Reliever salbutamol use as a measure of exacerbation risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Comparison of Rescue Medication Prescriptions in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Receiving Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus Tiotropium Bromide/Olodaterol in Routine Clinical Practice in England

Purpose

Routinely collected healthcare data on the comparative effectiveness of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist combination umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus tiotropium bromide/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. This study compared rescue medication prescriptions in patients with COPD in England receiving UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective cohort study used primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database linked with secondary care administrative data from Hospital Episode Statistics. Patients with a COPD diagnosis at age ≥35 years were included (indexed) following initiation of single-inhaler UMEC/VI or TIO/OLO between July 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019. Outcomes included the number of rescue medication prescriptions at 12-months (primary), and at 6-, 18- and 24-months (secondary), adherence at 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-months post-index, defined as proportion of days covered ≥80% (secondary), and time-to-initiation of triple therapy (exploratory). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance potential confounding baseline characteristics. Superiority of UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO for the primary outcome of rescue medication prescriptions was assessed using an intention-to-treat analysis with a p-value < 0.05.

Results

In total, 8603 patients were eligible (UMEC/VI: n = 6536; TIO/OLO: n = 2067). Following IPTW, covariates were well balanced across groups. Patients initiating UMEC/VI had statistically significantly fewer (mean [standard deviation]; p-value) rescue medication prescriptions versus TIO/OLO in both the unweighted (4.84 [4.78] vs 5.68 [5.00]; p < 0.001) and weighted comparison (4.91 [4.81] vs 5.48 [5.02]; p = 0.0032) at 12 months; consistent results were seen at all timepoints. Adherence was numerically higher for TIO/OLO versus UMEC/VI at all timepoints. Time-to-triple therapy was similar between treatment groups.

Conclusion

UMEC/VI was superior to TIO/OLO in reducing rescue medication prescriptions at 12 months after treatment initiation in a primary care cohort in England, potentially suggesting improvements in symptom control with UMEC/VI compared with TIO/OLO.

High use of short-acting β2-agonists in COPD is associated with an increased risk of exacerbations and mortality

Background

Short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) overuse has been associated with an increased risk of exacerbations in asthma; however, less is known about SABA use in COPD. Our aim was to describe SABA use and investigate potential associations between high SABA use and the risk of future exacerbations and mortality in COPD.

Methods

This observational study identified COPD patients in primary care medical records in Sweden. Data were linked to the National Patient Registry, the Prescribed Drug Registry and the Cause of Death Registry. The index date was 12 months after the date of COPD diagnosis. During a 12-month prior to index baseline period, information on SABA use was collected. Patients were followed with respect to exacerbations and mortality for 12 months post index.

Results

Of the 19 794 COPD patients included (mean age 69.1 years, 53.3% females), 15.5% and 7.0% had collected ≥3 or ≥6 SABA canisters during the baseline period, respectively. A higher level of SABA use (≥6 canisters) was independently associated with a higher risk of both moderate and severe exacerbations (hazard ratio (HR) 1.28 (95% CI 1.17‒1.40) and 1.76 (95% CI 1.50‒2.06), respectively) during follow-up. In total, 673 (3.4%) patients died during the 12-month follow-up period. An independent association was found between high SABA use and overall mortality (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.07‒2.39). This association, however, was not found in patients using inhaled corticosteroids as maintenance treatment.

Conclusion

In COPD patients in Sweden, high SABA use is relatively common and associated with a higher risk of exacerbations and all-cause mortality.

Risk of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for pneumonia associated with inhaled β2-agonists in patients with asthma, COPD or asthma-COPD overlap

β2-agonists provide necessary bronchodilatory action, are recommended by existing clinical practice guidelines and are widely prescribed for patients with these conditions. We examined the risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalization for pneumonia associated with long-or short-acting β2-agonists (LABA or SABA) or ICS (inhaled corticosteroids)/LABA use. In a nested case-control of 185,407 patients, we found no association between β2-agonist use and the risk of pneumonia in patients with asthma, COPD, or asthma-COPD overlap. In contrast, new SABA [HR 1.82 (95% CI 1.04-3.20)] or LABA [HR 2.77 (95% CI 1.22-6.31)] use was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to ICS use in COPD patients.

Concurrent Improvement Observed in Patient-Reported Burden and Sensor-Collected Medication Use Among Patients Enrolled in a COPD Digital Health Program

Background: The COPD assessment test (CAT) is an 8-item questionnaire widely used in clinical practice to assess patient burden of disease. Digital health platforms that leverage electronic medication monitors (EMMs) are used to track the time and date of maintenance and short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) inhaler medication use and record patient-reported outcomes. The study examined changes in CAT and SABA inhaler use in COPD to determine whether passively collected SABA and CAT scores changed in a parallel manner.

