A randomised, placebo- and active-controlled dose-finding study of aclidinium bromide administered twice a day in COPD patients

The discovery and development of aclidinium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Bronchodilators, including long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), are a mainstay of the pharmacological treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). LAMAs act as bronchodilators principally by antagonizing airway smooth muscle cells M₃ muscarinic receptors. Aclidinium bromide is a twice-daily LAMA which was developed to improve on the efficacy and/or safety of previous LAMAs. Area covered: Herein, the authors present the pharmacotherapeutic role of aclidinium in COPD and point out unmet need in this research area. The following aspects are covered: a) the discovery and medicinal chemistry of aclidinium bromide; b) an overview of the market; c) its mechanism of action; d) its pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile derived from pre-clinical studies; e) the clinical studies which led to its licensing; f) the evidence from meta-analyses; g) the aclidinium/formoterol fixed dose combination for COPD and h) priorities in this area of research. Expert opinion: Aclidinium bromide has the pharmacological properties, safety and efficacy profile and inhaler characteristics which makes it a valuable therapeutic option for pharmacological management of patients with COPD. Due to its rapid biotransformation into inactive metabolites, aclidinium is potentially one of the safest LAMAs. Further head-to-head randomized clinical trials are required to define efficacy and safety of aclidinium when compared to once-daily LAMAs. The clinical relevance of airway anti-remodeling effects of aclidinium has to be defined.

Comparison of the in vitro pharmacological profiles of long-acting muscarinic antagonists in human bronchus

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have been recommended for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and (more recently) asthma. However, the in vitro pharmacological profiles of the four LAMAs currently marketed (tiotropium, umeclidinium, aclidinium and glycopyrronium) have not yet been compared (relative to ipratropium) by using the same experimental approach.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

With a total of 560 human bronchial rings, we investigated the antagonists' potency, onset and duration of action for inhibition of the contractile response evoked by electrical field stimulation. We also evaluated the antagonists' potency for inhibiting cumulative concentration-contraction curves for acetylcholine and carbachol.

KEY RESULTS

The onset and duration of action were concentration-dependent. At submaximal, equipotent concentrations, the antagonists' onsets of action were within the same order of magnitude. However, the durations of action differed markedly. After washout, ipratropium's inhibitory activity decreased rapidly (within 30-90 min) but those of tiotropium and umeclidinium remained stable (at above 70%) for at least 9 h. Aclidinium and glycopyrronium displayed less stable inhibitory effects, with a progressive loss of inhibition at submaximal concentrations. In contrast to ipratropium, all the LAMAs behaved as insurmountable antagonists by decreasing the maximum responses to both acetylcholine and carbachol.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The observed differences in the LAMAs' in vitro pharmacological profiles in the human bronchus provide a compelling pharmacological rationale for the differences in the drugs' respective recommended daily doses and frequencies of administration.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Inhaled bronchodilators are the mainstay of COPD pharmacological treatment. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a major class of inhaled bronchodilators. Some LAMA/device systems with different characteristics and dosing schedules are currently approved for maintenance therapy of COPD and a range of other products are being developed. They improve lung function and patient-reported outcomes and reduce acute bronchial exacerbations with good safety. LAMAs are used either alone or associated with long-acting β₂-agonists, eventually in fixed dose combinations. Long-acting β₂-agonist/LAMA combinations assure additional benefits over the individual components alone. The reader will obtain a view of the safety and efficacy of the different LAMA/device systems in COPD patients.

Adverse events among COPD patients treated with long-acting anticholinergics and β2-agonists in an outpatient respiratory clinic

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death in Canada. Most patients with COPD receive long-term treatment with long-acting anticholinergics (LAAC) and/or long-acting β2-agonists (LABA). Adverse events (AEs) are also likely during long-term treatment with these medications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of AEs in COPD patients on LAAC and LABA in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients enrolled in the Registre de Données en Santé Pulmonaire (RESP) database, which records information on Canadian patients with asthma or COPD. COPD Patients completed a questionnaire about AEs that may be associated with LAAC and/or LABA. The prevalence of AEs and the corresponding 95% CI were calculated for three groups of patients (LAAC + LABA, LAAC alone, and LABA alone).

