An observational study of inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. ISOLDE Study Group

Overuse of long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: time to rethink prescribing patterns

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality globally. In the major revision of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2023 report, the scientific committee concluded that the use of long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) is not encouraged in patients with COPD. However, current prescribing patterns reveal significant use of LABA/ICS. In this paper, the evidence behind the current practice and the latest treatment recommendations is reviewed. We compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and LABA vs LABA/ICS and note that LAMA/LABA combinations have reduced the annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, delayed the time to first exacerbation, and increased post-dose FEV1 vs ICS-based regimens. The GOLD 2023 report recommends treatment with LABA and LAMA combination (preferably as a single inhaler) in patients with persistent dyspnea, with initiation of ICS in patients based on the symptoms (dyspnea and exercise intolerance as indicated by modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] score ≥ 2 and COPD Assessment Test [CAT™] > 20), blood eosinophil count (≥ 300 cells/µL), and exacerbation history (history of hospitalizations for exacerbations of COPD and ≥ 2 moderate exacerbations per year despite appropriate long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy). We describe practical recommendations for primary care physicians to optimize therapy for their patients and prevent overuse of ICS-based regimens. We advocate adherence to current recommendations and a greater focus on effective treatments to successfully control symptoms, minimize exacerbation risk, preserve lung function, maximize patient outcomes, and reduce the burden of drug-related adverse events.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus placebo for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been the subject of much uncertainty. COPD clinical guidelines currently recommend selective use of ICS. ICS are not recommended as monotherapy for people with COPD, and are only given in combination with long-acting bronchodilators due to greater efficacy of combination therapy. Incorporating and critiquing newly published placebo-controlled trials into the monotherapy evidence base may help to resolve ongoing uncertainties and conflicting findings about their role in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of inhaled corticosteroids, used as monotherapy versus placebo, in people with stable COPD, in terms of objective and subjective outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was October 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing any dose of any type of ICS, given as monotherapy, with a placebo control in people with stable COPD. We excluded studies of less than 12 weeks' duration and studies of populations with known bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) or bronchodilator reversibility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our a priori primary outcomes were 1. exacerbations of COPD and 2. quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were 3. all-cause mortality, 4. lung function (rate of decline of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)), 5. rescue bronchodilator use, 6. exercise capacity, 7. pneumonia and 8. adverse events including pneumonia. ]. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-six primary studies with 23,139 participants met the inclusion criteria. Mean age ranged from 52 to 67 years, and females were 0% to 46% of participants. Studies recruited across the severities of COPD. Seventeen studies were of duration longer than three months and up to six months and 19 studies were of duration longer than six months. We judged the overall risk of bias as low.  Long-term (more than six months) use of ICS as monotherapy reduced the mean rate of exacerbations in those studies where pooling of data was possible (generic inverse variance analysis: rate ratio 0.88 exacerbations per participant per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.94; I2 = 48%, 5 studies, 10,097 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; pooled means analysis: mean difference (MD) -0.05 exacerbations per participant per year, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.02; I2 = 78%, 5 studies, 10,316 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). ICS slowed the rate of decline in quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (MD -1.22 units/year, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.60; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2507 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; minimal clinically importance difference 4 points). There was no evidence of a difference in all-cause mortality in people with COPD (odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 16,636 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Long-term use of ICS  reduced the rate of decline in FEV1 in people with COPD (generic inverse variance analysis: MD 6.31 mL/year benefit, 95% CI 1.76 to 10.85; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 9829 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; pooled means analysis: 7.28 mL/year, 95% CI 3.21 to 11.35; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 12,502 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

ADVERSE EVENTS

in the long-term studies, the rate of pneumonia was increased in the ICS group, compared to placebo, in studies that reported pneumonia as an adverse event (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.88; I2 = 55%; 9 studies, 14,831 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was an increased risk of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.91 to 3.68; 5547 participants) and hoarseness (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.74; 3523 participants). The long-term studies that measured bone effects generally showed no major effect on fractures or bone mineral density over three years. We downgraded the certainty of evidence to moderate for imprecision and low for imprecision and inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review updates the evidence base for ICS monotherapy with newly published trials to aid the ongoing assessment of their role for people with COPD. Use of ICS alone for COPD likely results in a reduction of exacerbation rates of clinical relevance, probably results in a reduction in the rate of decline of FEV1 of uncertain clinical relevance and likely results in a small improvement in health-related quality of life not meeting the threshold for a minimally clinically important difference. These potential benefits should be weighed up against adverse events (likely to increase local oropharyngeal adverse effects and may increase the risk of pneumonia) and probably no reduction in mortality. Though not recommended as monotherapy, the probable benefits of ICS highlighted in this review support their continued consideration in combination with long-acting bronchodilators. Future research and evidence syntheses should be focused in that area.

Patient-Centered Discussion on End-of-Life Care for Patients with Advanced COPD

Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may lead to a rapid decline in health and subsequent death, an unfortunate tyranny of having COPD-an irreversible health condition of 16 million individuals in the USA totaling 60 million in the world. While COPD is the third largest leading cause of death, causing 3.23 million deaths worldwide in 2019 (according to the WHO), most patients with COPD do not receive adequate treatment at the end stages of life. Although death is inevitable, the trajectory towards end-of-life is less predictable in severe COPD. Thus, clinician-patient discussion for end-of-life and palliative care could bring a meaningful life-prospective to patients with advanced COPD. Here, we summarized the current understanding and treatment of COPD. This review also highlights the importance of patient-centered discussion and summarizes current status of managing patients with advanced COPD.

Recommendations for COPD management in Central and Eastern Europe

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy report provides guidance on effective management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) according to local healthcare systems. However, COPD is a heterogenous disease and certain aspects, including prevalence, disease-time course and phenotype distribution, can differ between countries. Moreover, features of clinical practice and healthcare systems for COPD patients can vary widely, even in geographically close and economically similar countries.

