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

Network pharmacology prediction and molecular docking analysis reveal the mechanism of modified Bushen Yiqi formulas on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to explore the mechanism of the modified Bushen Yiqi formula (MBYF) in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) based on network pharmacology and molecular docking.

METHODS

First, the active ingredients and corresponding targets in MBYF were mined through the Traditional Chinese Medicine Systems Pharmacology database. Subsequently, Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man, DrugBank, and GeneCard were used to screen COPD-related targets. Cytoscape was used to construct a network of candidate components of MBYF in COPD treatment. The overlapping targets of COPD and MBYF were used to treat COPD, and then CytoHubba and CytoNAC plug-ins in Cytoscape were used for topology analysis to build the core network. In addition, core targets were used for Gene Ontology analysis and enrichment analysis of the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes. Finally, AutoDock Vina software was used to conduct a molecular docking study on the core active ingredients and core targets to verify the above network pharmacological analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine active components of MBYF were screened and 261 corresponding targets were found. At the same time, 1307 related targets corresponding to COPD were screened and 111 overlapping targets were matched. By bioinformatics analysis, 10 core targets were identified, and subsequently, enrichment analysis revealed 385 BP, two CC, eight MF and 78 related signaling pathways. The binding of the core active components in MBYF to the core target was further verified by molecular docking, and all showed good binding.

CONCLUSIONS

The active components of MBYF, such as quercetin, kaempferol, luteolin, and baicalein, may be the material basis for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. They affect the expression of inflammatory cells and inflammatory factors, protein phosphorylation, and smooth muscle hyperplasia through tumor necrosis factor, interleukin-17, mitogen-activated protein kinase, nuclear factor-kappa B and other signaling pathways.

Bronchial rheoplasty for chronic bronchitis: 2-year results from a US feasibility study with RheOx

INTRODUCTION

Chronic bronchitis (CB), a phenotype of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) characterised by persistent cough and mucus hypersecretion, is associated with poor outcomes despite guideline-based treatment. Bronchial rheoplasty (BR) with the RheOx system delivers non-thermal pulsed electric fields to the lower airway epithelium and submucosa to reduce mucus producing cells. Early phase clinical trials including 1-year follow-up have demonstrated reduction in airway goblet cell hyperplasia and improvement in CB symptoms.

METHODS

The current multicentre observational BR study enrolled 21 patients with CB at six centres in the USA, with bilateral treatment and 2-year follow-up. Entry criteria included elevated cough and sputum scores from COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and forced expiratory volume in one second<80% predicted. Safety was assessed by serious adverse event (SAE) incidence through 24 months. Clinical utility was evaluated using changes in the CAT, the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and by comparing exacerbation rates before and following intervention.

RESULTS

No procedure-related or device-related SAEs occurred. Mean (SD) changes from baseline in CAT at 12 and 24 months were -9.0 (6.7) (p<0.0001) and -5.6 (7.1) (p<0.0047) and in SGRQ were -16.6 (13.2) (p<0.0001) and -11.8 (19.2) (p<0.0227), respectively. There was a 34% reduction in moderate and a 64% reduction in severe COPD exacerbation events compared with the year prior to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study extends the findings from previous feasibility studies, demonstrating that BR can be performed safely and may significantly improve symptoms and health-related quality of life for patients with CB through 24 months.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03631472.

Inhaled corticosteroids with combination inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) commonly involves a combination of long-acting bronchodilators including beta2-agonists (LABA) and muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). LABA and LAMA bronchodilators are now available in single-combination inhalers. In individuals with persistent symptoms or frequent exacerbations, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are also used with combination LABA and LAMA inhalers. However, the benefits and risks of adding ICS to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers as a triple therapy remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of adding an ICS to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers for the treatment of stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase up to 30 November 2022. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP up to 30 November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials of three weeks' duration or longer that compared the treatment of stable COPD with ICS in addition to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers against combination LABA/LAMA inhalers alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were acute exacerbations of COPD, respiratory health-related quality of life, pneumonia and other serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were symptom scores, lung function, physical capacity, and mortality. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for studies that contributed data to our prespecified outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 15,412 participants met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of study participants ranged from 64.4 to 65.3 years; the proportion of female participants ranged from 28% to 40%. Most participants had symptomatic COPD (COPD Assessment Test Score ≥ 10) with severe to very severe airflow limitation (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) < 50% predicted) and one or more moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations in the last 12 months. Trial medications differed amongst studies. The duration of follow-up was 52 weeks in three studies and 24 weeks in one study. We assessed the risk of selection, performance, and detection bias to be low in the included studies; one study was at high risk of attrition bias, and one study was at high risk of reporting bias. Triple therapy may reduce rates of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (rate ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 0.81; n = 15,397; low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis stratifying by blood eosinophil counts showed there may be a greater reduction in rate of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations with triple therapy in participants with high-eosinophils (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75) compared to low-eosinophils (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93) (test for subgroup differences: P < 0.01) (high/low cut-offs: 150 eosinophils/µL in three studies; 200 eosinophils/µL in one study). However, moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity was observed in both high- and low-eosinophil subgroups. These subgroup analyses are observational by nature and thus results should be interpreted with caution. Triple therapy may be associated with reduced rates of severe COPD exacerbations (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.84; n = 14,131; low-certainty evidence). Triple therapy improved health-related quality of life assessed using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold (4-point decrease) (35.3% versus 42.4%, odds ratio (OR) 1.35, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.45; n = 14,070; high-certainty evidence). Triple therapy may result in fewer symptoms measured using the Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.57; n = 3044; moderate-certainty evidence) and improved lung function as measured by change in trough FEV1 (mean difference 38.68 mL, 95% CI 22.58 to 54.77; n = 11,352; low-certainty evidence). However, these benefits fell below MCID thresholds for TDI (1-unit decrease) and trough FEV1 (100 mL), respectively. Triple therapy is probably associated with a higher risk of pneumonia as a serious adverse event compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (3.3% versus 1.9%, OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.18; n = 15,412; moderate-certainty evidence). In contrast, all-cause serious adverse events may be similar between groups (19.7% versus 19.7%, OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03; n = 15,412; low-certainty evidence). All-cause mortality may be lower with triple therapy (1.4% versus 2.0%, OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90; n = 15,397; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that triple therapy may reduce rates of COPD exacerbations (low-certainty evidence) and results in an improvement in health-related quality of life (high-certainty evidence) compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers, but probably confers an increased pneumonia risk as a serious adverse event (moderate-certainty evidence). Triple therapy probably improves respiratory symptoms and may improve lung function (moderate- and low-certainty evidence, respectively); however, these benefits do not appear to be clinically significant. Triple therapy may reduce the risk of all-cause mortality compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was downgraded most frequently for inconsistency or indirectness. Across the four included studies, there were important differences in inclusion criteria, trial medications, and duration of follow-up. Investigation of heterogeneity was limited due to the small number of included studies. We found limited data on the effects of triple therapy compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers in patients with mild-moderate COPD and those without a recent exacerbation history.

Peak Expiratory Flow Predicts Incident Dementia in a Representative Sample of U.S. Older Adults: The National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS)

BACKGROUND

Dementia is an increasingly important public health problem with various risk factors. Respiratory function, measured via peak expiratory flow (PEF), may be a modifiable dementia risk factor.

METHODS

We investigated the association between PEF and incident dementia in 5 935 older adults from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) from 2011 to 2014. Baseline PEF, expressed as a standardized residual (SR) percentile, was analyzed as a predictor of incident dementia using discrete-time proportional hazards models, while controlling for several health and sociodemographic covariates.

RESULTS

After 14 332 person-years of follow-up, 9.0% (N = 536) had incident cases of dementia. Compared to the lowest PEF category (SR-percentile < 10%), the highest PEF category (SR-percentile ≥ 80%) had 49% lower risk of incident dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.37, 0.71]), and the second highest PEF category (SR-percentile 50%-80%) had 25% lower risk of incident dementia (HR = 0.75; 95% CI [0.56, 1.00]). A sensitivity analysis using multiple imputation to account for missing PEF measurements yielded similar associations with incident dementia.

CONCLUSION

These associations suggest a dose-dependent relationship such that higher PEF categories were more protective against incident dementia. PEF may be considered as an easily administered, low-cost measure of respiratory function and a potentially modifiable dementia risk factor. Improving PEF may reduce dementia risk through vascular mechanisms, such as increased brain oxygenation. Future research should explore potential causal pathways between PEF and dementia.

