1
|
Qin J, Wang G, Han D. Benefits of LAMA in patients with asthma-COPD overlap: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Immunol 2022; 237:108986. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clim.2022.108986] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2022] [Revised: 03/13/2022] [Accepted: 03/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
|
2
|
Asthma with Fixed Airflow Obstruction: From Fixed to Personalized Approach. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12030333. [PMID: 35330333 PMCID: PMC8953236 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12030333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/22/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Asthma is generally characterized by variable symptoms such as dyspnea and wheezing and variable airflow obstruction. This review focuses on a subset of patients suffering from asthma with persistent airflow limitation that is not fully reversible (asthma with fixed airflow obstruction, FAO). The pathophysiology, the risk factors and the clinical outcomes associated with FAO are presented, as well as the distinct clinical entity of severe asthma and its inflammatory subtypes (T2 and non-T2). The current strategies for the treatment of these endotypes and treatment of the distinct Asthma/COPD overlap (ACO) phenotype are described. Management and medical interventions in FAO and/or ACO patients demand a holistic approach, which is not yet clearly established in guidelines worldwide. Finally, a treatment algorithm that includes FAO/ACO management based on pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, guideline-based management for specific co-morbidities, and modification of the risk factors is proposed.
Collapse
|
3
|
DI Stefano A, Gnemmi I, Dossena F, Ricciardolo FL, Maniscalco M, Lo Bello F, Balbi B. Pathogenesis of COPD at the cellular and molecular level. Minerva Med 2022; 113:405-423. [PMID: 35138077 DOI: 10.23736/s0026-4806.22.07927-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Chronic inflammatory responses in the lung of patients with stable mild-to severe forms of COPD play a central role in the definition, comprehension and monitoring of the disease state. A better understanding of the COPD pathogenesis can't avoid a detailed knowledge of these inflammatory changes altering the functional health of the lung during the disease progression. We here summarize and discuss the role and principal functions of the inflammatory cells populating the large, small airways and lung parenchyma of patients with COPD of increasing severity in comparison with healthy control subjects: T and B lymphocytes, NK and Innate Lymphoid cells, macrophages, and neutrophils. The differential inflammatory distribution in large and small airways of patients is also discussed. Furthermore, relevant cellular mechanisms controlling the homeostasis and the "normal" balance of these inflammatory cells and of structural cells in the lung, such as autophagy, apoptosis, necroptosis and pyroptosis are as well presented and discussed in the context of the COPD severity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonino DI Stefano
- Divisione di Pneumologia e Laboratorio di Citoimmunopatologia dell'Apparato Cardio Respiratorio, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, SpA, Società Benefit, IRCCS, Veruno, Novara, Italy -
| | - Isabella Gnemmi
- Divisione di Pneumologia e Laboratorio di Citoimmunopatologia dell'Apparato Cardio Respiratorio, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, SpA, Società Benefit, IRCCS, Veruno, Novara, Italy
| | - Francesca Dossena
- Divisione di Pneumologia e Laboratorio di Citoimmunopatologia dell'Apparato Cardio Respiratorio, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, SpA, Società Benefit, IRCCS, Veruno, Novara, Italy
| | - Fabio L Ricciardolo
- Rare Lung Disease Unit and Severe Asthma Centre, Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital Orbassano, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Mauro Maniscalco
- Divisione di Pneumologia, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, SpA, Società Benefit, IRCCS, Telese, Benevento, Italy
| | - Federica Lo Bello
- Pneumologia, Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche, Odontoiatriche e delle Immagini Morfologiche e Funzionali (BIOMORF), Università di Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Bruno Balbi
- Divisione di Pneumologia e Laboratorio di Citoimmunopatologia dell'Apparato Cardio Respiratorio, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, SpA, Società Benefit, IRCCS, Veruno, Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
