Efficacy of aclidinium bromide 400 μg twice daily compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD

Is it preferable to administer a bronchodilator once- or twice-daily when treating COPD?

Nocturnal and early morning symptoms are common and uncomfortable in many patients with COPD, and are likely to affect their long-term outcomes. However, it is still debated whether it is better to give long-acting bronchodilators once- or twice-daily to symptomatic COPD patients. The functional link between circadian rhythms of autonomic tone and airway calibre explains why the timing of administration of bronchodilators in chronic airway diseases can induce different effects when taken at different biological (circadian) times. However, the timing also depends on the pharmacological characteristics of the bronchodilator to be used. Because the profile of bronchodilation produced by once-daily vs. twice-daily long-acting bronchodilators differs throughout 24 h, selecting long-acting bronchodilators may be customized to specific patient preferences based on the need for further bronchodilation in the evening. This is especially helpful for people who experience respiratory symptoms at night or early morning. Compared to placebo, evening bronchodilator administration is consistently linked with persistent overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive. The current evidence indicates that nocturnal and early morning symptoms control is best handled by a LAMA taken in the evening. In contrast, it seems preferable to use a LABA for daytime symptoms. Therefore, it can be speculated that combining a LAMA with a LABA can improve bronchodilation and control symptoms better. Both LAMA and LABA must be rapid in their onset of action. Aclidinium/formoterol, a twice-daily combination, is the most studies of the available LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of impact on daytime and nocturnal symptoms.

Compensatory responses to increased mechanical abnormalities in COPD during sleep

PURPOSE

To assess whether night-time increases in mechanical loading negatively impact respiratory muscle function in COPD and whether compensatory increases in inspiratory neural drive (IND) are adequate to stabilize ventilatory output and arterial oxygen saturation, especially during sleep when wakefulness drive is withdrawn.

METHODS

21 patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and 20 age-/sex-matched healthy controls (CTRL) participated in a prospective, cross-sectional, one-night study to assess the impact of COPD on serial awake, supine inspiratory capacity (IC) measurements and continuous dynamic respiratory muscle function (esophageal manometry) and IND (diaphragm electromyography, EMGdi) in supine sleep.

RESULTS

Supine inspiratory effort and EMGdi were consistently twice as high in COPD versus CTRL (p < 0.05). Despite overnight increases in awake total airways resistance and dynamic lung hyperinflation in COPD (p < 0.05; not in CTRL), elevated awake EMGdi and respiratory effort were unaltered in COPD overnight. At sleep onset (non-rapid eye movement sleep, N2), EMGdi was decreased versus wakefulness in COPD (- 43 ± 36%; p < 0.05) while unaffected in CTRL (p = 0.11); however, respiratory effort and arterial oxygen saturation (SpO₂) were unchanged. Similarly, in rapid eye movement (stage R), sleep EMGdi was decreased (- 38 ± 32%, p < 0.05) versus wakefulness in COPD, with preserved respiratory effort and minor (2%) reduction in SpO₂.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite progressive mechanical loading overnight and marked decreases in wakefulness drive, inspiratory effort and SpO₂ were well maintained during sleep in COPD. Preserved high inspiratory effort during sleep, despite reduced EMGdi, suggests continued (or increased) efferent activation of extra-diaphragmatic muscles, even in stage R sleep.

CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION

The COPD data reported herein were secondary data (Placebo arm only) obtained through the following Clinical Trial: "Effect of Aclidinium/Formoterol on Nighttime Lung Function and Morning Symptoms in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease" ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02429765 ; NCT02429765).

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.

Long-Acting Bronchodilators for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Which One(S), How, and When?

Long-acting bronchodilators represent the mainstay of maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This state-of-the-art review summarizes currently available data on the safety, efficacy, and clinical effectiveness of long-acting bronchodilators and describes their role in the management of COPD, as defined by current national and international guidelines. Data from extensive clinical trials and real-life studies have demonstrated that long-acting beta-2 agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists can safely reduce the frequency of exacerbations, alleviate symptoms, and improve quality of life, exercise tolerance, and lung function of patients with COPD. They are recommended as first-line maintenance treatment of COPD.

Deterioration of Nighttime Respiratory Mechanics in COPD: Impact of Bronchodilator Therapy

BACKGROUND

COPD is associated with nighttime respiratory symptoms, poor sleep quality, and increased risk of nocturnal death. Overnight deterioration of inspiratory capacity (IC) and FEV₁ have been documented previously. However, the precise nature of this deterioration and mechanisms by which evening bronchodilation may mitigate this occurrence have not been studied.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the effect of evening dosing of dual, long-acting bronchodilation on detailed nocturnal respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive (IND)?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study assessed the effects of evening long-acting bronchodilation (aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate: 400/12 μg) or placebo on morning trough IC (12 h after the dose; primary outcome) and serial overnight measurements of spirometry, dynamic respiratory mechanics, and IND (secondary outcomes). Twenty participants with COPD (moderate/severe airway obstruction and lung hyperinflation) underwent serial measurements of IC, spirometry, breathing pattern, esophageal and transdiaphragmatic pressures, and diaphragm electromyography (diaphragmatic electromyography as a percentage of maximum; IND) at 6 time points from 0 to 12 h after the dose and compared with sleeping IND.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, evening bronchodilation was not associated with increased morning trough IC 12 h after the dose (P = .48); however, nadir IC (lowest IC, independent of time), peak IC, area under the curve for 12 h after the dose, and IC for 10 h after the dose were improved (P < .05). During placebo, total airways resistance, lung hyperinflation, IND, and tidal esophageal and transdiaphragmatic pressure swings all increased significantly overnight compared with baseline evening values; however, each of these parameters improved with bronchodilator treatment (P < .05) with no change in ventilation or breathing pattern.

INTERPRETATION

Respiratory mechanics significantly deteriorated at night during placebo. Although the morning trough IC was unchanged, evening bronchodilator treatment was associated consistently with sustained overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive compared with placebo CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02429765.

Imidafenacin, An Orally Active Muscarinic Receptor Antagonist, Improves Pulmonary Function In Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled 3×3 Crossover Phase II Trial

Background

Although long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists are central to the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), inhaled medicines may have technical difficulty in some patients and adherence barriers.

Methods

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 3×3 crossover Phase II trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral administration of the antimuscarinic agent imidafenacin in patients with COPD. Twenty-seven male COPD patients with % forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) ≥30% and <80% predicted were randomized to single oral dose of imidafenacin 0.1 mg, imidafenacin 0.2 mg, or placebo.

Results

Maximum change in FEV₁ with both doses of imidafenacin significantly improved from baseline to 24 hrs after administration when compared with a placebo. Area under the curve in FEV₁ during 24 hrs after administration with 0.2 mg, but not 0.1 mg dose, was significantly improved when compared with a placebo, and the improvement was significantly based on dose-dependent manners. Plasma imidafenacin level was positively correlated with change in FEV₁. All subjects with both doses of imidafenacin completed without moderate nor severe adverse events.

Conclusion

A single oral dose of imidafenacin 0.1 mg or imidafenacin 0.2 mg may contribute to the improvement of pulmonary function with excellent safety and tolerability in patients with COPD.

Trial registration

JapicCTI-121760 (Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center – Clinical Trials Information [JapicCTI]; http://www.clinicaltrials.jp/user/cteSearch_e.jsp).

Clinical benefit of two-times-per-day aclidinium bromide compared with once-a-day tiotropium bromide hydrate in COPD: a multicentre, open-label, randomised study

OBJECTIVE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is mainly treated pharmaceutically with bronchodilators. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical benefits of two-times-per-day aclidinium bromide (Acli-BID) compared with once-a-day tiotropium bromide hydrate (Tio-QD) in patients with COPD.

