The efficacy of tiotropium administered via Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler or HandiHaler in COPD patients

Aerosol Plumes of Inhalers Used in COPD

INTRODUCTION

The selection of inhaler device is of critical importance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as the interaction between a patient's inhalation profile and the aerosol characteristics of an inhaler can affect drug delivery and lung deposition. This study assessed the in vitro aerosol characteristics of inhaler devices approved for the treatment of COPD, including a soft mist inhaler (SMI), pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), and dry powder inhalers (DPIs).

METHODS

High-speed video recording was used to visualize and measure aerosol velocity and spray duration for nine different inhalers (one SMI, three pMDIs, and five DPIs), each containing dual or triple fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists and long-acting β2-agonists, with or without an inhaled corticosteroid. Measurements were taken in triplicate at experimental flow rates of 30, 60, and 90 l/min. Optimal flow rates were defined based on pharmacopoeial testing requirements: 30 l/min for pMDIs and SMIs, and the rate achieving a 4-kPa pressure drop against internal inhaler resistance for DPIs. Comparison of aerosol plumes was based on the experimental flow rates closest to the optimal flow rates.

RESULTS

The Respimat SMI had the slowest plume velocity (0.99 m/s) and longest spray duration (1447 ms) compared with pMDIs (velocity: 3.65-5.09 m/s; duration: 227-270 ms) and DPIs (velocity: 1.43-4.60 m/s; duration: 60-757 ms). With increasing flow rates, SMI aerosol duration was unaffected, but velocity increased (maximum 2.63 m/s), pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected, and DPI aerosol velocity tended to increase, with a more variable impact on duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosol characteristics (velocity and duration of aerosol plume) vary by inhaler type. Plume velocity was lower and spray duration longer for the SMI compared with pMDIs and DPIs. Increasing experimental flow rate was associated with faster plume velocity for DPIs and the SMI, with no or variable impact on plume duration, whereas pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected by increasing flow rate.

Effect of Tiotropium Soft Mist Inhalers on Dynamic Changes in Lung Mechanics of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A Prospective Pilot Study

The effects of tiotropium bromide soft mist inhalers (SMIs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving mechanical ventilation remain unexplored. This study investigated the dynamic effects of a tiotropium SMI on lung mechanics and gas exchange in these patients. We analyzed 11 mechanically ventilated and hemodynamically stable patients with COPD who experienced acute exacerbation and were ready to be weaned from the ventilator. Two puffs of tiotropium (2.5 μg/puff) were administered with a T-adaptor connected to the ventilator circuit. Lung mechanics—peak inspiratory pressure, plateau pressure, mean airway pressure, maximum respiratory resistance (Rrs), and gas exchange function—were analyzed. The two-puff tiotropium SMI treatment led to the greatest reduction in Rrs at 6 h, with the Rrs returning to baseline gradually, and significantly improved the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at 24 h. Compared with baseline values, tiotropium SMI had the strongest effect on Rrs between hours 3 and 6 but did not significantly affect hemodynamic parameters. Tiotropium SMI administration in mechanically ventilated patients with COPD achieved the greatest reduction in Rrs at 6 h and significantly improved the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at 24 h. Future studies should investigate whether the bronchodilation effect can be improved with increased dosage or frequency.

Tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a review of clinical development

Background

Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment for Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) groups B, C, and D.

Main body

Tiotropium bromide was the first LAMA available for COPD in clinical practice and, because of its long duration of action, is administered once daily. Tiotropium was initially available as an inhalation powder delivered via a dry-powder inhaler (DPI). Later, tiotropium also became available as an inhalation spray delivered via a soft mist inhaler (SMI). The SMI was designed to overcome or minimize some of the issues associated with other inhaler types (eg, the need for strong inspiratory airflow with DPIs). Results of short- and long-term randomized, controlled clinical trials of tiotropium in patients with COPD indicated tiotropium was safe and significantly improved lung function, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance, and reduced dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, exacerbations, and use of rescue medication compared with placebo or active comparators. These positive efficacy findings triggered the evaluation of tiotropium in fixed-dose combination with olodaterol (a long-acting β₂-agonist). In this review, we provide an overview of studies of tiotropium for the treatment of COPD, with a focus on pivotal studies.

Conclusion

Tiotropium is safe and efficacious as a long-term, once-daily LAMA for the maintenance treatment of COPD and for reducing COPD exacerbations. The SMI generates a low-velocity, long-duration aerosol spray with a high fine-particle fraction, which results in marked lung drug deposition. In addition, high inspiratory flow rates are not required.

Comparing Randomized Controlled Trials and Real-World Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Pharmacotherapy

Analytic epidemiological studies cover a large spectrum of study methodologies, ranging from noninterventional observational studies (population-based, case-control, or cohort studies) to interventional studies (clinical trials). Herein, we review the different research methodologies or study designs and discuss their advantages and disadvantages in the context of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) pharmacotherapy. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the "gold standard" for evaluating the efficacy and safety of an intervention, observational studies conducted in a real-world scenario are useful in providing evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention in clinical practice; understanding both efficacy and effectiveness is important from the clinician's perspective. Pragmatic clinical trials that use real-world data while retaining randomization bridge the gap between explanatory RCTs and noninterventional observational studies. Overall, different study designs have their associated advantages and disadvantages; together, findings from all types of studies bring about progress in clinical research as elucidated through examples from COPD research in this paper.

The Respimat® Soft Mist Inhaler: Implications of Drug Delivery Characteristics for Patients

Successful treatment for respiratory diseases relies on effective delivery of medication to the lungs using an inhalation device. Different inhalers have distinct characteristics affecting drug administration and patient adherence, which can impact clinical outcomes. We report on the development of the Respimat^® soft mist inhaler (SMI) and compare key attributes with metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). The Respimat SMI, a pocket-sized device generating a single-breath, inhalable aerosol, was designed to enhance drug delivery to the lungs, reduce the requirements for patient coordination and inspiratory effort, and improve the patients’ experience and ease of use. The drug deposition profile with Respimat SMI is favorable compared with MDIs and DPIs, with higher drug deposition to the lung and peripheral airways. The slow velocity and long spray duration of the Respimat SMI aerosol also aid patient coordination. Clinical equivalence has been demonstrated for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using once-daily tiotropium between Respimat SMI (5 µg) and HandiHaler DPI (18 µg). In comparative studies, patients preferred Respimat SMI to MDIs and DPIs; they reported that Respimat SMI was easy to use and felt the inhaled dose was delivered. The Respimat SMI, designed to generate a slow-moving and fine mist, is easy to use and effectively delivers drug treatment to the lungs. The patient-centered design of Respimat SMI improved patient satisfaction, and may help to promote long-term adherence and improve clinical outcomes with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Evaluation of patients' real-world post-dispensing use and storage environments of tiotropium bromide Respimat® soft mist inhaler on its in vitro dose delivery and lung deposition

