Effect of budesonide/formoterol pMDI on COPD exacerbations: A double-blind, randomized study

The application of nanoparticles as advanced drug delivery systems in Attenuating COPD

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a dilapidating condition which is characterized by inflammation, an excess in free radical generation and airway obstruction. Currently, the drugs commercially available for the management of COPD pose several limitations such as systemic adverse effects, including bone density loss and an increased risk of developing pneumonia. Moreover, another limitation includes the need for regular and frequent dosing regimens; which can affect the adherence to the therapy. Furthermore, these current treatments provide symptomatic relief; however, they cannot stop the progression of COPD. Comparatively, nanoparticles (NPs) provide great therapeutic potential to treat COPD due to their high specificity, biocompatibility, and higher bioavailability. Furthermore, the NP-based drug delivery systems involve less frequent dosing requirements and in smaller doses which assist in minimizing side effects. In this review, the benefits and limitations of conventional therapies are explored, while providing an in-depth insight on advanced applications of NP-based systems in the treatment of COPD.

Risk of adverse reactions associated with inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the majority of current therapeutic regimens for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bronchodilators are coupled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to lower the inflammatory response and improve symptoms. This study aims to evaluate the safety of ICS in the treatment of COPD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials related to ICS for COPD that were eligible up to 1 June 2023 were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. We searched and screened eligible studies for the occurrence of total adverse events, cardiovascular events, upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders, and finally analyzed them by Review Manager 5.4.1.

RESULTS

The results showed that ICS increased the incidence of adverse reactions in COPD patients (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.10, P = .0004); ICS treatment did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in COPD patients (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.88-1.02, P = .14); ICS increased the incidence of URTI in COPD patients (RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.02-1.62, P = .03); ICS increased the incidence of pneumonia in patients with COPD (RR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.63-2.69, P < .00001); ICS treatment significantly increased the incidence of oral Candida in patients with COPD (RR = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.99-4.41, P < .00001); ICS increased the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.51-5.45, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

ICS does not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with COPD, but it does increase the risk of URTI, pneumonia, oral Candida infections, and musculoskeletal disorders in patients with COPD.

LABA/LAMA versus LABA/ICS fixed-dose combinations in the prevention of COPD exacerbations: a modeling analysis of literature aggregate data

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to quantitatively compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in preventing moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using public databases. The time course characteristics of the probability of a moderate or severe exacerbation in stable COPD patients treated with LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS FDCs were described by the parametric survival function. A random-effects model in a single-arm meta-analysis was used to analyze the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) and pneumonia.

RESULTS

Twenty studies including 23,955 participants were included. The proportion of participants with a history of COPD exacerbation (%) in the previous year and the postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) (%predicted) were important factors affecting drug efficacy. After adjusting the above factors to median levels of 100% and 45.5%, respectively, the moderate or severe exacerbation rates at 52 weeks for olodaterol/tiotropium, formoterol/budesonide, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, formoterol/glycopyrronium, vilanterol/fluticasone, salmeterol/fluticasone, and vilanterol/umeclidinium were 38.3%, 41.0%, 42.6%, 47.0%, 47.5%, 47.9%, and 53.0%, respectively. In terms of safety, significant differences were observed among drugs containing different LABA/LAMA FDCs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that not all LABA/LAMA FDCs were superior to LABA/ICS FDCs in safety and in preventing moderate or severe exacerbations in patients with stable COPD, providing important quantitative information for COPD-related guidelines.

Effect of fracture risk in inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The fracture risk of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with inhaled corticosteroids is controversial. And some large-scale randomized controlled trials have not solved this problem. The purpose of our systematic review and meta-analysis including 44 RCTs is to reveal the effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the fracture risk of COPD patients.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently retrieved randomized controlled trials of inhaled corticosteroids or combinations of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of COPD from PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary outcome was a fracture event. This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022366778).

RESULTS

Forty-four RCTs were performed in 87,594 patients. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.37; P = 0.010), especially ICS/LABA (RR, 1.30; 95%CI, 1.10-1.53; P = 0.002) and triple therapy (RR, 1.49; 95%CI, 1.03-2.17; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture in COPD patients when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses showed that treatment duration ≥ 12 months (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.38; P = 0.01), budesonide therapy (RR, 1.64; 95%CI., 1.07-2.51; P = 0.02), fluticasone furoate therapy (RR, 1.37; 95%CI, 1.05-1.78; P = 0.02), mean age of study participants ≥ 65 (RR, 1.27; 95%CI, 1.01-1.61; P = 0.04), and GOLD stage III(RR, 1.18; 95%CI, 1.00-1.38; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with an increased risk of fracture. In addition, budesonide ≥ 320 ug bid via MDI (RR, 1.75; 95%CI, 1.07-2.87; P = 0.03) was significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture.

CONCLUSION

Inhalation therapy with ICSs, especially ICS/LABA or triple therapy, increased the risk of fracture in patients with COPD compared with inhaled therapy without ICS. Treatment duration, mean age of participants, GOLD stage, drug dosage form, and drug dose participated in this association. Moreover, different inhalation devices of the same drug also had differences in risk of fracture.

Practical Recommendations for a Selection of Inhaled Corticosteroids in COPD: A Composite ICO Chart

The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the maintenance of bronchodilator treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is controversial. While some patients achieve clinical benefits, such as fewer exacerbations and improved symptoms, others do not, and some experience undesired side effects, such as pneumonia. Thus, we reviewed the evidence related to predictors of ICS therapy treatment response in patients with COPD. The first priority clinical markers when considering the efficacy of ICS are type 2 inflammatory biomarkers, followed by a history of suspected asthma and recurrent exacerbations. It is also necessary to consider any potential infection risk associated with ICS, and several risk factors for pneumonia when using ICS have been clarified in recent years. In this article, based on the evidence supporting the selection of ICS for COPD, we propose an ICS composite that can be added to the COPD (ICO) chart for use in clinical practice. The chart divided the type 2 biomarkers into three ranges and provided recommendations (recommend, consider, and against) by combining the history of suspected asthma, history of exacerbations, and risk of infection.

Association of Inhaled Corticosteroids With All-Cause Mortality Risk in Patients With COPD: A Meta-analysis of 60 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have been used widely in the maintenance therapy of COPD. However, whether inhaled therapy containing ICSs can reduce the all-cause mortality risk and the possible benefited patient subgroups is unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does inhaled therapy containing ICSs reduce the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD compared with other inhaled therapies not containing ICSs?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Pooled results were calculated using Peto ORs with corresponding 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Sixty RCTs enrolling 103,034 patients were analyzed. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97), especially triple therapy (Peto OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91), was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk among patients with COPD when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses revealed that treatment duration of > 6 months (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), medium-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91), low-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97), and budesonide (Peto OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94) were involved in this association. The predictors of this association included eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL or percentage of ≥ 2%, documented history of ≥ 2 moderate and severe exacerbations in the previous year, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stages III or IV, age younger than 65 years, and BMI of ≥ 25 kg/m2, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL (Peto OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95) were the strongest predictor.

INTERPRETATION

Inhaled therapy containing ICSs, especially triple therapy, of longer than 6 months was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD. The predictors of this association included medication factors and patient characteristics, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL were the strongest predictor.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42022304725; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

High versus Medium Dose of Inhaled Corticosteroid in Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) combined with bronchodilators have been identified to improve outcomes in COPD but also to be associated with certain adverse effects.

Objective

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compile and summarize data on the efficacy and safety of dosing levels (high versus medium/low) of ICS alongside ancillary bronchodilators following PRISMA guidelines.

Data Sources

Medline and Embase were systematically searched until December 2021. Randomized, clinical trials (RCTs) that met predefined inclusion criteria were included.

Data Extraction

Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted. Any acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) risk was chosen as the primary efficacy outcome, mortality rate as the primary safety outcome, moderate/severe AECOPD risk as the secondary efficacy outcome and pneumonia risk as the secondary safety outcome. Subgroup analyses of individual ICS agents, of patients with baseline moderate/severe/very severe COPD and of patients with recent COPD exacerbation history were also performed. A random-effects model was used.

Results

We included 13 RCTs in our study. No data on low doses were included in the analysis. High dose ICS was not associated with a statistically significant difference in any AECOPD risk (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.05, I²: 41.3%), mortality rate (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.75-1.32, I²: 0.0%), moderate/severe AECOPD risk (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96-1.06, I²: 0.0%) or pneumonia risk (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.86 -1.33, I²: 9.3%) compared to medium dose ICS. The same trend was identified with the several subgroup analyses.

