.

RESULTS

The survey took place from May through October 2012. A total of 1,434 questionnaires (60% of the sample approached) were eligible for analysis, broken down as follows: 537 pulmonologists, 666 general practitioners (GPs), 72 internal medicine specialists, 36 allergists, 30 geriatricians, 93 other specialists. The results show that a significant proportion of GPs (33%) identified more than 50 patients in their practices with a diagnosis of COPD. Although most patients are or have been in treatment with a long-acting bronchodilator, the most common reasons for seeing a GP or a specialist were exacerbations and worsening of the symptoms, suggesting the importance of an appropriate background therapy in order to reduce the risk of disease instability. The frequent exacerbator phenotype was the most commonly found phenotype in clinical practice (by 75% of specialists and 66% of GPs); patients with a prevalent phenotype of chronic bronchitis were reported more often by GPs, while specialists reported a higher number of patients with a prevalent phenotype of emphysema.A medical history of exacerbations and the extent of deterioration of the spirometry parameters were considered to be the major indicators for COPD severity and clinical risk. In managing the frequent exacerbator phenotype, the therapeutic objectives - both for GPs and for specialists - included reducing airway inflammation, improving bronchial dilation, and reducing pulmonary hyperinflation. For this type of patients at high clinical risk, specialists selected a first-line therapeutic option based on a predetermined combination of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β2-agonist bronchodilator (LABA) and a second-line three-drug therapy (combination of ICS and two long-acting bronchodilators), while GPs' choices are more diversified, without a clear-cut prevalence of one type of treatment. In patients with COPD and concomitant cardiovascular diseases, frequently observed in clinical practice by all physicians, the combination of ICS and LABA was considered the first-choice option by the highest proportion of GPs (43%) and specialists (37%), while a smaller number of specialists (35%) opted for the long acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). Both GPs and specialists believe that therapeutic continuity is of primary importance for the achievement of clinical outcomes with all classes of drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

A good knowledge of COPD has been observed in a high percentage of GPs, indicating an increased awareness of this disease in Primary Health Care. The frequent exacerbator phenotype is viewed by all physicians as the most prevalent in clinical practice, bearing a high risk of hospitalization. For specialists, therapeutic measures aimed at reducing the number and severity of exacerbations are primarily based on the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and bronchodilator, presumably because of the complementary pharmacological action of its components, whereas while GPs' choices tend to be more diversified. Adherence to medication regimens is of the essence for the achievement of clinical outcomes.

Pulmonary function assessment in mild to moderate persistent asthma patients receiving montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with budesonide: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

There is no comparative study among asthma patients receiving first-line versus various second-line treatment regimens for mild to moderate persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the pulmonary function in asthma patients receiving montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with budesonide in a pilot group.

METHODS

Patients were recruited as per the study criteria and randomly allocated to 4 groups to receive budesonide (400 µg) with formoterol (12 µg), doxofylline (400 mg), montelukast (10 mg), or tiotropium (18 µg) for a period of 3 months. Outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and rescue medication use.

RESULTS

A total of 167 patients were recruited; among them, 123 patients completed the study. At baseline, no significant difference (P > 0.05) was observed in any of the outcome measures. Significant within-group improvement in FEV1 was observed in all the groups. At day 90, between-group difference revealed that improvement in FEV1 was significantly (P < 0.05) high for budesonide plus formoterol followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and, lastly, budesonide plus tiotropium. Similarly, within-group comparison revealed a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in rescue medication use in all the groups. The intensity in decrease was more in budesonide plus formoterol group followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and budesonide plus tiotropium groups.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of our findings, among the second-line treatment regimens, budesonide plus doxofylline and budesonide plus montelukast was found to be better than budesonide plus tiotropium in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Further studies with a larger sample size are likely to be useful.

