Tiotropium + olodaterol shows clinically meaningful improvements in quality of life

Systemic Manifestations of COPD and the Impact of Dual Bronchodilation with Tiotropium/Olodaterol on Cardiac Function and Autonomic Integrity

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has significant systemic manifestations, including cardiovascular morbidity. The main aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of short-term COPD treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) 5/5 μg on cardiac function and autonomic integrity. Methods: Twenty-nine patients with newly diagnosed moderate-to-severe COPD were enrolled. We performed pulmonary function tests, cardiac magnetic resonance, cardiac 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-MIBG) imaging and analysis of blood biomarkers on our study subjects. The correlations between the tests' results were evaluated at baseline. The changes in pulmonary and cardiac parameters from baseline through 12 weeks were assessed. Results: Significant associations between pulmonary function tests' results and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), as well as interleukin-22 (IL-22), were observed at baseline. Treatment with TIO/OLO significantly improved lung function as measured by spirometry and body plethysmography. Moreover, we found that the cardiac index increased from 2.89 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.09) to 3.21 L/min/m2 (IQR 0.78) (p = 0.013; N = 18) and the late heart-to-mediastinum ratio improved from 1.88 (IQR 0.37) to 2 (IQR 0.41) (p = 0.026; N = 16) after 12 weeks of treatment. Conclusions: Treatment with TIO/OLO improves lung function and positively impacts cardiac function and autonomic integrity, suggesting that dual bronchodilation might have a potential in decreasing the risk for cardiac events in COPD. Hs-CRP and IL-22 might be beneficial in determining the intensity of systemic inflammation in COPD. Further research with a larger cohort is needed to enhance the initial results of this study.

National Development in the Use of Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Repeated Cross-Sectional Studies from 1998 to 2018

Recommendations for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have shifted towards a more restrictive use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). We aimed to identify the nationwide development over time in the use of ICS treatment in COPD. We conducted a register-based repeated cross-sectional study using Danish nationwide registers. On a yearly basis from 1998 to 2018, we included all patients in Denmark ≥ 40 years of age with an ICD-10 diagnosis of COPD (J44). Accumulated ICS use was calculated for each year based on redeemed prescriptions. Patients were divided into the following groups: No ICS, low-dose ICS, medium-dose ICS, or high-dose ICS. From 1998 to 2018, the yearly proportion of patients without ICS treatment increased (from 50.6% to 57.6%), the proportion of patients on low-dose ICS treatment increased (from 11.3% to 14.9%), and the proportion of patients on high-dose ICS treatment decreased (from 17.0% to 9.4%). We demonstrated a national reduction in the use of ICS treatment in COPD from 1998 to 2018, with an increase in the proportion of patients without ICS and on low-dose ICS treatment and a decrease in the proportion of patients on high-dose ICS treatment.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fixed-Dose Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Tiotropium for COPD Patients in China

Purpose

Tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) fixed-dose combination (FDC) can improve lung function and quality of life for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is not inferior to other LAMA/LABAs. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC in patients with moderate to very severe COPD in China.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC versus TIO in the treatment of COPD from Chinese health system perspective. Four health states were based on 2021 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2021), which included moderate (GOLD II, 50% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 80% of predicted), severe (GOLD III, 30% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 50% of predicted) and very severe (GOLD IV, FEV1 > 30% of predicted) COPD and death. The model simulated in cycles yearly. The indicators of total costs, number of COPD exacerbations, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as the model output. Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 5% annual rate. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted over a 10-year time horizon. The threshold of incremental total cost per unit effectiveness gained (ICER) was 1.5 times of GDP per capita. Uncertainty was assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Results

TIO/OLO was 0.007 QALYs more than TIO but 0.012 LYs lower, which increased the total cost by $2268.17 per patient, but the total exacerbations number was less. Incremental cost effectiveness analysis had shown that the ICER exceeded the willingness to pay threshold. Results were robust under most parameter variation, except the parameters of total drug cost of TIO/OLO FDC in univariate sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

Although TIO/OLO FDC could reduce the exacerbation risk, it was not cost-effective, and needed to be repriced.

EVELUT®: A Real-World, Observational Study Assessing Dyspnoea and Symptom Burden in COPD Patients Switched from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA or LAMA/LABA/ICS

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2023) no longer recommends a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combination for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In patients treated with LABA/ICS, who continue to experience symptoms without frequent or severe exacerbations, GOLD now recommends switching to long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA instead of escalating to triple therapy (TT; LAMA/LABA/ICS), which previously was also a recommended option. EVELUT®, a real-life, observational study, compared these two treatment strategies in terms of symptom relief and health status improvement.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic COPD at low exacerbation risk (GOLD B) were switched, at their physicians' discretion, from LABA/ICS to either fixed-dose LAMA/LABA (tiotropium/olodaterol, Respimat® [Tio/Olo]) or fixed or free TT. Primary endpoints were change in modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and COPD Assessment Test™ (CAT™) scores after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The safety set contained 463 patients (Tio/Olo, n = 329; TT, n = 134). In a propensity score-matched set (Tio/Olo, n = 121; TT, n = 121), improvement in mMRC score was similar in patients on Tio/Olo (-0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.11, -0.36) and TT (-0.25; 95% CI -0.13, -0.38). Improvement in total CAT score was slightly larger in patients on Tio/Olo (-3.45; 95% CI -2.45, -4.45) versus TT (-2.51; 95% CI -1.62, -3.40). In both groups, Physician's Global Evaluation scores increased, with 69-89% of patients satisfied with their treatment overall. Marginally more patients on Tio/Olo responded to treatment versus TT (Δ mMRC score ≥ 1; 25% vs. 22%; Δ CAT score ≥ 2, 68% vs. 56%).

CONCLUSION

In patients with symptomatic COPD at low exacerbation risk, treatment can be switched from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA without compromising clinical benefit, compared with escalating to LAMA/LABA/ICS. Switching from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA can provide symptom relief and improve health status without exposure to the risks associated with ICS.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03954132.

Combination therapy with long-acting bronchodilators and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves clinical symptoms and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and reduces exacerbation risk. However, there is a growing concern that LAMA/LABA therapy may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the use of LAMA/LABA combination therapy modifies the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs of LAMA/LABA or LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the management of patients with COPD that reported on cardiovascular end-points. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 51 RCTs enrolling 91 021 subjects were analysed. Both dual LAMA/LABA (1.6% versus 1.3%; relative risk 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81) and triple therapy (1.6% versus 1.4%; relative risk 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) significantly increased the risk of MACE compared with ICS/LABA. The excess risk was most evident in RCTs in which the average underlying baseline risk for MACE was >1% per year. Compared with LAMA only, LABA only or placebo, dual LAMA/LABA therapy did not significantly increase the risk of MACE, though these comparisons may have lacked sufficient statistical power.

CONCLUSION

Compared with ICS/LABA, dual LAMA/LABA or triple therapy increases cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD. This should be considered in the context of the incremental benefits of these therapies for symptoms and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD, especially in those with a MACE risk of >1% per year.