A Review of Non-Invasive Drug Delivery through Respiratory Routes

With rapid and non-invasive characteristics, the respiratory route of administration has drawn significant attention compared with the limitations of conventional routes. Respiratory delivery can bypass the physiological barrier to achieve local and systemic disease treatment. A scientometric analysis and review were used to analyze how respiratory delivery can contribute to local and systemic therapy. The literature data obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database showed an increasing worldwide tendency toward respiratory delivery from 1998 to 2020. Keywords analysis suggested that nasal and pulmonary drug delivery are the leading research topics in respiratory delivery. Based on the results of scientometric analysis, the research hotspots mainly included therapy for central nervous systems (CNS) disorders (Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, depression, glioblastoma, and epilepsy), tracheal and bronchial or lung diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, acute lung injury or respiratory distress syndrome, lung cancer, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis), and systemic diseases (diabetes and COVID-19). The study of advanced preparations contained nano drug delivery systems of the respiratory route, drug delivery barriers investigation (blood-brain barrier, BBB), and chitosan-based biomaterials for respiratory delivery. These results provided researchers with future research directions related to respiratory delivery.

Yijin-Tang Attenuates Cigarette Smoke and Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Mice

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) refers to a lung disorder associated with symptoms of dyspnea, cough, and sputum production. Traditionally, Yijin-tang (YJT), a mixture of Pinellia ternate, Poria cocos, ginger, Chinese liquorice, and tangerine peel, has been prescribed for the treatment of respiratory system diseases caused by dampness phlegm. This experiment investigated the therapeutic effect of YJT in a mouse model of cigarette smoke (CS)- and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced COPD.

METHODS

COPD was induced by exposing mice to CS for 1 hour per day for 8 weeks, with intranasal delivery of LPS on weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7. YJT was administered at doses of 100 and 200 mg/kg 1 hour before CS exposure for the last 4 weeks.

RESULTS

YJT significantly suppressed CS- and LPS-induced increases in inflammatory cell counts and reduced interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) levels in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung tissue. In addition, YJT not only decreased airway wall thickness, average alveolar intercept, and lung fibrosis, but it also suppressed the expression of matrix metallopeptidase (MMP)-7, MMP-9, and transforming growth factor-B (TGF-β) and collagen deposition. Moreover, YJT suppressed phosphorylation of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) as well as expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS).

CONCLUSION

Collectively, our findings show that YJT attenuates respiratory inflammation and airway remodeling caused by CS and LPS exposure; therefore, therapeutic applications in COPD can be considered.

Effectiveness of one-on-one coaching in improving pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) technique among COPD patients: a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Incorrect use of inhalers among asthma and COPD patients is very prevalent. Yet, no single intervention is considered standard of care. We aimed to conduct a COPD-specific investigation of active one-on-one coaching as the educational intervention to improve pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) technique and COPD symptoms management.

METHODS

COPD patients who have pMDI in their treatment regimen were enrolled in this prospective study using the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease criteria. After rapid cognitive screen, inhaler technique was assessed and an active one-on-one coaching was provided utilizing the 12-step American Thoracic Society instructions. Patients' inhaler technique was assessed and scored again at their regular follow-up visits.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients participated in the study. The percentage of pMDI misuse decreased from 43.5% pre-teaching to 12.9% post-teaching (binomial test p value < 0.001). The mean number of errors decreased from 3.1 errors pre-teaching to 1.7 errors post-teaching (paired t-test p value < 0.001). The number needed to treat was 3.3 patients to prevent one misuse. Patients with an impaired cognitive function were more likely to have inhaler misuse in general and less likely to improve their technique when provided training.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that many COPD patients have incorrect pMDI techniques that can be improved with a short training in the clinic.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Beds, overlays and mattresses for preventing and treating pressure ulcers: an overview of Cochrane Reviews and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers (also known as pressure injuries, pressure sores and bed sores) are localised injuries to the skin or underlying soft tissue, or both, caused by unrelieved pressure, shear or friction. Specific kinds of beds, overlays and mattresses are widely used with the aim of preventing and treating pressure ulcers.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise evidence from Cochrane Reviews that assess the effects of beds, overlays and mattresses on reducing the incidence of pressure ulcers and on increasing pressure ulcer healing in any setting and population. To assess the relative effects of different types of beds, overlays and mattresses for reducing the incidence of pressure ulcers and increasing pressure ulcer healing in any setting and population. To cumulatively rank the different treatment options of beds, overlays and mattresses in order of their effectiveness in pressure ulcer prevention and treatment.

METHODS

In July 2020, we searched the Cochrane Library. Cochrane Reviews reporting the effectiveness of beds, mattresses or overlays for preventing or treating pressure ulcers were eligible for inclusion in this overview. Two review authors independently screened search results and undertook data extraction and risk of bias assessment using the ROBIS tool. We summarised the reported evidence in an overview of reviews. Where possible, we included the randomised controlled trials from each included review in network meta-analyses. We assessed the relative effectiveness of beds, overlays and mattresses for preventing or treating pressure ulcers and their probabilities of being, comparably, the most effective treatment. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We include six Cochrane Reviews in this overview of reviews, all at low or unclear risk of bias. Pressure ulcer prevention: four reviews (of 68 studies with 18,174 participants) report direct evidence for 27 pairwise comparisons between 12 types of support surface on the following outcomes: pressure ulcer incidence, time to pressure ulcer incidence, patient comfort response, adverse event rates, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Here we focus on outcomes with some evidence at a minimum of low certainty. (1) Pressure ulcer incidence: our overview includes direct evidence for 27 comparisons that mostly (19/27) have very low-certainty evidence concerning reduction of pressure ulcer risk. We included 40 studies (12,517 participants; 1298 participants with new ulcers) in a network meta-analysis involving 13 types of intervention. Data informing the network are sparse and this, together with the high risk of bias in most studies informing the network, means most network contrasts (64/78) yield evidence of very low certainty. There is low-certainty evidence that, compared with foam surfaces (reference treatment), reactive air surfaces (e.g. static air overlays) (risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.75), alternating pressure (active) air surfaces (e.g. alternating pressure air mattresses, large-celled ripple mattresses) (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.93), and reactive gel surfaces (e.g. gel pads used on operating tables) (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.01) may reduce pressure ulcer incidence. The ranking of treatments in terms of effectiveness is also of very low certainty for all interventions. It is unclear which treatment is best for preventing ulceration. (2) Time to pressure ulcer incidence: four reviews had direct evidence on this outcome for seven comparisons. We included 10 studies (7211 participants; 699 participants with new ulcers) evaluating six interventions in a network meta-analysis. Again, data from most network contrasts (13/15) are of very low certainty. There is low-certainty evidence that, compared with foam surfaces (reference treatment), reactive air surfaces may reduce the hazard of developing new pressure ulcers (hazard ratio (HR) 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.05). The ranking of all support surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers in terms of time to healing is uncertain. (3) Cost-effectiveness: this overview includes direct evidence for three comparisons. For preventing pressure ulcers, alternating pressure air surfaces are probably more cost-effective than foam surfaces (moderate-certainty evidence). Pressure ulcer treatment: two reviews (of 12 studies with 972 participants) report direct evidence for five comparisons on: complete pressure ulcer healing, time to complete pressure ulcer healing, patient comfort response, adverse event rates, and cost-effectiveness. Here we focus on outcomes with some evidence at a minimum of low certainty. (1) Complete pressure ulcer healing: our overview includes direct evidence for five comparisons. There is uncertainty about the relative effects of beds, overlays and mattresses on ulcer healing. The corresponding network meta-analysis (with four studies, 397 participants) had only three direct contrasts and a total of six network contrasts. Again, most network contrasts (5/6) have very low-certainty evidence. There was low-certainty evidence that more people with pressure ulcers may heal completely using reactive air surfaces than using foam surfaces (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.80). We are uncertain which surfaces have the highest probability of being the most effective (all very low-certainty evidence). (2) Time to complete pressure ulcer healing: this overview includes direct evidence for one comparison: people using reactive air surfaces may be more likely to have healed pressure ulcers compared with those using foam surfaces in long-term care settings (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.34 to 5.17; low-certainty evidence). (3) Cost-effectiveness: this overview includes direct evidence for one comparison: compared with foam surfaces, reactive air surfaces may cost an extra 26 US dollars for every ulcer-free day in the first year of use in long-term care settings (low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with foam surfaces, reactive air surfaces may reduce pressure ulcer risk and may increase complete ulcer healing. Compared with foam surfaces, alternating pressure air surfaces may reduce pressure ulcer risk and are probably more cost-effective in preventing pressure ulcers. Compared with foam surfaces, reactive gel surfaces may reduce pressure ulcer risk, particularly for people in operating rooms and long-term care settings. There are uncertainties for the relative effectiveness of other support surfaces for preventing and treating pressure ulcers, and their efficacy ranking. More high-quality research is required; for example, for the comparison of reactive air surfaces with alternating pressure air surfaces. Future studies should consider time-to-event outcomes and be designed to minimise any risk of bias.

