Efficacy and safety of once-daily QVA149 compared with the free combination of once-daily tiotropium plus twice-daily formoterol in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD (QUANTIFY): a randomised, non-inferiority study

LABA/LAMA versus LABA/ICS fixed-dose combinations in the prevention of COPD exacerbations: a modeling analysis of literature aggregate data

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to quantitatively compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in preventing moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using public databases. The time course characteristics of the probability of a moderate or severe exacerbation in stable COPD patients treated with LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS FDCs were described by the parametric survival function. A random-effects model in a single-arm meta-analysis was used to analyze the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) and pneumonia.

RESULTS

Twenty studies including 23,955 participants were included. The proportion of participants with a history of COPD exacerbation (%) in the previous year and the postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) (%predicted) were important factors affecting drug efficacy. After adjusting the above factors to median levels of 100% and 45.5%, respectively, the moderate or severe exacerbation rates at 52 weeks for olodaterol/tiotropium, formoterol/budesonide, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, formoterol/glycopyrronium, vilanterol/fluticasone, salmeterol/fluticasone, and vilanterol/umeclidinium were 38.3%, 41.0%, 42.6%, 47.0%, 47.5%, 47.9%, and 53.0%, respectively. In terms of safety, significant differences were observed among drugs containing different LABA/LAMA FDCs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that not all LABA/LAMA FDCs were superior to LABA/ICS FDCs in safety and in preventing moderate or severe exacerbations in patients with stable COPD, providing important quantitative information for COPD-related guidelines.

Quantitative analysis of efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations in the treatment of stable COPD

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to quantitatively compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), especially in terms of their loss of efficacy in lung function.

METHODS

Randomized controlled clinical trials of LABA/LAMA FDCs for the treatment of stable COPD were comprehensively searched for in public databases. Pharmacodynamic models were established to describe the time course of the primary outcome [trough forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1)]. Secondary outcomes [COPD exacerbations, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI), and rescue medication use] and safety outcomes [mortality, serious adverse events (SAEs), and withdrawals due to adverse events (AEs)] were also compared via a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies involving 16,486 participants were included in this study. The results showed that in terms of primary outcome (change from baseline in trough FEV1), the efficacy of vilanterol/umeclidinium was the highest, while the efficacy of formoterol/aclidinium was the lowest, with a maximum effect value (Emax) of 0.185 L [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.173-0.197 L] and 0.119 L (95% CI: 0.103-0.135 L), respectively. The efficacy of other drugs, such as formoterol/glycopyrronium, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, and olodaterol/tiotropium, were comparable, and their Emax values were 0.150-0.177 L. Except for vilanterol/umeclidinium, the other four LABA/LAMA FDCs showed a certain degree of loss of efficacy. Compared with the efficacy at 2 days, the trough FEV1 (L) relative to baseline at 24 weeks decreased by 0.029-0.041 L. In terms of secondary outcomes, the efficacy of different LABA/LAMA FDCs was similar in TDI and rescue medication use. However, formoterol/aclidinium was better in preventing the COPD exacerbations, while vilanterol/umeclidinium was the best in terms of SGRQ. In addition, different LABA/LAMA FDCs and placebo had similar safety outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The present findings may provide necessary quantitative information for COPD medication guidelines.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

What conservative interventions can improve the long-term quality of life, depression, and anxiety of individuals with stable COPD? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Many conservative interventions are used in the management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It could be helpful for the prescribers to know what the evidence suggests about the effects of these interventions on the long-term quality of life (QoL), depression, and anxiety. This study aimed to summarize the rationale for the use of conservative interventions to improve the long-term QoL, depression, and anxiety in patients with stable COPD.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from database inception to December 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the long-term effects of conservative interventions on three parameters, including QoL, depression, and anxiety in patients with COPD were eligible for further analysis. To improve methodological rigor, only RCTs examining these parameters as primary outcomes were included. The standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects models. Quality of evidence was rated using the updated version of Van Tulder's criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight RCTs were identified. Regarding long-term depression, there was moderate evidence supporting cognitive behavioral therapy compared with usual care in patients with COPD; regarding the long-term QoL of patients with COPD, there was limited evidence supporting walking programs, supplementary sugarcane bagasse dietary fiber, roflumilast, and tiotropium.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive behavioral therapy is effective in alleviating the long-term depression of patients with COPD. Evidence for other interventions was insufficient, making it difficult to draw conclusions in terms of their effectiveness on the long-term QoL, depression, and anxiety.

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium affects lung function and cardiovascular events in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilators are the cornerstone for treating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD), although some studies have shown that dual bronchodilators may exacerbate incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. Here, we evaluated the cardiopulmonary safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) using a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases, using "indacaterol/glycopyrronium", "indacaterol/glycopyrrolate", "IND/GLY", "QVA149", "chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases", "COPD", "chronic obstructive airway disease", "chronic obstructive lung disease" as key words. Acute exacerbation of COPD and FEV₁ as indicators of pulmonary function and occurrence of hypertension, atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction and heart failure as indicators of cardiovascular safety.