López-Campos JL, Carrasco Hernández L, Ruiz-Duque B, Reinoso-Arija R, Caballero-Eraso C. Step-Up and Step-Down Treatment Approaches for COPD: A Holistic View of Progressive Therapies. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2021; 16:2065-2076. [PMID: 34285480 PMCID: PMC8285922 DOI: 10.2147/copd.s275943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2021] [Accepted: 06/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Recent advances in inhaled drugs and a clearer definition of the disease have made the task of managing COPD more complex. Different proposals have been put forward which combine all the available treatments and the different clinical presentations in an effort to select the best therapeutic options for each clinical context. As COPD is a chronic progressive disease, the escalation of therapy has traditionally been considered the most natural way to tackle it. However, the notion of COPD as a constantly progressing disease has recently been challenged and, in specific areas, this points to the possibility of a de-escalation in treatment. In this context, the clinician requires simple, specific recommendations to guide these changes in treatment in their daily clinical practice. To accomplish this, the first step must be a correct evaluation and an accurate initial preliminary diagnosis of the patient's condition. Thereafter, the first escalation in therapy must be introduced with caution as the disease progresses, since clinical trials are not designed with clinical decision-making in mind. During this escalation, three possibilities are open to change the current treatment for a different one within the same family, to increase non-pharmacological interventions or to increase the pharmacological therapies. Beyond that point, a patient with persistent symptoms represents a complex clinical scenario which requires a specialized approach, including the evaluation of different respiratory and non-respiratory comorbidities. Unfortunately, there are few de-escalation studies available, and these are mainly observational in nature. The debate on de-escalation in pharmacological treatment, therefore, involves two main discussion points: the withdrawal of bronchodilators and the withdrawal of inhaled steroids. Altogether, the scheme for modifying treatment must be more personalized than just adding molecules, and the therapeutic response and its conditioning factors should be evaluated at each step before proceeding further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jose Luis López-Campos
- Unidad Médico-Quirúrgica de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Laura Carrasco Hernández
- Unidad Médico-Quirúrgica de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Borja Ruiz-Duque
- Unidad Médico-Quirúrgica de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain
| | - Rocio Reinoso-Arija
- Unidad Médico-Quirúrgica de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain
| | - Candelaria Caballero-Eraso
- Unidad Médico-Quirúrgica de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Matera MG, Belardo C, Rinaldi M, Rinaldi B, Cazzola M. Emerging muscarinic receptor antagonists for the treatment of asthma. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs 2020; 25:123-130. [PMID: 32312134 DOI: 10.1080/14728214.2020.1758059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The increased acetylcholine signaling in asthma pathophysiology offers the rationale for the use of LAMAs in the treatment of asthmatic patients. Tiotropium is still the only LAMA approved for use in asthma but there is a real interest in developing novel LAMAs for the treatment of asthma, or at least to extend this indication to other LAMAs already on the market. AREAS COVERED We examined and discussed trials and research that have studied or are evaluating the role of LAMAs already on the market in asthma and possible novel muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists. EXPERT OPINION Glycopyrronium and umeclidinium will soon be included in the GINA strategy with the same current indications of tiotropium. It is likely that the choice of the LAMA will be influenced not so much by its pharmacological profile as by the type of triple therapy chosen. It is extremely difficult to identify a new LAMA that is more effective than tiotropium, but is it plausible that new technologies that will allow delivering the drug in a more targeted way and with a lower risk of adverse effects may represent the real progress in the use of LAMAs in asthma in the coming years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Gabriella Matera
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Carmela Belardo
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Michele Rinaldi
- Multidisciplnary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialities, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Barbara Rinaldi
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Mario Cazzola
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kerwin E, Pascoe S, Bailes Z, Nathan R, Bernstein D, Dahl R, von Maltzahn R, Robbins K, Fowler A, Lee L. A phase IIb, randomised, parallel-group study: the efficacy, safety and tolerability of once-daily umeclidinium in patients with asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Respir Res 2020; 21:148. [PMID: 32532275 PMCID: PMC7291639 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-020-01400-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2019] [Accepted: 05/19/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with asthma uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroids may benefit from umeclidinium (UMEC), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist. METHODS This Phase IIb, double-blind