LABA/LAMA as First-Line Therapy for COPD: A Summary of the Evidence and Guideline Recommendations

Inhaled bronchodilators (alone or in combination) are the cornerstone of treatment for symptomatic patients with COPD, either as initial/first-line treatment or for second-line/treatment escalation in patients who experience persistent symptoms or exacerbations on monotherapy. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2022 report recommends initial pharmacological treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) as monotherapy for most patients, or dual bronchodilator therapy (LABA/LAMA) in patients with more severe symptoms, regardless of exacerbation history. The recommendations for LABA/LAMA are broader in the American Thoracic Society treatment guidelines, which strongly recommend LABA/LAMA combination therapy over LAMA or LABA monotherapy in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. However, despite consistent guideline recommendations, real-world prescribing data indicate that LAMA and/or LABA without an inhaled corticosteroid are not the most widely prescribed therapies in COPD. This article reviews global and regional/national guideline recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA in COPD, examines the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of LABA/LAMA versus other therapies and offers a practical guide for clinicians to help ensure appropriate use of LABA/LAMA therapy.

Dual bronchodilation for the treatment of COPD - From bench to bedside

Because there is a solid pharmacological rationale based on positive interactions between long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) for their ability to relax human airway smooth muscle in vitro alongside several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world observational studies that support the use of LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for the treatment of patients with COPD, in this narrative review we discuss the preclinical and clinical proofs supporting the use of LAMA+LABA therapy in COPD and why this therapeutic approach optimises bronchodilation. Robust evidence indicates that all LAMA/LABA FDCs are consistently more effective than LAMA or LABA administered alone in improving lung function, dyspnoea, quality of life, and exercise capacity in patients with COPD. However, the ability of dual bronchodilation with FDCs of LAMA/LABA to prevent or reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations remains unclear due to conflicting data from large RCTs, despite several mechanisms explaining why such combinations should be of value in decreasing the frequency of COPD exacerbations. Both LABAs and LAMAs mechanistically can affect the cardiovascular system, but from clinical studies to date, LAMA/LABA FDCs have an acceptable cardiovascular safety profile, at least in the COPD population enrolled in RCTs. Indirect evidence suggests that some FDCs may even exert a protective role against serious cardiovascular adverse events compared to monotherapies. Consequently, several LAMA/LABA FDCs have been developed and approved for clinical use as treatments for patients with COPD. However, to date, there are unfortunately very few head-to-head studies comparing the safety and efficacy of different LAMA/LABA FDCs making it difficult to choose the most appropriate combination, although the use of meta-analyses has provided some information in this regard.

Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Umeclidinium/Vilanterol, and Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Taiwan: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Background

Long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) combination therapy improved lung function and health-related quality-of-life and reduced exacerbation rates and dyspnea in symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We compared the real-world effects of three fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations for COPD in Taiwan.

Methods

This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated 1-year outcomes after LABA/LAMA combination therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD. Exacerbations and symptoms of COPD, lung functions, and therapy escalation were compared among patients using tiotropium/olodaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol and indacaterol/glycopyrronium. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the baseline characteristics.

Results

Data of 1,617 patients were collected. After PSM, time to first moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation was comparable among three groups, while the annualized rates of the exacerbation (episodes/patient/year) in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol (0.19) or umeclidinium/vilanterol (0.17) were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium (0.38). COPD-related symptoms were stable over the treatment period, and there was no significant difference in the changes of symptom scores including CAT and mMRC among three groups at the end of the study period.

Conclusion

This study presented valuable real-world outcome in terms of exacerbation and treatment response of COPD patients treated with fixed-dose LABA/LAMA regimens in Taiwan. The annualized rates of moderate-to-severe exacerbation in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol or umeclidinium/vilanterol were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium, though the time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation was similar among different fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations.

Therapeutic Success in Swiss COPD Patients Receiving Dual Bronchodilation Therapy as COPD Maintenance Treatment

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often reduced by high symptom burden and frequent exacerbations. So far, data on therapeutic success in Swiss COPD patients receiving dual bronchodilation therapy as COPD maintenance treatment are limited. Data from a recently published, non-interventional study on clinical benefit after the start of combined tiotropium-olodaterol treatment were analyzed focusing on Swiss patients compared to the overall cohort including patients from various European countries. Demographic data on the changes in Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for the assessment of HRQoL in correlation to symptoms and the number of exacerbations, as well as physician's global assessment (PGE), were evaluated 6 weeks after treatment start. In Switzerland (n = 61), significantly more patients had comorbidities and exacerbations but showed less symptoms compared to the overall cohort (n = 4639). HRQoL improved in both cohorts, with a negative correlation to symptom burden and number of exacerbations in the overall cohort. PGE scores improved after 6 weeks with a better general condition at baseline in Swiss patients (PGE score 4/5: 68.9% [Swiss cohort] vs. 49.0% [overall cohort]. Despite significant differences regarding the presence of symptoms and exacerbations, therapeutic success was similar in both patient groups. Highly symptomatic patients benefited mostly from tiotropium-olodaterol treatment.

Comparative Efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Other Bronchodilators for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual maintenance therapies for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus other dual and mono-bronchodilator therapies in symptomatic patients with COPD.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (October 2015-November 2020) was performed to identify RCTs ≥ 8 weeks long in adult patients with COPD that compared LAMA/LABA combinations against any long-acting bronchodilator-containing dual therapy or monotherapy. Data extracted on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, rescue medication use and moderate/severe exacerbation rate were analysed using an NMA in a frequentist framework. The primary comparison was at 24 weeks. Fixed effects model results are presented.

RESULTS

The NMA included 69 full-length publications (including 10 GSK clinical study reports) reporting 49 studies. At 24 weeks, UMEC/VI provided statistically significant greater improvements in FEV₁ versus all dual therapy and monotherapy comparators. UMEC/VI provided similar improvements in SGRQ total score compared with all other LAMA/LABAs, and significantly greater improvements versus UMEC 125 μg, glycopyrronium 50 μg, glycopyrronium 18 μg, tiotropium 18 μg and salmeterol 50 μg. UMEC/VI also provided significantly better outcomes versus some comparators for TDI focal score, rescue medication use, annualised moderate/severe exacerbation rate, and time to first moderate/severe exacerbation.

CONCLUSION

UMEC/VI provided generally better outcomes compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and consistent improvements in lung function (measured by change from baseline in trough FEV₁ at 24 weeks) versus dual therapies. Treatment with UMEC/VI may improve outcomes for symptomatic patients with COPD compared with alternative maintenance treatments.

Effect of Adding Inhaled Corticosteroid to Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist/Long-Acting Beta-Agonist Therapy Among Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

The role of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is unclear. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ICS as an add-on to long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting beta 2 agonist (LABA), which was assessed using the impulse oscillation system (IOS), in patients with COPD.

Methodology

We included patients with COPD whose treatment was changed from LAMA/LABA (≥four weeks) to ICS/LAMA/LABA between April 2019 and March 2021. To gain insight into the effect and safety of ICS-containing triple therapy for COPD, pulmonary function; Short-Form 36, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and modified Medical Research Council scores; and airway resistance assessed using the IOS from one week before LAMA/LABA was switched to ICS/LAMA/LABA therapy until more than eight but less than twelve weeks after switching were evaluated.

Results

In total, 46 patients with COPD (mean age: 72.28 ± 7.81 years) were included in the study. None of the pulmonary function test parameters significantly changed from baseline values (mean difference in forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1.0]: +0.032, P = 0.12; percentage FEV1.0 [FEV1.0%]/forced vital capacity [FVC]: −0.58, P = 0.42; and FVC: +0.087, P = 0.058). Meanwhile, the IOS showed that resonant frequency (mean difference from baseline: −2.12, P < 0.0001) and bodily pain scores in the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (mean difference: −7.03, P = 0.031) significantly decreased.