Prophylactic antibiotics for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic respiratory condition characterised by persistent respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation. Acute exacerbations punctuate the natural history of COPD and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality and disease progression. Chronic airflow limitation is caused by a combination of small airways (bronchitis) and parenchymal destruction (emphysema), which can impact day-to-day activities and overall quality of life. In carefully selected patients with COPD, long-term, prophylactic use of antibiotics may reduce bacterial load, inflammation of the airways, and the frequency of exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of different prophylactic antibiotics on exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events in people with COPD in three separate network meta-analyses (NMAs), and to provide rankings of identified antibiotics.

SEARCH METHODS

To identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs), we searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and clinical trials registries. We conducted the most recent search on 22 January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with a parallel design of at least 12 weeks' duration evaluating long-term administration of antibiotics prophylactically compared with other antibiotics, or placebo, for patients with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This Cochrane Review collected and updated pair-wise data from two previous Cochrane Reviews. Searches were updated and additional studies included. We conducted three separate network meta-analyses (NMAs) within a Bayesian framework to assess three outcomes: exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events. For quality of life, we collected data from St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Using previously validated methods, we selected the simplest model that could adequately fit the data for every analysis. We used threshold analysis to indicate which results were robust to potential biases, taking into account each study's contributions to the overall results and network structure. Probability ranking was performed for each antibiotic class for exacerbations, quality of life, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Characteristics of studies and participants Eight trials were conducted at multiple sites that included hospital clinics or academic health centres. Seven were single-centre trials conducted in hospital clinics. Two trials did not report settings. Trials durations ranged from 12 to 52 weeks. Most participants had moderate to severe disease. Mean age ranged from 64 years to 73 years, and more males were recruited (51% to 100%). Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) ranged from 0.935 to 1.36 L. Most participants had previous exacerbations. Data from 12 studies were included in the NMAs (3405 participants; 16 treatment arms including placebo). Prophylactic antibiotics evaluated were macrolides (azithromycin and erythromycin), tetracyclines (doxycyclines), quinolones (moxifloxacin) and macrolides plus tetracyclines (roxithromycin plus doxycycline). Risk of bias and threshold analysis Most studies were at low risk across domains, except detection bias, for which only seven studies were judged at low risk. In the threshold analysis for exacerbations, all comparisons in which one antibiotic was compared with another were robust to sampling variation, especially macrolide comparisons. Comparisons of classes with placebo were sensitive to potential bias, especially macrolide versus placebo, therefore, any bias in the comparison was likely to favour the active class, so any adjustment would bring the estimated relative effect closer to the null value, thus quinolone may become the best class to prevent exacerbations. Exacerbations Nine studies were included (2732 participants) in this NMA (exacerbations analysed as time to first exacerbation or people with one or more exacerbations). Macrolides and quinolones reduced exacerbations. Macrolides had a greater effect in reducing exacerbations compared with placebo (macrolides: hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.60 to 0.75; quinolones: HR 0.89, 95% CrI 0.75 to 1.04), resulting in 127 fewer people per 1000 experiencing exacerbations on macrolides. The difference in exacerbations between tetracyclines and placebo was uncertain (HR 1.29, 95% CrI 0.66 to 2.41). Macrolides ranked first (95% CrI first to second), with quinolones ranked second (95% CrI second to third). Tetracyclines ranked fourth, which was lower than placebo (ranked third). Contributing studies were considered as low risk of bias in a threshold analysis. Quality of life (SGRQ) Seven studies were included (2237 participants) in this NMA. SGRQ scores improved with macrolide treatment compared with placebo (fixed effect-fixed class effect: mean difference (MD) -2.30, 95% CrI -3.61 to -0.99), but the mean difference did not reach the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of 4 points. Tetracyclines and quinolones did not improve quality of life any more than placebo, and we did not detect a difference between antibiotic classes. Serious adverse events Nine studies were included (3180 participants) in the NMA. Macrolides reduced the odds of a serious adverse event compared with placebo (fixed effect-fixed class effect: odds ratio (OR) 0.76, 95% CrI 0.62 to 0.93). There was probably little to no difference in the effect of quinolone compared with placebo or tetracycline plus macrolide compared with placebo. There was probably little to no difference in serious adverse events between quinolones or tetracycline plus macrolide. With macrolide treatment 49 fewer people per 1000 experienced a serious adverse event compared with those given placebo. Macrolides ranked first, followed by quinolones. Tetracycline did not rank better than placebo. Drug resistance Ten studies reported drug resistance. Results were not combined due to variation in outcome measures. All studies concluded that prophylactic antibiotic administration was associated with the development of antimicrobial resistance.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This NMA evaluated the safety and efficacy of different antibiotics used prophylactically for COPD patients. Compared to placebo, prolonged administration of macrolides (ranked first) appeared beneficial in prolonging the time to next exacerbation, improving quality of life, and reducing serious adverse events. No clear benefits were associated with use of quinolones or tetracyclines. In addition, antibiotic resistance was a concern and could not be thoroughly assessed in this review. Given the trade-off between effectiveness, safety, and risk of antibiotic resistance, prophylactic administration of antibiotics may be best reserved for selected patients, such as those experiencing frequent exacerbations. However, none of the eligible studies excluded patients with previously isolated non-tuberculous mycobacteria, which would contraindicate prophylactic administration of antibiotics, due to the risk of developing resistant non-tuberculous mycobacteria.

Training improves the handling of inhaler devices and reduces the severity of symptoms in geriatric patients suffering from chronic-obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE

Elderly patients with impaired vision, cognitive decline or motor/sensory disturbances of their fingers suffering from chronic-obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) encounter difficulties in handling inhaler devices used as the cornerstones of treatment of pulmonary obstruction. Many elderly patients make severe mistakes which impede adequate drug delivery to the bronchioles. This multimodal training program was designed to reduce the number of handling mistakes of inhaler devices.

METHODS

From October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017, a prospective intervention study was conducted in 38 in-patients > 65 years (median age 79 years) with previously diagnosed COPD. The effect of an 8-day intervention comprising daily counselling and video demonstration according to the recommendations of the German Airway League on the frequency of mistakes during handling of inhaler devices, the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), the forced vital capacity (FVC) and the perception of symptoms (COPD Assessment Test, CAT) were studied. Measurements on days 1 and 8 were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

The number of handling mistakes per patient decreased as a consequence of the intervention from 3.0 (0-7) to 0.5 (0-6) [median (minimum-maximum; p < 0.0001)]. The CAT Score decreased from 19.5 (14/24) to 14.5 (10.75/21) [median (25./75. percentile; p < 0.0001) indicating a substantial reduction of clinical symptoms. Conversely, FEV1 and FVC only slightly increased (difference statistically not significant). At study entry, the number of handling mistakes was inversely correlated with the Mini Mental Status Test (MMST) score (p = 0.01). The reduction of the number of handling mistakes during the intervention was not correlated with the MMST.

CONCLUSION

In COPD, intensive training for 8 days improved the handling of inhalers and reduced clinical symptoms in geriatric patients. Patients with cognitive abnormalities also benefitted from this intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Registry DRKS00023196 , date of registration September 29, 2020 (retrospectively registered).

Once-daily single-inhaler versus twice-daily multiple-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD: lung function and health status results from two replicate randomized controlled trials

Background

The comparative efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy administered via single or multiple inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been evaluated comprehensively. We conducted two replicate trials comparing single- with multiple-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA combination in COPD.

Methods

207608 and 207609 were Phase IV, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy non-inferiority trials comparing once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg via Ellipta inhaler, with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400/12 μg via metered-dose inhaler plus once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg via HandiHaler. Patients had symptomatic COPD and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) < 50% predicted, or FEV₁ < 80% predicted and ≥ 2 moderate or 1 severe exacerbations in the prior year. The primary endpoint in both trials was weighted mean change from baseline (wmCFB) in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12. Secondary endpoints included CFB in trough FEV₁ at Day 84 and 85. Other endpoints included serial FEV₁ and health status outcomes at Week 12. Safety was evaluated descriptively.

Results

The modified per-protocol population included 720 and 711 patients in studies 207608 and 207609 (intent-to-treat population: 728 and 732). FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12 (Study 207608 treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: 15 mL [− 13, 43]; Study 207609: 11 mL [− 20, 41]). FF/UMEC/VI improved trough FEV₁ CFB versus BUD/FOR+TIO at Day 84 and 85 (Day 85 treatment difference: Study 207608: 38 mL [10, 66]; Study 207609: 51 mL [21, 82]) and FEV₁ at 12 and 24 h post-morning dose at Week 12 in both studies. No treatment differences were seen in health status outcomes. Safety profiles were similar between treatments; pneumonia occurred in 7 (< 1%) patients with FF/UMEC/VI and 9 (1%) patients with BUD/FOR+TIO, across both studies.

Conclusions

FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0–24-h FEV₁ at Week 12 in patients with COPD. Greater improvements in trough and serial FEV₁ measurements at Week 12 with FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR+TIO, together with similar health status improvements and safety outcomes including the incidence of pneumonia, suggest that once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI triple therapy is a viable option for patients looking to simplify their treatment regimen.

