Comparative effectiveness of LABA-ICS versus LAMA as initial treatment in COPD targeted by blood eosinophils: a population-based cohort study

Inflammatory profile of eosinophils in asthma-COPD overlap and eosinophilic COPD: a multi-omics study

Introduction

Elevated blood eosinophil levels in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with or without asthma are linked to increased exacerbations and the effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroid treatment. This study aimed to delineate the inflammatory cellular properties of eosinophils in patients with asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) and eosinophilic COPD (eCOPD).

Methods

Eosinophils were isolated from the peripheral blood of healthy volunteers, patients with non-eCOPD, and those with ACO/eCOPD. Multi-omics analysis involving transcriptomics, proteomics, and lipidomics was performed, followed by bioinformatic data analyses. In vitro experiments using eosinophils from healthy volunteers were conducted to investigate the molecular mechanisms underlying cellular alterations in eosinophils.

Results

Proteomics and transcriptomics analyses revealed cellular characteristics in overall COPD patients represented by viral infection (elevated expression of sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1) and inflammatory responses (elevated levels of IL1 receptor-like 1, Fc epsilon receptor Ig, and transmembrane protein 176B). Cholesterol metabolism enzymes were identified as ACO/eCOPD-related factors. Gene Ontology and pathway enrichment analyses demonstrated the key roles of antiviral responses, cholesterol metabolism, and inflammatory molecules-related signaling pathways in ACO/eCOPD. Lipidomics showed the impaired synthesis of cyclooxygenase-derived mediators including prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) in ACO/eCOPD. In vitro assessment confirmed that IL-33 or TNF-α stimulation combined with IL-5 and IFN-γ stimulation induced cellular signatures in eosinophils in ACO/eCOPD. Atorvastatin, dexamethasone, and PGE2 differentially modulated these inflammatory changes.

Discussion

ACO/eCOPD is associated with viral infection and an inflammatory milieu. Therapeutic strategies using statins and inhaled corticosteroids are recommended to control these pathogenic changes.

Comparing Costs and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Using LAMA versus LABA/ICS at Treatment Initiation for COPD: Findings from CITRUS (Comparing the Incidence of Tiotropium and ICS/LABA in Real-World Use in South Korea) Study

Background

COPD causes substantial economic burden on healthcare. Alternative treatment strategies for COPD can be associated with different costs dependent upon their relative safety and effectiveness. We compared costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with LAMA or LABA/ICS initiation.

Methods

Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we enrolled COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA or LABA/ICS between January 2005 and April 2015. Propensity score matched individuals were compared on all-cause and COPD-related medical costs and HCRU over a three-year follow-up period.

Results

A total of 2444 patients were enrolled in each treatment group. LAMA group was associated with significantly lower costs than LABA/ICS group, both in all-cause (403.08 vs 474.50 USD per patient per month [PPPM], cost ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.10-1.26, p<0.0001) and COPD-related (216.37 vs 267.32 USD PPPM, cost ratio 1.24, 95% CI=1.13-1.35, p<0.0001) medical costs. All-cause HCRU was not significantly different between groups, while COPD-related HRCU was higher in LAMA group (0.66 vs 0.60 medical visits PPPM, p<0.0001).

Conclusion

COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA were associated with lower all-cause and COPD-related medical costs than those starting with LABA/ICS despite the similar all-cause HCRU and higher COPD-related HCRU. Initiation with LAMA is a cost-efficient option for the treatment of COPD.

De-Prescribing Inhaled Corticosteroids in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Narrative Review

Objective: Combination therapy, including inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), is often prescribed as initial treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) despite limited evidence that ICS therapy is beneficial. Prescribing rates exceed the estimated number of candidates diagnosed with COPD who are eligible for ICS treatment per guideline-directed therapy. Therefore, some patients would benefit from ICS withdrawal due to potentially inappropriate prescribing. This review aims to highlight evidence evaluating ICS withdrawal approaches in COPD. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was performed between June 2021 and March 2022 with assistance from a reference librarian. Sources of literature review include PubMed and Embase. The authors selected randomized controlled trials and articles evaluating ICS withdrawal approaches in patients with COPD. Three clinical trials and one post-hoc analysis are discussed in this review. Pertinent safety, efficacy, and statistical and clinical outcomes are summarized. Conclusions: The most appropriate approach to de-prescribe ICS maintenance therapy in COPD without clear indication remains uncertain. Pharmacists can play a role in optimizing clinical outcomes by analyzing ICS use in practice and identifying potential candidates for ICS withdrawal. The withdrawal protocols discussed in this review offer options for clinicians to help guide therapy decisions.

Gabapentinoids and Risk for Severe Exacerbation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease : A Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

North American and European health agencies recently warned of severe breathing problems associated with gabapentinoids, including in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although supporting evidence is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether gabapentinoid use is associated with severe exacerbation in patients with COPD.

DESIGN

Time-conditional propensity score-matched, new-user cohort study.

SETTING

Health insurance databases from the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec in Canada.

PATIENTS

Within a base cohort of patients with COPD between 1994 and 2015, patients initiating gabapentinoid therapy with an indication (epilepsy, neuropathic pain, or other chronic pain) were matched 1:1 with nonusers on COPD duration, indication for gabapentinoids, age, sex, calendar year, and time-conditional propensity score.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was severe COPD exacerbation requiring hospitalization. Hazard ratios (HRs) associated with gabapentinoid use were estimated in subcohorts according to gabapentinoid indication and in the overall cohort.

RESULTS

The cohort included 356 gabapentinoid users with epilepsy, 9411 with neuropathic pain, and 3737 with other chronic pain, matched 1:1 to nonusers. Compared with nonuse, gabapentinoid use was associated with increased risk for severe COPD exacerbation across the indications of epilepsy (HR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.08 to 2.30]), neuropathic pain (HR, 1.35 [CI, 1.24 to 1.48]), and other chronic pain (HR, 1.49 [CI, 1.27 to 1.73]) and overall (HR, 1.39 [CI, 1.29 to 1.50]).

LIMITATION

Residual confounding, including from lack of smoking information.

CONCLUSION

In patients with COPD, gabapentinoid use was associated with increased risk for severe exacerbation. This study supports the warnings from regulatory agencies and highlights the importance of considering this potential risk when prescribing gabapentin and pregabalin to patients with COPD.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Canadian Lung Association.

2023 Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline on Pharmacotherapy in Patients With Stable COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the reality that airflow obstruction assessed by spirometry only partially reflects disease severity, a thorough clinical evaluation of the patient should include assessment of symptom burden and risk of exacerbations that permits the implementation of evidence-informed pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions. This guideline provides recommendations from a comprehensive systematic review with a meta-analysis and expert-informed clinical remarks to optimize maintenance pharmacologic therapy for individuals with stable COPD, and a revised and practical treatment pathway based on new evidence since the 2019 update of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Guideline. The key clinical questions were developed using the Patients/Population (P), Intervention(s) (I), Comparison/Comparator (C), and Outcome (O) model for three questions that focuses on the outcomes of symptoms (dyspnea)/health status, acute exacerbations, and mortality. The evidence from this systematic review and meta-analysis leads to the recommendation that all symptomatic patients with spirometry-confirmed COPD should receive long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy. Those with moderate to severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ≥ 2) and/or impaired health status (COPD Assessment Test ≥ 10) and a low risk of exacerbations should receive combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ẞ2-agonist (LAMA/LABA). For those with a moderate/severe dyspnea and/or impaired health status and a high risk of exacerbations should be prescribed triple combination therapy (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroids) azithromycin, roflumilast or N-acetylcysteine is recommended for specific populations; a recommendation against the use of theophylline, maintenance systemic oral corticosteroids such as prednisone and inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy is made for all COPD patients.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Generic Versus Brand-Name Fluticasone-Salmeterol to Treat Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND

In 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first generic maintenance inhaler for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The inhaler, Wixela Inhub (fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris), is a substitutable version of the dry powder inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline). When approving complex generic products like inhalers, the FDA applies a special "weight-of-evidence" approach. In this case, manufacturers were required to perform a randomized controlled trial in patients with asthma but not COPD, although the product received approval for both indications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of generic (Wixela Inhub) and brand-name (Advair Diskus) fluticasone-salmeterol among patients with COPD treated in routine care.

DESIGN

A 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study.

SETTING

A large, longitudinal health care database.