BACKGROUND

Oral inhalation is the main drug delivery route for treating obstructive lung conditions. Thus, many inhaler devices with various design and pharmaceutical formulation have been introduced. The fine particle dose (FPD) and mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD ≤ 5 μm) of the aerosol delivered dose (DD) dictate the therapeutically effective peripheral lung deposition. This study evaluated the in vitro aerosol emission performance of tiotropium bromide emitted from Spiriva® Respimat® soft mist inhalers (R) after living under patients' real-world, post-dispensing handling environments.

METHODS

This was a two-stage investigation. In the first clinical stage, research ethical approval was obtained to enrol patients already been using R for at least 3 months. Those who signed consent were given both new R to use and temperature and relative humidity (RH) handheld, portable data loggers to keep in the vicinity of the given R. The participants returned the given R and data loggers after 2 weeks. Patient recruitment took place in Amman, Jordan, during the summer (RS) and winter (RW). Subsequently, in the second laboratory stage, other R were strictly stored at an average of 21.0 °C and 46.9% RH as control (RC). The Next Generation Impactor (NGI) was used to evaluate the RS, RW and RC. The NGI was operated at a flow rate of 30 L/min.

RESULTS

The RS were exposed to an average (range) 23.6 °C (18.2-37.5 °C) and 43.8% RH (21.4-60.0% RH) that were statistically comparable (p > 0.05) to that of the RW; 17.3 °C (13.2-26.7 °C) and 52.8% RH (26.3-69.1% RH). The RW and RC retention environments were statistically different (p < 0.05), whilst the RS and RC had comparable (p > 0.05) conditions. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were found in the tiotropium bromide DD (2.39 vs 2.43 μg), FPD (0.88 vs 0.90 μg) and MMAD (5.1 vs 4.98 μm) between the RS and RW, respectively. Compared to the RC inhalers, both the RS and RW devices had significantly higher FPD and relatively smaller tiotropium bromide particles.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the R under the fluctuating summer and winter environments of our patients would not affect its overall tiotropium bromide emission performance. The significant increase in the respirable mass of the RS and RW might be offset by the increase in particles <1 μm particularly in patients with poor inhaler technique.

Delivered Lung Dose and Aerodynamic Particle Size Distribution of Salbutamol Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler After Living Under Patients' Realistic Retention Environments

Background: The impact of inhalers' postdispensing, real-life temperature and relative humidity (RH) environments on their delivered dose (DD) and aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) is usually overlooked. This work evaluated the salbutamol DD and APSD of Ventolin^® Evohaler^® (V) inhalers already been used and stored by respiratory patients. Methods: Adult patients, prescribed V for ≥3 months before study enrollment, were dispensed both new V to use and portable, handheld electronic temperature and RH data loggers to keep close to the given V before returning them both after 2-3 weeks. Patients' enrollment took place during summer (VS) and winter (VW) seasons. The returned V was then in vitro evaluated using the Next Generation Impactor, and compared with control V (VC) counterparts stored under 21°C and 46% RH. Results: The VS survived in fluctuating habitats of 21.2°C-40.4°C and 16.2%-63.2% RH, which significantly (p < 0.05) decreased the salbutamol DD from 80.4 to 70.5 μg compared with VC. This 12.3% DD reduction was accompanied with a decrease in the fine particle dose from 26.2 to 20.4 μg (p < 0.05), and an increase in the mass median aerodynamic diameter from 2.3 to 2.5 μm (p < 0.05). The VW and VC had equivalent DD and APSD. Conclusion: Patients using V are expected to receive smaller lung doses during the hot summer season compared with intentionally well-kept VC. To have equivalent lung deposition, V users should be advised to retain their inhalers around 20°C with minimal daily environmental fluctuations during summer times.

Improvements in Lung Function with Nebulized Revefenacin in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate to Very Severe COPD: Results from Two Replicate Phase III Clinical Trials

Background

Revefenacin, a novel, lung-selective, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, has been developed for nebulized therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We present the results of replicate Phase III efficacy and safety studies of revefenacin in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

Methods

In 2 double-blind, parallel-group studies, (Study 0126 and Study 0127), patients ≥ 40 years old were randomized to revefenacin 88 μg, revefenacin 175 μg or placebo administered once daily by standard jet nebulizer for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was 24-hour trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) on day 85. Secondary efficacy endpoints included overall treatment effect (OTE) on trough FEV₁ and peak FEV₁ (0-2 hours after first dose). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events.

Results

At day 85, revefenacin 88 µg and 175 µg improved trough FEV₁ versus placebo in Study 0126 (by 79 mL [p=0.0003] and 146 mL [p<0.0001]) and Study 0127 (by 160 mL and 147 mL; both p<0.0001). Compared with placebo, pooled data of revefenacin 88 µg and 175 µg increased OTE trough FEV₁ by 115 mL and 142 mL (both p<0.001) and increased peak FEV₁ by 127 mL and 129 mL (both p<0.0001). Revefenacin 175 µg demonstrated greater improvements in FEV₁ in concomitant long-acting beta2-agonist patients and in more severe patients than revefenacin 88 µg. Adverse events were minor.

Conclusion

Revefenacin, administered once daily for 12 weeks to patients with moderate to very severe COPD, demonstrated clinically significant improvements in trough FEV₁ and OTE FEV₁. Revefenacin was generally well tolerated with no major safety concerns.

Does device matter for inhaled therapies in advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)? A comparative trial of two devices

Objective

COPD patients have challenges for effective use of inhalers due to advanced age, fixed airflow obstruction and comorbid medical conditions. Published clinical trials investigate drug efficacy but rarely consider the inhaler device. This trial investigates device efficacy, comparing clinical outcomes for the same medication via two different devices. Our intention was to communicate the results and to critically appraise the study protocol to inform planning of future device comparison research. Subjects with spirometry confirming at least moderate COPD were randomly assigned to inhaler sequence; starting with Accuhaler or metered dose inhaler and spacer (MDI/s). After baseline testing, subjects were assigned to fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate (SFC) 500/50 mcg twice daily via the first device for 6 weeks’ duration, then changed to the alternate device for the following 6 weeks. Subjects were reassessed in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQL), exercise endurance and lung function after each exposure period.