Conclusion

Our study collected RCTs investigating the optimal dosing level of ICS prescribed alongside ancillary bronchodilators to patients with COPD. We identified that the high ICS dose neither reduces AECOPD risk and mortality rates nor increases pneumonia risk relative to the medium dose.

Non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae airways infection: the next treatable trait in asthma?

Asthma is a complex, heterogeneous condition that affects over 350 million people globally. It is characterised by bronchial hyperreactivity and airways inflammation. A subset display marked airway neutrophilia, associated with worse lung function, higher morbidity and poor response to treatment. In these individuals, recent metagenomic studies have identified persistent bacterial infection, particularly with non-encapsulated strains of the Gram-negative bacterium Haemophilus influenzae. Here we review knowledge of non-typeable H. influenzae (NTHi) in the microbiology of asthma, the immune consequences of mucosal NTHi infection, various immune evasion mechanisms, and the clinical implications of NTHi infection for phenotyping and targeted therapies in neutrophilic asthma. Airway neutrophilia is associated with production of neutrophil chemokines and proinflammatory cytokines in the airways, including interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, IL-17A and tumour necrosis factor. NTHi adheres to and invades the lower respiratory tract epithelium, inducing the NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3) and absent in melanoma 2 (AIM2) inflammasomes. NTHi reduces expression of tight-junction proteins, impairing epithelial integrity, and can persist intracellularly. NTHi interacts with rhinoviruses synergistically via upregulation of intracellular cell adhesion molecule 1 and promotion of a neutrophilic environment, to which NTHi is adapted. We highlight the clinical relevance of this emerging pathogen and its relevance for the efficacy of long-term macrolide therapy in airways diseases, we identify important unanswered questions and we propose future directions for research.

Efficacy of ICS versus Non-ICS Combination Therapy in COPD: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Discordant diagnostic criteria for pneumonia in COPD trials: a review

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a class effect of increasing pneumonia risk in patients with COPD. However, pneumonia incidence varies widely across clinical trials of ICS use in COPD. This review clarifies methodological differences in defining and recording pneumonia events in these trials and discusses factors that could contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. Literature searches and screening yielded 40 relevant references for inclusion. Methods used to capture pneumonia events in these studies included investigator-reported pneumonia adverse events, standardised list of signs or symptoms, radiographic confirmation of suspected cases and/or confirmation by an independent clinical end-point committee. In general, more stringent pneumonia diagnosis criteria led to lower reported pneumonia incidence rates. In addition, studies varied in design and population characteristics, including exacerbation history and lung function, factors that probably contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. As such, cross-trial comparisons are problematic. A minimal set of standardised criteria for diagnosis and reporting of pneumonia should be used in COPD studies, as well as reporting of patients’ pneumonia history at baseline, to allow comparison of pneumonia rates between trials. Currently, within-trial comparison of ICS-containing versus non-ICS-containing treatments is the appropriate method to assess the influence of ICS on pneumonia incidence.

Trials of ICS in COPD use varying methods of reporting pneumonia incidence, which influence the interpretation of results. A minimal set of standardised criteria for pneumonia diagnosis would allow comparison of pneumonia incidence between trials.https://bit.ly/3nbkdoL

Personalising add-on treatment with inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a benefit-harm modelling study

BACKGROUND

Since the benefit-harm balance of adding inhaled corticosteroids to long-acting β₂-agonists (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is unclear, we evaluated this addition for a range of patient profiles.

METHODS

Analyses considered the effects of low-to-moderate doses of inhaled corticosteroids, LABA, and LAMA compared with LABA and LAMA alone, outcome incidences, and preference weights assigned to averted moderate-to-severe exacerbations (benefit) and severe pneumonia, candidiasis, and dysphonia (harm). Using exponential models, we estimated the preference weight-adjusted 2-year net clinical benefit (ie, benefits outweighing harms) indices. Exacerbation risk thresholds for triggering inhaled corticosteroids, LABA, and LAMA were established when the probability of a 2-year net clinical benefit reached 60%. We estimated the proportion of patients benefiting from added inhaled corticosteroids using an externally validated prediction model for acute exacerbations in primary care.

FINDINGS

Adding low-to-moderate dose inhaled corticosteroids to LABA and LAMA provided a net clinical benefit in patients with a 2-year baseline exacerbation risk of 54-83%. Low-dose inhaled corticosteroids showed a net clinical benefit if the baseline risk was 40-91%, but not at higher doses. The benefit was modified by blood eosinophil count (BEC) and age. Although no net benefit was associated with a BEC of less than 150 cells per μL, patients with a BEC of 150 cells per μL or more had a net benefit from low-dose inhaled corticosteroids with a 2-year exacerbation risk of 32-95% in those aged 40-79 years and 41-93% in those older than 80 years. A moderate dose of inhaled corticosteroids showed a net benefit in patients younger than 80 years with a BEC of 150 cells per μL or more at 52-86% 2-year exacerbation risk. Depending on the subgroups, the proportion of patients with a net benefit from added inhaled corticosteroids ranged from 0 to 68%.

INTERPRETATION

The net clinical benefit of adding different inhaled corticosteroid doses to LABA and LAMA varies greatly with exacerbation risk, BEC, and age. Personalised treatment decisions based on these factors and predicted exacerbation risks might reduce overtreatment and undertreatment with inhaled corticosteroids.

FUNDING

None.

Association between ICS use and risk of hyperglycemia in COPD patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on risk of hyperglycemia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains ambiguous. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between ICS use and the incidence of hyperglycemia related adverse effects in COPD patients.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 25 May 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS versus control (non-ICS) treatment for COPD patients reporting on risk of hyperglycemia were included. The Mantel-Haenszel method with fixed-effects modeling was used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs with 43,430 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled results suggested that there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of hyperglycemia between the ICS group and the control group (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90-1.16, P = 0.76). In addition, no significant difference was noted in the effect on glucose level (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.79-1.82, P = 0.40), risk of diabetes progression (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.20-3.51, P = 0.81) and new onset diabetes mellitus (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.88-1.15, P = 0.95) between the ICS group and the control group. These findings also were consistent across all subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ICS does not have an effect on the blood glucose and is not associated with the risk of new onset diabetes mellitus and diabetes progression in patients with COPD. Further RCTs exploring the association between ICS use and risk of hyperglycemia in COPD patients are still needed to verify our results of this analysis.

Blood eosinophil count-guided corticosteroid therapy and as a prognostic biomarker of exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms and dyspnea, as well as an increase in the number of leukocytes in the airways, lungs, and pulmonary vessels. A 'One size fits all' approach to COPD patients with different clinical features may be considered outdated. The following are the two major objectives of this meta-analysis: the first is to determine if blood eosinophil counts (BEC) can serve as a prognostic biomarker of COPD outcomes, and the second is to determine which level of BEC is effective for inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment.

METHODS

We searched articles published before 15 May 2021 in the following four electronic databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed.

RESULTS

A total of 42 studies, comprising a sampling of 188,710 subjects, were summarized and compared in this meta-analysis. The rate ratio (RR) of exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) between ICS and non-ICS treatment was statistically significant for the COPD patients with a baseline BEC ⩾ 2% or ⩾ 200 cells/μl, RR = 0.82 (0.73, 0.93) or 0.79 (0.70, 0.89) respectively, while the RR of ECOPD between ICS and non-ICS treatment was statistically insignificant for the COPD patients with baseline BEC < 2% or <200 cells/μl, RR = 0.97 (0.87, 1.08) or 0.97 (0.86, 1.08), suggested that ICS therapy was beneficial to the improvement of ECOPD in patients with a baseline BEC ⩾ 2% or BEC ⩾ 200 cells/μl.

CONCLUSION

Our research shows that a BEC ⩾ 200 cells/μl or ⩾2% is likely to become the cutoff value of ICS treatment for ECOPD. Moreover, we believe that the baseline BEC can be used as a biomarker for predicting ECOPD. The stability of BEC requires special attention.

Inhaled Corticosteroids and the Pneumonia Risk in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Whether all types of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) would increase the pneumonia risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the association between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk in COPD patients, and the impact of medication details and baseline characteristics of patients on the association.

Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov) were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ICSs treatment with non-ICSs treatment on the pneumonia risk in COPD patients. Pooled results were calculated using Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: A total of 59 RCTs enrolling 103,477 patients were analyzed. All types of ICSs significantly increased the pneumonia risk (Peto OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.34–1.53). Subgroup analysis showed that there was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk (low-dose: Peto OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.22–1.45; medium-dose: Peto OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28–1.76; and high-dose: Peto OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.45–1.85). Subgroup analyses based on treatment durations and baseline characteristics (severity, age, and body mass index) of patients were consistant with the above results. Subgroup analysis based on severity of pneumonia showed that fluticasone (Peto OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.44–2.14) increased the risk of serious pneumonia, while budesonide and beclomethasone did not.

Conclusions: ICSs treatment significantly increased the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients. There was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk. The pneumonia risk was related with COPD severity.

Systematic review on long-term adverse effects of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of COPD

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are indicated for the prevention of exacerbations in COPD; however, a significant proportion of patients at low risk of exacerbations are treated with ICSs. We conducted a systematic review including a diversity of types of study designs and safety outcomes with the objective of describing the risk of adverse effects associated with the long-term use of ICSs in patients with COPD.A total of 90 references corresponding to 83 studies were included, including 26 randomised clinical trials (RCTs), 33 cohort studies, and 24 nested case-control (NCC) studies. Analysis of 19 RCTs showed that exposure to ICSs for ≥1 year increased the risk of pneumonia by 41% (risk ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.61). Additionally, cohort and NCC studies showed an association between ICSs and risk of tuberculosis and mycobacterial disease. There was a strong association between ICS use and local disorders such as oral candidiasis and dysphonia. The association between ICSs and the risk of diabetes and fractures was less clear and appeared significant only at high doses of ICSs.Since most patients with COPD are elderly and with frequent comorbidities, an adequate risk-benefit balance is crucial for the indication of ICSs.

Benefit/Risk Profile of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with major healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. International consortia recommend a personalized approach to treatment and management that aims to reduce both symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Recent clinical trials have investigated single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for patients with symptomatic COPD. Here, we review evidence from randomized controlled trials showing the benefits of SITT and weigh these against the reported risk of pneumonia with ICS use. We highlight the challenges associated with cross-trial comparisons of benefit/risk, discuss blood eosinophils as a marker of ICS responsiveness, and summarize current treatment recommendations and the position of SITT in the management of COPD, including potential advantages in terms of improving patient adherence. Evidence from trials of SITT versus dual therapies in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and increased risk of exacerbations shows benefits in lung function and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, the key benefits reported with SITT are significant reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations, with data also suggesting reduced all-cause mortality. These benefits outweigh the ICS-class effect of higher incidence of study-reported pneumonia compared with LAMA/LABA. Important differences in trial design, baseline population characteristics, such as exacerbation history, and assessment of outcomes, have significant implications for interpreting data from cross-trial comparisons. Current understanding interprets the blood eosinophil count as a continuum that can help predict response to ICS and has utility alongside other clinical factors to aid treatment decision-making. We conclude that treatment decisions in COPD should be guided by an approach that considers benefit versus risk, with early optimization of treatment essential for maximizing long-term benefits and patient outcomes.

Longitudinal FEV1 and Exacerbation Risk in COPD: Quantifying the Association Using Joint Modelling

BACKGROUND

Lung function, measured as forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and exacerbations are two endpoints evaluated in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials. Joint analysis of these endpoints could potentially increase statistical power and enable assessment of efficacy in shorter and smaller clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate joint modelling as a tool for analyzing treatment effects in COPD clinical trials by quantifying the association between longitudinal improvements in FEV1 and exacerbation risk reduction.

METHODS

A joint model of longitudinal FEV1 and exacerbation risk was developed based on patient-level data from a Phase III clinical study in moderate-to-severe COPD (1740 patients), evaluating efficacy of fixed-dose combinations of a long-acting bronchodilator, formoterol, and an inhaled corticosteroid, budesonide. Two additional studies (1604 and 1042 patients) were used for external model validation and parameter re-estimation.

RESULTS

A significant (p<0.0001) association between FEV1 and exacerbation risk was estimated, with an approximate 10% reduction in exacerbation risk per 100 mL improvement in FEV1, consistent across trials and treatment arms. The risk reduction associated with improvements in FEV1 was relatively small compared to the overall exacerbation risk reduction for treatment arms including budesonide (10-15% per 160 µg budesonide). High baseline breathlessness score and previous history of exacerbations also influenced the risk of exacerbation.

CONCLUSION

Joint modelling can be used to co-analyze longitudinal FEV1 and exacerbation data in COPD clinical trials. The association between the endpoints was consistent and appeared unrelated to treatment mechanism, suggesting that improved lung function is indicative of an exacerbation risk reduction. The risk reduction associated with improved FEV1 was, however, generally small and no major impact on exacerbation trial design can be expected based on FEV1 alone. Further exploration with other longitudinal endpoints should be considered to further evaluate the use of joint modelling in analyzing COPD clinical trials.

Intraclass Difference in Pneumonia Risk with Fluticasone and Budesonide in COPD: A Systematic Review of Evidence from Direct-Comparison Studies

Background

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are widely used and recommended to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). While generally considered safe, several studies demonstrated an increased risk of pneumonia with the use of ICS in COPD patients. Although all ICS indicated for COPD carry the class labeling warning of increased pneumonia risk, evidence suggests an intraclass difference in the risk of pneumonia between inhaled budesonide and fluticasone. To date, systematic reviews of direct-comparison studies have not been performed to assess if an intraclass difference exists.

Research Question

This review investigated whether there is an intraclass difference in risk of pneumonia between inhaled fluticasone and budesonide, the 2 most commonly used ICS in COPD.

Study Design and Methods

A search of the medical literature was conducted in PubMed and Embase for the time period of 01/01/69–05/31/19. The search strategy combined terms that defined the patient/disease type, exposures, outcome, and the study/publication type. Descriptive and comparative statistics reported for fluticasone- and budesonide-containing products in each study, including data for pneumonia event subgroups, were extracted and reported by dose, seriousness, or practice setting. Controlled clinical trials and observational studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed for methodologic quality by using the appropriate tool from the list of study quality assessment tools developed by the National Institutes of Health.

Results

The summary relative risk (RR) ratio across 5 included studies (57,199 patients) was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.09–1.19), representing a 13.5% increased risk of pneumonia among fluticasone users compared to budesonide users. Similarly, summary RR ratio for serious pneumonia implied a 14.4% increased risk of serious pneumonia among fluticasone users compared to budesonide users (pooled RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09–1.20).

Interpretation

There is likely a clinically important intraclass difference in the risk of pneumonia between fluticasone- and budesonide-containing inhaled medications in COPD.

Association between inhaled corticosteroids and upper respiratory tract infection in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the association between inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and the risk of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from inception to October 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any ICSs vs control for COPD with reporting of URTI as an adverse event were included. The study was registered with PROSPERO prospectively (#CRD42020153134).

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs (20,478 patients) were included. ICSs significantly increased the risk of URTI in COPD patients (RR, 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.24; P = 0.01; heterogeneity: I2 = 7%). Futher subgroup analyses suggested that short-term use of ICSs increased the risk of URTI (RR, 1.29; 95% CI 1.06-1.56; P = 0.01; heterogeneity: I2 = 14%) but not for long-term use (RR, 1.08; 95% CI 0.97-1.2; P = 0.14; heterogeneity: I2 = 0%). Short-term use of high-dose fluticasone increased the risk of URTI (RR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.03-1.71; P = 0.03; heterogeneity: I2 = 0%) but not for long-term use (RR, 1.12; 95% CI 0.97-1.29; P = 0.13; heterogeneity: I2 = 50%). Medium-dose (RR, 0.97; 95% CI 0.71-1.32; P = 0.84; heterogeneity: I2 = 0%) and low-dose (RR, 1.39; 95% CI 0.92-2.1; P = 0.12; heterogeneity: I2 = 30%) fluticasone did not increase the risk of URTI regardless of duration. Neither mometasone (RR, 1.05; 95% CI 0.87-1.26; P = 0.61; heterogeneity: I2 = 0%) nor budesonide (RR, 1.08; 95% CI 0.77-1.5; P = 0.67; heterogeneity: I2 = 46%) increased the risk of URTI, regardless of dosage or duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term use of ICSs does not increase the risk of URTI in patients with COPD. Short-term use of high-dose fluticasone increases the risk of URTI in patients with COPD, but not mometasone or budesonide.