PATIENTS

Adults older than 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD.

MEASUREMENTS

Incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (effectiveness outcome) and incidence of first pneumonia hospitalization (safety outcome) in the 365 days after cohort entry.

RESULTS

Among 45 369 patients (27 305 Advair Diskus users and 18 064 Wixela Inhub users), 10 012 matched pairs were identified for the primary analysis. Compared with Advair Diskus use, Wixela Inhub use was associated with a nearly identical incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.04]) and first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 0.99 [CI, 0.86 to 1.15]).

LIMITATIONS

Follow-up times were short, reflecting real-world clinical practice. The possibility of residual confounding cannot be completely excluded.

CONCLUSION

Use of generic and brand-name fluticasone-salmeterol was associated with similar outcomes among patients with COPD treated in routine practice.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Real-world comparative effectiveness of three single-inhaler dual bronchodilators for the treatment of COPD

BACKGROUND

Single-inhaler dual bronchodilators are now recommended as initial treatment of COPD for patients with multiple exacerbations or with moderate or severe dyspnoea. It is unclear whether there are differences in effectiveness among commonly used dual bronchodilators.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of COPD patients, aged ≥40 years, treated during 2017-2020, from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a real-world practice setting. Inhaled corticosteroid-naïve patients initiating vilanterol-umeclidinium (VIL-UME) were compared with those initiating olodaterol-tiotropium (OLO-TIO) or indacaterol-glycopyrronium (IND-GLY) dual bronchodilators primarily on the incidence of moderate and severe COPD exacerbation over 1 year, and corresponding hazard ratios (HRs), after adjustment by propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

The cohort included 15 224 initiators of VIL-UME, 5536 initiators of OLO-TIO and 5059 initiators of IND-GLY. The HR of a moderate or severe exacerbation with VIL-UME was 0.91 (95% CI 0.85-0.97) compared with OLO-TIO and 0.96 (95% CI 0.89-1.03) compared with IND-GLY. The risk of severe exacerbation was not different for VIL-UME when compared with OLO-TIO (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86-1.26) and IND-GLY (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.28). All-cause mortality was lower with VIL-UME compared with IND-GLY (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98), but not compared with OLO-TIO (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.04).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, the three dual bronchodilator combinations were similarly effective on the risk of a severe exacerbation of COPD. However, the VIL-UME and IND-GLY combinations may confer slightly superior effectiveness than OLO-TIO on the risk of moderate or severe exacerbation. The potential lower mortality with VIL-UME warrants further investigation.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay of treatment for asthma, but their role in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is debated. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients with COPD and frequent or severe exacerbations demonstrated a significant reduction (~25%) in exacerbations with ICS in combination with dual bronchodilator therapy (triple therapy). However, the suggestion of a mortality benefit associated with ICS in these trials has since been rejected by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration. Observational evidence from routine clinical practice demonstrates that dual bronchodilation is associated with better clinical outcomes than triple therapy in a broad population of patients with COPD and infrequent exacerbations. This reinforces guideline recommendations that ICS-containing maintenance therapy should be reserved for patients with frequent or severe exacerbations and high blood eosinophils (~10% of the COPD population), or those with concomitant asthma. However, data from routine clinical practice indicate ICS overuse, with up to 50-80% of patients prescribed ICS. Prescription of ICS in patients not fulfilling guideline criteria puts patients at unnecessary risk of pneumonia and other long-term adverse events and also has cost implications, without any clear benefit in disease control. In this article, we review the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD, drawing on evidence from RCTs and observational studies conducted in primary care. We also provide a practical guide to prescribing ICS, based on the latest global treatment guidelines, to help primary care providers identify patients for whom the benefits of ICS outweigh the risks.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations and Pneumonia Hospitalizations Among New Users of Combination Maintenance Inhalers

Importance

Clinical guidelines on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend inhalers containing long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) over inhalers containing inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and LABAs. However, data from randomized clinical trials comparing these combination inhalers (LAMA-LABAs vs ICS-LABAs) have been conflicting and raised concerns of generalizability.

Objective

To assess whether LAMA-LABA therapy is associated with reduced COPD exacerbations and pneumonia hospitalizations compared with ICS-LABA therapy in routine clinical practice.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study using Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart, a large commercial insurance-claims database. Patients must have had a diagnosis of COPD and filled a new prescription for a combination LAMA-LABA or ICS-LABA inhaler between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Patients younger than 40 years were excluded, as were those with a prior diagnosis of asthma. The current analysis was performed from February 2021 to March 2023.

Exposures

Combination LAMA-LABA inhalers (aclidinium-formoterol, glycopyrronium-formoterol, glycopyrronium-indacaterol, tiotropium-olodaterol, or umeclidinium-vilanterol) and combination ICS-LABA inhalers (budesonide-formoterol, fluticasone-salmeterol, fluticasone-vilanterol, or mometasone-formoterol).

Main Outcome

The primary effectiveness outcome was first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation, and the primary safety outcome was first pneumonia hospitalization. Propensity score matching was used to control for confounding between the 2 groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate propensity scores. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models stratified on matched pairs.

Results

Among 137 833 patients (mean [SD] age, 70.2 [9.9] years; 69 530 [50.4%] female) (107 004 new ICS-LABA users and 30 829 new LAMA-LABA users), 30 216 matched pairs were identified for the primary analysis. Compared with ICS-LABA use, LAMA-LABA use was associated with an 8% reduction in the rate of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96) and a 20% reduction in the rate of first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.86). These findings were robust across a range of prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

In this cohort study, LAMA-LABA therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with ICS-LABA therapy, suggesting that LAMA-LABA therapy should be preferred for patients with COPD.

Comparison of pneumonia incidence between long-acting muscarinic antagonist and inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting beta agonist in patients with COPD

Few studies have directly compared the incidence of pneumonia in patients on common chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatments such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) with those on inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LABA). Moreover, risk factors for pneumonia in COPD are still unclear. We aimed to compare the incidence of pneumonia in COPD patients on LAMA and those on ICS/LABA and explored the risk factors associated with pneumonia. This nationwide cohort study used Korean National Health Insurance claim data from January 2002 to April 2016. Patients who received COPD medication, either LAMA or ICS/LABA, with the COPD diagnostic code, were selected. We enrolled patients with good compliance (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%). The primary outcome was pneumonia in COPD patients initiating LAMA or ICS/LABA. We investigated the risk factors associated with pneumonia, including the sub-types of ICS treatments. After propensity score matching, the incidence rate per 1000 person-years of pneumonia was 93.96 for LAMA (n = 1003) and 136.42 for ICS/LABA (n = 1003) patients (p < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for pneumonia in patients on fluticasone/LABA was 1.496 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.204-1.859) compared with LAMA (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, a history of pneumonia was a risk factor associated with pneumonia (HR 2.123; 95% CI 1.580-2.852; p < 0.001). The incidence of pneumonia was higher in COPD patients on ICS/LABA compared with those on LAMA. It is recommended that ICS use be avoided in COPD patients with high pneumonia risk.

Time-Updated Phenotypic Guidance of Corticosteroids and Antibiotics in COPD: Rationale, Perspective and a Proposed Method

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous disease with distinct phenotypes, each having distinct treatment needs. Eosinophilic airway inflammation is present in a subset of COPD patients in whom it can act as a driver of exacerbations. Blood eosinophil counts are a reliable way to identify patients with an eosinophilic phenotype, and these measurements have proven to be successful in guiding the use of corticosteroids in moderate and severe COPD exacerbations. Antibiotic use in COPD patients induces a risk of Clostridium difficile infection, diarrhea, and antibiotic resistance. Procalcitonin could possibly guide antibiotic treatment in patients admitted with AECOPD. Current studies in COPD patients were successful in reducing exposure to antibiotics with no changes in mortality or length of stay. Daily monitoring of blood eosinophils is a safe and effective way to reduce oral corticosteroid exposure and side effects for acute exacerbations. No evidence on time-updated treatment guidance for stable COPD exists yet, but a current trial is testing an eosinophil-guided approach on inhaled corticosteroid use. Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment in AECOPD shows promising results in safely and substantially reducing antibiotic exposure both in time-independent and time-updated algorithms.