Methods: Patients with self-reported COPD enrolled in a digital health program, which provided EMMs to track SABA and maintenance inhaler use, and a companion smartphone application (“app”) to provide medication feedback and reminders. Patients completing the CAT questionnaire in the app at enrollment and at 6 months were included in the analysis. Changes in CAT burden category [by the minimally important difference (MID)] and changes in EMM-recorded mean SABA inhaler use per day were quantified at baseline and 6 months.

Results: The analysis included 611 patients. At 6 months, mean CAT improved by −0.9 (95% CI: −1.4, −0.4; p < 0.001) points, and mean SABA use decreased by −0.6 (−0.8, −0.4; p < 0.001) puffs/day. Among patients with higher burden (CAT ≥ 21) at enrollment, CAT improved by −2.0 (−2.6, −1.4; p < 0.001) points, and SABA use decreased by −0.8 (−1.1, −0.6; p < 0.001) puffs/day.

Conclusion: Significant and parallel improvement in CAT scores and SABA use at 6 months were noted among patients enrolled in a digital health program, with greater improvement for patients with higher disease burden.

Impact of baseline clinical features on outcomes of nebulized glycopyrrolate therapy in COPD

Inhaled bronchodilators are central for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as they can provide symptom relief and reduce the frequency and severity of exacerbations while improving health status and exercise tolerance. In 2017, glycopyrrolate (GLY) delivered via the eFlow® closed system (CS) nebulizer (nebulized GLY; 25 µg twice daily), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for maintenance treatment of moderate-to-very-severe COPD. This approval was based largely on results from the replicate, placebo-controlled, Phase III clinical trials- GOLDEN 3 and 4. In this review, we summarize key findings from secondary analyses of the GOLDEN 3 and 4 studies, and provide a comprehensive overview that may assist both pulmonologists and primary-care providers in their treatment decisions. Comorbidities are common among patients with COPD in clinical practice and may impact bronchodilator efficacy. This review highlights outcomes among subpopulations of patients with comorbidities (e.g., anxiety/depression, cardiovascular disease), and their impact on the efficacy of nebulized GLY. In addition, the efficacy and safety of nebulized GLY across various demographics (e.g., age, gender) and baseline disease characteristics (e.g., disease severity, rescue medication use) are discussed. Real-world outcomes with nebulized GLY, including device satisfaction, healthcare resource utilization, and exacerbations, are also presented. These secondary analyses and real-world data complement the primary results with nebulized GLY from Phase III studies and support the need for the inclusion of patients representative of real-world clinical practice in RCTs. In addition, these data suggest that RCTs for COPD therapies should be complemented with real-world observational studies.

Need for clarifying remote physiologic monitoring reimbursement during the COVID-19 pandemic: a respiratory disease case study

The use of remote monitoring and virtual visits has accelerated to support socially-distanced patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the necessity of this expansion, ambiguity in coding is hindering adoption and patient access, most notably for remote physiologic monitoring due to a lack of definition of the term “physiologic”. In this analysis, we describe the history of remote monitoring code development, present several examples in respiratory disease and other chronic conditions in which gaps and confusion remain and suggest ways to clarify and broaden coverage to ensure equitable access to remote monitoring.

COPD Clinical Control: predictors and long-term follow-up of the CHAIN cohort

Background

Control in COPD is a dynamic concept that can reflect changes in patients’ clinical status that may have prognostic implications, but there is no information about changes in control status and its long-term consequences.

Methods

We classified 798 patients with COPD from the CHAIN cohort as controlled/uncontrolled at baseline and over 5 years. We describe the changes in control status in patients over long-term follow-up and analyze the factors that were associated with longitudinal control patterns and related survival using the Cox hazard analysis.

Results

134 patients (16.8%) were considered persistently controlled, 248 (31.1%) persistently uncontrolled and 416 (52.1%) changed control status during follow-up. The variables significantly associated with persistent control were not requiring triple therapy at baseline and having a better quality of life. Annual changes in outcomes (health status, psychological status, airflow limitation) did not differ in patients, regardless of clinical control status. All-cause mortality was lower in persistently controlled patients (5.5% versus 19.1%, p = 0.001). The hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 2.274 (95% CI 1.394–3.708; p = 0.001). Regarding pharmacological treatment, triple inhaled therapy was the most common option in persistently uncontrolled patients (72.2%). Patients with persistent disease control more frequently used bronchodilators for monotherapy (53%) at recruitment, although by the end of the follow-up period, 20% had scaled up their treatment, with triple therapy being the most frequent therapeutic pattern.

Conclusions

The evaluation of COPD control status provides relevant prognostic information on survival. There is important variability in clinical control status and only a small proportion of the patients had persistently good control. Changes in the treatment pattern may be relevant in the longitudinal pattern of COPD clinical control. Further studies in other populations should validate our results.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov: identifier NCT01122758.