Results

The recruitment target was not achieved due to unanticipated developments within the pharmaceutical industry, potentially compromising the study’s power. Study outcomes did not differ significantly according to the allocated inhaler device even after adjusting for baseline lung function or inhaler technique. Recommendations for future device comparison protocols are offered.

Trial registration Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, Current Controlled Trials ACTRN12618000075280, date of registration: 18.01.2018. Retrospectively registered

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-019-4123-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Particle size and gastrointestinal absorption influence tiotropium pharmacokinetics: a pilot bioequivalence study of PUR0200 and Spiriva HandiHaler

AIMS

Plasma pharmacokinetics permit the assessment of efficacy and safety of inhaled drugs, and possibly their bioequivalence to other inhaled products. Correlating drug product attributes to lung deposited dose is important to achieving equivalence. PUR0200 is a spray-dried formulation of tiotropium that enables more efficient lung delivery than Spiriva^® HandiHaler^® (HH). The ratio of tiotropium lung-to-oral deposition in PUR0200 was varied to investigate the impact of particle size on tiotropium pharmacokinetics, and the contribution of oral absorption to tiotropium exposure was assessed using charcoal block.

METHODS

A seven-period, single-dose, crossover study was performed in healthy subjects. PUR0200 formulations differing in dose and aerodynamic particle size were administered in five periods and Spiriva HH in two periods. In one period, Spiriva HH gastrointestinal absorption was blocked with oral charcoal. Tiotropium plasma concentrations were assessed over 8 h after inhalation.

RESULTS

PUR0200 pharmacokinetics were influenced by aerodynamic particle size and the ratio of lung-to-oral deposition, with impactor sized mass (ISM) correlating most strongly with exposure. Formulation PUR0217a (3 μg tiotropium) lung deposition was similar to Spiriva HH (18 μg) with and without charcoal block, but total PUR0200 exposure was lower without charcoal. The C_max and AUC_0-0.5h of Spiriva HH with and without charcoal block were bioequivalent; however, Spiriva HH AUC_0-8h was lower when gastrointestinal absorption was inhibited with oral charcoal administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacokinetic bioequivalence indicative of lung deposition and efficacy can be achieved by matching the reference product ISM. Due to reduced oral deposition and more efficient lung delivery, PUR0200 results in a lower AUC_0-t than Spiriva HH due to reduced absorption of drug from the gastrointestinal tract.

Anticholinergics for asthma: a long history

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a fast overview about the introduction and development of anticholinergic drugs in Western medicine to their current indications particularly in asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although short-acting muscarinic antagonists have been positioned in the last 15 years for the treatment of adults and children with moderate-to-severe acute asthma in the emergency setting (reducing the risk of hospital admissions and improving lung function), a growing body of evidence has recently emerged that positions the long-acting muscarinic anticholinergic tiotropium bromide as add-on therapy to at least inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) maintenance therapy in adults, adolescents, and children with symptomatic asthma. Thus, the addition of tiotropium bromide to ICS alone or ICS and another controller was associated with significant improvements in spirometric measures and asthma control, and a significantly decrease in the rate of asthma exacerbations.

SUMMARY

Short-acting muscarinic antagonists and tiotropium bromide have a well established role in the treatment of different phases of asthma. Further data are needed to provide more evidence on other selective long-acting muscarinic antagonists in addition to tiotropium as potential treatment options.

A 28-day, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study of nebulized revefenacin in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

Revefenacin is a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in clinical development for the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In a dose-ranging study, nebulized once-daily revefenacin had a long duration of action in patients after 7 days’ administration of doses up to 700 μg. In this multiple-dose study, the bronchodilation efficacy and adverse events profile were characterized in patients administered nebulized revefenacin once daily for 28 days.

Methods

A total of 355 COPD patients (mean age 62 years, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁] 44% of predicted) were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study. Inhaled corticosteroids as well as short-acting bronchodilators were permitted. Once-daily treatments (44, 88, 175 or 350 μg revefenacin or matching placebo) were administered by a standard jet nebulizer, for 28 days. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in D28 trough FEV₁, and secondary endpoints included weighted mean FEV₁ over 0 to 24 h and rescue medication (albuterol) use. Safety evaluations included adverse events, laboratory assessments, electrocardiograms and 24-h Holter profiles.

Results

Revefenacin (88, 175 and 350 μg) significantly improved D28 trough FEV₁ over placebo (187.4, 166.6 and 170.6 mL, respectively, all p < 0.001); 44 μg produced a sub-therapeutic response. At doses ≥88 μg, more than 80% of patients achieved at least a 100-mL increase from baseline FEV₁ in the first 4 h post dose compared with 33% of placebo patients. For doses ≥88 μg, D28 24 h weighted mean differences from placebo for FEV₁ were numerically similar to respective trough FEV₁ values, indicating bronchodilation was sustained for 24 h post dose. Doses ≥88 μg reduced the average number of albuterol puffs/day by more than one puff/day. The 350 μg dose did not demonstrate additional efficacy over that observed with 175 μg revefenacin. Revefenacin was generally well tolerated, with minimal reports of systemic anti-cholinergic effects.

Conclusions

These data suggest that 88 and 175 μg revefenacin are appropriate doses for use in longer-term safety and efficacy trials. Revefenacin offers the potential for the first once-daily LAMA for nebulization in patients with COPD who require or prefer a nebulized drug delivery option.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02040792. Registered January 16, 2014.

Effects of indacaterol versus tiotropium on exercise tolerance in patients with moderate COPD: a pilot randomized crossover study

Objective:

To compare a once-daily long-acting β₂ agonist (indacaterol 150 µg) with a once-daily long-acting anticholinergic (tiotropium 5 µg) in terms of their effects on exercise endurance (limit of tolerance, Tlim) in patients with moderate COPD. Secondary endpoints were their effects on lung hyperinflation, exercise-related dyspnea, and daily-life dyspnea.

Methods:

This was a randomized, single-blind, crossover pilot study involving 20 patients (mean age, 60.9 ± 10.0 years; mean FEV₁, 69 ± 7% of predicted). Spirometric parameters, Transition Dyspnea Index scores, Tlim, and exertional dyspnea were compared after three weeks of each treatment (with a one-week washout period between treatments).