RESULTS

Most patients with COPD (n = 154) were current or ex-smokers. Over 50% of patients were overweight or obese, and had an annual family income of less or equal to $42,000. Dry mouth (55.2%, 40%, and 43.5%) and dry throat (33.6%, 26.7%, and 34.8%) occurred most of the time or always in the LAAC + LABA, LAAC, and LABA groups, respectively. Headache was reported by 17.4% of patients in the LABA group, but less than 11.2% in the other groups.

CONCLUSION

AEs reported in this study deserve clinical attention because they may negatively affect quality of life and treatment adherence of COPD patients.

Aclidinium bromide combined with formoterol inhibits remodeling parameters in lung epithelial cells through cAMP

Combined muscarinic receptor antagonists and long acting β2-agonists improve symptom control in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) significantly. In clinical studies aclidinium bromide achieved better beneficial effects than other bronchodilators; however, the underlying molecular mechanisms are unknown. This study assessed the effect of aclidinium bromide combined with formoterol on COPD lung (n=20) and non-COPD lung (n=10) derived epithelial cells stimulated with TGF-β1+carbachol on: (i) the generation of mesenchymal cells in relation to epithelial cells, (II) extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition, and (iii) the interaction of ECM on the generation of epithelial and mesenchymal cells. TGF-β1+carbachol enhanced the generation of mesenchymal cells, which was significantly reduced by aclidinium bromide or formoterol. The effect of combined drugs was additive. Inhibition of p38 MAP kinase and Smad by specific inhibitors or aclidinium bromide reduced the generation of mesenchymal cells. In mesenchymal cells, TGF-β1+carbachol induced the deposition of collagen-I and fibronectin which was prevented by both drugs dose-dependently. Formoterol alone reduced collagen-I deposition via cAMP, this however, was overruled by TGF-β1+carbachol and rescued by aclidinium bromide. Inhibition of fibronectin was cAMP independent, but involved p38 MAP kinase and Smad. Seeding epithelial cells on ECM collagen-I and fibronectin induced mesenchymal cell generation, which was reduced by aclidinium bromide and formoterol. Our results suggest that the beneficial effect of aclidinium bromide and formoterol involves cAMP affecting both, the accumulation of mesenchymal cells and ECM remodeling, which may explain the beneficial effect of the drugs on lung function in COPD.

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide in patients with COPD: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial in a Korean population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Aclidinium bromide ('aclidinium') is a novel, inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist. Therapeutic effects of aclidinium on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been demonstrated in Caucasian populations in several clinical trials. This was a randomized, double-blind, multi-centre phase-3 clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aclidinium in a Korean population.

METHODS

A total of 263 Korean patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to receive aclidinium (400 μg, bd) (Genuai) or placebo via a dry-powder inhaler. The primary end point was change in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1 ) at 12 weeks. Other lung function measurements, COPD exacerbation, health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), dyspnoea (Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) and safety were assessed throughout the study period.

RESULTS

A significant improvement in trough FEV1 from baseline was shown with aclidinium compared with the placebo (0.126 L, P < 0.0001). Significant improvements were also demonstrated in peak FEV1 (0.190 L, P < 0.0001), SGRQ and TDI. Furthermore, aclidinium significantly reduced the prevalence of exacerbations (aclidinium, 5.4%; placebo, 15.6%, P < 0.05), and the duration of exacerbations was shorter compared with placebo (rate ratio: 0.27; P < 0.05). Aclidinium (400 μg) was well tolerated and the prevalence of adverse events was comparable with the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled aclidinium (400 μg) was shown to be safe and efficacious in Korean patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01636401 at Clinicaltrials.gov.