RESULTS

A total of 23 articles, comprising 21,238 participants, were included in the analysis. FEV₁ values were significantly different compared to IND/GLY and single bronchodilator therapy (LABA or LAMA), with the MD 0.11 L (95%CI: 0.10-0.13, P<0.01). Hypertension was more frequent in the IND/GLY, than the single bronchodilator therapy group, although this difference was insignificant (IND/GLY vs LABA, RR=1.88, P = 0.09; IND/GLY vs LAMA, RR=1.42, P = 0.08; IND/GLY vs LABA+ICS, RR=1.85, P = 0.23). In addition, IND/GLY did not significantly increase the risk of myocardial infarction (IND/GLY vs LAMA or double therapy, total RR: 1.49, 95%CI: 0.72-3.08, P = 0.28), atrial fibrillation (IND/GLY vs LAMA, RR: 1.62, 95%CI: 0.64-4.10, P = 0.31) and heart failure (IND/GLY vs LAMA, RR: 0.40, 95%CI: 0.07-2.33, P = 0.31) in COPD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

IND/GLY significantly reduced incidence of acute COPD exacerbations, and slowed down the decline of FEV₁. Adequate safety measures are needed to control incidence of adverse cardiovascular events.

INTREPID: single- versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy for COPD in usual clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Real-world trial data comparing single- with multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in COPD patients are currently lacking. The effectiveness of once-daily single-inhaler fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) and MITT were compared in usual clinical care.

METHODS

INTREPID was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase IV effectiveness study comparing FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg via the ELLIPTA inhaler with a clinician's choice of any approved non-ELLIPTA MITT in usual COPD clinical practice in five European countries. Primary end-point was proportion of COPD Assessment Test (CAT) responders (≥2-unit decrease in CAT score from baseline) at week 24. Secondary end-points in a subpopulation included change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and percentage of patients making at least one critical error in inhalation technique at week 24. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

3092 patients were included (FF/UMEC/VI n=1545; MITT n=1547). The proportion of CAT responders at week 24 was significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI versus non-ELLIPTA MITT (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.13-1.51; p<0.001) and mean change from baseline in FEV1 was significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI (77 mL versus 28 mL; treatment difference 50 mL, 95% CI 26-73 mL; p<0.001). The percentage of patients with at least one critical error in inhalation technique was low in both groups (FF/UMEC/VI 6%; non-ELLIPTA MITT 3%). Safety profiles, including incidence of pneumonia serious adverse events, were similar between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In a usual clinical care setting, treatment with once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI resulted in significantly more patients gaining health status improvement and greater lung function improvement versus non-ELLIPTA MITT.

Direct Switch from Tiotropium to Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients in Korea

Background

Many chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients receiving monotherapy continue to experience symptoms, exacerbations and poor quality of life. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of direct switch from once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg to indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50 μg once daily in COPD patients in Korea.

Methods

This was a randomized, open-label, parallel group, 12-week trial in mild-to-moderate COPD patients who received TIO 18 μg once daily for ≥12 weeks prior to study initiation. Patients aged ≥40 years, with predicted post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) ≥50%, post-bronchodilator FEV₁/forced vital capacity <0.7 and smoking history of ≥10 pack-years were included. Eligible patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either IND/GLY or TIO. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of IND/GLY over TIO in pre-dose trough FEV₁ at week 12. Secondary endpoints included transition dyspnea index (TDI) focal score, COPD assessment test (CAT) total score, and rescue medication use following the 12-week treatment, and safety assessment.

Results

Of the 442 patients screened, 379 were randomized and 347 completed the study. IND/GLY demonstrated superiority in pre-dose trough FEV₁ versus TIO at week 12 (least squares mean treatment difference [Δ], 50 mL; p=0.013). Also, numerical improvements were observed with IND/GLY in the TDI focal score (Δ, 0.31), CAT total score (Δ, −0.81), and rescue medication use (Δ, −0.09 puffs/day). Both treatments were well tolerated by patients.

Conclusion

A direct switch from TIO to IND/GLY provided improvements in lung function and other patient-reported outcomes with an acceptable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate airflow limitation.

Comparisons of exacerbations and mortality among LAMA/LABA combinations in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Only few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for head-to-head comparison have been conducted between various combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs). Our study was conducted to compare acute exacerbation and all-cause mortality among different LAMA/LABA regimens using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library (search date: July 1, 2019). We included parallel-group RCTs comparing LAMA/LABA combinations with other inhaled drugs in the stable COPD for ≥ 48 weeks. Two different network geometries were used. The geometry of network (A) had nodes of individual drugs or their combination, while that of network (B) combined all other treatments except LAMA/LABA into each drug class. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO; CRD42019126753.

RESULTS

We included 16 RCTs involving a total of 39,065 patients with stable COPD. Six combinations of LAMA/LABA were identified: tiotropium/salmeterol, glycopyrrolate/indacaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol, tiotropium/olodaterol, aclidinium/formoterol, and glycopyrrolate/formoterol. We found that umeclidinium/vilanterol was associated with a lower risk of total exacerbations than other LAMA/LABAs in the NMA using network (A) (level of evidence: low or moderate). However, the significant differences were not present in the NMA of network (B). There were no significant differences among the LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of the number of moderate to severe exacerbations, all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

The present NMA including all available RCTs provided that there is no strong evidence suggesting different benefits among LAMA/LABAs in patients with stable COPD who have been followed up for 48 weeks or more.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO; CRD42019126753.

Early Clinically Important Improvement (ECII) and Exacerbation Outcomes in COPD Patients

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are difficult outcomes to measure in clinical trials. It would be valuable to be able to predict which patients are likely to benefit in terms of exacerbation prevention based on their early response in lung function and symptoms.

