Tiotropium and olodaterol fixed-dose combination versus mono-components in COPD (GOLD 2-4)

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.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fixed-Dose Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Tiotropium for COPD Patients in China

Purpose

Tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) fixed-dose combination (FDC) can improve lung function and quality of life for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is not inferior to other LAMA/LABAs. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC in patients with moderate to very severe COPD in China.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC versus TIO in the treatment of COPD from Chinese health system perspective. Four health states were based on 2021 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2021), which included moderate (GOLD II, 50% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 80% of predicted), severe (GOLD III, 30% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 50% of predicted) and very severe (GOLD IV, FEV1 > 30% of predicted) COPD and death. The model simulated in cycles yearly. The indicators of total costs, number of COPD exacerbations, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as the model output. Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 5% annual rate. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted over a 10-year time horizon. The threshold of incremental total cost per unit effectiveness gained (ICER) was 1.5 times of GDP per capita. Uncertainty was assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Results

TIO/OLO was 0.007 QALYs more than TIO but 0.012 LYs lower, which increased the total cost by $2268.17 per patient, but the total exacerbations number was less. Incremental cost effectiveness analysis had shown that the ICER exceeded the willingness to pay threshold. Results were robust under most parameter variation, except the parameters of total drug cost of TIO/OLO FDC in univariate sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

Although TIO/OLO FDC could reduce the exacerbation risk, it was not cost-effective, and needed to be repriced.

Drug combinations for inhalation: Current products and future development addressing disease control and patient compliance

Pulmonary delivery is an alternative route of administration with numerous advantages over conventional routes of administration. It provides low enzymatic exposure, fewer systemic side effects, no first-pass metabolism, and concentrated drug amounts at the site of the disease, making it an ideal route for the treatment of pulmonary diseases. Owing to the thin alveolar-capillary barrier, and large surface area that facilitates rapid absorption to the bloodstream in the lung, systemic delivery can be achieved as well. Administration of multiple drugs at one time became urgent to control chronic pulmonary diseases such as asthma and COPD, thus, development of drug combinations was proposed. Administration of medications with variable dosages from different inhalers leads to overburdening the patient and may cause low therapeutic intervention. Therefore, products that contain combined drugs to be delivered via a single inhaler have been developed to improve patient compliance, reduce different dose regimens, achieve higher disease control, and boost therapeutic effectiveness in some cases. This comprehensive review aimed to highlight the growth of drug combinations by inhalation over time, obstacles and challenges, and the possible progress to broaden the current options or to cover new indications in the future. Moreover, various pharmaceutical technologies in terms of formulation and device in correlation with inhaled combinations were discussed in this review. Hence, inhaled combination therapy is driven by the need to maintain and improve the quality of life for patients with chronic respiratory diseases; promoting drug combinations by inhalation to a higher level is a necessity.

EVELUT®: A Real-World, Observational Study Assessing Dyspnoea and Symptom Burden in COPD Patients Switched from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA or LAMA/LABA/ICS

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2023) no longer recommends a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) combination for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In patients treated with LABA/ICS, who continue to experience symptoms without frequent or severe exacerbations, GOLD now recommends switching to long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA instead of escalating to triple therapy (TT; LAMA/LABA/ICS), which previously was also a recommended option. EVELUT®, a real-life, observational study, compared these two treatment strategies in terms of symptom relief and health status improvement.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic COPD at low exacerbation risk (GOLD B) were switched, at their physicians' discretion, from LABA/ICS to either fixed-dose LAMA/LABA (tiotropium/olodaterol, Respimat® [Tio/Olo]) or fixed or free TT. Primary endpoints were change in modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and COPD Assessment Test™ (CAT™) scores after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The safety set contained 463 patients (Tio/Olo, n = 329; TT, n = 134). In a propensity score-matched set (Tio/Olo, n = 121; TT, n = 121), improvement in mMRC score was similar in patients on Tio/Olo (-0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.11, -0.36) and TT (-0.25; 95% CI -0.13, -0.38). Improvement in total CAT score was slightly larger in patients on Tio/Olo (-3.45; 95% CI -2.45, -4.45) versus TT (-2.51; 95% CI -1.62, -3.40). In both groups, Physician's Global Evaluation scores increased, with 69-89% of patients satisfied with their treatment overall. Marginally more patients on Tio/Olo responded to treatment versus TT (Δ mMRC score ≥ 1; 25% vs. 22%; Δ CAT score ≥ 2, 68% vs. 56%).

CONCLUSION

In patients with symptomatic COPD at low exacerbation risk, treatment can be switched from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA without compromising clinical benefit, compared with escalating to LAMA/LABA/ICS. Switching from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA can provide symptom relief and improve health status without exposure to the risks associated with ICS.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03954132.

Combination therapy with long-acting bronchodilators and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves clinical symptoms and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and reduces exacerbation risk. However, there is a growing concern that LAMA/LABA therapy may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the use of LAMA/LABA combination therapy modifies the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs of LAMA/LABA or LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the management of patients with COPD that reported on cardiovascular end-points. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 51 RCTs enrolling 91 021 subjects were analysed. Both dual LAMA/LABA (1.6% versus 1.3%; relative risk 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81) and triple therapy (1.6% versus 1.4%; relative risk 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) significantly increased the risk of MACE compared with ICS/LABA. The excess risk was most evident in RCTs in which the average underlying baseline risk for MACE was >1% per year. Compared with LAMA only, LABA only or placebo, dual LAMA/LABA therapy did not significantly increase the risk of MACE, though these comparisons may have lacked sufficient statistical power.

CONCLUSION

Compared with ICS/LABA, dual LAMA/LABA or triple therapy increases cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD. This should be considered in the context of the incremental benefits of these therapies for symptoms and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD, especially in those with a MACE risk of >1% per year.

Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Utilization and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Initiating Single-Inhaler Long-Acting β2-Agonist/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Dual Therapy in Primary Care in England

Purpose

Selection of treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may impact clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs. We aimed to characterize these outcomes along with treatment patterns, for patients with COPD following initiation of single-inhaler long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy in the primary care setting in England.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic medical record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care administrative data (Hospital Episode Statistics) in England to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a prescription for one of four single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies between 1st June 2015-31st December 2018 (indexing period). Outcomes were assessed during a 12-month follow-up period from the index date (date of earliest prescription of a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA within the indexing period). Incident users were those without previous LAMA/LABA dual therapy prescriptions prior to index; this manuscript focuses on a subset of incident users: non-triple therapy users (patients without concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use at index).

Results

Of 10,991 incident users included, 9888 (90.0%) were non-triple therapy users, indexed on umeclidinium/vilanterol (n=4805), aclidinium/formoterol (n=2109), indacaterol/glycopyrronium (n=1785) and tiotropium/olodaterol (n=1189). At 3 months post-index, 63.3% of non-triple therapy users remained on a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA, and 22.1% had discontinued inhaled therapy. Most patients (86.9%) required general practitioner consultations in the first 3 months post-index. Inpatient stays were the biggest contributor to healthcare costs. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs), adherence, time-to-triple therapy, time-to-first on-treatment moderate-to-severe AECOPD, time-to-index treatment discontinuation, HCRU and healthcare costs were similar across indexed therapies.

Conclusion

Patients initiating treatment with single-inhaler LAMA/LABA in primary care in England were unlikely to switch treatments in the first three months following initiation, but some may discontinue respiratory medication. Outcomes were similar across indexed treatments.

LABA/LAMA as First-Line Therapy for COPD: A Summary of the Evidence and Guideline Recommendations

Inhaled bronchodilators (alone or in combination) are the cornerstone of treatment for symptomatic patients with COPD, either as initial/first-line treatment or for second-line/treatment escalation in patients who experience persistent symptoms or exacerbations on monotherapy. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2022 report recommends initial pharmacological treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) as monotherapy for most patients, or dual bronchodilator therapy (LABA/LAMA) in patients with more severe symptoms, regardless of exacerbation history. The recommendations for LABA/LAMA are broader in the American Thoracic Society treatment guidelines, which strongly recommend LABA/LAMA combination therapy over LAMA or LABA monotherapy in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. However, despite consistent guideline recommendations, real-world prescribing data indicate that LAMA and/or LABA without an inhaled corticosteroid are not the most widely prescribed therapies in COPD. This article reviews global and regional/national guideline recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA in COPD, examines the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of LABA/LAMA versus other therapies and offers a practical guide for clinicians to help ensure appropriate use of LABA/LAMA therapy.

Characterization of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Initiating Single-Inhaler Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist/Long-Acting β2-Agonist Dual Therapy in a Primary Care Setting in England

Purpose

Treatment pathways of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving single-inhaler dual therapies remain unclear. We aimed to describe characteristics, prescribed treatments, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs of patients with COPD who initiated single-inhaler long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy in primary care in England.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective study using linked data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets. Patients with COPD with ≥1 single-inhaler LAMA/LABA prescription between June 2015 and December 2018 (index) were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics, prescribed treatments, HCRU and costs were evaluated in the 12 months pre-index. Data are presented for patients not receiving concomitant inhaled corticosteroids at index (non-triple users).