study included patients with reversible, uncontrolled/partially-controlled asthma for ≥6 months, receiving ≥100 mcg/day fluticasone propionate (or equivalent) for ≥12 weeks. Following a 2-week run-in on open-label fluticasone furoate (FF) 100 mcg, patients were randomised (1:1:1) to receive UMEC 31.25 mcg, UMEC 62.5 mcg or placebo on top of FF 100 mcg once-daily for 24 weeks. As-needed salbutamol was provided. Primary and secondary endpoints were change from baseline in clinic trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and clinic FEV1 3 h post-dose, respectively, at Week 24. Other endpoints included change from baseline in home daily spirometry (trough FEV1, evening FEV1, morning [pre-dose] and evening peak expiratory flow) over 24 weeks. Safety was assessed throughout the study. RESULTS The intent-to-treat population comprised 421 patients (UMEC 31.25 mcg: n =139, UMEC 62.5 mcg: n =139, placebo: n =143). UMEC 31.25 mcg and 62.5 mcg demonstrated significantly greater improvements from baseline in clinic trough FEV1 at Week 24 (difference [95% CI]: 0.176 L [0.092, 0.260; p<0.001] and 0.184 L [0.101, 0.268; p<0.001], respectively), clinic FEV1 3 h post-dose at Week 24 (0.190 L [0.100, 0.279; p<0.001] and 0.198 L [0.109, 0.287; p<0.001], respectively) and mean change from baseline in daily home spirometry over 24 weeks versus placebo. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS UMEC is a highly effective bronchodilator that leads to improved lung function when administered as a single bronchodilator on top of FF in subjects with fully reversible, uncontrolled/partially-controlled moderate asthma. These data support a favourable benefit/risk profile for UMEC (31.25 mcg and 62.5 mcg). TRIAL REGISTRATION GSK study ID: 205832; Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03012061.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Kerwin
- Crisor LLC Research, Clinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, Medford, OR, USA
| | | | - Zelie Bailes
- GSK, Stockley Park West, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK
| | - Robert Nathan
- Asthma & Allergy Associates, P.C. and Research Center, Colorado Springs, CO, USA
| | - David Bernstein
- Division of Immunology, Allergy and Rheumatology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.,Bernstein Clinical Research Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Ronald Dahl
- GSK, 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Calzetta L, Ritondo BL, Matera MG, Pezzuto G, Cazzola M, Rogliani P. Investigational treatments in phase I and II clinical trials: a systematic review in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2020; 29:723-738. [PMID: 32401655 DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2020.1769064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Introduction. The current pharmacological treatments for the management of stable COPD permit the reduction of symptoms and frequency and severity of exacerbations, and the improvement of exercise tolerance and health status. However, they do not modify the long-term decline in lung function and patient health. Consequently, there is the strong need for 'highly innovative' medications that are focused on new targets and/or mechanisms for the treatment of COPD. Areas covered. This systematic review assesses investigational agents in Phase I and II clinical trials over the last six years. It offers insights on whether drugs and/or formulations in clinical development offer future effective treatments of COPD. Expert opinion. There is no evidence to suggest that current investigational agents can reduce lung function decline and cure COPD. However, looking forward, investigational, innovative treatments in combination with the therapies already recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) may provide future suitable tools to counteract the progression of COPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luigino Calzetta
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| | - Beatrice Ludovica Ritondo
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Gabriella Matera
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli , Naples, Italy
| | - Gabriella Pezzuto
- Division of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospital "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| | - Mario Cazzola
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Rogliani
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Matera MG, Belardo C, Rinaldi M, Rinaldi B, Cazzola M. New perspectives on the role of muscarinic antagonists in asthma therapy. Expert Rev Respir Med 2020; 14:817-824. [PMID: 32316778 DOI: 10.1080/17476348.2020.1758069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is increasing evidence that tiotropium, a long-acting muscarinic agent (LAMA), is useful in the presence of severe-uncontrolled asthma despite the optimization of therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) as recommended by the current guidelines. Furthermore, in recent years there have been several preclinical and clinical studies on the pharmacological and therapeutic impact of other LAMAs in asthma. AREAS COVERED We have conducted an extensive search on muscarinic antagonists in asthma therapy throughout several sources and discuss what has emerged in the last 3 years (January 2017-March 2020). EXPERT OPINION New evidence indicates that the effectiveness of adding a LAMA, at least tiotropium, is independent of the degree of the type 2 inflammation and age of patient. Therefore, tiotropium can be administered without the need for patient phenotyping. Umeclidinium and glycopyrronium also appear effective in asthma. Initial treatment with LAMA+ICS for those with mild asthma may be an equally effective therapeutic option as LABA+ICS but this hypothesis should be confirmed by statistically powered trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Gabriella Matera