Trial registration

GSK (207608/207609; NCT03478683/NCT03478696).

Association of Guideline-Recommended COPD Inhaler Regimens With Mortality, Respiratory Exacerbations, and Quality of Life: A Secondary Analysis of the Long-Term Oxygen Treatment Trial

BACKGROUND

Although inhaled therapy reduces exacerbations among patients with COPD, the effectiveness of providing inhaled treatment per risk stratification models remains unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Are inhaled regimens that align with the 2017 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy associated with clinically important outcomes?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted secondary analyses of Long-term Oxygen Treatment Trial (LOTT) data. The trial enrolled patients with COPD with moderate resting or exertional hypoxemia between 2009 and 2015. Our exposure was the patient-reported inhaled regimen at enrollment, categorized as either aligning with, undertreating, or potentially overtreating per the 2017 GOLD strategy. Our primary composite outcome was time to death or first hospitalization for COPD. Additional outcomes included individual components of the composite outcome and time to first exacerbation. We generated multivariable Cox proportional hazard models across strata of GOLD-predicted exacerbation risk (high vs low) to estimate between-group hazard ratios for time to event outcomes. We adjusted models a priori for potential confounders, clustered by site.

RESULTS

The trial enrolled 738 patients (73.4% men; mean age, 68.8 years). Of the patients, 571 (77.4%) were low risk for future exacerbations. Of the patients, 233 (31.6%) reported regimens aligning with GOLD recommendations; most regimens (54.1%) potentially overtreated. During a 2.3-year median follow-up, 332 patients (44.9%) experienced the composite outcome. We found no difference in time to composite outcome or death among patients reporting regimens aligning with recommendations compared with undertreated patients. Among patients at low risk, potential overtreatment was associated with higher exacerbation risk (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.09-1.87), whereas inhaled corticosteroid treatment was associated with 64% higher risk of pneumonia (incidence rate ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01-2.66).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with COPD with moderate hypoxemia, we found no difference in clinical outcomes between inhaled regimens aligning with the 2017 GOLD strategy compared with those that were undertreated. These findings suggest the need to reevaluate the effectiveness of risk stratification model-based inhaled treatment strategies.

A Framework For Step Down Or Therapeutic Re-Organization For Withdrawal Of Inhaled Corticosteroids In Selected Patients With COPD: A Proposal For COPD Management

While chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality, pharmacological therapy has a definite benefit on symptoms as well as the frequency and severity of exacerbations, and general health. The most recent Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines recommend triple therapy (long-acting beta2 agonists [LABA] + long-acting muscarinic antagonists [LAMA] + inhaled corticosteroids [ICS]) only for patients with exacerbations, elevated eosinophils, and without control using a LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA combination. Long-term monotherapy with ICS is not currently recommended, but may be considered in association with LABAs in patients with a history of exacerbations and elevated eosinophils in spite of appropriate treatment with long-acting bronchodilators. However, long-term use of ICS in combination therapy has been associated with adverse effects, even if widely used in routine management for decades. The available evidence suggests that ICS can be rationally discontinued in patients with stable disease and is not likely to have unfavorable effects on lung function, overall health, or be associated with a greater risk of exacerbations. Indeed, it is widely accepted that ICS therapy should be limited to a small proportion of patients after careful assessment of the individual risk-benefit profile. Unfortunately, however, there are no international recommendations that provide specific guidance or a protocol for withdrawal of ICS. Herein, the available evidence on the use of ICS is reviewed and an easy to use tool is proposed that can provide clinicians with a simple management scheme to guide the most appropriate therapy for management of COPD and use of ICS. In management of COPD, a highly personalized approach is advocated so that the most appropriate therapy for each individual patient can be selected.

Decline of COPD exacerbations in clinical trials over two decades - a systematic review and meta-regression

Background

An important goal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment is to reduce the frequency of exacerbations. Some observations suggest a decline in exacerbation rates in clinical trials over time. A more systematic understanding would help to improve the design and interpretation of COPD trials.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-regression of the placebo groups in published randomized controlled trials reporting exacerbations as an outcome. A Bayesian negative binomial model was developed to accommodate results that are reported in different formats; results are reported with credible intervals (CI) and posterior tail probabilities (p_B).

Results

Of 1114 studies identified by our search, 55 were ultimately included. Exacerbation rates decreased by 6.7% (95% CI (4.4, 9.0); p_B <  0.001) per year, or 50% (95% CI (36, 61)) per decade. Adjusting for available study and baseline characteristics such as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) did not alter the observed trend considerably. Two subsets of studies, one using a true placebo group and the other allowing inhaled corticosteroids in the “placebo” group, also yielded consistent results.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this meta-regression indicates that the rate of COPD exacerbations decreased over the past two decades to a clinically relevant extent independent of important prognostic factors. This suggests that care is needed in the design of new trials or when comparing results from older trials with more recent ones. Also a considerable effect of adjunct therapy on COPD exacerbations can be assumed.

Registration

PROSPERO 2018 CRD4218118823.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-019-1163-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Tiotropium add-on therapy is safe and reduces seasonal worsening in paediatric asthma patients

There remains an unmet need for effective, well-tolerated therapeutic options in paediatric patients with not fully controlled asthma, for whom safety is of paramount importance.Data were pooled from five randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies evaluating tiotropium 5 or 2.5 µg versus placebo add-on therapy in patients with symptomatic asthma aged 1-17 years. Analysis included adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) reported throughout and for 30 days following treatment.Of 1691 patients treated, 1119 received tiotropium. Reporting of AEs was low and comparable across all groups: tiotropium 5 µg (51%), tiotropium 2.5 µg (51%) and placebo (54%). Reporting of drug-related AEs, those leading to discontinuation and SAEs was also low and balanced between treatment groups, irrespective of age, disease severity or sex. The number of AEs related to asthma symptoms and exacerbations was lower with tiotropium (5 µg) than with placebo, particularly during the seasonal peaks of these AEs.This comprehensive analysis of a large safety database allowed subgroup analyses that are often impractical with individual trials and provides further support for the safety of once-daily tiotropium Respimat add-on therapy in paediatric patients with symptomatic asthma.

Evaluating fluticasone furoate + vilanterol for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β-2 agonists (ICS/LABA) combination inhalers have been a lifeline for a generation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma patients. Fluticasone furoate and Vilanterol (FF/VI) as a once-daily ICS/LABA combination have an extensive clinical trial and real-world data to support its use in COPD patients. Areas covered: The authors provide pharmacological profiles of fluticasone furoate, vilanterol and the FF/VI fixed dose combination. Salient clinical trials evaluating efficacy and safety of the FF/VI combination, and studies demonstrating the impact on COPD exacerbation risk and mortality are also discussed. Expert opinion: ICS/LABA combinations provide bronchodilation and decrease the frequency of COPD exacerbations. Individualizing treatment of each COPD patient based on unique phenotypes will maximize chances of therapeutic responsiveness. Asthma-COPD overlap (ACO), patients with sputum and/or blood eosinophilia, patients with a brisk bronchodilator response, and patients with frequent exacerbations are more likely to show a therapeutic response to ICS than populations who have none of these features. FF/VI will likely remain a popular ICS/LBA combination to treat COPD, as a once-daily inhaled therapy delivered via the Ellipta device popular with COPD patients, with extensive clinical trial and real-world data to support its use.

12-month randomised controlled trial of ginseng extract for moderate COPD

BACKGROUND

Panax ginseng (ginseng) is a therapeutic herb which might be beneficial in COPD. The study investigated if ginseng, compared with placebo, is effective and safe for people with moderate COPD.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial compared 24 weeks of ginseng capsules (100 mg twice daily) with placebo. Participants were followed up for a further 24 weeks. Participants were aged 40 years and over and had airflow limitation in the moderate (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2) COPD range. The coprimary endpoints were the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the COPD Assessment Test and the Short Form Health Survey. Secondary outcomes included lung function, exacerbation rate and use of relief medication.

FINDINGS

168 participants were randomised 1:1 from five centres in Australia and China. Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. There were no significant differences between ginseng and placebo, with overall results improving in both groups. Ginseng seemed safe for, and well tolerated by, people with COPD.

INTERPRETATION

There was no significant difference in improvement in health-related quality of life (primary outcome) between the ginseng and placebo groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12610000768099.

A prospective study of salvational intervention with ICS/LABA for reducing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation under severe air pollution (SIRCAP) in Beijing: protocol of a multi-center randomized controlled trial

Background

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) not only accelerates the progression of disease, but also causes hospital administration and death events. Epidemiologic studies have shown air pollution is a high risk factor of AECOPD. However, there are rare technics or treatment strategies recommended to reduce severe air pollution related AECOPD.

