Comparison of three combined pharmacological approaches with tiotropium monotherapy in stable moderate to severe COPD: A systematic review

Adjuvant Novel Nanocarrier-Based Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer

Lung cancer has the lowest survival rate due to its late-stage diagnosis, poor prognosis, and intra-tumoral heterogeneity. These factors decrease the effectiveness of treatment. They release chemokines and cytokines from the tumor microenvironment (TME). To improve the effectiveness of treatment, researchers emphasize personalized adjuvant therapies along with conventional ones. Targeted chemotherapeutic drug delivery systems and specific pathway-blocking agents using nanocarriers are a few of them. This study explored the nanocarrier roles and strategies to improve the treatment profile's effectiveness by striving for TME. A biofunctionalized nanocarrier stimulates biosystem interaction, cellular uptake, immune system escape, and vascular changes for penetration into the TME. Inorganic metal compounds scavenge reactive oxygen species (ROS) through their photothermal effect. Stroma, hypoxia, pH, and immunity-modulating agents conjugated or modified nanocarriers co-administered with pathway-blocking or condition-modulating agents can regulate extracellular matrix (ECM), Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAF),Tyro3, Axl, and Mertk receptors (TAM) regulation, regulatory T-cell (Treg) inhibition, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) inhibition. Again, biomimetic conjugation or the surface modification of nanocarriers using ligands can enhance active targeting efficacy by bypassing the TME. A carrier system with biofunctionalized inorganic metal compounds and organic compound complex-loaded drugs is convenient for NSCLC-targeted therapy.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of triple therapy and non-triple therapy interventions for COPD: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Some systematic reviews (SRs) on triple therapy (consisting of long-acting β2-agonist, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and inhaled corticosteroid, LABA/LAMA/ICS) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have reported conflicting results. As the number of syntheses increases, the task of identifying and interpreting evidence becomes increasingly complex and demanding.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of the efficacy and safety of triple therapy for COPD.

DESIGN

Overview of SRs.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant SRs that compared triple therapy with any non-triple therapy for COPD, from the inception of these databases until 1 June 2023. The AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools were utilized to assess the quality of the included studies and the evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

Eighteen SRs encompassing 30 original studies and involving 47,340 participants were analyzed. The overall AMSTAR 2 rating revealed that 3 SRs were of low quality, 13 SRs were of critically low quality, and 2 SRs were of high quality. No high-certainty evidence revealed a significant advantage of triple therapy in improving lung function or reducing acute exacerbations. However, all evidence, including one high certainty, supported the benefits of improving quality of life. Regarding all-cause mortality, no significant difference was found when compared to LAMA or ICS/LABA; however, high-certainty evidence confirmed its effectiveness when compared with LABA/LAMA. Notably, high-certainty evidence indicated that triple therapy was associated with a significant increase in the risk of pneumonia compared to LABA/LAMA.

CONCLUSION

Triple therapy demonstrated notable benefits in improving lung function, reducing exacerbations, improving quality of life, and reducing all-cause mortality. However, it is important to note that it may also significantly increase the risk of pneumonia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This overview protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42023431548).

Incorporating New Evidence on Inhaled Medications in COPD. The Latin American Chest Association (ALAT) 2019

This document on COPD from the Latin American Chest Association (ALAT-2019) uses PICO methodology to analyze new evidence on inhaled medication and answer clinical questions. The following key points emerged from this analysis: 1) evidence is lacking on the comparison of short-acting vs. long-acting bronchodilators in patients with mild COPD; patients with moderate-to-severe COPD obtain greater benefit from long-acting bronchodilators; 2) the benefits of monotherapy with long-acting antimuscarinic agents (LAMA) and combined therapy with long-acting β₂-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) are similar, although the latter is associated with a greater risk of pneumonia; 3) LABA/LAMA offer greater benefits in terms of lung function and risk of exacerbation than LABA/ICS (the latter involve an increased risk of pneumonia), 4) LAMA/LABA/ICS have greater therapeutic benefits than LABA/LAMA on the risk of moderate-severe exacerbations. With regard to the role of eosinophils in guiding the use of ICS, ICS withdrawal must be considered when the initial indication was wrong or no response is elicited, in patients with side effects such as pneumonia, and in patients with a low risk of exacerbation and an eosinophil blood count of <300 cells/μl. All this evidence, categorized according to the severity of the obstruction, symptoms, and risk of exacerbations, has been used to generate an algorithm for the use of inhaled medication in COPD.

Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of COPD: questions and answers

The treatment of COPD has become increasingly effective. Measures that range from behavioral changes, reduction in exposure to risk factors, education about the disease and its course, rehabilitation, oxygen therapy, management of comorbidities, and surgical and pharmacological treatments to end-of-life care allow health professionals to provide a personalized and effective therapy. The pharmacological treatment of COPD is one of the cornerstones of COPD management, and there have been many advances in this area in recent years. Given the greater availability of drugs and therapeutic combinations, it has become increasingly challenging to know the indications for, limitations of, and potential risks and benefits of each treatment modality. In order to critically evaluate recent evidence and systematize the major questions regarding the pharmacological treatment of COPD, 24 specialists from all over Brazil gathered to develop the present recommendations. A visual guide was developed for the classification and treatment of COPD, both of which were adapted to fit the situation in Brazil. Ten questions were selected on the basis of their relevance in clinical practice. They address the classification, definitions, treatment, and evidence available for each drug or drug combination. Each question was answered by two specialists, and then the answers were consolidated in two phases: review and consensus by all participants. The questions answered are practical questions and help select from among the many options the best treatment for each patient and his/her peculiarities.

Umeclidinium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: latest evidence and place in therapy

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality and health care expenditure throughout the world. COPD guidelines recommend the use of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) either alone or in combination with a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA). For over 10 years, tiotropium was the only LAMA that was used in the management of COPD. Over the past few years, various new drugs have been identified that act on the muscarinic receptors and β2 receptors. Umeclidinium (Umec) is a new LAMA currently approved for use in patients with COPD either as monotherapy or in combination with vilanterol (Vil). Both Umec alone and in combination with Vil delivered through a multi-dose dry powder Ellipta™ device have shown improvement in lung function, health-related quality of life and exacerbation frequency in patients with COPD. This review provides an overview of the pharmacology, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of Umec, and evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety studies in patients with COPD.

Combination inhaled steroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus tiotropium or combination alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The long-acting bronchodilator tiotropium and single-inhaler combination therapy of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2-agonists (ICS/LABA) are commonly used for maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than administering the individual components.

OBJECTIVES

To assess relative effects of the following treatments on markers of exacerbations, symptoms, quality of life and lung function in patients with COPD.• Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus tiotropium.• Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (April 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) lasting three months or longer conducted to compare ICS and LABA combination therapy in addition to inhaled tiotropium versus tiotropium alone or combination therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed trials for inclusion, then extracted data on trial quality and outcome results. We contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected trial information on adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus tiotropiumWe included six studies (1902 participants) with low risk of bias that compared tiotropium in addition to inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-agonist combination therapy versus tiotropium alone. Investigators found no statistically significant differences in mortality between treatments (odds ratio (OR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 5.91; two studies; 961 participants), a reduction in all-cause hospitalisations with the use of combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.92; two studies; 961 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 19.7, 95% CI 10.75 to 123.41). The effect on exacerbations was heterogeneous among trials and was not meta-analysed. Health-related quality of life measured by St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) showed a statistically significant improvement in total scores with use of tiotropium + LABA/ICS compared with tiotropium alone (mean difference (MD) -3.46, 95% CI -5.05 to -1.87; four studies; 1446 participants). Lung function was significantly different in the combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) group, although average benefit with this therapy was small. None of the included studies included exercise tolerance as an outcome.A pooled estimate of these studies did not show a statistically significant difference in adverse events (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.47; four studies; 1363 participants), serious adverse events (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.30; four studies; 1758 participants) and pneumonia (Peto OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.54 to 4.82; four studies; 1758 participants). Tiotropium plus LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICSOne of the six studies (60 participants) also compared combined therapy (tiotropium + LABA/ICS) versus LABA/ICS therapy alone. This study was affected by lack of power; therefore results did not allow us to draw conclusions for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this update, we found new moderate-quality evidence that combined tiotropium + LABA/ICS therapy compared with tiotropium plus placebo decreases hospital admission. Low-quality evidence suggests an improvement in disease-specific quality of life with combined therapy. However, evidence is insufficient to support the benefit of tiotropium + LABA/ICS for mortality and exacerbations (moderate- and low-quality evidence, respectively). Of note, not all participants enrolled in the included studies would be candidates for triple therapy according to current international guidance.Compared with the use of tiotropium plus placebo, tiotropium + LABA/ICS-based therapy does not increase undesirable effects such as adverse events or serious non-fatal adverse events.

