Triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate with co-suspension delivery technology versus dual therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (KRONOS): a double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

Efficacy and Safety of Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Metered Dose Inhaler Formulated Using Co-Suspension Delivery Technology in Japanese Patients with COPD: A Subgroup Analysis of the KRONOS Study

Background

KRONOS, a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study (NCT02497001) conducted in Canada, China, Japan, and the USA, assessed the efficacy and safety of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI), a triple fixed-dose combination therapy, relative to dual therapies in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Here we present findings from the Japanese subgroup of KRONOS.

Methods

Patients received BGF MDI 320/18/9.6μg, glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) MDI 18/9.6μg, budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BFF) MDI 320/9.6μg, or budesonide/formoterol fumarate dry powder inhaler (BUD/FORM DPI) 400/12μg twice-daily for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) over Weeks 12-24. Symptoms, quality of life, exacerbations, and safety were also assessed.

Results

In total, 416 Japanese patients (21.9% of the global KRONOS population) were randomized and treated with BGF MDI (n=139), GFF MDI (n=138), BFF MDI (n=70), or BUD/FORM DPI (n=69). Nominally significant improvements in the change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough FEV1 over Weeks 12-24 were observed for BGF MDI vs GFF MDI (least squares mean [LSM] difference 37 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3, 72; P=0.0337) and BFF MDI (67 mL; 95% CI 25, 109; P=0.0020). Treatment with BGF MDI led to a nominally significant reduction in the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations vs GFF MDI (rate ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.19, 0.83; P=0.0142). Compared with dual therapies, numerical improvements were observed with BGF MDI for Transition Dyspnea Index focal score and the change from baseline in Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD total score (P≤0.3899). All treatments were generally well tolerated.

Conclusion

BGF MDI nominally significantly improved lung function and numerically improved symptoms vs GFF MDI and BFF MDI. BGF MDI nominally significantly reduced exacerbations vs GFF MDI in Japanese patients with COPD. Efficacy and safety findings were generally comparable to those in the global KRONOS population.

The peripheral blood inflammatory patterns in the control levels of asthma in children

OBJECTIVE

Asthma is the most common chronic inflammatory disease of childhood, but there are no useful and easily accessible laboratory tests routinely used in the diagnosis and follow-up of this disease in children. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the roles of white blood cell (WBC) count, platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV), and eosinophil percentage as full blood count inflammatory markers in evaluating the control level and follow-up of asthma in the pediatric age group.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patient records and files of 3,580 patients diagnosed with asthma at the University of Health Sciences in Ankara, Turkey was performed. Patients who met inclusion/exclusion criteria were divided into two groups based on the asthma control level: controlled and uncontrolled. Laboratory data were compared according to the asthma control levels, drug use status, and atopy status of the patients.

RESULTS

A total of 348 patients between 4 and 18 years of age, who were followed-up with the diagnosis of asthma, were included in this study. A significant difference was found between the controlled and uncontrolled groups of asthma patients in terms of the eosinophil percentage (mean ± SD, respectively; 3.493 ± 2.24; 4.992 ± 3.43; p = .003). When patients were grouped according to their asthma control levels and atopy status, only the eosinophil percentages were different in the logistic regression analysis (odds ratio = 1.276, 95% confidence interval = 1.113-1.462).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the percentage of eosinophils can be used as an asthma control parameter, but additional prospective studies would be desirable to confirm our results.

The IMPACT Study - Single Inhaler Triple Therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) Versus FF/VI And UMEC/VI In Patients With COPD: Efficacy And Safety In A Japanese Population

Purpose

The Informing the Pathway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) study demonstrated that single-inhaler triple therapy fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) reduces moderate/severe exacerbation rates and improves lung function and health status versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI dual therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations. This analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of FF/UMEC/VI in patients enrolled in Japan.

Patients and methods

IMPACT was a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study comparing FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg with FF/VI 100/25 µg or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg in patients ≥40 years with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the previous year. Endpoints included annual rate of on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbations (primary endpoint), time-to-first on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation and change from baseline at Week 52 in trough FEV1, post-bronchodilator FEV1, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, and COPD Assessment Test score. Safety was also assessed.

Results

The Japan subgroup accounted for only 4% (378/10,355) of the overall IMPACT intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In the Japan subgroup, FF/UMEC/VI reduced the annual rate of on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbations by 15% (95% CI: -20, 40) versus FF/VI (compared with 15% [10, 20] in the ITT) and 36% (95% CI: 6, 57) versus UMEC/VI (compared with 25% [19, 30] in the ITT). FF/UMEC/VI reduced moderate/severe exacerbation risk (time-to-first), improved lung function and health status at Week 52 versus both dual therapies. These results were in the same direction and of a generally similar magnitude to those seen in the overall ITT population. No new safety signals were identified in the Japan subgroup compared with the ITT population. Pneumonia incidence was higher with FF/UMEC/VI and FF/VI versus UMEC/VI.

