The efficacy of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol in asthma is comparable with morning or evening dosing

Assessing the Effects of Changing Patterns of Inhaled Corticosteroid Dosing and Adherence with Fluticasone Furoate and Budesonide on Asthma Management

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacological asthma management focuses on the use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies, which reduce airway inflammation and provide bronchoprotection, improving symptom control and reducing exacerbation risk. ICS underuse due to poor adherence is common, leading to poor clinical outcomes including increased risk of mortality. This article reviews efficacy versus systemic activity profiles for various adherence patterns and dosing regimens of fluticasone furoate (FF)-containing and budesonide (BUD)-containing asthma therapies in clinical trials and real-world studies.

METHODS

We performed a structured literature review (1 January 2000-3 March 2022) and mathematical modelling analysis of FF-containing and BUD-containing regular daily dosing in patients with mild-to-severe asthma, as-needed BUD/formoterol (FOR) in mild asthma, and BUD/FOR maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) dosing in moderate-to-severe asthma, to assess efficacy (bronchoprotection) and systemic activity (cortisol suppression) profiles of dosing patterns of ICS use in multiple adherence scenarios.

RESULTS

A total of 22 manuscripts were included in full-text review and 18 in the model simulations. Focusing on FF-containing or BUD-containing treatments at comparable adherence rates, regular daily FF or FF/vilanterol (VI) dosing provided more prolonged bronchoprotection and fewer systemic effects than daily BUD, daily BUD/FOR, or BUD/FOR MART dosing, especially in low adherence scenarios. In model simulations and the real-world setting, FF/VI generally provided longer bronchoprotection, lower systemic activity, and greater clinical benefits over BUD/FOR as well as consistently higher adherence.

CONCLUSION

In this literature review and modelling analysis, FF/VI was found to show clinical advantages on asthma control over BUD/FOR. These findings have implications for helping clinicians select the most suitable inhaled therapy for their patients with asthma.

One time a day mometasone/indacaterol fixed-dose combination versus two times a day fluticasone/salmeterol in patients with inadequately controlled asthma: pooled analysis from PALLADIUM and IRIDIUM studies

BACKGROUND

Despite currently available standard-of-care inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β₂-agonist therapies, a substantial proportion of patients with asthma remain inadequately controlled. This pooled analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate/indacaterol acetate (MF/IND) versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate (FLU/SAL) in patients with inadequately controlled asthma.

METHODS

This analysis included patients from PALLADIUM (NCT02554786) and IRIDIUM (NCT02571777) studies who received high-dose MF/IND (320/150 µg) or medium-dose MF/IND (160/150 µg) one time a day or high-dose FLU/SAL (500/50 µg) two times a day for 52 weeks. Reduction in asthma exacerbations, improvement in lung function, asthma control, and safety were evaluated for 52 weeks.

RESULTS

In total, 3154 patients (high-dose MF/IND, n=1054; medium-dose MF/IND, n=1044; high-dose FLU/SAL, n=1056) were included. High-dose MF/IND showed 26%, 22% and 19% reductions in rate of severe, moderate or severe, and all (mild, moderate and severe) exacerbations versus high-dose FLU/SAL, respectively, over 52 weeks (all, p<0.05). High-dose MF/IND improved trough FEV₁ versus high-dose FLU/SAL at weeks 26 (Δ, 43 mL, p=0.001) and 52 (Δ, 51 mL, p<0.001). Reductions in asthma exacerbation rate and improvement in trough FEV₁ with medium-dose MF/IND were comparable with high-dose FLU/SAL over 52 weeks. All treatments improved Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score from baseline to 52 weeks with no difference between treatments. Safety was comparable between high-dose MF/IND and high-dose FLU/SAL.

CONCLUSIONS

One time a day, single-inhaler, high-dose MF/IND reduced asthma exacerbations and improved lung function versus two times a day, high-dose FLU/SAL in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Similarly, improved outcomes were seen with one time a day, medium-dose MF/IND and two times a day, high-dose FLU/SAL, but at a lower ICS dose.