Vilanterol trifenatate for the treatment of COPD

INTRODUCTION

Currently the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has limited effectiveness and there is a need to develop new drugs. International guidelines recommend the use of long-acting bronchodilators (β2 agonists and anti-cholinergics/muscarinics), inhaled steroids and associations between these drugs in the maintenance treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.

AREA COVERED

Vilanterol trifenate is a new once-daily highly selective β2-agonist available in USA and Europe in association with umeclidinium bromide (a long-acting anti-muscarnic agent) and fluticasone furoate (an inhaled corticosteroid) for the once-daily maintenance treatment of COPD. Vilanterol combined in fixed-dose treatments has been tested in numerous clinical trials involving thousands of patients. Expert commentary: These new once-daily formulations have the potential to improve compliance to long-term inhaled therapy. This paper will review the clinical and experimental data regarding vilanterol use in the regular treatment of COPD as well as provide a critical discussion of possible future treatment settings.

One-year mortality associated with COPD treatment: a comparison of tiotropium and long-acting beta2-agonists in three Italian regions: results from the OUTPUL study

Purpose

Long‐acting bronchodilators, i.e. beta‐2‐agonists (LABA) and tiotropium are commonly used in COPD treatment. Choice of a specific agent is based on effectiveness and safety. Evidence yields controversial results with respect to mortality. The present study compared one‐year mortality associated to treatment with tiotropium versus LABA.

Methods

A population‐based cohort study using data from Italian health information systems was performed. Patients aged 45+ years, discharged with COPD diagnosis in 2006–2009 were identified. Through record linkage with drug claims, patients who received a first prescription of LABA or tiotropium within 6 months after discharge were enrolled. The main analysis was restricted to naïve users (no prior use of either LABA or tiotropium). We used ‘intention to treat’ (ITT) and ‘as treated’ (AT) approaches. We followed patients for a maximum of 12 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated by Cox regression including quintiles of propensity score. In sensitivity analysis patients receiving tiotropium + LABA combination were included in the tiotropium group.

Results

Among the 33 891 enrolees, 28% were exposed to Tio, 56% to LABA, 16% to both. Overall mean age was 74 years and the mortality rate was 122/1000 person‐years (py) at the ITT analysis and 108/1000 py at the AT analysis. The adjusted HR for tiotropium only compared with LABA only was 1.06 (95%CI: 0.94–1.20) at the ITT analysis and 1.00 (95%CI: 0.93–1.08) at the AT analysis. Results were robust in sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

In this real‐world study use of tiotropium was not associated with an increased risk of one‐year mortality compared with LABA. © 2016 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The efficacy and safety of triple inhaled treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis using Bayesian methods

PURPOSE

Although tiotropium (TIO) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β-agonists are frequently prescribed together, the efficacy of "triple therapy" has not been scientifically demonstrated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using Bayesian methods to compare triple therapy and TIO monotherapy.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of triple therapy and TIO monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of triple therapy and TIO monotherapy using Bayesian random effects models.

RESULTS

Seven trials were included, and the risk of bias in the majority of the studies was acceptable. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death and acute exacerbation of disease in the triple therapy and TIO monotherapy groups. Triple therapy improved the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (mean difference [MD], 63.68 mL; 95% credible interval [CrI], 45.29-82.73), and patients receiving triple therapy showed more improvement in St George Respiratory Questionnaire scores (MD, -3.11 points; 95% CrI, -6.00 to -0.80) than patients receiving TIO monotherapy. However, both of these differences were lower than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). No excessive adverse effects were reported in triple therapy group.

CONCLUSION

Triple therapy with TIO and ICSs/long-acting β-agonists was only slightly more efficacious than TIO monotherapy in treating patients with COPD. Further investigations into the efficacy of new inhaled drugs are needed.