Conclusion

These results highlight the favorable benefit-risk profile of FF/UMEC/VI single-inhaler triple therapy compared with FF/VI or UMEC/VI dual therapy in patients in Japan with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 exacerbation in the prior year.

Clinical And Economic Burden Of Eosinophilic COPD In A Large Retrospective US Cohort

Purpose

We sought to describe clinical and economic outcomes for COPD patients by blood eosinophil (EOS) count.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study of COPD patients used data from the Practice Fusion electronic medical records (EMR) database linked to Symphony Health Solutions transactional pharmacy, medical, outpatient, and inpatient claims data to evaluate COPD-related and all-cause health care resource utilization and cost in the 12-month period following the date of each patient’s greatest recorded blood eosinophil count during the 27-month period from January 2014 to March 2016. A post-index moderate exacerbation was defined as an outpatient or emergency care visit for COPD and a prescription for oral corticosteroid and/or antibiotics within 10 days of the visit. Severe exacerbation was defined as an inpatient hospitalization with COPD as primary diagnosis.

Results

Of 48,090 EMR patients, 39,939 (83.1%) had a charge in the claims data both pre- and post-index (mean age 67.2 years, 58.3% female), 17,397 (43.6%) had EOS ≥220 cells/µL. Moderate and severe exacerbations were more frequent for patients with EOS≥220 cells/µL compared with those with EOS <220 cells/µL (moderate: 6.8% vs 6.1%, p<0.05; severe: 3.1% vs 2.5%, p<0.001). After adjustment for baseline clinical characteristics, each 100-unit increase in EOS count was associated with a significant 2.24% increase in total all-cause costs and 4.54% increase in total COPD-related costs (p<0.001 for both). COPD-related costs were significantly greater for patients with an EOS count of ≥220 cells/µL compared with those with EOS <220 cells/µL (p<0.001). These costs appear to have been driven by a greater percentage of patients in the ≥220 cells/µL cohort with COPD-related resource use including hospitalization, office visits, ambulatory procedures and pharmacy prescriptions.

Conclusion

COPD patients with EOS counts ≥220 cells/µL were more likely to have had moderate or severe exacerbations and greater cost of care than those with EOS <220 cells/µL.

Single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review

Background

Guidelines recommend that treatment with a long-acting β₂ agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), i.e. triple therapy, is reserved for a select group of symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who continue to exacerbate despite treatment with dual therapy (LABA/LAMA). A number of single-inhaler triple therapies are now available and important clinical questions remain over their role in the patient pathway. We compared the efficacy and safety of single-inhaler triple therapy to assess the magnitude of benefit and to identify patients with the best risk-benefit profile for treatment. We also evaluated and compared study designs and population characteristics to assess the strength of the evidence base.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search, from inception to December 2018, of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD. The primary outcome was the annual rate of moderate and severe exacerbations.

Results

We identified 523 records, of which 15 reports/abstracts from six RCTs were included. Triple therapy resulted in the reduction of the annual rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in the range of 15–52% compared with LAMA/LABA, 15–35% compared to LABA/ICS and 20% compared to LAMA. The patient-based number needed to treat for the moderate or severe exacerbation outcome ranged between approximately 25–50 (preventing one patient from having an event) and the event-based number needed to treat of around 3–11 (preventing one event). The absolute benefit appeared to be greater in patients with higher eosinophil counts or historical frequency of exacerbations and ex-smokers. In the largest study, there was a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia in the triple therapy arm. There were important differences in study designs and populations impacting the interpretation of the results and indicating there would be significant heterogeneity in cross-trial comparisons.

Conclusion

The decision to prescribe triple therapy should consider patient phenotype, magnitude of benefit and increased risk of adverse events. Future research on specific patient phenotype thresholds that can support treatment and funding decisions is now required from well-designed, robust, clinical trials.

Trial registration

PROSPERO #CRD42018102125.

Triple Therapy Versus Dual Bronchodilation and Inhaled Corticosteroids/Long-Acting β-Agonists in COPD: Accumulating Evidence from Network Meta-Analyses

Guidelines are mainly based on evidence of well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but there are limitations to the transferability of conclusions of RCTs to usual care mainly because the patients enrolled in RCTs are selected and not representative of the population encountered in daily practice; moreover, the research environment is substantially different from that of the real world. Because of the scarcity of data generated in large unselected populations in everyday clinical practice, the possibility of using meta-analyses can be considered. Recently, several meta-analyses have attempted to clarify the role of triple therapy containing a long-acting β-agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) delivered from a single inhaler in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also considering that there is a big difference in the use of triple therapy between what is recommended by COPD guidelines or strategies and the prescriptive behaviour of clinicians. Taking into account the results of the most recent meta-analyses, we believe that triple therapy provides modest clinical benefit in the general COPD population, but in patients on LABA/LAMA combination therapy, who still experience acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) and have blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells·μl⁻¹, it is of clinical relevance. On the contrary, adding a LAMA to an ICS/LABA combination elicits relevant clinical benefit in the general COPD population, supporting the role of dual bronchodilation therapy for the treatment of COPD. The quantitative synthesis of the currently available clinical evidence seems to suggest that, in patients with COPD already on ICS/LABA combination, the therapy can be improved without an increase of cardiovascular severe adverse events (SAEs) when a LAMA is added to the combination.