AREAS COVERED

Based on an initial workshop of respiratory physicians from eleven countries across Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in December 2018 and subsequent discussions, this article offers region-specific insights from clinical practice and healthcare systems in CEE. Taking GOLD 2020 recommendations into account, we suggest approaches to adapt these into national clinical guidelines for COPD management in CEE.

EXPERT OPINION

Several factors should be considered when optimizing management of COPD in CEE compared with other regions, including differences in smoking status, vaccination uptake, prevalence of tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacteria, and variations in healthcare systems. We provide guidance and algorithms for pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic management of COPD for the following scenarios: initial and follow-up treatment, treatment of patients with frequent exacerbations, and withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids where appropriate.

Evidence for the impact of interventions and medicines reconciliation on problematic polypharmacy in the UK: A rapid review of systematic reviews

This was a rapid review of systematic reviews (SRs) on problematic polypharmacy (PP) in the UK. The commissioner-defined topics were burden of PP, interventions to reduce PP, implementation activities to increase uptake of interventions, and efficient handover between primary and secondary care to reduce PP. Databases including Medline were searched to June 2019, SR quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) and a narrative synthesis was undertaken. Except for burden of PP (SRs had to include UK studies), there were no restrictions on country, location of care or outcomes. Nine SRs were included. On burden, three SRs (including six UK studies) found a high prevalence of polypharmacy in long term care. PP was associated with mortality, although unclear if causal, with no information on costs or health consequences. On interventions, six reviews (27 UK studies) found that interventions can reduce PP, but no effects on health outcomes. On handover between primary and secondary care, one review (two UK studies) found medicine reconciliation activities to reduce medication discrepancies at care transitions reduce PP, although the evidence is low quality. No SRs on implementation activities to increase uptake of interventions were found. SR quality was variable, with some concerns regarding meta-analysis methods. Evidence of the extent of PP in the UK, and what interventions to address it are effective in the UK, is limited. Future UK research is needed on the prevalence and consequences of PP, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce PP, and barriers and activities to ensure uptake.

Long-Term Triple Therapy De-escalation to Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (SUNSET): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Triple-Dummy Clinical Trial

RATIONALE

There are no studies on withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in patients on long-term triple therapy in the absence of frequent exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct de-escalation from long-term triple therapy to indacaterol/glycopyrronium in nonfrequently exacerbating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This 26-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy study assessed the direct change from long-term triple therapy to indacaterol/glycopyrronium (110/50 μg once daily) or continuation of triple therapy (tiotropium [18 μg] once daily plus combination of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate [50/500 μg] twice daily) in nonfrequently exacerbating patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Primary endpoint was noninferiority on change from baseline in trough FEV₁. Moderate or severe exacerbations were predefined secondary endpoints.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 527 patients were randomized to indacaterol/glycopyrronium and 526 to triple therapy. Inhaled corticosteroids withdrawal led to a reduction in trough FEV₁ of -26 ml (95% confidence interval, -53 to 1 ml) with confidence limits exceeding the noninferiority margin of -50 ml. The annualized rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations did not differ between treatments (rate ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.40). Patients with ≥300 blood eosinophils/μl at baseline presented greater lung function loss and higher exacerbation risk. Adverse events were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with COPD without frequent exacerbations on long-term triple therapy, the direct de-escalation to indacaterol/glycopyrronium led to a small decrease in lung function, with no difference in exacerbations. The higher exacerbation risk in patients with ≥300 blood eosinophils/μl suggests that these patients are likely to benefit from triple therapy. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02603393).

Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD patients: rationale and algorithms

Observational studies indicate that overutilization of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is common in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Overprescription and the high risk of serious ICS-related adverse events make withdrawal of this treatment necessary in patients for whom the treatment-related risks outweigh the expected benefits. Elaboration of an optimal, universal, user-friendly algorithm for withdrawal of ICS therapy has been identified as an important clinical need. This article reviews the available evidence on the efficacy, risks, and indications of ICS in COPD, as well as the benefits of ICS treatment withdrawal in patients for whom its use is not recommended by current guidelines. After discussing proposed approaches to ICS withdrawal published by professional associations and individual authors, we present a new algorithm developed by consensus of an international group of experts in the field of COPD. This relatively simple algorithm is based on consideration and integrated assessment of the most relevant factors (markers) influencing decision-making, such a history of exacerbations, peripheral blood eosinophil count, presence of infection, and risk of community-acquired pneumonia.

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

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

Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: friend or foe?

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

Overuse of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: five questions for withdrawal in daily practice

Evidence and guidelines are becoming increasingly clear about imbalance between the risks and benefits of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in patients with COPD. While selected patients may benefit from ICS-containing regimens, ICSs are often inappropriately prescribed with - according to Belgian market research data - up to 70% of patients in current practice receiving ICSs, usually as a fixed combination with a long-acting β2-adrenoreceptor agonist. Studies and recommendations support withdrawal of ICSs in a large group of patients with COPD. However, historical habits appear difficult to change even in the light of recent scientific evidence. We have built a collaborative educational platform with chest physicians and primary care physicians to increase awareness and provide guidance and support in this matter.

Inhaled therapies in patients with moderate COPD in clinical practice: current thinking

COPD is a complex, heterogeneous condition. Even in the early clinical stages, COPD carries a significant burden, with breathlessness frequently leading to a reduction in exercise capacity and changes that correlate with long-term patient outcomes and mortality. Implementation of an effective management strategy is required to reduce symptoms, preserve lung function, quality of life, and exercise capacity, and prevent exacerbations. However, current clinical practice frequently differs from published guidelines on the management of COPD. This review focuses on the current scientific evidence and expert opinion on the management of moderate COPD: the symptoms arising from moderate airflow obstruction and the burden these symptoms impose, how physical activity can improve disease outcomes, the benefits of dual bronchodilation in COPD, and the limited evidence for the benefits of inhaled corticosteroids in this disease. We emphasize the importance of maximizing bronchodilation in COPD with inhaled dual-bronchodilator treatment, enhancing patient-related outcomes, and enabling the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD in well-defined patient groups.