New combination bronchodilators for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: current evidence and future perspectives

Fixed dose combination (FDC) dual bronchodilators that co-administer a long acting β2 -adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) and a long acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) are a new class of inhaled treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This review focuses on the clinical evidence for the benefit of LABA/LAMA FDCs compared with monocomponent treatments, and also compared with active comparators that are widely used for the treatment of COPD, namely tiotropium and salmeterol-fluticasone. Novel FDC dual bronchodilators include QVA149 and umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI). Long term clinical trials show that QVA149 and UMEC/VI are superior to monocomponent therapy in terms of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), although the FEV1 improvement was limited to approximately 80-90% of the added monocomponent values. This suggests that the effect of combining a LABA and a LAMA is not fully additive. LABA/LAMA FDC were associated with the largest mean changes in symptoms and health status that were above the minimal clinically important difference, in contrast to the monocomponents. Furthermore, these LABA/LAMA FDCs demonstrated superiority over the active comparators tiotropium and salmeterol-fluticasone in terms of trough FEV1 and patient-reported outcomes. LABA/LAMA FDCs offer a simplified means of maximizing bronchodilation for COPD patients, with the improvements in lung function being mirrored by benefits in terms of symptoms and exacerbations. The use of LABA/LAMA FDCs in clinical practice is set to grow and further studies are needed to define their optimal place in treatment guidelines.

Aclidinium bromide/formoterol fixed-dose combination therapy for COPD: the evidence to date

The quest for the right combination of bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β-agonists in the management of stable moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a topic of intense research activity currently, given the rising morbidity and mortality due to this disease. The fixed-dose combination of aclidinium bromide and formoterol fumarate in a single inhaler seems to offer superior advantages over either drugs given alone or as separate inhalers concurrently. Since the fixed-dose combination needs to be given twice daily, it is likely to achieve control of symptoms most crucial to the quality of life in COPD, namely, the morning hours. This is reflected in significant trough FEV₁ (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) improvements after the dose. This paper reviews the various studies related to this combination put in the perspective of its safety and efficacy and potential benefits over other therapeutic options. However, there is a dearth of data on the long-term safety and efficacy in terms of improvement in lung function. This combination could emerge as an excellent option in the management of stable COPD if data on exacerbation rates and patient-reported outcomes become available from longer-term studies. Moreover, we need some more studies to define the ideal phenotype of COPD best suited for the use of this combination.

Clinical potential of aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Three long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are now available in Europe, providing clinicians and patients with a choice of interventions, which is important in COPD, which is clinically a heterogeneous disease. The first LAMA, tiotropium, has been widely used over the last decade as a once-daily maintenance therapy in stable COPD to improve patients' health-related quality of life and to reduce the risk of exacerbations. Administered via the HandiHaler(®) device, it is safe and well tolerated. Another new once-daily LAMA, glycopyrronium, has also been shown to improve health status and reduce exacerbations, and is well tolerated. The subject of this review is a third LAMA, aclidinium bromide, which was approved as a twice-daily maintenance bronchodilator treatment. In the pivotal Phase III clinical trials, patients receiving aclidinium achieved significantly greater improvements in lung function, reductions in breathlessness, and improvements in health status compared with placebo, for up to 24 weeks. In continuation studies, these improvements were sustained for up to 52 weeks. Pooled data showed exacerbation frequency was significantly reduced with aclidinium versus placebo. Preclinical and pharmacological studies demonstrating low systemic bioavailability and a low propensity to induce cardiac arrhythmias were translated into a favorable tolerability profile in the clinical trial program - the adverse event profile of aclidinium was similar to placebo, with a low incidence of anticholinergic and cardiac adverse events. While additional studies are needed to evaluate its full clinical potential, aclidinium is an important part of this recent expansion of LAMA therapeutic options, providing clinicians and patients with an effective and well-tolerated COPD treatment.

The role of aclidinium bromide in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled bronchodilators remain a cornerstone of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); current guidelines recommend initiating inhaled bronchodilators as either monotherapy or combination therapy depending on disease severity and exacerbation risk to improve air flow and reduce breathlessness. Aclidinium bromide is a twice-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist recently approved in the United States and Europe and carries significant promise as an alternative long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic agent for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.