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Carmela Belardo
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Michele Rinaldi
- Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialities, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Barbara Rinaldi
- Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" , Naples, Italy
| | - Mario Cazzola
- Unit of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata" , Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nelsen LM, Lee LA, Wu W, Lin X, Murray L, Pascoe SJ, Leidy NK. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of E-RS:COPD in patients with spirometric asthma-COPD overlap. Respir Res 2019; 20:107. [PMID: 31151458 PMCID: PMC6545030 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-019-1070-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2018] [Accepted: 05/13/2019] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (E-RS:COPD) is a patient-reported diary that assesses respiratory symptoms in stable COPD. METHODS This post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-arm trial (GSK ID: 200699; NCT02164539) assessed the structure, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the E-RS, and a separate wheeze item, for use in patients with a primary diagnosis of asthma or COPD, but with spirometric characteristics of both (fixed airflow obstruction and reversibility to salbutamol; a subset of patients referred to as spirometric asthma-COPD overlap [ACO]; N = 338). RESULTS Factor analysis demonstrated that E-RS included Cough and Sputum, Chest Symptoms, and Breathlessness domains, with a Total score suitable for quantifying overall respiratory symptoms (comparative fit index: 0.9), consistent with the structure shown in COPD. The wheeze item did not fit the model. Total and domain scores were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha: 0.7-0.9) and reproducible (intra-class correlations > 0.7). Moderate correlations between RS-Total and RS-Breathlessness scores were observed with St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total and Activity domain scores at baseline (r = 0.43 and r = 0.48, respectively). E-RS scores were sensitive to change when a patient global impression of change and SGRQ change scores were used to define responders, with changes of ≥ - 1.4 in RS-Total score interpreted as clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS E-RS:COPD scores were reliable, valid and responsive in this sample, suggesting the measure may be suitable for evaluating the severity of respiratory symptoms and the effects of treatment in patients with asthma and COPD that exhibit spirometric characteristics of both fixed airflow obstruction and reversibility. Further study of this instrument and wheeze in new samples of patients with ACO is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda M Nelsen
- Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, 19426, USA.
| | - Laurie A Lee
- Research and Development, GSK, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK
| | - Wei Wu
- Biostatistics, PAREXEL International, Research Triangle Park, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | - Xiwu Lin
- Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, 19426, USA
| | | | - Steven J Pascoe
- Respiratory Medicines Development Center, GSK, Research Triangle Park, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | - Nancy K Leidy
- Patient-Centered Research, Evidera, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The precision medicine concept is both appealing and challenging. We review here the recent findings in the endotype-driven approach for major allergic diseases. RECENT FINDINGS Stratified medicine for different allergic diseases can identify patients who are more likely to benefit or experience an adverse reaction in response to a given therapy and anticipate their long-term outcome and vital risk. In addition, this approach potentially facilitates drug development and prevention strategies. SUMMARY The endotype-driven approach in allergic diseases has tremendous potential, but there are notable barriers in reaching the new world of precision medicine. Multidimensional endotyping integrating visible properties with multiple biomarkers is recommended for both type 2 and nontype 2 allergic diseases to provide evidence that a certain pathway is the key driver for a given patient. Significant healthcare system changes are required to achieve the expected targets.