Conclusions

Switching from LAMA/LABA to ICS/LAMA/LABA therapy reduces airway elasticity-to-inertial resistance ratios, which may lead to structural airway improvements in patients with COPD.

Targeting exertional breathlessness to improve physical activity: the role of primary care

Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). By working together with patients to target exertional breathlessness and increase physical activity, PCPs have an important role to play, early in the disease course, in improving patient outcomes in both the short and long term. In this article, we consider how physical activity affects disease progression from the PCP perspective. We discuss the role of pharmacological therapy, the importance of an holistic approach and the role of PCPs in assessing and promoting physical activity. The complexity and heterogeneity of COPD make it a challenging disease to treat. Patients' avoidance of activity, and subsequent decline in capacity to perform it, further impacts the management of the disease. Improving patient tolerance of physical activity, increasing participation in daily activities and helping patients to remain active are clear goals of COPD management. These may require an holistic approach to management, including pulmonary rehabilitation and psychological programmes in parallel with bronchodilation therapy, in order to address both physiological and behavioural factors. PCPs have an important role to optimise therapy, set goals and communicate the importance of maintaining physical activity to their patients. In addition, optimal treatment that addresses activity-related breathlessness can help prevent the downward spiral of inactivity and get patients moving again, to improve their overall health and long-term prognosis.

Cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium monotherapy or a fixed-dose combination of long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid for COPD in Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands: a model-based study

OBJECTIVES

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines advocate treatment with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators for patients with COPD who have persistent symptoms or continue to have exacerbations while using a single bronchodilator. This study assessed the cost-utility of the fixed dose combination of the bronchodilators tiotropium and olodaterol versus two comparators, tiotropium monotherapy and long-acting β2 agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) combinations, in three European countries: Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands.

METHODS

A previously published COPD patient-level discrete event simulation model was updated with most recent evidence to estimate lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for COPD patients receiving either tiotropium/olodaterol, tiotropium monotherapy or LABA/ICS. Treatment efficacy covered impact on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), total and severe exacerbations and pneumonias. The unit costs of medication, maintenance treatment, exacerbations and pneumonias were obtained for each country. The country-specific analyses adhered to the Finnish, Swedish and Dutch pharmacoeconomic guidelines, respectively.

RESULTS

Treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol gained QALYs ranging from 0.09 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.11 (the Netherlands) versus tiotropium and 0.23 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.28 (the Netherlands) versus LABA/ICS. The Finnish payer's incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tiotropium/olodaterol was €11 000/QALY versus tiotropium and dominant versus LABA/ICS. The Swedish ICERs were €6200/QALY and dominant, respectively (societal perspective). The Dutch ICERs were €14 400 and €9200, respectively (societal perspective). The probability that tiotropium/olodaterol was cost-effective compared with tiotropium at the country-specific (unofficial) threshold values for the maximum willingness to pay for a QALY was 84% for Finland, 98% for Sweden and 99% for the Netherlands. Compared with LABA/ICS, this probability was 100% for all three countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the simulations, tiotropium/olodaterol is a cost-effective treatment option versus tiotropium or LABA/ICS in all three countries. In both Finland and Sweden, tiotropium/olodaterol is more effective and cost saving (ie, dominant) in comparison with LABA/ICS.

Dual LABA/LAMA Therapy versus LABA or LAMA Monotherapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Support of the American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Rationale: There is uncertainty on the optimal first-line therapy for symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Long-acting β₂-receptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have long been mainstays of treatment, though it is still not clear if dual therapy with LABA/LAMA is superior to monotherapy for symptomatic COPD.Objectives: To clarify the evidence landscape, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following question: in patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, is LABA/LAMA combination therapy more effective and equally safe compared with LABA or LAMA monotherapy?Methods: A search of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted by a medical librarian for randomized controlled trials enrolling patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance that compare LABA/LAMA combination therapy to LABA or LAMA monotherapy. A systematic approach was used to screen, abstract, and critically appraise the emerging study evidence. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method was applied to rate the certainty and quality of the evidence.Results: A total of 24 studies were eligible for inclusion (n = 45,441). Pairwise random-effects meta-analysis revealed reductions in hospital admissions (11% reduction; P < 0.01) and acute exacerbations of COPD (20% reduction; P < 0.002), all in favor of LABA/LAMA dual therapy. Although there is reduced dyspnea (0.10 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001) and improved health-related quality of life (-0.13 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001), both values did not meet a clinical meaningful difference threshold. LABA/LAMA combination therapy showed no difference in treatment-emergent adverse effects (risk ratio, 0.99; P = 0.34) when compared with either LAMA or LABA monotherapy.Conclusions: Based on the reviewed evidence, in patients with symptomatic COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, dual LABA/LAMA therapy is superior to either LABA or LAMA monotherapy based on the reduced risk of exacerbations and hospitalizations.

Comparison of Effectiveness Using Different Dual Bronchodilator Agents in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment

The effectiveness and safety of fixed dual long-acting bronchodilators for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients have been well established; however, there is a paucity of clinical effectiveness comparison in patients with COPD treatment. The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of three once-daily dual bronchodilator agents in patients with COPD. Patients with diagnosed COPD and treated with a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) + long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination therapy (UME/VIL (umeclidinium and vilanterol inhalation powder), IND/GLY (indacaterol and glycopyrronium), and TIO/OLO (tiotropium and olodaterol)) were enrolled in this retrospective study over a period of 12 months. Effectiveness assessments were evaluated using a COPD assessment test (CAT) and lung function parameters. Besides, times for acute exacerbation were also assessed. The enrolled patients’ number was 177 in IND/GLY, 176 in UME/VIL and 183 in TIO/OLO. Lung function measurements with FEV1 had significantly improved for patients using TIO/OLO (98.7 mL) compared to those of IND/GLY (65.2 mL) and UME/VIL (64.4 mL) (p < 0.001). CAT scores were also significantly decreased in patients treated with TIO/OLO (CAT down 5.6) than those with IND/GLY (3.8) and UME/VIL (3.9) (p = 0.03). Acute exacerbation was also reduced in patients using TIO/OLO (4.9%) compared with those using IND/GLY (10.2%) and UME/VIL (11.9%) (p = 0.01). Significant improvement in pulmonary function, symptoms were demonstrated after 12 months of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combination therapy with three different treatment options. TIO/OLO demonstrated higher therapeutic effects compared with UME/VIL or IND/GLY. Determining clinical relevance will require a well-designed randomized controlled trial.

Romanian clinical guideline for diagnosis and treatment of COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease with increasing prevalence and burden for health systems worldwide. Every country collects its own epidemiological data regarding COPD prevalence, morbidity and mortality while taking steps to educate the population and medical community to improve early detection and treatment. The rising COPD prevalence creates a need for comprehensive guidelines. In 2012 and 2017–2018, the Romanian Society of Pneumology (SRP) organised national inquiries for COPD, while lung physicians in Romania began receiving education regarding the correct algorithms for COPD diagnosis and therapy. During 2019, a Romanian clinical guideline for diagnosis and treatment of COPD was published, and a condensed version of key points from this guideline are presented herein. COPD is diagnosed based on the presence of three major components: relevant exposure history, respiratory symptoms, and airway limitation that is not fully reversible. Clinical evaluation of patients diagnosed with COPD should include the level of symptoms, exacerbation rate, the presence of comorbidities and determination of phenotypes. The present abridged guideline is designed to be accessible and practical for assessing and managing patients with COPD. The application of up-to-date COPD guidelines may enhance the optimism of physicians and patients in managing this disease.