DESIGN

This study was a multicentre, open-label, randomised study.

SETTING

Fourcentres in Kagawa prefecture, Japan.

PARTICIPANT

Patients who were diagnosed to have COPD Grade 2-3 according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2015 criteria were enrolled.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive Acli-BID or Tio-QD at a 1:1 ratio, and followed for 8 weeks. Acli-BID was administered in the morning and night, and Tio-QD was administered in the night.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was forced expiratory volume in one second area under the curve (FEV₁AUC_0-3), and secondary outcomes were pulmonary function, physical activity, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), the 8-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8) and COPD exacerbations. Adverse events were evaluated during the study.

RESULTS

44 patients were included in this study. FEV₁AUC_0-3 at week 8 was 4.62±1.43 L·hour in Acli-BID and 4.73±1.60 L·hour in Tio-QD (mean difference (MD) -0.11 L·hour; 95% CI), -1.04 to 0.83). Significant improvement was observed in activity-related subscales of SGRQ (MD -7.78; 95% CI -14.61 to -0.94) and SF-8 (MD 4.01; 95% CI 0.37 to 7.65), mMRC (MD -0.66; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.13) and rate ratio (0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.99) of exacerbations in the Acli-BID compared with the Tio-QD. Acli-BID and Tio-QD significantly improved sedentary behaviour (MD -35.20 min; 95% CI -67.41 to -2.94 and MD -55.40 min; 95% CI -98.15 to -12.77) within each group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Acli-BID as with Tio-QD could be one of the therapeutic options for patients with COPD to improve pulmonary function. Also, our results suggest that intervention with bronchodilators enhanced physical activity in patients with COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN 000020020.

The discovery and development of aclidinium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Bronchodilators, including long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), are a mainstay of the pharmacological treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). LAMAs act as bronchodilators principally by antagonizing airway smooth muscle cells M₃ muscarinic receptors. Aclidinium bromide is a twice-daily LAMA which was developed to improve on the efficacy and/or safety of previous LAMAs. Area covered: Herein, the authors present the pharmacotherapeutic role of aclidinium in COPD and point out unmet need in this research area. The following aspects are covered: a) the discovery and medicinal chemistry of aclidinium bromide; b) an overview of the market; c) its mechanism of action; d) its pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile derived from pre-clinical studies; e) the clinical studies which led to its licensing; f) the evidence from meta-analyses; g) the aclidinium/formoterol fixed dose combination for COPD and h) priorities in this area of research. Expert opinion: Aclidinium bromide has the pharmacological properties, safety and efficacy profile and inhaler characteristics which makes it a valuable therapeutic option for pharmacological management of patients with COPD. Due to its rapid biotransformation into inactive metabolites, aclidinium is potentially one of the safest LAMAs. Further head-to-head randomized clinical trials are required to define efficacy and safety of aclidinium when compared to once-daily LAMAs. The clinical relevance of airway anti-remodeling effects of aclidinium has to be defined.

Improvement in 24-hour bronchodilation and symptom control with aclidinium bromide versus tiotropium and placebo in symptomatic patients with COPD: post hoc analysis of a Phase IIIb study

BACKGROUND

A previous Phase IIIb study (NCT01462929) in patients with moderate to severe COPD demonstrated that 6 weeks of treatment with aclidinium led to improvements in 24-hour bronchodilation comparable to those with tiotropium, and improvement of symptoms versus placebo. This post hoc analysis was performed to assess the effect of treatment in the symptomatic patient group participating in the study.

METHODS

Symptomatic patients (defined as those with Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms [E-RS™] in COPD baseline score ≥10 units) received aclidinium bromide 400 μg twice daily (BID), tiotropium 18 μg once daily (QD), or placebo, for 6 weeks. Lung function, COPD respiratory symptoms, and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were assessed.

RESULTS

In all, 277 symptomatic patients were included in this post hoc analysis. Aclidinium and tiotropium treatment improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline to week 6 at all time points over 24 hours versus placebo. In addition, improvements in FEV1 from baseline during the nighttime period were observed for aclidinium versus tiotropium on day 1 (aclidinium 157 mL, tiotropium 67 mL; P<0.001) and week 6 (aclidinium 153 mL, tiotropium 90 mL; P<0.05). Aclidinium improved trough FEV1 from baseline versus placebo and tiotropium at day 1 (aclidinium 136 mL, tiotropium 68 mL; P<0.05) and week 6 (aclidinium 137 mL, tiotropium 71 mL; P<0.05). Aclidinium also improved early-morning and nighttime symptom severity, limitation of early-morning activities, and E-RS Total and domain scores versus tiotropium (except E-RS Chest Symptoms) and placebo over 6 weeks. Tolerability showed similar incidence of AEs in each arm.

CONCLUSION

In this post hoc analysis of symptomatic patients with moderate to severe COPD, aclidinium 400 μg BID provided additional improvements compared with tiotropium 18 μg QD in: 1) bronchodilation, particularly during the nighttime, 2) daily COPD symptoms (E-RS), 3) early-morning and nighttime symptoms, and 4) early-morning limitation of activity.

Characteristics of COPD patients initiating treatment with aclidinium or tiotropium in primary care in Catalonia: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare demographic and clinical profile of patients newly initiated on aclidinium (ACL) or tiotropium (TIO) and identify factors associated with newly initiated ACL in real-life clinical practice during 2013 in Catalonia.

DESIGN

We performed a population-based, retrospective, observational study with data obtained from the Information System for Research Development in Primary Care, a population database that contains information of 5.8 million inhabitants (more than 80% of the Catalan population). Patients over 40 years old, with a recorded diagnosis of COPD and newly initiated treatment with either ACL or TIO during the study period (January to December 2013), were selected. A descriptive analysis of demographic and clinical characteristics was performed, and treatment adherence was also assessed for both cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 8,863 individuals were identified, 4,293 initiated with ACL and 4,570 with TIO. They had a mean age of 69.4 years (standard deviation: 11.3), a median COPD duration of 3 years (interquartile range: 0-8), and 71% were males. Patients treated with ACL were older, with more respiratory comorbidities, a longer time since COPD diagnosis, worse forced expiratory volume in 1 second (% predicted), and with a higher rate of exacerbations during the previous year compared with TIO. It was found that 41.3% of patients with ACL and 62.3% of patients with TIO had no previous COPD treatment. Inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β2-agonist were the most frequent concomitant medications (32.9% and 32.6%, respectively). Approximately 75% of patients were persistent with ACL or TIO at 3 months from the beginning of treatment, and more than 50% of patients remained persistent at 9 months.

CONCLUSION

Patients initiated with ACL had more severe COPD and were taking more concomitant respiratory medications than patients initiated with TIO. ACL was more frequently initiated as part of triple therapy, while TIO was more frequently initiated as monotherapy.

Bringing Stability to the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patient: Clinical and Pharmacological Considerations for Frequent Exacerbators

Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are critical events associated with an accelerated loss of lung function, increased morbidity, and excess mortality. AECOPD are heterogeneous in nature and this may directly impact clinical decision making, specifically in patients with frequent exacerbations. A 'frequent exacerbator' is a sub-phenotype of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is defined as an individual who experiences two or more moderate-to-severe exacerbations per year. This distinct subgroup has higher mortality and accounts for more than half of COPD-related hospitalizations annually. Thus, it is imperative to identify individuals at risk for frequent exacerbations and choose optimal strategies to minimize risk for these events. New paradigms for using combination inhalers and the introduction of novel oral compounds provide expanded treatment options to reduce the risk and frequency of exacerbations. The goals of managing frequent exacerbators or patients at risk for AECOPD are: (1) maximizing bronchodilation; (2) reducing inflammation; and (3) targeting specific molecular pathways implicated in COPD and AECOPD pathogenesis. Novel inhaler therapies including combination long-acting muscarinic agents plus long-acting beta agonists show promising results compared with monotherapy or a long-acting beta agonist inhaled corticosteroid combination in reducing exacerbation risk among individuals at risk for exacerbations and among frequent exacerbators. Likewise, oral medications including macrolides and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors reduce the risk for AECOPD in select groups of individuals at high risk for exacerbation. Future direction in COPD management is based on the identification of various subtypes or 'endotypes' and targeting therapies based on their pathophysiology. This review describes the impact of AECOPD and the challenges posed by frequent exacerbators, and explores the rationale for different pharmacologic approaches to preventing AECOPD in these individuals.