Circadian Variation in Efficacy of Medications

Although much has been learned about circadian clocks and rhythms over the past few decades, translation of this foundational science underlying the temporal regulation of physiology and behavior to clinical applications has been slow. Indeed, acceptance of the modern study of circadian rhythms has been blunted because the phenomenology of cyclic changes had to counteract the 20th century dogma of homeostasis in the biological sciences and medicine. We are providing this review of clinical data to highlight the emerging awareness of circadian variation in efficacy of medications for physicians, clinicians, and pharmacists. We are suggesting that gold-standard double-blind clinical studies should be conducted to determine the best time of day for optimal effectiveness of medications; also, we suggest that time of day should be tracked and reported as an important biological variable in ongoing clinical studies hereafter. Furthermore, we emphasize that time of day is, and should be considered, a key biological variable in research design similar to sex. In common with biomedical research data that have been historically strongly skewed toward the male sex, most pharmaceutical data have been skewed toward morning dosing without strong evidence that this is the optimal time of efficacy.

Lung function improvements following inhaled indacaterol/glycopyrronium/mometasone furoate are independent of dosing time in asthma patients: a randomised trial

Once-daily asthma treatment should prevent night-time deterioration, irrespective of the time of dosing. IND/GLY/MF, a fixed-dose combination of inhaled indacaterol acetate (IND, long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)), glycopyrronium bromide (GLY, long-acting muscarinic antagonist) and mometasone furoate (MF, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)) delivered by Breezhaler, is indicated in adult asthma patients inadequately controlled on LABA/ICS.

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-period, crossover, phase II study was performed to investigate the bronchodilator effect of IND/GLY/MF (150/50/80 μg) dosed morning and evening versus placebo in patients with mild-moderate asthma. The primary end-point was weighted mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) over 24 h following 14 days of IND/GLY/MF dosed a.m. and p.m. versus placebo. Secondary end-points included the effect of dosing time on peak expiratory flow (PEF) and safety/tolerability.

Of 37 randomised patients (age 18–72 years; 21 male, 16 female) 34 completed all three treatment periods. At screening, median (range) pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ was 75.8% (60–96%). Patients were using stable low- (83.8%) or medium-dose (16.2%) ICS. Morning and evening dosing of IND/GLY/MF improved FEV₁ (area under the curve from 0 to 24 h) by 610 mL (90% CI 538–681 mL) and 615 mL (90% CI 544–687 mL), respectively, versus placebo. Mean PEF over 14 days increased by 70.7 L·min⁻¹ (90% CI 60.5–80.9 L·min⁻¹) following a.m. dosing, and by 59.7 L·min⁻¹ (90% CI 49.5–69.9 L·min⁻¹) following p.m. dosing of IND/GLY/MF versus placebo. IND/GLY/MF demonstrated a safety profile comparable with placebo.

Once-daily inhaled IND/GLY/MF was well tolerated and provided sustained lung function improvements over 24 h, irrespective of a.m. or p.m. dosing, in patients with mild–moderate asthma.

This randomised study found single-inhaler indacaterol/glycopyrronium/mometasone furoate improved respiratory parameters FEV₁ and PEF in asthma patients, and showed similar efficacy when taken once daily in the morning or eveninghttps://bit.ly/3fH0I1K

Therapeutics on the clock: Circadian medicine in the treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases

The circadian clock is a collection of endogenous oscillators with a periodicity of ~ 24 h. Recently, our understanding of circadian rhythms and their regulation at genomic and physiologic scales has grown significantly. Knowledge of the circadian influence on biological processes has provided new possibilities for novel pharmacological strategies. Directly targeting the biological clock or its downstream targets, and/or using timing as a variable in drug therapy are now important pharmacological considerations. The circadian machinery mediates many aspects of the inflammatory response and, reciprocally, an inflammatory environment can disrupt circadian rhythms. Therefore, intense interest exists in leveraging circadian biology as a means to treat chronic inflammatory diseases such as sepsis, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and cardiovascular disease, which all display some type of circadian signature. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the crosstalk between circadian rhythms, inflammatory diseases, and their pharmacological treatment. Evidence suggests that carefully rationalized application of chronotherapy strategies - alone or in combination with small molecule modulators of circadian clock components - can improve efficacy and reduce toxicity, thus warranting further investigation and use.