Salbutamol use in relation to maintenance bronchodilator efficacy in COPD: a prospective subgroup analysis of the EMAX trial

Background

Short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) bronchodilators help alleviate symptoms in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may be a useful marker of symptom severity. This analysis investigated whether SABA use impacts treatment differences between maintenance dual- and mono-bronchodilators in patients with COPD.

Methods

The Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids 1:1:1 to once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg, once-daily umeclidinium 62.5 μg or twice-daily salmeterol 50 μg for 24 weeks. Pre-specified subgroup analyses stratified patients by median baseline SABA use (low, < 1.5 puffs/day; high, ≥1.5 puffs/day) to examine change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), change in symptoms (Transition Dyspnoea Index [TDI], Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD [E-RS]), daily SABA use and exacerbation risk. A post hoc analysis used fractional polynomial modelling with continuous transformations of baseline SABA use covariates.

Results

At baseline, patients in the high SABA use subgroup (mean: 3.91 puffs/day, n = 1212) had more severe airflow limitation, were more symptomatic and had worse health status versus patients in the low SABA use subgroup (0.39 puffs/day, n = 1206). Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium demonstrated statistically significant improvements in trough FEV₁ at Week 24 in both SABA subgroups (59–74 mL; p < 0.001); however, only low SABA users demonstrated significant improvements in TDI (high: 0.27 [p = 0.241]; low: 0.49 [p = 0.025]) and E-RS (high: 0.48 [p = 0.138]; low: 0.60 [p = 0.034]) scores. By contrast, significant reductions in mean SABA puffs/day with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium were observed only in high SABA users (high: − 0.56 [p < 0.001]; low: − 0.10 [p = 0.132]). Similar findings were observed when comparing umeclidinium/vilanterol and salmeterol. Fractional polynomial modelling showed baseline SABA use ≥4 puffs/day resulted in smaller incremental symptom improvements with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium compared with baseline SABA use < 4 puffs/day.

Conclusions

In high SABA users, there may be a smaller difference in treatment response between dual- and mono-bronchodilator therapy; the reasons for this require further investigation. SABA use may be a confounding factor in bronchodilator trials and in high SABA users; changes in SABA use may be considered a robust symptom outcome.

Funding

GlaxoSmithKline (study number 201749 [NCT03034915]).

Evaluation of Medication Adherence and Rescue Medication Use in Non-Exacerbating Patients with COPD Receiving Umeclidinium/Vilanterol or Budesonide/Formoterol as Initial Maintenance Therapy

Background

Adherence to inhaled maintenance therapy is critical to managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), while increasing rescue medication usage may indicate worsening symptoms. This study evaluated adherence and rescue medication use in patients with COPD without a history of exacerbation who initiated combination therapy with budesonide/formoterol (B/F) or umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI).

Methods

Retrospective observational study of commercially insured and Medicare Advantage with Part D enrollees who initiated UMEC/VI or B/F between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2017 (earliest fill defined as index date). Eligibility criteria included age ≥40 years, 12 months continuous enrollment pre- and post-index, ≥1 pre-index COPD diagnosis, no pre-index asthma diagnosis, COPD-related exacerbations, or medication fills containing inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting β₂-agonists, or long-acting muscarinic antagonists. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance treatment groups on potential confounders. Medication adherence (primary endpoint) was evaluated by the proportion of days covered (PDC). Rescue medication use (secondary endpoint) was standardized to canister equivalents (1 metered dose inhaler [200 puffs] or ~100 nebulized doses of short-acting β₂-agonist- and/or short-acting muscarinic agonist-containing medication).

Results

After IPTW, covariates were balanced between cohorts (UMEC/VI: N=4082; B/F: N=9529). UMEC/VI initiators had a significantly greater mean PDC (UMEC/VI: 0.47 [0.33]; B/F: 0.38 [0.30]; P<0.001) and significantly higher rates of adherence (PDC≥0.80) than B/F initiators (UMEC/VI: n=1004 [25%], B/F: n=1391 [15%]; relative risk: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.57, 1.81; P<0.001). In the year following initiation, UMEC/VI initiators filled significantly fewer rescue medication canister equivalents than B/F initiators (predicted mean [95% CI]: 1.78 [1.69, 1.88] vs 2.15 [2.08, 2.23]; mean difference [95% CI]: −0.37 [−0.50, −0.24]; P<0.001), corresponding to 17% less (estimated) rescue medication use (incidence rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.83 [0.78, 0.88]).

Conclusion

Among non-exacerbating patients with COPD initiating dual therapy, UMEC/VI demonstrated improved adherence and reduced rescue medication use compared with B/F.

Improving the evaluation of COPD exacerbation treatment effects by accounting for early treatment discontinuations: a post-hoc analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials aimed at evaluating treatment effects on exacerbations often suffer from early discontinuations of randomized treatment. Treatment discontinuations imply a loss of information and should ideally be considered in the statistical analysis of trial results, particularly if the discontinuations are related to the disease or treatment itself. Here, we explore this issue by investigating (1) whether there exists an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in COPD clinical trials and (2) whether disregarding this association can cause bias in exacerbation treatment effect estimates. We focus on the hypothetical estimand, i.e. the treatment effect that would have been observed had all subjects completed the trial as planned.