A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Umeclidinium and Vilanterol for the Treatment of COPD

BACKGROUND

COPD guidelines recommend the combined use of inhaled long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) if symptoms are not improved by a single agent. This systematic review tested the hypothesis that the bronchodilator effect of the LABA/LAMA combination, umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VIL), would translate into better outcomes without incurring increased adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

This was a systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled or crossover trials (> 4 weeks) involving UMEC/VIL compared with its monocomponents, tiotropium, or fluticasone/salmeterol. Primary outcomes were trough FEV1, serious adverse events (SAEs), and serious cardiovascular events (SCVEs).

RESULTS

Eleven trials from 10 studies (9,609 patients) showed that UMEV/VIL provided superior improvements in lung function compared with UMEC, VIL, tiotropium, and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (mean trough FEV1, 60, 110, 90, and 90 mL, respectively; P < .0001). Also, UMEC/VIL had a greater likelihood of demonstrating a minimal clinically important difference on the Transition Dyspnea Index compared with UMEC and VIL (number needed to treat for benefit [NNTB] = 14 and 10, respectively). UMEC/VIL therapy significantly reduced the risk of COPD exacerbations compared with UMEC and VIL (NNTB = 42 and 41, respectively). On the contrary, we noted no significant differences between UMEC/VIL and tiotropium with respect to dyspnea, health status, or risk of COPD exacerbation. Regarding safety issues, the incidence of AEs, SAEs, SCVEs, and mortality on treatment was similar across treatments, suggesting reduced safety concerns with the use of the UMEC/VIL combination.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily inhaled UMEC/VIL showed superior efficacy compared with its monocomponents, tiotropium, and fluticasone/combination in patients with moderate to severe COPD.

The reasons for triple therapy in stable COPD patients in Japanese clinical practice

Background

Triple combination therapy involving long-acting muscarinic antagonists long-acting β₂ agonists, and inhaled corticosteroids has recently become an option for maintenance treatment of COPD. Some add-on clinical trials have reported the benefits of these combinations. However, the process to step up to triple therapy varies for individual cases.

Methods

Keio University and affiliated hospitals conducted an observational COPD cohort study, recruiting patients diagnosed as having COPD by pulmonary physicians and those referred for investigation of possible COPD. Their prescription history and clinical course were retrospectively analyzed based on the physicians’ medical records and patient questionnaires. This study was registered with UMIN (UMIN000003470, April 10, 2010).

Results

A total of 95 of the 445 COPD patients (21%) were treated with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂ agonists/long-acting muscarinic antagonists as maintenance therapy, including 12 in COPD Grade I, 31 in Grade II, 38 in Grade III, and 14 in Grade IV, based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease spirometric grading. For more than half of the patients on triple therapy, the treatment had been intensified due to unsatisfactory improvement of symptoms, and 32% were treated with triple therapy due to comorbid asthma. In contrast, there were COPD patients whose therapy was maintained after starting with triple therapy because of their serious conditions or concurrent exacerbation at diagnosis (8%).

Conclusion

Triple therapy was often prescribed in the real-life management of COPD, even in patients whose airflow limitation was not severe. To better control symptoms was the major reason for choosing triple therapy, regardless of the severity of COPD, in Japan.

Glycopyrronium once-daily significantly improves lung function and health status when combined with salmeterol/fluticasone in patients with COPD: the GLISTEN study, a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal use of various therapeutic combinations for moderate/severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is unclear. The GLISTEN trial compared the efficacy of two long-acting anti-muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), when combined with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA).

METHODS

This randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial in moderate/severe COPD patients compared once-daily glycopyrronium (GLY) 50 µg, once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 µg or placebo (PLA), when combined with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SAL/FP) 50/500 µg twice daily. The primary objective was to determine the non-inferiority of GLY+SAL/FP versus TIO+SAL/FP on trough FEV1 after 12 weeks. An important secondary objective was whether addition of GLY to SAL/FP was better than SAL/FP alone.