The Role of the Body Clock in Asthma and COPD: Implication for Treatment

Asthma exhibits a marked time of day variation in symptoms, airway physiology, and airway inflammation. This is also seen in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but to a lesser extent. Our understanding of how physiological daily rhythms are regulated by the circadian clock is increasing, and there is growing evidence that the molecular clock is important in the pathogenesis of these two airway diseases. If time of day is important, then it follows that treatment of asthma and COPD should also be tailored to the most efficacious time of the day, a concept known as 'chronotherapy'. There have been a number of studies to determine the optimal time of day at which to take medications for asthma and COPD. Some of these agents are already used 'chronotherapeutically' in practice (often at night-time). However, several studies investigating systemic and inhaled corticosteroids have consistently shown that the best time of day to take these medications for treating asthma is in the afternoon or early evening and not in the morning, when these medications are often prescribed. Future, large, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of systemic and inhaled corticosteroids in asthma and COPD are needed to inform clinical practice.

The Role of the Body Clock in Asthma and COPD: Implication for Treatment

Asthma exhibits a marked time of day variation in symptoms, airway physiology, and airway inflammation. This is also seen in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but to a lesser extent. Our understanding of how physiological daily rhythms are regulated by the circadian clock is increasing, and there is growing evidence that the molecular clock is important in the pathogenesis of these two airway diseases. If time of day is important, then it follows that treatment of asthma and COPD should also be tailored to the most efficacious time of the day, a concept known as ‘chronotherapy’. There have been a number of studies to determine the optimal time of day at which to take medications for asthma and COPD. Some of these agents are already used ‘chronotherapeutically’ in practice (often at night-time). However, several studies investigating systemic and inhaled corticosteroids have consistently shown that the best time of day to take these medications for treating asthma is in the afternoon or early evening and not in the morning, when these medications are often prescribed. Future, large, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of systemic and inhaled corticosteroids in asthma and COPD are needed to inform clinical practice.

Digital Features

This article is published with a graphical abstract to facilitate understanding of the article. To view digital features for this article go to the Supplementary Information of the article.

Impact of dosage timing of once-daily inhaled corticosteroids in asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Once-daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used as first-line therapy in patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of ICSs administered once daily in the morning or evening as determined by lung function.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched for relevant clinical trials. The primary outcome was lung function assessed as trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second and peak expiratory flow at end point.

RESULTS

Eight randomized clinical trials involving 1,234 patients were analyzed. The total number of patients treated with once-daily ICS in the morning and evening was 628 and 606, respectively. Pooled estimates showed that ICS administered once daily in the evening resulted in mild improvements in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (mean difference 0.05 L; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.09; P = .026; I² = 22.5%) and morning peak expiratory flow (mean difference 13.92 L/min; 95% confidence interval 5.77-22.06; P = .001; I² = 13%) at end point compared with morning dosing. The change in use of rescue medicine and the incidence of adverse events with once-daily ICS were not significantly different between the 2 dosing times.

CONCLUSION

Compared with morning dosing, ICSs administered once daily in the evening seemed to provide some benefits in lung function for patients with asthma. However, because of methodologic limitations, further large-scale randomized clinical trials for dosing time of once-daily ICSs are needed.

Next generation beta adrenoreceptor agonists for the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION

A fixed-dose inhalation of a long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is commonly recommended for moderate to severe asthmatic patients not adequately controlled by an ICS only. In order to improve the patients' adherence and the control of disease there is a noteworthy interest for the next generation inhaled β adrenoreceptor agonists maintaining an over 24 hours bronchodilatation and used once-daily (ultra-LABAs). This review focuses on the currently available evidences on the clinical role of any single ultra-LABAs in the treatment of asthmatic patients. Areas covered: New ultra-LABAs have been developed in recent years for the treatment of asthma. In particular, several evidences in asthmatic patients include indacaterol, vilanterol, olodaterol, and abediterol. Expert opinion: Pharmacologically, all new ultra-LABAs considered have demonstrated a good ability to maintain a true bronchodilatation for over 24 hours and a good safety profile. This aspect could be a key point to improve the patient's perspective, the adherence to the treatment regimens and therefore the control of disease. At this time, however, limited data are available and no ultra-LABA+ICS may be recommended as preferred.