Methods

The association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was analysed by applying a joint frailty (random effect) model – allowing for the simultaneous analysis of multiple types of correlated events – to data from five Phase III-IV COPD clinical trials. Specifically, the impact of the association on exacerbation treatment effect estimates was assessed by comparing the treatment hazard ratios of the joint frailty model to the rate/hazard ratios of two related statistical models (the negative binomial and shared frailty models), which both assume discontinuations to be unrelated to the trial outcome. The models were also compared using simulated data.

Results

A statistically significant (p < 0.0001), positive association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was found in all trials. Importantly, simulations confirmed that – with such an association – models disregarding the association risk producing biased results (> 5 percentage point difference in hazard/rate ratio). For some treatment comparisons in the clinical trials, the difference in treatment effect estimates between the joint frailty and the other models was as high as 10–15 percentage points. The difference was affected by the strength of the exacerbation-discontinuation association, the population heterogeneity in exacerbation risk, and the difference in discontinuation rates between treatment arms.

Conclusions

We have identified an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in five COPD clinical trials. We recommend using the joint frailty model to account for this association when estimating exacerbation treatment effects, particularly when targeting the hypothetical estimand.

The Effect of Baseline Rescue Medication Use on Efficacy and Safety of Nebulized Glycopyrrolate Treatment in Patients with COPD from the GOLDEN 3 and 4 Studies

Purpose

Rescue medication use is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and tends to increase with symptoms and disease severity. An analysis of baseline rescue medication use was conducted to inform on patient phenotypes and subsequent effects on lung function, symptoms, and safety following 12 weeks of nebulized glycopyrrolate (GLY) 25 µg twice daily or placebo in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD.

Patients and Methods

Pooled data from the 12-week, placebo-controlled GOLDEN 3 and 4 studies (n=781) were used to assign patients into quarters based on baseline rescue medication use (ie, average puffs-per-day) during the run-in period. Placebo-adjusted trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and EXAcerbations of COPD Tool-Respiratory Symptoms (EXACT-RS) total score data were reported; safety was evaluated by reviewing the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs).

Results

Baseline rescue medication use was a proxy for disease severity, evidenced by decreased lung function, increased health status scores, symptom scores and use of background long-acting β2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids across quarters and treatment groups. Treatment with GLY led to greater improvements from baseline in trough FEV₁, SGRQ and EXACT-RS scores compared with placebo in all rescue medication use quarters. Additionally, the SGRQ and EXACT-RS exhibited greater improvement with increased baseline rescue medication use with GLY treatment. In the Q4 patients, SGRQ (≥4-unit reduction) or EXACT-RS (≥2-unit reduction) responders were significantly greater with GLY compared with placebo. AE and SAE incidences were similar across quartiles.

Conclusion

These results suggest that baseline rescue medication use assessments may be useful in the management of COPD. Treatment with nebulized GLY improved lung function and symptom scores, regardless of baseline rescue medication use. These results support the use of nebulized GLY for the treatment of COPD, independent of baseline rescue medication use.

Early and sustained symptom improvement with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in COPD: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), both the time needed for patients to gain symptom improvement with long-acting bronchodilator therapy and whether an early response is predictive of a sustained response is unknown. This study aimed to investigate how quickly meaningful symptom responses are seen in patients with COPD with bronchodilator therapy and whether these responses are sustained.

METHODS

Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) was a 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial that randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI), umeclidinium or salmeterol. Daily Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS:COPD) score and rescue salbutamol use were captured via an electronic diary and analysed initially in 4-weekly periods. Post hoc analyses assessed change from baseline in daily E-RS:COPD score and rescue medication use weekly (Weeks 1-8), and association between E-RS:COPD responder status at Weeks 1-4 and later time points.

RESULTS

In the intent-to-treat population (n = 2425), reductions from baseline in E-RS:COPD scores and rescue medication use were apparent from Day 2 with all treatments. Treatment differences for UMEC/VI versus either monotherapy plateaued by Week 4-8 and were sustained at Weeks 21-24; improvements were consistently greater with UMEC/VI. For all treatments, most patients (60-85%) retained their Weeks 1-4 E-RS:COPD responder/non-responder status at Weeks 21-24. Among patients receiving UMEC/VI who were E-RS:COPD responders at Weeks 1-4, 70% were responders at Weeks 21-24.