Benefit:Risk Profile of Budesonide in Obstructive Airways Disease

Airway inflammation is a major contributing factor in both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and represents an important target for treatment. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as monotherapy or in combination therapy with long-acting β2-agonists or long-acting muscarinic antagonists are used extensively in the treatment of asthma and COPD. The development of ICS for their anti-inflammatory properties progressed through efforts to increase topical potency and minimise systemic potency and through advances in inhaled delivery technology. Budesonide is a potent, non-halogenated ICS that was developed in the early 1970s and is now one of the most widely used lung medicines worldwide. Inhaled budesonide's physiochemical and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties allow it to reach a rapid and high airway efficacy due to its more balanced relationship between water solubility and lipophilicity. When absorbed from the airways and lung tissue, its moderate lipophilicity shortens systemic exposure, and its unique property of intracellular esterification acts like a sustained release mechanism within airway tissues, contributing to its airway selectivity and a low risk of adverse events. There is a large volume of clinical evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of budesonide, both alone and in combination with the fast- and long-acting β2-agonist formoterol, as maintenance therapy in patients with asthma and with COPD. The combination of budesonide/formoterol can also be used as an as-needed reliever with anti-inflammatory properties, with or without regular maintenance for asthma, a novel approach that is already approved by some country-specific regulatory authorities and currently recommended in the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines. Budesonide remains one of the most well-established and versatile of the inhaled anti-inflammatory drugs. This narrative review provides a clinical reappraisal of the benefit:risk profile of budesonide in the management of asthma and COPD.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study of Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Metered Dose Inhaler Relative to Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Dry Powder Inhaler in COPD

INTRODUCTION

Glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (GFF MDI), formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, is the only approved fixed-dose combination long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) delivered via MDI. Direct comparisons of GFF MDI versus other LAMA/LABAs have not previously been performed. We assessed the efficacy and safety of GFF MDI relative to umeclidinium/vilanterol dry powder inhaler (UV DPI) in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

In this phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, 24-week study, patients received GFF MDI 18/9.6 μg (equivalent to glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate 14.4/10 μg; two inhalations per dose, twice-daily; n = 559) or UV DPI 62.5/25 μg (one inhalation, once-daily; n = 560). Primary endpoints were change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) and peak change from baseline in FEV₁ within 2 h post-dose, both over 24 weeks. Additional lung function, symptom and safety endpoints were also assessed.

RESULTS

For the primary endpoints, GFF MDI was non-inferior to UV DPI (using a margin of - 50 mL) for peak FEV₁ (least squares mean [LSM] difference - 3.4 mL, 97.5% confidence interval [CI] - 32.8, 25.9) but not for trough FEV₁ (LSM difference - 87.2 mL; - 117.0, - 57.4). GFF MDI was nominally superior to UV DPI for onset of action (p < 0.0001) and was nominally non-inferior to UV DPI for all symptom endpoints (Transition Dyspnea Index focal score, Early Morning/Night-Time Symptoms COPD instrument scores, and COPD Assessment Test score). Exacerbation and safety findings were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 24 weeks of treatment, GFF MDI was non-inferior to UV DPI for peak FEV₁, but not for morning pre-dose trough FEV₁. GFF MDI had a faster onset of action versus UV DPI. There were no clinically meaningful differences between treatments in symptom endpoints. Both treatments were well tolerated with similar safety profiles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03162055 (Clinicaltrials.gov) FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Update on management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major chronic debilitating condition with significant impact on quality of life, symptoms, comorbidity, health care utilization and longevity. The main pathophysiological hallmark of COPD is expiratory flow limitation which impairs the ability of respiratory system to adequately and properly ventilate. To be able to prognosticate and manage patients with COPD, various societies have developed classifications of disease severity. Current classification schemes combine three elements that include lung function, patient reported symptoms (shortness of breath) and frequency of exacerbations. Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD), an international guideline for diagnosis and management of COPD, started using this approach since the 2011 revision. Management according to this scheme has been developed and is in use. Comprehensive COPD management is multifaceted. It includes pharmacologic management, patient education, smoking cessation, influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations, depression and anxiety management, pulmonary rehabilitation, and if indicated, home oxygen therapy. The following chapter will review management recommendations currently in use for stable COPD. We intend to make the chapter to the point and practical and avoid an exhaustive review of the literature.

A phase III study of triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler 320/18/9.6 μg and 160/18/9.6 μg using co-suspension delivery technology in moderate-to-very severe COPD: The ETHOS study protocol

BACKGROUND

Single inhaler triple therapies providing an inhaled corticosteroid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and a long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABAs) are an emerging treatment option for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the optimal patient population for triple therapy as well as the benefit:risk ratio of ICS treatment.