Is aclidinium alone or combined with a LABA a rational choice for symptomatic COPD patients?

BACKGROUND

As emphasized by international recommendations and largely confirmed by clinical experience, long-acting bronchodilators play a central role in the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to their proven efficacy in reducing airflow obstruction and improving symptoms.

MAIN BODY

There are some important aspects to define with regard to inhalation therapy for COPD, particularly those concerning the selection criteria and the optimal use of long-acting bronchodilators. First of all, it needs to be determined in which patients and clinical situations monotherapy with one bronchodilator, such as a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), should be considered adequate, and in which cases the use of combination therapies, such as the "double bronchodilation" with a LAMA and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), should be preferred. Another critical issue concerns the effect of the frequency of daily administration of inhaled agents on the control of symptoms during the 24 h. COPD symptoms are known to exhibit considerable circadian variability with worsening in the early morning, and a significant proportion of patients have disease-related sleep disorders which can adversely affect their quality of life. The worsening of symptoms in the early morning may be due, at least in part, to a reduction in airway caliber caused by an increased "cholinergic tone" at night. As such, the coverage of nighttime and early morning symptoms is a reasonable therapeutic goal, which can be achieved by many patients using LAMAs such as aclidinium bromide twice daily (BID). Therapeutic adherence is known to be a multifactorial phenomenon that is frequently affected by other aspects than dosing frequency, including the technical features and ease of use of the inhalers. To this end, it should be mentioned that certain new-generation inhalers such as Genuair® have been associated in clinical trials with higher patient preference.

CONCLUSION

In this work, in addition to presenting an overview of the main evidence on the efficacy of COPD treatment with the LAMA aclidinium bromide BID, we suggest some selection criteria for the monotherapy with one long-acting bronchodilator or the combination therapy with LAMA and LABA in COPD patients, with particular reference to specific clinical scenarios.

Evaluation of COPD Treatments: A Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Aclidinium and Tiotropium in the United States

BACKGROUND

Comparisons of the use of aclidinium bromide and tiotropium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease often concentrate on key end points (exacerbations) at the expense of other benefits and risks. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) can help overcome this by using stakeholder preferences to combine multiple end points into an overall value estimate.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of aclidinium bromide twice daily via Pressair™ (AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Wilmington, DE) and of tiotropium once daily via HandiHaler^® (Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT) from the perspective of patients using MCDA.

METHODS

Literature reviews and clinician engagement were used to identify value criteria. Performance of criteria was estimated from a clinical trial and clinician opinion. Scores and swing weights came from six clinicians who, during a 2-day workshop, reflected their patients' preferences. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were used to explore uncertainty in model designs and inputs.

RESULTS

Fourteen criteria, covering clinical effectiveness, safety, and convenience of the treatments of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were identified. Exacerbations and device preloading were identified as the most important to patients; the least important was rescue medication use. Tiotropium's higher overall clinical effectiveness score was offset by aclidinium's better performance on safety and convenience outcomes. The MCDA generated a -42 (worst performance) to 100 (best performance) scale. The net impact of benefits over risks of aclidinium (38.5) exceeded that of tiotropium (13.2), and patients preferred aclidinium 79.7% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering clinical benefits and risks, aclidinium and tiotropium generate similar value to patients, but when convenience criteria are considered, aclidinium may be preferred. Further work is required to replicate these results, including eliciting preferences directly from patients.

Tiotropium formulations and safety: a network meta-analysis

Tiotropium is now delivered via two different inhaler devices: the original Handihaler 18 μg once daily, which uses a powder formulation; and the newer Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) 5 μg once daily. It has been questioned whether the two devices can be assumed to have the same safety profile, although the TIOSPIR trial showed that tiotropium when administered via Respimat SMI 5 μg is not less safe than Handihaler 18 μg. Therefore, we have carried out a safety evaluation of tiotropium Handihaler 18 µg versus tiotropium Respimat SMI 5 µg and 2.5 µg, via systematic review and network meta-analysis of the currently available clinical evidence. The results of our meta-analysis with an extremely large number of patients analysed demonstrate that the safety profile of tiotropium HandiHaler is generally superior to that of tiotropium Respimat SMI, although no statistical difference was detected between these two devices. However, the SUCRA analysis favoured tiotropium Respimat SMI with regards to serious adverse events (AEs). We do not believe that using Respimat SMI rather that HandiHaler exposes patients to higher risks of real AEs. Rather, we believe that there may be a different cardiovascular (CV) response to muscarinic receptors blockage in individual patients. Therefore, it will be essential to make all possible efforts to proactively identify patients at increased risk of CV AEs when treated with tiotropium or another antimuscarinic drug.

Effects of aclidinium on determinants of COPD severity: symptoms and quality of life

The pathophysiology of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) includes persistent airflow limitation, altered gas exchange, and enhanced chronic inflammatory response. According to disease severity in individual patients, exacerbations and comorbidities frequently occur. The overall nocturnal and daily symptoms have a strong impact on patient quality of life and clinical outcomes. Bronchodilators, by targeting two important aspects of COPD pathophysiology, ie, bronchoconstriction and lung hyperinflation, are the mainstay of therapy for COPD. Aclidinium bromide in particular is an anticholinergic molecule, approved for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of stable COPD, that combines high antimuscarinic activity with strong kinetic selectivity for the M3 receptor subtype. Moreover, the elevated plasma clearance of aclidinium has been related to low systemic bioavailability and low incidence of anticholinergic adverse events, whereas the reduced residence time at M2 receptors provides good cardiovascular safety. Altogether, these characteristics result in a high safety and tolerability profile. This review aims to reappraise the contribution of symptoms and of the level of quality of life determinants on COPD severity and to evaluate how therapeutic strategies with aclidinium may positively impact on these specific determinants of disease severity.

Dose-response to inhaled glycopyrrolate delivered with a novel Co-Suspension™ Delivery Technology metered dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD

BACKGROUND

This study forms part of the first complete characterization of the dose-response curve for glycopyrrolate (GP) delivered using Co-Suspension™ Delivery Technology via a metered dose inhaler (MDI). We examined the lower GP MDI dose range to determine an optimal dose for patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, chronic-dosing, balanced incomplete-block, placebo-controlled, crossover study compared six doses of GP MDI (18, 9, 4.6, 2.4, 1.2, and 0.6 μg, twice daily [BID]) with placebo MDI BID and open-label tiotropium dry powder inhaler (18 μg, once daily [QD]) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were randomized into 1 of 120 treatment sequences. Each sequence included 4 of 8 treatments administered for 14-day periods separated by 7- to 21-day washout periods. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s area under the curve from 0 to 12 h (FEV1 AUC0-12) on Day 14. Secondary efficacy endpoints included peak change from baseline (post-dose) in FEV1 and inspiratory capacity (IC) on Days 1, 7, and 14; change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough FEV1 on Days 7 and 14; change from baseline in 12-h post-dose trough FEV1 on Day 14; time to onset of action (≥10 % improvement in mean FEV1) and the proportion of patients achieving ≥12 % improvement in FEV1 on Day 1; and pre-dose trough IC on Days 7 and 14. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

GP MDI 18, 9, 4.6, and 2.4 μg demonstrated statistically significant and clinically relevant increases in FEV1 AUC0-12 compared with placebo MDI following 14 days of treatment (modified intent-to-treat population = 120). GP MDI 18 μg was non-inferior to open-label tiotropium for peak change in FEV1 on Day 1 and morning pre-dose trough FEV1 on Day 14. All doses of GP MDI were well tolerated with no unexpected safety findings.

