Assessing the clinical value of fast onset and sustained duration of action of long-acting bronchodilators for COPD

Is it preferable to administer a bronchodilator once- or twice-daily when treating COPD?

Nocturnal and early morning symptoms are common and uncomfortable in many patients with COPD, and are likely to affect their long-term outcomes. However, it is still debated whether it is better to give long-acting bronchodilators once- or twice-daily to symptomatic COPD patients. The functional link between circadian rhythms of autonomic tone and airway calibre explains why the timing of administration of bronchodilators in chronic airway diseases can induce different effects when taken at different biological (circadian) times. However, the timing also depends on the pharmacological characteristics of the bronchodilator to be used. Because the profile of bronchodilation produced by once-daily vs. twice-daily long-acting bronchodilators differs throughout 24 h, selecting long-acting bronchodilators may be customized to specific patient preferences based on the need for further bronchodilation in the evening. This is especially helpful for people who experience respiratory symptoms at night or early morning. Compared to placebo, evening bronchodilator administration is consistently linked with persistent overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive. The current evidence indicates that nocturnal and early morning symptoms control is best handled by a LAMA taken in the evening. In contrast, it seems preferable to use a LABA for daytime symptoms. Therefore, it can be speculated that combining a LAMA with a LABA can improve bronchodilation and control symptoms better. Both LAMA and LABA must be rapid in their onset of action. Aclidinium/formoterol, a twice-daily combination, is the most studies of the available LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of impact on daytime and nocturnal symptoms.

Dupilumab Demonstrates Rapid Onset of Response Across Three Type 2 Inflammatory Diseases

BACKGROUND

Type 2 inflammatory diseases often coexist in patients. Dupilumab targets type 2 inflammation and has demonstrated treatment benefits in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), asthma, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) with an acceptable safety profile.

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis across five phase 3 studies in patients with moderate to severe AD or asthma, or severe CRSwNP, evaluated time of onset and duration of the treatment response.

METHODS

Patients received subcutaneous dupilumab 200/300 mg or placebo. Assessments included the Eczema Area and Severity Index, Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, and Dermatology Life Quality Index in AD; pre-bronchodilator FEV₁, daily morning peak expiratory flow, and symptom scores in asthma; and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test, daily nasal congestion, and loss of smell scores in CRSwNP.

RESULTS

At week 2 after the initiation of dupilumab versus placebo, 67.8% versus 36.5% of AD patients achieved a clinically meaningful benefit (Eczema Area and Severity Index: 50% or greater improvement; Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale: 3 point or greater improvement; or Dermatology Life Quality Index: 4 point or greater improvement) (P < .001). Moreover, 61.6% versus 39.9% of asthma patients achieved improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ of 100 mL or greater and 48.8% versus 26.3% achieved 200 mL or greater improvement (both P < .001); 33.2% versus 5.6% of CRSwNP patients regained a sense of smell (P < .001). Treatment effects further improved or were sustained to the end of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically meaningful responses were achieved rapidly after the first dupilumab dose in AD, asthma, or CRSwNP and were sustained throughout treatment (see Video in this article's Online Repository at www.jaci-inpractice.org).

Cost-Effectiveness of Once-Daily, Single-Inhaler Indacaterol Acetate/ Glycopyrronium Bromide/ Mometasone Furoate in Patients with Uncontrolled Moderate-to-Severe Asthma in Canada

Purpose

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of high-dose indacaterol acetate (IND)/glycopyrronium bromide (GLY)/mometasone furoate (MF) (150/50/160 μg, once daily) compared with high-dose salmeterol/fluticasone (SAL/FLU; 50/500 µg, twice daily)+tiotropium (TIO; 5 µg, once daily) (SAL/FLU+TIO) and with high-dose SAL/FLU (50/500 µg, twice daily) for the treatment of inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.

Patients and Methods

A Markov model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of treatment with high-dose IND/GLY/MF compared with SAL/FLU+TIO and high-dose IND/GLY/MF compared with SAL/FLU. The model included three health states (day-to-day symptoms without exacerbations, day-to-day symptoms with exacerbations, and death) with a 4-week cycle length. A lifetime time horizon was used. Exacerbation rates and utility values were derived from ARGON and IRIDIUM clinical trials. Canadian dollars (CAD$, 2020) were applied.