Results:

Nineteen patients completed the study (one having been excluded because of COPD exacerbation). Improvement in Tlim from baseline tended to be greater after treatment with tiotropium than after treatment with indacaterol (96 ± 163 s vs. 8 ± 82 s; p = 0.06). Tlim significantly improved from baseline after treatment with tiotropium (having increased from 396 ± 319 s to 493 ± 347 s; p = 0.010) but not after treatment with indacaterol (having increased from 393 ± 246 to 401 ± 254 s; p = 0.678). There were no differences between the two treatments regarding improvements in Borg dyspnea scores and lung hyperinflation at "isotime" and peak exercise. There were also no significant differences between treatments regarding Transition Dyspnea Index scores (1.5 ± 2.1 vs. 0.9 ± 2.3; p = 0.39).

Conclusions:

In patients with moderate COPD, tiotropium tends to improve Tlim in comparison with indacaterol. No significant differences were observed between the two treatments regarding their effects on lung hyperinflation, exercise-related dyspnea, and daily-life dyspnea. Future studies, including a larger number of patients, are required in order to confirm our findings and explore mechanistic explanations. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01693003 [http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/])

Safety of inhaled long-acting anti-muscarinic agents in COPD

Evidence-based guidelines recommend inhaled long-acting anti-muscarinic agents (LAMAs) as first-line maintenance therapy for symptomatic patients with COPD. Several LAMAs are now available for use either as monotherapy or in combination with other COPD medications, including long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The efficacy and long-term safety of these medications have been evaluated in multiple clinical trials and real-life studies. This review evaluates the evidence available on the safety of existing LAMAs alone or in combination with LABAs and ICS in patients with COPD.

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.

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.

Pharmacokinetics of tiotropium administered by Respimat® in asthma patients: Analysis of pooled data from Phase II and III clinical trials

Tiotropium is a long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic bronchodilator that has recently received marketing authorization for the indication of asthma with dose delivery via the Respimat^® inhaler, in addition to its widely established role in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This report presents a combined analysis of tiotropium plasma and urine pharmacokinetics at steady state from 8 Phase II/III clinical trials in asthma and delineates the effects of patient characteristics on systemic exposure based on the parameters fe_0-24,ss (fraction of dose excreted unchanged in urine over 24 h post-dose at steady-state) and dose-normalized AUC_tau,ss and C_max,ss. Pharmacokinetics were also compared between asthma and COPD, incorporating data from 3 COPD Phase II/III clinical trials. Tiotropium pharmacokinetics in asthma were dose-proportional up to 5 μg dosed once daily. The following factors showed no statistically significant effects on tiotropium systemic exposure in asthma based on analysis of geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals: age, asthma severity, lung function, reversibility testing, allergy status, smoking history, geographical region, and posology (5 μg once daily or 2.5 μg twice daily via Respimat^®). Asian patients showed a moderately but significantly higher systemic exposure compared to White or Black patients. However, no differences in safety by race were observed. Total systemic exposure (AUC_tau,ss) was similar between asthma and COPD, but C_max,ss was 52% lower in asthma patients compared to COPD. It is concluded that in asthma, patient characteristics have no relevant effect on tiotropium systemic exposure. Since systemic exposure to inhaled drugs is an indicator of safety, the lower C_max,ss compared to COPD is not considered a concern for tiotropium therapy of asthma.

A review of nebulized drug delivery in COPD

Current guidelines recommend inhaled pharmacologic therapy as the preferred route of administration for treating COPD. Bronchodilators (β₂-agonists and antimuscarinics) are the mainstay of pharmacologic therapy in patients with COPD, with long-acting agents recommended for patients with moderate to severe symptoms or those who are at a higher risk for COPD exacerbations. Dry powder inhalers and pressurized metered dose inhalers are the most commonly used drug delivery devices, but they may be inadequate in various clinical scenarios (eg, the elderly, the cognitively impaired, and hospitalized patients). As more drugs become available in solution formulations, patients with COPD and their caregivers are becoming increasingly satisfied with nebulized drug delivery, which provides benefits similar to drugs delivered by handheld inhalers in both symptom relief and improved quality of life. This article reviews recent innovations in nebulized drug delivery and the important role of nebulized therapy in the treatment of COPD.

A systematic review of comparative studies of tiotropium Respimat® and tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: does inhaler choice matter?

BACKGROUND

In many countries worldwide, the long-acting anticholinergic drug tiotropium is available as a dry powder formulation delivered by means of the HandiHaler® inhalation device and as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler. Tiotropium HandiHaler® is a single-dose, dry powder, breath-actuated inhaler that provides delivered doses and lung deposition of tiotropium that are, over a wide range, not influenced by the severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium Respimat® is a propellant-free, multi-dose inhaler that delivers a metered dose of medication as a fine, slow-moving, long-lasting soft mist, independently of patient inspiratory effort. The high fine-particle fraction of droplets produced by the Respimat® inhaler optimizes the efficiency of drug delivery to the lungs.

METHODS

To help inform the choice of tiotropium inhaler for prescribers and patients, this systematic review summarizes the available pharmacokinetic, efficacy and safety data from comparative studies of tiotropium Respimat® and tiotropium HandiHaler® in COPD, focusing on the licensed once-daily doses of 5 and 18 μg, respectively. Data sources reviewed include publications and abstracts identified from database searches.

RESULTS

Published evidence from comparative studies suggests that tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg and tiotropium HandiHaler® 18 μg provide similar clinical outcomes in patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that physicians can base their decision about an inhaler for tiotropium on factors other than efficacy or safety. These could be patient preference for a particular inhaler, ease of use and the efficiency of drug delivery, with the aim of optimizing adherence and clinical outcomes with long-term tiotropium maintenance therapy.

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.

TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIRTM ): Analysis of Asian cohort of COPD patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) trial showed similar safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles for tiotropium Respimat and HandiHaler in patients with COPD. The TIOSPIR results for patients in Asia are presented here.

METHODS

TIOSPIR evaluated once-daily tiotropium Respimat 5 and 2.5 µg with HandiHaler 18 µg in patients with COPD. Primary endpoints included time to death and time to first COPD exacerbation. Safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles were determined for the Asian region, and for Asia (all treatment arms pooled) versus the rest of the world (RoW).