Inhaled steroids and risk of pneumonia for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are anti-inflammatory drugs that have proven benefits for people with worsening symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and repeated exacerbations. They are commonly used as combination inhalers with long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) to reduce exacerbation rates and all-cause mortality, and to improve lung function and quality of life. The most common combinations of ICS and LABA used in combination inhalers are fluticasone and salmeterol, budesonide and formoterol and a new formulation of fluticasone in combination with vilanterol, which is now available. ICS have been associated with increased risk of pneumonia, but the magnitude of risk and how this compares with different ICS remain unclear. Recent reviews conducted to address their safety have not compared the relative safety of these two drugs when used alone or in combination with LABA.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of pneumonia associated with the use of fluticasone and budesonide for COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), clinicaltrials.gov, reference lists of existing systematic reviews and manufacturer websites. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies were included if they compared the ICS budesonide or fluticasone versus placebo, or either ICS in combination with a LABA versus the same LABA as monotherapy for people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, numerical data and risk of bias information for each included study.We looked at direct comparisons of ICS versus placebo separately from comparisons of ICS/LABA versus LABA for all outcomes, and we combined these with subgroups when no important heterogeneity was noted. After assessing for transitivity, we conducted an indirect comparison to compare budesonide versus fluticasone monotherapy, but we could not do the same for the combination therapies because of systematic differences between the budesonide and fluticasone combination data sets.When appropriate, we explored the effects of ICS dose, duration of ICS therapy and baseline severity on the primary outcome. Findings of all outcomes are presented in 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADEPro.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 43 studies that met the inclusion criteria, and more evidence was provided for fluticasone (26 studies; n = 21,247) than for budesonide (17 studies; n = 10,150). Evidence from the budesonide studies was more inconsistent and less precise, and the studies were shorter. The populations within studies were more often male with a mean age of around 63, mean pack-years smoked over 40 and mean predicted forced expiratory volume of one second (FEV1) less than 50%.High or uneven dropout was considered a high risk of bias in almost 40% of the trials, but conclusions for the primary outcome did not change when the trials at high risk of bias were removed in a sensitivity analysis.Fluticasone increased non-fatal serious adverse pneumonia events (requiring hospital admission) (odds ratio (OR) 1.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50 to 2.12; 18 more per 1000 treated over 18 months; high quality), and no evidence suggested that this outcome was reduced by delivering it in combination with salmeterol or vilanterol (subgroup differences: I(2) = 0%, P value 0.51), or that different doses, trial duration or baseline severity significantly affected the estimate. Budesonide also increased non-fatal serious adverse pneumonia events compared with placebo, but the effect was less precise and was based on shorter trials (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.62; six more per 1000 treated over nine months; moderate quality). Some of the variation in the budesonide data could be explained by a significant difference between the two commonly used doses: 640 mcg was associated with a larger effect than 320 mcg relative to placebo (subgroup differences: I(2) = 74%, P value 0.05).An indirect comparison of budesonide versus fluticasone monotherapy revealed no significant differences with respect to serious adverse events (pneumonia-related or all-cause) or mortality. The risk of any pneumonia event (i.e. less serious cases treated in the community) was higher with fluticasone than with budesonide (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.34); this was the only significant difference reported between the two drugs. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution because of possible differences in the assignment of pneumonia diagnosis, and because no trials directly compared the two drugs.No significant difference in overall mortality rates was observed between either of the inhaled steroids and the control interventions (both high-quality evidence), and pneumonia-related deaths were too rare to permit conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide and fluticasone, delivered alone or in combination with a LABA, are associated with increased risk of serious adverse pneumonia events, but neither significantly affected mortality compared with controls. The safety concerns highlighted in this review should be balanced with recent cohort data and established randomised evidence of efficacy regarding exacerbations and quality of life. Comparison of the two drugs revealed no statistically significant difference in serious pneumonias, mortality or serious adverse events. Fluticasone was associated with higher risk of any pneumonia when compared with budesonide (i.e. less serious cases dealt with in the community), but variation in the definitions used by the respective manufacturers is a potential confounding factor in their comparison.Primary research should accurately measure pneumonia outcomes and should clarify both the definition and the method of diagnosis used, especially for new formulations such as fluticasone furoate, for which little evidence of the associated pneumonia risk is currently available. Similarly, systematic reviews and cohorts should address the reliability of assigning 'pneumonia' as an adverse event or cause of death and should determine how this affects the applicability of findings.

Primary care COPD patients compared with large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies: an UNLOCK validation study

Background

Guideline recommendations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are based on the results of large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies (LPCS). There is a paucity of data on disease characteristics at the primary care level, while the majority of COPD patients are treated in primary care.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the external validity of six LPCS (ISOLDE, TRISTAN, TORCH, UPLIFT, ECLIPSE, POET-COPD) on which current guidelines are based, in relation to primary care COPD patients, in order to inform future clinical practice guidelines and trials.

Methods

Baseline data of seven primary care databases (n = 3508) from Europe were compared to baseline data of the LPCS. In addition, we examined the proportion of primary care patients eligible to participate in the LPCS, based on inclusion criteria.

Results

Overall, patients included in the LPCS were younger (mean difference (MD)-2.4; p = 0.03), predominantly male (MD 12.4; p = 0.1) with worse lung function (FEV1% MD -16.4; p<0.01) and worse quality of life scores (SGRQ MD 15.8; p = 0.01). There were large differences in GOLD stage distribution compared to primary care patients. Mean exacerbation rates were higher in LPCS, with an overrepresentation of patients with ≥1 and ≥2 exacerbations, although results were not statistically significant. Our findings add to the literature, as we revealed hitherto unknown GOLD I exacerbation characteristics, showing 34% of mild patients had ≥1 exacerbations per year and 12% had ≥2 exacerbations per year. The proportion of primary care patients eligible for inclusion in LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN) to 42% (ECLIPSE, UPLIFT).