OBJECTIVE

This review describes the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects of aclidinium bromide.

DISCUSSION

Clinical trials have demonstrated improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, nighttime symptom control, disease-related quality of life, and delay in time to first COPD exacerbation with aclidinium use compared with placebo. Commonly reported adverse effects include headache, nasopharyngitis, and cough. One trial reported narrow-angle glaucoma; however, no other serious adverse events have been reported to date.

CONCLUSION

Overall, aclidinium bromide has been found to be safe and effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD. Further clinical trials comparing aclidinium bromide to standard therapies are needed to fully elucidate its role in the treatment of COPD.

Aclidinium bromide for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilators are the mainstay for symptom relief in the management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Aclidinium bromide is a new long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) that differs from tiotropium by its higher selectivity for M3 muscarinic receptors with a faster onset of action. However, the duration of action of aclidinium is shorter than for tiotropium. It has been approved as maintenance therapy for stable, moderate to severe COPD, but its efficacy and safety in the management of COPD is uncertain compared to other bronchodilators.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide in stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), as well as www.clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website and Almirall Clinical Trials Registry and Results. We contacted Forest Laboratories for any unpublished trials and checked the reference lists of identified articles for additional information. The last search was performed on 7 April 2014 for CAGR and 11 April 2014 for other sources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group RCTs of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo, long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) or LAMA in adults with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We sought missing data from the trial authors as well as manufacturers of aclidinium. We used odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and reported both with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We applied the GRADE approach to summarise results and to assess the overall quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 12 multicentre RCTs randomly assigning 9547 participants with stable COPD. All the studies were industry-sponsored and had similar inclusion criteria with relatively good methodological quality. All but one study included in the meta-analysis were double-blind and scored low risk of bias. The study duration ranged from four weeks to 52 weeks. Participants were more often males, mainly Caucasians, mean age ranging from 61.7 to 65.6 years, and with a smoking history of 10 or more pack years. They had moderate to severe symptoms at randomisation; the mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was between 46% and 57.6% of the predicted normal value, and the mean St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ) ranged from 45.1 to 50.4 when reported.There was no difference between aclidinium and placebo in all-cause mortality (low quality) and number of patients with exacerbations requiring a short course of oral steroids or antibiotics, or both (moderate quality). Aclidinium improved quality of life by lowering the SGRQ total score with a mean difference of -2.34 (95% CI -3.18 to -1.51; I(2) = 48%, 7 trials, 4442 participants) when compared to placebo. More patients on aclidinium achieved a clinically meaningful improvement of at least four units decrease in SGRQ total score (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.31 to 1.70; I(2) = 34%; number needed to treat (NNT) = 10, 95% CI 8 to 15, high quality evidence) over 12 to 52 weeks than on placebo. Aclidinium also resulted in a significantly greater improvement in pre-dose FEV1 than placebo with a mean difference of 0.09 L (95% CI 0.08 to 0.10; I(2) = 39%, 9 trials, 4963 participants). No trials assessed functional capacity. Aclidinium reduced the number of patients with exacerbations requiring hospitalisation by 4 to 20 fewer per 1000 over 4 to 52 weeks (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.88; I(2) = 0%, 10 trials, 5624 people; NNT = 77, 95% CI 51 to 233, high quality evidence) compared to placebo. There was no difference in non-fatal serious adverse events (moderate quality evidence) between aclidinium and placebo.Compared to tiotropium, aclidinium did not demonstrate significant differences for exacerbations requiring oral steroids or antibiotics, or both, exacerbation-related hospitalisations and non-fatal serious adverse events (very low quality evidence). Inadequate data prevented the comparison of aclidinium to formoterol or other LABAs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aclidinium is associated with improved quality of life and reduced hospitalisations due to severe exacerbations in patients with moderate to severe stable COPD compared to placebo. Overall, aclidinium did not significantly reduce mortality, serious adverse events or exacerbations requiring oral steroids or antibiotics, or both.Currently, the available data are insufficient and of very low quality in comparisons of the efficacy of aclidinium versus tiotropium. The efficacy of aclidinium versus LABAs cannot be assessed due to inaccurate data. Thus additional trials are recommended to assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium compared to other LAMAs or LABAs.