Methods

This was a post-hoc analysis from the 52-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority FLAME trial. Early clinically important improvement (ECII) was defined as achievement of minimal clinically important difference in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; ≥100 mL increase) and one patient-reported outcome (PRO): either St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (≥4-unit reduction; D1), or COPD assessment test (≥2-point reduction; D2) at Week 4 or 12.

Results

Approximately 18-20% of patients achieved ECII at Week 4 or 12 post-randomization according to any of the two definitions. The rate of subsequent exacerbations was lower in patients who achieved ECII at Week 4 (D1: ratio of rates [95% CI], 0.85 [0.74 to 0.98]; D2, 0.88 [0.77 to 1.00]) or at Week 12 (D1, 0.85 [0.74 to 0.98]; D2, 0.86 [0.75 to 1.00]) versus patients not achieving ECII. Patients who achieved ECII experienced longer time-to-first exacerbation between Week 4 or 12 to end of study. More patients achieved ECII with indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone according to both definitions at Week 4 (D1, odds ratio [95% CI], 1.69 [1.40 to 2.04]; D2, 1.61 [1.34 to 1.93]), and 12 (D1, 2.01 [1.66 to 2.44]; D2, 1.80 [1.48 to 2.18]).

Conclusion

ECII is a novel composite endpoint, based on clinically relevant improvement in lung function and PROs in the early phase of treatment intervention that may predict subsequent exacerbation risk and may be used in clinical trials.

Improvement in health status with once-daily indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 μg in COPD patients: real-world evidence from an observational study in Ireland

AIMS

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50 μg is a once-daily (o.d.) fixed-dose combination of long-acting β₂-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved in over 90 countries, including Ireland, for the management of COPD. The present study was conducted to evaluate health status of COPD patients, initiated on IND/GLY 110/50 μg o.d., using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) tool in a real-world primary care setting in Ireland.

METHODS

This was a real-world, prospective, open-label study. COPD patients aged > 40 years and with a smoking history of > 10 pack-years were included and switched to once-daily IND/GLY 110/50 μg. Enrolment of patients into the study occurred only after the decision had been made by the physician to prescribe IND/GLY 110/50 μg. Data were collected at baseline and Week 26. Health status was assessed using the validated CCQ.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients were included in study. The mean CCQ total score decreased from 2.36 at baseline to 1.44 at Week 26 (Δ, 0.92; P < 0.0005). Of the 156 patients who completed study, 113 (72.4%) achieved minimum clinically important difference in CCQ total score with IND/GLY 110/50 μg. CCQ domain scores also decreased during the study. Improvement in health status was observed across all GOLD groups and irrespective of prior COPD treatment. Adverse events were reported by 20% of patients with COPD exacerbation/infected COPD being the most common AE, reported by 11 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life clinical practice in Ireland, IND/GLY 110/50 μg o.d. demonstrated statistically significant and clinically important improvement in health status in patients with COPD.

Dual bronchodilator therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: evidence for the efficacy and Safety of fixed dose combination treatments in the setting of recent guideline updates

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent updates to the GOLD guidelines emphasize the use of combination LABA and LAMA bronchodilators for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with persistent dyspnea despite monotherapy or frequent exacerbations despite LAMA monotherapy. There are several commercially available LABA/LAMA fixed dose combination inhalers, which are likely to become the principle therapy for many patients with COPD.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 4 years, there have been a number of large clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of combined LAMA and LABA bronchodilators. LAMA/LABA fixed dose combination therapies have consistently demonstrated clinically significant improvements to airway obstruction, dyspnea, and quality of life whenever compared with placebo, and more modest improvements compared with bronchodilator monotherapies and combined bronchodilator/inhaled corticosteroid therapy.

SUMMARY

New guidelines emphasize combination bronchodilators as a mainstay of therapy for many patients with symptomatic COPD and there are several new combination bronchodilator therapies available to patients. It is important for physicians and patients to understand the range and degree of expected clinical effects and the safety profiles of these new medications.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in comparison with other long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combinations in COPD

BACKGROUND

Dual bronchodilation with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) fixed-dose combination (FDC) is an established treatment strategy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The relative efficacy and safety of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (GFF MDI 18/9.6 μg) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, compared with other licensed LAMA/LABA FDCs, was investigated using an integrated Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review and subsequent screening process identified randomized controlled trials of ⩾10 weeks' duration that enrolled patients aged ⩾40 years with moderate-to-very severe COPD and included at least one LAMA/LABA FDC or open LAMA + LABA treatment arm. NMAs were conducted for outcomes including change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and transition dyspnea index (TDI) parameters, annualized rate of exacerbations, use of rescue medication, adverse events, and all-cause withdrawals. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses accounted for heterogeneity across studies.

RESULTS

In total, 29 studies including 34,617 patients contributed to the NMA for efficacy or safety outcomes at week 24 or exacerbations. For all LAMA/LABA FDCs with data available, significantly greater improvements in FEV1 [trough, peak, and area under the curve (AUC)0-4], SGRQ total score and TDI focal score at week 24, and annualized rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations, were observed versus placebo. Where indirect comparisons were possible, differences between GFF MDI and other LAMA/LABA FDCs were small relative to established margins of clinical relevance, and not statistically significant. The safety and tolerability profile of GFF MDI was consistent with other LAMA/LABA FDCs and placebo. The results of the meta-regression were generally similar to the base case.