METHODS

ETHOS is an ongoing, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group, 52-week study in symptomatic patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbation(s) in the previous year. Two doses of single inhaler triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI 320/18/9.6 μg and 160/18/9.6 μg) will be compared to glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) MDI 18/9.6 μg and budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BFF) MDI 320/9.6 μg, all formulated using co-suspension delivery technology. Outcomes include the rate of moderate/severe (primary endpoint) and severe COPD exacerbations, symptoms, quality of life, and all-cause mortality. Sub-studies will assess lung function and cardiovascular safety.

STUDY POPULATION

From June 2015-July 2018, 16,044 patients were screened and 8572 were randomized. Preliminary baseline demographics show that 55.9% of patients had experienced ≥2 moderate/severe exacerbations in the previous year, 79.1% were receiving an ICS-containing treatment at study entry, and 59.9% had blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/mm³.

CONCLUSIONS

ETHOS will provide data on exacerbations, patient-reported outcomes, mortality, and safety in 8572 patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD receiving triple and dual fixed-dose combinations. For the first time, ICS/LAMA/LABA triple therapy with two different doses of ICS will be compared to dual ICS/LABA and LAMA/LABA therapies.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02465567.

Real-world effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol as initial maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a retrospective cohort study

Background and objective

Retrospective claims data in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating maintenance therapy with inhaled fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) versus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA have not been reported.

Methods

Retrospective observational study in a COPD-diagnosed population of commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D (MAPD) enrollees aged ≥40 years from a US health insurer database. Patients initiated umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI [62.5/25 µg]) or fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL [250/50 µg]) between April 1, 2014 and August 31, 2016 (index date) and had 12 months continuous enrollment pre- and post-index. Exclusion criteria included an asthma diagnosis in the pre-index period/index date; ICS-, LABA-, or LAMA-containing therapy during the pre-index period; or pharmacy fills for both UMEC/VI and FP/SAL, multiple-inhaler triple therapy, a non-index therapy, or COPD exacerbation on the index date. Adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] ≥80%) was modeled using weighted logistic regression following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Weighted Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression following IPTW were performed for incidence of COPD exacerbation and escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy.

Results

The study population included 5306 patients (1386 initiating UMEC/VI and 3920 initiating FP/SAL). Adjusted odds of adherence were 2.00 times greater among UMEC/VI than FP/SAL initiators (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.62─2.46; P<0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for first exacerbation was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.74–1.01; P=0.067) among UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL initiators. UMEC/VI initiators had 35% lower adjusted risk of escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy (HR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47–0.89; P=0.008) versus FP/SAL. On-treatment, UMEC/VI initiators had an adjusted 30% reduced risk of a first moderate/severe COPD exacerbation (HR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54–0.90; P=0.006).

Conclusion

Patients with COPD initiating UMEC/VI had higher adherence and longer time before escalation to multiple-inhaler triple therapy than FP/SAL initiators.

Bone and ocular safety of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in COPD: a 52-week randomized study

Background

Long-term use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) has been associated with increased risk of bone and ocular comorbidities. We evaluated the effects of the triple fixed-dose combination budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI), formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, on bone mineral density (BMD) and ocular safety in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Methods

In this extension study, a subset of patients from the 24-week, phase III, randomized, double-blind KRONOS study (NCT02497001) continued treatment (BGF MDI 320/18/9.6 μg, budesonide/formoterol fumarate [BFF] MDI 320/9.6 μg or glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate [GFF] MDI 18/9.6 μg, as a non-steroidal comparator) for an additional 28 weeks. Primary endpoints were percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD and change from baseline in lens opacities classification system III posterior subcapsular cataract (P) score, both at Week 52. Adverse events were also assessed.

Results

In total, 456 patients were included in the safety population (53.1% male, mean age 62.8 years). Changes from baseline in lumbar spine BMD (least squares mean [LSM] range − 0.12 to 0.38%) and P score (LSM range 0.02–0.15) were small for all treatments. Both BGF MDI and BFF MDI were non-inferior to GFF MDI using margins of −2% (BMD) and 0.5 units (P score). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs)  was generally similar among groups. Rates of confirmed pneumonia were low overall (2.4%) and highest in the GFF MDI group (3.4%), followed by BGF MDI (2.1%) and BFF MDI (1.1%). There were no cumulative adverse effects of treatment over time as the incidence and types of TEAEs, were generally similar in the first 24 weeks of the study and after Week 24.

Conclusions

In patients with COPD, both ICS-containing therapies were non-inferior to GFF MDI for the primary BMD and ophthalmological endpoints. Changes from baseline in all three treatment groups over 52 weeks were small and not clinically meaningful. All treatments were well tolerated with no new or unexpected safety findings.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02536508. Registered 27 August 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-019-1126-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The effects of single inhaler triple therapy vs single inhaler dual therapy or separate triple therapy for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This study aims to compare the effects of single inhaler triple therapy comprised of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), and long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) with dual therapies comprised of either LABA/LAMA, ICS/LABA or separate ICS/LABA plus LAMA triple therapy.