CONCLUSION

Patients with symptomatic COPD had greater potential for early symptom improvements with UMEC/VI versus either monotherapy. This benefit was generally maintained for 24 weeks. Early monitoring of treatment response can provide clinicians with an early indication of a patient's likely longer-term response to prescribed bronchodilator treatment and will facilitate appropriate early adjustments in care.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03034915, 2016-002513-22 (EudraCT Number). The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Impact of prior and concurrent medication on exacerbation risk with long-acting bronchodilators in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a post hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and low exacerbation risk still have disease instability, which can be improved with better bronchodilation. We evaluated two long-acting bronchodilators individually and in combination on reducing exacerbation risk and the potential impact of concurrent medication in these patients.

METHODS

Integrated post hoc intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis of data from two large 24-week, randomized placebo (PBO)-controlled trials (NCT01313637, NCT01313650). Symptomatic patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD with/without an exacerbation history were randomized (2:3:3:3) to once-daily: PBO, umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg [NCT01313650] or 125/25 μg [NCT01313637]), UMEC (62.5 [NCT01313650] or 125 μg [NCT01313637]) or VI (25 μg) via the ELLIPTA inhaler. Medication subgroups were segmented by treatment status at screening: a) maintenance-naïve or on maintenance medications, b) inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]-free or ICS-treated, c) low or high albuterol use based on median run-in use (< 3.6 or ≥ 3.6 puffs/day). Time to first moderate/severe exacerbation (Cox proportional hazard model) and change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1; mixed model repeated measures) were analyzed. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 3021 patients (ITT population; UMEC/VI: n = 816; UMEC: n = 825; VI: n = 825; PBO: n = 555), 36% had a recent exacerbation history, 33% were maintenance-naïve, 51% were ICS-free. Mean baseline albuterol use was 5.1 puffs/day. In the ITT population, UMEC/VI, UMEC, and VI reduced the risk of a first exacerbation versus PBO by 58, 44, and 39%, respectively (all p < 0.05). UMEC/VI provided significant risk reductions versus PBO in all subgroups. VI had no benefit versus PBO in maintenance-naïve, ICS-free, and low rescue use patients and was significantly less effective than UMEC/VI in these subgroups. UMEC had no significant benefit versus PBO in maintenance-naïve and ICS-free patients. All bronchodilators improved FEV1 versus PBO, and UMEC/VI significantly improved FEV1 versus both monotherapies across all populations studied (p < 0.05). All bronchodilators were similarly well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that UMEC/VI reduces exacerbation risk versus PBO more consistently across medication subgroups than UMEC or VI, particularly in patients with no/low concurrent medication use. Confirmed prospectively, these findings may support first-line use of dual bronchodilation therapy in symptomatic low-risk patients.

Predictive factors for exacerbation and re-exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an extension of the Cox model to analyze data from the Swiss COPD cohort

Background

The Swiss COPD cohort was established in 2006 to collect data in a primary care setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate possible predictive factors for exacerbation and re-exacerbation.

Methods

In order to predict exacerbation until the next visit based on the knowledge of exacerbation since the last visit, a multistate model described by Therneau and Grambsch was performed.

Results

Data of 1,247 patients (60.4% males, 46.6% current smokers) were analyzed, 268 (21.5%) did not fulfill spirometric diagnostic criteria for COPD. Data of 748 patients (63% males, 44.1% current smokers) were available for model analysis. In order to predict exacerbation an extended Cox Model was performed. Mean FEV₁/FVC-ratio was 53.1% (±11.5), with a majority of patients in COPD GOLD classes 2 or 3. Hospitalization for any reason (HR1.7; P = 0.04) and pronounced dyspnea (HR for mMRC grade four 3.0; P < 0.001) at most recent visit as well as prescription of short-acting bronchodilators (HR1.7; P < 0.001), inhaled (HR1.2; P = 0.005) or systemic corticosteroids (HR1.8; P = 0.015) were significantly associated with exacerbation when having had no exacerbation at most recent visit. Higher FEV₁/FVC (HR0.9; P = 0.008) and higher FEV₁ values (HR0.9; P = 0.001) were protective. When already having had an exacerbation at the most recent visit, pronounced dyspnea (HR for mMRC grade 4 1.9; P = 0.026) and cerebrovascular insult (HR2.1; P = 0.003) were significantly associated with re-exacerbation. Physical activity (HR0.6; P = 0.031) and treatment with long-acting anticholinergics (HR0.7; P = 0.044) seemed to play a significant protective role. In a best subset model for exacerbation, higher FEV₁ significantly reduced and occurrence of sputum increased the probability of exacerbation. In the same model for re-exacerbation, coronary heart disease increased and hospitalization at most recent visit seemed to reduce the risk for re-exacerbation.

Conclusion

Our data confirmed well-established risk factors for exacerbations whilst analyzing their predictive association with exacerbation and re-exacerbation. This study confirmed the importance of spirometry in primary care, not only for diagnosis but also as a risk evaluation for possible future exacerbations.

Trial registration

Our study got approval by local ethical committee in 2006 (EK Nr. 170/06) and was registered retrospectively on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02065921, 19^th of February 2014).