A proposal for the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in the clinical practice of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

According to the current clinical practice guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the addition of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to long-acting β2 agonist therapy is recommended in patients with moderate-to-severe disease and an increased risk of exacerbations. However, ICS are largely overprescribed in clinical practice, and most patients are unlikely to benefit from long-term ICS therapy.Evidence from recent randomized-controlled trials supports the hypothesis that ICS can be safely and effectively discontinued in patients with stable COPD and in whom ICS therapy may not be indicated, without detrimental effects on lung function, health status, or risk of exacerbations. This article summarizes the evidence supporting the discontinuation of ICS therapy, and proposes an algorithm for the implementation of ICS withdrawal in patients with COPD in clinical practice.Given the increased risk of potentially serious adverse effects and complications with ICS therapy (including pneumonia), the use of ICS should be limited to the minority of patients in whom the treatment effects outweigh the risks.

[The effects of inhaled steroids withdrawal in COPD]

The key pathophysiological feature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an abnormal inflammatory bronchial reaction after inhalation of toxic substances. The priority is the avoidance of such toxic inhalations, but the use of anti-inflammatory drugs also seems appropriate, especially corticosteroids that are the sole anti-inflammatory drug available for this purpose in France. The risks associated with the prolonged use of these parenteral drugs are well known. Inhalation is therefore the optimal route, but inhaled drugs may also lead to adverse consequences. In COPD, there is an inhaled corticosteroids overuse, and a non-satisfactory respect of the guidelines. Consequently, their withdrawal should be considered. We reviewed seven clinical studies dealing with inhaled corticosteroids withdrawal in patients with COPD and found that included populations were heterogenous with different concomitant treatments. In non-frequent exacerbators receiving inhaled corticosteroids outside the recommendations, withdrawal appears to be safe under a well-managed bronchodilator treatment. In patients with severe COPD and frequent exacerbations, the risk of acute respiratory event is low when they receive concomitant optimal inhaled bronchodilators. However, other risks may be observed (declining lung function, quality of life) and a discussion of each case should be performed, especially in case of COPD and asthma overlap.

Airway inflammation in COPD after long-term withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids

Long-term treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) might attenuate lung function decline and decrease airway inflammation in a subset of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and discontinuing ICS treatment could result in further lung function decline. We hypothesised that airway inflammation increases after ICS withdrawal following long-term ICS treatment in COPD.

In the GLUCOLD-1 study (GL1), 114 patients with moderate-severe COPD were randomised to 6-month or 30-month treatment with fluticasone propionate (500 µg twice daily), 30-month treatment with fluticasone/salmeterol (500/50 µg twice daily) or placebo. During the 5-year follow-up study (GL2), patients were followed prospectively while being treated by their physician. Bronchial biopsies and induced sputum were collected at baseline, at 30 months (end of GL1) and at 7.5 years (end of GL2) to assess inflammatory cell counts. Data were analysed using linear mixed-effects models.

In patients using ICS during GL1 and using ICS 0–50% of the time during GL2 (n=61/85), there were significant increases in GL2 bronchial CD3+ (fold change per year calculated as GL2 minus GL1 2.68, 95% CI 1.87–3.84), CD4+ (1.91, 95% CI 1.33–2.75) and CD8+ cells (1.71, 95% CI 1.15–2.53), and mast cells (1.91, 95% CI 1.36–2.68). The sputum total cell counts increased significantly in GL2 (1.90, 95% CI 1.42–2.54), as did counts of macrophages (2.10, 95% CI 1.55–2.86), neutrophils (1.92, 95% CI 1.39–2.65) and lymphocytes (2.01, 95% CI 1.46–2.78).

ICS discontinuation increases airway inflammation in patients with moderate-severe COPD, suggesting that the anti-inflammatory effects of ICS in COPD are not maintained after ICS discontinuation.

Pharmacological treatment optimization for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Proposals from the Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française

The Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française proposes a decision algorithm on long-term pharmacological COPD treatment. A working group reviewed the literature published between January 2009 and May 2016. This document lays out proposals and not guidelines. It only focuses on pharmacological treatments except vaccinations, smoking cessation treatments and oxygen therapy. Any COPD diagnosis, based on pulmonary function tests, should lead to recommend smoking cessation, vaccinations, physical activity, pulmonary rehabilitation in case of activity limitation, and short-acting bronchodilators. Symptoms like dyspnea and exacerbations determine the therapeutic choices. In case of daily dyspnea and/or exacerbations, a long-acting bronchodilator should be suggested (beta-2 agonist, LABA or anticholinergics, LAMA). A clinical and lung function reevaluation is suggested 1 to 3 months after any treatment modification and every 3-12 months according to the severity of the disease. In case of persisting dyspnea, a fixed dose LABA+LAMA combination improves pulmonary function (FEV1), quality of life, dyspnea and decreases exacerbations without increasing side effects. In case of frequent exacerbations and a FEV1≤70%, a fixed dose long-acting bronchodilator combination or a LABA+ inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) combination can be proposed. A triple combination (LABA+LAMA+ICS) is indicated when exacerbations persist despite one of these combinations. Dyspnea in spite of a bronchodilator combination or exacerbations in spite of a triple combination should lead to consider other pharmacological treatments (theophylline if dyspnea, macrolides if exacerbations, low-dose opioids if refractory dyspnea).

Appropriate use of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: the candidates for safe withdrawal

International guidance on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management recommends the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in those patients at increased likelihood of exacerbation. In spite of this guidance, ICS are prescribed in a large number of patients who are unlikely to benefit. Given the evidence of the risks associated with ICS and the limited indications for their use, there is interest in understanding the effects of withdrawing ICS when prescribed inappropriately. In this review, we discuss the findings of large ICS withdrawal trials, with primary focus on the more recent trials using active comparators. Data from these trials indicate that ICS may be withdrawn without adverse impact on exacerbation risk and patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate COPD and no history of frequent exacerbations. Considering the safety concerns associated with ICS use, these medications should be withdrawn in patients for whom they are not recommended, while maintaining adequate bronchodilator therapy.