The Role of the Acetylcholine System in Common Respiratory Diseases and COVID-19

As an indispensable component in human beings, the acetylcholine system regulates multiple physiological processes not only in neuronal tissues but also in nonneuronal tissues. However, since the concept of the "Nonneuronal cholinergic system (NNCS)" has been proposed, the role of the acetylcholine system in nonneuronal tissues has received increasing attention. A growing body of research shows that the acetylcholine system also participates in modulating inflammatory responses, regulating contraction and mucus secretion of respiratory tracts, and influencing the metastasis and invasion of lung cancer. In addition, the susceptibility and severity of respiratory tract infections caused by pathogens such as Mycobacterium Tuberculosis and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can also correlate with the regulation of the acetylcholine system. In this review, we summarized the major roles of the acetylcholine system in respiratory diseases. Despite existing achievements in the field of the acetylcholine system, we hope that more in-depth investigations on this topic will be conducted to unearth more possible pharmaceutical applications for the treatment of diverse respiratory diseases.

The Impact of Inhaled Corticosteroids on the Prognosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

A comprehensive analysis of the effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on COPD in a real-world setting is required due to safety concerns regarding ICS in COPD. This study aimed to explore the impact of ICS on the prognosis of Asian COPD patients in the real-life world.

Methods

We examined 978 COPD patients registered in the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) database and with their data linked to Health Insurance and Review Assessment (HIRA) data. The outcome measures were ascertained by HIRA from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2012. This study enrolled two arms; ICS users (N = 85, mean age = 66.7 ± 8.9 years) and non-ICS users (N = 893, mean age = 63.7 ± 9.7 years).

Results

Compared to the non-ICS users, the ICS users had a higher rate of pneumonia, tuberculosis, and acute exacerbations (P<0.05). Hospitalization due to respiratory causes was also higher among ICS users (P<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that acute exacerbation was independently associated with the development of pneumonia (P<0.05), whereas ICS therapy had a tendency to be associated with pneumonia. Another multivariate analysis demonstrated that old age, FEV₁, ICS therapy, and pneumonia were independently associated with the occurrence of acute exacerbation (P<0.05). The concomitant pneumonia (HR = 3.353, P = 0.004) was independently associated with higher mortality (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Our data demonstrated that the ICS users had a higher rate of pneumonia and tuberculosis and the concomitant pneumonia was independently associated with higher mortality, highlighting the importance of cautious and targeted administration of ICS in COPD.

Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Guided-Therapy in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Stratified, Randomized, Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with eosinophilic airway inflammation represents a distinct phenotype that might respond to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) might predict eosinophilic inflammation and guide treatment option. We hypothesized that COPD patients with different baseline levels of FENO might have differentiated response to treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) or tiotropium (TIO).

METHODS

This open-label, randomized-controlled trial enrolled treatment-naïve COPD patients who were stratified into high- (≥23.5ppb) and low-FENO group, followed by 12-week treatment with SFC or TIO. A linear mixed model with repeated measures was applied to analyze the changes in FENO (primary outcome), COPD assessment test (CAT) score, FEV₁, and parameters in induced sputum and blood after treatment.

RESULTS

134 patients were divided into 4 subgroups: low-FENO/SFC (n=30), low-FENO/TIO (n=29), high-FENO/SFC (n=37), and high-FENO/TIO (n=38). At baseline, FENO 23.5ppb clearly differentiated between eosinophilic and non-eosinophilic inflammation groups based on the eosinophils in induced sputum and blood. FENO significantly correlated with sputum and blood eosinophils at baseline. High-FENO/SFC (vs. high-FENO/TIO) subgroup had significant reduction in FENO and sputum inflammation profiles (including eosinophils, macrophages, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and interlukin-8) after treatment. These differences were not replicated between low-FENO/SFC and low-FENO/TIO subgroups. The improvement in CAT and FEV₁ after treatment was indiscriminate between SFC and TIO in the low- and high-FENO groups.

CONCLUSION

High baseline FENO can serve as an indicator of eosinophilic airway inflammation in COPD patients who may respond favorably to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂-agonists.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02546349.

Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

Purpose

Randomized trials report that single-inhaler triple therapy is more effective than dual bronchodilators at reducing exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, this effect may have been influenced by the forced withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at randomization. We used an adaptive selection new-user design to compare single-inhaler triple therapy with dual bronchodilators in real-world clinical practice.

Patients and Methods

We identified a cohort of COPD patients, 40 years or older, treated during 2017–2020, from the United Kingdom’s Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a real-world practice setting. ICS-naïve patients initiating single-inhaler triple therapy or dual bronchodilators were compared on the incidence of COPD exacerbation and pneumonia over one year, after adjustment by propensity score weighting.

Results

The cohort included 4106 new users of single-inhaler triple therapy and 29,702 of dual bronchodilators. Single-inhaler triple therapy was the first maintenance treatment in 44% of the users and 43% had no COPD exacerbations in the prior year. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with triple therapy relative to dual bronchodilators was 1.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.16). Among patients with two or more prior exacerbations the HR was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74–0.92), while for those with prior asthma diagnosis it was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.70–1.06) and with blood eosinophil count >300 cells/µL it was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.76–1.05). The incidence of severe pneumonia was increased with triple therapy (HR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.29–1.75).

Conclusion

In a real-world setting of COPD treatment among ICS-naïve patients, thus unaffected by ICS withdrawal, single-inhaler triple therapy was not more effective than dual bronchodilators at reducing the incidence of exacerbation, except among patients with multiple exacerbations. Single-inhaler triple therapy should be initiated mainly in patients with multiple exacerbations while, for most others, dual bronchodilators are just as effective whilst avoiding the excess risk of severe pneumonias.

A descriptive cohort study of withdrawal from inhaled corticosteroids in COPD patients

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy is widely prescribed without a history of exacerbations and consensus guidelines suggest withdrawal of ICS in these patients would reduce the risk of side effects and promote cost-effective prescribing. The study describes the prescribing behaviour in the United Kingdom (UK) in relation to ICS withdrawal and identifies clinical outcomes following withdrawal using primary and secondary care electronic health records between January 2012 and December 2017. Patients with a history ≥12 months’ exposure who withdrew ICS for ≥6 months were identified into two cohorts; those prescribed a long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy and those that were not prescribed any maintenance therapy. The duration of withdrawal, predictors of restarting ICS, and clinical outcomes were compared between both patient cohorts. Among 76,808 patients that had ≥1 prescription of ICS in the study period, 11,093 patients (14%) withdrew ICS therapy at least once during the study period. The median time without ICS was 9 months (IQR 7–14), with the majority (71%) receiving subsequent ICS prescriptions after withdrawal. Patients receiving maintenance therapy with a COPD review at withdrawal were 28% less likely to restart ICS (HR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.61, 0.85). Overall, 69% and 89% of patients that withdrew ICS had no recorded exacerbation event or COPD hospitalisation, respectively, during the withdrawal. This study provides evidence that most patients withdrawing from ICS do not experience COPD exacerbations and withdrawal success can be achieved by carefully planning routine COPD reviews whilst optimising the use of available maintenance therapies.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and health-care use worldwide. COPD is caused by exposure to inhaled noxious particles, notably tobacco smoke and pollutants. However, the broad range of factors that increase the risk of development and progression of COPD throughout the life course are increasingly being recognised. Innovations in omics and imaging techniques have provided greater insight into disease pathobiology, which might result in advances in COPD prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. Although few novel treatments have been approved for COPD in the past 5 years, advances have been made in targeting existing therapies to specific subpopulations using new biomarker-based strategies. Additionally, COVID-19 has undeniably affected individuals with COPD, who are not only at higher risk for severe disease manifestations than healthy individuals but also negatively affected by interruptions in health-care delivery and social isolation. This Seminar reviews COPD with an emphasis on recent advances in epidemiology, pathophysiology, imaging, diagnosis, and treatment.