An Observational Study Assessing Changes in Health and Functional Status in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) During Therapy with Spiolto® Respimat® in Everyday Clinical Practice: The Greek ELLACTO Study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often report deteriorated functional status and poor health-related quality of life, both core aspects of their overall health status. The study objective was to assess tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® effects on health and functional status of COPD patients requiring long-acting dual bronchodilation treatment in the real world.

METHODS

ELLACTO was an open-label, observational, prospective study conducted in Greece, measuring changes on health and functional status of COPD patients treated with a fixed dose of tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® for approximately 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was "therapeutic success" defined as a ≥ 0.4-point decrease in the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) score at week 6. Secondary endpoints included absolute changes in the CCQ and the functional subscale CCQ-4 at week 6, patient general condition measured by Physician's Global Evaluation (PGE) score at baseline and week 6, patient satisfaction and preference with Respimat^® device (assessed by the abbreviated Patient Satisfaction and Preference Questionnaire (PASAPQ)) at week 6 and treatment continuation with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® after the study.

RESULTS

After approximately 6 weeks of treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^®, therapeutic success was achieved by 64.3% of 1332 patients included in the final analysis [95% confidence interval [CI] 62-67]. Mean [standard deviation (SD)] absolute changes in CCQ and CCQ-4 scores at week 6 were - 0.63 (0.635) and - 0.59 (0.714) points, respectively. Patient general condition improved and more than 77.4% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the use of the Respimat^® device. Among patients previously using the HandiHaler^® device (n = 254), 85.4% expressed a preference for Respimat^® over 6.7% for HandiHaler^®. Most patients (95.7%) were willing to continue treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® after the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® led to an improved health status in Greek COPD patients. Most patients also expressed a preference for the Respimat^® device and willingness to continue treatment with it.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03419962.

Pharmacological treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Pharmacological treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) aims to alleviate symptoms and reduce the future risk of events such as exacerbations, disease progression and death. The heterogeneity of COPD results in variable responses to pharmacological interventions. COPD treatment has evolved towards a precision medicine approach, integrating clinical and biomarker information in order to optimize treatment decisions for each individual. The evidence supporting the use of blood eosinophil counts to predict responses to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in COPD patients has led to the adoption of this biomarker for use in clinical practice. The development of novel double and triple inhaled combination treatments containing long-acting bronchodilators with or without ICS has involved some landmark randomized controlled trials in COPD patients. These studies have provided valuable evidence to direct the use of different classes of combination treatments. However, there are still some unresolved questions and debates. This review article describes the advances in the pharmacological treatment of COPD, particularly the personalization of treatment. The evidence base for current recommendations is discussed, and controversial issues are dissected.

Adherence to Treatment Recommendations for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - Results from the Swedish National Airway Register

Introduction

Swedish guidelines adhere to the international GOLD document regarding management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Based on data from the Swedish National Airway Register (SNAR) the aim was to evaluate adherence to guidelines of pharmacological treatment of COPD in Swedish primary and secondary care.

Methods

During a period of 18 months, data on symptoms (CAT, mMRC), lung function, exacerbation history and pharmacological treatment from 15,595 COPD patients from 853 primary care and 125 secondary care clinics were collected from SNAR. Patients with a co-diagnosis of asthma were excluded. Patients were divided into four treatment groups: no pharmacological treatment, short-acting bronchodilators alone, long-acting bronchodilators alone and ICS alone or in combination with bronchodilators.

Results

Of the patients, 29% were in GOLD group A, 58% in group B, 2% in group C and 11% in group D. CAT score was ≥10 and mMRC score was below 2 in 30.9% of the patients and mMRC score was ≥2 and CAT score <10 in 4.2% of the patients. In 61.4% of the patients, no exacerbation was registered during the last year. Long-acting bronchodilators were prescribed for 78% and ICS for 46% of all patients. In groups A, B, C and D, respectively, 21%, 11%, 11% and 5% did not receive any inhaler therapy; 67%, 81%, 81% and 90% received long-acting bronchodilators; 33%, 46%, 55% and 71% received any ICS containing therapy and 19%, 34%, 39% and 61% received triple therapy.

Discussion

Data from the SNAR indicate that only a minority of COPD patients were untreated. There was a liberal use of ICS containing drug combinations in subjects who do not have an indication for ICS. A considerable proportion of subjects at high risk of exacerbations did not receive ICS treatment.

Therapeutic Success of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Measured Using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), in Routine Clinical Practice: A Multinational Non-Interventional Study

Background

The Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) is a simple patient-reported tool to measure clinical control of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Objective

This open-label, single-arm, non-interventional study (NCT03663569) investigated changes in CCQ score during treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol in clinical practice.

Methods

Data were included from consenting COPD patients, enrolled in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Switzerland and Ukraine, who were receiving a new prescription for tiotropium/olodaterol according to the treating physician in a real-world environment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of therapeutic success, defined as a 0.4-point decrease in CCQ score after treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol for approximately 6 weeks.

Results

Overall, 4819 patients were treated; baseline and Week 6 CCQ scores were available for 4700 patients, mostly classified as Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) B (51.6%) or D (42.7%). After 6 weeks’ treatment, 81.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 80.24–82.49) of patients achieved therapeutic success; mean improvement in overall CCQ score was 1.02 points (95% CI 1.00–1.05). Improved CCQ score was seen in 92.2% of patients (95% CI 91.43–92.98), 2.5% had no change and 5.3% showed a worsening. When stratified by prior treatment, the greatest benefit was seen in treatment-naïve patients, with 85.7% achieving therapeutic success, compared with 79.5% of those pretreated with long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and 74.2% of those pretreated with LABA or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy. Overall, rescue medication decreased by 1.25 puffs/day (95% CI 1.19–1.31) versus baseline. In total, 29 patients (0.6%) reported drug-related adverse events and 7 patients reported serious adverse events (0.15%).

Conclusion

In 4700 COPD patients, 6 weeks’ treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol, as initial treatment or follow-up to LAMA or LABA monotherapy or LABA/ICS, improved CCQ and decreased rescue medication use. The adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of tiotropium/olodaterol.

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.

Dual versus monotherapy with bronchodilators in GOLD group B COPD patients according to baseline FEV1 level: a patient-level pooled analysis of phase-3 randomized clinical trials

Background

Which patients should receive dual therapy as initial treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is only loosely defined. We evaluated if a lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) identifies a population more likely to benefit from dual therapy than monotherapy among group B COPD patients in whom Global initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (GOLD) recommends monotherapy as initial treatment.

