The cardiovascular risk of tiotropium: is it real?

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Among Different Fixed-Dose Combinations of Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists and Long-Acting β2-Agonists in Patients With COPD

BACKGROUND

Researchers have yet to obtain conclusive evidence differentiating among fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for COPD in terms of real-world clinical outcomes.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the differences between available LAMA/LABA FDCs on the risk of acute exacerbation (AE) and cardiovascular events?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study based on a national insurance claims database included patients with COPD ≥ 40 years of age who were newly prescribed glycopyrronium (GLY)/indacaterol (IND), umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI), or tiotropium (TIO)/olodaterol (OLO) FDC between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019. Propensity score matching and Cox regression models were used to compare outcomes of AE and cardiovascular events associated with LAMA/LABA FDC treatment.

RESULTS

Among the 44,498 patients identified and included, 15,586 received GLY/IND, 20,460 received UMEC/VI, and 8,452 received TIO/OLO. Baseline characteristics were well balanced after 1:1 matching of UMEC/VI and GLY/IND, 2:1 matching of UMEC/VI and TIO/OLO, and 2:1 matching of GLY/IND and TIO/OLO. Risk of severe AE was lower among patients treated with UMEC/VI or GLY/IND than among those who received TIO/OLO (UMEC/VI vs TIO/OLO: 17.85 vs 29.32 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84; GLY/IND vs TIO/OLO: 15.54 vs 25.53 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88). In addition, GLY/IND users tended to have a lower risk of cardiovascular events than TIO/OLO users, but the difference dissipated when restricting follow up to a shorter duration.

INTERPRETATION

Our results revealed that the risk of severe AE was lower among patients with COPD receiving UMEC/VI or GLY/IND than among those receiving TIO/OLO, whereas the incidence of cardiovascular events was similar across groups but was slightly lower in GLY/IND users when compared with TIO/OLO users. Further research will be required to confirm these findings.

Efficacy and cardiovascular safety of LAMA in patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is at present the third leading cause of death in the world. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) is widely used as a bronchodilator in patients with COPD. However, there is controversy concerning their cardiovascular safety. This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and cardiovascular safety of LAMAs versus placebo in patients with COPD. We searched Pub Med, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared LAMA with placebo in patients with COPD. Twenty-one studies involving 24,987 participants were finally included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of all adverse events (risk ratio (RR)=1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02, I2=15.2%) and cardiovascular events (RR=0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09, I2=4.9%) in patients treated with LAMAs versus placebo. LAMAs significantly improved trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (weighted mean difference (WMD)=0.12, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.14, I2=86.6%), Transitional Dyspnea Index (WMD=0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.94, I2=0%), and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (WMD=‒2.50, 95% CI ‒3.32 to ‒1.69, I2=39.8%). Moreover, LAMAs significantly reduced the incidence of exacerbation in patients with COPD (RR=0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91, I2=69.9%). LAMAs are safe therapy and play a pivotal role in improving lung function, dyspnea, and health status, and reducing the exacerbation in patients with COPD.

Risk of adverse cardiovascular events with use of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators in management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Inhaled long-acting bronchodilators, including long-acting β₂ agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are the mainstay therapy in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a disease that poses a heavy burden on morbidity and mortality worldwide. Use of LABAs and LAMAs in patients with COPD, however, has been concerned about an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events, despite inconsistent findings reported from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. In this review, we detailed the relevant evidence generated from RCTs and observational studies with respect to the risk of cardiovascular disease with use of LABAs and LAMAs in management of COPD, and analyzed the contradictory findings in the literature, as well as recommended future research directions to clear the air regarding the cardiovascular safety of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators.

Risk of Severe Cardiovascular Events From Add-On Tiotropium in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

OBJECTIVE

To examine the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) from tiotropium added to inhaled long-acting β₂ agonists (LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in a nationwide population with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This nested case-control study included 65,966 patients with COPD treated with LABAs and ICSs identified from the Taiwan nationwide health care claims database from January 1, 2007, through June 30, 2011. Cases were all patients with a first primary diagnosis of ischemic heart disease, heart failure, stroke, or arrhythmia from inpatient or emergency care settings during follow-up, and each was matched with 4 disease risk score-matched controls from risk sets. The use of tiotropium in the year before the index/event date was measured, stratified by duration since therapy initiation, concomitant COPD medications, and dosage form. Conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios of the CVD risk from add-on tiotropium therapy.

RESULTS

From the study cohort, with a mean age of 70.3 years (interquartile range, 61.8-79.4 years), 3188 CVD cases (incidence rate, 6.2 [95% CI, 6.0-6.4] cases per 100 person-years) and 12,349 matched controls were identified. The new use of tiotropium was associated with a 1.88-fold (95% CI, 1.44-2.46) increased CVD risk within 30 days of therapy initiation, and the association was sustained up to 60 days after treatment initiation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08-2.70). The risk persisted across all tiotropium regimens, with a case-crossover analysis, and in comparison with new add-on theophylline therapy.