Lack of Association between Inhaled Corticosteroid Use and the Risk of Future Exacerbation in Patients with GOLD Group A Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background: As most clinical trials have been performed in more symptomatic and higher-risk patients, evidence regarding treatment in patients with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group A chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. We assessed the distribution of inhaler treatment and sought to investigate the association between inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use and future exacerbation in GOLD group A COPD patients. Methods: Patients with GOLD group A COPD who received maintenance inhalers were identified from a multicentre, prospective cohort in South Korea. Patients were categorized as group A when they had fewer symptoms and did not experience severe exacerbation in the previous year. Development of moderate or severe exacerbation during the 1-year follow-up was analysed according to baseline inhaler treatment. Results: In 286 patients with GOLD group A COPD, mono-bronchodilator (37.8%), dual-bronchodilator (29.0%), triple therapy (17.5%), and ICS/long-acting beta-2 agonist (15.4%) were used. Compared to patients without ICS-containing inhalers (N = 191), those using ICS (N = 95) were more dyspnoeic, and more likely to have asthma history, lower lung function, and bronchodilator response. During the 1-year follow-up, moderate or severe exacerbations occurred in 66 of 286 (23.1%) patients. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, ICS-containing inhaler use was not associated with the development of exacerbation, even in the subgroup with a high probability of asthma–COPD overlap. Conclusion: Although about one-third of patients with GOLD group A COPD were using ICS-containing inhalers, use of ICS was not associated with a reduction in the future development of exacerbation.

Discontinuation of Inhaled Corticosteroids from Triple Therapy in COPD: Effects on Major Outcomes in Real World Clinical Practice

Recent reports provide evidence-based guidelines for the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in COPD, but data on patients treated with ICS-based triple therapy are sparse and contradictory. We assessed the effect of ICS discontinuation on the incidence of severe exacerbation and pneumonia in a real-world population of patients with COPD who initiated triple therapy. We identified a cohort of patients with COPD treated with LAMA-LABA-ICS triple therapy during 2002-2018, age 50 or older, from the UK's CPRD database. Subjects who discontinued ICS were matched 1:1 on time-conditional propensity scores to those continuing ICS and followed for one year. Hazard ratios (HR) of severe exacerbation and pneumonia were estimated using Cox regression. The cohort included 42,667 patients who discontinued ICS matched to 42,667 who continued ICS treatment. The hazard ratio of a severe exacerbation with ICS discontinuation relative to ICS continuation was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78-0.95), while for severe pneumonia it was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.88-1.05). The incidence of severe exacerbation after ICS discontinuation was numerically higher than after continuation among patients with two or more exacerbations in the prior year (HR 1.09; 95% CI: 0.94-1.26) and among those with FEV₁ <30% predicted (HR 1.29; 95% CI: 1.04-1.59). This large real-world study in the clinical setting of COPD treatment suggests that certain patients on triple therapy can be safely withdrawn from ICS and remain on bronchodilator therapy. As residual confounding cannot be ruled out, ICS discontinuation is not warranted for patients with multiple exacerbations and with very severe airway obstruction.

Fluticasone-Based versus Budesonide-Based Triple Therapies in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

Triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is recommended for some patients, but the inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may differ in effectiveness and safety. We compared budesonide-based and fluticasone-based triple therapy given in two inhalers on the incidence of exacerbation, mortality and severe pneumonia, using an observational study approach. We identified a cohort of patients with COPD, new users of triple therapy given in two inhalers during 2002-2018, age 50 or older, from the UK's CPRD database, and followed for one year. The hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation, all-cause death and pneumonia was estimated using the Cox regression model, weighted by fine stratification of the propensity score of treatment initiation. The cohort included 29,716 new users of fluticasone-based triple therapy and 9,646 of budesonide-based. The HR of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with budesonide-based triple therapy was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-1.03), relative to fluticasone-based, while for a severe exacerbation it was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87-1.07). The incidence of all-cause death was lower with budesonide-based therapy among patients with no prior exacerbations (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.66-0.98). The HR of severe pneumonia with budesonide-based therapy was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.75-0.95). In a real-world clinical setting of COPD treatment, budesonide-based triple therapy given in two inhalers was generally as effective at reducing exacerbations as fluticasone-based triple therapy. However, the budesonide-based triple therapy was associated with a lower incidence of severe pneumonia and possibly also of all-cause death, especially among patients with no prior exacerbations for whom triple therapy is not recommended.

Home Dust Allergen Exposure Is Associated with Outcomes among Sensitized Individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rationale: Environmental exposures have been associated with adverse outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Approximately one-third of individuals with COPD have allergic sensitization, but it is unknown whether exposure to allergens in the home is associated with outcomes. Objectives: To determine the prevalence and associations of allergen sensitization with exposure to common indoor allergens with symptoms and exacerbation risk in COPD. Methods: Allergen sensitization to five common indoor allergens was assessed in former smokers with COPD. Home settled dust was assessed for presence of corresponding allergens. Sensitization and exposure status was determined and associations evaluated in adjusted models with longitudinal outcomes including symptoms, lung function, and exacerbations. Interactions were assessed between sensitization/exposure status and lung function. Measurements and Main Results: One hundred eighty-three individuals studied were on average 67.3 years of age (SD, 8.22) with average FEV1 of 53.2% (SD, 17.6%). Seventy-seven percent of participants were exposed to at least one tested allergen, and 17% had sensitization with corresponding allergen exposure. After adjustment, sensitization with exposure was associated with lower lung function (β, -8.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], -14.80 to -1.77), higher St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire Total Score (β, 6.71; 95% CI, 0.17 to 13.25), and higher exacerbation risk (odds ratio, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.11 to 4.79). Associations appeared to be more pronounced among individuals with lower lung function. Conclusions: Allergen exposures are common in COPD and associated with adverse outcomes among those with concomitant allergen sensitization. This study establishes allergens as an important home exposure that potentially could be addressed with comprehensive home environmental modification strategies to improve COPD outcomes.

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: Updated Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity.

Discordant diagnostic criteria for pneumonia in COPD trials: a review

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a class effect of increasing pneumonia risk in patients with COPD. However, pneumonia incidence varies widely across clinical trials of ICS use in COPD. This review clarifies methodological differences in defining and recording pneumonia events in these trials and discusses factors that could contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. Literature searches and screening yielded 40 relevant references for inclusion. Methods used to capture pneumonia events in these studies included investigator-reported pneumonia adverse events, standardised list of signs or symptoms, radiographic confirmation of suspected cases and/or confirmation by an independent clinical end-point committee. In general, more stringent pneumonia diagnosis criteria led to lower reported pneumonia incidence rates. In addition, studies varied in design and population characteristics, including exacerbation history and lung function, factors that probably contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. As such, cross-trial comparisons are problematic. A minimal set of standardised criteria for diagnosis and reporting of pneumonia should be used in COPD studies, as well as reporting of patients’ pneumonia history at baseline, to allow comparison of pneumonia rates between trials. Currently, within-trial comparison of ICS-containing versus non-ICS-containing treatments is the appropriate method to assess the influence of ICS on pneumonia incidence.

Trials of ICS in COPD use varying methods of reporting pneumonia incidence, which influence the interpretation of results. A minimal set of standardised criteria for pneumonia diagnosis would allow comparison of pneumonia incidence between trials.https://bit.ly/3nbkdoL

Blood eosinophils to guide inhaled maintenance therapy in a primary care COPD population

Blood eosinophils are a potentially useful biomarker for guiding inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment decisions in COPD. We investigated whether existing blood eosinophil counts predict benefit from initiation of ICS compared to bronchodilator therapy.

We used routinely collected data from UK primary care in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Participants were aged ≥40 years with COPD, were ICS-naïve and starting a new inhaled maintenance medication (intervention group: ICS; comparator group: long-acting bronchodilator, non-ICS). Primary outcome was time to first exacerbation, compared between ICS and non-ICS groups, stratified by blood eosinophils (“high” ≥150 cells·µL−1 and “low” <150 cells·µL−1).

Out of 9475 eligible patients, 53.9% initiated ICS and 46.1% non-ICS treatment with no difference in eosinophils between treatment groups (p=0.71). Exacerbation risk was higher in patients prescribed ICS than those prescribed non-ICS treatment, but with a lower risk in those with high eosinophils (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.98–1.10) than low eosinophils (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09–1.31) (p-value for interaction 0.01). Risk of pneumonia hospitalisation with ICS was greatest in those with low eosinophils (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05–1.50; p-value for interaction 0.04). Results were similar whether the most recent blood eosinophil count or the mean of blood eosinophil counts was used.

In a primary care population, the most recent blood eosinophil count could be used to guide initiation of ICS in COPD patients. We suggest that ICS should be considered in those with higher eosinophils and avoided in those with lower eosinophils (<150 cells·µL−1).