Conclusion

Primary care COPD patients stand out from patients enrolled in LPCS in terms of gender, lung function, quality of life and exacerbations. More research is needed to determine the effect of pharmacological treatment in mild to moderate patients. We encourage future guideline makers to involve primary care populations in their recommendations.

Steroid resistance in COPD? Overlap and differential anti-inflammatory effects in smokers and ex-smokers

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) reduce exacerbation rates and improve health status but can increase the risk of pneumonia in COPD. The GLUCOLD study, investigating patients with mild-to-moderate COPD, has shown that long-term (2.5-year) ICS therapy induces anti-inflammatory effects. The literature suggests that cigarette smoking causes ICS insensitivity. The aim of this study is to compare anti-inflammatory effects of ICS in persistent smokers and persistent ex-smokers in a post-hoc analysis of the GLUCOLD study.

METHODS

Persistent smokers (n = 41) and persistent ex-smokers (n = 31) from the GLUCOLD cohort were investigated. Effects of ICS treatment compared with placebo were estimated by analysing changes in lung function, hyperresponsiveness, and inflammatory cells in sputum and bronchial biopsies during short-term (0-6 months) and long-term (6-30 months) treatment using multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

Bronchial mast cells were reduced by short-term and long-term ICS treatment in both smokers and ex-smokers. In contrast, CD3⁺, CD4⁺, and CD8⁺ cells were reduced by short-term ICS treatment in smokers only. In addition, sputum neutrophils and lymphocytes, and bronchial CD8⁺ cells were reduced after long-term treatment in ex-smokers only. No significant interactions existed between smoking and ICS treatment.

CONCLUSION

Even in the presence of smoking, long-term ICS treatment may lead to anti-inflammatory effects in the lung. Some anti-inflammatory ICS effects are comparable in smokers and ex-smokers with COPD, other effects are cell-specific. The clinical relevance of these findings, however, are uncertain.

Clinical issues of mucus accumulation in COPD

Airway mucus is part of the lung's native immune function that traps particulates and microorganisms, enabling their clearance from the lung by ciliary transport and cough. Mucus hypersecretion and chronic productive cough are the features of the chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Overproduction and hypersecretion by goblet cells and the decreased elimination of mucus are the primary mechanisms responsible for excessive mucus in chronic bronchitis. Mucus accumulation in COPD patients affects several important outcomes such as lung function, health-related quality of life, COPD exacerbations, hospitalizations, and mortality. Nonpharmacologic options for the treatment of mucus accumulation in COPD are smoking cessation and physical measures used to promote mucus clearance. Pharmacologic therapies include expectorants, mucolytics, methylxanthines, beta-adrenergic receptor agonists, anticholinergics, glucocorticoids, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors, antioxidants, and antibiotics.

Early chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Beyond spirometry

The significant healthcare burden associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is driving us to improve our understanding of the natural history of this disease. Historically, the focus has been largely centred on diagnosing and treating individuals with moderate and severe disease. However, it is now recognised that the speed of decline in lung function as measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 s occurs faster in the earlier stages of the disease process. As a result, a clearer understanding of the potential benefits of treatment in early COPD is needed. It is recognised that many patients with COPD remain undiagnosed in the community which has prompted global case-finding initiatives. In this review we discuss the difficulties in diagnosing COPD in its early stages, examine the role of case-finding and look at the evidence for early intervention with therapeutic agents. There is a growing interest in the phenotypic variation amongst patients with COPD and we explore the role of phenotyping in early COPD and its potential benefits in providing a more individualised approach to COPD management. The majority of patients with COPD are known to die from non-respiratory causes such as cardiovascular disease. The mechanistic link is thought to relate to systemic inflammation, causing us to question whether earlier interventions could have a beneficial impact on the burden of co-morbidities for patients with COPD.

Can the anti-inflammatory activities of β2-agonists be harnessed in the clinical setting?

Beta2-adrenoreceptor agonists (β2-agonists) are primarily bronchodilators, targeting airway smooth muscle and providing critical symptomatic relief in conditions such as bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These agents also possess broad-spectrum, secondary, anti-inflammatory properties. These are mediated largely, though not exclusively, via interactions with adenylyl cyclase-coupled β2-adrenoreceptors on a range of immune and inflammatory cells involved in the immunopathogenesis of acute and chronic inflammatory disorders of the airways. The clinical relevance of the anti-inflammatory actions of β2-agonists, although often effective in the experimental setting, remains contentious. The primary objectives of the current review are: firstly, to assess the mechanisms, both molecular and cell-associated, that may limit the anti-inflammatory efficacy of β2-agonists; secondly, to evaluate pharmacological strategies, several of which are recent and innovative, that may overcome these limitations. These are preceded by a consideration of the various types of β2-agonists, their clinical applications, and spectrum of anti-inflammatory activities, particularly those involving adenosine 3',5'-cyclic adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase-mediated clearance of cytosolic calcium, and altered gene expression in immune and inflammatory cells.