Methods

This was a patient-level pooled analysis of phase-3 randomized controlled trials involving dual bronchodilators. Study patients were classified into two groups based on the FEV₁ of 50% of the predicted value (GOLD I/II versus GOLD III/IV). We evaluated the efficacy of dual versus monotherapy (long-acting beta-2 agonist [LABA] or long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) between these two groups in the following outcomes: changes in trough FEV₁, the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, the proportion of SGRQ responders, time to first exacerbation, and risk of adverse events.

Results

A total of 14,449 group B patients from 12 studies were divided into GOLD III/IV (n = 8043) or GOLD I/II group (n = 6406). In the GOLD III/IV group, dual therapy was significantly more effective in improving FEV₁, reducing SGRQ scores, and achieving a higher proportion of SGRQ responders compared with either LABA or LAMA. Dual therapy also showed a significantly longer time to first exacerbation compared with LABA in the GOLD III/IV group. In contrast, in the GOLD I/II group, the benefits of dual therapy over monotherapy were less consistent. Although dual therapy resulted in significantly higher FEV₁ than either LABA or LAMA, it did not show significant differences in the SGRQ score and proportion of SGRQ responders as compared with LABA. The time to first exacerbation was also not significantly different between dual therapy and either LABA or LAMA in the GOLD I/II group.

Conclusions

Dual therapy demonstrated benefits over monotherapy more consistently in patients with lower FEV₁ than those with higher FEV₁.

Reducing and managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations with tiotropium + olodaterol

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review clinical evidence supporting the use of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA), respectively, as the initial and follow-up treatment choice in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as per Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2020 recommendations-the impact of this treatment strategy on the reduction in the risk of exacerbations-and the importance of early therapeutic interventions.

METHODS

For this narrative review, the available literature was searched to identify studies including patients with COPD receiving tiotropium and olodaterol as either monotherapy or combination therapy and studies including patients with COPD receiving inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in addition to long-acting bronchodilators. Relevant studies were included in the review.

RESULTS

Patients with COPD are often prescribed ICS therapy, which, when used over a long term, can be associated with local and systemic adverse effects. The GOLD 2020 report recommends dual bronchodilator therapy as both an initial and follow-up treatment option. A LABA + LAMA combination is mechanistically synergistic, and cumulative evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol supports therapeutic advantages over monotherapy in most patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The early stages of COPD may represent a "window of therapeutic opportunity" during which initiation of tiotropium and olodaterol dual bronchodilator therapy may improve lung function and quality of life and reduce exacerbations in patients with COPD.

Effects of Tiotropium/Olodaterol on Activity-Related Breathlessness, Exercise Endurance and Physical Activity in Patients with COPD: Narrative Review with Meta-/Pooled Analyses

Abstract

One of the most debilitating symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is breathlessness, which leads to avoidance of physical activities in daily living and hastens clinical deterioration. Treatment of patients with COPD with inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combination therapy improves airflow limitation, reduces breathlessness compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and improves health status and quality of life. A large clinical trial programme focusing on the effects of tiotropium/olodaterol combination therapy demonstrated that this LAMA/LABA combination improves lung function and reduces hyperinflation (assessed by serial inspiratory capacity measurements) compared with either tiotropium alone or placebo in patients with COPD. Tiotropium/olodaterol also increases exercise endurance capacity and improves patient perception of the intensity of breathlessness compared with placebo. In this narrative review, we focus on the relationship between improving symptoms during activity, the ability to remain active in daily life and how this may impact quality of life. We consider the benefits of therapy optimisation by means of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol, and present new data from meta-analyses/pooled analyses showing that tiotropium/olodaterol improves inspiratory capacity compared with placebo and tiotropium and improves exercise endurance time compared with placebo after 6 weeks of treatment. We also discuss the importance of taking a holistic approach to improving physical activity, including pulmonary rehabilitation and exercise programmes in parallel with bronchodilator therapy and psychological programmes to support behaviour change.

Graphic Abstract

Assessment of physical functioning in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requiring long-acting dual bronchodilation in routine clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

We aim to determine the effect of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tiotropium/olodaterol on Physical activity (PA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a real world setting.

METHODS

COPD patients were prospectively enrolled to evaluate the effect of a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol inhaler therapy via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI) on the physical functioning scale (PF-10), and the general condition of the patient as assessed by the physician (Physician's Global Evaluation, PGE), and the patient's satisfaction after 6 weeks of treatment. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with therapeutic success at 6th week follow-up, defined as a ≥10-points increase in the standardised PF-10 score from baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 257 patients from 57 sites were enrolled, and 234 completed the follow up. After 6 weeks of treatment, 155 out of 234 patients (66.2%) showed therapeutic success in the physical functioning score, coupled with significant improvement in PGE score: 78 (33.3%) patients with good/excellent PGE score at baseline, increasing to 172 (73.5%) at 6th week (p<0.0001). The patient's satisfaction was excellent: 77.2% reporting to be satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment, 79.9% with inhaling and 79.0% with the handling of SMI device. 1.6% of patients reported an investigator-defined drug-related adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of COPD patients with a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol SMI for 6 weeks resulted in significant improvements in the patients' condition as assessed by patients and physicians, with no new safety findings.

Lung Deposition Using the Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler Mono and Fixed-Dose Combination Therapies: An In Vitro/In Silico Analysis

Tiotropium and olodaterol are mainstay treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and yield important clinical improvements, especially when used in fixed-dose combination. Whilst previous studies have shown consistent delivery of tiotropium to the lungs with the Respimat^® inhaler, no such study has been carried out for olodaterol or the components of their fixed-dose combination (TIO/OLO). Combining in vitro and in silico models, we measured the amount of drug retained in the mouth-throat area, entering the trachea and reaching the lung periphery. We applied a hybrid deposition model that considered the experimentally determined output of an Alberta throat model (in vitro - dose to lung) combined with a computational fluid dynamic model of the lungs (in silico). Regardless of the COPD breathing pattern, ≥50% of the nominal dose of either tiotropium, olodaterol, or TIO and OLO in the fixed-dose combination reached the lung. Of the dose reaching the lungs, greater than 50% is deposited in the lung periphery (from generation 8 onwards). Our study demonstrated that aerosol delivery via the Respimat inhaler achieved high deposition deep into the lung periphery with all formulations evaluated.

Tiotropium/Olodaterol Decreases Exacerbation Rates Compared with Tiotropium in a Range of Patients with COPD: Pooled Analysis of the TONADO®/DYNAGITO® Trials

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies demonstrated that tiotropium/olodaterol reduced rates of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, this should be examined in a wider population.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis pooled data from TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®, three 52-week, parallel-group, randomised, double-blind, phase III trials investigating patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with and without previous exacerbations, who received tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg or tiotropium 5 µg. Subgroup analyses were conducted on patients stratified by exacerbation history, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage 2-4 disease severity and baseline inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use.