Inhaled Corticosteroids in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Benefits and Risks

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), when used in combination with long-acting bronchodilators, reduce the risk of exacerbations and improve health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with bronchodilator or ICS therapy alone. Potential side effects of ICSs include adverse effects on glycemic control, bone density, cataract formation, skin changes, oral candidiasis, and pulmonary infections. Pneumonia is observed at increased rates in COPD patients, in particular those with greater airflow limitation, low body mass index, advanced age, and male gender, and ICSs may increase this risk. Risk assessment is essential in selecting appropriate patients for ICS-containing therapy.

COPDCompEx: A novel composite endpoint for COPD exacerbations to enable faster clinical development

BACKGROUND

Frequency of moderate and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations is an important endpoint in clinical trials, but makes them large and lengthy when powered to evaluate it. We aimed to develop a composite endpoint (COPDCompEx) that could predict treatment effect on exacerbations, enabling the design of shorter early phase clinical trials requiring fewer patients.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, data from 20 randomized controlled trials were used to develop and test COPDCompEx. Diary events were tested against predefined threshold values for peak expiratory flow, reliever medication use, and symptoms. A COPDCompEx event was defined as first occurrence of a diary event, a moderate or severe exacerbation, or a study dropout. Ratios of event frequency, treatment effect and future trial sample size were compared between COPDCompEx and moderate and severe exacerbations.

FINDINGS

At 3 months, the proportion of patients experiencing COPDCompEx events increased over 3-fold versus exacerbations alone. All components contributed to COPDCompEx event rate. Treatment effects at 3 months were closely matched between COPDCompEx and exacerbations, and the large net gain in power substantially reduced the required sample size.

INTERPRETATION

COPDCompEx may be used to predict treatment effect on moderate and severe exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This may enable the design of shorter Phase 2 clinical trials requiring fewer patients when compared with current exacerbation studies, with exacerbations as a key Phase 3 endpoint. This would, therefore, allow more efficient decision-making with reduced burden and risk to study participants.

Risk of Pneumonia with Different Inhaled Corticosteroids in COPD Patients: A Meta-Analysis

ICS are anti-inflammatory agents which have been suggested to benefit people with worsening symptoms of COPD, by improving lung function, reducing exacerbation of disease, and enhancing overall quality of life. This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the association of the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients that were undergoing treatment using ICS alone or together with LABAs or LAMAs. PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE were systematically searched through August 1, 2019; only double-blinded randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Eighteen randomized controlled trials were included. ICS treatment was linked to increased pneumonia incidence (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71; p < 0.001; I2 = 39.6%). Patients treated with salmeterol/fluticasone were more likely to have experience pneumonia-related adverse events than those treated using budesonide/formoterol or beclomethasone/formoterol. In subgroup analyses, pneumonia risk was found to be higher in the subgroups: >65 years old, lowest baseline forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration (FEV1) < 50% of the predicted value, highest ICS dose, and long duration of ICS use. Furthermore, we compared fluticasone propionate with fluticasone furoate and determined that pneumonia incidence was higher in the former group and pneumonia incidence rose as doses rose in these two groups. However, no difference was observed between the budesonide and beclomethasone groups. ICS treatment was linked to an elevated pneumonia risk, different kinds of ICS lead to different rates of pneumonia.

Improving the evaluation of COPD exacerbation treatment effects by accounting for early treatment discontinuations: a post-hoc analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials aimed at evaluating treatment effects on exacerbations often suffer from early discontinuations of randomized treatment. Treatment discontinuations imply a loss of information and should ideally be considered in the statistical analysis of trial results, particularly if the discontinuations are related to the disease or treatment itself. Here, we explore this issue by investigating (1) whether there exists an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in COPD clinical trials and (2) whether disregarding this association can cause bias in exacerbation treatment effect estimates. We focus on the hypothetical estimand, i.e. the treatment effect that would have been observed had all subjects completed the trial as planned.

Methods

The association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was analysed by applying a joint frailty (random effect) model – allowing for the simultaneous analysis of multiple types of correlated events – to data from five Phase III-IV COPD clinical trials. Specifically, the impact of the association on exacerbation treatment effect estimates was assessed by comparing the treatment hazard ratios of the joint frailty model to the rate/hazard ratios of two related statistical models (the negative binomial and shared frailty models), which both assume discontinuations to be unrelated to the trial outcome. The models were also compared using simulated data.

Results

A statistically significant (p < 0.0001), positive association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was found in all trials. Importantly, simulations confirmed that – with such an association – models disregarding the association risk producing biased results (> 5 percentage point difference in hazard/rate ratio). For some treatment comparisons in the clinical trials, the difference in treatment effect estimates between the joint frailty and the other models was as high as 10–15 percentage points. The difference was affected by the strength of the exacerbation-discontinuation association, the population heterogeneity in exacerbation risk, and the difference in discontinuation rates between treatment arms.

Conclusions

We have identified an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in five COPD clinical trials. We recommend using the joint frailty model to account for this association when estimating exacerbation treatment effects, particularly when targeting the hypothetical estimand.

Efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in COPD

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combination therapy is a recommended treatment option for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and increased exacerbation risk, particularly those with elevated blood eosinophil levels. SOPHOS (NCT02727660) evaluated the efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate metered dose inhaler (BFF MDI) versus formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) MDI, each delivered using co-suspension delivery technology, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations.

In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 12–52-week, variable length study, patients received twice-daily BFF MDI 320/10 µg or 160/10 µg, or FF MDI 10 µg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) at week 12. Secondary and other endpoints included assessments of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and safety.

The primary analysis (modified intent-to-treat) population included 1843 patients (BFF MDI 320/10 µg, n=619; BFF MDI 160/10 µg, n=617; and FF MDI, n=607). BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved morning pre-dose trough FEV₁ at week 12 versus FF MDI (least squares mean differences 34 mL [p=0.0081] and 32 mL [p=0.0134], respectively), increased time to first exacerbation (hazard ratios 0.827 [p=0.0441] and 0.803 [p=0.0198], respectively) and reduced exacerbation rate (rate ratios 0.67 [p=0.0001] and 0.71 [p=0.0010], respectively). Lung function and exacerbation benefits were driven by patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells·mm⁻³. The incidence of adverse events was similar, and pneumonia rates were low (≤2.4%) across treatments.

SOPHOS demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD at increased risk of exacerbations.

Co-suspension delivery technology budesonide/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler improve lung function and reduce exacerbation risk versus LABA monotherapy in patients with moderate to very severe COPD and an exacerbation history in the prior yearhttp://bit.ly/3aDOvru

Benefit:Risk Profile of Budesonide in Obstructive Airways Disease

Airway inflammation is a major contributing factor in both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and represents an important target for treatment. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as monotherapy or in combination therapy with long-acting β₂-agonists or long-acting muscarinic antagonists are used extensively in the treatment of asthma and COPD. The development of ICS for their anti-inflammatory properties progressed through efforts to increase topical potency and minimise systemic potency and through advances in inhaled delivery technology. Budesonide is a potent, non-halogenated ICS that was developed in the early 1970s and is now one of the most widely used lung medicines worldwide. Inhaled budesonide's physiochemical and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties allow it to reach a rapid and high airway efficacy due to its more balanced relationship between water solubility and lipophilicity. When absorbed from the airways and lung tissue, its moderate lipophilicity shortens systemic exposure, and its unique property of intracellular esterification acts like a sustained release mechanism within airway tissues, contributing to its airway selectivity and a low risk of adverse events. There is a large volume of clinical evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of budesonide, both alone and in combination with the fast- and long-acting β₂-agonist formoterol, as maintenance therapy in patients with asthma and with COPD. The combination of budesonide/formoterol can also be used as an as-needed reliever with anti-inflammatory properties, with or without regular maintenance for asthma, a novel approach that is already approved by some country-specific regulatory authorities and currently recommended in the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines. Budesonide remains one of the most well-established and versatile of the inhaled anti-inflammatory drugs. This narrative review provides a clinical reappraisal of the benefit:risk profile of budesonide in the management of asthma and COPD.