Methods

The Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to October 31st 2018. Only randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the rate of moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations.

Results

Seven studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. Single inhaler triple therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of COPD exacerbation compared with LABA/LAMA (rate ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 0.87, I²=85%), and ICS/LABA (rate ratio, 0.81; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.89, I²=29%) dual therapy. Single inhaler triple therapy led to a more significant improvement in lung function and quality of life compared with LABA/LAMA and ICS/LABA dual therapy. Single inhaler triple therapy was associated with a higher risk of pneumonia compared with LABA/LAMA (risk ratio, 1.38, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.67, I²=0) dual therapy.

Conclusions

The use of single inhaler triple therapy for COPD patients can result in lower rates of moderate or severe exacerbations of COPD as well as improved lung function and quality of life compared with dual therapy with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA.

Blood eosinophils and treatment response with triple and dual combination therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: analysis of the IMPACT trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have highlighted a relationship between reduction in rate of exacerbations with therapies containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and baseline blood eosinophil count in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The IMPACT trial showed that once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy significantly reduced exacerbations versus dual therapies. Blood eosinophil counts and smoking status could be important modifiers of treatment response to ICS. We aimed to model these relationships and their interactions, including outcomes other than exacerbations.

METHODS

IMPACT was a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 52-week global study comparing once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (fluticasone furoate-umeclidinium-vilanterol) with dual inhaled therapy (fluticasone furoate-vilanterol or umeclidinium-vilanterol). Eligible patients had moderate-to-very-severe COPD and at least one moderate or severe exacerbation in the previous year. We used fractional polynomials to model continuous blood eosinophil counts. We used negative binomial regression for numbers of moderate and severe exacerbations, severe exacerbations, and pneumonia. We modelled differences at week 52 in trough FEV₁, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, and Transition Dyspnoea Index using repeated measurements mixed effect models. IMPACT was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02164513.

FINDINGS

The magnitude of benefit of regimens containing ICS (fluticasone furoate-umeclidinium-vilanterol n=4151 and fluticasone furoate-vilanterol n=4134) in reducing rates of moderate and severe exacerbations increased in proportion with blood eosinophil count, compared with a non-ICS dual long-acting bronchodilator (umeclidinium-vilanterol n=2070). The moderate and severe exacerbation rate ratio for triple therapy versus umeclidinium-vilanterol was 0·88 (95% CI 0·74 to 1·04) at blood eosinophil count less than 90 cells per μL and 0·56 (0·47 to 0·66) at counts of 310 cells per μL or more; the corresponding rate ratio for fluticasone furoate-vilanterol versus umeclidinium-vilanterol was 1·09 (0·91 to 1·29) and 0·56 (0·47 to 0·66), respectively. Similar results were observed for FEV₁, Transition Dyspnoea Index, and SGRQ total score; however, the relationship with FEV₁ was less marked. At blood eosinophil counts less than 90 cells per μL and at counts of 310 cells per μL or more, the triple therapy versus umeclidinium-vilanterol treatment difference was 40 mL (95% CI 10 to 70) and 60 mL (20 to 100) for trough FEV₁, -0·01 (-0·68 to 0·66) and 0·30 (-0·37 to 0·97) for Transition Dyspnoea Index score, and -0·01 (-1·81 to 1·78) and -2·78 (-4·64 to -0·92) for SGRQ total score, respectively. Smoking status modified the relationship between observed efficacy and blood eosinophil count for moderate or severe exacerbations, Transition Dyspnoea Index, and FEV₁, with former smokers being more corticosteroid responsive at any eosinophil count than current smokers.

INTERPRETATION

This analysis of the IMPACT trial shows that assessment of blood eosinophil count and smoking status has the potential to optimise ICS use in clinical practice in patients with COPD and a history of exacerbations.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Inflammatory endotypes in COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major global health problem that is poorly treated by current therapies as it has proved difficult to treat the underlying inflammation, which is largely corticosteroid-resistant in most patients. Although rare genetic endotypes of COPD have been recognized, despite the clinical heterogeneity of COPD, it has proved difficult to identify distinct inflammatory endotypes. Most patients have increased neutrophils and macrophages in sputum, reflecting the increased secretion of neutrophil and monocyte chemotactic mediators in the lungs. However, some patients also have increased eosinophils in sputum and this may be reflected by increased blood eosinophils. Increased blood and sputum eosinophils are associated with more frequent exacerbations and predict a good response to corticosteroids in reducing and treating acute exacerbations. Eosinophilic COPD may represent an overlap with asthma but the mechanism of eosinophilia is uncertain as, although an increase in sputum IL-5 has been detected, anti-IL-5 therapies are not effective in preventing exacerbations. More research is needed to link inflammatory endotypes to clinical manifestations and outcomes in COPD and in particular to predict response to precision medicines.