Results

IND/GLY/MF was the less costly and more effective treatment strategy compared with SAL/FLU+TIO and SAL/FLU in the base-case analyses. IND/GLY/MF had lower costs (CAD $33,501 versus CAD $50,907) and higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (18.37 versus 18.06 QALYs) compared with SAL/FLU+TIO. Compared with SAL/FLU, IND/GLY/MF had lower costs (CAD $33,408 versus CAD $36,577) and higher QALYs (19.33 versus 19.04 QALYs). IND/GLY/MF was the most cost-effective option in all scenarios tested.

Conclusion

IND/GLY/MF was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD $50,000/QALY in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma versus SAL/FLU+TIO and SAL/FLU in the base case and all scenarios tested.

24-Hour Serial Spirometric Assessment of Once-Daily Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Twice-Daily Budesonide/Formoterol in Patients with COPD: Analysis of the FULFIL Study

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have utilized 24-h serial spirometry to compare the effects of inhaled chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies on lung function. The FULFIL study previously reported significant lung function improvements with once-daily single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus twice-daily single-inhaler budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations.

METHODS

This prespecified analysis evaluated 24-h serial spirometry data from a subgroup of 406 patients in FULFIL. BUD/FOR twice-daily dosing was maintained during 24-h spirometry. A post hoc analysis evaluated serial forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at day 1 and week 24 by disease severity at screening (FEV1 < 50% predicted and no moderate or severe exacerbation in prior year, FEV1 < 50% predicted and ≥ 1 moderate or severe exacerbation in prior year, and FEV1 ≥ 50% and < 80% predicted and ≥ 2 moderate or ≥ 1 severe exacerbations in prior year).

RESULTS

Odds of achieving a ≥ 100-mL increase from baseline in FEV1 within the first 6 h post dose on day 1 were significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI than BUD/FOR [odds ratio 2.79 (95% confidence interval 1.56-4.98); p < 0.001]. FF/UMEC/VI led to greater improvements in weighted mean FEV1 over 0-6, 0-12, 0-24, and 12-24 h on day 1 and at week 24, with the greatest between-group differences at week 24 (range 196-210 mL; all p < 0.001). Significant between-treatment differences in FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC) in favor of FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR were seen at all time points at week 24 (FEV1 range 156-231 mL, all p < 0.001; FVC range 139-309 mL, all p ≤ 0.002). Serial FEV1 results were consistent irrespective of disease severity at screening.

CONCLUSION

These findings further demonstrate sustained lung function benefits with once-daily FF/UMEC/VI single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations across a range of disease severities.

Chemocentric Informatics Analysis: Dexamethasone Versus Combination Therapy for COVID-19

COVID-19 is a biphasic infectious disease with no approved vaccine or pharmacotherapy. The first drug that has shown promise in reducing COVID-19 mortality in severely-ill patients is dexamethasone, a cheap, well-known anti-inflammatory glucocorticoid, approved for the treatment of inflammatory conditions including respiratory diseases such as asthma and tuberculosis. However, about 80% of COVID-19 patients requiring oxygenation, and about 67% of patients on ventilators, are not responsive to dexamethasone therapy mainly. Additionally, using higher doses of dexamethasone for prolonged periods of time can lead to severe side effects and some patients may develop corticosteroid resistance leading to treatment failure. In order to increase the therapeutic efficacy of dexamethasone in COVID-19 patients, while minimizing dexamethasone-related complications that could result from using higher doses of the drug, we applied a chemocentric informatics approach to identify combination therapies. Our results indicated that combining dexamethasone with fast long-acting beta-2 adrenergic agonists (LABAs), such as formoterol and salmeterol, can ease respiratory symptoms hastily, until dexamethasone's anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant effects kick in. Our studies demonstrated that LABAs and dexamethasone (or other glucocorticoids) exert synergistic effects that will augment both anti-inflammatory and fibronectin-mediated anticoagulant effects. We also propose other alternatives to LABAs that are supported by sound systems biology evidence, such as nitric oxide. Other drugs such as sevoflurane and treprostinil interact with the SARS-CoV-2 interactome and deserve further exploration. Moreover, our chemocentric informatics approach provides systems biology evidence that combination therapies for COVID-19 will have higher chances of perturbing the SARS-CoV-2 human interactome, which may negatively impact COVID-19 disease pathways.

