Initiating or changing to a fixed-dose combination of Fluticasone propionate/Formoterol over Fluticasone propionate/Salmeterol: A real-life effectiveness and cost impact evaluation

Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol for the Management of COPD in a UK Primary Care Population: Real-World Use and Early Medication Success

Purpose

Real-life research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol (BGF) in routine COPD primary care management. We assessed the frequency of medication success among patients with COPD who initiated BGF using real-world data.

Patients and Methods

Patients with a recorded diagnostic COPD code who started BGF with ≥2 prescriptions within 90-days were identified in the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database and followed from first prescription until censoring at the end of follow-up (180-days), death, leaving database or end of data at 24/10/2022. The primary outcome was medication success at 90-days post-BGF initiation, defined as no major cardiac or respiratory event (ie no complicated COPD exacerbation, hospitalization for any respiratory event, myocardial infarction, new/hospitalized heart failure, and death) and no incidence of pneumonia. Medication success was also assessed at 180-days post-BGF initiation. Overall real-life medication success was claimed if the lower 95% confidence interval (CI) for the proportion of patients meeting the primary outcome was ≥70% (defined a priori).

Results

Two hundred eighty-five patients were included. Prior to BGF initiation, these patients often had severe airflow obstruction (mean ppFEV1: 54.5%), were highly symptomatic (mMRC ≥2: 77.9% (n = 205/263); mean CAT score: 21.7 (SD 7.8)), with evidence of short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) over-use (≥3 inhalers/year: 62.1%, n=179/285), repeat OCS prescriptions (≥2 courses/year: 33.0%, n = 95/285) and multiple primary care consultations (≥2 visits/year: 61.1%, n = 174/285). Overall, 39.6% of patients (n = 113/285) switched from previous triple therapies. Real-life medication success was achieved by 96.5% of patients (n = 275/285 [95% CI: 93.6, 98.3]) during 90-days treatment with BGF and by 91.8% (n = 169/184 [95% CI: 86.9, 95.4]) of patients at 180-days. The prescribed daily dose of SABA remained stable over the study period.

Conclusion

The majority of patients initiating BGF experienced real-life medication success reflecting the absence of severe cardiopulmonary events. These benefits were apparent after 90-days of treatment and sustained over 180-days.

Fixed-dose combination fluticasone/formoterol for asthma treatment in a real-world setting: meta-analysis of exacerbation rates and asthma control

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines for asthma management are derived almost exclusively from the results of controlled clinical trials undertaken in carefully selected patient populations; meaning that their outcomes may not reflect the true performance of treatments when used in general daily medical practice. The aim of this meta-analysis was to combine the results of observational studies investigating the fluticasone propionate/formoterol (FP/FORM) fixed-dose combination in real-world asthma patients.

METHODS

A systemic literature review was completed in March 2019 using the PubMed database. We identified 394 studies. Five studies, which included a total of 4756 patients treated with FP/FORM, were judged eligible and included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The estimated severe asthma exacerbation rate was 11.47% (95% CI, 5.8 to 18.72%), calculated from the random effect model. A sensitivity analysis excluding 2 studies (one was an outlier, and the exacerbation rate for the studied treatment alone could not be determined in the other) showed a 7.04% rate of severe asthma exacerbations. The estimated relative risk of the incidence of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.323 (95% CI, 0.159 to 0.658). The estimated asthma control rate was 60.6% (95% CI, 55.7% to 65.6%). The odds of achieving asthma control significantly increased by FP/FORM compared with pre-study conditions (estimated odds ratio: 2.214 [95% CI, 1.292 to 3.795]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this meta-analysis confirm the effectiveness of FP/FORM for the treatment of asthma patients in a real-world setting beyond the limitations of RCTs.

A review of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate/formoterol fixed-dose combination

INTRODUCTION

Fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate (FP/FORM) is one of the newer combinations among inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combination formulations currently available. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of this FP/FORM combination, it is important to review all the available evidence and take a comprehensive look at the current and relevant data in the patient population suffering from asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

AREAS COVERED

In this focused review, we summarize the available literature published until January 2021 using the PubMed/Medline and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases on the efficacy and safety of FP/FORM with its mono-components; concurrent administration of FP+FORM; and with other ICS/LABA combinations in asthma and COPD patients.

EXPERT OPINION

FP/FORM combination therapy is a strong alternative in the treatment of persistent asthma and moderate-severe COPD. Extensive study of several trials has established the superior efficacy of FP/FORM combination therapy over FP or FORM monotherapy, comparable efficacy with FP+FORM and non-inferiority to other ICS/LABA fixed-dose combinations. The safety profile of FP/FORM has also been found to be comparable with respect to its mono-components and their concurrent use, and also other ICS/LABA combinations such as formoterol/budesonide and fluticasone/salmeterol.

Therapeutic preferences and factors determining the use of inhaled corticosteroids with long-acting β2-agonists in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) are a part of standard therapy of bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

AIM

Assessment of the therapeutic preferences and factors determining the choice of polytherapy with ICS and LABA in patients with asthma and COPD in daily clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, post-marketing observational survey was performed nation-wide with the participation of 245 doctors and 13,800 patients with asthma or COPD on polytherapy with ICS and LABA. The study questionnaire included two parts: concerning doctors' preferences in the use of ICS and LABA and their prescription in patients as well as efficacy and tolerance of inhaled drugs during two consecutive visits.

RESULTS

The study doctors frequently declared a choice of polytherapy with formoterol and fluticasone in patients with asthma and COPD. The most important factors supporting the choice of ICS and LABA, declared by doctors, were safety and efficacy. ICS and LABA polytherapy with formoterol and fluticasone was used in 71.0% of patients with asthma and 81.4% with COPD. The most important factors explaining the choice of this drug combination were safety (75.3% and 72.5%, respectively) and efficacy (75.2% and 71.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Formoterol and fluticasone polytherapy is frequently chosen by Polish physicians in the treatment of asthma and COPD due to its high efficacy and safety. In accordance with doctors' declaration, in the study group this therapy was characterized by the highest effectiveness and the best tolerance.