RESULTS

In 9942 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol was associated with lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations (0.68 vs. 0.77 per patient-year; rate ratio (RR) vs. tiotropium 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 0.95; P = 0.0003) and exacerbations requiring hospitalisation (0.11 vs. 0.13 per patient-year; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75, 0.99; P = 0.0380) versus tiotropium. Lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were evident in patients with 0-1 moderate exacerbation in the previous year (0.54 vs. 0.60 per patient-year; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82, 0.98; P = 0.0187) and at least two moderate or at least one severe exacerbation(s) in the previous year (0.97 vs. 1.09 per patient-year; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82, 0.97; P = 0.0096). In patients with GOLD 2 and GOLD 3 COPD, moderate/severe exacerbation rates were lower with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium; GOLD 4 patients showed negligible difference between treatments. When evaluating patients by baseline ICS use, there was a significantly lower rate of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in patients receiving ICS.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium/olodaterol decreased the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations and exacerbations leading to hospitalisation versus tiotropium. Results from this large, pooled, post hoc analysis support the use of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in a broad range of patients, reflective of patients with COPD in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TONADO^® 1 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431274); TONADO^® 2 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431287); DYNAGITO^® (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02296138). People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may have times when their symptoms worsen, known as exacerbations. This may mean that they need to take additional medications, such as antibiotics or oral steroids. Studies have shown that a combination of two types of inhaled medicine-tiotropium and olodaterol-can help to reduce exacerbations in some people. To see if this is also the case across a larger and more diverse range of people, we combined the results from three studies (TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®) that looked at people who were taking tiotropium and olodaterol together and people who were taking tiotropium alone. We showed that, across a wide range of people, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol was generally better at reducing exacerbations than tiotropium. Tiotropium/olodaterol also decreased the number of exacerbations that led to hospitalisation compared with tiotropium. Overall, our results support the use of combined tiotropium/olodaterol in people at different stages of COPD.

Efficacy of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium as a First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Patients with COPD Who Are Naïve to LAMA, LABA and ICS: Pooled Analysis of Four Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol compared with tiotropium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been demonstrated in a large clinical programme. Currently, randomised controlled trial (RCT) data on dual bronchodilation as first-line maintenance therapy are limited. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from four RCTs, we compared the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium as maintenance therapy in patients with COPD who were not receiving maintenance treatment with long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) ("maintenance naïve") at study entry.

METHODS

TONADO^® 1/2 (52 weeks) and OTEMTO^® 1/2 (12 weeks) were phase III RCTs in patients with COPD. TONADO 1/2 and OTEMTO 1/2 enrolled patients with post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) < 80% predicted (lower limit FEV₁ ≥ 30% in OTEMTO 1/2 only). We examined the effect of tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg versus tiotropium 5 µg on trough FEV₁ response, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score at 12 weeks in four pooled studies.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis included 1078 maintenance-naïve patients. There were significant improvements with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in trough FEV₁ [0.056 L; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.033, 0.079; P < 0.0001], SGRQ score (- 1.780; 95% CI - 3.126 to - 0.434; P = 0.0096) and TDI score (0.409; 95% CI 0.077, 0.741; P = 0.0158) at week 12. For patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol, the odds of achieving a minimal clinically important difference from baseline in any of the analysed outcomes (FEV₁ ≥ 0.1 L, SGRQ ≥ 4.0 points or TDI ≥ 1.0 point) were higher versus tiotropium.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who were maintenance naïve at baseline, treatment initiation with tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in greater improvements in lung function, health status and dyspnoea severity compared with tiotropium alone, without compromising patient safety. These results support the use of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol as first-line maintenance treatment in patients with COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: TONADO^® 1 and 2 (NCT01431274 and NCT01431287, registered 8 September 2011) and OTEMTO^® 1 and 2 (NCT01964352 and NCT02006732, registered 14 October 2013).

COPD Maintenance Therapy with Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium: An Analysis in the Absence of Additional ICS Therapy

The American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) dual bronchodilation over LAMA or LABA monotherapy as maintenance therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease suffering from dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Previous studies, which included patients receiving background inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), have shown the benefits of dual bronchodilation over monotherapy. This analysis aimed to confirm the benefits of LAMA/LABA over LAMA alone, without any confounding effects from ICS use. This pooled post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol with tiotropium alone in patients from the TONADO^® and OTEMTO^® clinical trials who were not receiving ICS at study entry or during the studies. We analyzed change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score in all patients, by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage, baseline SGRQ score, and Baseline Dyspnea Index score. In this analysis of 1596 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol improved trough FEV₁, SGRQ and TDI compared with tiotropium alone. The observed mean differences were: trough FEV₁, 0.054 L (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.036, 0.073; p < 0.001); SGRQ, -1.918 (95% CI -2.994, -0.843; p < 0.001); and TDI, 0.575 (95% CI 0.301, 0.848; p < 0.001). Similar improvements were seen in each of the subgroup analyses. Tiotropium/olodaterol therapy significantly improved lung function, symptoms and health status compared with tiotropium alone. In a population free from ICS treatment, these data confirm the benefits of dual bronchodilation versus monotherapy.

Integrating Comorbidities and Phenotype-Based Medicine in Patient-Centered Medicine in COPD

Despite recent notable innovations in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), no major advances in patient-centered medicine have been achieved. Current guidelines base their proposals on the average results from clinical trials, leading to what could be termed ‘means-based’ medical practice. However, the therapeutic response is variable at the patient level. Additionally, the variability of the clinical presentation interacts with comorbidities to form a complex clinical scenario for clinicians to deal with. Consequently, no consensus has been reached over a practical approach for combining comorbidities and disease presentation markers in the therapeutic algorithm. In this context, from the patients’ first visit, the clinician faces four major dilemmas: (1) establishing the correct diagnosis of COPD as opposed to other airway diseases, such as bronchial asthma; (2) deciding on the initial therapeutic approach based on the clinical characteristics of each case; (3) setting up a study strategy for non-responding patients; (4) pursuing a follow-up strategy with two well-defined periods according to whether close or long-term follow-up is required. Here, we will address these major dilemmas in the search for a patient-centered approach to COPD management and suggest how to combine them all in a single easy-to-use strategy.

Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Background: This document provides clinical recommendations for the pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It represents a collaborative effort on the part of a panel of expert COPD clinicians and researchers along with a team of methodologists under the guidance of the American Thoracic Society.

Methods: Comprehensive evidence syntheses were performed on all relevant studies that addressed the clinical questions and critical patient-centered outcomes agreed upon by the panel of experts. The evidence was appraised, rated, and graded, and recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results: After weighing the quality of evidence and balancing the desirable and undesirable effects, the guideline panel made the following recommendations: 1) a strong recommendation for the use of long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) combination therapy over LABA or LAMA monotherapy in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance; 2) a conditional recommendation for the use of triple therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/LABA/LAMA over dual therapy with LABA/LAMA in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance who have experienced one or more exacerbations in the past year; 3) a conditional recommendation for ICS withdrawal for patients with COPD receiving triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) if the patient has had no exacerbations in the past year; 4) no recommendation for or against ICS as an additive therapy to long-acting bronchodilators in patients with COPD and blood eosinophilia, except for those patients with a history of one or more exacerbations in the past year requiring antibiotics or oral steroids or hospitalization, for whom ICS is conditionally recommended as an additive therapy; 5) a conditional recommendation against the use of maintenance oral corticosteroids in patients with COPD and a history of severe and frequent exacerbations; and 6) a conditional recommendation for opioid-based therapy in patients with COPD who experience advanced refractory dyspnea despite otherwise optimal therapy.

Conclusions: The task force made recommendations regarding the pharmacologic treatment of COPD based on currently available evidence. Additional research in populations that are underrepresented in clinical trials is needed, including studies in patients with COPD 80 years of age and older, those with multiple chronic health conditions, and those with a codiagnosis of COPD and asthma.