Pharmacological targets and emerging treatments for respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis

RSV infection of the lower respiratory tract in infants is the leading cause of pediatric hospitalizations and second to malaria in causing infant deaths worldwide. RSV also causes substantial morbidity in immunocompromised and elderly populations. The only available therapeutic is a prophylactic drug called Palivizumab that is a humanized monoclonal antibody, given to high-risk infants. However, this intervention is expensive and has a limited impact on annual hospitalization rates caused by RSV. No vaccine is available, nor are efficacious antivirals to treat an active infection, and there is still no consensus on how infants with bronchiolitis should be treated during hospital admission. In this comprehensive review, we briefly outline the function of the RSV proteins and their suitability as therapeutic targets. We then discuss the most promising drug candidates, their inhibitory mechanisms, and whether they are in the process of clinical trials. We also briefly discuss the reasons for some of the failures in RSV therapeutics and vaccines. In summary, we provide insight into current antiviral development and the considerations toward producing licensed antivirals and therapeutics.

Pharmacology and Therapeutics of Bronchodilators Revisited

Bronchodilators remain the cornerstone of the treatment of airway disorders such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is therefore considerable interest in understanding how to optimize the use of our existing classes of bronchodilator and in identifying novel classes of bronchodilator drugs. However, new classes of bronchodilator have proved challenging to develop because many of these have no better efficacy than existing classes of bronchodilator and often have unacceptable safety profiles. Recent research has shown that optimization of bronchodilation occurs when both arms of the autonomic nervous system are affected through antagonism of muscarinic receptors to reduce the influence of parasympathetic innervation of the lung and through stimulation of β ₂-adrenoceptors (β ₂-ARs) on airway smooth muscle with β ₂-AR-selective agonists to mimic the sympathetic influence on the lung. This is currently achieved by use of fixed-dose combinations of inhaled long-acting β ₂-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists (LAMAs). Due to the distinct mechanisms of action of LAMAs and LABAs, the additive/synergistic effects of using these drug classes together has been extensively investigated. More recently, so-called "triple inhalers" containing fixed-dose combinations of both classes of bronchodilator (dual bronchodilation) and an inhaled corticosteroid in the same inhaler have been developed. Furthermore, a number of so-called "bifunctional drugs" having two different primary pharmacological actions in the same molecule are under development. This review discusses recent advancements in knowledge on bronchodilators and bifunctional drugs for the treatment of asthma and COPD. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Since our last review in 2012, there has been considerable research to identify novel classes of bronchodilator drugs, to further understand how to optimize the use of the existing classes of bronchodilator, and to better understand the role of bifunctional drugs in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Emerging muscarinic receptor antagonists for the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION

The increased acetylcholine signaling in asthma pathophysiology offers the rationale for the use of LAMAs in the treatment of asthmatic patients. Tiotropium is still the only LAMA approved for use in asthma but there is a real interest in developing novel LAMAs for the treatment of asthma, or at least to extend this indication to other LAMAs already on the market.

AREAS COVERED

We examined and discussed trials and research that have studied or are evaluating the role of LAMAs already on the market in asthma and possible novel muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists.

EXPERT OPINION

Glycopyrronium and umeclidinium will soon be included in the GINA strategy with the same current indications of tiotropium. It is likely that the choice of the LAMA will be influenced not so much by its pharmacological profile as by the type of triple therapy chosen. It is extremely difficult to identify a new LAMA that is more effective than tiotropium, but is it plausible that new technologies that will allow delivering the drug in a more targeted way and with a lower risk of adverse effects may represent the real progress in the use of LAMAs in asthma in the coming years.