The once-daily fixed-dose combination of olodaterol and tiotropium in the management of COPD: current evidence and future prospects

Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Spiolto® or Stiolto® is a fixed-dose combination (FDC) containing two long-acting bronchodilators, the long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist tiotropium (TIO) and the long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonist olodaterol (OLO), formulated in the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler. A total of 13 large, multicentre studies of up to 52 weeks' duration have documented its efficacy in more than 15,000 patients with COPD. TIO/OLO 5/5 µg FDC significantly increases pulmonary function compared with placebo and its respective constituent mono-components TIO 5 µg and OLO 5 µg. TIO/OLO 5/5 µg also results in statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes, such as dyspnoea, use of rescue medication, and health status. Addition of OLO 5 µg to TIO 5 µg reduces the rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations by approximately 10%. Compared with placebo and TIO 5 µg, TIO/OLO 5/5 µg significantly improves exercise capacity (e.g. endurance time) and physical activity, the latter increase being reached by a unique combination behavioural modification intervention, dual bronchodilatation and exercise training. Overall, the likelihood for patients to experience a clinically significant benefit is higher with TIO/OLO 5/5 µg than with its constituent mono-components, which usually yield smaller improvements which do not always reach statistical significance, compared with baseline or placebo. This supports the early introduction of TIO/OLO 5/5 µg in the management of patients with symptomatic COPD.

Digital technologies and adherence in respiratory diseases: the road ahead

Outcomes for patients with chronic respiratory diseases remain poor despite the development of novel therapies. In part, this reflects the fact that adherence to therapy is low and clinicians lack accurate methods to assess this issue. Digital technologies hold promise to overcome these barriers to care. For example, algorithmic analysis of large amounts of information collected on health status and treatment use, along with other disease relevant information such as environmental data, can be used to help guide personalised interventions that may have a positive health impact, such as establishing habitual and correct inhaler use. Novel approaches to data analysis also offer the possibility of statistical algorithms that are better able to predict exacerbations, thereby creating opportunities for preventive interventions that may adapt therapy as disease activity changes. To realise these possibilities, digital approaches to disease management should be supported by strong evidence, have a solid infrastructure, be designed collaboratively as clinically effective and cost-effective systems, and reflect the needs of patients and healthcare providers. Regulatory standards for digital interventions and strategies to handle the large amounts of data generated are also needed. This review highlights the opportunities provided by digital technologies for managing patients with respiratory diseases.

Preventing Clinically Important Deterioration of COPD with Addition of Umeclidinium to Inhaled Corticosteroid/Long-Acting β2-Agonist Therapy: An Integrated Post Hoc Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Assessing clinically important measures of disease progression is essential for evaluating therapeutic effects on disease stability in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis assessed whether providing additional bronchodilation with the long-acting muscarinic antagonist umeclidinium (UMEC) to patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) therapy would improve disease stability compared with ICS/LABA therapy alone.

METHODS

This integrated post hoc analysis of four 12-week, randomized, double-blind trials (NCT01772134, NCT01772147, NCT01957163, NCT02119286) compared UMEC 62.5 µg with placebo added to open-label ICS/LABA in symptomatic patients with COPD (modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score ≥ 2). A clinically important deterioration (CID) was defined as: a decrease from baseline of ≥ 100 mL in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), an increase from baseline of ≥ 4 units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, or a moderate/severe exacerbation. Risk of a first CID was evaluated in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in patients stratified by Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification, exacerbation history and type of ICS/LABA therapy. Adverse events (AEs) were also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1637 patients included in the ITT population received UMEC + ICS/LABA (n = 819) or placebo + ICS/LABA (n = 818). Additional bronchodilation with UMEC reduced the risk of a first CID by 45-58% in the ITT population and all subgroups analyzed compared with placebo (all p < 0.001). Improvements were observed in reducing FEV1 (69% risk reduction; p < 0.001) and exacerbation (47% risk reduction; p = 0.004) events in the ITT population. No significant reduction in risk of a SGRQ CID was observed. AE incidence was similar between treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Symptomatic patients with COPD receiving ICS/LABA experience frequent deteriorations. Additional bronchodilation with UMEC significantly reduced the risk of CID and provided greater short-term stability versus continued ICS/LABA therapy in these patients.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline (study number: 202067). Plain language summary available for this article.

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium and olodaterol in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of COPD. The new combination of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA) olodaterol (OLO) has been introduced as fist line therapy for COPD. This article analyses the evidence of efficacy and safety of the TIO/OLO combination.

Methods

A systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with a period of treatment of at least 6 weeks, in patients with COPD confirmed by spirometry, comparing combined treatment with TIO/OLO (approved doses only), with any of the mono-components or any other active comparator administered as an inhalator.