No Influence on Cardiac Arrhythmia or Heart Rate from Long-Term Treatment with Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Monocomponents by Holter ECG Analysis in Patients with Moderate-to-Very-Severe COPD

Background

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular comorbidities may have an increased risk of medication-related cardiac arrhythmias. We therefore performed an analysis of Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) data from two large, long-term, controlled clinical COPD trials to investigate whether tiotropium/olodaterol increased the risk of cardiac arrhythmia and mean heart rate.

Methods

We analyzed Holter ECG data from a representative subset of patients (N=506) from the two pooled replicate studies (TONADO 1 and 2) assessing tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg therapy versus tiotropium 5 µg or olodaterol 5 µg monotherapy, inhaled once daily (two single inhalations) using the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler device. Additionally, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) with tiotropium/olodaterol were assessed versus the respective monotherapies.

Results

After 12 weeks of treatment, there was no difference in the number of patients who had an increase or decrease from baseline in 24-hour supraventricular premature beats or ventricular premature beats between tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg combination therapy and its monocomponents. Compared with baseline, a small but statistically significant increase in adjusted mean heart rate was observed for tiotropium 5 µg (+1.6 beats per minute [bpm]; P=0.0010), but no difference was observed for olodaterol 5 µg (+0.3 bpm; P=0.2778) or tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg (-0.1 bpm; P=0.4607). MACE and fatal MACE were limited to 1 to 3 patients across treatment groups.

Conclusion

Compared with the compounds given as monotherapy, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol fixed-dose combination therapy is not associated with medically relevant or statistically significant effects on arrhythmia as assessed by Holter ECG. Based on these findings, there is no evidence to assume a clinically relevant impact on cardiac function from dual tiotropium/olodaterol treatment.

Trial Registration

TONADO 1 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431274); TONADO 2 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431287).

Benefits of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium in Patients with COPD Receiving only LAMA at Baseline: Pooled Analysis of the TONADO® and OTEMTO® Studies

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy report recommends long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) or long-acting β₂-agonists (LABA) as first-line treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but many patients remain symptomatic on monotherapy and escalation to dual-bronchodilator therapy may be warranted.

METHODS

TONADO^® 1&2 and OTEMTO^® 1&2 assessed lung function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe (OTEMTO) or moderate-to-very-severe (TONADO) COPD. This pooled post hoc analysis included patients treated with LAMA monotherapy at baseline who were randomised to receive either 5 µg tiotropium (LAMA) or 5/5 µg tiotropium/olodaterol (LAMA/LABA). We assessed changes from baseline and responder rates for trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI).

RESULTS

Overall, 151 patients received tiotropium; 148 received tiotropium/olodaterol. Mean differences from baseline with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were + 0.074 l (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.033, 0.115; P = 0.0004) for trough FEV₁, - 2.675 (95% CI - 5.060, - 0.291; P = 0.0280) for SGRQ and 1.148 (95% CI 0.564, 1.732; P = 0.0001) for TDI. Patients were more likely to respond when treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium for trough FEV₁ (odds ratio [OR] 3.14, 95% CI 1.94, 5.06; P < 0.0001), SGRQ (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.93, 2.40; P = 0.0980) and TDI (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.71, 4.60; P < 0.0001). Minimum clinically important difference from baseline in any of the analysed outcomes (FEV₁ ≥ 0.1 l, SGRQ ≥ 4.0 points or TDI ≥ 1.0 point) was more likely in patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32, 4.51; P = 0.0046).

CONCLUSION

In patients with COPD receiving only LAMA monotherapy, treatment escalation to tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in lung function, health status and breathlessness. These results support early therapy optimisation to dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in patients receiving tiotropium alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TONADO^® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431274). TONADO^® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431287). OTEMTO^® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 17 October 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01964352). OTEMTO^® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 10 December 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02006732).

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

Background

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

Main body

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

Conclusion

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

Relieving exertional dyspnea during the 3-min constant speed shuttle test in patients with COPD with indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus tiotropium: the RED trial

Background:

Exertional dyspnea is a cardinal feature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a major cause of activity limitation. Although dual bronchodilation is more effective than bronchodilator monotherapy at improving resting pulmonary function, it is unclear to which extent this translates into superior relief of exertional dyspnea.

Methods:

We conducted a randomized controlled, double-blind, cross-over trial comparing indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg once daily (OD) with tiotropium 50 µg OD in patients with moderate to severe COPD and resting hyperinflation (functional residual capacity >120% of predicted value). The primary outcome was Borg dyspnea score at the end of a 3-min constant speed shuttle test after 3 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included changes in Borg dyspnea score after the first dose of study medication, expiratory flows and lung volumes. Statistical analysis was conducted using a cross-over analysis of variance model with repeated measurements.

Results:

A total of 50 patients with COPD and a mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 54 ± 11% (mean ± SEM) predicted participated in the cross-over phase of the trial. Compared with baseline, there was a decrease in dyspnea after the first dose of medication with indacaterol/glycopyrronium [mean −1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.49 to −0.52] but not with tiotropium alone (mean −0.36, 95% CI −0.81 to 0.08). The reduction in dyspnea after the first dose was statistically significant between the two treatments (mean difference of −0.64, 95% CI −1.11 to −0.17). Despite indacaterol/glycopyrronium providing further bronchodilation and lung deflation throughout the trial, the reduction in dyspnea was not sustained at 3 weeks of treatment (mean between-treatment difference at 3 weeks of 0.09, 95% CI −0.44 to 0.61).

Conclusion:

In comparison with bronchodilator monotherapy, indacaterol/glycopyrronium provided greater immediate exertional dyspnea relief, although this difference was not sustained after 3 weeks of therapy despite evidence of further bronchodilation and lung deflation.

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of LABA/LAMA Fixed-Dose Combinations Aclidinium/Formoterol, Glycopyrronium/Indacaterol and Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in the Treatment of COPD in Daily Practice - Results of the Non-Interventional DETECT Study

Background

LABA (long-acting β2-agonists) and/or LAMA (long-acting muscarinic antagonists) represent the first treatment options for patients with symptomatic COPD. Although both display different mechanisms of activity, in combination they have a stronger broncho-dilating effect than monotherapy; hence, a combination of both LABA and LAMA is particularly recommended for patients whose symptoms cannot be sufficiently improved by a single active ingredient. To date, only few data have been collected regarding the therapeutic outcomes of approved LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) under everyday (real-life) conditions in non-clinical trial settings.

Objective and Methods

The main objective of the DETECT study was to investigate the impact of aclidinium/formoterol (AB/FF, b.i.d.), glycopyrronium/indacaterol (GLY/IND, q.d.) and umeclidinium/vilanterol (UME/VL, q.d.) in patients with COPD in daily clinical practice. Therefore, a prospective, non-randomized, 12-month, observational study was implemented to assess the effectiveness of these treatments in patients who had been switched to FDC within the last 3 months or for whom such a changeover was intended. Changes in lung function were analyzed by the forced expiratory volume (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) measures. Quality of life and well-being were evaluated by the COPD Assessment Test (CAT™). Furthermore, a number of exacerbations and early morning COPD symptoms were documented.