The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Deprescribing is a suggested intervention to reverse the potential iatrogenic harms of inappropriate polypharmacy. The review aimed to determine whether or not deprescribing is a safe, effective and feasible intervention to modify mortality and health outcomes in older adults.

METHODS

Specified databases were searched from inception to February 2015. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were pooled using RevMan v5.3. Eligible studies included those where older adults had at least one medication deprescribed. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse drug withdrawal events, psychological and physical health outcomes, quality of life, and medication usage (e.g. successful deprescribing, number of medications prescribed, potentially inappropriate medication use).

RESULTS

A total of 132 papers met the inclusion criteria, which included 34 143 participants aged 73.8 ± 5.4 years. In nonrandomized studies, deprescribing polypharmacy was shown to significantly decrease mortality (OR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.60). However, this was not statistically significant in the randomized studies (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61-1.11). Subgroup analysis revealed patient-specific interventions to deprescribe demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.88). However, generalized educational programmes did not change mortality (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.86-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nonrandomized data suggested that deprescribing reduces mortality, deprescribing was not shown to alter mortality in randomized studies. Mortality was significantly reduced when applying patient-specific interventions to deprescribe in randomized studies.

Pinellia ternata Attenuates Mucus Secretion and Airway Inflammation after Inhaled Corticosteroid Withdrawal in COPD Rats

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are widely used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, withdrawal of ICS generally causes various adverse effects, warranting careful management of the ICS withdrawal. Pinellia ternata, a traditional Chinese herbal medicine, has been used to treat respiratory diseases in China for centuries. Here, we investigated its role in antagonizing ICS withdrawal-induced side effects, and explored the underlying mechanisms. The rat COPD model was established using a combination of passive cigarette smoking and intratracheal instillation of lipopolysaccharide (LPS). COPD rats were treated with saline or budesonide inhalation, or with budesonide inhalation followed by saline inhalation or Pinellia ternata gavage. The number of goblet cells and the level of mucin 5AC (MUC5AC) were enhanced by budesonide withdrawal. Pinellia ternata treatment significantly blocked these effects. Further, Pinellia ternata treatment reversed budesonide withdrawal-induced increase of interleukin 1[Formula: see text] (IL-1[Formula: see text] and tumor necrosis factor [Formula: see text] (TNF-[Formula: see text]) levels in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF). Extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), but neither p38 nor c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK), was activated by budesonide withdrawal, and the activation was blocked by Pinellia ternata treatment. The MUC5AC expression was positively correlated with goblet cell number, IL-1[Formula: see text] and TNF-[Formula: see text] levels, and ERK activity. Pinellia ternata treatment protected the airway from ICS withdrawal-induced mucus hypersecretion and airway inflammation by inhibiting ERK activation. Pinellia ternata treatment may represent a novel therapeutic strategy to prevent ICS withdrawal-induced side effects in COPD patients.

Blood eosinophils as a marker of response to inhaled corticosteroids in COPD

Identification of a biomarker that predicts response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) would help evaluate the risk/benefit profile of ICS in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and guide treatment.The ISOLDE study randomised 751 patients (mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 1.4 L: 50% predicted normal) to fluticasone propionate 500 μg twice daily or placebo for 3 years, finding no difference in FEV1 rate of decline between treatments (p=0.16) and a significant reduction in median exacerbation rate with fluticasone propionate versus placebo (p=0.026). We re-analysed ISOLDE results by baseline blood eosinophil count to investigate whether eosinophil level predicts ICS benefit.Patients with eosinophils <2% (n=456) had a similar rate of post-bronchodilator FEV1 decline with fluticasone propionate as placebo (-2.9 mL·year(-1); p=0.688). With eosinophils ≥2% (n=214), the rate of decline decreased by 33.9 mL·year(-1) with fluticasone propionate versus placebo (p=0.003). Exacerbation rate reduction on ICS for fluticasone propionate versus placebo was higher in the eosinophil <2% group compared with the ≥2% group; time-to-first moderate/severe exacerbation was not different between treatments in either group.A baseline blood eosinophil count of ≥2% identifies a group of COPD patients with slower rates of decline in FEV1 when treated with ICS: prospective testing of this hypothesis is now warranted.

Applying the wisdom of stepping down inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD: a proposed algorithm for clinical practice

Current guidelines for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend limiting the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to patients with more severe disease and/or increased exacerbation risk. However, there are discrepancies between guidelines and real-life practice, as ICS are being overprescribed. In light of the increasing concerns about the clinical benefit and long-term risks associated with ICS use, therapy needs to be carefully weighed on a case-by-case basis, including in patients already on ICS. Several studies sought out to determine the effects of withdrawing ICS in patients with COPD. Early studies have deterred clinicians from reducing ICS in patients with COPD as they reported that an abrupt withdrawal of ICS precipitates exacerbations, and results in a deterioration in lung function and symptoms. However, these studies were fraught with numerous methodological limitations. Recently, two randomized controlled trials and a real-life prospective study revealed that ICS can be safely withdrawn in certain patients. Of these, the WISDOM (Withdrawal of Inhaled Steroids During Optimized Bronchodilator Management) trial was the largest and first to examine stepwise withdrawal of ICS in patients with COPD receiving maintenance therapy of long-acting bronchodilators (ie, tiotropium and salmeterol). Even with therapy being in line with the current guidelines, the findings of the WISDOM trial indicate that not all patients benefit from including ICS in their treatment regimen. Indeed, only certain COPD phenotypes seem to benefit from ICS therapy, and validated markers that predict ICS response are urgently warranted in clinical practice. Furthermore, we are now better equipped with a larger armamentarium of novel and more effective long-acting β2-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist combinations that can be considered by clinicians to optimize bronchodilation and allow for safer ICS withdrawal. In addition to providing a review of the aforementioned, this perspective article proposes an algorithm for the stepwise withdrawal of ICS in real-life clinical practice.