Clinical potential of aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is increasing worldwide and is predicted to become the third most frequent cause of death by 2030. Muscarinic receptor antagonists, alone or in combination with long-acting β2-agonists, are frequently used for COPD therapy. Aclidinium bromide is a novel muscarinic receptor antagonist, and clinical studies indicate that its metabolism is more rapid than that of other muscarinic receptor inhibitors, so systemic side effects are expected to occur less frequently. Aclidinium bromide is well tolerated, and when compared with other muscarinic receptor antagonists, the drug achieves better control of lung function, especially night-time symptoms in COPD patients. This review summarizes the safety profile and side effects reported by recent clinical studies using aclidinium bromide alone.

ACCORD COPD II: a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the 12-week efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Aclidinium bromide is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved for the long-term maintenance treatment of bronchospasm associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This 12-week phase III study evaluated efficacy and tolerability of aclidinium 200 or 400 μg in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

METHODS

In this double-blind study, 544 patients with COPD were randomized to placebo or twice-daily aclidinium 200 or 400 μg administered by Genuair(®)/Pressair(®). Lung function, health status [measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)], dyspnea [measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI)], and safety were assessed throughout the study.

RESULTS

Mean changes from baseline in morning trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at week 12 (primary endpoint) were significantly higher for aclidinium than for placebo (200 μg, 51 mL; 400 μg, 72 mL; both p < 0.05). Aclidinium also significantly improved other lung function outcomes. At week 12, improvements from baseline were observed with aclidinium in SGRQ total score (200 μg, -6.0; 400 μg, -5.4) and TDI focal score (200 μg, 1.0; 400 μg, 1.3). Furthermore, clinically important improvements in SGRQ total and TDI focal scores were achieved by 45 and 51 % of patients, respectively, who received aclidinium 400 μg, with a significant difference versus placebo for TDI (p < 0.05). Anticholinergic-related adverse events (e.g., dry mouth) were infrequent, occurring <2 % for any event in any treatment group. Both aclidinium doses were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates efficacy and safety of aclidinium in COPD patients. Unexpected baseline imbalances between treatment groups may have impacted the aclidinium treatment benefit in this study.

Clinical use of aclidinium in patients with COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the sixth-leading cause of death in the US. The Global initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the clinical management of chronic COPD. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators continue to be the mainstay of current management. Aclidinium bromide (Tudorza™ Pressair™) joins tiotropium as a long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic bronchodilator approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the maintenance treatment of COPD. Early studies demonstrated aclidinium's significant bronchodilatory effects supporting once-daily dosing; however, two Phase III studies, Aclidinium Clinical Trial Assessing Efficacy and Safety in Moderate to Severe COPD Patients (ACCLAIM/COPD) I and ACCLAIM/COPD II, in which patients were randomized to receive aclidinium 200 μg daily, failed to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in improvement of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), suggesting the need for higher doses or more frequent dosing. Additional studies - Aclidinium to Treat Airway Obstruction in COPD Patients (ATTAIN) and Aclidinium in Chronic Obstructive Respiratory Disease (ACCORD) I - were undertaken to compare 200 and 400 μg twice-daily dosing. The mean improvements from baseline in trough FEV1 in the 400 μg groups were +129 mL over 24 weeks and +124 mL over 12 weeks in ATTAIN and ACCORD I, respectively. Aclidinium also had beneficial effects on health-related quality of life and other endpoints, such as rescue medication use and rates of exacerbations. Aclidinium bromide inhalation powder is generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with headache, cough, diarrhea, and rhinosinusitis among the most commonly reported adverse events. Cardiovascular side effects were rarely reported. Patient satisfaction studies found that patients using the aclidinium delivery device had fewer errors affecting drug delivery than those using the tiotropium device and, overall, the aclidinium device was preferred to the tiotropium device. In conclusion, aclidinium bromide is approved for use in the US at a dose of 400 μg twice daily and is a promising alternative to tiotropium.