Triple versus dual inhaler therapy in moderate-to-severe COPD: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is evolving specially with triple inhaler therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a meta-analysis to ascertain the safety and efficacy of triple inhaler therapy consisting of an inhaled-glucocorticoid (ICS), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) when compared with dual therapy (ICS-LABA or LAMA-LABA).

METHODS

We performed an electronic database search to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing between triple and dual inhalers. Pooled rate-ratio (RR) or odds-ratio (OR) for dichotomous data and weighted mean difference (MD) for continuous data were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Our study included 12 RCTs totaling 19,322 patients, mean age of 65 ± 8.2 years and 68.2% were male. Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations with triple therapy (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.69-0.83; P < 0.01). Additionally, triple therapy caused significant increase in trough FEV1 (MD 0.09 L; 95% CI 0.07-0.12; P < 0.01), significant reduction in the mean St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (MD -1.67; 95% CI -2.02- -1.31; P < 0.01), and more patients experienced ≥ 4 points reduction of SGRQ score (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19-1.35; P < 0.01). Triple therapy was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia when compared to LABA/LAMA (OR 1.25; 95% 1.03-1.97; P = 0.03) but there were no significant differences in other adverse events between triple and dual inhalers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, triple inhaler therapy was associated with a reduction of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations, improved lung function and improved quality of life when compared to dual inhaler therapy but with an increased pneumonia risk.

Pharmacokinetics and Tolerability of Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate and Glycopyrronium/Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate Metered Dose Inhalers in Healthy Chinese Adults: A Randomized, Double-blind, Parallel-group Study

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to assess pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles of 2 fixed-dose combinations in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate metered-dose inhaler (BGF MDI; triple combination) and glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (GFF MDI; dual combination). The PK and safety profiles of BGF MDI and GFF MDI were assessed for the first time in healthy Chinese adults after single and repeated (7-day) dosing.

METHODS

This Phase I, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted at a single site in Shanghai, China. Male or female Chinese subjects, 18-45 years of age and in good general health, were randomized 1:1:1 to receive BGF MDI 320/14.4/10 μg, BGF MDI 160/14.4/10 μg, or GFF MDI 14.4/10 μg. PK parameters were assessed after a single dose (day 1) and at steady state (day 8), and included AUC_0-12, C_max, and T_max. Tolerability was assessed using physical examination findings, adverse events reporting, 12-lead ECG, vital signs, and clinical laboratory values.

FINDINGS

Ninety-six subjects (mean age, 25.6 years; 83.3% male) were randomized and received treatment. All randomized subjects were included in the safety and PK populations. After single and repeated dosing, budesonide AUC_0-12 and C_max were increased dose proportionally from BGF MDI 160/14.4/10 μg to BGF MDI 320/14.4/10 μg, respectively (single dose: AUC_0-12, 811.8 vs 1748 h · pg/mL; C_max, 224.3 vs 459.3 pg/mL; repeated dosing: AUC_0-12, 1250 vs 2510 h · pg/mL; C_max, 315.4 vs 626.4 pg/mL). After single and repeated dosing, glycopyrronium AUC_0-12 and C_max were similar across all treatments (single dose: AUC_0-12, 27.20-29.40 h · pg/mL; C_max, 4.884-5.674 pg/mL; repeated dosing: AUC_0-12, 69.49-77.08 h · pg/mL; C_max, 11.30-13.12 pg/mL) and formoterol (single dose: AUC_0-12, 46.49-53.58 h · pg/mL; C_max 9.651-10.62 pg/mL; repeated dosing: AUC_0-12, 81.94-85.32 h · pg/mL; C_max, 16.13-17.71 pg/mL), suggesting that the addition of budesonide did not appreciably alter the PK properties of GFF MDI. All treatment-emergent adverse events were mild in severity and rates were similar across groups (range, 50.0%-56.3%). There were no new or unexpected findings on tolerability.

IMPLICATIONS

Overall, all treatments were well tolerated and PK parameters were generally comparable to those previously reported in Western and Japanese healthy subjects, suggesting that the doses of BGF MDI and GFF MDI in development globally for COPD are also appropriate for Chinese patients with COPD. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03075267.

Diagnosis and Outpatient Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Review

IMPORTANCE

There are 30 million adults (12%) in the United States who have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease accounts for 3.2% of all physician office visits annually and is the fourth leading cause of death (126 000 deaths per year). Most patients are diagnosed by their primary care clinicians who must address the highly variable clinical features and responses to therapy. The diagnosis and treatment of COPD is rapidly changing, so understanding recent advances is important for the delivery of optimal patient care.