CONCLUSIONS

GFF MDI demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety outcomes to other LAMA/LABA FDCs. Personalization of treatment choice within the class on the basis of other factors such as patient preference may be appropriate.

Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators such as long-acting β-agonist (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combinations have been used in people with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to control symptoms such as dyspnoea and cough, and prevent exacerbations. A number of LABA/LAMA combinations are now available for clinical use in COPD. However, it is not clear which group of above mentioned inhalers is most effective or if any specific formulation works better than the others within the same group or class.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of available formulations from four different groups of inhalers (i.e. LABA/LAMA combination, LABA/ICS combination, LAMA and LABA) in people with moderate to severe COPD. The review will update previous systematic reviews on dual combination inhalers and long-acting bronchodilators to answer the questions described above using the strength of a network meta-analysis (NMA).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register, which contains several databases. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' websites. The most recent searches were conducted on 6 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited people aged 35 years or older with a diagnosis of COPD and a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of less than 80% of predicted. We included studies of at least 12 weeks' duration including at least two active comparators from one of the four inhaler groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted NMAs using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo method. We considered a study as high risk if recruited participants had at least one COPD exacerbation within the 12 months before study entry and as low risk otherwise. Primary outcomes were COPD exacerbations (moderate to severe and severe), and secondary outcomes included symptom and quality-of-life scores, safety outcomes, and lung function. We collected data only for active comparators and did not consider placebo was not considered. We assumed a class/group effect when a fixed-class model fitted well. Otherwise we used a random-class model to assess intraclass/group differences. We supplemented the NMAs with pairwise meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 101,311 participants from 99 studies (26 studies with 32,265 participants in the high-risk population and 73 studies with 69,046 participants in the low-risk population) in our systematic review. The median duration of studies was 52 weeks in the high-risk population and 26 weeks in the low-risk population (range 12 to 156 for both populations). We considered the quality of included studies generally to be good.The NMAs suggested that the LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations followed by LAMA in the both populations.There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination, LAMA, and LABA in the high-risk population (network hazard ratios (HRs) 0.86 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.76 to 0.99), 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.99), and 0.70 (95% CrI 0.61 to 0.8) respectively), and that LAMA decreases moderate to severe exacerbations compared to LABA in the high- and low-risk populations (network HR 0.80 (95% CrI 0.71 to 0.88) and 0.87 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.97), respectively). There is evidence that the LABA/LAMA combination reduces severe exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS combination and LABA in the high-risk population (network HR 0.78 (95% CrI 0.64 to 0.93) and 0.64 (95% CrI 0.51 to 0.81), respectively).There was a general trend towards a greater improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores with the combination therapies compared to monotherapies, and the combination therapies were generally ranked higher than monotherapies.The LABA/ICS combination was the lowest ranked in pneumonia serious adverse events (SAEs) in both populations. There is evidence that the LABA/ICS combination increases the odds of pneumonia compared to LAMA/LABA combination, LAMA and LABA (network ORs: 1.69 (95% CrI 1.20 to 2.44), 1.78 (95% CrI 1.33 to 2.39), and 1.50 (95% CrI 1.17 to 1.92) in the high-risk population and network or pairwise OR: 2.33 (95% CI 1.03 to 5.26), 2.02 (95% CrI 1.16 to 3.72), and 1.93 (95% CrI 1.29 to 3.22) in the low-risk population respectively). There were significant overlaps in the rank statistics in the other safety outcomes including mortality, total, COPD, and cardiac SAEs, and dropouts due to adverse events.None of the differences in lung function met a minimal clinically important difference criterion except for LABA/LAMA combination versus LABA in the high-risk population (network mean difference 0.13 L (95% CrI 0.10 to 0.15). The results of pairwise meta-analyses generally agreed with those of the NMAs. There is no evidence to suggest intraclass/group differences except for lung function at 12 months in the high-risk population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The LABA/LAMA combination was the highest ranked treatment group to reduce COPD exacerbations although there was some uncertainty in the results. LAMA containing inhalers may have an advantage over those without a LAMA for preventing COPD exacerbations based on the rank statistics. Combination therapies appear more effective than monotherapies for improving symptom and quality-of-life scores. ICS-containing inhalers are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.Our most comprehensive review including intraclass/group comparisons, free combination therapies, 99 studies, and 20 outcomes for each high- and low-risk population summarises the current literature and could help with updating existing COPD guidelines.

Cost-effectiveness of twice-daily indacaterol/glycopyrrolate inhalation powder for the treatment of moderate to severe COPD in the US

Background

Indacaterol 27.5 µg/glycopyrrolate 15.6 µg (IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg) inhalation powder, a twice-daily, fixed-dose combination of a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting antimuscarinic antagonist (LAMA), is indicated in the US for long-term maintenance treatment of airflow obstruction in patients with COPD. The safety and efficacy of IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg have been established, but cost-effectiveness is not yet known. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg with other long-acting COPD maintenance therapies.

Methods

A Markov model was constructed from the US payer perspective. Health states were defined as mild (post-bronchodilator FEV₁ ≥80% of predicted), moderate (50% ≤FEV₁ <80% of predicted), severe (30% ≤FEV₁ <50% of predicted), and very severe (FEV₁ <30% of predicted) COPD. Patients entering the model transitioned through health states based on placebo-adjusted change from baseline in trough FEV₁ for each comparator at week 12. Comparators included other US Food and Drug Administration-approved LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations as well as commonly prescribed LAMA and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid agents. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the model assumptions and the overall robustness of the results.