What proportion of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outpatients is eligible for inclusion in randomized clinical trials?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore to what extent an unselected population of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outpatients would be eligible for inclusion in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the clinical records of outpatient subjects with an ascertained diagnosis of COPD. COPD outpatients were assessed against the following inclusion criteria: 40 < age < 80 years, current or former smokers, forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) <70% predicted, no long-term oxygen therapy, no other concomitant lung diseases and absence of major extrapulmonary comorbidities. The study consisted of 2 phases; in phase 1, the criteria for inclusion in RCTs on COPD were selected, and in phase 2, the above criteria were applied to an unselected outpatient COPD population.

RESULTS

A total of 578 subjects (83% of the whole group) failed at least one of the inclusion criteria. Lung diseases other than COPD (occurring in 30% of our population, mostly bronchiectasis), long-term oxygen therapy (31%), FEV1 (19%), age (14%) and extrapulmonary comorbidities such as cognitive impairment (14%), arrhythmias (17%) and congestive heart disease (13%) would have been the most frequent causes for exclusion from RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life settings, more than 80% of COPD subjects are currently treated by protocols based on results of RCTs for which they would not have been eligible. We encourage a more extensive use of pragmatic trials in COPD to better modulate the application of results of RCTs to patients encountered in daily practice.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist in one inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Both long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their coadministration in a combination inhaler may facilitate adherence to medication regimens and improve efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of combined ICS and LABA for stable COPD in comparison with placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, reference lists of included studies and manufacturers' trial registries. The date of the most recent search was June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and double-blind studies of at least four weeks' duration. Eligible studies compared combined ICS and LABA preparations with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed-effect odds ratios (OR) or rate ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and continuous data as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria (with 10,400 participants randomly assigned, lasting between 4 and 156 weeks, mean 42 weeks). Studies used three different combined preparations (fluticasone/salmeterol, budesonide/formoterol or mometasone/formoterol). The studies were generally at low risk of bias for blinding but at unclear or high risk for attrition bias because of participant dropouts. Compared with placebo, both fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol reduced the rate of exacerbations. Mometasone/formoterol reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbation. Pooled analysis of the combined therapies indicated that exacerbations were less frequent when compared with placebo (Rate Ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.78, 7 studies, 7495 participants); the quality of this evidence when GRADE criteria were applied was rated as moderate. Participants included in these trials had on average one or two exacerbations per year, which means that treatment with combined therapy would lead to a reduction of one exacerbation every two to four years in these individuals. An overall reduction in mortality was seen, but this outcome was dominated by the results of one study (TORCH) of fluticasone/salmeterol. Generally, deaths in the smaller, shorter studies were too few to contribute to the overall estimate. Further longer studies on budesonide/formoterol and mometasone/formoterol are required to clarify whether this is seen more widely. When a baseline risk of death of 15.2% from the placebo arm of TORCH was used, the three-year number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with fluticasone/salmeterol to prevent one extra death was 42 (95% CI 24 to 775). All three combined treatments led to statistically significant improvement in health status measurements, although the mean differences observed are relatively small in relation to the minimum clinically important difference. Furthermore, symptoms and lung function assessments favoured combined treatments. An increase in the risk of pneumonia was noted with combined inhalers compared with placebo treatment (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.94), and the quality of this evidence was rated as moderate, but no dose effect was seen. The three-year NNTH for one extra case of pneumonia was 17, based on a 12.3% risk of pneumonia in the placebo arm of TORCH. Fewer participants withdrew from the combined treatment arms for adverse events or lack of efficacy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combined inhaler therapy led to around a quarter fewer COPD exacerbations than were seen with placebo. A significant reduction in all-cause mortality was noted, but this outcome was dominated by one trial (TORCH), emphasising the need for further trials of longer duration. Increased risk of pneumonia is a concern; however, this did not translate into increased exacerbations, hospitalisations or deaths. Current evidence does not suggest any major differences between inhalers in terms of effects, but nor is the evidence strong enough to demonstrate that all are equivalent. To permit firmer conclusions about the effects of combined therapy, more data are needed, particularly in relation to the profile of adverse events and benefits in relation to different formulations and doses of inhaled ICS. Head-to-head comparisons are necessary to determine whether one combined inhaler is better than the others.

Modeling hard clinical end-point data in economic analyses

OBJECTIVE

The availability of hard clinical end-point data, such as that on cardiovascular (CV) events among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, is increasing, and as a result there is growing interest in using hard end-point data of this type in economic analyses. This study investigated published approaches for modeling hard end-points from clinical trials and evaluated their applicability in health economic models with different disease features.