Results

Of 10,991 patients initiating LAMA/LABA, 9888 were non-triple users, of whom 21.3% (n=2109) received aclidinium bromide/formoterol, 18.1% (n=1785) received indacaterol/glycopyrronium, 12.0% (n=1189) received tiotropium bromide/olodaterol and 48.6% (n=4805) received umeclidinium/vilanterol. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar across indexed therapies. LAMA monotherapy was the most frequently prescribed respiratory therapy at 12 (18.4-25.8% of patients) and 3 months (23.9-33.7% of patients) pre-index across indexed therapies; 42.5-59.0% of patients were prescribed no respiratory therapy at these time points. COPD-related HCRU during the 12 months pre-index was similar across indexed therapies (general practitioner consultations: 62.0-68.6% patients; inpatient stays: 19.3-26.1% patients). Pre-index COPD-related costs were similar across indexed therapies, with inpatient stays representing the highest contribution. Mean total direct annual COPD-related costs ranged from £805-£1187.

Conclusion

Characteristics of patients newly initiating single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapy were highly consistent across indexed therapies. As half of non-triple users were not receiving respiratory therapy one year prior to LAMA/LABA initiation, there may be an opportunity for early optimization of treatment to relieve clinical burden versus current prescribing patterns in primary care in England.

The Role of Dual Bronchodilation and the Conscientious Use of Inhaled Corticosteroid in COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a global public health burden that stands out as a leading cause of mortality around the world, especially in less developed countries. COPD treatment should be centered on the individual necessities of each patient, integrating pharmacological therapy, immunization, nutritional support, pulmonary rehabilitation and control of comorbidities. Combining a long-acting antimuscarinic (LAMA) with a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) bronchodilator has proven to be more effective than monotherapy with LABA or LAMA, in terms of the functional improvement of forced expiratory volume (FEV1), symptoms and life quality and may be helpful in patients with progressive dyspnea. The eosinophil blood count is a simple biomarker that could guide personalized treatment strategies by identifying patients with greater clinical benefits of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment. However, one critical concern is the increased risk of pneumonia in individuals treated with ICS.

Dual bronchodilation for the treatment of COPD - From bench to bedside

Because there is a solid pharmacological rationale based on positive interactions between long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) for their ability to relax human airway smooth muscle in vitro alongside several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world observational studies that support the use of LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for the treatment of patients with COPD, in this narrative review we discuss the preclinical and clinical proofs supporting the use of LAMA+LABA therapy in COPD and why this therapeutic approach optimises bronchodilation. Robust evidence indicates that all LAMA/LABA FDCs are consistently more effective than LAMA or LABA administered alone in improving lung function, dyspnoea, quality of life, and exercise capacity in patients with COPD. However, the ability of dual bronchodilation with FDCs of LAMA/LABA to prevent or reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations remains unclear due to conflicting data from large RCTs, despite several mechanisms explaining why such combinations should be of value in decreasing the frequency of COPD exacerbations. Both LABAs and LAMAs mechanistically can affect the cardiovascular system, but from clinical studies to date, LAMA/LABA FDCs have an acceptable cardiovascular safety profile, at least in the COPD population enrolled in RCTs. Indirect evidence suggests that some FDCs may even exert a protective role against serious cardiovascular adverse events compared to monotherapies. Consequently, several LAMA/LABA FDCs have been developed and approved for clinical use as treatments for patients with COPD. However, to date, there are unfortunately very few head-to-head studies comparing the safety and efficacy of different LAMA/LABA FDCs making it difficult to choose the most appropriate combination, although the use of meta-analyses has provided some information in this regard.

Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Umeclidinium/Vilanterol, and Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Taiwan: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Background

Long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) combination therapy improved lung function and health-related quality-of-life and reduced exacerbation rates and dyspnea in symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We compared the real-world effects of three fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations for COPD in Taiwan.

Methods

This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated 1-year outcomes after LABA/LAMA combination therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD. Exacerbations and symptoms of COPD, lung functions, and therapy escalation were compared among patients using tiotropium/olodaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol and indacaterol/glycopyrronium. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the baseline characteristics.

Results

Data of 1,617 patients were collected. After PSM, time to first moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation was comparable among three groups, while the annualized rates of the exacerbation (episodes/patient/year) in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol (0.19) or umeclidinium/vilanterol (0.17) were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium (0.38). COPD-related symptoms were stable over the treatment period, and there was no significant difference in the changes of symptom scores including CAT and mMRC among three groups at the end of the study period.

Conclusion

This study presented valuable real-world outcome in terms of exacerbation and treatment response of COPD patients treated with fixed-dose LABA/LAMA regimens in Taiwan. The annualized rates of moderate-to-severe exacerbation in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol or umeclidinium/vilanterol were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium, though the time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation was similar among different fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations.

A Pooled Analysis of Mortality in Patients with COPD Receiving Dual Bronchodilation with and without Additional Inhaled Corticosteroid

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

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 (E_max) 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 E_max 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.

Therapeutic Success in Swiss COPD Patients Receiving Dual Bronchodilation Therapy as COPD Maintenance Treatment

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often reduced by high symptom burden and frequent exacerbations. So far, data on therapeutic success in Swiss COPD patients receiving dual bronchodilation therapy as COPD maintenance treatment are limited. Data from a recently published, non-interventional study on clinical benefit after the start of combined tiotropium-olodaterol treatment were analyzed focusing on Swiss patients compared to the overall cohort including patients from various European countries. Demographic data on the changes in Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for the assessment of HRQoL in correlation to symptoms and the number of exacerbations, as well as physician's global assessment (PGE), were evaluated 6 weeks after treatment start. In Switzerland (n = 61), significantly more patients had comorbidities and exacerbations but showed less symptoms compared to the overall cohort (n = 4639). HRQoL improved in both cohorts, with a negative correlation to symptom burden and number of exacerbations in the overall cohort. PGE scores improved after 6 weeks with a better general condition at baseline in Swiss patients (PGE score 4/5: 68.9% [Swiss cohort] vs. 49.0% [overall cohort]. Despite significant differences regarding the presence of symptoms and exacerbations, therapeutic success was similar in both patient groups. Highly symptomatic patients benefited mostly from tiotropium-olodaterol treatment.

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.

The physiology and pathophysiology of exercise hyperpnea

In health, the near-eucapnic, highly efficient hyperpnea during mild-to-moderate intensity exercise is driven by three obligatory contributions, namely, feedforward central command from supra-medullary locomotor centers, feedback from limb muscle afferents, and respiratory CO₂ exchange (V̇CO₂). Inhibiting each of these stimuli during exercise elicits a reduction in hyperpnea even in the continuing presence of the other major stimuli. However, the relative contribution of each stimulus to the hyperpnea remains unknown as does the means by which V̇CO2 is sensed. Mediation of the hyperventilatory response to exercise in health is attributed to the multiple feedback and feedforward stimuli resulting from muscle fatigue. In patients with COPD, diaphragm EMG amplitude and its relation to ventilatory output are used to decipher mechanisms underlying the patients' abnormal ventilatory responses, dynamic lung hyperinflation and dyspnea during exercise. Key contributions to these exercise-limiting responses across the spectrum of COPD severity include high dead space ventilation, an excessive neural drive to breathe and highly fatigable limb muscles, together with mechanical constraints on ventilation. Major controversies concerning control of exercise hyperpnea are discussed along with the need for innovative research to uncover the link of metabolism to breathing in health and disease.

Factors Associated with Reduction of Sedentary Time Following Tiotropium/Olodaterol Therapy in Treatment-Naïve Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Prolonged sedentary behavior is associated with worse prognosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our previous study found that first-line dual therapy with tiotropium/olodaterol significantly reduces sedentary time compared to tiotropium monotherapy in Japanese patients with treatment-naïve COPD, although the characteristics of responders to dual-therapy versus monotherapy for COPD are still unclear.

Methods

Patients with treatment-naïve COPD were randomized to receive either tiotropium or tiotropium/olodaterol treatment for 12 weeks. Physical activity was assessed using a triaxle accelerometer for 2 weeks before and after treatment. This analysis focused on the change in sedentary time, indicated by physical activity of 1.0–1.5 metabolic equivalents (METs), with stratification for the following factors: age, body mass index (BMI), pulmonary function, COPD assessment test (CAT), the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), and physical activity level at study entry.