RESULTS

In Asia (n = 2356), time to death was similar for Respimat 5 and 2.5 µg versus HandiHaler 18 µg (hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI): 0.96 (0.67, 1.38) and 1.23 (0.87, 1.73)). Risk of COPD exacerbation was similar for Respimat 5 µg, but increased for 2.5 µg versus HandiHaler 18 µg (HR (95% CI): 0.99 (0.85, 1.15) and 1.17 (1.00, 1.35)). Time to death in Asia and RoW was similar (HR (95% CI): 1.15 (0.99, 1.35)). Time to first COPD exacerbation was longer (HR (95% CI): 0.84 (0.78, 0.89)) and exacerbation rates were lower in Asia, but severe exacerbations were more frequent than in the RoW. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar for both regions.

CONCLUSION

Similar safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles were observed for tiotropium Respimat 5 µg and HandiHaler 18 µg in patients with COPD from Asia, analogous to the global analysis. Asian patients had lower risk of, and fewer exacerbations overall, but a higher proportion of severe exacerbations than in the RoW.

Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

The long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide is approved in many countries as maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium is available as a dry-powder formulation delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) and is now also approved as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler (5 μg once daily, 2 puffs of 2.5 µg). Several studies have compared the efficacy of tiotropium HandiHaler (18 μg once daily) with different doses of Respimat. We aimed to compare available bronchodilator efficacy data of once-daily Respimat 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 µg, and HandiHaler 18 µg to investigate which dose of tiotropium delivered by Respimat is the closest match to tiotropium HandiHaler.

METHODS

Evaluation of six clinical trials (duration from 3 weeks to 2-3 years) that included lung function measures (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s and trough forced vital capacity) as key outcomes.

RESULTS

In the six trials, bronchodilator efficacy of Respimat 5 μg and HandiHaler 18 μg was similar; however, reduced bronchodilator efficacy was observed with lower doses of Respimat (1.25 and 2.5 μg).

CONCLUSION

These findings support the use of the marketed once-daily dose of Respimat 5 μg for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD.

FUNDING

Boehringer Ingelheim.

Efficiency of Ipratropium Bromide and Albuterol Deposition in the Lung Delivered via a Soft Mist Inhaler or Chlorofluorocarbon Metered-Dose Inhaler

The propellant-free Combivent Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler (CVT-R) was developed to replace the chlorofluorocarbon-propelled Combivent metered-dose inhaler (CVT-MDI). This steady-state pharmacokinetic (PK) substudy evaluated drug lung-delivery efficiency, using data from two phase III safety and efficacy trials. PK parameters were obtained from well-controlled population PK analyses. Area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC), maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)), and minimum observed plasma concentration (C(min)) showed systemic exposure to ipratropium bromide and albuterol delivered via the CVT-R was proportional to ex-mouthpiece delivered dose. Although the labeled dose of ipratropium bromide in the CVT-R was half that in the CVT-MDI, the systemic exposure was comparable. No PK interaction for the ipratropium bromide and albuterol Respimat drug components was demonstrated. Ipratropium bromide alone resulted in similar exposure to the combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol. These results show that CVT-R delivers drug more efficiently to the lung than CVT-MDI.

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.

Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics Following Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Dosing of Tiotropium Respimat® in Asthma Using Standardized Sample-Contamination Avoidance

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to confirm the 24-hour bronchodilator efficacy and pharmacokinetic profile of once-daily tiotropium Respimat^® 5 μg add-on to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adults with symptomatic asthma. It used a trial protocol designed to minimize the risk of pharmacokinetic sample contamination resulting from improper sampling procedure, sample handling, or device handling during priming and subsequent inhalation procedure.

METHODS

A Phase II, randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover study (NCT01696071) comparing two daily dosing regimens of tiotropium for 4 weeks, once-daily 5 μg (evening dosing) or twice-daily 2.5 μg (morning and evening dosing), as add-on to maintenance therapy with ICS (400-800 μg budesonide or equivalent) as controller medication. There was no washout between treatment periods.

RESULTS

An increase in the area under the curve of the 24-hour forced expiratory volume in 1 second profile from study baseline was observed following once-daily tiotropium 5 μg (217 mL) and twice-daily 2.5 μg (219 mL), with no difference between the two regimens (-2 mL [95% confidence interval: -38, 34]). In a subset of the study population, total tiotropium exposure, expressed as area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over 24 hours, was comparable between dosing regimens. Unexpected tiotropium plasma levels were observed in two patients, possibly because of contamination.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed bronchodilator efficacy over 24 hours was similar with once-daily tiotropium 5 μg and twice-daily 2.5 μg as add-on to ICS therapy, supporting the suitability of once-daily dosing to provide sustained improvements in lung function in adults with symptomatic asthma.

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.

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 Bromide in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Bronchial Asthma

Inhaled bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including β2-agonists and muscarinic antagonists. Tiotropium bromide, a long-acting antimuscarinic bronchodilator (LAMA), is a treatment choice for moderate-to-severe COPD; its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in recent trials. Studies also point to a beneficial role of tiotropium in the treatment of difficult-to-control asthma and a potential function in the asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). Combination of different bronchodilator molecules and addition of inhaled corticosteroids are viable therapeutic alternatives. A condensation of the latest trials and the rationale behind these therapies will be presented in this article.

Combined bronchodilators (tiotropium plus olodaterol) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a respiratory disease characterized by a progressive decline in lung function, is considered to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators, such as long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), are the cornerstone of maintenance therapy for patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD. For patients not sufficiently controlled on a single long-acting bronchodilator, a combination of different bronchodilators has shown a significant increase in lung function. Tiotropium, a once-daily dosing LAMA, demonstrated sustained improvements in lung function as well as improved health-related quality of life, reduced exacerbations, and increased survival without altering the rate of decline in the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) with fairly tolerable side effects. Olodaterol is a once-daily dosing LABA that has proven to be effective in improving lung function, reducing rescue medication use, and improving dyspnea and health-related quality of life, as well as improving exercise endurance with an acceptable safety profile. The combination of olodaterol and tiotropium provided additional improvements in lung function greater than monotherapy with each drug alone. Several well-designed randomized trials confirmed that the synergistic effect of both drugs in combination was able to improve lung function and health-related quality of life without a significant increase in adverse effects. The objective of this paper is to review available evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of tiotropium, olodaterol, and their combination in patients with COPD.