Methods

This is a multi-center, prospective, randomized and standard treatment parallel control clinical trial. Seven hundred sixty-four stable COPD patients in group B, C and D according to GOLD 2017 will be recruited and equally divided into two parallel groups, salvational intervention (SI group) and control group (CT group). Original treatments for participants include tiotropium (18μg once q.d), budesonide/formoterol (160μg/4.5μg once or twice b.i.d) or budesonide/formoterol (160μg/4.5μg once or twice b.i.d) with tiotropium (18μg once q.d). The savational intervention for SI group is routine treatment plus budesonide/formoterol (160μg/4.5μg once b.i.d) from the first day after severe air pollution (air quality index, AQI ≥200) to the third day after AQI < 200. CT group will maintain the original treatment. The intervention will last for 2 years. Primary outcome is the frequency of AECOPD per year and the secondary outcomes include the incidence of unplanned outpatient visits, emergency visits, hospitalization, medical cost and mortality associated with AECOPD per year.

Discussion

The salvational intervention is a novel strategy for COPD management under severe air pollution. Results of the present study will provide reference information to guide clinical practice in reducing the air pollution related exacerbation of COPD.

Trial registration

This study has been registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (registration identifier: NCT03083067) in 17 March, 2017.

Indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate provides sustained improvements in lung function compared with salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD: results from a Phase II randomized, double-blind 12-week study

Background and purpose

Fixed-dose combinations of a long-acting beta agonist and an inhaled corticosteroid are more effective than the individual components in COPD. The primary study objective was to demonstrate that the combination indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate (IND/MF [QMF149]) was non-inferior to the twice-daily combination salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate (Sal/Flu) in terms of trough FEV₁ at week 12 (day 85). Secondary objectives were to compare the efficacy of IND/MF (QMF149) vs Sal/Flu with respect to other lung function parameters, COPD exacerbations, symptoms and dyspnea, health status/health-related quality of life, and rescue medication use.

Materials and methods

This was a 12-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, Phase II study in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, who were randomized (1:1) to IND/MF (QMF149) (150/160 µg once daily; n=316) or Sal/Flu (50/500 µg twice daily; n=313).

Results

Over 90% of patients completed the study: 94.6% in the IND/MF (QMF149) group and 92.0% in the Sal/Flu group. The primary objective of non-inferiority of IND/MF (QMF149) to Sal/Flu for trough FEV₁ at week 12 (day 85) was met: the lower limit of the CI (95% CI: 27.7, 83.3 mL) was greater than −60 mL. The analysis for superiority of IND/MF (QMF149) to Sal/Flu demonstrated superiority of IND/MF (QMF149), with a difference of 56 mL (P<0.001). In addition, IND/MF (QMF149) treatment significantly improved COPD exacerbation-related parameters during the 12-week period. Other significant improvements with IND/MF (QMF 149) vs Sal/Flu were noted for dyspnea at week 12 and other COPD symptoms and COPD rescue medication use over the 12 weeks. The safety and tolerability profiles of both the treatments were similar.

Conclusion

IND/MF (QMF149) (150/160 µg once daily) offered superior lung function and symptom efficacy and a favorable safety profile compared with Sal/Flu (50/500 µg twice daily) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.

Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators such as long-acting β-agonist (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combinations have been used in people with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to control symptoms such as dyspnoea and cough, and prevent exacerbations. A number of LABA/LAMA combinations are now available for clinical use in COPD. However, it is not clear which group of above mentioned inhalers is most effective or if any specific formulation works better than the others within the same group or class.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of available formulations from four different groups of inhalers (i.e. LABA/LAMA combination, LABA/ICS combination, LAMA and LABA) in people with moderate to severe COPD. The review will update previous systematic reviews on dual combination inhalers and long-acting bronchodilators to answer the questions described above using the strength of a network meta-analysis (NMA).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register, which contains several databases. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites. The most recent searches were conducted on 6 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited people aged 35 years or older with a diagnosis of COPD and a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of less than 80% of predicted. We included studies of at least 12 weeks' duration including at least two active comparators from one of the four inhaler groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted NMAs using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo method. We considered a study as high risk if recruited participants had at least one COPD exacerbation within the 12 months before study entry and as low risk otherwise. Primary outcomes were COPD exacerbations (moderate to severe and severe), and secondary outcomes included symptom and quality-of-life scores, safety outcomes, and lung function. We collected data only for active comparators and did not consider placebo was not considered. We assumed a class/group effect when a fixed-class model fitted well. Otherwise we used a random-class model to assess intraclass/group differences. We supplemented the NMAs with pairwise meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 101,311 participants from 99 studies (26 studies with 32,265 participants in the high-risk population and 73 studies with 69,046 participants in the low-risk population) in our systematic review. The median duration of studies was 52 weeks in the high-risk population and 26 weeks in the low-risk population (range 12 to 156 for both populations). We considered the quality of included studies generally to be good.The NMAs suggested that the LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations followed by LAMA in the both populations.There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination, LAMA, and LABA in the high-risk population (network hazard ratios (HRs) 0.86 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.76 to 0.99), 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.99), and 0.70 (95% CrI 0.61 to 0.8) respectively), and that LAMA decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA in the high- and low-risk populations (network HR 0.80 (95% CrI 0.71 to 0.88) and 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.97), respectively). There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination reduces severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination and LABA in the high-risk population (network HR 0.78 (95% CrI 0.64 to 0.93) and 0.64 (95% CrI 0.51 to 0.81), respectively).There was a general trend towards a greater improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores with the combination therapies compared to monotherapies, and the combination therapies were generally ranked higher than monotherapies.The LABA/ICS combination was the lowest ranked in pneumonia serious adverse events (SAEs) in both populations. There is evidence that the LABA/ICS combination increases the odds of pneumonia compared to LAMA/LABA combination, LAMA and LABA (network ORs: 1.69 (95% CrI 1.20 to 2.44), 1.78 (95% CrI 1.33 to 2.39), and 1.50 (95% CrI 1.17 to 1.92) in the high-risk population and network or pairwise OR: 2.33 (95% CI 1.03 to 5.26), 2.02 (95% CrI 1.16 to 3.72), and 1.93 (95% CrI 1.29 to 3.22) in the low-risk population respectively). There were significant overlaps in the rank statistics in the other safety outcomes including mortality, total, COPD, and cardiac SAEs, and dropouts due to adverse events.None of the differences in lung function met a minimal clinically important difference criterion except for LABA/LAMA combination versus LABA in the high-risk population (network mean difference 0.13 L (95% CrI 0.10 to 0.15). The results of pairwise meta-analyses generally agreed with those of the NMAs. There is no evidence to suggest intraclass/group differences except for lung function at 12 months in the high-risk population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations although there was some uncertainty in the results. LAMA containing inhalers may have an advantage over those without a LAMA for preventing COPD exacerbations based on the rank statistics. Combination therapies appear more effective than monotherapies for improving symptom and quality-of-life scores. ICS-containing inhalers are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.Our most comprehensive review including intraclass/group comparisons, free combination therapies, 99 studies, and 20 outcomes for each high- and low-risk population summarises the current literature and could help with updating existing COPD guidelines.

The dose of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD: when less is better

Background

The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in combination with bronchodilators in patients with COPD has been shown to decrease the rate of disease exacerbations and to improve the lung function and patients’ quality of life. However, their use has also been associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.

Materials and methods

We have reviewed existing clinical evidence on the risks and benefits of ICS in COPD, including large randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and clinical reviews.

Results

A large body of evidence supports the clinical benefits of ICS in patients with COPD in terms of exacerbations, symptoms, lung function, and quality of life. The incidence of adverse events related to ICS, including pneumonia, varies strongly among the studies and seems to be dose dependent, with recent well-designed, large studies on low-dose ICS reporting similar safety profiles in ICS and non-ICS groups.

Conclusion

The benefits of ICS in COPD continue to outweigh the risks, especially when lower ICS doses are employed. Given that the data on ICS withdrawal in COPD are scarce and conflicting, we argue that using reduced doses of ICS could be an optimal strategy to manage patients with COPD.

New developments in optimizing bronchodilator treatment of COPD: a focus on glycopyrrolate/formoterol combination formulated by co-suspension delivery technology

COPD causes considerable health and economic burden worldwide, with incidence of the disease expected to continue to rise. Inhaled bronchodilators, such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), are central to the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. Clinical studies have demonstrated that combined LAMA + LABA therapies improve efficacy while retaining a safety profile similar to LAMA or LABA alone. This has led to the development of several LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies, which provide patients with the convenience of two active compounds in a single inhaler. GFF MDI (Bevespi Aerosphere®) is an FDC of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate 18/9.6 µg formulated using innovative co-suspension delivery technology for administration via metered dose inhaler (MDI). GFF MDI was developed to make a treatment option available for patients who have a requirement or preference to use an MDI, rather than a dry powder or soft mist inhaler. Now that several LAMA/LABA FDCs have been approved for use in COPD, we review the impact of dual-bronchodilator treatment on COPD therapy and discuss recent clinical studies that are helping to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how LAMA/LABA FDCs can improve patient outcomes.