Results

Using the model, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg treatment for 12 weeks resulted in total costs of US $23,375 vs US $9,365 for placebo. Compared with placebo, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 treatment resulted in the highest improvement in FEV₁ across all comparators and the lowest cost per decline in 100 mL FEV₁. IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg was also among the most cost-effective treatment option as measured by St George's Respiratory Questionnaire response rate, at US $3,518 per additional responder at 12 weeks compared with placebo. In addition, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg had the lowest cost per severe exacerbation avoided vs placebo across all comparators (US $87,686).

Conclusion

This model, developed from the US payer perspective with a 5-year time horizon, found IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg to be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with moderate to severe COPD.

Dual bronchodilation vs triple therapy in the "real-life" COPD DACCORD study

Background

No observational studies have evaluated the "real-world" effectiveness of dual bronchodilation comprising a long-acting β₂-agonist plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonist vs that of triple therapy (long-acting β₂-agonist plus long-acting muscarinic antagonist plus inhaled corticosteroid) in COPD.

Materials and methods

DACCORD is a non-interventional, observational clinical study that recruited patients following COPD maintenance therapy initiation or change in maintenance therapy between or within therapeutic class. Given the non-interventional nature of the study, the decision to initiate or change medication had to be made by the patients' physicians prior to inclusion in DACCORD. We used a matched-pairs analysis to compare disease progression in two patient groups: those receiving dual bronchodilation vs those receiving triple therapy (each group n=1,046).

Results

In two subgroups of patients matched according to a broad range of demographic and disease characteristics, over 1 year, fewer patients receiving dual bronchodilation exacerbated than those receiving triple therapy (15.5% vs 26.6%; P<0.001), with a greater improvement from baseline in COPD Assessment Test total score at 1 year (mean±SD -2.9±5.8 vs -1.4±5.5;P<0.001). When analyzed according to prior therapy, the highest rate of exacerbations was in patients on triple therapy prior to the study who remained on triple therapy. Those changing from mono-bronchodilator to dual bronchodilation had the greatest COPD Assessment Test total score improvement.

Conclusion

In this "real-life" cohort of patients with COPD, most of whom had not exacerbated in the 6 months prior to entry, triple therapy did not seem to improve outcomes compared with dual bronchodilation in terms of either exacerbations or health status. Our analyses clearly demonstrate the potential impact of prior medication on study results, something that should be taken into account when interpreting the results even of controlled clinical trials.

Optimal Bronchodilation for COPD Patients: Are All Long-Acting β₂-Agonist/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists the Same?

Bronchodilators provide improvements in lung function and reductions in symptoms and exacerbations, and are the mainstay of pharmacological management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease strategy recommends the use of a combination of long-acting β₂-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABA/LAMA) as the first-line treatment option in the majority of symptomatic patients with COPD. This review provides an indirect comparison of available LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) through discussion of important efficacy and safety data from the key literature, with the objective of providing physicians with a framework for informed decision-making. LABA/LAMA FDCs provided greater benefits compared with placebo and similar or greater benefits compared with tiotropium and salmeterol/fluticasone in improving lung function, dyspnea, health-related quality of life, reducing rescue medication use and preventing exacerbations, although with some variability in efficacy between individual FDCs; further, tolerability profiles were comparable among LABA/LAMA FDCs. However, there is a disparity in the amount of evidence generated for different LABA/LAMA FDCs. Thus, this review shows that all LABA/LAMA FDCs may not be the same and that care should be taken when extrapolating individual treatment outcomes to the entire drug class. It is important that physicians consider the efficacy gradient that exists among LABA/LAMA FDCs, and factors such as inhaler devices and potential biomarkers, when choosing the optimal bronchodilator treatment for long-term management of patients with COPD.

Inhaled glycopyrrolate for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), along with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), are the mainstay for treatment of patients with COPD. Glycopyrrolate, or glycopyrronium bromide, like other LAMAs, inhibits parasympathetic nerve impulses by selectively blocking the binding of acetylcholine to muscarinic receptors. Glycopyrrolate is unusual in that it preferentially binds to M3 over M2 muscarinic receptors, thereby specifically targeting the primary muscarinic receptor responsible for bronchoconstriction occurring in COPD. Inhaled glycopyrrolate is slowly absorbed from the lungs and rapidly eliminated from the bloodstream, most likely by renal excretion in its unmetabolized form, limiting the potential for systemic adverse events. Inhaled glycopyrrolate is a fast-acting, efficacious treatment option for patients with moderate-severe COPD. It improves lung function, reduces the risk of exacerbations, and alleviates the symptoms of breathlessness, which in turn may explain the improvement seen in patients' quality of life. Inhaled formulations containing glycopyrrolate are well tolerated, and despite being an anticholinergic, few cardiovascular-related events have been reported. Inhaled glycopyrrolate is thus of value as both monotherapy and in combination with other classes of medication for maintenance treatment of COPD. This review covers the mechanism of action of inhaled glycopyrrolate, including its pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and safety profiles, and effects on mucus secretion. It also discusses the use of inhaled glycopyrrolate in the treatment of COPD, as monotherapy and in fixed-dose combinations with LABAs and inhaled corticosteroid-LABAs, including a triple therapy recently approved in Europe.