CONCLUSIONS

These efficacy and safety results support GP MDI 18 μg BID as the most appropriate dose for evaluation in Phase III trials in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01566773 . Registered 27 March 2012.

Symptoms and quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with aclidinium in a real-life setting

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive disease with symptoms that can have a major impact on patients' physical health. The aim of this study was to evaluate quality of life (QoL), symptom severity and dyspnoea in COPD patients treated with aclidinium up to 24 weeks.

METHODS

In this prospective non-interventional multicentre study (198 centres in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway), COPD patients (age ≥40 years) who started treatment with aclidinium (initial therapy, change of treatment, or add-on therapy) could be included. Health-related QoL was obtained by COPD assessment test (CAT). Symptoms were evaluated on a 6-point Likert scale. The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Dyspnoea Scale was used as a simple grading system to assess the level of dyspnoea/shortness of breath from0 to 4. Patients on treatment with aclidinium who completed baseline and at least one follow-up visit (week 12 or 24) were included in the study population.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,093 patients were enrolled (mean 69 years, 54% females), one-third had ≥1 exacerbation the year prior to baseline. At enrolment, 48% were LAMA naïve. Mean (standard deviation, SD) CAT score decreased from 16.9 (7.7) at baseline to 14.3 (7.3) at week 24 (p<0.01) with a decrease in all individual CAT items (p<0.05). Mean difference in morning and night-time symptoms from baseline to week 24 was -0.60 (SD 2.51) and -0.44 (SD 2.48), respectively (both p<0.001). Mean (SD) mMRC Dyspnoea Scale changed from 1.6 (1.0) at baseline to 1.5 (1.0) at week 24 (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this observational study of a Nordic real-life COPD population, treatment with aclidinium was associated with a clinically important improvement in QoL and morning and night-time symptoms, most pronounced in the LAMA naïve group. However, there is still room for improvement in the management of symptomatic COPD patients.

Effect of tiotropium on night-time awakening and daily rescue medication use in patients with COPD

Background

Several small studies found night-time awakenings due to COPD symptoms were associated with decreased health status. In this study, night-time awakenings in patients with COPD were examined and effects of tiotropium therapy evaluated.

Methods

This study was a post hoc, exploratory, pooled analysis of twin, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials. Patients with stable moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to tiotropium HandiHaler® (n = 550) or placebo (n = 371) and followed for 13 weeks. During a 2-week, pre-treatment baseline period and for 13 weeks on treatment, self-reported night-time awakenings due to COPD symptoms, rescue medication (albuterol) use, and morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were recorded daily. Nightly, COPD-related awakenings were scored: 0 = no awakenings; 1 = 1 awakening; 2 = 2–3 awakenings; or 3 = awake most of the night. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and energy–fatigue questionnaires were completed at baseline and during treatment.

Results

Patients were aged 65.2 ± 8.7 years (mean ± SD), with a mean pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ of 36.1 ± 13.5 % predicted normal at baseline. Data for night-time awakenings and albuterol use were available for 543 (99 %) patients on tiotropium and 352 (95 %) on placebo. At baseline, 280 (51.5 %) patients on tiotropium and 179 (50.1 %) on placebo reported ≥1 COPD-related night-time awakening per week. Over the 13-weeks’ treatment, tiotropium was associated with fewer night-time awakenings, with mean ± SE overall awakening scores per week of 0.356 ± 0.006 compared with 0.421 ± 0.007 for placebo (p < 0.001); means were significantly lower for tiotropium versus placebo in patients with baseline awakenings (p < 0.001), but not for those without baseline awakenings. COPD-related night-time awakenings were associated with increased nocturnal rescue medication use and lower HRQoL ratings in both treatment arms. Following start of treatment, tiotropium decreased patients’ use of rescue medication compared with placebo, and morning and evening adjusted means for PEFR were higher for tiotropium compared with placebo.

Conclusions

Tiotropium is associated with decreased COPD-related night-time awakenings. Night-time awakenings are associated with increased nocturnal rescue medication use and may be a surrogate marker of symptom control in patients with COPD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-016-0340-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects of Adding Tiotropium or Aclidinium as Triple Therapy Using Impulse Oscillometry in COPD

Introduction

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists confer improvements in spirometry when used in addition to inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists (ICS/LABA) in COPD. The dual objectives of this proof of concept study were to evaluate trough effects of tiotropium (TIO) or aclidinium (ACL) when used as triple therapy and to assess if impulse oscillometry (IOS) might be more sensitive than spirometry in detecting subtle differences in bronchodilator response.

Methods

Patients with moderate to severe COPD already taking ICS/LABA were randomized to receive add-on therapy in cross-over fashion with either TIO 18 µg od or ACL 322 µg bid for 2–3 weeks each. Measurements of IOS, spirometry, 6-min walk test, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and Baseline/Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) were made at baseline and after chronic dosing at trough (12 h for ACL and 24 h for TIO), in addition to domiciliary diurnal spirometry.

Results

13 patients were completed: mean age 69 years, FEV₁ 52 % predicted, FEV₁/FVC 0.48, and R5 202 % predicted. There were no differences in any visit-based trough IOS or spirometry outcomes comparing TIO versus ACL. Resonant frequency but not total airway resistance at 5 Hz (R5) significantly improved from baseline with both treatments while peripheral airway resistance (R5–R20) significantly improved with ACL. Visit-based FEV₁, and forced and relaxed vital capacity were also significantly improved from baseline with both treatments. There were no significant differences in diurnal FEV₁ and FEV₆ profiles between treatments. 6-min walk distance and post-walk fatigue significantly improved from baseline with ACL, while post-walk dyspnea improved with TIO. SGRQ symptom score significantly improved to a similar degree with both treatments. TDI significantly improved with ACL versus TIO by 1.54 units.

Conclusion

We observed comparable bronchodilator efficacy at trough with TIO and ACL when used as triple therapy in COPD, while IOS was no more sensitive than spirometry.

Comparative efficacy of long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapies in COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Randomized, controlled trials comparing long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) efficacy in COPD are limited. This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the relative efficacy of tiotropium 18 µg once-daily (OD) and newer agents (aclidinium 400 µg twice-daily, glycopyrronium 50 µg OD, and umeclidinium 62.5 µg OD).

Methods

A systematic literature review identified randomized, controlled trials of adult COPD patients receiving LAMAs. A NMA within a Bayesian framework examined change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), transitional dyspnea index focal score, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score, and rescue medication use.