Spotlight on fluticasone furoate/vilanterol trifenatate for the once-daily treatment of asthma: design, development and place in therapy

The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) plays a key role in the treatment of asthmatic patients, and international guidelines have designated ICSs as an early maintenance therapy in controlling asthma symptoms. When asthmatic patients remain symptomatic on ICSs, one common option is to add a long-acting beta₂ agonist (LABA) to the maintenance treatment. Fixed combination inhalers that contain both an ICS and a LABA have been popular for both chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. Historically, these inhalers have been dosed twice daily. However, currently, there is a once-daily combination therapy with the ICS fluticasone furoate (FF) and the LABA vilanterol trifenatate (VI) with indications for use in both COPD and asthma. This dry powder inhaler (DPI) comes in two doses of FF (100 or 200 μg) both combined with VI (25 μg). This article reviews the clinical trial data for FF, VI and FF/VI combination inhalers and documents the efficacy and safety of once-daily inhaled maintenance therapy by DPI in asthmatic patients.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over single dose study of the bronchodilator duration of action of combination fluticasone furoate/vilanterol inhaler in adult asthma

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) is a once-daily maintenance treatment for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The duration of bronchodilation beyond 24 h has not been determined previously.

METHODS

Adults aged 18-65 (n = 32), with asthma and reversibility to salbutamol (≥15% and ≥200 mL increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁]) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Patients were admitted to a clinical trials unit for 72 h, and inhaled, in random order, placebo or FF/VI 100/25 mcg via ELLIPTA dry powder inhaler on two occasions 7-14 days apart. FEV₁ was measured at baseline, 15 and 30 min, 1, 2, 4, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 h. The differences in change in FEV₁ from baseline between treatments and corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated at each time point.

FINDINGS

FF/VI produced a rapid onset of bronchodilation (adjusted mean difference in change from baseline in FEV₁ versus placebo at 15 min, 252 mL [95% CI 182-322]). Maximum bronchodilation was observed at 12 h (adjusted mean difference in the change from baseline in FEV₁, 383 mL [95% CI 285-481]). Bronchodilation was maintained throughout the 72-h assessment period (adjusted mean difference in the change in FEV₁ from baseline at 72 h, 108 mL (95% CI 15-200]). FF/VI was well tolerated and no serious side effects were reported.

INTERPRETATION

A single dose of FF/VI 100/25 mcg showed evidence of a 72-h bronchodilator duration of action in adults with asthma.

Vilanterol and fluticasone furoate for asthma

BACKGROUND

Vilanterol (VI) is a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) that binds to the beta2-adrenoceptor on the airway smooth muscle, producing bronchodilation. LABA therapy, which is well established in adults as part of the British Thoracic Society (BTS) Guidelines for the Management of Asthma, leads to improvement in symptoms and lung function and reduction in exacerbations. At present, the commonly used LABAs licensed for use in asthma management (formoterol and salmeterol) require twice-daily administration, whereas VI is a once-daily therapy.Fluticasone furoate (FF) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), and ICS therapy is recommended by the BTS asthma guidelines. ICSs, the mainstay of asthma treatment, lead to a reduction in both airway inflammation and airway hyper-responsiveness. Regular use leads to improvement in symptoms and lung function. ICSs are currently recommended as 'preventer' therapy for patients who use a 'reliever' medication (e.g. short-acting beta2 agonist (SABA), salbutamol) three or more times per week. Most of the commonly used ICS treatments are twice-daily medications, although two once-daily products are currently licensed (ciclesonide and mometasone).At the present time, only one once-daily ICS/LABA combination (FF/VI) is available, and several other combination inhalers are recommended for twice-daily administration.