Results

Thirty-five patients received tiotropium/olodaterol and 34 patients received tiotropium. In patients with lower inspiratory capacity at study entry, a significant reduction in sedentary time was observed in the tiotropium/olodaterol group compared with the tiotropium group (Tio: −12.8 ± 13.5 min, Tio/Olo: −65.1 ± 21.0 min, mean difference, −52.2 min, 95% CI −103.6 to 0.88, p = 0.046). In patients with a shorter duration of physical activity of ≥2 METs at study entry, a significant reduction of sedentary time was observed in the tiotropium/olodaterol group compared with the tiotropium group (Tio: −3.3 ± 17.5 min, Tio/Olo: −72.9 ± 23.1 min, mean difference, −69.7 min, 95% CI −128.7 to −10.6, p = 0.02). There were no differences in terms of age, BMI, CAT score, 6MWD, FEV1, FVC, VC, and physical activity of 1.0–1.5 METs and ≥3.0 METs.

Conclusion

This study showed that COPD patients with lower inspiratory capacity or shorter active time of ≥2.0 METs at study entry are likely to exhibit significantly greater reduction in sedentary time with tiotropium/olodaterol treatment.

Update on guidelines for the treatment of COPD in Taiwan using evidence and GRADE system-based recommendations

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has significant contributions to morbidity and mortality world-wide. Early symptoms of COPD are not readily distinguishable, resulting in a low rate of diagnosis and intervention. Different guidelines and recommendatations for the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exist globally. The first edition of clinical practice guidelines for COPD was published in 2016 by the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan in collaboration with the Taiwan evidence-based medicine association and Cochrane Taiwan, and was revised in 2019 in order to update recent diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for COPD and its acute exacerbation. This revised guideline covered a range of topics highlighted in the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report, including strategies for the diagnosis, assessment, monitoring, and management of stable COPD and exacerbations, with particular focus on evidence from Taiwan. The recommendations included in the revised guideline were formed based on a comprehensive systematic review or meta-analysis of specific clinical issues identified by an expert panel that surveyed relevant scientific evidence in the literature and guidelines published by the clinical communities and organizations nationally and internationally. The guidelines and recommendations are applicable to the clinical settings in Taiwan. We expect this revised guideline to facilitate the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with COPD by physicians and health care professionals in Taiwan. Adaptations of the materials included herein for educational and training purposes is encouraged.

TRONARTO: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Delivered via Soft Mist Inhaler in COPD Patients Stratified by Peak Inspiratory Flow

Background

Inhaled bronchodilator therapy is currently the mainstay of treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Some inhalers require patients to achieve certain inhalation efforts either to activate the device or to deliver medication to the site of action. For dry powder inhalers, low peak inspiratory flow (PIF) can result in poor medication delivery but the clinical significance of this is not well understood.

Methods

TRONARTO was a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group study which stratified patients with moderate-to-severe COPD according to their PIF against medium-low resistance at screening. Patients were randomized to receive tiotropium/olodaterol (5 μg/5 μg) or matched placebo delivered via the Respimat^® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI). After 4 weeks of treatment, we assessed change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) area under the curve 0–3 hours (FEV₁ AUC_0–3h) and trough FEV₁.

Results

Overall, 213 patients were randomized, of whom 106 received tiotropium/olodaterol (PIF <60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥60 L/min, 51) and 107 received placebo (PIF <60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥60 L/min, 52). For FEV₁ AUC_0–3h, the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 336 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 246–425 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF <60 L/min group and 321 mL (95% CI 233–409 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF ≥60 L/min group. For trough FEV₁, the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 201 mL (95% CI 117–286 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF <60 L/min group and 217 mL (95% CI 135–299 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF ≥60 L/min group.

Conclusion

In the TRONARTO study, which included patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and varying inspiratory flow abilities, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in significant lung function improvements versus placebo. This SMI can be used irrespective of the PIF that a patient can generate.

Targeting exertional breathlessness to improve physical activity: the role of primary care

Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). By working together with patients to target exertional breathlessness and increase physical activity, PCPs have an important role to play, early in the disease course, in improving patient outcomes in both the short and long term. In this article, we consider how physical activity affects disease progression from the PCP perspective. We discuss the role of pharmacological therapy, the importance of an holistic approach and the role of PCPs in assessing and promoting physical activity. The complexity and heterogeneity of COPD make it a challenging disease to treat. Patients' avoidance of activity, and subsequent decline in capacity to perform it, further impacts the management of the disease. Improving patient tolerance of physical activity, increasing participation in daily activities and helping patients to remain active are clear goals of COPD management. These may require an holistic approach to management, including pulmonary rehabilitation and psychological programmes in parallel with bronchodilation therapy, in order to address both physiological and behavioural factors. PCPs have an important role to optimise therapy, set goals and communicate the importance of maintaining physical activity to their patients. In addition, optimal treatment that addresses activity-related breathlessness can help prevent the downward spiral of inactivity and get patients moving again, to improve their overall health and long-term prognosis.

Cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium monotherapy or a fixed-dose combination of long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid for COPD in Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands: a model-based study

OBJECTIVES

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines advocate treatment with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators for patients with COPD who have persistent symptoms or continue to have exacerbations while using a single bronchodilator. This study assessed the cost-utility of the fixed dose combination of the bronchodilators tiotropium and olodaterol versus two comparators, tiotropium monotherapy and long-acting β2 agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) combinations, in three European countries: Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands.

METHODS

A previously published COPD patient-level discrete event simulation model was updated with most recent evidence to estimate lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for COPD patients receiving either tiotropium/olodaterol, tiotropium monotherapy or LABA/ICS. Treatment efficacy covered impact on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), total and severe exacerbations and pneumonias. The unit costs of medication, maintenance treatment, exacerbations and pneumonias were obtained for each country. The country-specific analyses adhered to the Finnish, Swedish and Dutch pharmacoeconomic guidelines, respectively.

RESULTS

Treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol gained QALYs ranging from 0.09 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.11 (the Netherlands) versus tiotropium and 0.23 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.28 (the Netherlands) versus LABA/ICS. The Finnish payer's incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tiotropium/olodaterol was €11 000/QALY versus tiotropium and dominant versus LABA/ICS. The Swedish ICERs were €6200/QALY and dominant, respectively (societal perspective). The Dutch ICERs were €14 400 and €9200, respectively (societal perspective). The probability that tiotropium/olodaterol was cost-effective compared with tiotropium at the country-specific (unofficial) threshold values for the maximum willingness to pay for a QALY was 84% for Finland, 98% for Sweden and 99% for the Netherlands. Compared with LABA/ICS, this probability was 100% for all three countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the simulations, tiotropium/olodaterol is a cost-effective treatment option versus tiotropium or LABA/ICS in all three countries. In both Finland and Sweden, tiotropium/olodaterol is more effective and cost saving (ie, dominant) in comparison with LABA/ICS.

Health and functional status of tiotropium/olodaterol-treated patients with COPD: results from the AERIAL® non-interventional study

Patients with COPD often have reduced physical activity, which can impair health status. Real-world data can provide valuable information on the health and functional status of patients with COPD treated with tiotropium/olodaterol.  AERIAL® (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03165045) was a German, non-interventional study of patients with COPD receiving treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol under real-world conditions for ∼6 weeks. The primary end-point was the proportion of patients achieving a decrease of ≥0.4 points in Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) score. The CCQ-4 subdomain was used to assess functional status, and the Physician's Global Evaluation (PGE) scale was used to assess the patients' general condition. Safety was assessed, as well as patient satisfaction and willingness to continue treatment.  Out of 1351 screened patients, 1322 were treated and 1140 comprised the full analysis set. The primary end-point was met: 66.3% of patients achieved a ≥0.4-point decrease in overall CCQ score (mean±sd decrease 0.78±0.95). Mean±sd decreases in CCQ symptoms and functional state subdomains were 0.84±1.06 and 0.75±1.05 points, respectively. PGE scores improved. One fatality (not treatment-related) and 23 drug-related adverse events were recorded, most commonly nausea and vertigo. >85% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied with tiotropium/olodaterol overall and with the Respimat® device, both in terms of inhalation and handling. Most patients (95.2%) expressed willingness to continue treatment.  Patients with COPD treated with tiotropium/olodaterol via Respimat® in routine clinical practice had clinically relevant improvements in health and functional status compared with baseline.

Future concepts in bronchodilation for COPD: dual- versus monotherapy

Most patients with COPD are recommended to initiate maintenance therapy with a single long-acting bronchodilator, such as a long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting β₂-agonist. However, many patients receiving mono-bronchodilation continue to experience high symptom burden, suggesting that patients are frequently not receiving optimal treatment. Treatment goals for COPD are often broad and not individually tailored, making initial treatment response assessments difficult. A personalised approach to initial maintenance therapy, based upon an individual's symptom burden and exacerbation risk, may be more appropriate.An alternative approach would be to maximise bronchodilation early in the disease course of all patients with COPD. Evidence suggests that dual bronchodilation has greater and consistent efficacy for lung function and symptoms than mono-bronchodilation, whilst potentially reducing the risk of exacerbations and disease deterioration, with a similar safety profile to mono-bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and symptoms between dual- and mono-bronchodilation have also been demonstrated in maintenance-naïve patients, who are most likely to resemble those at first presentation in a clinical setting. Despite promising results, there are several evidence gaps that need to be addressed to allow decision makers to evaluate the merits of a widespread earlier introduction of dual bronchodilation.