Budesonide/formoterol therapy: effective and appropriate use in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Aim: Quality, real-world comparative effectiveness (CE) studies of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy efficacy are scarce. We identified and evaluated peer-reviewed CE and appropriate-use evaluations of budesonide/formoterol combination (BFC) maintenance therapy. Materials & methods: Analyses were limited to retrospective, real-world utilization studies of BFC delivered by pressurized metered-dose inhalers. Results: In a CE study of BFC versus fluticasone/salmeterol combinations (FSC) in asthma, BFC users had fewer total exacerbations. In appropriate-use studies of asthma treatment, BFC patients were consistently more likely to meet treatment escalation recommendations. BFC comparisons with FSC or tiotropium for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease found differences in exacerbation rates and rescue inhaler use. Conclusion: We found available, good quality BFC CE and appropriate-use articles; however, all had limitations.

Reduced risk of clinically important deteriorations by ICS in COPD is eosinophil dependent: a pooled post-hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinically Important Deterioration (CID) is a novel composite measure to assess treatment effect in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We examined the performance and utility of CID in assessing the effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in COPD.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis of four budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) studies comprised 3576 symptomatic moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients with a history of exacerbation. Analysis of time to first CID event (exacerbation, deterioration in forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁] or worsening St George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ] score) was completed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with ≥1 CID in the four studies ranged between 63 and 77% and 69-84% with BUD/FORM and FORM, respectively, with an average 25% reduced risk of CID with BUD/FORM. All components contributed to the CID event rate. Experiencing a CID during the first 3 months was associated with poorer outcomes (lung function, quality of life, symptoms and reliever use) and increased risk of later CID events. The effect of BUD/FORM versus FORM in reducing CID risk was positively associated with the blood eosinophil count.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that BUD/FORM offers protective effects for CID events compared with FORM alone, with the magnitude of the effect dependent on patients' eosinophil levels. CID may be an important tool for evaluation of treatment effect in a complex, multifaceted, and progressive disease like COPD, and a valuable tool to allow for shorter and smaller future outcome predictive trials in early drug development.

Inhaled corticosteroids and risk of pneumonia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are generally used to treat patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who suffer from repeated exacerbations. Recently, it was reported that ICS treatment increased the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients. But it is controversial.The objective of this paper is to clarify the associations between ICS treatment and the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials.gov, and Embase were searched from February 2019 to June 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were incorporatedthat compared ICS with non-ICS treatment on the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients. Meta-analyses were conducted by the Peto and Mantel-Haenszel approaches with corresponding 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Twenty-five trials (N = 49,982 subjects) were included. Pooled results demonstrated a significantly increased risk of pneumonia with ICS use in COPD patients (RR, 1.59, 95% CI, 1.33-1.90; I² = 51%). ICS treatment also increased the risk of severe pneumonia (RR, 2.17, 95% CI, 1.47-3.22; I² = 29%). The results of subgroup analysis based on doses of ICS were consistent with the above. However, subgroup analyses based on types of ICS revealed that fluticasone therapy was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia but not budesonide. In addition, medium- and low-doses of budesonide treatment also did not increase the risk of pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ICS increases the risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD. The above is prominent for fluticasone-containing ICSs but not for budesonide-containing ICSs.

Blood eosinophils and treatment response with triple and dual combination therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: analysis of the IMPACT trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have highlighted a relationship between reduction in rate of exacerbations with therapies containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and baseline blood eosinophil count in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The IMPACT trial showed that once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy significantly reduced exacerbations versus dual therapies. Blood eosinophil counts and smoking status could be important modifiers of treatment response to ICS. We aimed to model these relationships and their interactions, including outcomes other than exacerbations.

METHODS

IMPACT was a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 52-week global study comparing once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (fluticasone furoate-umeclidinium-vilanterol) with dual inhaled therapy (fluticasone furoate-vilanterol or umeclidinium-vilanterol). Eligible patients had moderate-to-very-severe COPD and at least one moderate or severe exacerbation in the previous year. We used fractional polynomials to model continuous blood eosinophil counts. We used negative binomial regression for numbers of moderate and severe exacerbations, severe exacerbations, and pneumonia. We modelled differences at week 52 in trough FEV₁, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, and Transition Dyspnoea Index using repeated measurements mixed effect models. IMPACT was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02164513.

FINDINGS

The magnitude of benefit of regimens containing ICS (fluticasone furoate-umeclidinium-vilanterol n=4151 and fluticasone furoate-vilanterol n=4134) in reducing rates of moderate and severe exacerbations increased in proportion with blood eosinophil count, compared with a non-ICS dual long-acting bronchodilator (umeclidinium-vilanterol n=2070). The moderate and severe exacerbation rate ratio for triple therapy versus umeclidinium-vilanterol was 0·88 (95% CI 0·74 to 1·04) at blood eosinophil count less than 90 cells per μL and 0·56 (0·47 to 0·66) at counts of 310 cells per μL or more; the corresponding rate ratio for fluticasone furoate-vilanterol versus umeclidinium-vilanterol was 1·09 (0·91 to 1·29) and 0·56 (0·47 to 0·66), respectively. Similar results were observed for FEV₁, Transition Dyspnoea Index, and SGRQ total score; however, the relationship with FEV₁ was less marked. At blood eosinophil counts less than 90 cells per μL and at counts of 310 cells per μL or more, the triple therapy versus umeclidinium-vilanterol treatment difference was 40 mL (95% CI 10 to 70) and 60 mL (20 to 100) for trough FEV₁, -0·01 (-0·68 to 0·66) and 0·30 (-0·37 to 0·97) for Transition Dyspnoea Index score, and -0·01 (-1·81 to 1·78) and -2·78 (-4·64 to -0·92) for SGRQ total score, respectively. Smoking status modified the relationship between observed efficacy and blood eosinophil count for moderate or severe exacerbations, Transition Dyspnoea Index, and FEV₁, with former smokers being more corticosteroid responsive at any eosinophil count than current smokers.

INTERPRETATION

This analysis of the IMPACT trial shows that assessment of blood eosinophil count and smoking status has the potential to optimise ICS use in clinical practice in patients with COPD and a history of exacerbations.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

FKBP5 rs4713916: A Potential Genetic Predictor of Interindividual Different Response to Inhaled Corticosteroids in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a Real-Life Setting

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common, preventable, and manageable lung disease characterized by large heterogeneity in disease presentation and grades impairment. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are commonly used to manage COPD/COPD-exacerbation. The patient's response is characterized by interindividual variability without disease progression/survival modification. Objectives: We hypothesize that a therapeutic intervention may be more effective if single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are investigated. Methods: In 71 COPD patients under pulmonary rehabilitation, a small number of powerful SNPs, selected according to current literature, were analyzed; namely the glucocorticoid receptor gene NR3C1 (rs6190/rs6189/rs41423247), the glucocorticoid-induced transcript 1 gene (GLCCI1 rs37972), and the related co-chaperone FKBP5 gene (rs4713916). MDR1 rs2032582 was also evaluated. Lung function outcomes were assessed. Results: A significant association with functional outcomes, namely FEV₁ (forced expiration volume/one second) and 6MWD (six-minutes walking distance), was found for rs4713916 and weakly for rs37972. The genotype rs4713916(GA) and, in a lesser extent, the genotype rs37972(TT), were more favorable than the wild-type. Conclusions: Our study supports a possible picture of pharmacogenomic control for COPD intervention. rs4713916 and, possibly, rs37972 may be useful predictors of clinical outcome. These results may help to tailor an optimal dose for individual COPD patients based on their genetic makeup.

Treatment Patterns of New Users of Fluticasone Furoate/Vilanterol in Asthma and COPD in UK Primary Care: Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

This retrospective database study explored treatment patterns and potential off-label prescribing among patients newly prescribed fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) in a UK primary care setting.

Methods

In Europe, FF/VI is approved in two strengths: 100/25 µg for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and 100/25 µg or 200/25 µg for treatment of asthma in patients aged 12 or older. Using electronic health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, new users of FF/VI or other inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonist fixed-dose combination products were identified and classified into one of three groups: COPD diagnosis, asthma diagnosis, and other diagnosis (not COPD or asthma).