New developments in inhaler devices within pharmaceutical companies: A systematic review of the impact on clinical outcomes and patient preferences

BACKGROUND

Pharmaceutical companies offer an increasing number of inhaler devices, whether or not together with new substances, for maintenance treatment of patients with COPD or asthma. However, well-designed studies to support these developments are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this research was to evaluate how far new developments of inhaler devices are scientifically supported and translate into improvements of patient preferences and/or clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to retrieve randomised controlled trials in patients with COPD or asthma that studied the in-company evolution of inhaler devices. Results were tabulated and discussed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were found comparing Respimat(®) vs. HandiHaler(®), Diskus(®)(Accuhaler(®)) vs. Diskhaler(®)(Rotadisk(®)) or pMDI, Ellipta(®) vs. Diskus(®)(Accuhaler(®)), Nexthaler(®) vs. pMDI, or Breezhaler(®) vs. Aerolizer(®). These studies show that developments of inhaler devices may improve patient satisfaction but do not lead to demonstrable improvements in clinical efficacy. Current changes of devices are most commonly parallelled by changes in administration frequency towards once daily treatment. The only well-documented effect was found for the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler, which realises a more than 3-fold lowering of the once-daily tiotropium dose through increased performance of the inhaler device. There are however, no data on clinical efficacy or safety comparing the two devices at the same dosage.

CONCLUSIONS

Future developments of inhaler devices should all require well-designed studies to demonstrate patient benefit.

The safety of anticholinergic bronchodilators for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Poorly absorbable quaternary ammonium-inhaled muscarinic antagonists both as the short-acting ipratropium and as long-acting (12 - 24 h) agents (tiotropium, glycopyrronium, aclidinium and umeclidinium) have all demonstrated statistically and clinically significant efficacy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease compared with placebo. However, controversy has arisen concerning the safety of this class of agents principally regarding their association with both fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular toxicity.

AREAS COVERED

The safety of both ipratropium and the long-acting muscarinic antagonists is reviewed with a major emphasis on potential cardiovascular toxicity, based on published clinical trials data and results of analyses of pooled data, meta-analyses, and observational studies. Since glycopyrronium, aclidinium, and umeclidinium have become available only relatively recently, more emphasis will be placed on the more extensive literature concerning the safety of the older anticholinergic compounds, the short-acting ipratropium, and the long-acting tiotropium in its dry powder formulation, as well as its newer soft mist inhaler delivery device.

EXPERT OPINION

Pooled analyses and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tiotropium in both its dry powder and soft mist formulations, as well as some observational studies, have implicated this agent as increasing the risk of nonfatal and fatal cardiovascular events. However, the most robust evidence based on large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of relatively long duration specifically designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of tiotropium have not confirmed these safety concerns. Because of the relatively limited amount of safety data for the newer long-acting muscarinic antagonists compared to the far more extensive experience with tiotropium, it will be important to accumulate additional safety information from post-marketing pharmacovigilance for these newer agents.

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.

Cardiac safety of tiotropium in patients with cardiac events: a retrospective analysis of the UPLIFT® trial

Background

Tiotropium is an anticholinergic bronchodilator for symptom relief and reducing exacerbations with an established safety profile in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Using data from the 4-year Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT®) study, we re-evaluated the safety of tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients who experienced recent myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure or unstable rhythm disorder during the study.

Methods

A post-hoc analysis of all-cause mortality and serious cardiac adverse events (cardiac SAEs), including cardiac deaths and death unknown, was conducted in patients who had experienced cardiac arrhythmia, MI or cardiac failure during UPLIFT® and who completed the study. Descriptive analyses were performed.

Results

Most patients experiencing cardiac events, for which they would have been excluded at baseline, remained in the trial. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed a trend to later occurrence of cardiac SAEs with tiotropium HandiHaler® versus placebo. Patients who experienced a cardiac event and continued in UPLIFT® were not found to be at subsequently increased risk of all-cause mortality or cardiac SAEs with tiotropium treatment. Evaluation of deaths by major adverse cardiac events composite endpoints also showed that patients treated with tiotropium were not at increased risk of mortality or cardiac SAEs compared with placebo.

Conclusions

Risk of cardiac events, mortality or SAEs was not increased by tiotropium in patients experiencing cardiac events for which they would have been excluded at study baseline. The findings support the cardiac safety of tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients with COPD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-015-0216-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Opportunities in respiratory drug delivery

A wide range of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease products are soon to be released onto the inhaled therapies market and differentiation between these devices will help them to gain market share over their competitors. Current legislation is directing healthcare towards being more efficient and cost-effective in order to continually provide quality care despite the challenges of aging populations and fewer resources. Devices and drugs that can be differentiated by producing improved patient outcomes would, therefore, be likely to win market share. In this perspective article, the current and potential opportunities for the successful delivery and differentiation of new inhaled drug products are discussed.

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 mcg versus twice daily combination therapies in COPD - mixed treatment comparisons of clinical efficacy

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) treatment approved in the United States, Canada and Europe for the long-term maintenance therapy of COPD. We report data from mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) of once-daily FF/VI against established twice-daily ICS/LABA combination therapies on clinical efficacy outcomes.

METHODS

Data from 33 parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS/LABAs, of ≥8 weeks' duration in patients ≥12 years of age with COPD, identified by systematic review, were analysed using covariate-adjusted Bayesian hierarchical models for three efficacy outcomes. Lung function, assessed by change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), was the outcome of primary interest (n = 28 studies). Secondary objectives were assessment of annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (n = 15) and patient-reported health status, measured by change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total score (n = 20). Overall, 25 different treatments were included in the MTC; we report findings, including probabilities of non-inferiority, for comparisons of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with twice-daily fluticasone propionate (FP)/salmeterol (SAL) 500/50 mcg and budesonide (BUD)/formoterol (FORM) 400/12 mcg.

RESULTS

For FEV1, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated >99% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg using a 50 mL margin. For annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated 73% and 77% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg, respectively, using a 10% rate ratio margin. For SGRQ Total score, the corresponding probabilities of non-inferiority were 99% and 98%, respectively, on a 2-unit margin. Significant covariate effects were identified: increased age was associated with deterioration in FEV1 and reduced exacerbation frequency; shorter study duration was associated with reduced exacerbation frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

FF/VI 100/25 mcg was comparable with corresponding doses of FP/SAL and BUD/FORM on lung function and health status outcomes. Non-inferiority on moderate/severe exacerbation rate was not demonstrated to the same degree of confidence, though observed rates were similar. Model limitations include a weak treatment network for the exacerbation analysis and variability across the included studies. Our data support previous RCT findings suggesting that the efficacy of FF/VI 100/25 mcg on lung function and health status in COPD is comparable with twice-daily ICS/LABAs.