OBJECTIVES

To compare effects of VI and FF in combination versus placebo, or versus other ICSs and/or LABAs, on acute exacerbations and on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults and children with chronic asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials, clinical trial registries, manufacturers' websites and reference lists of included studies up to June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults and children with a diagnosis of asthma. Included studies compared VI and FF combined versus placebo, or versus other ICSs and/or LABAs. Our primary outcomes were health-related quality of life, severe asthma exacerbation, as defined by hospital admissions or treatment with a course of oral corticosteroids, and serious adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a fixed-effect model. We used standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 studies that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 6641 randomised participants, of whom 5638 completed the study. All studies lasted between two and 78 weeks and showed good methodological quality overall.We included 10 comparisons in this review, seven for which the dose of VI and FF was 100/25 mcg (VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs placebo; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs same dose of FF; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs same dose of VI; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs fluticasone propionate (FP) 500 mcg twice-daily; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) 250/50 mcg twice-daily; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs FP/SAL 250/25 mcg twice-daily; FF/VI 100/25 vs FP/SAL500/50) and three for which the dose of VI and FF was 200/25 mcg (VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs placebo; VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs FP 500 mcg; VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs same dose of FF).We found very few opportunities to combine results from the 14 included studies in meta-analyses. We tabulated the data for our pre-specified primary outcomes. In particular, we found insufficient information to assess whether once-daily VI/FF was better or worse than twice-daily FP/SAL in terms of efficacy or safety.Only one of the 14 studies looked at health-related quality of life when comparing VI and FF 100/25 mcg versus placebo and identified a significant advantage of VI/FF 100/25 mcg (mean difference (MD) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.46; 329 participants); we recognised this as moderate-quality evidence. Only two studies compared VI/FF 100/25 mcg versus placebo with respect to exacerbations; both studies reported no exacerbations in either treatment arm. Five studies (VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs placebo) sought information on serious adverse events; all five studies reported no serious adverse events in the VI/FF 100/25 mcg or placebo arms. We found no comparison relevant to our primary outcomes for VI/FF at a higher dose (200/25 mcg) versus placebo.The small number of studies contributing to each comparison precludes the opportunity to draw robust conclusions for clinical practice. These studies were not of sufficient duration to allow conclusions about long-term side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some evidence suggests clear advantages for VI/FF, in combination, compared with placebo, particularly for forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow; however, the variety of questions addressed in the included studies did not allow review authors to draw firm conclusions. Information was insufficient for assessment of whether once-daily VI/FF was better or worse than twice-daily FP/SAL in terms of efficacy or safety. It is clear that more research is required to reduce the uncertainties that surround interpretation of these studies. It will be necessary for these findings to be replicated in other work before more robust conclusions are revealed. Only five of the 13 included studies provided data on health-related quality of life, and only six recorded asthma exacerbations. Only one study focused on paediatric patients, so no conclusions can be drawn for the paediatric population. More research is needed, particularly in the primary outcome areas selected for this review, so that we can draw firmer conclusions in the next update of this review.

Fluticasone furoate and vilanterol trifenatate combination therapy for the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION

Combination inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long acting β2-adrenergic agonists (LABA) are used in a stepwise fashion for patients whose asthma is not controlled by low dose ICS alone. Adherence is one of the main issues facing clinicians in the control of asthma symptoms with currently available combination inhalers requiring twice-daily (BD) inhalation. Fluticasone furoate (FF) and vilanterol trifenatate (VI) both have prolonged retention in the lung with effects on lung function over 24-hours and as such the combination has been proposed for once-daily (OD) dosing.

AREAS COVERED

The stepwise pharmacologic approach to asthma management is addressed, followed by a detailed assessment of the literature pertaining to the efficacy, tolerability and safety of FF/VI combination therapy for the treatment of asthma. Expert commentary: Doses of 100/25µg and 200/25µg inhaled OD, have similar improvements in lung function, asthma control as well as rates of side effects to one of the currently available BD ICS/LABA combinations, fluticasone propionate and salmeterol (FP/SAL) but have not been compared with other commonly used combinations. It is hoped that OD dosage of FF/VI can improve adherence and hence asthma control in these patients, however evidence to support this has yet to become available.

The combination of fluticasone furoate and vilanterol trifenatate in the management of asthma: clinical trial evidence and experience

The treatment of persistent asthma has been aided by the recent approval of new medications. The combined inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) powder inhaler fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol trifenatate (VI) is one of these new agents, which was recently approved as a maintenance therapy for persistent asthma. This once-daily ICS/LABA inhaler has previously been approved and used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as a maintenance therapy. Both FF and VI individually have been shown to have efficacy in the treatment of persistent asthma; the combination of FF/VI at the dose of 100/25 μg daily improves trough peak expiratory flows and forced expiratory volume in 1 s. It also reduces the frequency of asthma exacerbations in patients with persistent asthma. The once-daily dosing is well tolerated, with limited clinically significant adverse events; the once-daily inhaled dosing regimen should also improve medication adherence. The data supporting the use of the FF/VI inhaler in persistent asthma are reviewed. The dry powder inhaler of FF/VI (100/25 μg) is an effective and well tolerated once-daily maintenance treatment for patients with persistent asthma.

The efficacy of fluticasone furoate administered in the morning or evening is comparable in patients with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

The inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) is efficacious as a once-daily treatment for the management of asthma. Asthma is associated with circadian changes, with worsening lung function at night. We compared the efficacy of once-daily FF in the morning or evening for the treatment of asthma.