Results

During 2014–2015, 4373 patients initiated FF/VI: 3380 on FF/VI 100/25 (65% in the COPD diagnosis group) and 993 on FF/VI 200/25 (51% in the asthma diagnosis group). During up to 12 months of follow-up, the median number (interquartile range) of prescriptions of the index strength issued per patient was 7 (2–8) for FF/VI 100/25 and 5 (2–8) for FF/VI 200/25; most new users did not change from the index strength prescribed (93.0% COPD; 89.7% asthma, of all patients initiating treatment with FF/VI). Potential off-label FF/VI prescribing in children < 12 years old was rare (< 0.29% in the combined asthma and other diagnosis groups), and up to one in five new users of FF/VI with COPD were potentially prescribed FF/VI 200/25 off-label during the study period. Much of the potential off-label prescribing in COPD occurred in patients with a history of asthma, those presenting with greater disease severity, and/or prior treatment with high-dose steroids.

Conclusions

The prescription of FF/VI is rare in children under 12 years of age in the UK, according to our findings, but up to one in five COPD patients in the UK may have been prescribed FF/VI 200/25, some of which may have been off-label.

Funding

This study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline plc (study 205052).

Study Registration

GlaxoSmithKline plc Clinical Trial Registry study number 205052.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s41030-019-0092-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Budesonide, Aclidinium and Formoterol in combination limit inflammaging processes in bronchial epithelial cells exposed to cigarette smoke

Inflammation and cellular senescence (also called inflammaging) are involved in the pathogenesis of premature lung aging, a key driver of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Downregulation of histone deacetylases and FoxO3 expression, activation of the ERK 1/2 pathway and IL-8 increase are hallmarks of lung inflammaging. The effects of Budesonide (BUD), Aclidinium (ACL) and Formoterol (FO) on lung inflammaging are unknown. This study was aimed to assess the effects of BUD, ACL and FO in bronchial epithelial cells exposed to cigarette smoke extract (CSE) by evaluating: a) Expression of TLR4 and survivin and LPS binding by flow cytometry; b) expression of HDAC2, HDAC3, SIRT1 and FoxO3 and activation of the ERK 1/2 pathway by western blot; c) IL-8 mRNA levels and release by Real Time-PCR and ELISA, respectively. Reported results show that CSE increased TLR4 and survivin, LPS binding, ERK 1/2 activation, IL-8 release and mRNA levels but decreased SIRT1, HDAC2, HDAC3 and FoxO3 nuclear expression. Combined therapy with BUD, ACL and FO counteracted the effects of CSE on LPS binding, FoxO3 nuclear expression, ERK 1/2 activation, survivin and IL-8 release and mRNA levels. These findings suggest a new role of combination therapy with BUD, ACL and FO in counteracting inflammaging processes induced by cigarette smoke exposure.

Risks of budesonide/formoterol for the treatment of stable COPD: a meta-analysis

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate the comparative risks of budesonide/formoterol, versus placebo or monotherapies, for the treatment of patients with stable COPD.

Materials and methods

We undertook a systematic search of the literature in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing budesonide/formoterol with control regimens for the treatment of patients with stable COPD and at least 12 weeks of follow-up, meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were reviewed, and OR with corresponding 95% CI was used to pool the results.

Results

A total of eight studies involving 9,254 patients met the inclusion criteria of this meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, combination therapy with budesonide/formoterol was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse effects including oral candidiasis (OR: 3.09, 95% CI: 1.95–4.91) and dysphonia (OR: 2.76, 95% CI: 1.40–5.44), but not pneumonia (OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.64–1.37) or bronchitis (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.95–1.95). A similar pattern was also evident for the comparison of formoterol with budesonide/formoterol, with increased occurrence of oral candidiasis (OR: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.33–5.58) and dysphonia (OR: 4.13, 95% CI: 1.95–8.76); however, there were no significant differences in pneumonia (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.98–1.74) or bronchitis (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83–1.31). In contrast, compared with budesonide, combined budesonide/formoterol was associated with similar risks of adverse effects, including pneumonia (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.60–2.39), bronchitis (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.41–2.20), oral candidiasis (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.41–1.53), and dysphonia (OR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.40–2.47).

Conclusion

Combination therapy does not cause more adverse events, including pneumonia and bronchitis, than control (placebo, formoterol, or budesonide) treatment in patients with stable COPD, while there were higher risks of oral candidiasis and dysphonia compared with the non-inhaled corticosteroid group (placebo, formoterol).

Asthma-COPD overlap: identification and optimal treatment

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are both highly prevalent conditions that can coexist in the same individual: the so-called ‘asthma -COPD overlap’ (ACO). Its prevalence and prognosis vary widely depending on how ACO is defined in each publication, the severity of bronchial obstruction of patients included and the treatment they are receiving. Although there is a lack of evidence about the biology of ACO, the overlap of both diseases should express a mixture of a Th1 inflammatory pattern (characteristic of COPD) and a Th2 signature (characteristic of asthma). In this review we support a novel algorithm for ACO diagnosis proposed by the Spanish Respiratory Society (SEPAR), based on a sequential evaluation that considers: (a) the presence of chronic airflow limitation in a smoker or ex-smoker patient ⩾35 years old; (b) a current diagnosis of asthma; and (c) the existence of a very positive bronchodilator test (PBT; ⩾15% and ⩾400 ml) or the presence of eosinophilia in blood (⩾300 eosinophils/μl). This algorithm can identify those patients who may benefit from a treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and maybe from biological drugs in a near future. In addition, it is easily applicable in clinical practice. The major disadvantage is that it groups patients with very different characteristics under the ACO’s umbrella. In view of this heterogeneity, we recommend a strategy of defining specific and measurable therapeutic objectives for every single patient and identifying the traits that can be treated to achieve those objectives.

Comparative Efficacy of Budesonide/Formoterol with Budesonide, Formoterol or Placebo for Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND The 2018 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease publication suggested that the combination of bronchodilator therapy of inhaled glucocorticoid/long-acting β₂ adrenoceptor agonist is more effective in improving pulmonary function and health status in the treatment of patients with acute exacerbations than the individual components; however, it is not known whether this also the case for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol in the maintenance and relief therapy of patients with stable COPD. MATERIAL AND METHODS An electronic search of the literature in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was undertaken to identify published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ≥12 weeks duration comparing the budesonide/formoterol, with budesonide, formoterol, or placebo in the treatment of patients with stable COPD. The identified RCTs were reviewed. The mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to pool the results. RESULTS Seven high quality studies with RCTs met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Compared with budesonide alone, the combination therapy of budesonide/formoterol showed significant improvement in the following spirometric indices: pre-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) (SMD: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.34; P=0.000). In addition, versus formoterol alone, budesonide/formoterol was associated with a significant increase in pre-dose FEV₁ (SMD: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.17; P=0.000). A similar pattern was also evident in the comparison to placebo, where budesonide/formoterol yielded greater increase in pre-dose FEV₁ (SMD: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.30; P=0.000). Moreover, compared with other controls, the combination of budesonide-formoterol significantly improved morning peak expiratory flow and evening peak expiratory flow, significantly reduced the total score of St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS For stable COPD patients, compared with controls (monocomponents or placebo), budesonide/formoterol improved pulmonary function and health status. Future larger long-term RCTs are warranted to assess the beneficial clinical efficacy of budesonide/formoterol in COPD patients.

The efficacy of adding budesonide/formoterol to ipratropium plus theophylline in managing severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an open-label, randomized study in China

BACKGROUND

Patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in China are commonly prescribed ipratropium plus theophylline (I+T) therapy. Studies have shown that an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combination is also efficacious in reducing symptoms and exacerbations. This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of adding budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) to I+T in Chinese patients with severe COPD.

METHODS

A randomized, parallel-group, open-label, multicenter phase IV study (Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT01415518) was conducted in China. Patients received either BUD/FORM (160/4.5 µg; two inhalations twice daily [bid] via Turbuhaler®) + I (20 µg per inhalation, two inhalations four times daily) + T (100 mg bid) or I+T alone for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was change from baseline in predose forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1).

RESULTS

A total of 584 patients were randomized equally between treatment groups. At the end of the study, the BUD/FORM plus I+T group displayed significant improvements in predose FEV1 versus the I+T group (between-group difference 6.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.3, 9.6; p < 0.0001). Forced vital capacity, inspiratory capacity, peak expiratory flow and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores were significantly improved (all p < 0.0001) and exacerbation frequency was reduced (43.5% reduction; rate ratio 0.565, 95% CI 0.325, 0.981; p = 0.0425) with BUD/FORM plus I+T versus I+T alone.

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe COPD in China treated with BUD/FORM plus I+T showed significant improvements in lung function and HRQoL and a reduction in exacerbations compared with I+T alone. Both treatments were well tolerated and no safety concerns were noted. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: friend or foe?