Dual LABA/LAMA Therapy versus LABA or LAMA Monotherapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Support of the American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Rationale: There is uncertainty on the optimal first-line therapy for symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Long-acting β₂-receptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have long been mainstays of treatment, though it is still not clear if dual therapy with LABA/LAMA is superior to monotherapy for symptomatic COPD.Objectives: To clarify the evidence landscape, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following question: in patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, is LABA/LAMA combination therapy more effective and equally safe compared with LABA or LAMA monotherapy?Methods: A search of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted by a medical librarian for randomized controlled trials enrolling patients with COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance that compare LABA/LAMA combination therapy to LABA or LAMA monotherapy. A systematic approach was used to screen, abstract, and critically appraise the emerging study evidence. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method was applied to rate the certainty and quality of the evidence.Results: A total of 24 studies were eligible for inclusion (n = 45,441). Pairwise random-effects meta-analysis revealed reductions in hospital admissions (11% reduction; P < 0.01) and acute exacerbations of COPD (20% reduction; P < 0.002), all in favor of LABA/LAMA dual therapy. Although there is reduced dyspnea (0.10 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001) and improved health-related quality of life (-0.13 standardized mean difference; P < 0.001), both values did not meet a clinical meaningful difference threshold. LABA/LAMA combination therapy showed no difference in treatment-emergent adverse effects (risk ratio, 0.99; P = 0.34) when compared with either LAMA or LABA monotherapy.Conclusions: Based on the reviewed evidence, in patients with symptomatic COPD who complain of dyspnea and/or exercise intolerance, dual LABA/LAMA therapy is superior to either LABA or LAMA monotherapy based on the reduced risk of exacerbations and hospitalizations.

Real-world effectiveness of early intervention with fixed-dose tiotropium/olodaterol vs tiotropium in Japanese patients with COPD: a high-dimensional propensity score-matched cohort analysis

Background

Escalation to triple therapy (long-acting muscarinic antagonist/β₂-agonist, inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) is recommended for patients on LAMA/LABA combinations with frequent exacerbations and severe symptoms. An extended time-to-escalation to triple therapy suggests patients are in a stable condition and is an indicator of treatment effectiveness. No studies in Japanese clinical practice have compared the effectiveness of LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combination therapies with LAMA monotherapy in terms of time-to-escalation to triple therapy. The primary objective of this real-world study in Japan was to compare time-to-escalation to triple therapy among new users of tiotropium/olodaterol or tiotropium monotherapy for COPD without asthma.

Methods

In this active-comparator cohort study, new users of tiotropium/olodaterol (n = 1436) and tiotropium monotherapy (n = 5352) were identified from a large Japanese hospital-based database (Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd., Tokyo; prespecified study period: 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2019); patients in each group were matched 1:1 using high-dimensional propensity scores (hdPS). The primary outcome was time-to-escalation to triple therapy.

Results

For the prespecified study period in the hdPS-matched cohort, escalation to triple therapy was infrequent among new users of tiotropium/olodaterol (n = 1302, 7 escalation events) and tiotropium monotherapy (n = 1302, 8 escalation events). The difference in time-to-escalation to triple therapy between groups was not statistically significant (median [interquartile range]: 28 days [15.0–139.2] for tiotropium monotherapy vs 193 days [94.5–302.0] for tiotropium/olodaterol; hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.32–2.46). Similar findings (hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% Cl: 0.36–1.40) were observed in a post hoc analysis, which extended the study period by 1 year to 31 March 2020. Risks of first moderate and/or severe COPD exacerbation were lower for tiotropium/olodaterol than tiotropium monotherapy (between-group differences not significant). There were no significant between-group differences for the risks of all-cause inpatient mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and first use of home oxygen therapy.

Conclusions

ICS monotherapy or ICS/LABA added to tiotropium or tiotropium/olodaterol is limited in Japanese clinical settings. The number of escalations to triple therapy was very limited in the dataset and there was insufficient power to detect differences between the treatment groups in the primary hdPS-matched cohort.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-021-01776-y.

Comparison of Effectiveness Using Different Dual Bronchodilator Agents in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment

The effectiveness and safety of fixed dual long-acting bronchodilators for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients have been well established; however, there is a paucity of clinical effectiveness comparison in patients with COPD treatment. The aim of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of three once-daily dual bronchodilator agents in patients with COPD. Patients with diagnosed COPD and treated with a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) + long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination therapy (UME/VIL (umeclidinium and vilanterol inhalation powder), IND/GLY (indacaterol and glycopyrronium), and TIO/OLO (tiotropium and olodaterol)) were enrolled in this retrospective study over a period of 12 months. Effectiveness assessments were evaluated using a COPD assessment test (CAT) and lung function parameters. Besides, times for acute exacerbation were also assessed. The enrolled patients’ number was 177 in IND/GLY, 176 in UME/VIL and 183 in TIO/OLO. Lung function measurements with FEV1 had significantly improved for patients using TIO/OLO (98.7 mL) compared to those of IND/GLY (65.2 mL) and UME/VIL (64.4 mL) (p < 0.001). CAT scores were also significantly decreased in patients treated with TIO/OLO (CAT down 5.6) than those with IND/GLY (3.8) and UME/VIL (3.9) (p = 0.03). Acute exacerbation was also reduced in patients using TIO/OLO (4.9%) compared with those using IND/GLY (10.2%) and UME/VIL (11.9%) (p = 0.01). Significant improvement in pulmonary function, symptoms were demonstrated after 12 months of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combination therapy with three different treatment options. TIO/OLO demonstrated higher therapeutic effects compared with UME/VIL or IND/GLY. Determining clinical relevance will require a well-designed randomized controlled trial.

The cost-saving switch from inhaled corticosteroid-containing treatments to dual bronchodilation: a two-country projection of epidemiological and economic burden in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Purpose:

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2018 recommendations support maintenance treatment with long-acting bronchodilators in most symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). While restricting the overuse of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may influence healthcare utilization required to treat inadvertent respiratory (exacerbations and pneumonia) and diabetes-related events, it may also change the total medication cost. This analysis was performed to estimate the 5-year budget impact of switching from ICS-containing treatment combinations to dual bronchodilation, in line with the recommendations.

Methods:

The model quantified the budget impact of treatment and healthcare resource utilization when COPD patients were anticipated to switch from ICS-containing treatments to dual bronchodilation. Three switch scenarios were calculated with increasing proportions of patients on dual long-acting bronchodilators, to the detriment of ICS-containing double and triple combinations. Clinical and cost input data were based on results from clinical trials and Greek and Portuguese healthcare cost databases.

Results:

Healthcare resource use to manage exacerbations, pneumonia and diabetes-related events were projected to increase between 2019 and 2023 in parallel with the growing COPD patient population and associated costs were estimated at 52–57% of the total disease cost in the Greek and Portuguese base case scenarios. Total cost savings between 21 and 112 million EUR were projected when the proportion of patients on double and triple ICS-containing treatments was gradually reduced to 50% in scenario A, 20% in scenario B and 7% in scenario C. Sensitivity analyses showed that none of the model assumptions had a major impact on the projected savings.

Conclusion:

The alignment of COPD treatment with current recommendations may bring clinical benefits to patients, without substantial cost increases and even cost savings for payers.

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Efficacy of preoperative inhaled LAMA/LABA combinations in patients with lung cancer and untreated COPD

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). When untreated COPD is found before lung cancer surgery, we have been actively intervening therapeutically with inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations. We investigated the efficacy of preoperative LAMA/LABA treatment.

METHODS

We reviewed data from 261 patients who underwent pulmonary resection for primary lung cancer. Of these, 59 patients showed unrecognized obstructive ventilatory impairment on respiratory function testing. We administered inhaled drugs for 38 patients, of whom 22 patients treated with LAMA/LABA combinations and diagnosed with COPD were retrospectively analyzed regarding improvement of respiratory function and postoperative course.

RESULTS

Median duration of LAMA/LABA treatment was 19.5 days (interquartile range (IQR), 10.5-28.3 days). Percentage predicted vital capacity (%VC) (pretreatment: 95.6%, IQR 91.9-111.7 vs posttreatment 102.8%, IQR 92.3-113.0), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (1.76 L, 1.43-2.12 vs 2.00 L, 1.78-2.40), forced VC (FVC) (2.96 L, 2.64-3.47 vs 3.22 L, 2.95-3.74) and percentage predicted FEV1 (80.1%, 68.4-97.0 vs 91.6%, 80.3-101.9) were all significantly improved (p < 0.05 each). FEV1/FVC tended to be improved, but not significantly. No significant difference in improvement of respiratory function was seen between short-term (≤2 weeks) and normal-term (>2 weeks) treatment. PPCs occurred in 4 of 22 patients (18.2%), showing no significant difference compared to patients with COPD previously treated with inhaled drugs (2/20; 10.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Respiratory function is improved by preoperative LAMA/LABA treatment even in the short term. Starting treatment allows even COPD patients diagnosed on preoperative screening to experience the same frequency of PPCs as previously treated patients.