METHODS

A review of cost-effectiveness models of interventions in clinically significant therapeutic areas (CV diseases, cancer, and chronic lower respiratory diseases) was conducted in PubMed and Embase using a defined search strategy. Only studies integrating hard end-point data from randomized clinical trials were considered. For each study included, clinical input characteristics and modeling approach were summarized and evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles (23 CV, eight cancer, two respiratory) were accepted for detailed analysis. Decision trees, Markov models, discrete event simulations, and hybrids were used. Event rates were incorporated either as constant rates, time-dependent risks, or risk equations based on patient characteristics. Risks dependent on time and/or patient characteristics were used where major event rates were >1%/year in models with fewer health states (<7). Models of infrequent events or with numerous health states generally preferred constant event rates.

LIMITATIONS

The detailed modeling information and terminology varied, sometimes requiring interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Key considerations for cost-effectiveness models incorporating hard end-point data include the frequency and characteristics of the relevant clinical events and how the trial data is reported. When event risk is low, simplification of both the model structure and event rate modeling is recommended. When event risk is common, such as in high risk populations, more detailed modeling approaches, including individual simulations or explicitly time-dependent event rates, are more appropriate to accurately reflect the trial data.

Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor therapy for lung diseases

Phosphodiesterases (PDEs) are a superfamily of enzymes that catalyze the breakdown of cAMP and/or cyclic guanosine monophosphate (GMP) to their inactive form. PDE4 is the main selective cAMP-metabolizing enzyme in inflammatory and immune cells. Because PDE4 is highly expressed in leukocytes and other inflammatory cells involved in the pathogenesis of inflammatory lung diseases, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), inhibition of PDE4 has been predicted to have an antiinflammatory effect and thus therapeutic efficacy. The limited and inconsistent efficacy and side effects of the early compounds made their further development less desirable in asthma, given the excellent efficacy/tolerability ratio of inhaled steroids. The lack of effective antiinflammatory drug treatment for COPD has thus shifted the interest in development toward COPD. Roflumilast, the only PDE4 inhibitor that has reached the market because of the good efficacy/tolerability ratio, is recommended for patients with COPD with severe airflow limitation, symptoms of chronic bronchitis, and a history of exacerbations, whose disease is not adequately controlled by long-acting bronchodilators. Albeit safe, it maintains significant side effects (diarrhea, nausea, weight loss) that make it intolerable in some patients. Future developments of PDE4 inhibitors include extended indications of roflumilast (1) in patients with COPD, and (2) in other respiratory (e.g., asthma) and nonrespiratory chronic inflammatory/metabolic conditions (e.g., diabetes), as well as (3) the development of new molecules with PDE4 inhibitory properties with an improved efficacy/tolerability profile.

Long-acting beta2-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a respiratory disease that causes progressive symptoms of breathlessness, cough and mucus build-up. It is the fourth or fifth most common cause of death worldwide and is associated with significant healthcare costs.Inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) are widely prescribed to manage the symptoms of COPD when short-acting agents alone are no longer sufficient. Twice-daily treatment with an inhaled LABA is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving exercise tolerance and quality of life, slowing decline and even improving lung function and preventing and treating exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of twice-daily long-acting beta2-agonists compared with placebo for patients with COPD on the basis of clinically important endpoints, primarily quality of life and COPD exacerbations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites in June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting populations of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Studies were required to be at least 12 weeks in duration and designed to assess the safety and efficacy of a long-acting beta2-agonist against placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data and characteristics were extracted independently by two review authors, and each study was assessed for potential sources of bias. Data for all outcomes were pooled and subgrouped by LABA agent (formoterol 12 μg, formoterol 24 μg and salmeterol 50 μg) and then were separately analysed by LABA agent and subgrouped by trial duration. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for the proportion of participants taking inhaled corticosteroids and for studies with high or uneven rates of attrition.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs met the inclusion criteria, randomly assigning 14,939 people with COPD to receive twice-daily LABA or placebo. Study duration ranged from three months to three years; the median duration was six months. Participants were more often male with moderate to severe symptoms at randomisation; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was between 33% and 55% predicted normal in the studies, and mean St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ) ranged from 44 to 55 when reported.Moderate-quality evidence showed that LABA treatment improved quality of life on the SGRQ (mean difference (MD) -2.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.09 to -1.54; I(2) = 50%; 17 trials including 11,397 people) and reduced the number of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation (odds ratio (OR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; I(2) = 10%; seven trials including 3804 people). In absolute terms, 18 fewer people per 1000 were hospitalised as the result of an exacerbation while receiving LABA therapy over a weighted mean of 7 months (95% CI 3 to 31 fewer). Scores were also improved on the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), and more people receiving LABA treatment showed clinically important improvement of at least four points on the SGRQ.The number of people who had exacerbations requiring a course of oral steroids or antibiotics was also lower among those taking LABA (52 fewer per 1000 treated over 8 months; 95% CI 24 to 78 fewer, moderate quality evidence).Mortality was low, and combined findings of all studies showed that LABA therapy did not significantly affect mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.08; I(2) = 21%; 23 trials including 14,079 people, moderate quality evidence). LABA therapy did not affect the rate of serious adverse events (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; I(2) = 34%, moderate quality evidence), although there was significant unexplained heterogeneity, especially between the two formoterol doses.LABA therapy improved predose FEV1 by 73 mL more than placebo (95% CI 48 to 98; I(2) = 71%, low quality evidence), and people were more likely to withdraw from placebo than from LABA therapy (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; I(2) = 0%). Higher rates of withdrawal in the placebo arm may reduce our confidence in some results, but the disparity is more likely to reduce the magnitude of difference between LABA and placebo than inflate the true effect; removing studies at highest risk of bias on the basis of high and unbalanced attrition did not change conclusions for the primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence from 26 studies showed that inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists are effective over the medium and long term for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Their use is associated with improved quality of life and reduced exacerbations, including those requiring hospitalisation. Overall, findings showed that inhaled LABAs did not significantly reduce mortality or serious adverse events.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