Tiotropium HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) in COPD: a pooled safety analysis

INTRODUCTION

Tiotropium is prescribed for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) or Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ inhaler (5 μg once daily). The recent TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat(®) (TIOSPIR™) study demonstrated that both exhibit similar safety profiles. This analysis provides an updated comprehensive safety evaluation of tiotropium(®) using data from placebo-controlled HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials.

METHODS

Pooled analysis of adverse event (AE) data from tiotropium HandiHaler(®) 18 μg and Respimat(®) 5 μg randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, clinical trials in patients with COPD (treatment duration ≥4 weeks). Incidence rates, rate ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials, both together and separately.

RESULTS

In the 28 HandiHaler(®) and 7 Respimat(®) trials included in this analysis, 11,626 patients were treated with placebo and 12,929 with tiotropium, totaling 14,909 (12,469 with HandiHaler(®); 2,440 with Respimat(®)) patient-years of tiotropium exposure. Mean age was 65 years, and mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 1.16 L (41% predicted). The risk (RR [95% CI]) of AEs (0.90 [0.87, 0.93]) and of serious AEs (SAEs) (0.94 [0.89, 0.99]) was significantly lower in the tiotropium than in the placebo group (HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) pooled results), and there was a numerically lower risk of fatal AEs (FAEs) (0.90 [0.79, 1.01]). The risk of cardiac AEs (0.93 [0.85, 1.02]) was numerically lower in the tiotropium group. Incidences of typical anticholinergic AEs, but not SAEs, were higher with tiotropium. Analyzed separately by inhaler, the risks of AE and SAE in the tiotropium groups remained lower than in placebo and similarly for FAEs.

CONCLUSION

This analysis indicates that tiotropium is associated with lower rates of AEs, SAEs, and similar rates of FAEs than placebo when delivered via HandiHaler(®) or Respimat(®) (overall and separately) in patients with COPD.

Questionnaire on switching from the tiotropium HandiHaler to the Respimat inhaler in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: changes in handling and preferences immediately and several years after the switch

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium (Spiriva) is an inhaled muscarinic antagonist for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is available in two forms: the HandiHaler and the Respimat inhaler. The aim of this study was to investigate the handling of and preference for each device immediately after switching from the HandiHaler to the Respimat and 2-3 years after the switch.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study comprised two surveys. A questionnaire was first administered to 57 patients with COPD (male:female 52:5, mean age 73.6±7.1 years) 8 weeks after switching from the HandiHaler (18 μg) to the Respimat (5 μg). A second similar but simplified questionnaire was administered to 39 of these patients who continued to use the Respimat and were available for follow-up after more than 2 years. Pulmonary function was also measured during each period.

RESULTS

In the first survey, 17.5% of patients preferred the HandiHaler, and 45.6% preferred the Respimat. There were no significant changes in pulmonary function or in the incidence of adverse events after the switch. In the second survey, performed 2-3 years later, the self-assessed handling of the Respimat had significantly improved, and the number of patients who preferred the Respimat had increased to 79.5%.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of the Respimat was similar to that of the HandiHaler. This was clear immediately after the switch, even in elderly patients with COPD who were long-term users of the HandiHaler. The preference for the Respimat increased with continued use.

Cardiac safety of tiotropium in patients with COPD: a combined analysis of Holter-ECG data from four randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is generally well tolerated; however, there has been debate whether antimuscarinics, particularly tiotropium administered via Respimat(®) Soft Mist(™) Inhaler, may induce cardiac arrhythmias in a vulnerable subpopulation with cardiovascular comorbidity. The aim of this study was to provide evidence of the cardiac safety of tiotropium maintenance therapy.

METHODS

Combined analysis of Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) data from clinical trials of tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Trials in the Boehringer Ingelheim clinical trials database conducted between 2003 and 2012, involving tiotropium HandiHaler(®) 18 μg and/or tiotropium Respimat(®) (1.25-, 2.5-, 5.0- and 10-μg doses) were reviewed. All trials involving Holter-ECG monitoring during this period were included in the analysis. Men and women aged ≥ 40 years with a smoking history of ≥ 10 pack-years, and a clinical diagnosis of COPD were included. Holter ECGs were evaluated for heart rate (HR), supraventricular premature beats (SVPBs), ventricular premature beats (VPBs) and pauses. Quantitative and categorical end-points were derived for each of the Holter monitoring days.

RESULTS

Four trials (n = 727) were included in the analysis. Respimat(®) (1.25-10 μg) or HandiHaler(®) (18 μg) was not associated with changes in HR, SVPBs, VPBs and pauses compared with placebo or the pretreatment baseline period. In terms of cardiac arrhythmia end-points, there was no evidence for an exposure-effect relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis, tiotropium maintenance therapy administered using Respimat(®) (1.25-10 μg) or HandiHaler(®) (18 μg) once daily for periods of up to 48 weeks was well tolerated with no increased risk of cardiac arrhythmia in patients with COPD.

Testing two different doses of tiotropium Respimat® in cystic fibrosis: phase 2 randomized trial results

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium is a once-daily, long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator with the potential to alleviate airway obstruction in cystic fibrosis. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2.5 and 5 µg once-daily tiotropium delivered via the Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler vs. placebo in people with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

This phase 2, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study of tiotropium Respimat as add-on to usual cystic fibrosis maintenance therapy included people with cystic fibrosis with pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥ 25% predicted. Co-primary efficacy end points were change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 4 hours (FEV1 AUC0-4h), and trough FEV1 at the end of week 12.

FINDINGS

A total of 510 subjects with cystic fibrosis aged 5-69 years were randomized. Both doses of tiotropium resulted in significant improvement compared with placebo in the co-primary efficacy end points at the end of week 12 (change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV1 AUC0-4h: 2.5 µg: 2.94%, 95% confidence interval 1.19-4.70, p = 0.001; 5 µg: 3.39%, 95% confidence interval 1.67-5.12, p = 0.0001; in percent-predicted trough FEV1 ∶ 2.5 µg: 2.24%, p = 0.2; 5 µg: 2.22%, p = 0.02). There was a greater benefit with tiotropium 5 vs. 2.5 µg. No treatment-related adverse events or unexpected safety findings were observed in patients taking tiotropium.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium significantly improved lung function in people with cystic fibrosis. The improvement was greater with the higher dose than the lower dose, with no difference in adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00737100 EudraCT 2008-001156-43.