Results

Twenty-four studies (n=21,311) compared LAMAs with placebo/each other. Aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, and umeclidinium, respectively, demonstrated favorable results versus placebo, for change from baseline (95% credible interval) in 12-week trough FEV₁ (primary endpoint: 101.40 mL [77.06–125.60]; 117.20 mL [104.50–129.90]; 114.10 mL [103.10–125.20]; 136.70 mL [104.20–169.20]); 24-week trough FEV₁ (128.10 mL [84.10–172.00]; 135.80 mL [123.10–148.30]; 106.40 mL [95.45–117.30]; 115.00 mL [74.51–155.30]); 24-week St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score (−4.60 [−6.76 to −2.54]; −3.14 [−3.83 to −2.45]; −2.43 [−2.92 to −1.93]; −4.69 [−7.05 to −2.31]); 24-week transitional dyspnea index score (1.00 [0.41–1.59]; 1.01 [0.79–1.22]; 0.82 [0.62–1.02]; 1.00 [0.49–1.51]); and 24-week rescue medication use (data not available; −0.41 puffs/day [−0.62 to −0.20]; −0.52 puffs/day [−0.74 to −0.30]; −0.30 puffs/day [−0.81 to 0.21]). For 12-week trough FEV₁, differences in change from baseline (95% credible interval) were −12.8 mL (−39.39 to 13.93), aclidinium versus tiotropium; 3.08 mL (−7.58 to 13.69), glycopyrronium versus tiotropium; 22.58 mL (−11.58 to 56.97), umeclidinium versus tiotropium; 15.90 mL (−11.60 to 43.15), glycopyrronium versus aclidinium; 35.40 mL (−5.06 to 76.07), umeclidinium versus aclidinium; and 19.50 mL (−15.30 to 54.38), umeclidinium versus glycopyrronium. Limitations included inhaler-related factors and safety; longer-term outcomes were not considered.

Conclusion

The new LAMAs studied had at least comparable efficacy to tiotropium, the established class standard. Choice should depend on physician’s and patient’s preference.

Aclidinium bromide combined with formoterol inhibits remodeling parameters in lung epithelial cells through cAMP

Combined muscarinic receptor antagonists and long acting β2-agonists improve symptom control in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) significantly. In clinical studies aclidinium bromide achieved better beneficial effects than other bronchodilators; however, the underlying molecular mechanisms are unknown. This study assessed the effect of aclidinium bromide combined with formoterol on COPD lung (n=20) and non-COPD lung (n=10) derived epithelial cells stimulated with TGF-β1+carbachol on: (i) the generation of mesenchymal cells in relation to epithelial cells, (II) extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition, and (iii) the interaction of ECM on the generation of epithelial and mesenchymal cells. TGF-β1+carbachol enhanced the generation of mesenchymal cells, which was significantly reduced by aclidinium bromide or formoterol. The effect of combined drugs was additive. Inhibition of p38 MAP kinase and Smad by specific inhibitors or aclidinium bromide reduced the generation of mesenchymal cells. In mesenchymal cells, TGF-β1+carbachol induced the deposition of collagen-I and fibronectin which was prevented by both drugs dose-dependently. Formoterol alone reduced collagen-I deposition via cAMP, this however, was overruled by TGF-β1+carbachol and rescued by aclidinium bromide. Inhibition of fibronectin was cAMP independent, but involved p38 MAP kinase and Smad. Seeding epithelial cells on ECM collagen-I and fibronectin induced mesenchymal cell generation, which was reduced by aclidinium bromide and formoterol. Our results suggest that the beneficial effect of aclidinium bromide and formoterol involves cAMP affecting both, the accumulation of mesenchymal cells and ECM remodeling, which may explain the beneficial effect of the drugs on lung function in COPD.

Tiotropium Bromide in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Bronchial Asthma

Inhaled bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including β2-agonists and muscarinic antagonists. Tiotropium bromide, a long-acting antimuscarinic bronchodilator (LAMA), is a treatment choice for moderate-to-severe COPD; its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in recent trials. Studies also point to a beneficial role of tiotropium in the treatment of difficult-to-control asthma and a potential function in the asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). Combination of different bronchodilator molecules and addition of inhaled corticosteroids are viable therapeutic alternatives. A condensation of the latest trials and the rationale behind these therapies will be presented in this article.

The safety of anticholinergic bronchodilators for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Poorly absorbable quaternary ammonium-inhaled muscarinic antagonists both as the short-acting ipratropium and as long-acting (12 - 24 h) agents (tiotropium, glycopyrronium, aclidinium and umeclidinium) have all demonstrated statistically and clinically significant efficacy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease compared with placebo. However, controversy has arisen concerning the safety of this class of agents principally regarding their association with both fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular toxicity.

AREAS COVERED

The safety of both ipratropium and the long-acting muscarinic antagonists is reviewed with a major emphasis on potential cardiovascular toxicity, based on published clinical trials data and results of analyses of pooled data, meta-analyses, and observational studies. Since glycopyrronium, aclidinium, and umeclidinium have become available only relatively recently, more emphasis will be placed on the more extensive literature concerning the safety of the older anticholinergic compounds, the short-acting ipratropium, and the long-acting tiotropium in its dry powder formulation, as well as its newer soft mist inhaler delivery device.

EXPERT OPINION

Pooled analyses and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tiotropium in both its dry powder and soft mist formulations, as well as some observational studies, have implicated this agent as increasing the risk of nonfatal and fatal cardiovascular events. However, the most robust evidence based on large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of relatively long duration specifically designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of tiotropium have not confirmed these safety concerns. Because of the relatively limited amount of safety data for the newer long-acting muscarinic antagonists compared to the far more extensive experience with tiotropium, it will be important to accumulate additional safety information from post-marketing pharmacovigilance for these newer agents.

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide in patients with COPD: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial in a Korean population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Aclidinium bromide ('aclidinium') is a novel, inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist. Therapeutic effects of aclidinium on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been demonstrated in Caucasian populations in several clinical trials. This was a randomized, double-blind, multi-centre phase-3 clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aclidinium in a Korean population.

METHODS

A total of 263 Korean patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to receive aclidinium (400 μg, bd) (Genuai) or placebo via a dry-powder inhaler. The primary end point was change in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1 ) at 12 weeks. Other lung function measurements, COPD exacerbation, health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), dyspnoea (Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) and safety were assessed throughout the study period.

RESULTS

A significant improvement in trough FEV1 from baseline was shown with aclidinium compared with the placebo (0.126 L, P < 0.0001). Significant improvements were also demonstrated in peak FEV1 (0.190 L, P < 0.0001), SGRQ and TDI. Furthermore, aclidinium significantly reduced the prevalence of exacerbations (aclidinium, 5.4%; placebo, 15.6%, P < 0.05), and the duration of exacerbations was shorter compared with placebo (rate ratio: 0.27; P < 0.05). Aclidinium (400 μg) was well tolerated and the prevalence of adverse events was comparable with the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled aclidinium (400 μg) was shown to be safe and efficacious in Korean patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01636401 at Clinicaltrials.gov.

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

BACKGROUND

Debate exists regarding which endpoints most sensitively reflect day-to-day variation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) symptoms and are most useful in clinical practice to predict COPD exacerbations. We hypothesized that short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) reliever use would predict short- and long-term exacerbation risk in COPD patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from a study (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT00419744) comparing budesonide/formoterol 320/9 μg with formoterol 9 μg (both twice daily) in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD; reliever salbutamol 90 μg was provided. First occurrence of reliever use >4 (low), >10 (medium), and >20 (high) inhalations/day was assessed as a predictor of short-term (3-week) exacerbation risk. Mean daily reliever use in the week preceding the 2-month visit was investigated as a predictor of the long-term (10-month) exacerbation risk, using intervals of 2-5, 6-9, and ≥10 inhalations/day.

RESULTS

Overall, 810 patients were included (61 % male; mean age 63.2 years; post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s 37.7 % of predicted). First occurrence of low, medium, or high reliever use was predictive of an exacerbation within the following 3 weeks; exacerbation risk increased significantly with increasing reliever use. Mean reliever use over 1 week was predictive of long-term exacerbation risk. Patients with mean use of 2-5, 6-9, and ≥10 inhalations/day exhibited 21 %, 67 %, and 135 % higher exacerbation rates, respectively, in the following 10 months, compared with <2 inhalations/day. Budesonide/formoterol was associated with lower short- and long-term exacerbation risk than formoterol in all reliever-use groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SABA reliever use is a predictor of short- and long-term exacerbation risk in moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients with a history of exacerbations receiving budesonide/formoterol or formoterol.

