Comparative mortality risk of tiotropium administered via handihaler or respimat in COPD patients: Are they equivalent?

[COPD inhaled therapy narrative review]

Inhaled therapy with long-acting bronchodilators is the base of pharmacological treatment in COPD. In order to find out those that offer better control, a search was carried out in Medline (Pubmed). Comparative studies of inhaler therapy in COPD patients were analyzed. The comparison between the fixed combination LABA/LAMA versus LABA/CI in non-exacerbating patients, revealed a better control with LABA/LAMA. Within the LABA/CI combinations, budesonide/formoterol combination offered better control. LAMA inhalers revealed no great differences, but when compared to LABA, it offered a better control. Regarding triple therapy in a single device, was superior to double therapy and to triple therapy in two devices, with no relevant differences among the available combinations.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Stroke

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is currently the fourth leading cause of death in the world and its incidence and prevalence is on the rise. It is evident that COPD is linked to cardiovascular disease. In the last years, several studies demonstrated that COPD may also be a risk factor for stroke, another major cause of death worldwide. Taking in consideration that COPD has multiple comorbidities it is hard to say whether COPD is an independent risk factor for stroke or it is due to confounding effect. This review is aimed to discuss current data on COPD and stroke, potential links, therapy, and prevention. Current data suggest that COPD may increase the risk of hemorrhagic stroke. The incidence of other stroke subtypes may also be increased in COPD or may be due to confounding effect. However, COPD patients who have stroke are at risk for pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications. We conclude that more studies are needed to further clarify the links between COPD and stroke. The management of COPD as well as the use of prevention therapy is essential to decrease the risk for stroke and should be at special attention in pulmonary medicine and neurology.

Optimizing drug delivery in COPD: The role of inhaler devices

BACKGROUND

Inhaled medication is the cornerstone of the pharmacological treatment for patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Several inhaler devices exist, and each device has specific characteristics to achieve the optimal inhalation of drugs. The correct use of inhaler devices is not granted and patients may incur in mistakes when using pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) or dry-powder inhaler (DPIs). The incorrect use of inhaler devices can lead to a poorly controlled disease status. Unfortunately, guidelines provide limited guidance regarding the choice of devices. This article presents a review of the literature on different inhaler device requirements. Data from literature (PubMed and Google Scholar) on the commercially available inhaler devices have been evaluated and the history of inhaler medicine described. Furthermore, advantages and disadvantages of each type of device have been analyzed. The evaluation of literature indicated the availability of robust data on the devices characteristics and factors influencing selection of delivery devices. Each type of device has its own pro and cons. The age, cognitive status, visual acuity, manual dexterity, manual strength and ability to coordinate the inhaler actuation with inhalation may be as important as the disease severity in determining the correct approach to delivery of respiratory medication. The administration of effective therapies via a device that is simple to use and accepted by patients may help to improve treatment outcomes in patients with COPD.

Tiotropium formulations and safety: a network meta-analysis

Tiotropium is now delivered via two different inhaler devices: the original Handihaler 18 μg once daily, which uses a powder formulation; and the newer Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) 5 μg once daily. It has been questioned whether the two devices can be assumed to have the same safety profile, although the TIOSPIR trial showed that tiotropium when administered via Respimat SMI 5 μg is not less safe than Handihaler 18 μg. Therefore, we have carried out a safety evaluation of tiotropium Handihaler 18 µg versus tiotropium Respimat SMI 5 µg and 2.5 µg, via systematic review and network meta-analysis of the currently available clinical evidence. The results of our meta-analysis with an extremely large number of patients analysed demonstrate that the safety profile of tiotropium HandiHaler is generally superior to that of tiotropium Respimat SMI, although no statistical difference was detected between these two devices. However, the SUCRA analysis favoured tiotropium Respimat SMI with regards to serious adverse events (AEs). We do not believe that using Respimat SMI rather that HandiHaler exposes patients to higher risks of real AEs. Rather, we believe that there may be a different cardiovascular (CV) response to muscarinic receptors blockage in individual patients. Therefore, it will be essential to make all possible efforts to proactively identify patients at increased risk of CV AEs when treated with tiotropium or another antimuscarinic drug.

Long-term safety of tiotropium delivered by Respimat® SoftMist™ Inhaler: patient selection and special considerations

Tiotropium bromide is a long-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonist used in patients with chronic respiratory disease. It has been available since 2002 as a single-dose dry powder formulation via the HandiHaler^® dry powder inhaler (DPI) device, and since 2007 as the Respimat^® SoftMist™ Inhaler (SMI). The latter is a novel method of medication delivery that utilizes a multidose aqueous solution to deliver the drug as a fine mist. Potential benefits include more efficient drug deposition throughout the respiratory tract, reduced systemic exposure, and greater ease of use and patient satisfaction compared with the use of HandiHaler DPI. Although tiotropium bromide delivered via the HandiHaler DPI has been clearly shown to improve lung function, dyspnea, and quality of life and to reduce exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), there is accumulating evidence regarding the use of tiotropium HandiHaler in other respiratory diseases characterized by airflow limitation, such as asthma and cystic fibrosis. Developed more recently, tiotropium delivered via the Respimat SMI appears to have a similar efficacy and safety profile to the HandiHaler DPI, and early data raising the possibility of safety concerns with its use in COPD have been refuted by more recent evidence. The benefits over the HandiHaler DPI, however, remain unclear. This paper will review the evidence for tiotropium delivered via the Respimat SMI inhaler, in particular as an alternative to the HandiHaler DPI, and will focus on the safety profile for each of the chronic lung diseases in which it has been trialed, as well as an approach to appropriate patient selection.