An Observational Study Assessing Changes in Health and Functional Status in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) During Therapy with Spiolto® Respimat® in Everyday Clinical Practice: The Greek ELLACTO Study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often report deteriorated functional status and poor health-related quality of life, both core aspects of their overall health status. The study objective was to assess tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® effects on health and functional status of COPD patients requiring long-acting dual bronchodilation treatment in the real world.

METHODS

ELLACTO was an open-label, observational, prospective study conducted in Greece, measuring changes on health and functional status of COPD patients treated with a fixed dose of tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® for approximately 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was "therapeutic success" defined as a ≥ 0.4-point decrease in the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) score at week 6. Secondary endpoints included absolute changes in the CCQ and the functional subscale CCQ-4 at week 6, patient general condition measured by Physician's Global Evaluation (PGE) score at baseline and week 6, patient satisfaction and preference with Respimat^® device (assessed by the abbreviated Patient Satisfaction and Preference Questionnaire (PASAPQ)) at week 6 and treatment continuation with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® after the study.

RESULTS

After approximately 6 weeks of treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^®, therapeutic success was achieved by 64.3% of 1332 patients included in the final analysis [95% confidence interval [CI] 62-67]. Mean [standard deviation (SD)] absolute changes in CCQ and CCQ-4 scores at week 6 were - 0.63 (0.635) and - 0.59 (0.714) points, respectively. Patient general condition improved and more than 77.4% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the use of the Respimat^® device. Among patients previously using the HandiHaler^® device (n = 254), 85.4% expressed a preference for Respimat^® over 6.7% for HandiHaler^®. Most patients (95.7%) were willing to continue treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® after the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol Respimat^® led to an improved health status in Greek COPD patients. Most patients also expressed a preference for the Respimat^® device and willingness to continue treatment with it.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03419962.

Role of Airway Smooth Muscle in Inflammation Related to Asthma and COPD

Airway smooth muscle contributes to both contractility and inflammation in the pathophysiology of asthma and COPD. Airway smooth muscle cells can change the degree of a variety of functions, including contraction, proliferation, migration, and the secretion of inflammatory mediators (phenotype plasticity). Airflow limitation, airway hyperresponsiveness, β₂-adrenergic desensitization, and airway remodeling, which are fundamental characteristic features of these diseases, are caused by phenotype changes in airway smooth muscle cells. Alterations between contractile and hyper-contractile, synthetic/proliferative phenotypes result from Ca²⁺ dynamics and Ca²⁺ sensitization. Modulation of Ca²⁺ dynamics through the large-conductance Ca²⁺-activated K⁺ channel/L-type voltage-dependent Ca²⁺ channel linkage and of Ca²⁺ sensitization through the RhoA/Rho-kinase pathway contributes not only to alterations in the contractile phenotype involved in airflow limitation, airway hyperresponsiveness, and β₂-adrenergic desensitization but also to alteration of the synthetic/proliferative phenotype involved in airway remodeling. These Ca²⁺ signal pathways are also associated with synergistic effects due to allosteric modulation between β₂-adrenergic agonists and muscarinic antagonists. Therefore, airway smooth muscle may be a target tissue in the therapy for these diseases. Moreover, the phenotype changing in airway smooth muscle cells with focuses on Ca²⁺ signaling may provide novel strategies for research and development of effective remedies against both bronchoconstriction and inflammation.

Therapeutic Success of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Measured Using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), in Routine Clinical Practice: A Multinational Non-Interventional Study

BACKGROUND

The Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) is a simple patient-reported tool to measure clinical control of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

OBJECTIVE

This open-label, single-arm, non-interventional study (NCT03663569) investigated changes in CCQ score during treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol in clinical practice.

METHODS

Data were included from consenting COPD patients, enrolled in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Switzerland and Ukraine, who were receiving a new prescription for tiotropium/olodaterol according to the treating physician in a real-world environment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of therapeutic success, defined as a 0.4-point decrease in CCQ score after treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol for approximately 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Overall, 4819 patients were treated; baseline and Week 6 CCQ scores were available for 4700 patients, mostly classified as Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) B (51.6%) or D (42.7%). After 6 weeks' treatment, 81.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 80.24-82.49) of patients achieved therapeutic success; mean improvement in overall CCQ score was 1.02 points (95% CI 1.00-1.05). Improved CCQ score was seen in 92.2% of patients (95% CI 91.43-92.98), 2.5% had no change and 5.3% showed a worsening. When stratified by prior treatment, the greatest benefit was seen in treatment-naïve patients, with 85.7% achieving therapeutic success, compared with 79.5% of those pretreated with long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and 74.2% of those pretreated with LABA or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy. Overall, rescue medication decreased by 1.25 puffs/day (95% CI 1.19-1.31) versus baseline. In total, 29 patients (0.6%) reported drug-related adverse events and 7 patients reported serious adverse events (0.15%).

CONCLUSION

In 4700 COPD patients, 6 weeks' treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol, as initial treatment or follow-up to LAMA or LABA monotherapy or LABA/ICS, improved CCQ and decreased rescue medication use. The adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of tiotropium/olodaterol.

Dual versus monotherapy with bronchodilators in GOLD group B COPD patients according to baseline FEV1 level: a patient-level pooled analysis of phase-3 randomized clinical trials

Background

Which patients should receive dual therapy as initial treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is only loosely defined. We evaluated if a lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) identifies a population more likely to benefit from dual therapy than monotherapy among group B COPD patients in whom Global initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (GOLD) recommends monotherapy as initial treatment.

Methods

This was a patient-level pooled analysis of phase-3 randomized controlled trials involving dual bronchodilators. Study patients were classified into two groups based on the FEV₁ of 50% of the predicted value (GOLD I/II versus GOLD III/IV). We evaluated the efficacy of dual versus monotherapy (long-acting beta-2 agonist [LABA] or long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) between these two groups in the following outcomes: changes in trough FEV₁, the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, the proportion of SGRQ responders, time to first exacerbation, and risk of adverse events.

Results

A total of 14,449 group B patients from 12 studies were divided into GOLD III/IV (n = 8043) or GOLD I/II group (n = 6406). In the GOLD III/IV group, dual therapy was significantly more effective in improving FEV₁, reducing SGRQ scores, and achieving a higher proportion of SGRQ responders compared with either LABA or LAMA. Dual therapy also showed a significantly longer time to first exacerbation compared with LABA in the GOLD III/IV group. In contrast, in the GOLD I/II group, the benefits of dual therapy over monotherapy were less consistent. Although dual therapy resulted in significantly higher FEV₁ than either LABA or LAMA, it did not show significant differences in the SGRQ score and proportion of SGRQ responders as compared with LABA. The time to first exacerbation was also not significantly different between dual therapy and either LABA or LAMA in the GOLD I/II group.

Conclusions

Dual therapy demonstrated benefits over monotherapy more consistently in patients with lower FEV₁ than those with higher FEV₁.

Reducing and managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations with tiotropium + olodaterol

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review clinical evidence supporting the use of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA), respectively, as the initial and follow-up treatment choice in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as per Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2020 recommendations-the impact of this treatment strategy on the reduction in the risk of exacerbations-and the importance of early therapeutic interventions.

METHODS

For this narrative review, the available literature was searched to identify studies including patients with COPD receiving tiotropium and olodaterol as either monotherapy or combination therapy and studies including patients with COPD receiving inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in addition to long-acting bronchodilators. Relevant studies were included in the review.

RESULTS

Patients with COPD are often prescribed ICS therapy, which, when used over a long term, can be associated with local and systemic adverse effects. The GOLD 2020 report recommends dual bronchodilator therapy as both an initial and follow-up treatment option. A LABA + LAMA combination is mechanistically synergistic, and cumulative evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol supports therapeutic advantages over monotherapy in most patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The early stages of COPD may represent a "window of therapeutic opportunity" during which initiation of tiotropium and olodaterol dual bronchodilator therapy may improve lung function and quality of life and reduce exacerbations in patients with COPD.