Once-daily long-acting beta₂-agonists/inhaled corticosteroids combined inhalers versus inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Three classes of inhaler medication are used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA); long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA); and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). To encourage patient adherence, two classes of medication are often combined in a single medication device; it seems that once-daily dosing offers greatest convenience to patients and may markedly influence adherence.

OBJECTIVES

To compare a once-daily combination of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist inhalers (ICS/LABA) versus inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists alone (LAMA) for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an electronic search of the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Airways Group (14 May 2018), ClinicalTrials.gov (14 May 2018), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (20 September 2017), then a search of other resources, including reference lists of included studies and manufacturers' trial registers (10 October 2017). Two pairs of review authors screened and scrutinised selected articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing once-daily administered ICS/LABA and LAMA in adults with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in each study. We analysed dichotomous data as random-effects odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), both with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), using Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 880 participants. We identified one ongoing trial with planned recruitment of 80 participants. Included studies enrolled participants with both partially reversible and non-reversible COPD and baseline mean per cent predicted (%pred) forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) of 43.4 to 49.6. Both studies lasted 12 weeks. Both studies used the same combination of inhaled ICS/LABA (fluticasone furoate and vilanterol 100/25 mcg once daily; FF/VI) versus LAMA (18 mcg tiotropium; TIO). They were published as full articles, and neither study was at low risk of bias in all domains.Compared to the TIO arm, results for pooled primary outcomes for the FF/VI arm were as follows: mortality: OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.73, 880 participants (deaths reported only in the TIO arm), very low-quality evidence; COPD exacerbation (requiring short-burst oral corticosteroids or antibiotics, or both): OR 0.72, 95% Cl 0.35 to 1.50, 880 participants, very low-quality evidence; pneumonia: reported in both studies only during treatment with FF/VI: OR 6.12, 95% Cl 0.73 to 51.24, 880 participants, very low-quality evidence; and total serious adverse events: OR 0.96, 95% Cl 0.50 to 1.83, 880 participants, very low-quality evidence. None of the pneumonias were fatal. Compared to the TIO arm, we found no statistically significant difference for pooled secondary outcomes, including St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) mean total score change; hospital admissions (all-cause); disease-specific adverse events; mean weekly rescue medication use (results available from only one of the studies); and mean weekly percentage of rescue-free days for FF/VI. We found no statistically significant differences between ICS/LABA and LAMA for improvement in symptoms measured by the COPD Assessment Test (CAT score) nor for FEV₁ (change from baseline trough in 24-hour weighted mean on treatment day 84). Many pooled estimates lacked precision. Data for other endpoints such as exacerbations leading to intubation and physical activity measures were not available in included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on analysis of primary and secondary outcomes, we are uncertain whether once-daily ICS/LABA, combined in one inhaler, has a different efficacy or adverse effect profile compared to LAMA for treatment of people with COPD. However, the current review is based on only two trials with the main focus on primary outcomes other than those considered in this review. The short follow-up period and the very low quality of evidence limit our confidence in the result and increase uncertainty. Further trials of longer duration are needed. Current evidence is not strong enough to demonstrate important differences between inhalers in terms of effects, nor to establish that once-daily fluticasone/vilanterol 100/25 mcg and tiotropium 18 mcg are equivalent.

A randomized trial of symptom-based management in Japanese patients with COPD

Background

The Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease strategy document for COPD recommends treatment changes according to the persistence of symptoms or exacerbations. This study assessed the feasibility and outcomes of a structured step-up/step-down treatment approach in a randomized controlled clinical trial setting.

Methods

Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to blinded, double-dummy treatment with twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) 250/50 µg or once-daily tiotropium bromide (TIO) 18 µg for 24 weeks (dual bronchodilator was not available). At 4-weekly intervals, patients remaining symptomatic (COPD Assessment Test score >10) or experiencing an exacerbation were offered the option to use triple therapy. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients remaining on randomized therapy.

Results

In total, 406 patients participated (mean FEV₁ 59%±13% predicted; COPD Assessment Test 12±6). Of these, 204 and 201 patients were included in the FP/SAL and TIO groups, respectively, of whom 67% and 63% continued treatment throughout the study; this difference was not statistically significant. Time to first therapy switch was longer with FP/SAL, but not significantly (P=0.21). More patients in Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (2011 criteria) groups C/D switched (FP/SAL 55%, TIO 63%) than in groups A/B (FP/SAL 27%, TIO 27%).

Conclusion

Given the choice, patients with more symptoms or those experiencing an exacerbation will agree to step-up therapy. Effectiveness of disease management pathways can be tested using double-blind studies.

Treatment of exacerbations as a predictor of subsequent outcomes in patients with COPD

Rationale

Exacerbations of COPD are managed differently, but whether treatment of one exacerbation predicts the likelihood of subsequent events is unknown.

Objective

We examined whether the treatment given for exacerbations predicted subsequent outcomes.

Methods

This was a post-hoc analysis of 17,135 patients with COPD from TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat^® (TIOSPIR^®). Patients treated with tiotropium with one or more moderate to severe exacerbations on study were analyzed using descriptive statistics, logistic and Cox regression analysis, and Kaplan–Meier plots.

Results

Of 8,061 patients with moderate to severe exacerbation(s), demographics were similar across patients with exacerbations treated with antibiotics and/or steroids or hospitalization. Exacerbations treated with systemic corticosteroids alone or in combination with antibiotics had the highest risk of subsequent exacerbation (HR: 1.21, P=0.0004 and HR: 1.33, P<0.0001, respectively), and a greater risk of having a hospitalized (severe) exacerbation (HR: 1.59 and 1.63, P<0.0001, respectively) or death (HR: 1.50, P=0.0059 and HR: 1.47, P=0.0002, respectively) compared with exacerbations treated with antibiotics alone. Initial hospitalization led to the highest risk of subsequent hospitalization (all-cause or COPD related [severe exacerbation], HR: 3.35 and 4.31, P<0.0001, respectively) or death (all-cause or COPD related, HR: 3.53 and 5.54, P<0.0001, respectively) versus antibiotics alone.

Conclusion

These data indicate that the way exacerbations are treated initially is a useful guide to the patient’s subsequent clinical course. Factors that clinicians consider when making treatment choices require further clarification.

Practical considerations when prescribing a long-acting muscarinic antagonist for patients with COPD

COPD is characterized by persistent airflow limitation, progressive breathlessness, cough, and sputum production. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are one of the recommended first-choice therapeutic options for patients with COPD, and several new agents have been developed in recent years. A literature search identified 14 published randomized, placebo-controlled studies of the efficacy and safety of LAMAs in patients with COPD, with improvements seen in lung function, exacerbations, breathlessness, and health status. A greater weight of evidence currently exists for glycopyrronium (GLY) and tiotropium than for umeclidinium and aclidinium, especially in terms of exacerbation reductions. To date, there have been few head-to-head clinical studies of the different LAMAs. Available data indicate that GLY and aclidinium have similar efficacy to tiotropium in terms of improving lung function, dyspnea, exacerbations, and health status. Overall, evidence demonstrates that currently available LAMAs provide effective and generally well-tolerated therapy for patients with COPD. Delivery devices for the different LAMAs vary, which may affect individual patient's adherence to and preference for treatment. Subtle differences between individual therapeutic options may be important to individual patients and the final treatment choice should involve physician's and patient's experiences and preferences.

Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: Personalising the therapeutic choice

There has been a recent surge in interest in the role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the treatment of COPD, especially regarding patients with high eosinophil counts. Evidence has shown that despite the increase in localised adverse effects and a small increase in non-fatal pneumonia events with ICS use, ICS still have an important role to play in reducing exacerbation rates and addressing the inflammation that is at the heart of the pathogenesis of COPD. Current international guidelines recommend the use of ICS only in patients with severe disease. This review examines the potential role of ICS in all COPD patients.

Hypomagnesemia in critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Magnesium (Mg) is essential for life and plays a crucial role in several biochemical and physiological processes in the human body. Hypomagnesemia is common in all hospitalized patients, especially in critically ill patients with coexisting electrolyte abnormalities. Hypomagnesemia may cause severe and potential fatal complications if not timely diagnosed and properly treated, and associate with increased mortality.

MAIN BODY

Mg deficiency in critically ill patients is mainly caused by gastrointestinal and/or renal disorders and may lead to secondary hypokalemia and hypocalcemia, and severe neuromuscular and cardiovascular clinical manifestations. Because of the physical distribution of Mg, there are no readily or easy methods to assess Mg status. However, serum Mg and the Mg tolerance test are most widely used. There are limited studies to guide intermittent therapy of Mg deficiency in critically ill patients, but some empirical guidelines exist. Further clinical trials and critical evaluation of empiric Mg replacement strategies is needed.

CONCLUSION

Patients at risk of Mg deficiency, with typical biochemical findings or clinical symptoms of hypomagnesemia, should be considered for treatment even with serum Mg within the normal range.

Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention: A network meta-analysis

Background

Pressure ulcers are a prevalent and global issue and support surfaces are widely used for preventing ulceration. However, the diversity of available support surfaces and the lack of direct comparisons in RCTs make decision-making difficult.

Objectives

To determine, using network meta-analysis, the relative effects of different support surfaces in reducing pressure ulcer incidence and comfort and to rank these support surfaces in order of their effectiveness.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, using a literature search up to November 2016, to identify randomised trials comparing support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. We grouped the support surfaces according to their characteristics and formed evidence networks using these groups. We used network meta-analysis to estimate the relative effects and effectiveness ranking of the groups for the outcomes of pressure ulcer incidence and participant comfort. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

Main results

We included 65 studies in the review. The network for assessing pressure ulcer incidence comprised evidence of low or very low certainty for most network contrasts. There was moderate-certainty evidence that powered active air surfaces and powered hybrid air surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence compared with standard hospital surfaces (risk ratios (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.29 to 0.63; 0.22, 0.07 to 0.66, respectively). The network for comfort suggested that powered active air-surfaces are probably slightly less comfortable than standard hospital mattresses (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.94; moderate-certainty evidence).

Conclusions

This is the first network meta-analysis of the effects of support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Powered active air-surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence, but are probably less comfortable than standard hospital surfaces. Most prevention evidence was of low or very low certainty, and more research is required to reduce these uncertainties.

Pattern and Adherence to Maintenance Medication Use in Medicare Beneficiaries with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: 2008-2013

Background: Maintenance medications provide symptomatic relief, improve lung function and reduce the risk of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite their proven benefits, limited information exists on maintenance medication use and adherence among users. Objective: We examined the patterns and factors associated with the receipt of and adherence to maintenance medication in individuals with COPD. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study of 5% of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Parts A, B and D with COPD who received maintenance medication from 2008 to 2013 was conducted. Maintenance medication includes: inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), long-acting beta2- agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) alone or in combination. We examined the proportion of beneficiaries with COPD who had at least one prescription filled for maintenance medication. Among users of maintenance medications, we also examined adherence, defined as proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥80% over the year from the first maintenance medication prescription fill date. Results: Overall, maintenance medication (LAMAs, LABAs, ICSs and/or LABA/ICS) use increased from 67.8% in 2008 to 72.1% in 2013. The increase is related to increases in use of LABA/ICS, which rose from 41.1% in 2008 to 49.6% in 2013. Factors associated with receipt of maintenance medication include female gender, recent COPD hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-1.73), oxygen therapy (OR 1.74 95% CI, 1.68-1.81), dual eligibility status (OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.39-1.51), higher education level and evaluation by a pulmonary provider (OR 1.88; 95% CI 1.81-1.96). The overall adherence among maintenance medication users remained flat. The most important factor associated with adherence was dual eligibility status (OR, 1.67; 95% CI: 1.59-1.75). Conclusions: Receipt of maintenance medications increased during the study period and was higher in those with dual eligibility. Overall, adherence to maintenance medications was suboptimal and remained unchanged.

The impact of dual bronchodilation on cardiovascular serious adverse events and mortality in COPD: a quantitative synthesis

Objective

Long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are burdened by the potential risk of inducing cardiovascular serious adverse events (SAEs) in COPD patients. Since the risk of combining a LABA with a LAMA could be greater, we have carried out a quantitative synthesis to investigate the cardiovascular safety profile of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs).

Methods

A pair-wise and network meta-analysis was performed by using the data of the repository database ClinicalTrials.gov concerning the impact of approved LABA/LAMA FDCs versus monocomponents and/or placebo on cardiovascular SAEs in COPD.

Results

Overall, LABA/LAMA FDCs did not significantly (P>0.05) modulate the risk of cardiovascular SAEs versus monocomponents. However, the network meta-analysis indicated that aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg and tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg were the safest FDCs, followed by umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg which was as safe as placebo, whereas glycopyrronium/formoterol 14.9/9.6, glycopyrronium/indacaterol 15.6/27.5 µg, and glycopyrronium/indacaterol 50/110 µg were the least safe FDCs. No impact on mortality was detected for each specific FDC.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis indicates that LABA/LAMA FDC therapy is characterized by an excellent cardiovascular safety profile in COPD patients. However, the findings of this quantitative synthesis have been obtained from populations that participated in randomized clinical trials, and were devoid of major cardiovascular diseases. Thus, post-marketing surveillance and observational studies may help to better define the real impact of specific FDCs with regard to the cardiovascular risk.

Budesonide, fluticasone propionate, and azithromycin do not modulate the membrane vesicle release by THP-1 macrophages and respiratory pathogens during macrophage infection

Patients with more severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease frequently experience exacerbations and it is estimated that up to 50% of these exacerbations are associated with bacterial infections. The mainstay treatment for these infection-related exacerbations constitutes the administration of glucocorticoids, alone or in combination with antibiotics. A recent line of evidence demonstrates that many hormones including the steroid beclomethasone can also directly affect bacterial growth, virulence, and antibiotic resistance. The effect of these regimens on the release of potentially virulent and toxic membrane vesicles (MVs) is at present unclear. In this study, we determined the effect of several pharmacological agents on MVs release by and bacterial growth of common respiratory pathogens. We found that neither the release of MVs nor the bacterial growth was affected by the glucocorticoids budesonide and fluticasone. The macrolide antibiotic azithromycin only inhibited the growth of Moraxella catarrhalis but no effects were observed on bacterial MV release at a concentration that is achieved locally in the epithelial lining on administration. The macrophage pro-inflammatory response to MVs was significantly reduced after treatment with budesonide and fluticasone but not by azithromycin treatment. Our findings suggest that these glucocorticoids may have a positive effect on infection-related inflammation although the bacterial growth and MV release remained unaffected.

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium and olodaterol in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of COPD. The new combination of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA) olodaterol (OLO) has been introduced as fist line therapy for COPD. This article analyses the evidence of efficacy and safety of the TIO/OLO combination.

Methods

A systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with a period of treatment of at least 6 weeks, in patients with COPD confirmed by spirometry, comparing combined treatment with TIO/OLO (approved doses only), with any of the mono-components or any other active comparator administered as an inhalator.

Results

A total of 10 Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified (N = 10,918). TIO/OLO significantly improved trough FEV₁ from baseline to week 12 versus TIO, OLO and LABA/ICS (0.06 L, 0.09 L and between 0.04 and 0.05 L, respectively). TIO/OLO improved transitional dyspnea index (TDI) and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) compared with mono-components, with patients more likely to achieve clinically important improvements in TDI (risk ratio [RR]: 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.07, 1.28] versus TIO and RR: 1.14, 95%CI: [1.01, 1.28] versus OLO) and in SGRQ (RR: 1.21, 95%CI: [1.12, 1.30] versus TIO and RR: 1.28, 95%CI: [1.18, 1.40] versus OLO). Patients treated with TIO/OLO showed a significant reduction in the use of rescue medication and no significant differences in frequency of general and serious adverse events were observed between TIO/OLO and mono-components.

Conclusions

Treatment with TIO/OLO provided significant improvements in lung function versus mono-components and LABA/ICS with more patients achieving significant improvements in dyspnea and health status. No differences in adverse events were observed compared with other active treatments.

Clinical trial registration

PROSPERO register of systematic reviews (CRD42016040162).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-017-0683-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Triple therapy in COPD: new evidence with the extrafine fixed combination of beclomethasone dipropionate, formoterol fumarate, and glycopyrronium bromide

The goals of COPD therapy are to prevent and control symptoms, reduce the frequency and severity of exacerbations, and improve exercise tolerance. The triple combination therapy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), long-acting beta₂ agonists (LABAs), and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) has become an option for maintenance treatment of COPD and as a “step-up” therapy from single or double combination treatments. There is evidence that triple combination ICS/LABA/LAMA with different inhalers improves lung function, symptoms, and health status and reduces exacerbations. A new triple fixed-dose combination of extrafine beclomethasone dipropionate (100 µg/puff)/formoterol fumarate (6 µg/puff)/glycopyrronium bromide (12.5 µg/puff) has been developed as a hydrofluoroalkane pressurized metered dose inhaler. Two large pivotal studies showed that this extrafine fixed ICS/LABA/LAMA triple combination is superior to fixed ICS/LABA combined therapy and also superior to the LAMA tiotropium in terms of lung function and exacerbation prevention in COPD patients at risk of exacerbation. This review considers the new information provided by these clinical trials of extrafine triple therapy and the implications for the clinical management of COPD patients.