Positioning new pharmacotherapies for COPD

COPD imposes considerable worldwide burden in terms of morbidity and mortality. In recognition of this, there is now extensive focus on early diagnosis, secondary prevention, and optimizing medical management of the disease. While established guidelines recognize different grades of disease severity and offer a structured basis for disease management based on symptoms and risk, it is becoming increasingly evident that COPD is a condition characterized by many phenotypes and its control in a single patient may require clinicians to have access to a broader spectrum of pharmacotherapies. This review summarizes recent developments in COPD management and compares established pharmacotherapy with new and emerging pharmacotherapies including long-acting muscarinic antagonists, long-acting β-2 sympathomimetic agonists, and fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β-2 sympathomimetic agonists as well as inhaled cortiocosteroids, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and targeted anti-inflammatory drugs. We also review the available oral medications and new agents with novel mechanisms of action in early stages of development. With several new pharmacological agents intended for the management of COPD, it is our goal to familiarize potential prescribers with evidence relating to the efficacy and safety of new medications and to suggest circumstances in which these therapies could be most useful.

Aclidinium bromide/formoterol fixed-dose combination therapy for COPD: the evidence to date

The quest for the right combination of bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β-agonists in the management of stable moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a topic of intense research activity currently, given the rising morbidity and mortality due to this disease. The fixed-dose combination of aclidinium bromide and formoterol fumarate in a single inhaler seems to offer superior advantages over either drugs given alone or as separate inhalers concurrently. Since the fixed-dose combination needs to be given twice daily, it is likely to achieve control of symptoms most crucial to the quality of life in COPD, namely, the morning hours. This is reflected in significant trough FEV₁ (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) improvements after the dose. This paper reviews the various studies related to this combination put in the perspective of its safety and efficacy and potential benefits over other therapeutic options. However, there is a dearth of data on the long-term safety and efficacy in terms of improvement in lung function. This combination could emerge as an excellent option in the management of stable COPD if data on exacerbation rates and patient-reported outcomes become available from longer-term studies. Moreover, we need some more studies to define the ideal phenotype of COPD best suited for the use of this combination.

Clinical potential of aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Three long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are now available in Europe, providing clinicians and patients with a choice of interventions, which is important in COPD, which is clinically a heterogeneous disease. The first LAMA, tiotropium, has been widely used over the last decade as a once-daily maintenance therapy in stable COPD to improve patients' health-related quality of life and to reduce the risk of exacerbations. Administered via the HandiHaler(®) device, it is safe and well tolerated. Another new once-daily LAMA, glycopyrronium, has also been shown to improve health status and reduce exacerbations, and is well tolerated. The subject of this review is a third LAMA, aclidinium bromide, which was approved as a twice-daily maintenance bronchodilator treatment. In the pivotal Phase III clinical trials, patients receiving aclidinium achieved significantly greater improvements in lung function, reductions in breathlessness, and improvements in health status compared with placebo, for up to 24 weeks. In continuation studies, these improvements were sustained for up to 52 weeks. Pooled data showed exacerbation frequency was significantly reduced with aclidinium versus placebo. Preclinical and pharmacological studies demonstrating low systemic bioavailability and a low propensity to induce cardiac arrhythmias were translated into a favorable tolerability profile in the clinical trial program - the adverse event profile of aclidinium was similar to placebo, with a low incidence of anticholinergic and cardiac adverse events. While additional studies are needed to evaluate its full clinical potential, aclidinium is an important part of this recent expansion of LAMA therapeutic options, providing clinicians and patients with an effective and well-tolerated COPD treatment.

Improvements in patient-reported outcomes: A prospective, non-interventional study with aclidinium bromide for treatment of COPD

BACKGROUND

The inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist aclidinium bromide has been shown to significantly improve lung function parameters and symptom severity in patients with COPD in randomised placebo- and active-controlled clinical studies. To obtain a comprehensive view of the treatment effects, patient-reported outcomes were investigated in a real-life COPD population in routine clinical practice in Austria.

METHODS

Multicentre, prospective, non-interventional study in patients with COPD who were newly initiated on treatment with Eklira® Genuair® (aclidinium bromide; recommended dose 400 μg twice daily) as first-line or add-on therapy. Patients were either treatment naïve or switched from other COPD medications. Health-related quality of life by means of the COPD Assessment Test™ (CAT) and symptom-related variables were evaluated at the first visit (baseline) and after approximately 12 weeks of treatment. Features of the inhaler were assessed by patients and physicians at the follow-up visit.

RESULTS

A total of 795 COPD patients (56% male; median age: 64 years) were enrolled and treated. During the observational period, the proportion of patients with at least moderate nighttime symptoms, early-morning symptoms, and limitations in morning activities decreased from 45.0% to 21.4%, from 57.7% to 26.0%, and from 49.9% to 25.3%, respectively. All improvements from baseline in symptom severity and activity limitation were statistically significant (p < 0.0001, all tests). The mean (±SD) frequency of nocturnal awakenings decreased from 1.2 (±1.4) to 0.7 (±1.2) times per night (p < 0.0001). Quality of life improved significantly in patients treated with aclidinium bromide over 3 months compared to baseline (p < 0.0001; mean CAT total score: 18.5 ± 7.5 vs. 13.8 ± 7.3). Up to 90% of the patients and up to 91% of the physicians assessed individual features of the inhaler as 'very good' or 'good'. Aclidinium bromide was well tolerated; 6.9% of the patients reported adverse drug reactions, none of which were serious.

CONCLUSIONS

This non-interventional study indicated beneficial effects of Eklira® Genuair® in the treatment of COPD with regard to nighttime and early-morning symptoms, limitation of morning activities, and quality of life under routine conditions. The acceptance of the inhaler device was high, which is a prerequisite to ensure adherence in long-term therapy.

A randomised, double-blind, four-way, crossover trial comparing the 24-h FEV1 profile for once-daily versus twice-daily treatment with olodaterol, a novel long-acting β2-agonist, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

This randomised, double-blind, four-way, crossover, Phase II study compared the 24-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) profile of alternative dosing frequencies of two total daily doses of olodaterol (5 and 10 μg) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

Patients received olodaterol 2 μg twice daily (BID), 5 μg BID, 5 μg once daily (QD) and 10 μg QD in a randomised sequence over 3-week treatment periods. Co-primary end points were FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC0-12) and area under the curve from 12 to 24 h (AUC12-24) responses. Additional lung-function responses, pharmacokinetics and safety were assessed.

RESULTS

47 patients were treated. All olodaterol doses provided significant increases in FEV1 versus baseline (p < 0.001) and FEV1 time profiles were nearly identical for olodaterol 5 and 10 μg QD. Olodaterol 5 μg QD demonstrated improved FEV1 AUC0-12 and similar AUC12-24 versus 2 μg BID. Olodaterol 5 μg QD showed slightly increased FEV1 AUC0-12 but lower AUC12-24 compared to 5 μg BID. Bronchodilation over 24 h was similar for olodaterol 5 μg QD and BID. All doses were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Olodaterol 5 μg QD is efficacious in COPD, with a superior bronchodilatory profile compared to 2 μg BID, which is close to the same total daily dose, and a similar degree of bronchodilation over 24 h compared with double the daily dose (administered as 10 μg QD or 5 μg BID).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00846768.