Escalation Time to Open Triple Combination Therapy from the Initiation of LAMA versus ICS/LABA in COPD Management: Findings from Comparing the Incidence of Tiotropium and ICS/LABA in Real-World Use in South Korea (CITRUS) Study

Background: bronchodilators are the key treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), however, inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs)/long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) are widely prescribed. We compared the escalation time to open triple combination therapy between long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA) and ICS/LABA in COPD management. Methods: this retrospective study included COPD patients selected from the National Health Insurance Service of South Korea from January 2005 to April 2015. The primary outcome was the escalation time to triple therapy in patients who initially received LAMA or ICS/LABA. Other outcomes included risk factors predisposing escalation to triple combination therapy. Results: a total of 2444 patients were assigned to the LAMA or ICS/LABA groups. The incidences of triple combination therapy in the LAMA and ICS/LABA groups were 81.0 and 139.8 per 1000 person-years, respectively (p < 0.001); the median times to triple therapy escalation were 281 and 207 days, respectively (p = 0.03). Treatment with ICS/LABA showed a higher risk of triple therapy escalation compared to LAMA (hazard ratio (HR), 1.601; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.402–1.829). The associated risk factor was male sex. (HR, 1.564; 95% CI, 1.352–1.809). Conclusions: the initiation of COPD treatment with LAMA is associated with a reduced escalation time to triple therapy compared with ICS/LABA.

Evaluating a Cox marginal structural model to assess the comparative effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids versus no inhaled corticosteroid treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE

To evaluate the potential of a Cox marginal structural model (MSM) to estimate the time-varying causal inference of a known clinical trial association where the effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroid- (ICS-) versus non-ICS-containing treatments has been compared in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This retrospective study from 2006 to 2016 used linked data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink-GOLD, Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics mortality. A Cox MSM, incorporating a new-user design, was deemed capable of replicating a clinical trial-like pathway. Repeated outcomes for exacerbation events and stabilised weights were used to include time-varying and fixed covariate exposures.

RESULTS

Of 45,958 patients, 55% were male; 52% had moderate COPD. ICS-treated patients had a higher incidence of comorbid asthma than non-ICS-treated patients. Adjusted hazard risk ratios for any exacerbation event: ICS/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) versus long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), 1.07 (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.10); ICS/LABA versus LABA/LAMA, 1.05 (1.00-1.10); ICS/LABA/LAMA versus LAMA, 1.04 (1.01-1.06); ICS/LABA/LAMA versus LABA/LAMA 1.02 (0.97-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

The Cox MSM was not able to fully demonstrate results consistent with the previously established benefits of ICS-containing treatments seen in clinical trials. Future studies should continue to investigate causal inference methods and their capability to estimate the long-term outcomes of treatment in COPD.

Comparing initial LABA-ICS inhalers in COPD: Real-world effectiveness and safety

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with multiple exacerbations and eosinophilia recommend a long-acting beta₂-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combined inhaler, with no distinction between different agents. We compared the effectiveness and safety of budesonide-formoterol versus fluticasone-salmeterol on the incidence of exacerbations and pneumonia in a real-world clinical practice setting of COPD, particularly considering eosinophilia, an important marker for ICS effectiveness.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of patients with COPD, new users of a LABA-ICS during 2002-2018, age 50 or older, from the UK's CPRD database, and followed for one year. The hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation and of pneumonia was estimated using the Cox regression model, weighted by fine stratification of the propensity score of treatment initiation.

RESULTS

The cohort included 24,973 of budesonide-formoterol and 61,251 initiators of fluticasone-salmeterol. The adjusted HR of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with budesonide-formoterol relative to fluticasone-salmeterol was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.01), while for severe exacerbation it was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99). The HR of severe pneumonia with budesonide-formoterol was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83), and was particularly decreased with higher blood eosinophil count, dropping to 0.62 (95% CI: 0.51-0.77) at >300 cells/μL.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world clinical setting of COPD treatment, a budesonide-formoterol inhaler was generally as effective at reducing the incidence of moderate-severe exacerbations as fluticasone-salmeterol. However, budesonide-formoterol was more effective than fluticasone-salmeterol at reducing the incidence of severe exacerbation and the risk of severe pneumonia, particularly in patients with higher blood eosinophil counts.

Unmet need in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the Middle East and Africa region: An expert panel consensus

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has a significant impact on healthcare systems and health-related quality of life. Increased prevalence of smoking is an important factor contributing to high burden of COPD in the Middle East and Africa (MEA). Several other factors including sedentary lifestyle, urbanization, second-hand smoke, air pollution, and occupational exposure are also responsible for the upsurge of COPD in the MEA. Frequent COPD exacerbations accelerate disease progression, progressively deteriorate the lung function, and negatively affect quality of life. This consensus is based on review of the published evidence, international and regional guidelines, and insights provided by the expert committee members from the MEA region. Spirometry, though the gold standard for diagnosis, is often unavailable and/or underutilized leading to underdiagnosis of COPD in primary care settings. Low adherence to the treatment guidelines and delayed use of appropriate combination therapy including triple therapy are additional barriers in management of COPD in MEA. It is necessary to recognize COPD as a screenable condition and develop easy and simple screening tools to facilitate early diagnosis. Knowledge of the disease symptomatology at patient and physician level and adherence to the international or regional guidelines are important to create awareness about harmful effects of smoking and develop national guidelines to focus on prevention on COPD. Implementation of vaccination program and pulmonary rehabilitation are equally valuable to manage patients with COPD at local and regional level. We present recommendations made by the expert panel for improved screening, diagnosis, and management of COPD in MEA.

Triple Inhaler versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Effectiveness on Mortality

Randomized trials of triple therapy including an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) reported remarkable benefits on mortality compared with dual bronchodilators, likely resulting from ICS withdrawal at randomization. We compared triple therapy with dual bronchodilator combinations on major COPD outcomes in a real-world clinical practice setting. We identified a cohort of COPD patients, age 50 or older, treated during 2002-2018, from the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients initiating treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), a long-acting beta₂-agonist (LABA) and an ICS on the same day, were compared with patients initiating a LAMA and LABA, weighted by fine stratification of propensity scores. Subjects were followed-up one year for all-cause mortality, severe exacerbation and pneumonia. The cohort included 117,729 new-users of LAMA-LABA-ICS and 26,666 of LAMA-LABA. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of all-cause mortality with LAMA-LABA-ICS compared with LAMA-LABA was 1.17 (95% CI: 1.04-1.31) while for severe exacerbation and pneumonia it was 1.19 (1.08-1.32) and 1.29 (1.16-1.45) respectively. However, mortality was not elevated with triple therapy among patients with asthma diagnosis (HR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.74-1.34), with two or more prior exacerbations (HR 0.88; 95% CI: 0.70-1.11), and with FEV₁ percent predicted >30%. In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, triple therapy initiation was not more effective than dual bronchodilators at preventing all-cause mortality and severe COPD exacerbations. Triple therapy may be unsafe among patients without prior exacerbations, in whom ICS are not recommended, with no asthma diagnosis and with very severe airflow obstruction.

Medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a historical non-interventional cohort study with validation against RCT results

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment is informed by randomised controlled trial results, but it is unclear if these findings apply to people excluded from these trials. We used data from the TORCH (TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health) randomised controlled trial to validate non-interventional methods for assessing the clinical effectiveness of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, before applying these methods to the analysis of people who would have been excluded from TORCH.

OBJECTIVES

To validate the use of non-interventional Clinical Practice Research Datalink data and methods for estimating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment effects against trial results, and, using validated methods, to determine treatment effects in people who would have been excluded from the TORCH trial.

DESIGN

A historical non-interventional cohort design, including validation against randomised controlled trial results.

SETTING

The UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

PARTICIPANTS

People aged ≥ 18 years with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease registered in Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD between January 2000 and January 2017. For objective 1, we prepared a cohort that was analogous to the TORCH trial cohort by applying TORCH trial inclusion/exclusion criteria followed by individual matching to TORCH trial participants. For objectives 2 and 3, we prepared cohorts that were analogous to the TORCH trial that, nevertheless, would not have been eligible for the TORCH trial because of age, asthma, comorbidity or mild disease.

INTERVENTIONS

The long-acting beta-2 agonist and inhaled corticosteroid combination product Seretide (GlaxoSmithKline plc) [i.e. fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol (FP-SAL)] compared with (1) no FP-SAL exposure or (2) exposure to salmeterol (i.e. the long-acting beta-2 agonist) only.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Exacerbations, mortality, pneumonia and time to treatment change.