CONCLUSION

Tiotropium newly added to LABA/ICS combination therapy was associated with an increased cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD.

Does Cardiovascular Comorbidity Influence the Prescribing of Bronchodilators in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease?

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most prevalent comorbidity for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Potential adverse cardiovascular events of bronchodilators warrant their cautionary use in the comorbid COPD-CVD population, yet little is known about the prescribing of bronchodilators in this high-risk patient group.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether comorbid CVD is associated with reduced bronchodilator prescribing in patients with COPD. In addition, we explored how the association was modified by gender, concurrent asthma, and concomitant β-blocker (BB) use.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted using the 2010 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. All visits among diagnosed COPD patients 40 years and older were examined. Logistic regression on survey-weighted data was used to predict treatment with bronchodilators and determine the influence of gender, asthma, and BBs on bronchodilator prescribing.

RESULTS

Among 11 627 061 ambulatory COPD visits, we found a significantly lower bronchodilator treatment rate among patients with comorbid CVD (32.3%) than among patients without CVD (57.6%). The observed effect was modified by gender, asthma, and BBs. Deprescribing was more pronounced for females than males, for nonusers of BBs than users of BBs, and for asthma patients than nonasthma patients. CVD did not affect bronchodilator prescribing in either asthmatic or nonasthmatic males taking BBs.

CONCLUSIONS

Most COPD patients with concurrent CVD were less likely to be prescribed bronchodilators, with the exception of males who were also prescribed BBs. Thus, this study highlights a specific patient subgroup for whom the guidelines are less likely to be observed.

Role of Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist/Long-Acting β2-Agonist Therapy in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

OBJECTIVE

To compare the available literature regarding the use of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β₂ agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA combination inhaler therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) maintenance therapy management.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE literature search from database inception to February 2017 was conducted using the search terms chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, adrenergic beta-agonist, muscarinic antagonist, and inhaled corticosteroid. References from extracted sources were further searched for any relevant, missed data sources.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All English-language randomized-controlled trials comparing LAMA/LABA and ICS/LABA combination inhaler therapy were evaluated.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 10 randomized controlled trials have reviewed the use of LAMA/LABA compared with ICS/LABA therapy for COPD maintenance therapy. Results of clinical trials that evaluated LAMA/LABA and ICS/LABA maintenance therapy demonstrated superior improvements in pulmonary function tests via spirometry and improved clinical outcomes with LAMA/LABA therapy, specifically reduction in COPD exacerbation rates. The safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy also is favorable compared with ICS/LABA combination therapy because of the increased infection risk with ICS therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

COPD is a disease state with significant morbidity and mortality in the United States and is the third leading cause of death. Long-acting inhalers are recommended for the majority of COPD severities, and combination therapy is typically utilized. LAMA/LABA combination therapy has demonstrated superior improvements in pulmonary function and reduction in COPD exacerbation rates compared with ICS/LABA. LAMA/LABA combination therapy will have a larger future role in COPD maintenance management.

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.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and coronary disease: COPDCoRi, a simple and effective algorithm for predicting the risk of coronary artery disease in COPD patients

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often associated with cardiovascular artery disease (CAD), representing a potential and independent risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify an algorithm for predicting the risk of CAD in COPD patients.

METHODS

We analyzed data of patients afferent to the Cardiology ward and the Respiratory Diseases outpatient clinic of Tor Vergata University (2010-2012, 1596 records). The study population was clustered as training population (COPD patients undergoing coronary arteriography), control population (non-COPD patients undergoing coronary arteriography), test population (COPD patients whose records reported information on the coronary status). The predicting model was built via causal relationship between variables, stepwise binary logistic regression and Hosmer-Lemeshow analysis. The algorithm was validated via split-sample validation method and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. The diagnostic accuracy was assessed.

RESULTS

In training population the variables gender (men/women OR: 1.7, 95%CI: 1.237-2.5, P < 0.05), dyslipidemia (OR: 1.8, 95%CI: 1.2-2.5, P < 0.01) and smoking habit (OR: 1.5, 95%CI: 1.2-1.9, P < 0.001) were significantly associated with CAD in COPD patients, whereas in control population also age and diabetes were correlated. The stepwise binary logistic regressions permitted to build a well fitting predictive model for training population but not for control population. The predictive algorithm shown a diagnostic accuracy of 81.5% (95%CI: 77.78-84.71) and an AUC of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.78-0.85) for the validation set.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed algorithm is effective for predicting the risk of CAD in COPD patients via a rapid, inexpensive and non-invasive approach.