The impact of dual bronchodilation on cardiovascular serious adverse events and mortality in COPD: a quantitative synthesis

Objective

Long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are burdened by the potential risk of inducing cardiovascular serious adverse events (SAEs) in COPD patients. Since the risk of combining a LABA with a LAMA could be greater, we have carried out a quantitative synthesis to investigate the cardiovascular safety profile of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs).

Methods

A pair-wise and network meta-analysis was performed by using the data of the repository database ClinicalTrials.gov concerning the impact of approved LABA/LAMA FDCs versus monocomponents and/or placebo on cardiovascular SAEs in COPD.

Results

Overall, LABA/LAMA FDCs did not significantly (P>0.05) modulate the risk of cardiovascular SAEs versus monocomponents. However, the network meta-analysis indicated that aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg and tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg were the safest FDCs, followed by umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg which was as safe as placebo, whereas glycopyrronium/formoterol 14.9/9.6, glycopyrronium/indacaterol 15.6/27.5 µg, and glycopyrronium/indacaterol 50/110 µg were the least safe FDCs. No impact on mortality was detected for each specific FDC.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis indicates that LABA/LAMA FDC therapy is characterized by an excellent cardiovascular safety profile in COPD patients. However, the findings of this quantitative synthesis have been obtained from populations that participated in randomized clinical trials, and were devoid of major cardiovascular diseases. Thus, post-marketing surveillance and observational studies may help to better define the real impact of specific FDCs with regard to the cardiovascular risk.

A Network Meta-Analysis of Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist (LAMA) and Long-Acting β2-Agonist (LABA) Combinations in COPD

INTRODUCTION

Comparative data on the efficacies of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations for the treatment of moderate-to-very-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited. The aim of this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) is to assess the relative efficacies of available open combinations (delivered via separate inhalers) and fixed-dose combinations (FDCs, delivered via a single inhaler).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ≥8-week duration in adults aged ≥40 years with COPD that compared LAMA + LABA combinations with each other, with tiotropium (TIO), or with placebo. Data on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and on St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score, and rescue medication use at 12 and 24 weeks were extracted from these RCTs and analyzed using a NMA in a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Data from 44 RCTs were included in the NMA. All FDCs showed improvements relative to placebo in terms of trough FEV1, SGRQ total score, and TDI focal score above clinically relevant thresholds, with the exception of TIO/olodaterol and aclidinium/formoterol, both of which failed to show clinically relevant improvements in SGRQ score at 24 weeks. All FDCs demonstrated reduced rescue medication use versus placebo. Open combinations demonstrated improved efficacy in all outcomes versus placebo, but these improvements did not consistently exceed clinically relevant thresholds for SGRQ and TDI scores. All once-daily FDCs showed improved efficacy versus TIO, but improvements were less consistently observed versus TIO with open dual combinations and combinations containing formoterol or salmeterol administered twice daily. Relative probabilities of improvement between FDCs highlighted potential between-class differences for trough FEV1 but suggested little potential for differences in patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LAMA + LABA combinations generally showed improved outcomes versus placebo and TIO. FDCs appeared to perform better than open dual combinations. A potential effectiveness gradient was observed between FDCs for objectively assessed functional outcomes, although further prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

FUNDING

GSK.

Comparative Efficacy of Once-Daily Umeclidinium/Vilanterol and Tiotropium/Olodaterol Therapy in Symptomatic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

We report the results of the first direct comparison of the once-daily fixed-dose long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) combinations umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) and tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) in patients with COPD.

METHODS

This was a randomized, two-period crossover open-label study in symptomatic patients with COPD [age 40 years or older, postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 70% or less and 50% or more of predicted normal values, and modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale score of 2 or greater] not receiving inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Patients were randomized to receive UMEC/VI (62.5/25 µg once daily) via a multidose dry powder inhaler (ELLIPTA) followed by TIO/OLO (5/5 µg once daily) via a soft mist inhaler (Respimat), each for 8 weeks with an interim 3-week washout or vice versa. The primary end point was the change from baseline in trough FEV1 at week 8 with a noninferiority margin of - 50 mL in the per-protocol (PP) population. The incidence of adverse events was also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 236 patients (mean age 64.4 years, 60% male) were included in the intent-to-treat population and 227 were included in the PP population. UMEC/VI treatment was noninferior in the PP population and superior in the intent-to-treat population to TIO/OLO treatment with regard to trough FEV1 at week 8 [FEV1 change from baseline 180 mL vs 128 mL; difference 52 mL (95% confidence interval 28-77 mL); p < 0.001]. Patients receiving UMEC/VI had twofold increased odds of experiencing a clinically meaningful increase (100 mL or more) from baseline in trough FEV1 at week 8 compared with patients receiving TIO/OLO (odds ratio 2.05; 95% confidence interval 1.34-3.14). Adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the UMEC/VI group and in 31% of patients in the TIO/OLO group.