How and when to use inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Since inflammatory processes play a key role in the pathogenesis of the disease and ICSs have been shown to be very effective in controlling asthma, their use in COPD patients has become widespread. However, their efficacy in COPD is more limited than in asthma, since the type of inflammation in COPD is predominantly neutrophilic and resistant to corticosteroids. ICSs have not been shown to prevent disease progression or reduce mortality in clinical trials. By contrast, these agents reduce exacerbations and improve both symptoms and quality of life in selected patients, particularly those with bronchial reversibility. Since ICSs are not harmless drugs, clinicians should make every effort to distinguish patients who will benefit from ICS treatment from those who will not. Side effects of ICSs may be both local and systemic, with most of them being dose dependent. A potential increase in the risk of pneumonia, diabetes, dysphonia or candiadiasis, among other complications, should be considered when prescribing these drugs in patients who usually have several comorbidities. Hence, it is important to identify those patients in whom the best risk-to-benefit ratio can be achieved and to use the most appropriate ICS dose with the least incidence of side effects.

Inhaled long-acting β2 agonists enhance glucocorticoid receptor nuclear translocation and efficacy in sputum macrophages in COPD

BACKGROUND

Combination inhaled therapy with long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) and corticosteroids is beneficial in treating asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

OBJECTIVE

In asthma, LABAs enhance glucocorticoid receptor (GR) nuclear translocation in the presence of corticosteroids. Whether this biological mechanism occurs in COPD, a relatively corticosteroid-resistant disease, is uncertain.

METHODS

Eight patients with mild/moderate COPD participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study and inhaled single doses of fluticasone propionate (FP) 100 μg, FP 500 μg, salmeterol xinafoate (SLM) 50 μg, and combination FP 100 μg + SLM 50 μg. One hour postinhalation, sputum was induced, nuclear proteins isolated from purified macrophages, and levels of activated nuclear GR quantified by using a GR-glucocorticoid response element ELISA-based assay.

RESULTS

Nuclear GR significantly increased after the inhalation of FP 500 μg (P < .01), but not after the inhalation of FP 100 μg or SLM 50 μg, compared with placebo. Interestingly, SLM in combination with FP 100 μg increased nuclear GR levels equivalent to those of FP 500 μg alone. This was significantly greater than either FP 100 μg (P < .05) or SLM 50 μg (P < .01) alone. In vitro in a human macrophage cell line, SLM (10(-8) mol/L) enhanced FP (10(-9) mol/L)-induced mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphatase-1 mRNA (5.8 ± 0.6 vs 8.4 ± 1.1 × 10(-6) copies, P < .05) and 2 × glucocorticoid response element-luciferase reporter gene activity (250.1 ± 15.6 vs 103.1 ± 23.6-fold induction, P < .001). Addition of SLM (10(-9) mol/L) to FP (10(-11) mol/L) significantly enhanced FP-mediated suppression of IL-1β-induced CXCL8 (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of SLM 50 μg to FP 100 μg enhanced GR nuclear translocation equivalent to that seen with a 5-fold higher dose of FP in sputum macrophages from patients with COPD. This may account for the superior clinical effects of combination LABA/corticosteroid treatment compared with either as monotherapy observed in COPD.

Clinical and economic impact of non-adherence in COPD: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medication for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) has shown to substantially reduce symptoms and slow progression of disease. However, non-adherence to medication is common and associated with worsened clinical and economic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of published literature to assess the impact of non-adherence to COPD medication on clinical and economic outcomes.