Safety and efficacy of tiotropium in patients switching from HandiHaler to Respimat in the TIOSPIR trial

OBJECTIVES

This post hoc analysis of TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) evaluated safety and exacerbation efficacy in patients with stable (≥ 2 months) use of tiotropium HandiHaler 18 µg (HH18) prior to study entry, to evaluate whether there was a difference in risk for patients who switched from HH18 to tiotropium Respimat 2.5 µg (R2.5) or 5 g (R5).

SETTING

TIOSPIR (n=17,135) was an international, Phase IIIb/IV, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, event-driven trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients from TIOSPIR with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and postbronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced vital capacity ≤ 0.70, receiving HH18 before study entry, were analysed (n=2784).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to once-daily tiotropium R2.5 (n=914), R5 (n=918) or HH18 (n=952) for 2-3 years.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

time to death (safety) and time to first COPD exacerbation (efficacy).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

number of exacerbations and time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in all groups. Respimat had a similar mortality risk versus HH18 (vital status follow-up, HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.87; 0.64 to 1.17; R5: 0.79; 0.58 to 1.07) with no significant differences in the risk and rates of exacerbations and severe exacerbations across treatment groups. Risk of MACE and fatal MACE was similar for Respimat versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI MACE R2.5: 0.73; 0.47 to 1.15; R5: 0.69; 0.44 to 1.08; fatal MACE R2.5: 0.57; 0.27 to 1.19; R5: 0.67; 0.33 to 1.34). Overall risk of a fatal event (on treatment) was lower for R5 versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.78; 0.55 to 1.09; R5: 0.62; 0.43 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis indicates that it is safe to switch patients from tiotropium HandiHaler to tiotropium Respimat, and that the efficacy is maintained over the switch.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01126437; Post-results.

Tiotropium Respimat(®) vs. HandiHaler(®): real-life usage and TIOSPIR trial generalizability

AIM

Two inhaler devices (Respimat® and HandiHaler®) are available for tiotropium, a long acting anticholinergic agent. We aimed to analyze drug utilization, off-label usage and generalizability of the TIOSPIR trial results for both devices.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years exhibiting at least one documented prescription of tiotropium in the database of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Bavaria, Germany, were included (years 2004-2008). Annual period prevalence rates (PPRs) were calculated stratified by age, gender and inhaler devices. Off-label usage (patients lacking a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) diagnosis) and the proportion of patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the TIOSPIR trial were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 2004 and 2008, PPRs increased and varied between 49.2 and 74.5 per 10 000 persons for HandiHaler® and between 1.5 and 9.3 per 10 000 persons for Respimat®. Small differences regarding patient characteristics existed between the two inhaler devices. Only about 30% (HandiHaler® 32.1%, Respimat® 30.0%) of the database patients receiving tiotropium could be theoretically included in the TIOSPIR trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing the two tiotropium devices, no clinically relevant differences regarding patient and prescribing characteristics were revealed. Results of the TIOSPIR trial were generalizable only to a minority of our study patients, underlining the need for real-life data.

Tiotropium Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ inhaler: a review of its use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The long-acting anticholinergic agent tiotropium bromide (Spiriva(®)) is available as a solution for inhalation via Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler in the EU and various other countries for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). With the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler there is improved lung deposition of drug (allowing a reduced dosage compared with tiotropium HandiHaler(®)), the delivered drug dose is independent of inspiratory effort and the prolonged duration of the aerosol cloud should make the co-ordination of actuation and inhalation easier. In patients with COPD, tiotropium Respimat(®) improved lung function, COPD exacerbations, health-related quality of life and dyspnoea and was at least as effective as tiotropium HandiHaler(®). Tiotropium Respimat(®) was generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with anticholinergic adverse events among the most commonly reported adverse events. In the TIOSPIR trial, tiotropium Respimat(®) was noninferior to tiotropium HandiHaler(®) in terms of all-cause mortality, and the risk of cardiovascular mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events did not significantly differ between the two treatment groups. In conclusion, tiotropium Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler is a useful option for the treatment of patients with COPD.