METHODS

Adults with persistent bronchial asthma were enrolled into this randomised, repeat-dose, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study. After a 14-day run-in period, patients received either: FF 100 μg in the morning (AM); FF 100 μg in the evening (PM); or placebo, via the ELLIPTA(®) dry powder inhaler. Patients received all three treatments (14 ± 2 day duration) separated by a 14- to 21-day washout period. The primary endpoint was 24-h weighted mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) measured at the end of each 14-day treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients aged between 19 and 67 years were randomised and 21 (75%) completed all three study arms. Once-daily administration of FF 100 μg resulted in an increased 24-hour weighted mean FEV1; differences between the adjusted means for AM and PM FF dosing versus placebo were 0.077 L (90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.001, 0.152) and 0.105 L (90% CI: 0.029, 0.180), respectively (adjusted mean difference: -0.028 L [90% CI: -0.102, 0.045]). AM or PM doses had comparable incidences of adverse events (AEs; 18/23 versus 18/24, respectively), no serious AEs occurred.

CONCLUSION

AM and PM doses of once-daily FF 100 μg produced comparable improvements in lung function relative to placebo.

Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol: a review of its use in patients with asthma

Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (Relvar(®)) is a once-daily, fixed combination of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β2-adrenoreceptor agonist (LABA), delivered via a dry powder inhaler (Ellipta(®)). It is approved for the treatment of asthma in the EU and Japan, and is the first once-daily ICS/LABA to be available for this indication. Fluticasone furoate is an enhanced-affinity glucocorticoid receptor agonist, with potent anti-inflammatory activity. Vilanterol produces rapid and prolonged bronchodilation. In phase III trials in adolescents and adults with various levels of asthma uncontrolled on ICS and/or ICS/LABA, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 or 200/25 µg once daily (approved dosages in the EU) significantly improved pulmonary function compared with placebo or equivalent dosages of fluticasone furoate alone (in some trials) or fluticasone propionate. In similar trials, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 µg once daily was as effective as fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 µg twice daily in improving pulmonary function and significantly reduced the risk of severe asthma exacerbation relative to fluticasone furoate alone. In clinical trials, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol was generally well tolerated with fewer than 15 % of patients experiencing treatment-related adverse events, the most common of which were oral/oropharyngeal candidiasis, dysphonia, extrasystoles and cough. The tolerability profile of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol was generally similar to that of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol. Thus, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol is an effective and generally well tolerated ICS/LABA option for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma.

Patient perspectives on fluticasone-vilanterol versus other corticosteroid combination products for the treatment of asthma

OBJECTIVE

Fluticasone furoate (FF), an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), and vilanterol (VI), a long-acting beta2 receptor agonist (LABA), is a new combination used in an Ellipta(®) device. This article compares FF-VI to other ICS-LABA combinations available, particularly emphasizing product selection from the patient perspective.

DATA SOURCES

A PubMED and EMBASE search completed in October 2015 identified trials using the MeSH terms "fluticasone", "vilanterol", and "asthma". Additional information was gathered from references cited in the identified publications, the manufacturer, package insert, and ClinicalTrials.gov registry.

STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION

Preference was given to randomized controlled clinical trials. Animal trials, trials for COPD, and non-English sources were excluded.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Seven efficacy trials of FF-VI in asthma were identified. Only one (24 weeks) trial compared FF-VI to another ICS-LABA combination (fluticasone propionate-salmeterol). Primary outcomes (usually lung function) and secondary outcomes (eg, quality of life and symptom scores) were comparable. In three FF-VI safety trials, the type and frequency of common adverse reactions (ie, thrush and dysphonia) were similar to those in clinical trials. Over 90% of subjects rated the Ellipta(®) device as "easy to use" and demonstrated correct device technique initially and at 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Individuals may have drug- and device-specific preferences that should be incorporated into therapeutic decision making. Limited data indicate that clinical and patient-oriented efficacy/safety outcomes of FF-VI are likely comparable to other available combinations for adults with asthma. Patient-friendly features include once-daily dosing, flexibility of dose timing, and design/ease of the use of the device. Additional larger and long-term comparative studies are needed to determine whether these features translate into greater efficacy, safety, patient preference, or adherence versus other ICS-LABA combinations. In the next few years, the availability of less expensive generic ICS-LABA products may strongly influence patient preference.