RESULTS

For objective 1, the exacerbation rate ratio was comparable to that in the TORCH trial for FP-SAL compared with salmeterol (0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.97, vs. TORCH trial 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 0.95), but not for FP-SAL compared with no FP-SAL (1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.42, vs. TORCH trial 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.81). Active comparator results were also consistent with the TORCH trial for mortality (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.32, vs. TORCH trial hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.13) and pneumonia (risk ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.87, vs. TORCH trial risk ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 1.73). For objectives 2 and 3, active comparator results were consistent with the TORCH trial for exacerbations, with the exception of people with milder chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, in whom we observed a stronger protective association (risk ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.70, vs. TORCH trial risk ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.97). For the analysis of mortality, we saw a lack of association with being prescribed FP-SAL (vs. being prescribed salmeterol), with the exception of those with prior asthma, for whom we observed an increase in mortality (hazard ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.85, vs. TORCH trial-analogous HR 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Routinely collected electronic health record data can be used to successfully measure chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment effects when comparing two treatments, but not for comparisons between active treatment and no treatment. Analyses involving patients who would have been excluded from trials mostly suggests that treatment effects for FP-SAL are similar to trial effects, although further work is needed to characterise a small increased risk of death in those with concomitant asthma.

LIMITATIONS

Some of our analyses had small numbers.

FUTURE WORK

The differences in treatment effects that we found should be investigated further in other data sets. Currently recommended chronic obstructive pulmonary disease inhaled combination therapy (other than FP-SAL) should also be investigated using these methods.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Monocyte Count as a Prognostic Biomarker in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Rationale: There is an urgent need for simple, cost-effective prognostic biomarkers for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF); biomarkers that show potential include monocyte count. Objectives: We used pooled data from pirfenidone and IFNγ-1b trials to explore the association between monocyte count and prognosis in patients with IPF. Methods: This retrospective pooled analysis included patients (active and placebo arms) from the following four phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trials: ASCEND (NCT01366209), CAPACITY (NCT00287729 and NCT00287716), and INSPIRE (NCT00075998). Outcomes included IPF progression (≥10% absolute decline in FVC% predicted, ≥50 m decline in 6-minute-walk distance, or death), all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality over 1 year. The relationship between monocyte count (defined as time-dependent) and outcomes was assessed using bivariate and multivariable models. Measurements and Main Results: This analysis included 2,067 patients stratified by monocyte count (at baseline: <0.60 × 109 cells/L [n = 1,609], 0.60 to <0.95 × 109 cells/L [n = 408], and ≥0.95 × 109 cells/L [n = 50]). In adjusted analyses, a higher proportion of patients with monocyte counts of 0.60 to <0.95 × 109 cells/L or ≥0.95 × 109 cells/L versus <0.60 × 109 cells/L experienced IPF progression (P = 0.016 and P = 0.002, respectively), all-cause hospitalization (P = 0.030 and P = 0.003, respectively), and all-cause mortality (P = 0.005 and P < 0.001, respectively) over 1 year. Change in monocyte count from baseline was not associated with any of the outcomes over 1 year and did not appear to be affected by study treatment. Conclusions: In patients with IPF, elevated monocyte count was associated with increased risks of IPF progression, hospitalization, and mortality. Monocyte count may provide a simple and inexpensive prognostic biomarker in IPF.

Systematic review on long-term adverse effects of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of COPD

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are indicated for the prevention of exacerbations in COPD; however, a significant proportion of patients at low risk of exacerbations are treated with ICSs. We conducted a systematic review including a diversity of types of study designs and safety outcomes with the objective of describing the risk of adverse effects associated with the long-term use of ICSs in patients with COPD.A total of 90 references corresponding to 83 studies were included, including 26 randomised clinical trials (RCTs), 33 cohort studies, and 24 nested case-control (NCC) studies. Analysis of 19 RCTs showed that exposure to ICSs for ≥1 year increased the risk of pneumonia by 41% (risk ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.61). Additionally, cohort and NCC studies showed an association between ICSs and risk of tuberculosis and mycobacterial disease. There was a strong association between ICS use and local disorders such as oral candidiasis and dysphonia. The association between ICSs and the risk of diabetes and fractures was less clear and appeared significant only at high doses of ICSs.Since most patients with COPD are elderly and with frequent comorbidities, an adequate risk-benefit balance is crucial for the indication of ICSs.

Increased monocyte count and red cell distribution width as prognostic biomarkers in patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Background

Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) represents a chronic lung disease with unpredictable course.

Methods

We aimed to investigate prognostic performance of complete blood count parameters in IPF. Treatment-naïve patients with IPF were retrospectively enrolled from two independent cohorts (derivation and validation) and split into subgroups (high and low) based on median baseline monocyte count and red cell distribution width (RDW).

Results

Overall, 489 patients (derivation cohort: 300, validation cohort: 189) were analyzed. In the derivation cohort, patients with monocyte count ≥ 0.60 K/μL had significantly lower median FVC%pred [75.0, (95% CI 71.3–76.7) vs. 80.9, (95% CI 77.5–83.1), (P = 0.01)] and DLCO%pred [47.5, (95% CI 44.3–52.3) vs. 53.0, (95% CI 48.0–56.7), (P = 0.02)] than patients with monocyte count < 0.60 K/μL. Patients with RDW ≥ 14.1% had significantly lower median FVC%pred [75.5, (95% CI 71.2–79.2) vs. 78.3, (95% CI 76.0–81.0), (P = 0.04)] and DLCO%pred [45.4, (95% CI 43.3–50.5) vs. 53.0, (95% CI 50.8–56.8), (P = 0.008)] than patients with RDW < 14.1%. Cut-off thresholds from the derivation cohort were applied to the validation cohort with similar discriminatory value, as indicated by significant differences in median DLCO%pred between patients with high vs. low monocyte count [37.8, (95% CI 35.5–41.1) vs. 45.5, (95% CI 41.9–49.4), (P < 0.001)] and RDW [37.9, (95% CI 33.4–40.7) vs. 44.4, (95% CI 41.5–48.9), (P < 0.001)]. Patients with high monocyte count and RDW of the validation cohort exhibited a trend towards lower median FVC%pred (P = 0.09) and significantly lower median FVC%pred (P = 0.001), respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis in the derivation cohort demonstrated higher all-cause mortality in patients with high (≥ 0.60 K/μL) vs. low monocyte count (< 0.60 K/μL) [HR 2.05, (95% CI 1.19–3.53), (P = 0.01)].

Conclusions

Increased monocyte count and RDW may represent negative prognostic biomarkers in patients with IPF.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-021-01725-9.

Effectiveness and Safety of COPD Maintenance Therapy with Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus LABA/ICS in a US Claims Database

Introduction

In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), treatment with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves lung function versus LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). To investigate whether LAMA/LABA could provide better clinical outcomes than LABA/ICS, this non-interventional database study assessed the risk of COPD exacerbations, pneumonia, and escalation to triple therapy in patients with COPD initiating maintenance therapy with tiotropium/olodaterol versus any LABA/ICS combination.

Methods

Administrative healthcare claims and laboratory results data from the US HealthCore Integrated Research Database^sm were evaluated for patients with COPD initiating tiotropium/olodaterol versus LABA/ICS treatment (January 2013–March 2019). Patients were aged at least 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD (but not asthma) at cohort entry. A Cox proportional hazard regression model was used (as-treated analysis) to assess risk of COPD exacerbation, community-acquired pneumonia, and escalation to triple therapy, both individually and as a combined risk of any one of these events. Potential imbalance of confounding factors between cohorts was handled using fine stratification, reweighting, and trimming by exposure propensity score (high-dimensional); subgroup analyses were conducted on the basis of blood eosinophil levels and exacerbation history.

Results

The total population consisted of 61,985 patients (tiotropium/olodaterol n = 2684; LABA/ICS n = 59,301); after reweighting, the total was 42,953 patients (tiotropium/olodaterol n = 2600; LABA/ICS n = 40,353; mean age 65 years; female 54.5%). Patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus LABA/ICS experienced a reduction in the risk of COPD exacerbations (adjusted hazard ratio 0.76 [95% confidence interval 0.68, 0.85]), pneumonia (0.74 [0.57, 0.97]), escalation to triple therapy (0.22 [0.19, 0.26]), and any one of these events (0.45 [0.41, 0.49]); the combined risk was similar irrespective of baseline eosinophils and exacerbation history.