OBSERVATIONS

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is characterized by incompletely reversible expiratory airflow limitation. Spirometry is the reference standard for diagnosing and assessing the severity of COPD. All patients should be counseled about and receive preventive measures such as smoking cessation and vaccination. Treatment should be guided by the severity of lung impairment, symptoms such as dyspnea, the amount of cough and sputum production, and how often a patient experiences an exacerbation. When dyspnea limits activity or quality of life, COPD should be treated with once- or twice-daily maintenance long-acting anticholinergic and β-agonist bronchodilators. Patients with acute exacerbations may benefit from the addition of inhaled corticosteroids, particularly those with elevated peripheral eosinophil levels. Pulmonary rehabilitation, which includes strength and endurance training and educational, nutritional, and psychosocial support, improves symptoms and exercise tolerance but is underutilized. Supplemental oxygen for patients with resting hypoxemia (defined as Spo2 <89%) improves survival.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a complicated disease requiring intensive treatment. Appropriate use of long-acting maintenance bronchodilators, inhaled corticosteroids, and pulmonary rehabilitation decreases symptoms, optimizes functional performance, and reduces exacerbation frequency. Supplemental oxygen in patients with resting hypoxemia prolongs life, and other advanced treatments are available based on specific patient characteristics.

Triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) in COPD: thinking out of the box

A current hot topic in COPD is that two “fixed triple” combinations of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in a single inhaler have become available for patients with COPD, and a third triple therapy is in advanced development with the first large randomised clinical trial (RCT) recently published in Lancet Respiratory Medicine [1]. The triple therapies available in a single inhaler are: beclomethasone-dipropionate/formoterol/glycopyrronium (BDP/FF/G); fluticasone-furoate/vilanterol/umeclidinium (FLF/VI/UMEC); and budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (B/G/F).

Triple inhaler therapy in COPD might in some real-life situations be useful outside of the strict indications reported by the registration agencies, but at the same time in some other situations it could be better avoided, even when recommendedhttp://ow.ly/CbOe30njXV2

Real-life effectiveness of indacaterol-glycopyrronium after switching from tiotropium or salmeterol/fluticasone therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD: the POWER study

Purpose

In contrast to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), changes in maintenance pharmacotherapy in clinical practice occur without a washout period. The Prospective cohort study for the real-life effectiveness evaluation of glycOpyrronium With indacatERol combination in the management of COPD in Canada (POWER) study evaluated the real-life effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) following a direct switch from a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA, tiotropium) or long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance treatment (salmeterol/fluticasone [SFC]).

Methods

POWER was a single-cohort, prospective, multicenter, interventional study in which patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, who remained symptomatic on their current treatment of once-daily (od) tiotropium 18 µg or twice-daily (bid) SFC (any dose), were switched to treatment with open-label IND/GLY 110/50 µg od for 16 weeks. Effectiveness end points were change from baseline in trough FEV₁, transition dyspnea index (TDI) total scores, and COPD assessment test (CAT) scores at 16 weeks.

Results

Trough FEV₁ improved by 175 mL at Week 16 in patients who switched to IND/GLY. The change was 176 mL (95% CI: 135-217) when switched from tiotropium and 172 mL (95% CI: 85-258) when switched from SFC fixed-dose combination (FDC). At Week 16, significant improvements were observed in the mean TDI total scores (Δ=2.5) and CAT scores (Δ=-6.5) after the switch to IND/GLY treatment (both P<0.0001). Additionally, IND/GLY was well tolerated in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, and no safety signal was observed.

Conclusion

In clinical practice settings, a direct switch from previous treatment with either tiotropium or SFC to IND/GLY was safe and provided superior clinically significant improvements in lung function and patient-related outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Clinical trial registration

NCT02202616.

Adding a LAMA to ICS/LABA Therapy: A Meta-analysis of Triple Combination Therapy in COPD

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combination is commonly prescribed to treat COPD; therefore, we performed a meta-analysis on the effect of adding a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA) to ICS/LABA combination in COPD.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching in different databases the randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of ICS/LABA/LAMA combination in COPD. The primary end points were the effect of triple therapy on trough FEV₁, risk of acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD), and risk of cardiovascular serious adverse events (SAEs), compared with ICS/LABA combination. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials including 15,519 patients with COPD (ICS/LABA/LAMA combination, 53.1%; ICS/LABA combination, 46.9%) were meta-analyzed. ICS/LABA/LAMA combination improved trough FEV₁ (mean difference, +104.86 mL; 95% CI, 86.74-122.99; high quality of evidence) and protected against AECOPD (relative risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.85; high quality of evidence) vs ICS/LABA combination. For every approximately four patients treated with triple therapy, one increased FEV₁ > 100 mL, and approximately 26 patients had to be treated for 1 year with ICS/LABA/LAMA combination to prevent one AECOPD, compared with ICS/LABA combination. Adding a LAMA to ICS/LABA therapy did not modulate the risk of cardiovascular SAEs (moderate quality of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy provides significant clinical benefit in patients with COPD on ICS/LABA combination. ICS/LABA therapy can be escalated to triple therapy without a real risk to increase cardiovascular SAEs when a LAMA is added to the combination.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: CRD42018095300; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Impact of smoking status and concomitant medications on the effect of high-dose N-acetylcysteine on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: A post-hoc analysis of the PANTHEON study

BACKGROUND

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) 600 mg twice daily is a well-tolerated oral antioxidant mucolytic that reduces the risk of moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. PANTHEON was one of the largest studies to evaluate NAC in COPD. It recruited current, ex- and never-smokers, concomitantly treated with other medications, and used a symptom-based definition of COPD exacerbations rather than the conventional healthcare resource utilisation (HCU) criteria.