METHODS

A search in PubMed and Web of Science databases was conducted of original studies published from database inception to 2012. Studies must report on the association between adherence to COPD medication and outcomes, published in English in peer-reviewed journals and full texts needed to be available.

RESULTS

Twelve full articles were included in the review. Most studies were retrospective database studies. Seven studies reported on the association between adherence and clinical outcomes, two on mortality, three on costs, four on quality of life and one on work productivity. Results indicated a clear association between adherence and both clinical and economic outcomes. Evidence from studies revealed increased hospitalizations, mortality, quality of life and loss of productivity among non-adherent patients.

CONCLUSION

This review revealed a clear association between non-adherence to COPD medication and worsened clinical and economic outcomes making non-adherent patients a priority for cost-effective interventions.

Differential effects of fluticasone on extracellular matrix production by airway and parenchymal fibroblasts in severe COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by abnormal repair in the lung resulting in airway obstruction associated with emphysema and peripheral airway fibrosis. Because the presence and degree of airways disease and emphysema varies between COPD patients, this may explain the heterogeneity in the response to treatment. It is currently unknown whether and to what extent inhaled steroids can affect the abnormal repair process in the airways and lung parenchyma in COPD. We investigated the effects of fluticasone on transforming growth factor (TGF)-β- and cigarette smoke-induced changes in mothers against decapentaplegic homolog (Smad) signaling and extracellular matrix (ECM) production in airway and parenchymal lung fibroblasts from patients with severe COPD. We showed that TGF-β-induced ECM production by pulmonary fibroblasts, but not activation of the Smad pathway, was sensitive to the effects of fluticasone. Fluticasone induced decorin production by airway fibroblasts and partly reversed the negative effects of TGF-β treatment. Fluticasone inhibited biglycan production in both airway and parenchymal fibroblasts and procollagen 1 production only in parenchymal fibroblasts, thereby restoring the basal difference in procollagen 1 production between airway and parenchymal fibroblasts. Our findings suggest that the effects of steroids on the airway compartment may be beneficial for patients with severe COPD, i.e., restoration of decorin loss around the airways, whereas the effects of steroids on the parenchyma may be detrimental, since the tissue repair response, i.e., biglycan and procollagen production, is inhibited. More research is needed to further disentangle these differential effects of steroid treatment on the different lung compartments and its impact on tissue repair and remodeling in COPD.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist in one inhaler versus inhaled corticosteroids alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Both long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their co-administration in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens and to improve efficacy. Three preparations are currently available: fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FPS). budesonide/formoterol (BDF) and mometasone furoate/formoterol (MF/F).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of combined long-acting beta2-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) preparations, as measured by clinical endpoints and pulmonary function testing, compared with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, which is compiled from systematic searches of multiple literature databases. The search was conducted in June 2013. In addition, we checked the reference lists of included studies and contacted the relevant manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Compared studies combined LABA/ICS with the ICS component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia. Health-related quality of life (as measured by validated scales), lung function and side effects were secondary outcomes. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed-effect odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous data as mean differences or rate ratios and 95% CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 15 studies of good methodological quality met the inclusion criteria by randomly assigning 7814 participants with predominantly poorly reversible, severe COPD. Data were most plentiful for the FPS combination. Exacerbation rates were significantly reduced with combination therapies (rate ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.94, 6 studies, N = 5601) compared with ICS alone. The mean exacerbation rate in the control (ICS) arms of the six included studies was 1.21 exacerbations per participant per year (range 0.88 to 1.60), and we would expect this to be reduced to a rate of 1.05 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.14) among those given combination therapy. Mortality was also lower with the combination (odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94, 12 studies, N = 7518) than with ICS alone, but this was heavily weighted by a three-year study of FPS. When this study was removed, no significant mortality difference was noted. The reduction in exacerbations did not translate into significantly reduced rates of hospitalisation due to COPD exacerbation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07, 10 studies, N = 7060). Lung function data favoured combination treatment in the FPS, BDF and MF/F trials, but the improvement was small. Small improvements in health-related quality of life were measured on the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) with FPS or BDF compared with ICS, but this was well below the minimum clinically important difference. Adverse event profiles were similar between the two treatments arms, and rates of pneumonia when it was diagnosed by chest x-ray (CXR) were lower than those reported in earlier trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination ICS and LABA offer some clinical benefits in COPD compared with ICS alone, especially for reduction in exacerbations. This review does not support the use of ICS alone when LABAs are available. Adverse events were not significantly different between treatments. Further long-term assessments using practical outcomes of current and new 24-hour LABAs will help determine their efficacy and safety. For robust comparisons as to their relative effects, long-term head-to-head comparisons are needed.