The efficacy, safety and positioning of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is much debated, since it can result in clear clinical benefits in some patients ("friend") but can be ineffective or even associated with undesired side effects, e.g. pneumonia, in others ("foe"). After critically reviewing the evidence for and against ICS treatment in patients with COPD, we propose that: 1) ICS should not be used as a single, stand-alone therapy in COPD; 2) patients most likely to benefit from the addition of ICS to long-acting bronchodilators include those with history of multiple or severe exacerbations despite appropriate maintenance bronchodilator use, particularly if blood eosinophils are >300 cells·µL^-1, and those with a history of and/or concomitant asthma; and 3) the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients using ICS is higher in those with older age, lower body mass index (BMI), greater overall fragility, receiving higher ICS doses and those with blood eosinophils <100 cells·µL^-1 All these factors must be carefully considered and balanced in any individual COPD patient before adding ICS to her/his maintenance bronchodilator treatment. Further research is needed to clarify some of these issues and firmly establish these recommendations.

Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators such as long-acting β-agonist (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combinations have been used in people with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to control symptoms such as dyspnoea and cough, and prevent exacerbations. A number of LABA/LAMA combinations are now available for clinical use in COPD. However, it is not clear which group of above mentioned inhalers is most effective or if any specific formulation works better than the others within the same group or class.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of available formulations from four different groups of inhalers (i.e. LABA/LAMA combination, LABA/ICS combination, LAMA and LABA) in people with moderate to severe COPD. The review will update previous systematic reviews on dual combination inhalers and long-acting bronchodilators to answer the questions described above using the strength of a network meta-analysis (NMA).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register, which contains several databases. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites. The most recent searches were conducted on 6 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited people aged 35 years or older with a diagnosis of COPD and a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of less than 80% of predicted. We included studies of at least 12 weeks' duration including at least two active comparators from one of the four inhaler groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted NMAs using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo method. We considered a study as high risk if recruited participants had at least one COPD exacerbation within the 12 months before study entry and as low risk otherwise. Primary outcomes were COPD exacerbations (moderate to severe and severe), and secondary outcomes included symptom and quality-of-life scores, safety outcomes, and lung function. We collected data only for active comparators and did not consider placebo was not considered. We assumed a class/group effect when a fixed-class model fitted well. Otherwise we used a random-class model to assess intraclass/group differences. We supplemented the NMAs with pairwise meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 101,311 participants from 99 studies (26 studies with 32,265 participants in the high-risk population and 73 studies with 69,046 participants in the low-risk population) in our systematic review. The median duration of studies was 52 weeks in the high-risk population and 26 weeks in the low-risk population (range 12 to 156 for both populations). We considered the quality of included studies generally to be good.The NMAs suggested that the LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations followed by LAMA in the both populations.There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination, LAMA, and LABA in the high-risk population (network hazard ratios (HRs) 0.86 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.76 to 0.99), 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.99), and 0.70 (95% CrI 0.61 to 0.8) respectively), and that LAMA decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA in the high- and low-risk populations (network HR 0.80 (95% CrI 0.71 to 0.88) and 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.97), respectively). There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination reduces severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination and LABA in the high-risk population (network HR 0.78 (95% CrI 0.64 to 0.93) and 0.64 (95% CrI 0.51 to 0.81), respectively).There was a general trend towards a greater improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores with the combination therapies compared to monotherapies, and the combination therapies were generally ranked higher than monotherapies.The LABA/ICS combination was the lowest ranked in pneumonia serious adverse events (SAEs) in both populations. There is evidence that the LABA/ICS combination increases the odds of pneumonia compared to LAMA/LABA combination, LAMA and LABA (network ORs: 1.69 (95% CrI 1.20 to 2.44), 1.78 (95% CrI 1.33 to 2.39), and 1.50 (95% CrI 1.17 to 1.92) in the high-risk population and network or pairwise OR: 2.33 (95% CI 1.03 to 5.26), 2.02 (95% CrI 1.16 to 3.72), and 1.93 (95% CrI 1.29 to 3.22) in the low-risk population respectively). There were significant overlaps in the rank statistics in the other safety outcomes including mortality, total, COPD, and cardiac SAEs, and dropouts due to adverse events.None of the differences in lung function met a minimal clinically important difference criterion except for LABA/LAMA combination versus LABA in the high-risk population (network mean difference 0.13 L (95% CrI 0.10 to 0.15). The results of pairwise meta-analyses generally agreed with those of the NMAs. There is no evidence to suggest intraclass/group differences except for lung function at 12 months in the high-risk population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations although there was some uncertainty in the results. LAMA containing inhalers may have an advantage over those without a LAMA for preventing COPD exacerbations based on the rank statistics. Combination therapies appear more effective than monotherapies for improving symptom and quality-of-life scores. ICS-containing inhalers are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.Our most comprehensive review including intraclass/group comparisons, free combination therapies, 99 studies, and 20 outcomes for each high- and low-risk population summarises the current literature and could help with updating existing COPD guidelines.

The dose of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD: when less is better

Background

The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in combination with bronchodilators in patients with COPD has been shown to decrease the rate of disease exacerbations and to improve the lung function and patients’ quality of life. However, their use has also been associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.

Materials and methods

We have reviewed existing clinical evidence on the risks and benefits of ICS in COPD, including large randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and clinical reviews.

Results

A large body of evidence supports the clinical benefits of ICS in patients with COPD in terms of exacerbations, symptoms, lung function, and quality of life. The incidence of adverse events related to ICS, including pneumonia, varies strongly among the studies and seems to be dose dependent, with recent well-designed, large studies on low-dose ICS reporting similar safety profiles in ICS and non-ICS groups.

Conclusion

The benefits of ICS in COPD continue to outweigh the risks, especially when lower ICS doses are employed. Given that the data on ICS withdrawal in COPD are scarce and conflicting, we argue that using reduced doses of ICS could be an optimal strategy to manage patients with COPD.

Concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use and the risk of pneumonia in COPD: a matched-subgroup post hoc analysis of the UPLIFT® trial

BACKGROUND

Use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) increases the risk of pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the magnitude of risk with different ICS remains unclear.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT® trial to assess whether pneumonia risk differed by type of ICS (fluticasone propionate [FP], other ICS, or no ICS) in permanent users (defined by use until end of study) or in users at baseline (sensitivity analysis).

RESULTS

For the permanent-users analysis, 825 patients receiving FP throughout the trial, 825 patients receiving other ICS and 825 patients not receiving ICS were matched on relevant baseline features 1:1:1. A significantly greater risk of pneumonia was observed for FP versus no ICS: the hazard ratio (HR) for risk of pneumonia was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00, 1.75; p = 0.046) and the rate ratio (RR) was 1.58 (95% CI 1.05, 2.37; p = 0.028). A greater risk was also found for FP versus other ICS: HR 1.28 (95% CI 0.97, 1.68; p = 0.078) and RR 1.48 (95% CI 1.00, 2.19; p = 0.049). A higher proportion of patients on FP were hospitalized with pneumonia (7.9%) versus other ICS (6.7%) or no ICS (5.9%). Whilst other ICS use was associated with the highest number of fatal pneumonia events, the total number of fatal pneumonia incidents was low. A similar pattern was observed in the sensitivity analyses, which included 4002 patients on different treatments at baseline (FP, other ICS, and no ICS) and considered potential switches during the study.

CONCLUSION

The results support existing evidence of an increased pneumonia risk with FP use compared with other ICS and no ICS use in patients with COPD. Healthcare professionals should evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of using ICS when making treatment decisions with their patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Post hoc analysis of UPLIFT®. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00144339 . Retrospectively registered September 2, 2005.

Drugs that increase the risk of community-acquired pneumonia: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), a major cause of morbidity and mortality, is the leading infectious cause of death in the developed world. Population-based studies and systematic reviews have identified a large number of risk factors for the development of pneumonia in adults. In addition to age, lifestyle habits, and comorbidities, some forms of pharmacotherapy may also increase the risk for CAP.

AREAS COVERED

MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were used in 2017 to search for case-control, cohort studies, as well as randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis that involved outpatient proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), antipsychotics, oral antidiabetics, and CAP diagnosis in patients aged >18 years.