Long-term safety and efficacy of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in patients with COPD

BACKGROUND

Aclidinium is a novel, long-acting muscarinic antagonist indicated for maintenance treatment of COPD.

METHODS

In this 52-week, parallel-group, double-blind study, patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized (1:1) to receive aclidinium twice-daily (BID) 200 μg or 400 μg via a novel, dry powder inhaler (Genuair(®)/Pressair(®)) [Registered trademarks of Almirall, SA, Barcelona, Spain for use within the European Union, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland as Genuair(®) and within the United States as Pressair(®)]. Safety, the primary objective, was assessed via adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and 12-lead electrocardiograms. Efficacy was evaluated using spirometry, SGRQ, and rescue medication use.

RESULTS

A total of 605 patients were randomized in the study. The percentage of patients reporting any treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) was comparable between groups; most TEAEs were mild or moderate. Anticholinergic TEAEs were reported by low percentages of patients in either treatment group (dry mouth: 200 μg, 1.3%; 400 μg, 2.7%; constipation: 200 μg, 2.9%; 400 μg, 1.7%). Cardiac TEAEs were also reported by a low percentage of patients (<2% for any event in any group) and did not appear to be dose dependent. There were no clinically relevant abnormalities in other safety outcomes. Both aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg resulted in improvements from baseline to Week 52 in FEV1, with numerically greater increases observed with the higher dose. Clinically important improvements in SGRQ scores and a reduction in rescue medication use were observed throughout the study for both doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with aclidinium 200 μg or 400 μg BID was well tolerated, with sustained benefits in lung function and health status in patients with COPD throughout the 1-year study.

Aclidinium bromide: an alternative long-acting inhaled anticholinergic in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide, a novel, long-acting inhaled muscarinic receptor antagonist approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in July 2012, as a treatment in the management of moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

DATA SOURCES

Literature was identified through PubMed/MEDLINE (2000-March 2013) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts using the search terms aclidinium, COPD, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, anticholinergic, and muscarinic antagonist. In addition, US government websites, including fda.gov and clinicaltrials.gov, were reviewed for pertinent information. Forest Laboratories, Inc provided previously unpublished clinical trial data. All reference citations from identified publications were reviewed for possible inclusion.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All identified Phase 1, 2a, 2b, and 3 studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of aclidinium bromide were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Once- and twice-daily aclidinium bromide was assessed for efficacy and safety in patients with moderate to severe COPD. In comparison to placebo, aclidinium significantly improves trough and peak forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Significant increases in trough and peak FEV1 were sustainable for up to 64 weeks. In addition to improvement in trough and peak FEV1, twice-daily aclidinium 400 μg induced clinically meaningful improvements in the health status of patients with moderate to severe COPD. Aclidinium was generally well tolerated, with headache, cough, diarrhea, and nasopharyngitis the most common treatment-related adverse effects noted in clinical trials. Aclidinium did not demonstrate a difference in the incidence of systemic anticholinergic-associated adverse effects in comparison to placebo or active comparator.

CONCLUSIONS

Aclidinium bromide is a novel, inhaled, long-acting anticholinergic that, when administered at the FDA-approved dose, safely produces clinically and statistically significant bronchodilation and improves health status in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Long-term clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of aclidinium are warranted.