The EFFECT trial: evaluating exacerbations, biomarkers, and safety outcomes with two dose levels of fluticasone propionate/formoterol in COPD

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist combination therapy is recommended in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients at high risk of exacerbations. The EFFECT (Efficacy of Fluticasone propionate/FormotErol in COPD Treatment) trial is a Phase III, 52-week, randomized, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two doses of fluticasone propionate/formoterol compared to formoterol monotherapy in COPD patients with FEV1 ≥50% predicted and a history of exacerbations. The primary endpoint is the annualized rate of moderate and severe exacerbations. Secondary endpoints include pre-dose FEV1, EXACT-PRO (EXAcerbations of Chronic pulmonary disease Tool - Patient-Reported Outcome)-defined exacerbations, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD, COPD Assessment Test, and EXACT-Respiratory Symptoms total score. Lung-specific biomarkers (surfactant protein D and CC chemokine ligand-18) will be measured in a subset of patients to explore their relationship to other clinical indices in COPD and their predictive utility. Pneumonia will be diagnosed per criteria defined by the British Thoracic Society community acquired pneumonia guideline, primarily by radiological confirmation and, additionally, using clinical criteria when a chest radiograph cannot be obtained. Serial measurements of serum potassium, vital signs and electrocardiograms, 24-hour Holter monitoring, and 24-hour urinary cortisol measurement will be performed in a subset of patients in addition to conventional safety assessments.

A re-evaluation of the role of inhaled corticosteroids in the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (in fixed combinations with long-acting β2-agonists [LABAs]) are frequently prescribed for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), outside their labeled indications and recommended treatment strategies and guidelines, despite having the potential to cause significant side effects.

AREAS COVERED

Although the existence of asthma in patients with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) clearly supports the use of anti-inflammatory treatment (typically an ICS/LABA combination, as ICS monotherapy is usually not indicated for COPD), the current level of ICS/LABA use is not consistent with the prevalence of ACOS in the COPD population. Data have recently become available showing the comparative efficacy of fixed bronchodilator combinations (long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]/LABA with ICS/LABA combinations). Additionally, new information has emerged on ICS withdrawal without increased risk of exacerbations, under cover of effective bronchodilation.

EXPERT OPINION

For patients with COPD who do not have ACOS, a LAMA/LABA combination may be an appropriate starting therapy, apart from those with mild disease who can be managed with a single long-acting bronchodilator. Patients who remain symptomatic or present with exacerbations despite effectively delivered LAMA/LABA treatment may require additional drug therapy, such as ICS or phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors. When prescribing an ICS/LABA, the risk:benefit ratio should be considered in individual patients.

Inhaled corticosteroids and pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Inhaled corticosteroids are widely used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and, in combination with long-acting β2 agonists, reduce exacerbations and improve lung function and quality of life. However, inhaled corticosteroids have been linked with an increased risk of pneumonia in individuals with COPD, but the magnitude of this risk, the effects of different preparations and doses, and the mechanisms of this effect remain unclear. Therefore, making informed clinical decisions--balancing the beneficial and adverse effects of inhaled corticosteroids in individuals with COPD--is difficult. Understanding of the mechanisms of increased pneumonia risk with inhaled corticosteroids is urgently needed to clarify their role in the management of COPD and to aid the development of new, safer therapies.

Withdrawal of inhaled glucocorticoids and exacerbations of COPD

BACKGROUND

Treatment with inhaled glucocorticoids in combination with long-acting bronchodilators is recommended in patients with frequent exacerbations of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the benefit of inhaled glucocorticoids in addition to two long-acting bronchodilators has not been fully explored.

METHODS

In this 12-month, double-blind, parallel-group study, 2485 patients with a history of exacerbation of COPD received triple therapy consisting of tiotropium (at a dose of 18 μg once daily), salmeterol (50 μg twice daily), and the inhaled glucocorticoid fluticasone propionate (500 μg twice daily) during a 6-week run-in period. Patients were then randomly assigned to continued triple therapy or withdrawal of fluticasone in three steps over a 12-week period. The primary end point was the time to the first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation. Spirometric findings, health status, and dyspnea were also monitored.

RESULTS

As compared with continued glucocorticoid use, glucocorticoid withdrawal met the prespecified noninferiority criterion of 1.20 for the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) with respect to the first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.19). At week 18, when glucocorticoid withdrawal was complete, the adjusted mean reduction from baseline in the trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 38 ml greater in the glucocorticoid-withdrawal group than in the glucocorticoid-continuation group (P<0.001); a similar between-group difference (43 ml) was seen at week 52 (P=0.001). No change in dyspnea and minor changes in health status occurred in the glucocorticoid-withdrawal group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe COPD receiving tiotropium plus salmeterol, the risk of moderate or severe exacerbations was similar among those who discontinued inhaled glucocorticoids and those who continued glucocorticoid therapy. However, there was a greater decrease in lung function during the final step of glucocorticoid withdrawal. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma; WISDOM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00975195.).

Long-acting inhaled therapy (beta-agonists, anticholinergics and steroids) for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving quality of life and preventing or treating exacerbations.Treatment tends to begin with one inhaler, and additional therapies are introduced as necessary. For persistent or worsening symptoms, long-acting inhaled therapies taken once or twice daily are preferred over short-acting inhalers. Several Cochrane reviews have looked at the risks and benefits of specific long-acting inhaled therapies compared with placebo or other treatments. However for patients and clinicians, it is important to understand the merits of these treatments relative to each other, and whether a particular class of inhaled therapies is more beneficial than the others.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of treatment options for patients whose chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cannot be controlled by short-acting therapies alone. The review will not look at combination therapies usually considered later in the course of the disease.As part of this network meta-analysis, we will address the following issues.1. How does long-term efficacy compare between different pharmacological treatments for COPD?2. Are there limitations in the current evidence base that may compromise the conclusions drawn by this network meta-analysis? If so, what are the implications for future research?