Patient-reported outcomes and considerations in the management of COPD: focus on aclidinium

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a complex heterogeneous disease, in which several factors combine to give the final clinical expression. Both early and more recent studies have shown that forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), despite being an extremely important parameter to predict the progression of the disease, is a poor surrogate marker for symptoms perception. Accordingly, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have gained popularity as a measure of the impact of treatment from the patients' perspective, since they represent the individuals' perception of their health status, beyond any physiological limitations. Several such PROs, therefore, are currently included in multidimensional COPD evaluation. This multidimensional approach helps identify different patient types and individualize, up to a certain point, pharmacological treatment. In this multidimensional approach it is important to highlight the importance of long-acting bronchodilators in COPD treatment strategies. Long-acting bronchodilators are cost-effective and have been shown to achieve the greatest functional and clinical improvements in COPD. As a result, long-acting bronchodilators are now the main pharmacological treatment for COPD at all stages of the disease. Until recently, tiotropium was the leading bronchodilator for the treatment of COPD. The clinical development of this medication, unprecedented in inhaled therapy, involved tens of thousands of patients and yielded consistent outcomes in terms of lung function, symptoms, quality of life, exacerbations, and prognosis. However, new long-acting bronchodilators have recently been developed or are currently under development. In this review, we evaluate the effects of aclidinium bromide, a novel long-acting bronchodilator, on PROs in COPD. Aclidinium is a novel long-acting muscarinic antagonist with a good safety profile for the treatment of COPD, and has proven efficacy in both objective functional measurements and PROs. Comparison studies with tiotropium have shown it to have similar lung function improvement and a similar impact on PROs, including quality of life or symptom perception.

The role of aclidinium bromide in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled bronchodilators remain a cornerstone of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); current guidelines recommend initiating inhaled bronchodilators as either monotherapy or combination therapy depending on disease severity and exacerbation risk to improve air flow and reduce breathlessness. Aclidinium bromide is a twice-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist recently approved in the United States and Europe and carries significant promise as an alternative long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic agent for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.

OBJECTIVE

This review describes the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects of aclidinium bromide.

DISCUSSION

Clinical trials have demonstrated improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, nighttime symptom control, disease-related quality of life, and delay in time to first COPD exacerbation with aclidinium use compared with placebo. Commonly reported adverse effects include headache, nasopharyngitis, and cough. One trial reported narrow-angle glaucoma; however, no other serious adverse events have been reported to date.

CONCLUSION

Overall, aclidinium bromide has been found to be safe and effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD. Further clinical trials comparing aclidinium bromide to standard therapies are needed to fully elucidate its role in the treatment of COPD.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combinations of aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate: the 24-week, randomized, placebo-controlled AUGMENT COPD study

BACKGROUND

Combining two long-acting bronchodilators with complementary mechanisms of action may provide treatment benefits to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that are greater than those derived from either treatment alone. The efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of aclidinium bromide, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and formoterol fumarate, a long-acting β2-agonist, in patients with moderate to severe COPD are presented.

METHODS

In this 24-week double-blind study, 1692 patients with stable COPD were equally randomized to twice-daily treatment with FDC aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 12 μg (ACL400/FOR12 FDC), FDC aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 6 μg (ACL400/FOR6 FDC), aclidinium 400 μg, formoterol 12 μg, or placebo administered by a multidose dry powder inhaler (Genuair®/Pressair®)*. Coprimary endpoints were change from baseline to week 24 in 1-hour morning postdose FEV1 (FDCs versus aclidinium) and change from baseline to week 24 in morning predose (trough) FEV1 (FDCs versus formoterol). Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and improvement in Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score at week 24. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

At study end, improvements from baseline in 1-hour postdose FEV1 were significantly greater in patients treated with ACL400/FOR12 FDC or ACL400/FOR6 FDC compared with aclidinium (108 mL and 87 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001). Improvements in trough FEV1 were significantly greater in patients treated with ACL400/FOR12 FDC versus formoterol (45 mL; p = 0.0102), a numerical improvement of 26 mL in trough FEV1 over formoterol was observed with ACL400/FOR6 FDC. Significant improvements in both SGRQ total and TDI focal scores were observed in the ACL400/FOR12 FDC group at study end (p < 0.0001), with differences over placebo exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of ≥4 points and ≥1 unit, respectively. All treatments were well tolerated, with safety profiles of the FDCs similar to those of the monotherapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with twice-daily aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 12 μg FDC provided rapid and sustained bronchodilation that was greater than either monotherapy; clinically significant improvements in dyspnea and health status were evident compared with placebo. Aclidinium/formoterol FDC may be an effective and well tolerated new treatment option for patients with COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01437397.

Aclidinium bromide for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilators are the mainstay for symptom relief in the management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Aclidinium bromide is a new long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) that differs from tiotropium by its higher selectivity for M3 muscarinic receptors with a faster onset of action. However, the duration of action of aclidinium is shorter than for tiotropium. It has been approved as maintenance therapy for stable, moderate to severe COPD, but its efficacy and safety in the management of COPD is uncertain compared to other bronchodilators.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide in stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), as well as www.clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website and Almirall Clinical Trials Registry and Results. We contacted Forest Laboratories for any unpublished trials and checked the reference lists of identified articles for additional information. The last search was performed on 7 April 2014 for CAGR and 11 April 2014 for other sources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group RCTs of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo, long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) or LAMA in adults with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We sought missing data from the trial authors as well as manufacturers of aclidinium. We used odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, and reported both with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We applied the GRADE approach to summarise results and to assess the overall quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 12 multicentre RCTs randomly assigning 9547 participants with stable COPD. All the studies were industry-sponsored and had similar inclusion criteria with relatively good methodological quality. All but one study included in the meta-analysis were double-blind and scored low risk of bias. The study duration ranged from four weeks to 52 weeks. Participants were more often males, mainly Caucasians, mean age ranging from 61.7 to 65.6 years, and with a smoking history of 10 or more pack years. They had moderate to severe symptoms at randomisation; the mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was between 46% and 57.6% of the predicted normal value, and the mean St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (SGRQ) ranged from 45.1 to 50.4 when reported.There was no difference between aclidinium and placebo in all-cause mortality (low quality) and number of patients with exacerbations requiring a short course of oral steroids or antibiotics, or both (moderate quality). Aclidinium improved quality of life by lowering the SGRQ total score with a mean difference of -2.34 (95% CI -3.18 to -1.51; I(2) = 48%, 7 trials, 4442 participants) when compared to placebo. More patients on aclidinium achieved a clinically meaningful improvement of at least four units decrease in SGRQ total score (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.31 to 1.70; I(2) = 34%; number needed to treat (NNT) = 10, 95% CI 8 to 15, high quality evidence) over 12 to 52 weeks than on placebo. Aclidinium also resulted in a significantly greater improvement in pre-dose FEV1 than placebo with a mean difference of 0.09 L (95% CI 0.08 to 0.10; I(2) = 39%, 9 trials, 4963 participants). No trials assessed functional capacity. Aclidinium reduced the number of patients with exacerbations requiring hospitalisation by 4 to 20 fewer per 1000 over 4 to 52 weeks (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.88; I(2) = 0%, 10 trials, 5624 people; NNT = 77, 95% CI 51 to 233, high quality evidence) compared to placebo. There was no difference in non-fatal serious adverse events (moderate quality evidence) between aclidinium and placebo.Compared to tiotropium, aclidinium did not demonstrate significant differences for exacerbations requiring oral steroids or antibiotics, or both, exacerbation-related hospitalisations and non-fatal serious adverse events (very low quality evidence). Inadequate data prevented the comparison of aclidinium to formoterol or other LABAs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aclidinium is associated with improved quality of life and reduced hospitalisations due to severe exacerbations in patients with moderate to severe stable COPD compared to placebo. Overall, aclidinium did not significantly reduce mortality, serious adverse events or exacerbations requiring oral steroids or antibiotics, or both.Currently, the available data are insufficient and of very low quality in comparisons of the efficacy of aclidinium versus tiotropium. The efficacy of aclidinium versus LABAs cannot be assessed due to inaccurate data. Thus additional trials are recommended to assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium compared to other LAMAs or LABAs.