Results

A total of 10 Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified (N = 10,918). TIO/OLO significantly improved trough FEV₁ from baseline to week 12 versus TIO, OLO and LABA/ICS (0.06 L, 0.09 L and between 0.04 and 0.05 L, respectively). TIO/OLO improved transitional dyspnea index (TDI) and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) compared with mono-components, with patients more likely to achieve clinically important improvements in TDI (risk ratio [RR]: 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.07, 1.28] versus TIO and RR: 1.14, 95%CI: [1.01, 1.28] versus OLO) and in SGRQ (RR: 1.21, 95%CI: [1.12, 1.30] versus TIO and RR: 1.28, 95%CI: [1.18, 1.40] versus OLO). Patients treated with TIO/OLO showed a significant reduction in the use of rescue medication and no significant differences in frequency of general and serious adverse events were observed between TIO/OLO and mono-components.

Conclusions

Treatment with TIO/OLO provided significant improvements in lung function versus mono-components and LABA/ICS with more patients achieving significant improvements in dyspnea and health status. No differences in adverse events were observed compared with other active treatments.

Clinical trial registration

PROSPERO register of systematic reviews (CRD42016040162).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-017-0683-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effect of erdosteine on the rate and duration of COPD exacerbations: the RESTORE study

Oxidative stress contributes to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations and antioxidants can decrease exacerbation rates, although we lack data about the effect of such drugs on exacerbation duration.

The RESTORE (Reducing Exacerbations and Symptoms by Treatment with ORal Erdosteine in COPD) study was a prospective randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, enrolling patients aged 40–80 years with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage II/III. Patients received erdosteine 300 mg twice daily or placebo added to usual COPD therapy for 12 months. The primary outcome was the number of acute exacerbations during the study.

In the pre-specified intention-to-treat population of 445 patients (74% male; mean age 64.8 years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 51.8% predicted) erdosteine reduced the exacerbation rate by 19.4% (0.91 versus. 1.13 exacerbations·patient⁻¹·year⁻¹ for erdosteine and placebo, respectively; p=0.01), due to an effect on mild events; the reduction in the rate of mild exacerbations was 57.1% (0.23 versus 0.54 exacerbations·patient⁻¹·year⁻¹ for erdosteine and placebo, respectively; p=0.002). No significant difference was observed in the rate of moderate and severe exacerbations (0.68 versus 0.59 exacerbations·patient⁻¹·year⁻¹ for erdosteine and placebo, respectively; p=0.054) despite a trend in favour of the comparison group. Erdosteine decreased the exacerbation duration irrespective of event severity by 24.6% (9.55 versus 12.63 days for erdosteine and placebo, respectively; p=0.023). Erdosteine significantly improved subject and physician subjective severity scores (p=0.022 and p=0.048, respectively), and reduced the use of reliever medication (p<0.001), but did not affect the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score or the time to first exacerbation.

In patients with COPD, erdosteine can reduce both the rate and duration of exacerbations. The percentage of patients with adverse events was similar in both the placebo and erdosteine treatment groups.

RESTORE study: erdosteine reduces both rate and duration of COPD exacerbations with a placebo-like safety profilehttp://ow.ly/BbGI30dRdEt

When is dual bronchodilation indicated in COPD?

Inhaled bronchodilator medications are central to the management of COPD and are frequently given on a regular basis to prevent or reduce symptoms. While short-acting bronchodilators are a treatment option for people with relatively few COPD symptoms and at low risk of exacerbations, for the majority of patients with significant breathlessness at the time of diagnosis, long-acting bronchodilators may be required. Dual bronchodilation with a long-acting β2-agonist and long-acting muscarinic antagonist may be more effective treatment for some of these patients, with the aim of improving symptoms. This combination may also reduce the rate of exacerbations compared with a bronchodilator-inhaled corticosteroid combination in those with a history of exacerbations. However, there is currently a lack of guidance on clinical indicators suggesting which patients should step up from mono- to dual bronchodilation. In this article, we discuss a number of clinical indicators that could prompt a patient and physician to consider treatment escalation, while being mindful of the need to avoid unnecessary polypharmacy. These indicators include insufficient symptomatic response, a sustained increased requirement for rescue medication, suboptimal 24-hour symptom control, deteriorating symptoms, the occurrence of exacerbations, COPD-related hospitalization, and reductions in lung function. Future research is required to provide a better understanding of the optimal timing and benefits of treatment escalation and to identify the appropriate tools to inform this decision.

Rescue medication use as a patient-reported outcome in COPD: a systematic review and regression analysis

Background

Reducing rescue medication use is a guideline-defined goal of asthma treatment, however, little is known about the validity of rescue medicine use as a marker of symptoms in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To improve patient outcomes, greater insight is needed into the relationship between rescue medication use and alternative COPD outcomes.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (Embase®, MEDLINE® and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from database start to 26 May, 2015. Studies of bronchodilator therapy with a duration of ≥24 weeks were included if they reported either mean change from baseline (CFB) in rescue medication use in puffs/day or % rescue-free days (%RFD), and at least one other COPD endpoint. Correlation and meta-regression analyses were undertaken to test the association between rescue medication use and other COPD outcomes using weighted means (weights proportional to the sample size of the treatment group) and unweighted means (equal weight for each treatment group). Each association was assessed at 6 months and study end.