CONCLUSION

In this first direct comparison of two once-daily fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combinations, superiority was observed for the primary end point of trough FEV1 at week 8 with UMEC/VI compared with TIO/OLO in patients with symptomatic COPD. Both treatments had similar safety profiles. These findings confirm the results of previous indirect LAMA/LABA comparisons, and show that an efficacy gradient exists within the LAMA/LABA class.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02799784.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Impact and prevention of severe exacerbations of COPD: a review of the evidence

Severe exacerbations of COPD, ie, those leading to hospitalization, have profound clinical implications for patients and significant economic consequences for society. The prevalence and burden of severe COPD exacerbations remain high, despite recognition of the importance of exacerbation prevention and the availability of new treatment options. Severe COPD exacerbations are associated with high mortality, have negative impact on quality of life, are linked to cardiovascular complications, and are a significant burden on the health-care system. This review identified risk factors that contribute to the development of severe exacerbations, treatment options (bronchodilators, antibiotics, corticosteroids [CSs], oxygen therapy, and ventilator support) to manage severe exacerbations, and strategies to prevent readmission to hospital. Risk factors that are amenable to change have been highlighted. A number of bronchodilators have demonstrated successful reduction in risk of severe exacerbations, including long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting β2-agonist mono- or combination therapies, in addition to vaccination, mucolytic and antibiotic therapy, and nonpharmacological interventions, such as pulmonary rehabilitation. Recognition of the importance of severe exacerbations is an essential step in improving outcomes for patients with COPD. Evidence-based approaches to prevent and manage severe exacerbations should be implemented as part of targeted strategies for disease management.

Comparative effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium has been the first long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination to be approved as a maintenance treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Comparative effectiveness studies indicate that it is constantly superior to a LAMA or a LABA alone or even a LABA/inhaled corticosteroid combination, regardless of the drugs used. However, definitive data documenting the benefit of indacaterol/glycopyrronium fixed-dose combination over these consolidated therapies are still absent in a real-world setting, although the results of pivotal randomized controlled trials show that this is the case. Therefore, in addition to the large body of evidence already available supporting the use of indacaterol/glycopyrronium, pragmatic observational studies or ad hoc designed trials should be planned to collect data that could confirm the high effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium even in the real-life clinical practice.

Maintenance therapy in COPD: time to phase out ICS and switch to the new LAMA/LABA inhalers?

Long-term maintenance therapy for COPD is evolving rapidly. Dual bronchodilation with new long-acting muscarinic antagonist and long-acting beta-agonist (LAMA/LABA) fixed dose combination inhalers were introduced over the past 2 years. In clinical trials, these inhalers significantly improved lung function (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second), patient-reported outcomes, and quality of life measures compared with placebo, their respective monocomponents, and tiotropium. The recorded adverse events of these new inhalers were also similar to those of their monocomponents or placebo. There are concerns regarding long-term complications (weight gain, osteoporosis, cataract) and increased risk of community-acquired pneumonia with the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The new LAMA/LABA inhalers could potentially reduce the use of ICS as part and parcel of maintenance therapy in COPD. Recent studies compared these LAMA/LABA inhalers with ICS/LABA combination inhalers in moderate-to-severe COPD. The results are promising and favor the LAMA/LABA inhalers, especially in the longer duration trials. Furthermore, there is a clearer picture emerging as to the subgroup of COPD patients who may be able to successfully switch from their current ICS/LABA therapy to these new LAMA/LABA inhalers.

Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes - a review

Several fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of long-acting bronchodilators (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA] plus a long-acting β2-agonist [LABA]) are available for the treatment of COPD. Studies of these FDCs have demonstrated substantial improvements in lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) in comparison with their respective constituent monocomponents. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms and health status, as well as exacerbation rates, have been reported compared with a LABA or LAMA alone, but results are less consistent. The inconsistencies may in part be owing to differences in study design, methods used to assess study end points, and patient populations. Nevertheless, these observations tend to support an association between improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and improvements in symptom-based outcomes. In order to assess the effects of FDCs on PROs and evaluate relationships between PROs and changes in lung function, we performed a systematic literature search of publications reporting randomized controlled trials of FDCs. Results of this literature search were independently assessed by two reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving any conflicting results. In total, 22 Phase III randomized controlled trials of FDC bronchodilators in COPD were identified, with an additional study including a post-literature search (ten for indacaterol-glycopyrronium once daily, eight for umeclidinium-vilanterol once daily, three for tiotropium-olodaterol once daily, and two for aclidinium-formoterol twice daily). Results from these studies demonstrated that the LAMA-LABA FDCs significantly improved lung function compared with their component monotherapies or other single-agent treatments. Furthermore, LABA-LAMA combinations also generally improved symptoms and health status versus monotherapies, although some discrepancies between lung function and PROs were observed. Overall, the safety profiles of the FDCs were similar to placebo. Further research is required to examine more closely any relationship between lung function and PROs in patients receiving LABA-LAMA combinations.

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium in Japanese patients with COPD: Pooled analysis of SHINE and ARISE

BACKGROUND

To better evaluate the efficacy and safety of the indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) fixed-dose combination versus tiotropium in Japanese patients, a pooled data analysis was conducted from the SHINE and ARISE studies, which were part of the IND/GLY clinical trial program.

METHODS

Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were included in the analysis. Efficacy in terms of pre-dose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) at Week 12 and Week 24/26 (ARISE/SHINE) and FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose at Day 1, Week 12, and Week 24/26 was evaluated. Health status using the St. George׳s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, rescue medication use (number of puffs/day), safety, and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 340 patients (IND/GLY, n=161; IND, n=41; GLY, n=40; tiotropium, n=79; and placebo, n=19) were included in the analysis that focused on comparing IND/GLY versus tiotropium since they were included in both studies. At Week 12 and Week 24/26, pre-dose FEV₁ was significantly improved with IND/GLY compared with tiotropium (treatment differences=70mL and 80mL, respectively; both P≤0.001). FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose, the SGRQ total score, and rescue medication use were more statistically significant with IND/GLY than with tiotropium for all assessed time-points. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs was similar between the IND/GLY- and tiotropium-treated groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to tiotropium, IND/GLY provided significant improvements in lung function, health status, and rescue medication use, while having a good safety profile in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Inhaled treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: what's new and how does it fit?