Effects of Tiotropium/Olodaterol on Activity-Related Breathlessness, Exercise Endurance and Physical Activity in Patients with COPD: Narrative Review with Meta-/Pooled Analyses

Abstract

One of the most debilitating symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is breathlessness, which leads to avoidance of physical activities in daily living and hastens clinical deterioration. Treatment of patients with COPD with inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combination therapy improves airflow limitation, reduces breathlessness compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and improves health status and quality of life. A large clinical trial programme focusing on the effects of tiotropium/olodaterol combination therapy demonstrated that this LAMA/LABA combination improves lung function and reduces hyperinflation (assessed by serial inspiratory capacity measurements) compared with either tiotropium alone or placebo in patients with COPD. Tiotropium/olodaterol also increases exercise endurance capacity and improves patient perception of the intensity of breathlessness compared with placebo. In this narrative review, we focus on the relationship between improving symptoms during activity, the ability to remain active in daily life and how this may impact quality of life. We consider the benefits of therapy optimisation by means of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol, and present new data from meta-analyses/pooled analyses showing that tiotropium/olodaterol improves inspiratory capacity compared with placebo and tiotropium and improves exercise endurance time compared with placebo after 6 weeks of treatment. We also discuss the importance of taking a holistic approach to improving physical activity, including pulmonary rehabilitation and exercise programmes in parallel with bronchodilator therapy and psychological programmes to support behaviour change.

Graphic Abstract

Tiotropium/Olodaterol Delays Clinically Important Deterioration Compared with Tiotropium Monotherapy in Patients with Early COPD: a Post Hoc Analysis of the TONADO® Trials

Introduction

Since chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous condition, a composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration (CID) may provide a more holistic assessment of treatment efficacy. We compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist combination therapy with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium alone using a composite endpoint for CID. CID was evaluated overall and in patients with low exacerbation history (at most one moderate exacerbation in the past year [not leading to hospitalisation]), Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2 patients and maintenance-naïve patients with COPD. We assessed whether early treatment optimisation is more effective with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in delaying and reducing the risk of CID.

Methods

Data were analysed from 2055 patients treated with either tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 μg or tiotropium 5 μg (delivered via Respimat^®) in two replicate, 52-week, parallel-group, double-blind studies (TONADO^® 1/2). CID was defined as a decline of at least 0.1 L from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, increase from baseline of at least 4 units in St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score, or moderate/severe exacerbation. Time to first occurrence of one of these events was recorded as time to first CID.

Results

Overall, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol significantly increased the time to, and reduced the risk of, CID versus tiotropium (median time to CID 226 versus 169 days; hazard ratio [HR] 0.76 [95% confidence interval 0.68, 0.85]; P < 0.0001). Significant reductions were also observed in patients with low exacerbation history (241 versus 170; HR 0.73 [0.64, 0.83]; P < 0.0001), GOLD 2 patients (241 versus 169; 0.72 [0.61, 0.84]; P < 0.0001) and maintenance-naïve patients (233 versus 171; 0.75 [0.62, 0.91]; P = 0.0030).

Conclusion

In patients with COPD, including patients with low exacerbation history, GOLD 2 patients and maintenance-naïve patients, tiotropium/olodaterol reduced the risk of CID versus tiotropium. These results demonstrate the advantages of treatment optimisation with tiotropium/olodaterol over tiotropium monotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: TONADO^® 1 and 2 (NCT01431274 and NCT01431287, registered 8 September 2011).

Graphic Abstract

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-020-01528-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

COPD is a complicated disease that deteriorates over time. Worsening of COPD is associated with the lungs working less effectively, a fall in quality of life and a rise in sudden flare-ups of the disease. In this study, we looked at lung function, quality of life and flare-ups together using a measure called “clinically important deterioration” (CID). We looked at 2055 people with COPD to compare the effects of taking two bronchodilators (tiotropium and olodaterol) against taking one bronchodilator (tiotropium alone). Bronchodilators are a type of inhaled medication that relax the muscles in the lungs and widen airways, making it easier to breathe. They have also been shown to reduce sudden flare-ups of COPD. Across a wide range of people with COPD, we found that treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol reduced the risk of a CID compared with tiotropium alone. This includes in those patients at an early stage of disease, who may benefit from finding the best treatment option for them as early as possible.

Assessment of physical functioning in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requiring long-acting dual bronchodilation in routine clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

We aim to determine the effect of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tiotropium/olodaterol on Physical activity (PA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a real world setting.

METHODS

COPD patients were prospectively enrolled to evaluate the effect of a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol inhaler therapy via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI) on the physical functioning scale (PF-10), and the general condition of the patient as assessed by the physician (Physician's Global Evaluation, PGE), and the patient's satisfaction after 6 weeks of treatment. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with therapeutic success at 6th week follow-up, defined as a ≥10-points increase in the standardised PF-10 score from baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 257 patients from 57 sites were enrolled, and 234 completed the follow up. After 6 weeks of treatment, 155 out of 234 patients (66.2%) showed therapeutic success in the physical functioning score, coupled with significant improvement in PGE score: 78 (33.3%) patients with good/excellent PGE score at baseline, increasing to 172 (73.5%) at 6th week (p<0.0001). The patient's satisfaction was excellent: 77.2% reporting to be satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment, 79.9% with inhaling and 79.0% with the handling of SMI device. 1.6% of patients reported an investigator-defined drug-related adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of COPD patients with a FDC of tiotropium/olodaterol SMI for 6 weeks resulted in significant improvements in the patients' condition as assessed by patients and physicians, with no new safety findings.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - diagnosis and management of stable disease; a personalized approach to care, using the treatable traits concept based on clinical phenotypes. Position paper of the Czech Pneumological and Phthisiological Society

This position paper has been drafted by experts from the Czech national board of diseases with bronchial obstruction, of the Czech Pneumological and Phthisiological Society. The statements and recommendations are based on both the results of randomized controlled trials and data from cross-sectional and prospective real-life studies to ensure they are as close as possible to the context of daily clinical practice and the current health care system of the Czech Republic. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a preventable and treatable heterogeneous syndrome with a number of pulmonary and extrapulmonary clinical features and concomitant chronic diseases. The disease is associated with significant mortality, morbidity and reduced quality of life. The main characteristics include persistent respiratory symptoms and only partially reversible airflow obstruction developing due to an abnormal inflammatory response of the lungs to noxious particles and gases. Oxidative stress, protease-antiprotease imbalance and increased numbers of pro-inflammatory cells (mainly neutrophils) are the main drivers of primarily non-infectious inflammation in COPD. Besides smoking, household air pollution, occupational exposure, low birth weight, frequent respiratory infections during childhood and also genetic factors are important risk factors of COPD development. Progressive airflow limitation and airway remodelling leads to air trapping, static and dynamic hyperinflation, gas exchange abnormalities and decreased exercise capacity. Various features of the disease are expressed unequally in individual patients, resulting in various types of disease presentation, emerging as the "clinical phenotypes" (for specific clinical characteristics) and "treatable traits" (for treatable characteristics) concept. The estimated prevalence of COPD in Czechia is around 6.7% with 3,200-3,500 deaths reported annually. The elementary requirements for diagnosis of COPD are spirometric confirmation of post-bronchodilator airflow obstruction (post-BD FEV₁/VCmax <70%) and respiratory symptoms assessement (dyspnoea, exercise limitation, cough and/or sputum production. In order to establish definite COPD diagnosis, a five-step evaluation should be performed, including: 1/ inhalation risk assessment, 2/ symptoms evaluation, 3/ lung function tests, 4/ laboratory tests and 5/ imaging. At the same time, all alternative diagnoses should be excluded. For disease classification, this position paper uses both GOLD stages (1 to 4), GOLD groups (A to D) and evaluation of clinical phenotype(s). Prognosis assessment should be done in each patient. For this purpose, we recommend the use of the BODE or the CADOT index. Six elementary clinical phenotypes are recognized, including chronic bronchitis, frequent exacerbator, emphysematous, asthma/COPD overlap (ACO), bronchiectases with COPD overlap (BCO) and pulmonary cachexia. In our concept, all of these clinical phenotypes are also considered independent treatable traits. For each treatable trait, specific pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies are defined in this document. The coincidence of two or more clinical phenotypes (i.e., treatable traits) may occur in a single individual, giving the opportunity of fully individualized, phenotype-specific treatment. Treatment of COPD should reflect the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease and be tailored to individual patients. Major goals of COPD treatment are symptom reduction and decreased exacerbation risk. Treatment strategy is divided into five strata: risk elimination, basic treatment, phenotype-specific treatment, treatment of respiratory failure and palliative care, and treatment of comorbidities. Risk elimination includes interventions against tobacco smoking and environmental/occupational exposures. Basic treatment is based on bronchodilator therapy, pulmonary rehabilitation, vaccination, care for appropriate nutrition, inhalation training, education and psychosocial support. Adequate phenotype-specific treatment varies phenotype by phenotype, including more than ten different pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. If more than one clinical phenotype is present, treatment strategy should follow the expression of each phenotypic label separately. In such patients, multicomponental therapeutic regimens are needed, resulting in fully individualized care. In the future, stronger measures against smoking, improvements in occupational and environmental health, early diagnosis strategies, as well as biomarker identification for patients responsive to specific treatments are warranted. New classes of treatment (inhaled PDE3/4 inhibitors, single molecule dual bronchodilators, anti-inflammatory drugs, gene editing molecules or new bronchoscopic procedures) are expected to enter the clinical practice in a very few years.