One-year extension study of ACCORD COPD I: safety and efficacy of two doses of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in patients with COPD

This was a 52-week, double-blind, extension study in which COPD patients previously treated with twice-daily (BID) aclidinium bromide 200 μg or 400 μg during a 12-week lead-in study (ACCORD COPD I) continued the same treatment, while patients previously receiving placebo were rerandomized (1:1) to aclidinium 200 μg or 400 μg BID. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of aclidinium treatment. Efficacy outcomes included bronchodilation, health status, and rescue medication use. A total of 467 patients completed the lead-in study and 291 patients consented to participate in the extension. At study end, the percentages of patients who reported a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) were similar for both treatments (200 μg, 77.4%; 400 μg, 73.7%). Incidence of anticholinergic TEAEs was low and similar for both treatments, with dry mouth reported in only 1 patient (400 μg). Cardiac TEAEs were reported by a similarly low percentage of patients (<5% for any event in any group) with no apparent dose dependence. Improvements from baseline in lung function were greatest for patients who received continuous aclidinium treatment and those who were rerandomized from placebo to aclidinium 400 μg; these improvements were generally sustained throughout the study. Health status and overall rescue medication use was improved from baseline for both treatments. The safety profile of twice-daily aclidinium and sustained improvements in lung function and health status throughout the 52-week extension study support its use as a long-term maintenance treatment for patients with COPD. (Clinical trial registration number NCT00970268).

Emerging Therapeutic Options for the Management of COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death worldwide and is projected to be the third by 2020. COPD is characterized by chronic airflow limitation caused by airway inflammation and parenchymal destruction that is usually progressive. Inhaled bronchodilators continue to be the mainstay of the current management of COPD. Safety and efficacy data of the recently approved medications including aclidinium, glycopyrronium, roflumilast, and indacaterol are reviewed here.

Aclidinium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Although there are some challenges with current therapies, the growing evidence that tiotropium bromide is important in the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has led to enthusiastic investigation in search of novel muscarinic antagonists which share some of the beneficial characteristics of tiotropium and perhaps improve upon less desirable ones.

AREAS COVERED

Aclidinium bromide is a new muscarinic antagonist that has been developed to relieve symptoms in patients with COPD. Preclinical data showed that it has an intriguing pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profile. Aclidinium bromide was initially assessed as a once-daily bronchodilator. Subsequently, it has been evaluated as a twice-daily agent to increase the size of the clinical effect. Pivotal Phase III trials have documented that aclidinium bromide 400 μg twice-daily shows clinically meaningful effects in lung function and other important supportive outcomes, such as health-related quality of life, dyspnea and night-time/early morning symptoms, and is safe.

EXPERT OPINION

Aclidinium bromide can to be used as an alternative to tiotropium or a long-acting β₂-agonist. It is likely that the device used to deliver aclidinium, Genuair inhaler, a novel, multidose and a breath-actuated dry powder inhaler (DPI), will be important for the possible success of this drug. However, additional Phase III trials to assess advantages over tiotropium bromide and long-acting β₂-agonists are required to allow the place of aclidinium bromide to be fully elucidated.

Aclidinium bromide twice daily for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review

The inhaled, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, aclidinium bromide, was indicated in July 2012 in Europe and the USA for the maintenance of bronchodilator treatment to relieve symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in adults. Although initially investigated as a once-daily agent, a lower than expected improvement in trough forced expiratory volume over 1 s prompted re-evaluation as a twice-daily (b.i.d.) regimen. The dose approved for use in Europe, 400 μg b.i.d., achieved statistically significant improvements in lung function, reductions in breathlessness, and improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for up to 24 weeks of treatment in the pivotal phase 3 trials (AClidinium in Chronic Obstructive Respiratory Disease I [ACCORD COPD I] [12 weeks] and Aclidinium To Treat Airway obstruction In COPD patieNts [ATTAIN] [24 weeks]). These improvements were sustained during maintenance therapy of up to 52 weeks. Pooled data from the ATTAIN and ACCORD studies (both included a placebo arm) showed that exacerbation frequency was significantly reduced, although neither study was prospectively designed to evaluate this endpoint. Pharmacological and preclinical studies demonstrated the low systemic bioavailability of aclidinium and the low propensity to induce cardiac arrhythmias. The good tolerability of aclidinium was confirmed in the phase 3 program up to 52 weeks of treatment. The adverse event (AE) profile of the approved dose, 400 μg b.i.d., was similar to that of placebo, with a low incidence of anticholinergic and cardiac AEs. Aclidinium is delivered via the Genuair(®) multidose dry powder inhaler (Almirall Sofotec GmBH, Bad Homburg, Germany). The device is simple to use with multiple feedback mechanisms ensuring consistent dose delivery. In summary, aclidinium 400 μg b.i.d. is effective for the treatment of patients with COPD, offering improvements in lung function, breathlessness, and HRQoL, with a good safety profile and a low incidence of anticholinergic and cardiac AEs.