Clinical potential of aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is increasing worldwide and is predicted to become the third most frequent cause of death by 2030. Muscarinic receptor antagonists, alone or in combination with long-acting β2-agonists, are frequently used for COPD therapy. Aclidinium bromide is a novel muscarinic receptor antagonist, and clinical studies indicate that its metabolism is more rapid than that of other muscarinic receptor inhibitors, so systemic side effects are expected to occur less frequently. Aclidinium bromide is well tolerated, and when compared with other muscarinic receptor antagonists, the drug achieves better control of lung function, especially night-time symptoms in COPD patients. This review summarizes the safety profile and side effects reported by recent clinical studies using aclidinium bromide alone.

ACCORD COPD II: a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the 12-week efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Aclidinium bromide is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved for the long-term maintenance treatment of bronchospasm associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This 12-week phase III study evaluated efficacy and tolerability of aclidinium 200 or 400 μg in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

METHODS

In this double-blind study, 544 patients with COPD were randomized to placebo or twice-daily aclidinium 200 or 400 μg administered by Genuair(®)/Pressair(®). Lung function, health status [measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)], dyspnea [measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI)], and safety were assessed throughout the study.

RESULTS

Mean changes from baseline in morning trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at week 12 (primary endpoint) were significantly higher for aclidinium than for placebo (200 μg, 51 mL; 400 μg, 72 mL; both p < 0.05). Aclidinium also significantly improved other lung function outcomes. At week 12, improvements from baseline were observed with aclidinium in SGRQ total score (200 μg, -6.0; 400 μg, -5.4) and TDI focal score (200 μg, 1.0; 400 μg, 1.3). Furthermore, clinically important improvements in SGRQ total and TDI focal scores were achieved by 45 and 51 % of patients, respectively, who received aclidinium 400 μg, with a significant difference versus placebo for TDI (p < 0.05). Anticholinergic-related adverse events (e.g., dry mouth) were infrequent, occurring <2 % for any event in any treatment group. Both aclidinium doses were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates efficacy and safety of aclidinium in COPD patients. Unexpected baseline imbalances between treatment groups may have impacted the aclidinium treatment benefit in this study.

Clinical use of aclidinium in patients with COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the sixth-leading cause of death in the US. The Global initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the clinical management of chronic COPD. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators continue to be the mainstay of current management. Aclidinium bromide (Tudorza™ Pressair™) joins tiotropium as a long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic bronchodilator approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the maintenance treatment of COPD. Early studies demonstrated aclidinium's significant bronchodilatory effects supporting once-daily dosing; however, two Phase III studies, Aclidinium Clinical Trial Assessing Efficacy and Safety in Moderate to Severe COPD Patients (ACCLAIM/COPD) I and ACCLAIM/COPD II, in which patients were randomized to receive aclidinium 200 μg daily, failed to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in improvement of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), suggesting the need for higher doses or more frequent dosing. Additional studies - Aclidinium to Treat Airway Obstruction in COPD Patients (ATTAIN) and Aclidinium in Chronic Obstructive Respiratory Disease (ACCORD) I - were undertaken to compare 200 and 400 μg twice-daily dosing. The mean improvements from baseline in trough FEV1 in the 400 μg groups were +129 mL over 24 weeks and +124 mL over 12 weeks in ATTAIN and ACCORD I, respectively. Aclidinium also had beneficial effects on health-related quality of life and other endpoints, such as rescue medication use and rates of exacerbations. Aclidinium bromide inhalation powder is generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with headache, cough, diarrhea, and rhinosinusitis among the most commonly reported adverse events. Cardiovascular side effects were rarely reported. Patient satisfaction studies found that patients using the aclidinium delivery device had fewer errors affecting drug delivery than those using the tiotropium device and, overall, the aclidinium device was preferred to the tiotropium device. In conclusion, aclidinium bromide is approved for use in the US at a dose of 400 μg twice daily and is a promising alternative to tiotropium.

Economic evaluation of aclidinium bromide in the management of moderate to severe COPD: an analysis over 5 years

PURPOSE

Aclidinium bromide is a long-acting muscarinic antagonistic used in maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A model-based health economic study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of aclidinium 400 μg bid as an alternative to tiotropium 18 μg od for this indication in the US.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS IN THIS MODEL REFLECT THOSE IN THE ACLIDINIUM CLINICAL STUDIES: age >40 years, stable moderate-to-severe COPD, current or ex-smokers (>10 pack-years), post-salbutamol forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥30% and <80% of predicted normal value, and FEV1/forced vital capacity <70%. The model consists of five main health states indicating severity of COPD and the level of utility, resource use, and costs. Treatment efficacy over 5 years was modeled using FEV1% predicted; a network meta-analysis comparing aclidinium and tiotropium was used to estimate disease progression during the first 24 weeks, and results from the UPLIFT trial were used for time points after 24 weeks. Quality of life was assessed using utility scores in US patients from the UPLIFT trial. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

Over 5 years, QALYs were 3.50 for aclidinium versus 3.49 for tiotropium; life years accumulated were 4.52 for both. In this economic model, aclidinium versus tiotropium showed marginally fewer exacerbations (3.364 versus 3.390, respectively) and mean total health care costs (US$126,274 versus US$128,591, respectively). In all scenario analyses performed (discount factors of 0% and 6% for benefits and costs; time horizon of 1 year; mapping St George's Respiratory Questionnaire to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions; excluding pharmacy costs, COPD-related cost only; cost of exacerbations; including ACCORD II trial in the network meta-analysis), aclidinium was associated with lower costs and marginally greater QALYs versus tiotropium.

CONCLUSION

Aclidinium is potentially cost-effective compared with tiotropium for maintenance treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.

Effects of aclidinium bromide in a cigarette smoke-exposed Guinea pig model of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists are widely used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In addition to bronchodilation, muscarinic antagonism may affect pulmonary histopathological changes. The effects of long-acting muscarinic antagonists have not been thoroughly evaluated in experimental models of COPD induced by chronic exposure to cigarette smoke (CS). We investigated the effects of aclidinium bromide on pulmonary function, airway remodeling, and lung inflammation in a CS-exposed model of COPD. A total of 36 guinea pigs were exposed to CS and 22 were sham exposed for 24 weeks. Animals were nebulized daily with vehicle, 10 μg/ml, or 30 μg/ml aclidinium, resulting in six experimental groups. Pulmonary function was assessed weekly by whole-body plethysmography, determining the enhanced pause (Penh) at baseline, after treatment, and after CS/sham exposure. Lung changes were evaluated by morphometry and immunohistochemistry. CS exposure increased Penh in all conditions. CS-exposed animals treated with aclidinium showed lower baseline Penh than untreated animals (P = 0.02). CS induced thickening of all bronchial wall layers, airspace enlargement, and inflammatory cell infiltrate in airways and septa. Treatment with aclidinium abrogated the CS-induced smooth muscle enlargement in small airways (P = 0.001), and tended to reduce airspace enlargement (P = 0.054). Aclidinium also attenuated CS-induced neutrophilia in alveolar septa (P = 0.04). We conclude that, in guinea pigs chronically exposed to CS, aclidinium has an antiremodeling effect on small airways, which is associated with improved respiratory function, and attenuates neutrophilic infiltration in alveolar septa. These results indicate that, in COPD, aclidinium may exert beneficial effects on lung structure in addition to its bronchodilator action.