RESULTS

773 patients (mean FEV1 57.2% predicted) were randomised; 84.9% completed the trial. At week 12, GLY+SAL/FP demonstrated non-inferiority to TIO+SAL/FP for trough FEV1: least square mean treatment difference (LSMdiff) -7 mL (SE 17.4) with a lower limit for non-inferiority of -60 mL. There was significant increase in week 12 trough FEV1 with GLY+SAL/FP versus PLA+SAL/FP (LSMdiff 101 mL, p<0.001). At 12 weeks, GLY+SAL/FP produced significant improvement in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score versus PLA+SAL/FP (LSMdiff -2.154, p=0.02). GLY+SAL/FP demonstrated significant rescue medication reduction versus PLA+SAL/FP (LSMdiff -0.72 puffs/day, p<0.001). Serious adverse events were similar for GLY+SAL/FP, TIO+SAL/FP and PLA+SAL/FP with an incidence of 5.8%, 8.5% and 5.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

GLY+SAL/FP showed comparable improvements in lung function, health status and rescue medication to TIO+SAL/FP. Importantly, addition of GLY to SAL/FP demonstrated significant improvements in lung function, health status and rescue medication compared to SAL/FP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01513460.

Hospital management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The course of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often complicated by episodes of acute worsening of respiratory symptoms, which may lead to escalation of therapy and occasionally emergency department visits and hospitalization. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) have a negative impact on quality of life and hasten the decline of lung function. They also significantly contribute to the direct and indirect healthcare costs of this disease. Severe exacerbations (those leading to hospital admission) have been associated with significant poor outcomes including an increased risk of readmissions and mortality. COPD is currently the fourth leading cause of hospital readmission in the United States. In this review, we will provide a broad overview on the etiology, assessment, management, discharge planning, and follow-up care of patients hospitalized with AECOPD.

Prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD: American College of Chest Physicians and Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline

BACKGROUND

COPD is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States as well as throughout the rest of the world. An exacerbation of COPD (periodic escalations of symptoms of cough, dyspnea, and sputum production) is a major contributor to worsening lung function, impairment in quality of life, need for urgent care or hospitalization, and cost of care in COPD. Research conducted over the past decade has contributed much to our current understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment of COPD. Additionally, an evolving literature has accumulated about the prevention of acute exacerbations.

METHODS

In recognition of the importance of preventing exacerbations in patients with COPD, the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) and Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) joint evidence-based guideline (AECOPD Guideline) was developed to provide a practical, clinically useful document to describe the current state of knowledge regarding the prevention of acute exacerbations according to major categories of prevention therapies. Three key clinical questions developed using the PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) format addressed the prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD: nonpharmacologic therapies, inhaled therapies, and oral therapies. We used recognized document evaluation tools to assess and choose the most appropriate studies and to extract meaningful data and grade the level of evidence to support the recommendations in each PICO question in a balanced and unbiased fashion.

RESULTS

The AECOPD Guideline is unique not only for its topic, the prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD, but also for the first-in-kind partnership between two of the largest thoracic societies in North America. The CHEST Guidelines Oversight Committee in partnership with the CTS COPD Clinical Assembly launched this project with the objective that a systematic review and critical evaluation of the published literature by clinical experts and researchers in the field of COPD would lead to a series of recommendations to assist clinicians in their management of the patient with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline is unique because it provides an up-to-date, rigorous, evidence-based analysis of current randomized controlled trial data regarding the prevention of COPD exacerbations.

ALAT-2014 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Clinical Practice Guidelines: questions and answers

ALAT-2014 COPD Clinical Practice Guidelines used clinical questions in PICO format to compile evidence related to risk factors, COPD screening, disease prognosis, treatment and exacerbations. Evidence reveals the existence of risk factors for COPD other than tobacco, as well as gender differences in disease presentation. It shows the benefit of screening in an at-risk population, and the predictive value use of multidimensional prognostic indexes. In stable COPD, similar benefits in dyspnea, pulmonary function and quality of life are achieved with LAMA or LABA long-acting bronchodilators, whereas LAMA is more effective in preventing exacerbations. Dual bronchodilator therapy has more benefits than monotherapy. LAMA and combination LABA/IC are similarly effective, but there is an increased risk of pneumonia with LABA/IC. Data on the efficacy and safety of triple therapy are scarce. Evidence supports influenza vaccination in all patients and anti-pneumococcal vaccination in patients <65years of age and/or with severe airflow limitation. Antibiotic prophylaxis may decrease exacerbation frequency in patients at risk. The use of systemic corticosteroids and antibiotics are justified in exacerbations requiring hospitalization and in some patients managed in an outpatient setting.