Results

Forty-six studies involving 46,531 patients provided mean data from 145 treatment groups for evaluation. Changes in both measures of rescue medication use were correlated with changes in trough forced expiratory volume in one second ([FEV₁]; Pearson correlation coefficients |r| ≥ 0.63; p < 0.0001) and with St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (|r| ≥ 0.70; p < 0.0001) at study end. Change in rescue medication use in puffs/day during the study correlated with annualized rates of moderate/severe exacerbations at 6 months and study end (both r = 0.66; p ≤ 0.0028). CFB in puffs/day was not well correlated with Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI), but %RFD did correlate with TDI score at 6 months and study end (both r = 0.69; p < 0.0001). The values for CFB in puffs/day corresponding to the proposed minimal clinically important differences for trough FEV₁ and SGRQ score were -1.3 and -0.6 puffs/day, respectively. A -1.0 puffs/day CFB in rescue use corresponded to a change of 0.26 events/patient-year in moderate/severe exacerbations.

Conclusion

This analysis provides clear evidence of associations at a patient group level between rescue medication use and other clinically important COPD outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-017-0566-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Bronchodilator reliever use and its association with the economic and humanistic burden of COPD: a propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Short-acting bronchodilators are normally used as supplemental relief medication for breakthrough symptoms in COPD patients. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to assess if more frequent vs infrequent use of relief medication in maintenance-treated COPD patients, split by the severity dyspnea, was associated with an increase in the overall disease burden.

METHODS

A population-based cross-sectional survey (Adelphi DSP) was conducted among patients with COPD in five European countries. Information was collected on demographic and clinical characteristics, reliever inhaler use, dyspnea (mMRC), health status (CAT, EQ-5D), sleep quality (JSEQ) and healthcare resource use including moderate-severe COPD exacerbations, physician visits, COPD medications and other COPD related resources. The humanistic and economic burden was compared between patients with infrequent reliever use (<1 occasion/week) and more frequent use (≥ 1 occasion/week). The association between increased reliever use and economic burden was also examined after matching patients based on propensity-scores balancing demographic and disease burden characteristics.

RESULTS

Among the 1373 COPD patients prescribed a reliever inhaler, 29% reported using reliever medication ≥1 occasion/week. In the unmatched cohort, more frequent reliever use (n = 377) compared to infrequent use (n = 996) was linked to poorer health status (CAT: 25.7 vs 20.0; p < .0001; EQ-5D-3L: 0.63 vs 0.82; p < .0001) and poorer sleep quality (JSEQ: 8.6 vs 4.6 units; p < .0001). More frequent reliever use was also associated with higher annual rates of moderate/severe exacerbations (1.6 vs 1.0 events/year; p < .0001) and respiratory specialist visits (2.8 vs 2.2 events/year; p = .0001). In the propensity-score matched population, more frequent reliever use was also associated with significantly higher annual costs for COPD management (€5,034 vs €3,705, p = .0327) compared to patients with infrequent reliever use.

CONCLUSION

In moderate-to-severe COPD, more frequent reliever use is associated with increased exacerbation risk and increased management costs.

Early efficacy of budesonide/formoterol in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD

Background and objective

Large clinical trials have confirmed the long-term efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combinations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It was hypothesized that significant treatment effects would already be present within 3 months after the initiation of treatment across a range of clinical outcomes, irrespective of COPD severity.

Methods

Post hoc analysis of 3-month post-randomization outcomes, including exacerbation rates, dropouts, symptoms, reliever use, and lung function, from three studies with similar inclusion criteria of moderate-to-very-severe COPD. Patients (n=1,571) were treated with budesonide/formoterol (B/F) 320/9 μg or placebo, twice daily; in one study, tiotropium 18 μg once daily was also given.

Results

Over the first 3 months of treatment, fewer patients randomized to B/F experienced exacerbations versus the placebo group (111 and 196 patients with ≥1 exacerbation, respectively). This was true in each COPD severity group. Compared with placebo, B/F treatment led to significantly lower 3-month exacerbation rates in the moderate and severe COPD severity groups (46% and 57% reduction, respectively), with a nonsignificant reduction (29%) in very severe COPD. Fewer dropouts occurred among patients treated with B/F versus placebo, this effect being greater with increasing COPD severity. B/F was associated with improved forced expiratory volume in 1 s, morning peak expiratory flow rate, total reliever use, and total symptom score versus placebo.

Conclusion

Treatment with B/F decreased exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD within 3 months of commencing treatment. This effect was paralleled by improved lung function, less reliever medication use, and fewer symptoms, irrespective of disease severity.