Ultra Long-Acting β-Agonists in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled β-agonists have been foundational medications for maintenance COPD management for decades. Through activation of cyclic adenosine monophosphate pathways, these agents relax airway smooth muscle and improve expiratory airflow by relieving bronchospasm and alleviating air trapping and dynamic hyperinflation improving breathlessness, exertional capabilities, and quality of life. β-agonist drug development has discovered drugs with increasing longer durations of action: short acting (SABA) (4-6 h), long acting (LABA) (6-12 h), and ultra-long acting (ULABA) (24 h). Three ULABAs, indacaterol, olodaterol, and vilanterol, are approved for clinical treatment of COPD.

PURPOSE

This article reviews both clinically approved ULABAs and ULABAs in development.

CONCLUSION

Indacaterol and olodaterol were originally approved for clinical use as monotherapies for COPD. Vilanterol is the first ULABA to be approved only in combination with other respiratory medications. Although there are many other ULABA's in various stages of development, most clinical testing of these novel agents is suspended or proceeding slowly. The three approved ULABAs are being combined with antimuscarinic agents and corticosteroids as dual and triple agent treatments that are being tested for clinical use and efficacy. Increasingly, these clinical trials are using specific COPD clinical characteristics to define study populations and to begin to develop therapies that are trait-specific.

Lung Deposition Using the Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler Mono and Fixed-Dose Combination Therapies: An In Vitro/In Silico Analysis

Tiotropium and olodaterol are mainstay treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and yield important clinical improvements, especially when used in fixed-dose combination. Whilst previous studies have shown consistent delivery of tiotropium to the lungs with the Respimat^® inhaler, no such study has been carried out for olodaterol or the components of their fixed-dose combination (TIO/OLO). Combining in vitro and in silico models, we measured the amount of drug retained in the mouth-throat area, entering the trachea and reaching the lung periphery. We applied a hybrid deposition model that considered the experimentally determined output of an Alberta throat model (in vitro - dose to lung) combined with a computational fluid dynamic model of the lungs (in silico). Regardless of the COPD breathing pattern, ≥50% of the nominal dose of either tiotropium, olodaterol, or TIO and OLO in the fixed-dose combination reached the lung. Of the dose reaching the lungs, greater than 50% is deposited in the lung periphery (from generation 8 onwards). Our study demonstrated that aerosol delivery via the Respimat inhaler achieved high deposition deep into the lung periphery with all formulations evaluated.

Long-term safety of tiotropium/olodaterol in older patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD in the TONADO® studies

Older patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may be at increased risk of adverse events (AEs) due to decreased protective organ function and increased comorbidities. TONADO® 1 + 2 were replicate, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 52-week, Phase III trials comparing the efficacy and safety of tiotropium/olodaterol (5/5 µg) versus the monocomponents via the Respimat® inhaler in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD. In this prespecified safety analysis, patients were grouped by age. Of 3100 patients, 1585 (51.1%) were aged <65 years, 1198 (38.7%) 65-<75 years, 309 (10.0%) 75-<85 years, and eight (0.3%) ≥85 years. At baseline, 23.4% had a pre-existing cardiac disorder, 45.6% had hypertension, and 13.3% had glucose metabolism disorders, including diagnosed diabetes. Overall, there was no increase in major adverse cardiac events, other AEs, or serious AEs with tiotropium/olodaterol versus the monocomponents in any age group, supporting the safety of tiotropium/olodaterol in older patients with COPD.

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.

Dual Bronchodilator in the Era of Triple Therapy

Pharmacological medications used for the treatment of COPD patients have increased significantly. Long-acting bronchodilators have been recognized as the mainstay of the treatment of stable COPD, while ICS are usually added in patients with COPD who experience exacerbations, despite bronchodilator treatment. In the latest years, several studies have been published showing the beneficial effect of adding ICS on dual bronchodilation in patients suffering from more severe disease comparing triple therapy with several therapeutic regiments including dual bronchodilation and providing a message that this triple therapy might be more appropriate for COPD patients. However, not all COPD patients have a desirable response to ICS treatment while long-term ICS use in COPD is associated with several side effects. In this report, we aimed to provide a review of the current knowledge on the importance of dual bronchodilation on COPD patients and to compare its use with triple therapy, by covering a wide spectrum of topics. Finally, we propose an algorithm on performing treatment step up from dual bronchodilation to triple therapy and step down from triple to double bronchodilation considering the current evidence.

A Non-Interventional Study of Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Any Triple Combination Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The EVELUT® Study Protocol

Background

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2020 report recommends that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) suffering from persistent dyspnea, despite long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance therapy, are switched to either a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA combination regimen or LAMA/LABA/ICS triple therapy. However, to date, no studies have investigated the direct switch from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA therapy—instead of switching to triple therapy—in a prospective, real-world, non-interventional setting.

Methods

EVELUT^® (NCT03954132) is an ongoing, prospective, open-label, multicenter, non-interventional study comparing the once-daily fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol (tio/olo) versus any triple therapy (LAMA/LABA/ICS) in patients with COPD who are symptomatic despite LABA/ICS maintenance therapy. Patients with acute or frequent COPD exacerbations are excluded from the study. Participants will receive LABA/ICS maintenance treatment until Visit 1, followed by switching of treatment to tio/olo or LAMA/LABA/ICS. The primary endpoints are changes in modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT^®) scores after approximately 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints are change in the patients’ general condition according to the Physician’s Global Evaluation score, the proportion of responders with a change in mMRC score of ≥1 and in CAT^® score of ≥2, and patient satisfaction with the inhaler and therapy. The study is expected to enroll approximately 900 patients.

Conclusion

EVELUT results are expected to add to the current real-world evidence informing therapeutic decisions for COPD in everyday clinical practice.

Trial Registration

The European Union electronic Register of Post-authorisation Studies (EU PAS Register): EUPAS29784; the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM): NIS Study No 7305; Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03954132.

Tiotropium/Olodaterol Decreases Exacerbation Rates Compared with Tiotropium in a Range of Patients with COPD: Pooled Analysis of the TONADO®/DYNAGITO® Trials

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies demonstrated that tiotropium/olodaterol reduced rates of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, this should be examined in a wider population.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis pooled data from TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®, three 52-week, parallel-group, randomised, double-blind, phase III trials investigating patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with and without previous exacerbations, who received tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg or tiotropium 5 µg. Subgroup analyses were conducted on patients stratified by exacerbation history, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage 2-4 disease severity and baseline inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use.

RESULTS

In 9942 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol was associated with lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations (0.68 vs. 0.77 per patient-year; rate ratio (RR) vs. tiotropium 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 0.95; P = 0.0003) and exacerbations requiring hospitalisation (0.11 vs. 0.13 per patient-year; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75, 0.99; P = 0.0380) versus tiotropium. Lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were evident in patients with 0-1 moderate exacerbation in the previous year (0.54 vs. 0.60 per patient-year; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82, 0.98; P = 0.0187) and at least two moderate or at least one severe exacerbation(s) in the previous year (0.97 vs. 1.09 per patient-year; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82, 0.97; P = 0.0096). In patients with GOLD 2 and GOLD 3 COPD, moderate/severe exacerbation rates were lower with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium; GOLD 4 patients showed negligible difference between treatments. When evaluating patients by baseline ICS use, there was a significantly lower rate of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in patients receiving ICS.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium/olodaterol decreased the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations and exacerbations leading to hospitalisation versus tiotropium. Results from this large, pooled, post hoc analysis support the use of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in a broad range of patients, reflective of patients with COPD in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TONADO^® 1 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431274); TONADO^® 2 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431287); DYNAGITO^® (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02296138). People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may have times when their symptoms worsen, known as exacerbations. This may mean that they need to take additional medications, such as antibiotics or oral steroids. Studies have shown that a combination of two types of inhaled medicine-tiotropium and olodaterol-can help to reduce exacerbations in some people. To see if this is also the case across a larger and more diverse range of people, we combined the results from three studies (TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®) that looked at people who were taking tiotropium and olodaterol together and people who were taking tiotropium alone. We showed that, across a wide range of people, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol was generally better at reducing exacerbations than tiotropium. Tiotropium/olodaterol also decreased the number of exacerbations that led to hospitalisation compared with tiotropium. Overall, our results support the use of combined tiotropium/olodaterol in people at different stages of COPD.

Efficacy of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium as a First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Patients with COPD Who Are Naïve to LAMA, LABA and ICS: Pooled Analysis of Four Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol compared with tiotropium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been demonstrated in a large clinical programme. Currently, randomised controlled trial (RCT) data on dual bronchodilation as first-line maintenance therapy are limited. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from four RCTs, we compared the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium as maintenance therapy in patients with COPD who were not receiving maintenance treatment with long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) ("maintenance naïve") at study entry.