Advances in device and formulation technologies for pulmonary drug delivery

Inhaled pharmaceuticals are formulated and delivered differently according to the therapeutic indication. However, specific device-formulation coupling is often fickle, and new medications or indications also demand new strategies. The discontinuation of chlorofluorocarbon propellants has seen replacement of older metered dose inhalers with dry powder inhaler formulations. High-dose dry powder inhalers are increasingly seen as an alternative dosage form for nebulised medications. In other cases, new medications have completely bypassed conventional inhalers and been formulated for use with unique inhalers such as the Staccato® device. Among these different devices, integration of software and electronic assistance has become a shared trend. This review covers recent device and formulation advances that are forming the current landscape of inhaled therapeutics.

COPD 2013: an update on treatment and newly approved medications for pharmacists

OBJECTIVES

To educate pharmacists about the Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (GOLD) guidelines for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), newly approved medications, and recent developments since the guidelines were published.

SUMMARY

The evidence-based GOLD guidelines provide recommendations for clinicians managing patients with COPD. These guidelines were revised most recently in 2013. Three new medications (indacaterol maleate, aclidinium bromide, and fluticasone furoate/vilanterol) have been approved in the previous 2 years. Adding to the armamentarium of medications for treating COPD is useful. Studies also have been conducted to determine which inhaled agents are preferred for use when long-acting bronchodilators are needed as mono- and combination therapy. In addition, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors and macrolides are being studied for use in COPD. An extensive COPD pipeline consists of many oral and inhaled medications, including olodaterol and glycopyrronium maleate, which are in Phase III clinical trials. Medication adherence is a very important piece of COPD management. Pharmacists play an integral role in drug selection and patient education to ensure the best possible outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The GOLD guidelines represent the standard of care for COPD management. New drug approvals and recent research may affect practitioner choices in managing the disease. Pharmacists can improve medication adherence and selection in order to maximize therapeutic effectiveness and ensure that patients are using inhalation delivery devices optimally.

Inhaled beta-2-agonists/muscarinic antagonists and acute myocardial infarction in COPD patients

OBJECTIVE

Empirical results indicate an increased risk for cardiovascular (CV) adverse drug events (ADE) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients treated with beta-2-agonists (B2A) and muscarinic antagonists (MA). A systematic review (including a meta-analysis for drug classes with sufficient sample size) was conducted assessing the association between B2A or MA and acute myocardial infarctions (MI) in COPD patients.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane database) was performed (January 1, 1946-April 1, 2013). Results were presented by narrative synthesis including a comprehensive quality assessment. In the meta-analysis, a random effects model was used for estimating relative risk estimates for acute MI.

RESULTS

Eight studies (two systematic reviews, two randomized controlled trials, and four observational studies) were comprised. Most studies comparing tiotropium vs. placebo showed a decreased MI risk for tiotropium, whereas for studies with active control arms no clear tendency was revealed. For short-acting B2A, an increased MI risk was shown after first treatment initiation. For all studies, a good quality was found despite some shortcomings in ADE-specific criteria. A meta-analysis could be conducted for tiotropium vs. placebo only, showing a relative risk reduction of MI (0.74 [0.61-0.90]) with no evidence of statistical heterogeneity among the included trials (I(2) = 0%; p = 0.8090).

CONCLUSIONS

An MI-protective effect of tiotropium compared to placebo was found, which might be attributable to an effective COPD treatment leading to a decrease in COPD-related cardiovascular events. Further studies with effective control arms and minimal CV risk are required determining precisely tiotropium's cardiovascular risk.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of tiotropium solution and tiotropium powder in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The aim of the study was to characterize pharmacokinetics of tiotropium solution 5 µg compared to powder 18 µg and assess dose-dependency of tiotropium solution pharmacodynamics in comparison to placebo. In total 154 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were included in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind within-solution (1.25, 2.5, 5 µg, and placebo), and open-label powder 18 µg, crossover study, including 4-week treatment periods. Primary end points were peak plasma concentration (Cmax,ss ), and area under the plasma concentration-time profile (AUC0-6h,ss ), both at steady state. The pharmacodynamic response was assessed by serial spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity). Safety was evaluated as adverse events and by electrocardiogram/Holter. Tiotropium was rapidly absorbed with a median tmax,ss of 5-7 minutes postdosing for both devices. The gMean ratio of solution 5 µg over powder 18 µg was 81% (90% confidence interval, 73-89%) for Cmax,ss and 76% (70-82%) for AUC0-6h,ss , indicating that bioequivalence was not established. Dose ordering for bronchodilation was observed. Powder 18 µg and solution 5 µg were most effective, providing comparable bronchodilation. All treatments were well tolerated with no apparent relation to dose or device. Comparable bronchodilator efficacy to powder18 µg at lower systemic exposure supports tiotropium solution 5 µg for maintenance treatment of COPD.

Tiotropium Respimat inhaler and the risk of death in COPD

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium delivered at a dose of 5 μg with the Respimat inhaler showed efficacy similar to that of 18 μg of tiotropium delivered with the HandiHaler inhalation device in placebo-controlled trials involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although tiotropium HandiHaler was associated with reduced mortality, as compared with placebo, more deaths were reported with tiotropium Respimat than with placebo.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial involving 17,135 patients with COPD, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat at a once-daily dose of 2.5 μg or 5 μg, as compared with tiotropium HandiHaler at a once-daily dose of 18 μg. Primary end points were the risk of death (noninferiority study, Respimat at a dose of 5 μg or 2.5 μg vs. HandiHaler) and the risk of the first COPD exacerbation (superiority study, Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler). We also assessed cardiovascular safety, including safety in patients with stable cardiac disease.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, Respimat was noninferior to HandiHaler with respect to the risk of death (Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.09; Respimat at a dose of 2.5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.14) and not superior to HandiHaler with respect to the risk of the first exacerbation (Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.03). Causes of death and incidences of major cardiovascular adverse events were similar in the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium Respimat at a dose of 5 μg or 2.5 μg had a safety profile and exacerbation efficacy similar to those of tiotropium HandiHaler at a dose of 18 μg in patients with COPD. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; TIOSPIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01126437.).