Bronchodilator efficacy of tiotropium/formoterol (18/12 µg once daily via a Discair inhaler), tiotropium alone (18 µg by Handihaler) or combined with formoterol (12 µg twice daily by Aerolizer) in adults with moderate-to-severe stable COPD

Objectives: The bronchodilator efficacy of a once-daily fixed-dose combination of tiotropium/formoterol (18/12 µg administered via a dry-powder inhaler, Discair) [TIO/FORM_fixed group] vs a single-dose of tiotropium (18 µg) by Handihaler¹ alone [TIO_mono group], or combined with formoterol 12 µg twice-daily by Aerolizer² [TIO/FORM_bid group] was compared in patients with moderate-to-severe stable COPD.Methods: COPD patients were randomized (28 patients/group) to receive TIO/FORM_fixed, TIO_mono, or TIO/FORM_bid. AUC for the changes in FEV₁ and FVC over a 24-h period; bronchodilator response (100 ml improvement in FEV₁) in the first 30 min; maximum changes in FEV₁ and FVC; and safety data were recorded. The primary endpoint was to confirm the non-inferiority of TIO/FORM_fixed vs TIO/FORM_bid in terms of the AUC for the changes in FEV₁ over a 24-h period.Results: Changes in AUC_0-24h for FEV₁ and FVC were similar for TIO/FORM_fixed and TIO/FORM_bid, and were superior to TIO_mono (p < 0.001). A positive bronchodilator response at 30 min was demonstrated in 50%, 64%, and 71% of patients in the TIO_mono, TIO/FORM_bid, and TIO/FORM_fixed groups, respectively (NS). Maximum FEV₁ and FVC changes were measured as 0.25/0.41 L, 0.32/0.49 L, and 0.37/0.53 L, for TIO_mono, TIO/FORM_bid, and TIO/FORM_fixed, respectively (FEV₁: TIO/FORM_fixed vs TIO_mono, p = 0.0017 and TIO/FORM_fixed vs TIO/FORM_bid, p = 0.4846); no differences were recorded between the combination groups.Conclusions: The 24-h bronchodilator efficacy of TIO/FORM_fixed 18/12 µg once-daily by Discair³ was non-inferior to a combination of tiotropium 18 µg by Handihaler plus formoterol 12 µg twice-daily by Aerolizer, and superior to tiotropium 18 µg monotherapy by Handihaler.

Can medicines development improve outcomes in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management by driving effectiveness?

Despite the availability of treatment guidelines and inhaled medications for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), much remains to be done to lessen the burden of these respiratory diseases for patients. The challenge of selecting effective and efficacious drugs for patients is a key focus area for healthcare professionals. Here we discuss the concept of "drivers of effectiveness"- features of a medicine which may increase or decrease its effectiveness in the presence of real-world factors - and highlight the importance of considering these drivers in the early stages of drug development, and exploring their impact in carefully designed pragmatic trials. Using the Salford Lung Studies (SLS) in asthma and COPD as an illustrative example, we discuss various features of the inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist combination, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI), as potential drivers of effectiveness that may have contributed to the improved patient outcomes observed with initiation of FF/VI versus continuation of usual care in the UK primary care setting.

LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations in patients with COPD: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the current evidence for long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in the treatment of COPD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials published in English up to September 2017 of LABA/LAMA FDCs vs LABA or LAMA or LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) FDCs in COPD patients was performed using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Outcomes including forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) scores, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores, exacerbations, exercise tolerance (endurance time [ET]), inspiratory capacity (IC), and rescue medication use were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 27 studies were included in the review. LABA/LAMA FDCs significantly improved lung function (FEV1) at 12 weeks compared with LABA or LAMA or LABA/ICS. These effects were maintained over time. Significant improvements with LABA/LAMA FDCs vs each evaluated comparator were also observed in TDI and SGRQ scores, even if significant differences between different LABA/LAMA FDCs were detected. Only the LABA/LAMA FDC indacaterol/glycopyrronium has shown superiority vs LAMA and LABA/ICS for reducing exacerbation rates, while olodaterol/tiotropium and indacaterol/glycopyrronium have been shown to improve ET and IC vs the active comparators. Rescue medication use was significantly reduced by LABA/LAMA FDCs vs the evaluated comparators. LABA/LAMA FDCs were safe, with no increase in the risk of adverse events with LABA/LAMA FDCs vs the monocomponents.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supporting the efficacy of LABA/LAMA FDCs for COPD is heterogeneous, particularly for TDI and SGRQ scores, exacerbation rates, ET, and IC. So far, indacaterol/glycopyrronium is the LABA/LAMA FDC that has the strongest evidence for superiority vs LABA, LAMA, and LABA/ICS FDCs across the evaluated outcomes. LABA/LAMA FDCs were safe; however, more data should be collected in a real-world setting to confirm their safety.

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

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

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.