METHODS

TONADO^® 1/2 (52 weeks) and OTEMTO^® 1/2 (12 weeks) were phase III RCTs in patients with COPD. TONADO 1/2 and OTEMTO 1/2 enrolled patients with post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) < 80% predicted (lower limit FEV₁ ≥ 30% in OTEMTO 1/2 only). We examined the effect of tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg versus tiotropium 5 µg on trough FEV₁ response, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score at 12 weeks in four pooled studies.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis included 1078 maintenance-naïve patients. There were significant improvements with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in trough FEV₁ [0.056 L; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.033, 0.079; P < 0.0001], SGRQ score (- 1.780; 95% CI - 3.126 to - 0.434; P = 0.0096) and TDI score (0.409; 95% CI 0.077, 0.741; P = 0.0158) at week 12. For patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol, the odds of achieving a minimal clinically important difference from baseline in any of the analysed outcomes (FEV₁ ≥ 0.1 L, SGRQ ≥ 4.0 points or TDI ≥ 1.0 point) were higher versus tiotropium.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who were maintenance naïve at baseline, treatment initiation with tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in greater improvements in lung function, health status and dyspnoea severity compared with tiotropium alone, without compromising patient safety. These results support the use of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol as first-line maintenance treatment in patients with COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: TONADO^® 1 and 2 (NCT01431274 and NCT01431287, registered 8 September 2011) and OTEMTO^® 1 and 2 (NCT01964352 and NCT02006732, registered 14 October 2013).

First-Line Treatment with Tiotropium/Olodaterol Improves Physical Activity in Patients with Treatment-Naïve Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Comparative effects on physical activity of mono and dual bronchodilators remain unclear in patients with treatment-naïve chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We sought to compare the changes in physical activity before and after tiotropium and tiotropium/olodaterol treatment in treatment-naïve COPD patients.

Methods

A prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-labeled, and parallel interventional study was conducted. Eighty Japanese patients with treatment-naïve COPD were randomized to receive either tiotropium or tiotropium/olodaterol treatment for 12 weeks. Spirometry and dyspnea index were assessed, and COPD assessment test (CAT) and the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) were conducted before and after treatment. Evaluation of physical activity was assessed by a triaxle accelerometer over a 2-week period before and after treatment.

Results

There were no differences in the mean age (69.8 vs 70.4 years), body mass index (BMI) (22.5 vs 22.6 kg/m²) and mean % forced expiratory volume in 1 second (%FEV1) at baseline (61.5 vs 62.6%) between the two groups. Changes in FEV1 (mean±standard error, 242.8±28.8 mL) and transient dyspnea index (TDI) (2.4±0.3 points) before and after tiotropium/olodaterol treatment were greater than with tiotropium treatment (104.1±31.9 mL, p<0.01 and 1.5±0.3, p=0.02, respectively). Changes in the duration of physical activity with 1.0–1.5 metabolic equivalents (METs) estimated in the sedentary position following tiotropium/olodaterol treatment (−38.7±14.7 min) tended to be reduced more than with tiotropium treatment (−4.6±10.6 min) (p=0.06), although those with ≥2.0 METs numerically increased with both treatments (+10.8±7.6 min for tiotropium/olodaterol vs +8.3±7.6 min for tiotropium, p=0.82). Tiotropium/olodaterol treatment reduced the duration of physical activity with 1.0–1.5 METs (regression coefficient, −43.6 [95% CI −84.1, −3.1], p=0.04) in a multiple regression model adjusted for cofounding factors such as age, FEV1, total CAT scores, 6MWD, and TDI.

Conclusion

This is the first study to report the impact of dual bronchodilator on physical activity in treatment-naïve COPD patients of Japanese with low BMI.

Blood eosinophils as a biomarker of future COPD exacerbation risk: pooled data from 11 clinical trials

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterised by progressive airflow limitation and chronic inflammation. Predicting exacerbations of COPD, which contribute to disease progression, is important to guide preventative treatment and improve outcomes. Blood eosinophils are a biomarker for patient responsiveness to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS); however, their effectiveness as a predictive biomarker for COPD exacerbations is unclear.

Methods

This post hoc analysis pooled data from 11 Boehringer Ingelheim-sponsored Phase III and IV randomised COPD studies with similar methodologies. Exacerbation data were collected from these studies, excluding patients from the ICS withdrawal arm of the WISDOM® study. Patients were grouped according to their baseline blood eosinophil count, baseline ICS use and number of exacerbations in the year prior to each study.

Results

Exacerbation rate data and baseline eosinophil count were available for 22,125 patients; 45.6% presented with a baseline blood eosinophil count of ≤ 150 cells/μL, 34.3% with 150–300 cells/μL and 20.1% with > 300 cells/μL. The lowest exacerbation rates were observed in patients with ≤ 150 cells/μL, with small increases in exacerbation rate observed with increasing eosinophil count. When stratified by exacerbation history, the annual rate of exacerbations for patients with 0 exacerbations in the previous year increased in line with increasing eosinophil counts (0.38 for ≤ 150 cells/μL, 0.39 for 150–300 cells/μL and 0.44 for > 300 cells/μL respectively). A similar trend was identified for patients with one exacerbation in the previous year, 0.62, 0.66 and 0.67 respectively. For patients with ≥ 2 exacerbations, exacerbation rates fluctuated between 1.02 (≤ 150 cells/μL) to 1.10 (150–300 cells/μL) and 1.07 (> 300 cells/μL). Higher exacerbation rates were noted in patients treated with ICS at baseline (range 0.75 to 0.82 with increasing eosinophil count) compared with patients not on ICS (range 0.45 to 0.49).

Conclusion

We found no clinically important relationship between baseline blood eosinophil count and exacerbation rate. Hence, the current analysis does not support the use of blood eosinophils to predict exacerbation risk; however, previous exacerbation history was found to be a more reliable predictor of future exacerbations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00168844, NCT00168831, NCT00387088, NCT00782210, NCT00782509, NCT00793624, NCT00796653, NCT01431274, NCT01431287, NCT02296138 and NCT00975195.

Graphical abstract

COPD Maintenance Therapy with Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium: An Analysis in the Absence of Additional ICS Therapy

The American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) dual bronchodilation over LAMA or LABA monotherapy as maintenance therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease suffering from dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Previous studies, which included patients receiving background inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), have shown the benefits of dual bronchodilation over monotherapy. This analysis aimed to confirm the benefits of LAMA/LABA over LAMA alone, without any confounding effects from ICS use. This pooled post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol with tiotropium alone in patients from the TONADO^® and OTEMTO^® clinical trials who were not receiving ICS at study entry or during the studies. We analyzed change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score in all patients, by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage, baseline SGRQ score, and Baseline Dyspnea Index score. In this analysis of 1596 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol improved trough FEV₁, SGRQ and TDI compared with tiotropium alone. The observed mean differences were: trough FEV₁, 0.054 L (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.036, 0.073; p < 0.001); SGRQ, -1.918 (95% CI -2.994, -0.843; p < 0.001); and TDI, 0.575 (95% CI 0.301, 0.848; p < 0.001). Similar improvements were seen in each of the subgroup analyses. Tiotropium/olodaterol therapy significantly improved lung function, symptoms and health status compared with tiotropium alone. In a population free from ICS treatment, these data confirm the benefits of dual bronchodilation versus monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler delivered using co-suspension delivery technology in Japanese patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

PINNACLE-4 evaluated the efficacy and safety of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β₂-agonist fixed-dose combination glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (GFF MDI) in patients from Asia, Europe, and the USA with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This pre-specified analysis included Japanese patients in PINNACLE-4.

METHODS

In this double-blind randomized study (NCT02343458), patients received GFF MDI (18/9.6 μg), glycopyrrolate (GP) MDI (18 μg), formoterol fumarate (FF) MDI (9.6 μg), or placebo MDI twice daily for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) over Weeks 12-24. Secondary lung function endpoints, patient-reported outcomes, and safety were assessed. The Japanese subpopulation (n = 150) analyses were exploratory.

RESULTS

GFF MDI improved change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough FEV₁ over Weeks 12-24 versus GP MDI, FF MDI, and placebo MDI (least squares mean [LSM] differences [95% confidence interval]: 69 [8-131], 60 [-1 to 121], and 275 [180-370] mL, respectively). GFF MDI numerically improved Transition Dyspnea Index focal score and change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score versus placebo MDI (LSM differences 0.19 and -3.78, respectively). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in ≤4.5% of patients in any treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

GFF MDI improved lung function versus monocomponents and placebo MDI in the Japan subpopulation of PINNACLE-4. The efficacy and safety results were generally consistent with those of the global study population, supporting the use of GFF MDI in Japanese patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.