Results

In total, 3653 patients were enrolled. FEV1 and FVC values significantly improved during the study with AB/FF (increase by 0.09 ± 0.40 L and 0.10 ± 0.57 L, respectively; p<0.0001), GLY/IND (0.06±0.38/0.05±0.51 L; p<0.0001 and p=0.0025) and UME/VL (0.12±0.39/0.10±0.52 L; p<0.0001). CAT scores decreased indicating improved COPD (AB/FF, 4.17±8.30; GLY/IND, 3.66±7.88; UME/VL, 4.06±7.96; p<0.0001). Moreover, the number of exacerbations as well as early morning COPD symptoms similarly diminished in all treatment groups. A comparable proportion of patients with adverse drug reactions was recorded: AB/FF, 4.07% of patients; GLY/IND, 3.52%; UME/VL, 3.64%.

Conclusion

In summary, AB/FF, GLY/IND and UME/VL provided clinical benefits in lung function, quality of life and early morning COPD symptoms in a broad cohort of COPD patients under routine medical practice conditions. All three treatments were well tolerated.

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

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

Adding a Second Bronchodilator in COPD: A Meta-Analysis on the Risk of Specific Cardiovascular Serious Adverse Events of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Fixed-Dose Combination

Dual bronchodilation therapy represents the cornerstone for the treatment of COPD. A large retrospective study reports that adding a second long-acting bronchodilator in patients with COPD significantly increases the risk of heart failure. Nevertheless, retrospective studies are characterized by limitations including misdiagnosis and inaccuracy of recordkeeping. This study aimed to ascertain whether tiotropium/olodaterol (T/O) 5/5 μg fixed-dose combination (FDC) may modulate the risk of main cardiovascular outcomes in COPD patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A meta-analysis (CRD42017070100) was performed by selecting RCTs reporting raw data from the ClinicalTrials.gov database concerning the impact of T/O 5/5 µg FDC vs. monocomponents on the occurrence of specific cardiovascular serious adverse events: arrhythmia, heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Data were reported as relative risk and 95% Confidence Interval, and the risk of publication bias assessed via Egger's test. Eighty six full text articles were identified, and 10 RCTs published in 7 studies between 2015 and 2018 were included into the analysis. Data obtained from 12,690 COPD patients (44.47% T/O FDC, 55.53% monocomponents) were extracted. T/O 5/5 μg FDCs did not significantly modulate (p-value > 0.05) the risk of arrhythmia (1.02, 0.55 - 1.92), heart failure (0.88, 0.41 - 1.92), myocardial infarction (1.15, 0.70 - 1.87), and stroke (0.98, 0.44 - 2.16) vs. monocomponents. No significant publication bias affected the effect estimates of this meta-analysis. The results of this quantitative synthesis indicate that dual bronchodilation with T/O 5/5 μg FDC is characterized by an acceptable cardiovascular safety profile in COPD patients.

A comparison of tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium alone in terms of treatment effect for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Combinations of long-acting bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action are recommended to improve prognosis and reduce risk of adverse events of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is unclear whether the new combination therapy with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA) olodaterol (OLO) was superior to tiotropium alone.

METHODS

We measured the efficacy of the TIO/OLO combination vsTIO alone for COPD patients based on electronic databases up to February 2019. After rigorous quality review, data was extracted from eligible trials. All the main outcomes were pooled analysis using RevMan software.

RESULTS

A total of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. The pooled results of our meta-analysis demonstrated that FEV1 [MD = 0.03, 95% CI (-0.01,0.07), P = .18], FVC [MD = -0.03, 95%CI (-0.06,0.00), P = .09] and FEV1%pred [MD = 0.35, 95%CI (-0.30, 0.99), P = .29] all showed no significant difference between the 2 groups. The overall incidence of adverse effects (AEs) [OR = 1.01,95%CI (0.93,1.09), P = .87] and serious AEs [OR = 1.04,95% CI (0.82, 1.32), P = .72] in the combination group was similar to that of the TIO alone group, without statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

These studies reported that the TIO/OLO combination did not show superior effects than tiotropium alone for COPD. Additionally, both therapies were well tolerated.

COPD: Gaps in the GOLD Recommendations and Related Imperative Research Needs

The GOLD 2020 updates added more lucidity on the treatment of COPD. However, few diagnostic dilemmas still exist. Research is needed on the use of the CAT score in assessing symptoms for the diagnosis of COPD. Further work-up is needed on diagnostic instability of spirometry, and diagnostic role of the lower limit of normal (LLN) criteria, slow vital capacity (FEV₁/VC), forced inspiratory vital capacity (FEV1/FIVC), and rapid FEV₁ decline. Incorporating parameters of lung hyperinflation and exercise capacity in the COPD diagnostic criteria might add value in its diagnosis and management. GOLD's approach towards routine CT imaging needs to be reviewed. Establishing a "pre-COPD" stage can be helpful in the early diagnosis and intervention to reduce the rapid lung function decline among at-risk individuals. The use of mMRC score as a surrogate to assess the overall severity of COPD related symptoms should be reviewed. The therapeutic guidance role of sputum eosinophils should be studied in patients with intermediate and low blood eosinophil counts.

Tiotropium/Olodaterol: A Review in COPD

Tiotropium/olodaterol (Stiolto® Respimat®; Spiolto® Respimat®) is an inhaled fixed-dose combination of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide (hereafter referred to as tiotropium) and the long-acting β2-adrenergic agonist olodaterol. It is available in several countries, including the USA, Japan, China and those of the EU, where it is indicated for the long-term maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 μg/day in patients with COPD was evaluated in phase III or IV trials of 6-52 weeks' duration. Tiotropium/olodaterol improved lung function to a greater extent than each of its individual components or placebo in 12- and 52-week trials. In 6-week trials, tiotropium/olodaterol provided greater lung function benefits over 24 h than the individual components, placebo or twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol. Tiotropium/olodaterol also demonstrated beneficial effects on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL), dyspnoea, inspiratory capacity, exercise endurance and the need for rescue medication. In an 8-week open-label trial, umeclidinium/vilanterol was superior to tiotropium/olodaterol for the primary endpoint of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s. The tolerability profile of tiotropium/olodaterol was generally similar to that of the individual components. In conclusion, tiotropium/olodaterol provides a useful option for the maintenance treatment of COPD, with the convenience of once-daily administration via a single inhaler.

Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease: the GOLD science committee report 2019

Precision medicine is a patient-specific approach that integrates all relevant clinical, genetic and biological information in order to optimise the therapeutic benefit relative to the possibility of side-effects for each individual. Recent clinical trials have shown that higher blood eosinophil counts are associated with a greater efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Blood eosinophil counts are a biomarker with potential to be used in clinical practice, to help target ICS treatment with more precision in COPD patients with a history of exacerbations despite appropriate bronchodilator treatment.The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 pharmacological treatment algorithms, based on the ABCD assessment, can be applied relatively easily to treatment-naive individuals at initial presentation. However, their use is more problematic during follow-up in patients who are already on maintenance treatment. There is a need for a different system to guide COPD pharmacological management during follow-up.Recent large randomised controlled trials have provided important new information concerning the therapeutic effects of ICSs and long-acting bronchodilators on exacerbations. The new evidence regarding blood eosinophils and inhaled treatments, and the need to distinguish between initial and follow-up pharmacological management, led to changes in the GOLD pharmacological treatment recommendations. This article explains the evidence and rationale for the GOLD 2019 pharmacological treatment recommendations.