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in existing Cochrane reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). In addition, we ran a comprehensive citation search on the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials (CAGR) and checked manufacturer websites and reference lists of other reviews. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group RCTs of at least 6 months' duration recruiting people with COPD. Studies were included if they compared any of the following treatments versus any other: long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs; formoterol, indacaterol, salmeterol); long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium); inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs; budesonide, fluticasone, mometasone); combination long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) (formoterol/budesonide, formoterol/mometasone, salmeterol/fluticasone); and placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a network meta-analysis using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for two efficacy outcomes: St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). We modelled the relative effectiveness of any two treatments as a function of each treatment relative to the reference treatment (placebo). We assumed that treatment effects were similar within treatment classes (LAMA, LABA, ICS, LABA/ICS). We present estimates of class effects, variability between treatments within each class and individual treatment effects compared with every other.To justify the analyses, we assessed the trials for clinical and methodological transitivity across comparisons. We tested the robustness of our analyses by performing sensitivity analyses for lack of blinding and by considering six- and 12-month data separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 71 RCTs randomly assigning 73,062 people with COPD to 184 treatment arms of interest. Trials were similar with regards to methodology, inclusion and exclusion criteria and key baseline characteristics. Participants were more often male, aged in their mid sixties, with FEV1 predicted normal between 40% and 50% and with substantial smoking histories (40+ pack-years). The risk of bias was generally low, although missing information made it hard to judge risk of selection bias and selective outcome reporting. Fixed effects were used for SGRQ analyses, and random effects for Trough FEV1 analyses, based on model fit statistics and deviance information criteria (DIC). SGRQ SGRQ data were available in 42 studies (n = 54,613). At six months, 39 pairwise comparisons were made between 18 treatments in 25 studies (n = 27,024). Combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked intervention, with a mean improvement over placebo of -3.89 units at six months (95% credible interval (CrI) -4.70 to -2.97) and -3.60 at 12 months (95% CrI -4.63 to -2.34). LAMAs and LABAs were ranked second and third at six months, with mean differences of -2.63 (95% CrI -3.53 to -1.97) and -2.29 (95% CrI -3.18 to -1.53), respectively. Inhaled corticosteroids were ranked fourth (MD -2.00, 95% CrI -3.06 to -0.87). Class differences between LABA, LAMA and ICS were less prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and aclidinium were ranked somewhat higher than other members of their classes, and formoterol 12 mcg, budesonide 400 mcg and formoterol/mometasone combination were ranked lower within their classes. There was considerable overlap in credible intervals and rankings for both classes and individual treatments. Trough FEV1 Trough FEV1 data were available in 46 studies (n = 47,409). At six months, 41 pairwise comparisons were made between 20 treatments in 31 studies (n = 29,271). As for SGRQ, combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked class, with a mean improvement over placebo of 133.3 mL at six months (95% CrI 100.6 to 164.0) and slightly less at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 100, 95% CrI 55.5 to 140.1). LAMAs (MD 103.5, 95% CrI 81.8 to 124.9) and LABAs (MD 99.4, 95% CrI 72.0 to 127.8) showed roughly equivalent results at six months, and ICSs were the fourth ranked class (MD 65.4, 95% CrI 33.1 to 96.9). As with SGRQ, initial differences between classes were not so prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and salmeterol/fluticasone were ranked slightly better than others in their class, and formoterol 12, aclidinium, budesonide and formoterol/budesonide combination were ranked lower within their classes. All credible intervals for individual rankings were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis compares four different classes of long-acting inhalers for people with COPD who need more than short-acting bronchodilators. Quality of life and lung function were improved most on combination inhalers (LABA and ICS) and least on ICS alone at 6 and at 12 months. Overall LAMA and LABA inhalers had similar effects, particularly at 12 months. The network has demonstrated the benefit of ICS when added to LABA for these outcomes in participants who largely had an FEV1 that was less than 50% predicted, but the additional expense of combination inhalers and any potential for increased adverse events (which has been established by other reviews) require consideration. Our findings are in keeping with current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

Inhaled steroids and risk of pneumonia for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are anti-inflammatory drugs that have proven benefits for people with worsening symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and repeated exacerbations. They are commonly used as combination inhalers with long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) to reduce exacerbation rates and all-cause mortality, and to improve lung function and quality of life. The most common combinations of ICS and LABA used in combination inhalers are fluticasone and salmeterol, budesonide and formoterol and a new formulation of fluticasone in combination with vilanterol, which is now available. ICS have been associated with increased risk of pneumonia, but the magnitude of risk and how this compares with different ICS remain unclear. Recent reviews conducted to address their safety have not compared the relative safety of these two drugs when used alone or in combination with LABA.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of pneumonia associated with the use of fluticasone and budesonide for COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), clinicaltrials.gov, reference lists of existing systematic reviews and manufacturer websites. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies were included if they compared the ICS budesonide or fluticasone versus placebo, or either ICS in combination with a LABA versus the same LABA as monotherapy for people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, numerical data and risk of bias information for each included study.We looked at direct comparisons of ICS versus placebo separately from comparisons of ICS/LABA versus LABA for all outcomes, and we combined these with subgroups when no important heterogeneity was noted. After assessing for transitivity, we conducted an indirect comparison to compare budesonide versus fluticasone monotherapy, but we could not do the same for the combination therapies because of systematic differences between the budesonide and fluticasone combination data sets.When appropriate, we explored the effects of ICS dose, duration of ICS therapy and baseline severity on the primary outcome. Findings of all outcomes are presented in 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADEPro.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 43 studies that met the inclusion criteria, and more evidence was provided for fluticasone (26 studies; n = 21,247) than for budesonide (17 studies; n = 10,150). Evidence from the budesonide studies was more inconsistent and less precise, and the studies were shorter. The populations within studies were more often male with a mean age of around 63, mean pack-years smoked over 40 and mean predicted forced expiratory volume of one second (FEV1) less than 50%.High or uneven dropout was considered a high risk of bias in almost 40% of the trials, but conclusions for the primary outcome did not change when the trials at high risk of bias were removed in a sensitivity analysis.Fluticasone increased non-fatal serious adverse pneumonia events (requiring hospital admission) (odds ratio (OR) 1.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50 to 2.12; 18 more per 1000 treated over 18 months; high quality), and no evidence suggested that this outcome was reduced by delivering it in combination with salmeterol or vilanterol (subgroup differences: I(2) = 0%, P value 0.51), or that different doses, trial duration or baseline severity significantly affected the estimate. Budesonide also increased non-fatal serious adverse pneumonia events compared with placebo, but the effect was less precise and was based on shorter trials (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.62; six more per 1000 treated over nine months; moderate quality). Some of the variation in the budesonide data could be explained by a significant difference between the two commonly used doses: 640 mcg was associated with a larger effect than 320 mcg relative to placebo (subgroup differences: I(2) = 74%, P value 0.05).An indirect comparison of budesonide versus fluticasone monotherapy revealed no significant differences with respect to serious adverse events (pneumonia-related or all-cause) or mortality. The risk of any pneumonia event (i.e. less serious cases treated in the community) was higher with fluticasone than with budesonide (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.34); this was the only significant difference reported between the two drugs. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution because of possible differences in the assignment of pneumonia diagnosis, and because no trials directly compared the two drugs.No significant difference in overall mortality rates was observed between either of the inhaled steroids and the control interventions (both high-quality evidence), and pneumonia-related deaths were too rare to permit conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide and fluticasone, delivered alone or in combination with a LABA, are associated with increased risk of serious adverse pneumonia events, but neither significantly affected mortality compared with controls. The safety concerns highlighted in this review should be balanced with recent cohort data and established randomised evidence of efficacy regarding exacerbations and quality of life. Comparison of the two drugs revealed no statistically significant difference in serious pneumonias, mortality or serious adverse events. Fluticasone was associated with higher risk of any pneumonia when compared with budesonide (i.e. less serious cases dealt with in the community), but variation in the definitions used by the respective manufacturers is a potential confounding factor in their comparison.Primary research should accurately measure pneumonia outcomes and should clarify both the definition and the method of diagnosis used, especially for new formulations such as fluticasone furoate, for which little evidence of the associated pneumonia risk is currently available. Similarly, systematic reviews and cohorts should address the reliability of assigning 'pneumonia' as an adverse event or cause of death and should determine how this affects the applicability of findings.