Conclusions

In patients with COPD, tiotropium/olodaterol was associated with a lower risk of COPD exacerbations, pneumonia, and escalation to triple therapy versus LABA/ICS, both individually and in combination; the combined risk was reduced irrespective of baseline eosinophils or exacerbation history.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04138758 (registered 23 October 2019).

Graphic Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01646-5.

Real world effects of COPD medications: a cohort study with validation against results from randomised controlled trials

Real-world data provide the potential for generating evidence on drug treatment effects in groups excluded from trials, but rigorous, validated methodology for doing so is lacking. We investigated whether non-interventional methods applied to real-world data could reproduce results from the landmark TORCH COPD trial.We performed a historical cohort study (2000-2017) of COPD drug treatment effects in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Two control groups were selected from CPRD by applying TORCH inclusion/exclusion criteria and 1:1 matching to TORCH participants, as follows. Control group 1: people with COPD not prescribed fluticasone propionate (FP)-salmeterol (SAL); control group 2: people with COPD prescribed SAL only. FP-SAL exposed groups were then selected from CPRD by propensity score matching to each control group. Outcomes studied were COPD exacerbations, death from any cause and pneumonia.2652 FP-SAL exposed people were propensity score matched to 2652 FP-SAL unexposed people while 991 FP-SAL exposed people were propensity score matched to 991 SAL exposed people. Exacerbation rate ratio was comparable to TORCH for FP-SAL versus SAL (0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.97 versus 0.88, 0.81-0.95) but not for FP-SAL versus no FP-SAL (1.30, 1.19-1.42 versus 0.75, 0.69-0.81). In addition, active comparator results were consistent with TORCH for mortality (hazard ratio 0.93, 0.65-1.32 versus 0.93, 0.77-1.13) and pneumonia (risk ratio 1.39, 1.04-1.87 versus 1.47, 1.25-1.73).We obtained very similar results to the TORCH trial for active comparator analyses, but were unable to reproduce placebo-controlled results. Application of these validated methods for active comparator analyses to groups excluded from randomised controlled trials provides a practical way for contributing to the evidence base and supporting COPD treatment decisions.

Comparative Effectiveness of Initial LAMA versus LABA in COPD: Real-World Cohort Study

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommendations for the initial bronchodilator to use in newly diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are based on trials of patients with longstanding disease and treatment. We compared the real world effectiveness of initial treatment with long-acting muscarinic agents (LAMA) versus long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA) on the incidence of exacerbations in newly diagnosed patients. We identified a cohort of patients with COPD, new users of a LAMA or LABA (not combined with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)) during 2002-2018, age 50 or older, from the UK's CPRD database, and followed for one year. The hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation estimated using the Cox regression model, weighted by fine stratification of propensity scores. The cohort included 40,538 initiators of LAMA and 10,680 of LABA. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of a first moderate or severe exacerbation comparing LAMA with LABA initiation was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.90-1.02), while for severe exacerbation it was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.75-1.12). The incidence of exacerbation on LAMA was significantly lower than on LABA (HR 0.88; 95% CI: 0.80-0.96) among patients with a prior exacerbation, and the HR of exacerbation increased with percent predicted FEV₁. This study in the real world clinical setting of COPD treatment found that using a LAMA or a LABA (no ICS) as the initial bronchodilator is generally as effective at reducing exacerbation incidence and frequency. However, a LAMA may be more effective in patients with prior exacerbations, which supports the GOLD recommendations for newly diagnosed COPD. The role of airway obstruction on the effectiveness of bronchodilators warrants further investigation.

COPD patients prescribed inhaled corticosteroid in primary care: time for re-assessment based on exacerbation rate and blood eosinophils?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy for COPD should be guided by exacerbations and blood-eosinophils according to the GOLD 2020 strategy document. In the present study, we applied these recent recommendations in a large cohort of COPD patients recruited from general practice.

METHODS

The participating general practitioners (n = 144) recruited patients with a diagnosis of COPD currently prescribed ICS and reported data on exacerbation history and blood-eosinophils. Clinical variables were compared using two-sample t-tests.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 1,567 COPD patients (44% males and mean age 72 years). In the past 12 months, 849 (54%) of the COPD patients currently prescribed ICS had no exacerbation, whereas 383 (24%) and 328 (21%) patients, respectively, had a history of one exacerbation and two or more exacerbations. Compared to patients with one or no exacerbation, patients with ≥ 2 exacerbations (21%) per year reported more dyspnea (p < 0.001) and had higher degree of airflow obstruction (p < 0.001). Among patients with no and at least one exacerbation within the preceding 12 months, 30% and 26%, respectively, had a blood-eosinophil count ≥ 0.3 × 109/L. In patients with two or more exacerbations within the last 12 months, 77% had a blood-eosinophil count of ≥ 0.1 × 109/L. Furthermore, 166 patients (11%) had at least one hospital admission due to COPD exacerbation, and a blood-eosinophil count of ≥ 0.1 × 109/L.

CONCLUSION

This study of a large cohort of COPD patients currently prescribed inhaled corticosteroids suggests the need for re-evaluating the management strategy to increase benefit and reduce adverse effects of ICS treatment in COPD patients managed in primary care.

Association Between Blood Eosinophils and Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To explore the relationship between the blood eosinophil concentrations in the early stage and mortality in critically ill patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

METHODS

Patient data were extracted from the MIMIC-III V1.4 database. Only the acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with the first measurement time of blood eosinophil concentrations (%) between 24 hours before admission and 24 hours after admission was included. The logistic regression model was used to analyze the association between eosinophil and outcomes.

RESULTS

1019 patients were included in the study. Two multivariate regression models were built. The adjusted odds ratio of in-hospital mortality, in-ICU mortality, hospital length of stay and ICU length of stay for initial blood eosinophil concentrations in model 1 (adjusted for SAPS Ⅱ, cardiac arrhythmias, solid tumor, metastatic cancer, liver disease, neutrophils) were 0.792 (95% CI: 0.643-0.976, p=0.028), 0.812 (95% CI: 0.645-1.022, p=0.076), 0.847 (95% CI: 0.772-0.930, p=0.001) and 0.914 (95% CI: 0.836-1.000, p=0.049) respectively. Meanwhile, in model 2 (adjusted for SOFA score, age, cardiac arrhythmias, solid tumor, metastatic cancer, liver disease, neutrophils) ORs were 0.785 (95% CI: 0.636-0.968, p=0.024), 0.807 (95% CI: 0.641-1.016, p=0.068), 0.854 (95% CI: 0.778-0.939, p=0.001) and 0.917 (95% CI: 0.838-1.004, p=0.060) respectively. The area under the ROC curve for eosinophil initial was 0.608 (95% CI: 0.559-0.657). The discriminatory eosinophil thresholds were 0.35% (sensitivity=0.59, specificity=0.61) for in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Increased blood eosinophils were associated with decreased in-hospital mortality and shorten hospital length of stay in critically ill patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A discriminatory eosinophil threshold of 0.35% for mortality was found, but further studies were needed to verify it.

Targeting eosinophils in respiratory diseases: Biological axis, emerging therapeutics and treatment modalities

Eosinophils are bi-lobed, multi-functional innate immune cells with diverse cell surface receptors that regulate local immune and inflammatory responses. Several inflammatory and infectious diseases are triggered with their build up in the blood and tissues. The mobilization of eosinophils into the lungs is regulated by a cascade of processes guided by Th2 cytokine generating T-cells. Recruitment of eosinophils essentially leads to a characteristic immune response followed by airway hyperresponsiveness and remodeling, which are hallmarks of chronic respiratory diseases. By analysing the dynamic interactions of eosinophils with their extracellular environment, which also involve signaling molecules and tissues, various therapies have been invented and developed to target respiratory diseases. Having entered clinical testing, several eosinophil targeting therapeutic agents have shown much promise and have further bridged the gap between theory and practice. Moreover, researchers now have a clearer understanding of the roles and mechanisms of eosinophils. These factors have successfully assisted molecular biologists to block specific pathways in the growth, migration and activation of eosinophils. The primary purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the eosinophil biology with a special emphasis on potential pharmacotherapeutic targets. The review also summarizes promising eosinophil-targeting agents, along with their mechanisms and rationale for use, including those in developmental pipeline, in clinical trials, or approved for other respiratory disorders.

Asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome

Overlap of asthma and chronic obstructive lung disease (ACO) in patients with obstructive lung disease is growing in recognition, though there is no consistent agreement on the diagnostic criteria for the disease process. Patients with ACO have distinct clinical characteristics and trajectories, which are representative of a heterogenous, multifactorial, and incompletely understood inflammatory pathophysiology. Current treatment strategies are focused on titration of inhaled therapies such as long-acting bronchodilators, with increasing interest in the use of targeted biologic therapies aimed at the underlying inflammatory mechanisms. Future directions for research will focus on elucidating the varied inflammatory signatures leading to ACO, the development of consistent diagnostic criteria and biomarkers of disease, and improving the clinical management with an eye toward targeted therapies.

Extrafine Beclometasone Dipropionate/Formoterol Fumarate vs Double Bronchodilation Therapy in Patients with COPD: A Historical Real-World Non-Inferiority Study

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of initiating extrafine beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate (BDP/FF) versus double bronchodilation (long-acting beta-agonists [LABA]/long-acting muscarinic antagonists [LAMA]) among patients with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations.

Patients and Methods

A historical cohort study was conducted using data from the UK's Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Patients with COPD ≥40 years at diagnosis were included if they initiated extrafine BDP/FF or any LABA/LAMA double therapy as a step-up from no maintenance therapy or monotherapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LAMA, or LABA and a history of ≥2 moderate/severe exacerbations in the previous two years. The primary outcome was exacerbation rate from therapy initiation until a relevant therapy change or end of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included rate of acute respiratory events, acute oral corticosteroids (OCS) courses, and antibiotic prescriptions with lower respiratory indication, modified Medical Research Council score (mMRC) ≥2, and time to first pneumonia diagnosis. The non-inferiority boundary was set at a relative difference of 15% on the ratio scale. Five potential treatment effect modifiers were investigated.

Results

A total of 1735 patients initiated extrafine BDP/FF and 2450 patients initiated LABA/LAMA. The mean age was 70 years, 51% were male, 41% current smokers, and 85% had FEV₁ <80% predicted. Extrafine BDP/FF showed non-inferiority to LABA/LAMA for rate of exacerbations (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.01 [95% CI 0.94-1.09]), acute respiratory events (IRR = 0.98 [0.92-1.04]), acute OCS courses (IRR = 1.01 [0.91-1.11]), and antibiotic prescriptions (IRR = 0.99 [0.90-1.09]), but not for mMRC (OR = 0.93 [0.69-1.27]) or risk of pneumonia (HR = 0.50 [0.14-1.73]). None of the a priori defined effect modifier candidates affected the comparative effectiveness.

Conclusion

This study found that stepping up to extrafine BDP/FF from no maintenance or monotherapy was not inferior to stepping up to double bronchodilation therapy in patients with a history of exacerbations.

Pharmacology and Therapeutics of Bronchodilators Revisited

Bronchodilators remain the cornerstone of the treatment of airway disorders such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is therefore considerable interest in understanding how to optimize the use of our existing classes of bronchodilator and in identifying novel classes of bronchodilator drugs. However, new classes of bronchodilator have proved challenging to develop because many of these have no better efficacy than existing classes of bronchodilator and often have unacceptable safety profiles. Recent research has shown that optimization of bronchodilation occurs when both arms of the autonomic nervous system are affected through antagonism of muscarinic receptors to reduce the influence of parasympathetic innervation of the lung and through stimulation of β ₂-adrenoceptors (β ₂-ARs) on airway smooth muscle with β ₂-AR-selective agonists to mimic the sympathetic influence on the lung. This is currently achieved by use of fixed-dose combinations of inhaled long-acting β ₂-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists (LAMAs). Due to the distinct mechanisms of action of LAMAs and LABAs, the additive/synergistic effects of using these drug classes together has been extensively investigated. More recently, so-called "triple inhalers" containing fixed-dose combinations of both classes of bronchodilator (dual bronchodilation) and an inhaled corticosteroid in the same inhaler have been developed. Furthermore, a number of so-called "bifunctional drugs" having two different primary pharmacological actions in the same molecule are under development. This review discusses recent advancements in knowledge on bronchodilators and bifunctional drugs for the treatment of asthma and COPD. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Since our last review in 2012, there has been considerable research to identify novel classes of bronchodilator drugs, to further understand how to optimize the use of the existing classes of bronchodilator, and to better understand the role of bifunctional drugs in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Absolute Blood Eosinophil Counts to Guide Inhaled Corticosteroids Therapy Among Patients with COPD: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2019 recommends the use of absolute blood eosinophil count as a guide for the escalation and de-escalation of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the pharmacological management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the risk of moderate or severe exacerbations among patients escalating and de-escalating ICS therapy by absolute blood eosinophil thresholds in this systematic review.

METHODS

Through a comprehensive literature search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinical trial sites up to April 2019, we identified relevant studies. We used generic inverse variance method with fixed-effects estimates to compare the risk of moderate or severe exacerbations among COPD patients with elevated blood eosinophil counts exposed to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) versus non-ICS treatments groups expressed as risk ratios.

RESULTS

Ten studies (8 randomised control trials and 2 observational studies) were included, with a total of 85,059 COPD patients. In our pooled analysis, we found an overall reduction in risk of moderate or severe exacerbations in patients with absolute blood eosinophil thresholds ranging from ≥ 100 to ≥ 340 cells/µL among patients escalating ICS (RR, 0.77, 95% CI, 0.73-0.81). For studies evaluating the effects of de-escalation of ICS on moderate to severe exacerbations using blood eosinophil thresholds of ≥ 300 to ≥ 340 cells/µL had an increased risk of moderate or severe exacerbations following the de-escalation of ICS (RR, 1.66, 95% CI, 1.31-2.10).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the validity of the recommended absolute blood eosinophil count thresholds for the escalation and de-escalation of ICS among COPD patients. However, this recommendation is for COPD patients with prior exacerbations rather than among newly diagnosed COPD patients as observed in this study. COPD patients with current or past history of asthma represent a unique phenotypic group which should be further evaluated.

Eosinophils in COPD-Current Concepts and Clinical Implications

In recent years, heterogeneity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) inflammatory patterns has been recognized as a basis for more precise treatment interventions because current therapies have limited effectiveness. Eosinophilic airway inflammation in COPD has become a subject of research interest as a potential treatment target for inhaled corticosteroid therapy. However, the role of eosinophils in COPD is still unclear, and it is unknown why only some patients with COPD develop eosinophilic airway inflammation. Induced sputum analysis is the most common method of assessing the type of airway inflammation. Accessibility to sputum induction, however, is limited in clinical practice, and blood eosinophils have been proposed to serve as a surrogate marker and treatment guide. Blood eosinophil count has been shown to poorly predict sputum eosinophilia, and, moreover, it seems to be fairly unstable and affected by various factors. Nevertheless, in several trials, blood eosinophil count appeared to predict good response to inhaled corticosteroids However, biologics targeting eosinophils do not appear to be effective in COPD. In this review, we briefly summarize the current knowledge on eosinophils in COPD pathogenesis. Then, we discuss the use of blood eosinophil count in COPD in relation to the recent Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease recommendations, their ability to predict sputum eosinophilia, and their potential role in guiding treatment.

Inhaled Corticosteroids in COPD: Trying to Make a Long Story Short

The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in long-term treatment of COPD has been a debated topic for a long time. According to the evidence produced till now, ICSs are presently advocated in combination with long-acting bronchodilators for high-risk symptomatic COPD patients with a history of frequent COPD exacerbations. However, the heterogeneity of COPD patients in terms of prevalent underlying disease, with its associated biological and functional characteristics, and different types of exacerbation makes this recommendation highly questionable. This review aims to discuss the usefulness of ICSs in the pharmacological management of COPD and trys to detect those aspects that may likely anticipate a beneficial response following their therapeutic use related to respiratory function, functional decline, prevention of exacerbation, and quality of life. In this respect, the BERN acronym, meaning Bronchiolitis, Eosinophilia, Responsiveness to bronchodilator, and Non-smoker, may be of practical utility to select among COPD patients those that can take more advantage from ICS adoption when positive and vice versa when negative.