EXPERT OPINION

Our review confirmed that the use of ICSs, PPIs or antipsychotic drugs was independently associated with an increased risk for CAP. We also identified a positive association between specific oral antidiabetics and the development of pneumonia.

Budesonide/formoterol MDI with co-suspension delivery technology in COPD: the TELOS study

TELOS compared budesonide (BD)/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) metered dose inhaler (BFF MDI), formulated using innovative co-suspension delivery technology that enables consistent aerosol performance, with its monocomponents and budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate dry powder inhaler (DPI) in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), without a requirement for an exacerbation history.

In this phase III, double-blind, parallel-group, 24-week study (NCT02766608), patients were randomised to BFF MDI 320/10 µg (n=664), BFF MDI 160/10 µg (n=649), FF MDI 10 µg (n=648), BD MDI 320 µg (n=209) or open-label budesonide/formoterol DPI 400/12 µg (n=219). Primary end-points were change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) and FEV₁ area under the curve from 0–4 h (AUC_0–4). Time to first and rate of moderate/severe exacerbations were assessed.

BFF MDI 320/10 µg improved pre-dose trough FEV₁versus FF MDI (least squares mean (LSM) 39 mL; p=0.0018), and BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved FEV₁ AUC_0–4versus BD MDI (LSM 173 mL and 157 mL, respectively; both p<0.0001) at week 24. BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved time to first and rate of moderate/severe exacerbations versus FF MDI. Treatments were well tolerated, with pneumonia incidence ranging from 0.5–1.4%.

BFF MDI improved lung function versus monocomponents and exacerbations versus FF MDI in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

TELOS: co-suspension delivery technology budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate in a metered dose inhaler improved lung function and time to first and rate of exacerbations versus monocomponents in patients with moderate to very severe COPDhttp://ow.ly/ffWo30lrJL6

Identifying the associated risks of pneumonia in COPD patients: ARCTIC an observational study

Background

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Other factors such as severity of airflow limitation and concurrent asthma may further raise the possibility of developing pneumonia. This study assessed the risk of pneumonia associated with ICS in patients with COPD.

Methods

Electronic Medical Record data linked to National Health Registries were collected from COPD patients and matched reference controls in 52 Swedish primary care centers (2000–2014). Levels of ICS treatment (high, low, no ICS) and associated comorbidities were assessed. Patients were categorized by airflow limitation severity.

Results

A total of 6623 patients with COPD and 48,566 controls were analyzed. Patients with COPD had a more than 4-fold increase in pneumonia versus reference controls (hazard ratio [HR] 4.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.48–5.06). ICS use increased the risk of pneumonia by 20–30% in patients with COPD with forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≥ 50% versus patients not using ICS. Asthma was an independent risk factor for pneumonia in the COPD population. Multivariate analysis identified independent predictors of pneumonia in the overall population. The highest risk of pneumonia was associated with high dose ICS (HR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.23–1.62).

Conclusions

Patients with COPD have a greater risk of pneumonia versus reference controls; ICS use and concurrent asthma increased the risk of pneumonia further.

Blood eosinophils and inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

COPD is a highly heterogeneous disease. Potential biomarkers to identify patients with COPD who will derive the greatest benefit from inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment are needed. Blood eosinophil count can serve as a predictive biomarker for the efficacy of ICS treatment. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess whether a blood eosinophil count of ≥2% in patients undergoing ICS therapy was associated with a greater reduction in COPD exacerbation rate and pneumonia incidence.

Materials and methods

An electronic search was performed using the keywords "COPD", "eosinophil", and "clinical trial" in the PubMed and EMBASE databases to retrieve articles, up to 2017, relevant to our focus. Data were extracted, and a meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5 (version 5.3.5).

Results

Five studies comprising 12,496 patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD were included. At baseline, 60% of the patients had ≥2% blood eosinophils. Our meta-analysis showed a 17% reduction in exacerbation of moderate/severe COPD in patients with ≥2% blood eosinophils undergoing ICS therapy compared to the non-ICS/ICS withdrawal/placebo group. The difference between the two types of treatment was significant (risk ratio [RR], 0.816; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99; P=0.03). Furthermore, the risk of pneumonia-related events was significantly increased in the subgroup with eosinophil count ≥2% undergoing ICS-containing treatments (RR, 1.969; 95% CI, 1.369-2.833; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the subgroup with eosinophil count <2% (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.888-1.879; P<0.181).

Conclusion

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that the 2% threshold for blood eosinophils could accurately predict ICS treatment response in patients with COPD, but increased the risk of pneumonia.

Effect of a spacer on total systemic and lung bioavailability in healthy volunteers and in vitro performance of the Symbicort® (budesonide/formoterol) pressurized metered dose inhaler

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma experience difficulties in coordinating inhalation with pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) actuation. The use of a spacer device can improve drug delivery in these patients. The aim of this study was to establish the relative bioavailability of single doses of Symbicort^® (budesonide/formoterol) pMDI 160/4.5 μg/actuation (2 actuations) used with and without a spacer device. In addition, an in vitro study was conducted to characterize performance of the inhaler when used in conjunction with a spacer device.

METHODS

A Phase I, randomized, open-label, single-dose, single-center, crossover study in 50 healthy volunteers (NCT02934607) assessed the relative bioavailability of single-dose Symbicort^® pMDI 160/4.5 μg/actuation (2 actuations) with and without a spacer (AeroChamber Plus^® Flow-Vu^®). Inhaled doses were administered without or with activated charcoal (taken orally) to estimate total systemic exposure and exposure through the lung, respectively. The in vitro study characterized the effect of the spacer with respect to delivered dose, fine particle dose, and dose during simulated breathing of budesonide and formoterol.

RESULTS

In terms of total systemic exposure, use of the spacer increased the relative bioavailability determined by AUC_(0-last) and C_max by 68% (spacer:no spacer treatment ratio, 167.9%; 90% CI, 144.1 to 195.6) and 99% (ratio, 198.7%; 90% CI, 164.4 to 240.2) for budesonide, and 77% (ratio, 176.6%; 90% CI, 145.1 to 215.0) and 124% (ratio, 223.6%; 90% CI, 189.9 to 263.3) for formoterol, respectively, compared with pMDI alone. Similarly, the lung exposure of budesonide and formoterol increased (AUC_(0-last) and C_max by 146% [ratio, 246.0%; 90% CI, 200.7 to 301.6] and 127% [ratio, 226.5%; 90% CI, 186.4 to 275.4] for budesonide, and 173% [ratio, 272.8%; 90% CI, 202.5 to 367.4] and 136% [ratio, 236.2%; 90% CI, 192.6 to 289.6] for formoterol, respectively) when the pMDI was administered through the spacer. When assessed by AUC_(0-last) quartile without spacer, subjects in the lowest exposure quartile (indicating poor inhalation technique) with Symbicort^® pMDI 160/4.5 μg/actuation (2 actuations) had markedly increased total systemic and lung exposure when the same dose was administered with the spacer. In contrast, for subjects in the highest exposure quartile with pMDI alone, total systemic and lung exposure of formoterol and budesonide was similar with and without the spacer. In the in vitro study, the fine particle dose (<5 μm) of both budesonide and formoterol from the spacer at delay time (i.e. pause period after actuation) = 0 s (instantaneous) after actuation was similar to the fine particle dose when not using the spacer. The delivered doses of budesonide and formoterol from the spacer were both lower compared with the doses administered without the spacer. There was also a decrease in delivered dose with increasing delay time.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical study demonstrated that in subjects with poor inhalation technique the use of the AeroChamber Plus^® Flow-Vu^® spacer increased the bioavailability of Symbicort^® pMDI to a level observed in subjects with good inhalation technique without a spacer. The findings from the in vitro study support the fine particle dose characteristics of Symbicort^® pMDI with the AeroChamber Plus^® Flow-Vu^® spacer.

Pneumonia in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a frequent comorbid condition associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Pneumonia is the most common infectious disease condition. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the impact of pneumonia in patients with COPD. We will evaluate the epidemiology and factors associated with pneumonia. We are discussing the clinical characteristics of COPD that may favor the development of infections conditions such as pneumonia. Over the last 10 years, there is an increased evidence that COPD patients treated with inhaled corticosteroids are at increased risk to develp pneumonia. We will review the avaialbe information as well as the possible mechanism for this events. We also discuss the impact of influenza and pneumococcal vaccination in the prevention of pneumonia in COPD patients.