Since chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by progressive airflow obstruction, inhaled bronchodilators form the mainstay of treatment. A variety of new inhaled drugs and inhaler devices have recently been licensed and approved for prescribing to patients with COPD; many such drugs have been formulated in devices to deliver two different drugs at the same time. The evidence based review article highlights all of the drugs now licensed, describes some of the evidence surrounding their use and highlights practical steps in helping decide when these drugs should be considered in the context of guidelines.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Inhaled bronchodilators are the mainstay of COPD pharmacological treatment. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a major class of inhaled bronchodilators. Some LAMA/device systems with different characteristics and dosing schedules are currently approved for maintenance therapy of COPD and a range of other products are being developed. They improve lung function and patient-reported outcomes and reduce acute bronchial exacerbations with good safety. LAMAs are used either alone or associated with long-acting β₂-agonists, eventually in fixed dose combinations. Long-acting β₂-agonist/LAMA combinations assure additional benefits over the individual components alone. The reader will obtain a view of the safety and efficacy of the different LAMA/device systems in COPD patients.

Adverse events among COPD patients treated with long-acting anticholinergics and β2-agonists in an outpatient respiratory clinic

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death in Canada. Most patients with COPD receive long-term treatment with long-acting anticholinergics (LAAC) and/or long-acting β2-agonists (LABA). Adverse events (AEs) are also likely during long-term treatment with these medications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of AEs in COPD patients on LAAC and LABA in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients enrolled in the Registre de Données en Santé Pulmonaire (RESP) database, which records information on Canadian patients with asthma or COPD. COPD Patients completed a questionnaire about AEs that may be associated with LAAC and/or LABA. The prevalence of AEs and the corresponding 95% CI were calculated for three groups of patients (LAAC + LABA, LAAC alone, and LABA alone).

RESULTS

Most patients with COPD (n = 154) were current or ex-smokers. Over 50% of patients were overweight or obese, and had an annual family income of less or equal to $42,000. Dry mouth (55.2%, 40%, and 43.5%) and dry throat (33.6%, 26.7%, and 34.8%) occurred most of the time or always in the LAAC + LABA, LAAC, and LABA groups, respectively. Headache was reported by 17.4% of patients in the LABA group, but less than 11.2% in the other groups.

CONCLUSION

AEs reported in this study deserve clinical attention because they may negatively affect quality of life and treatment adherence of COPD patients.

Bronchodilators, receptors and cross-talk: Together is better?

The most widely used maintenance therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and a number of these drugs are now available in combination with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs). LAMAs inhibit the parasympathetic muscarinic pathway, while LABAs, as sympathomimetics, reduce airway smooth muscle (ASM) tone. As well as directly controlling the constriction and relaxation of ASM, muscarinic and adrenergic receptors are found on inflammatory cells, and drugs that target these receptors may also reduce inflammation in COPD. Evidence suggests that the muscarinic and adrenergic pathways cross-talk at the level of neuronal input to the ASM via second-messenger pathways within ASM cells. Although the cross-talk is not completely understood, pharmacologically targeting both pathways in COPD can maximize bronchodilation. Combining LAMAs and LABAs demonstrated improved efficacy compared with the individual therapies and so, for greater convenience, several fixed-dose combinations for once-daily use have been developed. These fixed-dose combinations demonstrate improvements in both lung-function and patient-reported outcomes compared with well-established monotherapies, with similar tolerability profiles to the individual agents.

Clinical role of dual bronchodilation with an indacaterol-glycopyrronium combination in the management of COPD: its impact on patient-related outcomes and quality of life

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the result of persistent and progressive pathologic abnormalities in the small airways, most often associated with alveolar loss. Smoking cessation is the most effective intervention to slow down the progression of COPD. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators are prescribed for the symptomatic relief at any stage of disease severity. For patients whose COPD cannot be not sufficiently controlled with long-acting bronchodilator monotherapy, international guidelines suggest the possibility of associating a long-acting beta₂ agonist (LABA) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), ie, dual bronchodilation. This is not a new concept as the combination of short-acting agents has been popular in the past. In recent years, several fixed-dose combinations containing a LAMA and a LABA in a single inhaler have been approved by regulatory authorities in several countries. Among the new LAMA/LABA combinations, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg (QVA149) has been shown in a series of clinical trials to be as safe as the single components and placebo, and more effective than placebo and the single components with regard to lung function, symptoms, and patient-oriented outcomes. Furthermore, QVA149 achieved better bronchodilation than salmeterol 50 µg/fluticasone 500 µg twice daily. Compared with tiotropium, a well-recognized treatment for COPD, the percentage of patients that exceed the minimal clinical important difference for dyspnea and health-related quality of life measurements was superior with QVA149. Other patient-oriented outcomes, such as daily symptoms, night-time awakening, and use of rescue medication consistently favored QVA149. Finally, QVA149 was significantly superior to LAMAs for reducing all types of exacerbation. In conclusion, several years after introduction of dual bronchodilation, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg in a single inhaler for once-daily administration via the Breezhaler^® device (QVA149) has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective treatment for COPD patients.