Evaluation of salmeterol xinafoate plus fluticasone propionate for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Current clinical guidelines recommend long-acting bronchodilators as the mainstay of the pharmacotherapy of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), in conjunction with long-acting beta-agonists (LABA), are routinely considered at severe and very severe stages of COPD when patients lack adequate response to single-therapy with LABAs. Although the study methodologies evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the combination therapy using salmeterol and fluticasone (SAL/FLU) for patients with COPD have been questioned, a number of studies have suggested that using ICS, in combination with a LABA agent, may improve survival of patients with COPD.

AREAS COVERED

This article attempts to review the most current evidence for using SAL/FLU in the management of COPD and summarizes the results of outcome measures reported in randomized controlled trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Until new forms of drug combinations are made available, the use of dual-therapy containing a LABA and ICS remain as the most logical and appropriate approach for the treatment of patients suffering from severe and very severe COPD with repeated exacerbations.

Response to add-on inhaled corticosteroids in COPD based on airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol

BACKGROUND

The use of inhaled corticosteroids in mild to moderate COPD is controversial. The aim of this study was to determine whether airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol might identify patients who are likely to respond to add-on inhaled corticosteroids.

METHODS

Ninety subjects with mild to moderate COPD were recruited and 68 subsequently randomized in a double-blind manner to receive inhaled budesonide (1,600 μg/d, n = 31) or placebo (n = 37) for 3 months. Thirty-eight subjects had airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol (17 received budesonide, 21 placebo). All subjects received tiotropium throughout the study, including 4 weeks before randomization. Spirometry, quality of life (St. George Respiratory Questionnaire), degree of dyspnea, airway responsiveness to mannitol, and exhaled nitric oxide were assessed at week 0 (recruitment), week 4 (baseline prior to randomization), and week 16 (posttreatment).

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, budesonide was associated with improved quality of life in subjects showing airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol (difference of changes in quality of life score between randomization and study completion, −9.1; 95% CI, −15.8 to −2.3; P < .01). Treatment with inhaled budesonide also led to a reduction in airway responsiveness to mannitol compared with placebo (difference in log10 response-dose ratio, −0.3; 95% CI, −0.6 to −0.04; P < .01). However, postrandomization changes in FEV1 % predicted, quality of life, and exhaled nitric oxide showed no difference between budesonide and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with mild to moderate COPD and airway hyperresponsiveness to mannitol, quality of life and airway responsiveness improved after treatment with inhaled corticosteroids added to long-acting bronchodilator therapy.

Putting health status guided COPD management to the test: protocol of the MARCH study

BACKGROUND

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a disease state characterized by airflow limitation that is not fully reversible and usually progressive. Current guidelines, among which the Dutch, have so far based their management strategy mainly on lung function impairment as measured by FEV1, while it is well known that FEV1 has a poor correlation with almost all features of COPD that matter to patients. Based on this discrepancy the GOLD 2011 update included symptoms and impact in their treatment algorithm proposal. Health status measures capture both symptoms and impact and could therefore be used as a standardized way to capture the information a doctor could otherwise only collect by careful history taking and recording. We hypothesize that a treatment algorithm that is based on a simple validated 10 item health status questionnaire, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), improves health status (as measured by SGRQ) and classical COPD outcomes like exacerbation frequency, patient satisfaction and health care utilization compared to usual care based on guidelines.

METHODS/DESIGN

This hypothesis will be tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) following 330 patients for two years. During this period general practitioners will receive treatment advices every four months that are based on the patient's health status (in half of the patients, intervention group) or on lung function (the remaining half of the patients, usual care group).

DISCUSSION

During the design process, the selection of outcomes and the development of the treatment algorithm were challenging. This is discussed in detail in the manuscript to facilitate researchers in designing future studies in this changing field of implementation research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2643.

Guidelines for diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Joint ICS/NCCP (I) recommendations

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major public health problem in India. Although several International guidelines for diagnosis and management of COPD are available, yet there are lot of gaps in recognition and management of COPD in India due to vast differences in availability and affordability of healthcare facilities across the country. The Indian Chest Society (ICS) and the National College of Chest Physicians (NCCP) of India have joined hands to come out with these evidence-based guidelines to help the physicians at all levels of healthcare to diagnose and manage COPD in a scientific manner. Besides the International literature, the Indian studies were specifically analyzed to arrive at simple and practical recommendations. The evidence is presented under these five headings: (a) definitions, epidemiology, and disease burden; (b) disease assessment and diagnosis; (c) pharmacologic management of stable COPD; (d) management of acute exacerbations; and (e) nonpharmacologic and preventive measures. The modified grade system was used for classifying the quality of evidence as 1, 2, 3, or usual practice point (UPP). The strength of recommendation was graded as A or B depending upon the level of evidence.