METHODS

This manuscript reports post-hoc analyses of the PANTHEON dataset investigating whether smoking status or use of concomitant medications influenced the efficacy of NAC in terms of reducing exacerbations, defined according to HCU.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo (N = 482), NAC (N = 482) reduced the rate of HCU events by 20% (p = 0.0027), with a larger effect in current/ex-smokers (23%; p < 0.01). In patients receiving NAC and long-acting inhaled bronchodilator(s) but no ICS, there was a 60% reduction in the rate of exacerbations compared to those receiving placebo, long-acting bronchodilator(s) and ICS (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, these post-hoc hypothesis-generating analyses confirm that NAC reduces the rate of COPD exacerbations, particularly in patients with COPD who have a significant smoking history, and in those not treated with ICS. NAC may provide an alternative to ICS-containing combinations in these patient subgroups.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, ChiCTR-TRC-09000460.

The once-daily fixed-dose combination of olodaterol and tiotropium in the management of COPD: current evidence and future prospects

Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Spiolto® or Stiolto® is a fixed-dose combination (FDC) containing two long-acting bronchodilators, the long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist tiotropium (TIO) and the long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonist olodaterol (OLO), formulated in the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler. A total of 13 large, multicentre studies of up to 52 weeks' duration have documented its efficacy in more than 15,000 patients with COPD. TIO/OLO 5/5 µg FDC significantly increases pulmonary function compared with placebo and its respective constituent mono-components TIO 5 µg and OLO 5 µg. TIO/OLO 5/5 µg also results in statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes, such as dyspnoea, use of rescue medication, and health status. Addition of OLO 5 µg to TIO 5 µg reduces the rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations by approximately 10%. Compared with placebo and TIO 5 µg, TIO/OLO 5/5 µg significantly improves exercise capacity (e.g. endurance time) and physical activity, the latter increase being reached by a unique combination behavioural modification intervention, dual bronchodilatation and exercise training. Overall, the likelihood for patients to experience a clinically significant benefit is higher with TIO/OLO 5/5 µg than with its constituent mono-components, which usually yield smaller improvements which do not always reach statistical significance, compared with baseline or placebo. This supports the early introduction of TIO/OLO 5/5 µg in the management of patients with symptomatic COPD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) in COPD: time for a reappraisal

Recently, two "fixed triple" single-inhaler combinations of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA), and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) have become available for patients with COPD. This review presents the clinical evidence that led to the approval of these triple therapies, discusses the role of ICS in patients with COPD, and presents data on the relative efficacy of "fixed triple" (ICS/LAMA/LABA) therapy vs LAMA, ICS/LABA, and LAMA/LABA combinations, and summarizes studies in which ICS/LABAs were combined with LAMAs to form "open triple" combinations. Of the five main fixed triple studies completed so far, three evaluated the efficacy and safety of an extrafine formulation of beclometasone dipropionate, formoterol fumarate, and glycopyrronium; the other two studies evaluated fluticasone furoate, vilanterol, and umeclidinium. Overall, compared to LAMA, ICS/LABA, or LAMA/LABA, triple therapy decreased the risk of exacerbations and improved lung function and health status, with a favorable benefit-to-harm ratio. Furthermore, triple therapy showed a promising signal in terms of improved survival. The evidence suggests that triple therapy is the most effective treatment in moderate/severe symptomatic patients with COPD at risk of exacerbations, with marginal if any risk of side effects including pneumonia. Ongoing studies are examining the role of triple therapy in less severe symptomatic patients with COPD and asthma-COPD overlap.

Current appraisal of single inhaler triple therapy in COPD

A single inhaler containing inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) is a more convenient way of delivering triple therapy in patients with COPD. Single triple therapy has been shown to be superior at reducing exacerbations and improving quality of life compared to LABA/LAMA, especially in patients with a prior history of frequent exacerbations and blood eosinophilia, who have ICS responsive disease. The corollary is that patients with infrequent exacerbations who are noneosinophilic may be safely de-escalated from triple therapy to LABA/LAMA without loss of control. Pointedly, there is a substantially increased risk of pneumonia associated with the triple therapy containing fluticasone furoate but not beclometasone dipropionate or budesonide. Since triple therapy is also better than ICS/LABA at reducing exacerbations and improving lung function, symptoms, and quality of life, this brings into question the rationale for using ICS/LABA. Hence, we propose a simplified pragmatic decision process based on symptoms, prior to exacerbation history, and blood eosinophils to select which patients should be given a single triple inhaler or LABA/LAMA. Differences in patient preference of inhaler device, formulations and drugs will also determine which triple inhaler prescribers elect to use.