Stepwise withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD patients receiving dual bronchodilation: WISDOM study design and rationale

Long-acting bronchodilators in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended to decrease the risk of recurrent exacerbations in patients with Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage 3-4 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is increasing concern about the clinical benefit and long-term safety of ICS use in COPD patients. The WISDOM (Withdrawal of Inhaled Steroids During Optimised bronchodilator Management) study (NCT00975195) aims to evaluate the need for ICS use via stepwise withdrawal of ICS in COPD patients (GOLD 3-4 with a history of at least one exacerbation during the 12-month period prior to screening) receiving dual bronchodilation. During the 6-week run-in period, 2456 patients receive tiotropium 18 μg once daily, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily and fluticasone 500 μg twice daily. In a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled fashion, one group of patients continues to receive tiotropium, salmeterol and fluticasone, while the second group initiates stepwise withdrawal of fluticasone. The primary end point is time to first moderate or severe exacerbation following randomized treatment over 52 weeks. Lung function, symptoms and safety are also assessed. A sub-study aims to identify sub-populations and markers of steroid need. This study will determine the benefit of continued ICS therapy in combination with dual long-acting bronchodilators in COPD.

Impact of a large-scale natural disaster on patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the aftermath of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake

BACKGROUND

A large-scale natural disaster may exacerbate chronic respiratory diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aftermath of a natural disaster can include poor access to medication, medical equipment, and medical supplies. Little is known about the impact on patients with COPD.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a regional medical center in Ishinomaki, the area affected most severely by the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011. The study was performed 6 months after the disaster. The characteristics, clinical courses, and outcomes of COPD patients hospitalized after emergency visits during the study period were investigated and compared.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (112 episodes) were identified. Within a few days after the disaster, patients undergoing oxygen therapy at home came to the hospital to receive oxygen. In the subacute phase (from the third to the fifth week), the number of hospitalizations due to COPD exacerbations was significantly increased compared to the numbers observed before the earthquake (p<0.05). On admission, COPD patients reported significantly reduced participation in the activities of daily living (ADLs) after as compared to before the disaster. The incidence of cases of exacerbated COPD normalized 6 weeks after the earthquake.

CONCLUSIONS

The large-scale natural disaster that hit Japan in 2011 had a serious negative impact on the clinical outcomes of COPD patients in the disaster-affected area.

Chronic bronchial infection in COPD. Is there an infective phenotype?

Microorganisms, particularly bacteria, are frequently found in the lower airways of COPD patients, both in stable state and during exacerbations. The host–pathogen relationship in COPD is a complex, dynamic process characterised by frequent changes in pathogens, their strains and loads, and subsequent host immune responses.

Exacerbations are detrimental events in the course of COPD and evidence suggests that 70% may be caused by microorganisms. When considering bacterial exacerbations, recent findings based on molecular typing have demonstrated that the acquisition of new strains of bacteria or antigenic changes in pre-existing strains are the most important triggers for exacerbation onset.

Even in clinically stable COPD patients the presence of microorganisms in their lower airways may cause harmful effects and induce chronic low-grade airway inflammation leading to increased exacerbation frequency, an accelerated decline in lung function and impaired health-related quality of life. Besides intraluminal localisation in the distal airways, bacteria can be found in the bronchial walls and parenchymal lung tissue of COPD patients. Therefore, the isolation of pathogenic bacteria in stable COPD should be considered as a form of chronic infection rather than colonisation. This new approach may have important implications for the management of patients with COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroids for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been the subject of much controversy. Major international guidelines recommend selective use of ICS. Recently published meta-analyses have reported conflicting findings on the effects of inhaled steroid therapy in COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled corticosteroids in stable patients with COPD, in terms of objective and subjective outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