Muscarinic Receptor Antagonists

Parasympathetic activity is increased in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma and appears to be the major reversible component of airway obstruction. Therefore, treatment with muscarinic receptor antagonists is an effective bronchodilator therapy in COPD and also in asthmatic patients. In recent years, the accumulating evidence that the cholinergic system controls not only contraction by airway smooth muscle but also the functions of inflammatory cells and airway epithelial cells has suggested that muscarinic receptor antagonists could exert other effects that may be of clinical relevance when we must treat a patient suffering from COPD or asthma. There are currently six muscarinic receptor antagonists licenced for use in the treatment of COPD, the short-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (SAMAs) ipratropium bromide and oxitropium bromide and the long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) aclidinium bromide, tiotropium bromide, glycopyrronium bromide and umeclidinium bromide. Concerns have been raised about possible associations of muscarinic receptor antagonists with cardiovascular safety, but the most advanced compounds seem to have an improved safety profile. Further beneficial effects of SAMAs and LAMAs are seen when added to existing treatments, including LABAs, inhaled corticosteroids and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors. The importance of tiotropium bromide in the maintenance treatment of COPD, and likely in asthma, has spurred further research to identify new LAMAs. There are a number of molecules that are being identified, but only few have reached the clinical development.

Pharmacological characterization of the interaction between umeclidinium and vilanterol in human bronchi

The long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) / long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed dose combination (FDC) therapy represents the cornerstone for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Nevertheless, conflicting clinical findings still exist on the real benefit of the LABA/LAMA FDCs. Therefore, we investigated whether combining the LABA vilanterol with the LAMA umeclidinium may induce synergistic bronchorelaxant effect in isolated airways. The effect of umeclidinium and vilanterol, administered alone, in combination at the ratio of concentrations reproducing the doses delivered by Anoro^® Ellipta^® (55:22), or at isoeffective low concentrations, was investigated on the cholinergic contractile tone induced by the parasympathetic activation of human isolated airways. The interaction was analyzed by using the Bliss Independence and Unified Theory models. Umeclidinium and vilanterol induced a concentration-dependent relaxation of isolated bronchi, with umeclidinium significantly (P < 0.05) more potent than vilanterol (E_max at 10Hz: umeclidium 102.6 ± 6.8%, vilanterol 75.1 ± 13.8%; pEC₅₀ at 10Hz: umeclidinium 8.6 ± 0.4, vilanterol 6.9 ± 0.6). When administered at 55:22 concentration-ratio, umeclidinium plus vilanterol completely relaxed the isolated airways (E_max at 10Hz: 99.6 ± 8.0%; pEC₅₀ at 10Hz: 8.2 ± 0.4). No synergistic interaction was detected for umeclidinium/vilanterol combined at 55:22 ratio, whereas strong synergism was elicited when the drugs were administered at low isoeffective concentrations (+ 41.4 ± 5.8% vs. monocomponents), leading to submaximal relaxant effect (81.4 ± 5.8%). Umeclidinium and vilanterol are imbalanced when combined at 55:22 ratio, with umeclidinium over-dosed, or vice versa vilanterol under-dosed. Specific studies are needed to identify the dose ratio of umeclidinium/vilanterol combination to guarantee equipotency concentrations of each component into the lung, and induce synergistic bronchodilation.

Why choose tiotropium for my patient? A comprehensive review of actions and outcomes versus other bronchodilators

PURPOSE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are leading causes of morbidity and mortality. This narrative review provides an appraisal of the pharmacological and clinical characteristics of tiotropium in COPD and asthma, and examines how these compare with other long-acting bronchodilators. The evidence base is placed into context by relating it to factors affecting clinicians' choice of therapy.

MAIN FINDINGS

Desirable attributes of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) maintenance therapy include effective pharmacological bronchodilation, improved lung function, exacerbation efficacy, and positive effects on symptom control, exercise capacity and quality of life across a broad patient population. Tolerability and convenience of use are also important for patient well-being and treatment adherence. Tiotropium shows higher affinity for muscarinic receptors than ipratropium, and prolonged binding to the M₃ receptor compared with other LAMAs. In COPD, tiotropium has demonstrated improved lung function and exacerbation prevention compared with placebo or long-acting β₂-agonists, similar exacerbation efficacy to other LAMAs, and enhanced symptom control and health status versus placebo. UniTinA-asthma^® showed the benefits of add-on tiotropium in patients with uncontrolled mild to moderate and severe asthma. Tiotropium is well tolerated, with an incidence of adverse events similar to placebo, except for known infrequent side effects of anticholinergics. Tiotropium HandiHaler^® and Respimat^® augment inhaler choice in COPD.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

With over 10 years' prescribing history and 50 million patient-years of use, tiotropium has the benefit of a more extensive clinical evidence base than other long-acting bronchodilators, with demonstrated efficacy and safety in COPD and symptomatic asthma.

Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists for Difficult-to-Treat Asthma: Emerging Evidence and Future Directions

Asthma is a complex disease where many patients remain symptomatic despite guideline-directed therapy. This suggests an unmet need for alternative treatment approaches. Understanding the physiological role of muscarinic receptors and the parasympathetic nervous system in the respiratory tract will provide a foundation of alternative therapeutics in asthma. Currently, several long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are on the market for the treatment of respiratory diseases. Many studies have shown the effectiveness of tiotropium, a LAMA, as add-on therapy in uncontrolled asthma. These studies led to FDA approval for tiotropium use in asthma. In this review, we discuss how the neurotransmitter acetylcholine itself contributes to inflammation, bronchoconstriction, and remodeling in asthma. We further describe the current clinical studies evaluating LAMAs in adult and adolescent patients with asthma, providing a comprehensive review of the current known physiological benefits of LAMAs in respiratory disease.

Efficacy of tiotropium-olodaterol fixed-dose combination in COPD

Tiotropium-olodaterol, formulated in the Respimat soft-mist inhaler, is an inhaled fixed-dose combination (FDC) of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), commercialized under the name of Spiolto or Stiolto. The efficacy of tiotropium-olodaterol 5-5 μg once daily in adult patients with COPD was documented in eleven large, multicenter trials of up to 52 weeks duration. Tiotropium-olodaterol 5-5 μg not only improved spirometric values to a significantly greater extent than placebo but also resulted in statistically significant beneficial effects on dyspnea, markers of hyperinflation, use of rescue medication, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance. Improvements exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), dyspnea, and quality of life. Differences between tiotropium-olodaterol 5-5 μg and the respective monocomponents were statistically significant for FEV1, dyspnea, markers of hyperinflation, use of rescue medication, and health-related quality of life, but did not reach the MCID. However, dual bronchodilatation significantly increased the number of patients who exceeded the MCID for dyspnea and quality of life. Moreover, tiotropium-olodaterol 5-5 μg was significantly more effective than salmeterol-fluticasone (FDC) twice daily at improving pulmonary function. Differences between tiotropium-olodaterol and other LAMA/LABA FDCs were not observed for FEV1 or other efficacy markers. Therefore, tiotropium-olodaterol is a valuable option in the treatment of COPD patients who remain symptomatic under monotherapy.

Treatment options for moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

The appropriate drug management of COPD is still based on the use of bronchodilators, possibly associated with an anti-inflammatory agent. However, there are still fundamental questions that require clarification to optimise their use and major unmet clinical needs that must be addressed.

AREAS COVERED

The advances obtained with the pharmacological options currently consolidated and the different approaches that are often used in an attempt to respond to unmet therapeutic needs are reviewed Expert opinion: In view of the unsatisfactory status of current treatments for COPD, there is an urgent need for alternative and more effective therapeutic approaches that will help to relieve patient symptoms and affect the natural course of COPD, inhibiting chronic inflammation and reversing the disease process or preventing its progression. However, new pharmacologic options have proved difficult to develop. Therefore, it is mandatory to optimize the use of the treatment options at our disposal. However, there are still fundamental questions regarding their use, including the step-up and step-down pharmacological approach, that require clarification to optimise the use of these drugs. It is likely that phenotyping COPD patients would help in identifying the right treatment for each COPD patient and improve the effectiveness of therapies.