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vilanterol (VI) is a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) that binds to the beta2-adrenoceptor on the airway smooth muscle, producing bronchodilation. LABA therapy, which is well established in adults as part of the British Thoracic Society (BTS) Guidelines for the Management of Asthma, leads to improvement in symptoms and lung function and reduction in exacerbations. At present, the commonly used LABAs licensed for use in asthma management (formoterol and salmeterol) require twice-daily administration, whereas VI is a once-daily therapy.Fluticasone furoate (FF) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), and ICS therapy is recommended by the BTS asthma guidelines. ICSs, the mainstay of asthma treatment, lead to a reduction in both airway inflammation and airway hyper-responsiveness. Regular use leads to improvement in symptoms and lung function. ICSs are currently recommended as 'preventer' therapy for patients who use a 'reliever' medication (e.g. short-acting beta2 agonist (SABA), salbutamol) three or more times per week. Most of the commonly used ICS treatments are twice-daily medications, although two once-daily products are currently licensed (ciclesonide and mometasone).At the present time, only one once-daily ICS/LABA combination (FF/VI) is available, and several other combination inhalers are recommended for twice-daily administration. OBJECTIVES To compare effects of VI and FF in combination versus placebo, or versus other ICSs and/or LABAs, on acute exacerbations and on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults and children with chronic asthma. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials, clinical trial registries, manufacturers' websites and reference lists of included studies up to June 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults and children with a diagnosis of asthma. Included studies compared VI and FF combined versus placebo, or versus other ICSs and/or LABAs. Our primary outcomes were health-related quality of life, severe asthma exacerbation, as defined by hospital admissions or treatment with a course of oral corticosteroids, and serious adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data and analysed outcomes using a fixed-effect model. We used standard Cochrane methods. MAIN RESULTS We identified 14 studies that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 6641 randomised participants, of whom 5638 completed the study. All studies lasted between two and 78 weeks and showed good methodological quality overall.We included 10 comparisons in this review, seven for which the dose of VI and FF was 100/25 mcg (VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs placebo; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs same dose of FF; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs same dose of VI; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs fluticasone propionate (FP) 500 mcg twice-daily; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) 250/50 mcg twice-daily; VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs FP/SAL 250/25 mcg twice-daily; FF/VI 100/25 vs FP/SAL500/50) and three for which the dose of VI and FF was 200/25 mcg (VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs placebo; VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs FP 500 mcg; VI/FF 200/25 mcg vs same dose of FF).We found very few opportunities to combine results from the 14 included studies in meta-analyses. We tabulated the data for our pre-specified primary outcomes. In particular, we found insufficient information to assess whether once-daily VI/FF was better or worse than twice-daily FP/SAL in terms of efficacy or safety.Only one of the 14 studies looked at health-related quality of life when comparing VI and FF 100/25 mcg versus placebo and identified a significant advantage of VI/FF 100/25 mcg (mean difference (MD) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.46; 329 participants); we recognised this as moderate-quality evidence. Only two studies compared VI/FF 100/25 mcg versus placebo with respect to exacerbations; both studies reported no exacerbations in either treatment arm. Five studies (VI/FF 100/25 mcg vs placebo) sought information on serious adverse events; all five studies reported no serious adverse events in the VI/FF 100/25 mcg or placebo arms. We found no comparison relevant to our primary outcomes for VI/FF at a higher dose (200/25 mcg) versus placebo.The small number of studies contributing to each comparison precludes the opportunity to draw robust conclusions for clinical practice. These studies were not of sufficient duration to allow conclusions about long-term side effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Some evidence suggests clear advantages for VI/FF, in combination, compared with placebo, particularly for forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow; however, the variety of questions addressed in the included studies did not allow review authors to draw firm conclusions. Information was insufficient for assessment of whether once-daily VI/FF was better or worse than twice-daily FP/SAL in terms of efficacy or safety. It is clear that more research is required to reduce the uncertainties that surround interpretation of these studies. It will be necessary for these findings to be replicated in other work before more robust conclusions are revealed. Only five of the 13 included studies provided data on health-related quality of life, and only six recorded asthma exacerbations. Only one study focused on paediatric patients, so no conclusions can be drawn for the paediatric population. More research is needed, particularly in the primary outcome areas selected for this review, so that we can draw firmer conclusions in the next update of this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerry Dwan
- Cochrane Central ExecutiveReview Production and Quality Unit, Editorial & Methods DepartmentSt Albans House, 57‐59 HaymarketLondonEnglandUKSW1Y 4QX
| | | | - Lynne Bax
- Lancashire Care NHS Foundation TrustSceptre Point, Sceptre WayWalton SummitPrestonUKPR5 6AW
| | - Nicola Walters
- St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustChest UnitLondonUK
| | - Colin VE Powell
- Cardiff UniversityDepartment of Child Health, The Division of Population Medicine, The School of MedicineCardiffUK
| | | |
Collapse
|