Aclidinium Bromide: Clinical Benefit in Patients with Moderate to Severe COPD

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Long-acting bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the clinical studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of inhaled aclidinium bromide, a novel long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator, for the treatment of COPD.

METHOD

This systematic review explored the efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide in comparison with placebo and other long-acting bronchodilators for treatment of moderate to severe COPD. Randomised controlled trials were identified through systematic searches of different databases of published trials.

RESULTS

Ten trials (3.922 participants) were included. Aclidinium bromide appears to be a safe and well-tolerated long-acting anti-cholinergic bronchodilator with a relatively fast onset of action. Compared with other long-acting bronchodilators, including tiotropium bromide, aclidinium bromide leads to at least similar clinically important improvements in level of FEV(1), health status, use of rescue medication, and day-time dyspnea scores in patients suffering from moderate to severe COPD. With twice-daily dosing, aclidinium bromide may have clinically important effect on night-time symptom scores in COPD patients, but further studies are needed in order to permit valid conclusions with regard to this point. The effect of aclidinium bromide on exercise tolerance, as assessed by exercise endurance time, and dynamic hyperinflation in patients with moderate to severe COPD seems to be at least comparable to other long-acting bronchodilators, incl. tiotropium bromide and indacaterol. Aclidinium bromide might reduce the rate of exacerbations in COPD patients, but conclusions must await further long-term controlled trials.

CONCLUSION

Aclidinium bromide has effects on relevant COPD outcome measures, including level of FEV(1), similar to other long-acting bronchodilators, and therefore seems to have the potential for a significant role in the future management of moderate to severe COPD.

The potential for aclidinium bromide, a new anticholinergic, in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) play a central role in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Previously, only one LAMA (tiotropium) was available for the treatment of COPD, necessitating the development of other therapeutic options due to the heterogeneity of COPD and patient responses to treatment. This article reviews the COPD management potential of aclidinium bromide, a LAMA administered twice daily (BID) by a multidose dry powder inhaler that is indicated for maintenance treatment of COPD. Aclidinium possesses kinetic selectivity for the M3 versus M2 receptor and is rapidly hydrolyzed in plasma to two major inactive metabolites, resulting in a low and transient systemic exposure and minimizing the potential for systemic side effects. A pharmacokinetic study with multiple doses of twice-daily aclidinium demonstrated the short half-life of aclidinium in plasma, suggesting that a steady state may be reached as early as the second day postdose. In a phase II study, twice-daily aclidinium 400 µg provided 24-hour bronchodilation, with significant improvements versus tiotropium during the second half of the day. In two phase III studies (ACCORD I and ATTAIN), both aclidinium 200 µg and 400 µg BID provided statistically significant improvements in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and other related lung function measurements. Improvements in peak FEV1 on day 1 were comparable to those at study end, demonstrating that aclidinium provides maximal bronchodilation after the first dose that is maintained over time. Health status was significantly improved and dyspnea, nighttime and morning symptoms of COPD were likewise significantly reduced with aclidinium. Numerically greater improvements in efficacy were observed with the 400 µg dose compared with the lower dose, with similar safety profiles between the two doses and a low incidence of anticholinergic side effects. The approved therapeutic dose of aclidinium 400 µg BID is thus an effective new treatment option for patients with COPD.