Inhaled bronchodilators and the risk of tachyarrhythmias

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

There have been controversies about whether inhaled bronchodilators could increase the risk of clinically important tachyarrhythmias. We investigated the association between inhaled bronchodilators and the development of tachyarrhythmias, including atrial fibrillation and other paroxysmal tachyarrhythmias in real practice.

METHODS

We conducted a nested case-control study with the use of the nationwide insurance claims database of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (Seoul, Republic of Korea). Overall, 3312 cases with newly developed tachyarrhythmias including atrial fibrillation and other paroxysmal tachyarrhythmias and 9732 matched (up to 1:5) controls were identified from 545,508 subjects without acute major cardiovascular events in the past year between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2011. Conditional logistic regression analysis adjusted by comorbidities, cardiovascular drugs and healthcare utilization was performed.

RESULTS

In various multivariate models, the use of inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) or long-acting inhaled β2 agonists (LABAs) was significantly associated with tachyarrhythmias. Statistically significant effects of LAMAs on tachyarrhythmias were found only in the non-users of β-blockers. We did not find a statistically significant difference in the impact of a LABA without a LAMA vs a LAMA without a LABA (aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74-1.18), or a multiplicative or additive interaction between a LABA and a LAMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled LAMAs and LABAs were significantly and comparably associated with an increased risk of tachyarrhythmias.

Comorbidities of patients in tiotropium clinical trials: comparison with observational studies of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate on whether patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) seen in real-life clinical settings are represented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of COPD. It is thought that the stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria of RCTs may prevent the participation of patients with specific characteristics or risk factors.

METHODS

We surveyed a database of patients recruited into 35 placebo-controlled tiotropium RCTs and also conducted a systematic literature review of large-scale observational studies conducted in patients with a documented diagnosis of COPD between 1990 and 2013. Patient demographics and comorbidities with a high prevalence in patients with COPD were compared between the two patient populations at baseline. Using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA; v 14.0), patient comorbidities in the pooled tiotropium RCTs were classified according to system organ class, pharmacovigilance (PV) endpoints, and Standardised MedDRA Queries to enable comparison with the observational studies.

RESULTS

We identified 24,555 patients in the pooled tiotropium RCTs and 61,361 patients among the 13 observational studies that met our search criteria. The Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) staging of patients in the RCTs differed from that in observational studies: the proportion of patients with GOLD stages I+II disease ranged from 40.0% to 51.5% in the RCTs but 24.5% to 44.1% in the observational studies; for GOLD stage III or IV disease these ranges were 7.2%-45.8% (RCTs) and 13.7-42.1% (observational studies). The comorbidities with the highest prevalence reported in the RCTs and observational studies were: hypertension (39.4%-40.0% vs 40.1%-60.6%), other ischemic heart disease (12.3%-14.2% vs 12.5%-41.0%), diabetes (10.3%-10.9% vs 4.0%-38.9%), depression (8.5%-9.5% vs 17.0%-20.6%), and cardiac arrhythmia (7.8%-11.4% vs 11.3%-15.8%).

CONCLUSION

The clinical profile of COPD patients treated in the tiotropium trial program appears to be largely in the range of clinical characteristics, including cardiovascular comorbidities, reported for "real-life patients." The tiotropium RCTs tended to include patients with more severe disease than the observational studies.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist use in adults with asthma: real-life prescribing and outcomes of add-on therapy with tiotropium bromide

Background

Randomized controlled trials indicate that addition of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) such as tiotropium may improve asthma control and reduce exacerbation risk in patients with poorly controlled asthma, but broader clinical studies are needed to investigate the effectiveness of LAMA in real-life asthma care.

Methods

Medical records of adults with asthma (aged ≥18 years) prescribed tiotropium were obtained from the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database for the period 2001–2013. Patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were excluded, but no other clinical exclusions were applied. Two primary outcomes were compared in the year before (baseline) and the year after (outcome) addition of tiotropium: exacerbations (asthma-related hospital emergency department attendance or inpatient admission, or acute oral corticosteroid course) and acute respiratory events (exacerbation or antibiotic prescription with lower respiratory consultation). Secondary outcomes included lung function test results and short-acting β₂ agonist usage. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for variables measured on the interval scale, the marginal homogeneity test for categorized variables, and the paired t-test for lung function indices.

Results

Of the 2,042 study patients, 83% were prescribed an inhaled corticosteroid and 68% a long-acting β₂ agonist during the baseline year; 67% were prescribed both. Comparing baseline and outcome years, the percentage of patients having at least one exacerbation decreased from 37% to 27% (P<0.001) and the percentage having at least one acute respiratory event decreased from 58% to 47% (P<0.001). There were no significant changes in lung function, and usage of short-acting β₂ agonists (in salbutamol/albuterol equivalents) increased from a median (interquartile range) of 274 (110, 548) to 329 (110, 603) μg/day (P=0.01).

Conclusion

In this real-life asthma population, addition of LAMA therapy was associated with significant decreases in the incidence of exacerbations and antibiotic prescriptions for lower respiratory tract infections in the following year.