New combinations in the treatment of COPD: rationale for aclidinium-formoterol

The current guidelines on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend the prominent use of bronchodilators, including long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), while inhaled corticosteroids are recommended only in patients with severe disease or frequent exacerbations. LABA–LAMA combinations are indicated when single bronchodilators are insufficient to control COPD. A number of LABA–LAMA combinations are available, based on twice-daily or once-daily administration according to the 12- or 24-hour duration of action, respectively. The aclidinium–formoterol combination is based on the new LAMA aclidinium bromide, which has a high selectivity for M₃ muscarinic receptors and a fast onset of action, and the well-known LABA formoterol. Both drugs require twice-daily administration. The fixed-dose combination of aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 12 μg has shown in randomized controlled trials fast and sustained bronchodilation that was greater than either monotherapy and provided clinically significant improvements in dyspnea and health status compared with placebo, also reducing the use of rescue medications. The overall incidence of adverse events was low and comparable to placebo. These data define the aclidinium–formoterol fixed-dose combination as a new treatment option for patients with COPD. The need for twice-daily administration could be an apparent disadvantage compared to the available once-daily LABA–LAMA combinations, but the immediately perceived benefit in reducing dyspnea due to the fast onset of action, as well as reported correct patient use and satisfaction with the Genuair inhaler might prove useful in favoring adherence.

Striving for optimal bronchodilation: focus on olodaterol

β2-agonists were introduced in the 1940s as bronchodilators to be used in obstructive respiratory diseases. Long-acting β2-agonists have been a mainstay of bronchodilating treatment for decades. Recently, agents extending their effect to 24 hours and thus allowing the once-daily administration were introduced, defined as very-long-acting β2-agonists. Olodaterol is a new very-long-acting β2-agonist that has been shown, in controlled trials, to improve lung function as well as clinical outcomes and quality of life. Most of these trials included patients with moderate, severe, or very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Olodaterol has a rapid onset of action (comparable to formoterol) and provides bronchodilation over 24 hours. In controlled trials, olodaterol was shown to be as effective as formoterol twice daily, but significantly superior in terms of quality of life in patients with COPD. The safety profile of olodaterol was very good, with a rate of adverse events, including the cardiac events that are particularly important for β2-agonists, comparable to placebo. Also, the efficiency of the Respimat(®) device concurs to the effectiveness of treatment.

Specific role of combination aclidinium: formoterol in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Co-administration of a long-acting β2-agonist and a long acting muscarinic antagonist produces superior bronchodilation compared with their individual effects. Our preclinical data indicated that combining aclidinium bromide (ACLI) and formoterol fumarate (FORM) provides synergistic benefit on smooth muscle relaxation of both large and small human airways. Data from more than 2,000 patients in eleven clinical trials documented that ACLI/FORM, a twice-daily fixed-dose combination, produces a greater degree of bronchodilation than ACLI or FORM monotherapy alone and is safe and well tolerated. Two large key trials have shown that there is a benefit in using ACLI/FORM when the clinical target is the variability of symptoms and mainly nighttime and/or early morning symptoms. ACLI/FORM is the only long acting muscarinic antagonist/long acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combination that has been studied for this therapeutic indication.

Differential pharmacology and clinical utility of long-acting bronchodilators in COPD - focus on olodaterol

Olodaterol (BI 1744 CL) is a novel, once-daily long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) designed with the aim of improving β₂-adrenoreceptor selectivity and intrinsic activity. Phase III pivotal trials have documented that olodaterol Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 5 μg induces fast onset of bronchodilation, comparable with formoterol at day 1. Moreover, significant lung function improvements have been documented up to 48 weeks in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Olodaterol was generally well tolerated and had an acceptable cardiovascular and respiratory adverse event profile. Regrettably, the clinical development of olodaterol is however still too partial to draw any firm conclusions on the positioning of this ultra-LABA as monotherapy in the management of COPD. Waiting for further data on the impact of olodaterol on different patient-reported outcomes, which however are widely available for indacaterol, and mainly for a head-to-head comparison between these two ultra-LABAs and between olodaterol long-acting antimuscarinic antagonists other than tiotropium, we believe it is correct to follow the clinical indications of indacaterol also for olodaterol. In any case, the parallel bronchodilating modes of action of olodaterol and tiotropium make them an attractive combination in COPD. The results from the ongoing large TOviTO Phase III trial program have documented the efficacy and safety of olodaterol/tiotropium fixed-dose combination as maintenance therapy in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. In particular, olodaterol/tiotropium fixed-dose combination provides a convincing alternative for patients remaining symptomatic with olodaterol monotherapy.