A pre-defined search strategy was used to search the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register for relevant literature. Searches are current as of July 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing any dose of any type of inhaled steroid with a placebo control in patients with COPD. Acute bronchodilator reversibility to short-term beta(2)-agonists and bronchial hyper-responsiveness were not exclusion criteria. The a priori primary outcome was change in lung function. We also analysed data on mortality, exacerbations, quality of life and symptoms, rescue bronchodilator use, exercise capacity, biomarkers and safety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected adverse effects information from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five primary studies with 16,154 participants met the inclusion criteria. Long-term use of ICS (more than six months) did not consistently reduce the rate of decline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) in COPD patients (generic inverse variance analysis: mean difference (MD) 5.80 mL/year with ICS over placebo, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to 11.88, 2333 participants; pooled means analysis: 6.88 mL/year, 95% CI 1.80 to 11.96, 4823 participants), although one major trial demonstrated a statistically significant difference. There was no statistically significant effect on mortality in COPD patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16, 8390 participants). Long-term use of ICS reduced the mean rate of exacerbations in those studies where pooling of data was possible (generic inverse variance analysis: MD -0.26 exacerbations per patient per year, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14, 2586 participants; pooled means analysis: MD -0.19 exacerbations per patient per year, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.08, 2253 participants). ICS slowed the rate of decline in quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (MD -1.22 units/year, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.60, 2507 participants). Response to ICS was not predicted by oral steroid response, bronchodilator reversibility or bronchial hyper-responsiveness in COPD patients. There was an increased risk of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OR 2.65, 95% CI 2.03 to 3.46, 5586 participants) and hoarseness. In the long-term studies, the rate of pneumonia was increased in the ICS group compared to placebo, in studies that reported pneumonia as an adverse event (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.86, 6235 participants). The long-term studies that measured bone effects generally showed no major effect on fractures and bone mineral density over three years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians should balance the potential benefits of inhaled steroids in COPD (reduced rate of exacerbations, reduced rate of decline in quality of life and possibly reduced rate of decline in FEV(1)) against the potential side effects (oropharyngeal candidiasis and hoarseness, and risk of pneumonia).

The relationship between inspiratory lung function parameters and airway hyper-responsiveness in subjects with mild to moderate COPD

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of increasing doses of inhaled histamine on the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), inspiratory lung function parameters (ILPs) and dyspnea in subjects with mild to moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) METHODS: Thirty-nine (27 males and 12 females) stable COPD patients (GOLD stages I and II) inhaled a maximum of six sequential doses of histamine according to ERS standards until one of these provocative doses produced a 20% decrease in FEV1 (PD20). The effects on the FEV1, the forced inspiratory volume in one second (FIV1), inspiratory capacity (IC), forced inspiratory flow at 50% of the vital capacity (FIF50), peak inspiratory flow (PIF) and dyspnea score by a visual analogue scale (VAS) were measured and investigated after each dose step

RESULTS

After each dose of histamine, declines in all of the lung function parameters were detected; the largest decrease was observed in the FEV1. At the PD20 endpoint, more FEV1 responders than ILP responders were found. Among the ILPs, the FIV1 and IC best predicted which patients would reach the PD20 endpoint. No significant correlations were found between any of the lung function parameters and the VAS results

CONCLUSIONS

In COPD patients, the FEV1 and ILPs declined after each dose of inhaled histamine. FEV1 was more sensitive to histamine than the ILPs. Of the ILPs, FIV1 and IC were the best predictors of reaching the PD20 endpoint. No statistically significant correlations were found between the lung function parameters and the degree of dyspnea.

Effects of inhaled corticosteroids in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been described as a heterogeneous multifactorial disorder associated with an abnormal inflammatory response of the peripheral airways and with variable morphologic, physiologic and clinical phenotypes. This notion of the disease is actually poorly supported by data, and there are substantial discrepancies and a weak correlation between inflammation, structural damage, functional impairment and degree of clinical symptoms. This problem is compounded by a poor understanding of the complexity and intricacies on the inflammatory pathways in COPD. Despite the evidence for efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on selected clinical endpoints in COPD, we cannot assume that anti-inflammatory treatment with ICS alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators will necessarily improve the underlying inflammatory processes and patient relevant outcomes in COPD. Given the widespread use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone or in combination for the treatment of COPD across all severities, it is important to weigh their clinically proven benefits and shortcomings cautiously and critically. Reviewed is the current evidence-based role of ICS on inflammatory markers and patient relevant outcomes in COPD.

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the development of emphysema in smokers assessed by annual computed tomography

The objective was to evaluate the effect of inhaled corticosteroids on disease progression in smokers with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as assessed by annual computed tomography (CT) using lung density (LD) measurements. Two hundred and fifty-four current smokers with COPD were randomised to treatment with either an inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), budesonide 400 microg bid, or placebo. COPD was defined as FEV(1) < or = 70% pred, FEV(1)/FVC < or = 60% and no reversibility to beta(2)-agonists and oral corticosteroids. The patients were followed for 2-4 years with biannual spirometry and annual CT and comprehensive lung function tests (LFT). CT images were analysed using Pulmo-CMS software. LD was derived from a pixel-density histogram of the whole lung as the 15th percentile density (PD15) and the relative area of emphysema at a threshold of -910 Hounsfield units (RA-910), and both were volume-adjusted to predicted total lung capacity. At baseline, mean age was 64 years and 64 years; mean number of pack-years was 56 and 56; mean FEV(1) was 1.53 L (51% pred) and 1.53 L (53% pred); mean PD15 was 103 g/L and 104 g/L; and mean RA-910 was 14% and 13%, respectively, for the budesonide and placebo groups. The annual fall in PD15 was -1.12 g/L in the budesonide group and -1.81 g/L in the placebo group (p = 0.09); the annual increase in RA-910 was 0.4% in the budesonide group and 1.1% in the placebo group (p = 0.02). There was no difference in annual decline in FEV(1) between ICS (-54 mL) and placebo (-56 mL) (p = 0.89). Long-term budesonide inhalation shows a non-significant trend towards reducing the progression of emphysema as determined by the CT-derived 15th percentile lung density from annual CT scans in current smokers with moderate to severe COPD.