A randomized, crossover study to investigate the pharmacokinetics and safety of inhaled fluticasone furoate and umeclidinium, administered separately and in combination via dry powder inhaler in healthy adult volunteers

INTRODUCTION

A combination of fluticasone furoate (FF) and umeclidinium (UMEC) has been considered for development for the treatment of asthma. The primary objectives were to investigate the plasma and urine pharmacokinetics (PK) of FF/UMEC in combination compared with FF and UMEC monotherapies.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, three-period crossover, single-center study in healthy volunteers assessed the PK of FF 400 mcg and UMEC 500 mcg administered separately and in combination (four inhalations of FF/UMEC 100/125 mcg, FF 100 mcg, or UMEC 125 mcg) via dual-strip dry powder inhaler. Subjects were randomized based on codes generated using a validated computerized system (Randall, GlaxoSmithKline).

RESULTS

Eighteen subjects were enrolled; 17 received all three scheduled doses of study medication. Plasma FF and UMEC concentrations peaked at 0.5 and 0.08 h post-dose, respectively, for FF/UMEC and the monotherapies. FF and UMEC co-administration resulted in slightly lower or similar systemic exposure for both drugs versus the monotherapies. In post hoc sensitivity analyses (performed because two subjects administered inhalations incorrectly), the ratio of adjusted geometric means (maximum plasma concentration and area under the curve) was closer to unity than in the planned analyses. Cumulative urinary UMEC excretion (Ae) was similar for FF/UMEC and UMEC. Post hoc sensitivity analyses on Ae(0-24) suggested a small carryover effect but results were similar to those of the population as a whole. Urinary UMEC excretion following FF/UMEC was low (~1.5% over 24 h) and unlikely to have impacted upon PK comparisons. Three adverse events were reported; none were severe or led to withdrawal. There were no clinically significant effects on electrocardiogram, vital sign, or laboratory parameters.

CONCLUSION

Fluticasone furoate and umeclidinium co-administration was well tolerated and was not associated with meaningful changes in systemic or urinary PK versus the monotherapies.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate 50 mcg in adults with persistent asthma: a 12-week randomized trial

Background

Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a novel, once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) that has been shown to improve lung function vs. placebo in asthma patients. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FF 50 mcg compared with placebo in asthma patients uncontrolled by non-ICS therapy.

Methods

This 12-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase III study randomized 248 patients (aged ≥12 years) to once-daily FF 50 mcg administered via the ELLIPTA™^a dry powder inhaler or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in pre-dose evening trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁). Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in percentage of rescue-free 24-h periods (powered), evening and morning peak expiratory flow, symptom-free 24-h periods and withdrawals due to lack of efficacy. Other endpoints included Asthma Control Test™, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and ELLIPTA ease of use questions. Safety was assessed throughout the study.

Results

There was a significant difference in evening trough FEV₁ between FF 50 mcg and placebo (treatment difference: 120 mL; p = 0.012). There was also a significant difference in rescue-free 24-h periods (11.6%; p = 0.004) vs. placebo. There were numerically greater improvements with FF vs. placebo for all remaining secondary endpoints. The incidence of adverse events was lower with FF (31%) than with placebo (38%); few were treatment-related (FF 50 mcg: n = 1, <1%; placebo: n = 4, 3%).

Conclusion

FF 50 mcg once daily significantly improved FEV₁ and percentage of rescue-free 24-h periods experienced over 12 weeks vs. placebo, and was well tolerated.

Trial registration

www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT01436071

New combination treatments in the management of asthma: focus on fluticasone/vilanterol

Despite the 2007 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Expert Panel 3 guidelines for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma, many patients with poorly controlled asthma still continue to tax the health care system. Controlling asthma symptoms and preventing acute exacerbations have been the foundation of care. Using long-term controller treatments such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) is a common approach. While patient responses to recommended pharmacotherapy may vary, poor adherence to therapy also contributes to poor asthma control. A once-daily combination inhaler, such as fluticasone furoate, an ICS, in combination with vilanterol, a LABA, offers increased convenience and potential improved adherence, which should result in enhanced clinical outcomes and reduced exacerbations. The ICS/LABA combination inhaler of fluticasone furoate and vilanterol is currently approved in the United States for use in the maintenance of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and to reduce exacerbations. This paper reviews the expanding literature on the efficacy of fluticasone furoate and vilanterol in treating asthma.