Fluticasone/formoterol compared with other ICS/LABAs in asthma: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

An inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-long-acting beta-2 agonist (LABA) combination has become the standard of care in asthma. Various ICS-LABAs are commercially available providing the clinician with many choices. A thorough understanding of the clinical efficacy and safety of various formulations will immensely benefit the prescribing doctor to decide the choice of agent. The present systematic review was undertaken to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of formoterol fluticasone (FF) to other ICS/LABA combinations in asthmatics.

METHODS

The review adhered to the general principles mentioned in the CRD guidance and the PRISMA statement. We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases on the efficacy of FF in treating asthma compared with other ICS-LABAs. A total of 138 trials identified initially. Only trials comparing the efficacy and safety of FF in comparision with Salmeterol/fluticasone (SF) or Budesonide/Formoterol (BF) were selected. The outcomes compared were onset of bronchodilator action, improvement in lung function, asthma control, asthma-related quality of life and risk of pneumonia.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the final analysis. FF therapy provided faster onset of bronchodilatation than SF. A better improvement in lung function was seen with FF inhaler use as compared with comparators in two studies. Patients using the FF inhaler had a non-inferior asthma control and asthma-related quality of life. Pneumonia risk was least with FF usage.

CONCLUSION

FF provides faster onset of action, numerically superior improvement in lung function and comparable asthma control than other ICS-LABA formulations. FF has better safety evidenced by lower occurrence of pneumonia.

Inhaled Formoterol-Fluticasone Single Inhaler Therapy in Asthma: Real-World Efficacy, Budget Impact, and Potential to Improve Adherence

Asthma is the commonest chronic disease affecting airways in humans and has an increasing global disease burden. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the first-line therapeutic option for asthma, and addition of a long-acting beta 2-agonist (LABA) has been shown to improve asthma control. A combination of the two agents in a single inhaler is beneficial with regard to ease of administration and patient compliance. Various ICS-LABA formulations are available across various countries in the world, one among them being formoterol-fluticasone. Both formoterol and fluticasone have pharmacologic peculiarities which places the combination in a uniquely advantageous position when it comes to asthma therapy. The present review focuses on some of the, hitherto, less explored aspects of this combination inhaler such as real-world efficacy, impact on budget allocation, results of switch-over therapy, and potential to improve adherence to asthma treatment. It also provides practical recommendations on positioning it in real-world asthma management.

Pharmacotherapeutic management of asthma in the elderly patient

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with variable phenotypes. Reversible airway obstruction and airway hyper-responsiveness often with an atopic or eosinophilic component is common in the elderly asthmatic. Asthma chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS), a combination of atopy-mediated airway hyper-responsiveness and a history of smoking or other environmental noxious exposures, can lead to some fixed airway obstruction and is also common in elderly patients. Little specific data exist for the treating the elderly asthmatic, thus requiring the clinician to extrapolate from general adult data and asthma treatment guidelines.

AREAS COVERED

A stepwise approach to pharmacotherapy of the elderly patient with asthma and ACOS is offered and the literature supporting the use of each class of drugs reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Inhaled, long-acting bronchodilators in combination with inhaled corticosteroids represent the backbone of treatment for the elderly patient with asthma or ACOS . Beyond these medications used as direct bronchodilators and topical anti-inflammatory agents, a stepwise approach to escalation of therapy includes multiple options such as oral leukotriene receptor antagonist or 5-lipoxygense inhibitor therapy, oral phosphodiesterase inhibitors, systemic corticosteroids, oral macrolide antibiotics and if evidence of eosinophilic/atopic component disease exists then modifying monoclonal antibody therapies.

Real-life effectiveness of inhaler device switch from dry powder inhalers to pressurized metred-dose inhalers in patients with asthma treated with ICS/LABA

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Mixed inhaler device use for asthma is associated with worse inhaler technique and outcomes. Given that relievers are commonly prescribed as pressurized metred-dose inhalers (pMDI), changing preventers from dry powder inhalers (DPI) to pMDI may improve asthma outcomes. This study aimed to assess the persistence and effectiveness of switching from DPI to pMDI for inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β₂ -agonist combination therapy (ICS/LABA).

METHODS

This was a historical cohort study using Ajou University Hospital (Korea) patient records. Persistence of switch was defined as receiving ≥1 pMDI and no DPI after the switch. Effectiveness of switch was assessed as the proportion without severe asthma exacerbation and the proportion achieving risk domain asthma control (RDAC; no asthma-related hospitalization, antibiotics without upper respiratory diagnosis or acute course of oral corticosteroids) and overall asthma control (OAC; RDAC and ≤ 200 μg salbutamol/≤500 μg terbutaline average daily dose) comparing 1 year after and before the switch.

RESULTS

Within 85 patients who switched from DPI to pMDI and persisted for a year, higher proportion were free from asthma exacerbation after the switch (mean difference in proportion = 0.129, 95% CI: 0.038-0.220). Switching to pMDI was also associated with better RDAC (75.3% vs 57.7%, P = 0.001) and OAC (57.7% vs 45.9%, P = 0.021). From the entire 117 patients who switched to fixed-dose combination (FDC)/ICS LABA pMDI, 76.1% (95% CI: 69.0-100.0%) patients persisted in the following 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Switching to and persisting with pMDI was associated with decreased asthma exacerbations and improved asthma control. The majority of patients persisted with the switch to pMDI for ICS/LABA treatment.