Prevention of Exacerbations in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Knowns and Unknowns

The 2011 recommendations of the Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) constituted a major paradigm shift in COPD management since they set 2 major goals for the assessment and management of patients: (1) the reduction of their current level of symptoms (i.e., treat the patient today); and (2) the reduction of their risk of exacerbations (i.e., prevent them tomorrow). Exacerbations are not only an important clinical endpoint in patients with COPD, but they are also a risk factor themselves for additional adverse outcomes since they have been shown to increase the risk for mortality, to accelerate the decline in pulmonary function, and to decrease health status and quality of life. Despite their importance, many unanswered questions related to exacerbations remain. The purpose of this review is to discuss: (1)knowns and unknowns in our current understanding of exacerbations, (2) what known factors increase their risk, and (3) how to best prevent them.

Inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend the use of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators, inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and their combinations for maintenance treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, it is questionable whether all COPD patients should be treated, as the long-term use of ICSs is accompanied by side effects.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the evidence about the effects of ICSs in the treatment of COPD. It mainly focuses on meta-analyses of published data and pooled analyses of primary data. It also offers an overview of pipeline developments.

EXPERT OPINION

There is now more evidence that there are subsets of patients (mainly, frequent exacerbators with predominant chronic bronchitis and those with overlap between COPD and asthma) with a favorable response to treatment with ICSs (i.e., reduced progression of lung function loss, reduced exacerbation rate and improved health-related quality of life). Therefore, nowadays, the right question is not whether ICSs should not be used at all unless patients have concomitant asthma, but, instead, which COPD patient can benefit from a therapy with ICSs. Unfortunately, however, the number of studies that have investigated the clinical features that might predict corticosteroid response in COPD is still inadequate.

What is in the guidelines about the pharmacological treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?

With the publication of the new guidelines (The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2011 and Guía Española de la COPD) on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the pharmacological treatment of this disease has changed substantially. In this article, the evidence supporting the use of pharmacological groups in COPD is summarized and the place of each of these drugs among the new therapeutic strategies is established. Although short-acting bronchodilators have been used as maintenance therapy for COPD for many years, few clinical trials are available on the efficacy and safety of these agents, whose role was defined at the very early stages of treatment. The introduction of long-acting bronchodilators, administered every 12 or 24 h, led to an increase in therapeutic effects and an improvement in both treatment adherence and dosage; therefore, both guidelines consider these drugs as the standard therapy for all types of patients and clinical phenotypes. The combination of long-acting bronchodilators from different families has been established as a new therapeutic approach for patients with persistent symptoms despite an appropriate bronchodilator treatment. Anti-inflammatory therapy with inhaled corticosteroids has been discussed at length, and is considered in the current guidelines as the treatment of choice in patients with a high risk of exacerbations associated with an impaired lung function or previous exacerbations, or presenting with phenotypes that are susceptible to the effect of corticosteroids. Roflumilast is a novel drug with a clearly defined indication. Finally, further evidence about other therapies, such as antibiotics or mucolytics, is emerging that will help define their appropriate use in selected patients. At present, pharmacological management of COPD is being re-evaluated. As long as we are able to apply the new treatment approaches to the clinical reality of our patients we will achieve greater benefits in both the short and the long term with a reduction in potential complications.

[Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : new pharmacotherapeutic options]

Data about the clinical presentation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have resulted in a new classification of the disease. The degree of airflow limitation has been amended by symptoms and exacerbation rate. The standard pharmacotherapy of stable COPD is in transition, as fixed combinations of long acting beta agonists and long acting anticholinergics are in the late stages of clinical development. On this background inhaled corticosteroids will need to be re-evaluated. Roflumilast is a recently approved therapeutic option that primarily diminishes exacerbation frequency in patients with chronic bronchitis and severe airflow obstruction (FEV(1) < 50%). In COPD patients with acute exacerbations procalcitonin levels can be used to guide antibiotic therapy. Comparable clinical outcomes can be achieved while using significantly less amounts of antibiotics.

Diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the Swiss guidelines. Official guidelines of the Swiss Respiratory Society

The new Swiss Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Guidelines are based on a previous version, which was published 10 years ago. The Swiss Respiratory Society felt the need to update the previous document due to new knowledge and novel therapeutic developments about this prevalent and important disease. The recommendations and statements are based on the available literature, on other national guidelines and, in particular, on the GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) report. Our aim is to advise pulmonary physicians, general practitioners and other health care workers on the early detection and diagnosis, prevention, best symptomatic control, and avoidance of COPD as well as its complications and deterioration.