The Salford Lung Study: a pioneering comparative effectiveness approach to COPD and asthma in clinical trials

The Salford Lung Study (SLS) of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a practical, community-based, randomized, open-label pragmatic study on the efficacy and safety of the once-daily dry powder inhaler that combines the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) with the long-acting beta₂ agonist vilanterol (VI). The asthma component of the SLS is not yet reported but the COPD component, done over a 12-month period, found a statistically significant 8.4% reduction in COPD exacerbations when compared to usual care. No differences in adverse events, including serious adverse events and pneumonia, were noted. The importance of real-world findings, such as those found in the SLS COPD trial with inhaled FF/VI, is discussed in comparison to classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with inhaled FF/VI in COPD patients. The real-world, community-based pragmatic RCT like the SLS provides additional generalizable data with direct clinical applicability and potential usefulness in the development of practice guidelines. The results from the SLS, along with those of large and small RCTs, are supportive of the use of once-daily FF/VI in COPD maintenance therapy.

Reduced COPD Exacerbation Risk Correlates With Improved FEV1: A Meta-Regression Analysis

BACKGROUND

The mechanism by which various classes of medication reduce COPD exacerbation risk remains unknown. We hypothesized a correlation between reduced exacerbation risk and improvement in airway patency as measured according to FEV1.

METHODS

By systematic review, COPD trials were identified that reported therapeutic changes in predose FEV1 (dFEV1) and occurrence of moderate to severe exacerbations. Using meta-regression analysis, a model was generated with dFEV1 as the moderator variable and the absolute difference in exacerbation rate (RD), ratio of exacerbation rates (RRs), or hazard ratio (HR) as dependent variables.

RESULTS

The analysis of RD and RR included 119,227 patients, and the HR analysis included 73,475 patients. For every 100-mL change in predose FEV1, the HR decreased by 21% (95% CI, 17-26; P < .001; R2 = 0.85) and the absolute exacerbation rate decreased by 0.06 per patient per year (95% CI, 0.02-0.11; P = .009; R2 = 0.05), which corresponded to an RR of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.81-0.91; P < .001; R2 = 0.20). The relationship with exacerbation risk remained statistically significant across multiple subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant correlation between increased FEV1 and lower COPD exacerbation risk suggests that airway patency is an important mechanism responsible for this effect.

Pharmacotherapy for Non-Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis: Results From an NTM Info & Research Patient Survey and the Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry

BACKGROUND

Non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis ("bronchiectasis") is a chronic inflammatory lung disease often associated with nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infection. Very little data exist to guide bronchiectasis management decisions. We sought to describe patterns of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and antibiotic therapy in the United States.

METHODS

We invited 2,000 patients through NTM Info & Research (NTMir) to complete an anonymous electronic survey. We separately queried baseline clinical and laboratory data from the US Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry (BRR).

RESULTS

Among 511 NTMir survey responders with bronchiectasis, whose median age was 67 years, 85 (17%) reported asthma and 99 (19%) reported COPD. History of ICS use was reported by 282 (55%), 171 (61%) of whom were treated 1 year or longer, and 150 (53%) were currently taking ICSs. Fewer reported ever taking azithromycin for non-NTM bronchiectasis (203 responders [40%]) or inhaled tobramycin (78 responders [15%]). The median age of 1,912 BRR patients was 69 years; 528 (28%) had asthma and 360 (19%) had COPD. Among 740 patients (42%) without NTM, 314 were taking ICSs at baseline. Among patients without NTM who were taking ICSs, only 178 (57%) had a concurrent diagnosis of COPD or asthma that could explain ICS use. Fewer were taking suppressive macrolides (96 patients [13%]), and of the 70 patients (10%) taking inhaled suppressive antibiotics, 48 (68%) had chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection.

CONCLUSIONS

ICS use was common in two national samples of patients with bronchiectasis, with relatively few patients taking suppressive antibiotic therapies. Further research is needed to clarify the safety and effectiveness of these therapies in patients with bronchiectasis.

Treatment of lung disease in alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is a rare genetic condition predisposing individuals to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The treatment is generally extrapolated from COPD unrelated to AATD; however, most COPD trials exclude AATD patients; thus, this study sought to systematically review AATD-specific literature to assist evidence-based patient management.

METHODS

Standard review methodology was used with meta-analysis and narrative synthesis (PROSPERO-CRD42015019354). Eligible studies were those of any treatment used in severe AATD. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were the primary focus; however, case series and uncontrolled studies were eligible. All studies had ≥10 participants receiving treatment or usual care, with baseline and follow-up data (>3 months). Risk of bias was assessed appropriately according to study methodology.

RESULTS

In all, 7,296 studies were retrieved from searches; 52 trials with 5,632 participants met the inclusion criteria, of which 26 studies involved alpha-1 antitrypsin augmentation and 17 concerned surgical treatments (largely transplantation). Studies were grouped into four management themes: COPD medical, COPD surgical, AATD specific, and other treatments. Computed tomography (CT) density, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide, health status, and exacerbation rates were frequently used as outcomes. Meta-analyses were only possible for RCTs of intravenous augmentation, which slowed progression of emphysema measured by CT density change, 0.79 g/L/year versus placebo (P=0.002), and associated with a small increase in exacerbations 0.29/year (P=0.02). Mortality following lung transplant was comparable between AATD- and non-AATD-related COPD. Surgical reduction of lung volume demonstrated inferior outcomes compared with non-AATD-related emphysema.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous augmentation remains the only disease-specific therapy in AATD and there is evidence that this slows decline in emphysema determined by CT density. There is paucity of data around other treatments in AATD. Treatments for usual COPD may not be as efficacious in AATD, and further studies may be required for this disease group.

Impact of Nonadherence to Inhaled Corticosteroid/LABA Therapy on COPD Exacerbation Rates and Healthcare Costs in a Commercially Insured US Population

BACKGROUND

Evidence of poor patient adherence to medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is well-documented, but its impact on disease exacerbation rates and associated healthcare costs remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between adherence levels to different inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-adrenergic agonist (LABA) and COPD exacerbation rates and costs in a commercially insured population.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, patients with COPD (aged ≥40 years) who were treatment-naïve to inhaled corticosteroid/LABA and were initiating budesonide plus formoterol or fluticasone plus salmeterol between March 1, 2009, and January 31, 2014, were identified in a national representative claims database and were followed for up to 12 months. The date of the first prescription fill for either drug was defined as the index date. Patients were divided into 4 cohorts based on adherence to the index therapy, which was measured by proportion of days covered (PDC); the cohorts were classified as adherent (PDC ≥0.8), mildly nonadherent (0.5 ≤ PDC <0.8), moderately nonadherent (0.3 ≤ PDC <0.5), and highly nonadherent (PDC <0.3). Each nonadherent group was matched in a 1:1 ratio to the adherent group independently, based on prognostically important variables, using propensity score analyses. Exacerbation rates and healthcare costs were analyzed for 1 year after treatment initiation.

RESULTS

During the study period, 13,657 eligible patients with COPD initiated inhaled corticosteroid/LABA; of these, only 1898 (13.9%) patients were adherent during follow-up. Group matching resulted in 1572 patients per group for comparison 1 (adherent vs mildly nonadherent), 1604 patients for comparison 2 (adherent vs moderately nonadherent), and 1755 patients for comparison 3 (adherent vs highly nonadherent). The moderately and highly nonadherent cohorts had higher exacerbation rates than the adherent patients (comparison 2: rate ratio [RR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.21; P = .03; comparison 3: RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21; P = .02). Adherent patients incurred significantly lower healthcare costs than all the nonadherent groups (comparison 1, $22,671 vs $25,545; P <.01; comparison 2, $22,508 vs $24,303; P <.01; comparison 3, $22,460 vs $25,148; P <.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients adhered to their inhaled corticosteroid/LABA treatments had lower COPD exacerbation rates and lower healthcare costs compared with the moderately and highly nonadherent patients. Better adherence to maintenance therapies may help to reduce the clinical and economic burdens of COPD.

"Real-life" inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal in COPD: a subgroup analysis of DACCORD

Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) without a clear indication, and thus, the impact of ICS withdrawal on disease control is of great interest. DACCORD is a prospective, noninterventional 2-year study in the primary and secondary care throughout Germany. A subgroup of patients were taking ICS prior to entry - 1,022 patients continued to receive ICS for 2 years; physicians withdrew ICS on entry in 236 patients. Data from these two subgroups were analyzed to evaluate the impact of ICS withdrawal. Patients aged ≥40 years with COPD, initiating or changing COPD maintenance medication were recruited, excluding patients with asthma. Demographic and disease characteristics, prescribed COPD medication, COPD Assessment Test, exacerbations, and lung function were recorded. There were few differences in baseline characteristics; ICS withdrawn patients had shorter disease duration and better lung function, with 74.2% of ICS withdrawn patients not exacerbating, compared with 70.7% ICS-continued patients. During Year 1, exacerbation rates were 0.414 in the withdrawn group and 0.433 in the continued group. COPD Assessment Test total score improved from baseline in both groups. These data suggest that ICS withdrawal is possible with no increased risk of exacerbations in patients with COPD managed in the primary and secondary care.