Risks associated with tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: overview of the evidence to date

Tiotropium is a long-acting inhaled anticholinergic agent that is widely used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It was initially launched as the tiotropium HandiHaler formulation, but this was followed by a newer version based on a potentially more efficient drug delivery device, known as Respimat. This Respimat formulation is available worldwide but has not yet succeeded in gaining regulatory approval in the USA. In the past few years, the adverse effects profile of tiotropium has come under close scrutiny owing to concerns about the possibility of urinary and cardiovascular adverse effects. These concerns appeared to have been alleviated following the publication of data from the Understanding Potential Long-Term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT) trial, which was a large trial of 4 years' duration. This trial did not show any excess myocardial infarction, renal or urinary adverse events with tiotropium compared with placebo. However, the risk of urinary retention has been in the spotlight again following publication of two observational studies reporting a significantly increased risk of urinary retention in men recently started on inhaled anticholinergics, especially when prostatic hyperplasia coexists. More recently, a meta-analysis of mortality data for the tiotropium Respimat formulation raised the possibility of an increased risk of death, including death from cardiovascular causes. It is unclear if the more efficient drug delivery offered by the Respimat device is hitting a different part of the dose-toxicity curve. In the absence of any evidence of superior clinical efficacy with tiotropium Respimat compared with tiotropium HandiHaler, some experts have argued that there is no compelling reason to choose the Respimat formulation given the new uncertainties about its safety profile.

Pharmacology and therapeutics of bronchodilators

Bronchodilators are central in the treatment of of airways disorders. They are the mainstay of the current management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and are critical in the symptomatic management of asthma, although controversies around the use of these drugs remain. Bronchodilators work through their direct relaxation effect on airway smooth muscle cells. at present, three major classes of bronchodilators, β(2)-adrenoceptor (AR) agonists, muscarinic receptor antagonists, and xanthines are available and can be used individually or in combination. The use of the inhaled route is currently preferred to minimize systemic effects. Fast- and short-acting agents are best used for rescue of symptoms, whereas long-acting agents are best used for maintenance therapy. It has proven difficult to discover novel classes of bronchodilator drugs, although potential new targets are emerging. Consequently, the logical approach has been to improve the existing bronchodilators, although several novel broncholytic classes are under development. An important step in simplifying asthma and COPD management and improving adherence with prescribed therapy is to reduce the dose frequency to the minimum necessary to maintain disease control. Therefore, the incorporation of once-daily dose administration is an important strategy to improve adherence. Several once-daily β(2)-AR agonists or ultra-long-acting β(2)-AR-agonists (LABAs), such as indacaterol, olodaterol, and vilanterol, are already in the market or under development for the treatment of COPD and asthma, but current recommendations suggest the use of LABAs only in combination with an inhaled corticosteroid. In addition, some new potentially long-acting antimuscarinic agents, such as glycopyrronium bromide (NVA-237), aclidinium bromide, and umeclidinium bromide (GSK573719), are under development, as well as combinations of several classes of long-acting bronchodilator drugs, in an attempt to simplify treatment regimens as much as possible. This review will describe the pharmacology and therapeutics of old, new, and emerging classes of bronchodilator.

Tiotropium bromide inhalation powder: a review of its use in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The anticholinergic agent tiotropium bromide (Spiriva®) is a long-acting bronchodilator that is indicated for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This article reviews the clinical efficacy and tolerability of tiotropium bromide inhalation powder, administered using the HandiHaler® device, in patients with COPD, as well as reviewing its pharmacological properties and the results of pharmacoeconomic analyses. Shorter-term placebo-controlled trials in patients with COPD demonstrated significantly higher trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) responses with tiotropium bromide than with placebo, confirming it has a duration of action of ≥24 hours and is suitable for once-daily administration. Lung function improved to a greater extent with tiotropium bromide than with ipratropium bromide or, in most instances, salmeterol. Indacaterol was shown to be noninferior to tiotropium bromide in terms of the trough FEV(1) response. The large, 4-year UPLIFT® trial did not show a significant reduction in the annual rate of decline in FEV(1) with tiotropium bromide versus placebo in patients with COPD, although subgroup analyses demonstrated a significantly lower rate of decline with tiotropium bromide than with placebo in some patient groups (e.g. patients with moderate COPD, patients aged ≥50 years, patients not receiving maintenance therapy at baseline). Tiotropium bromide prevented exacerbations in patients with COPD, with a significantly lower exacerbation rate and a significantly longer time to first exacerbation seen with tiotropium bromide than with placebo or salmeterol. Exacerbation rates did not significantly differ between patients receiving tiotropium bromide and those receiving salmeterol/fluticasone propionate. Tiotropium bromide also had beneficial effects on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and other endpoints, such as dyspnoea and rescue medication use. Combination therapy with tiotropium bromide plus formoterol with or without budesonide improved lung function to a significantly greater extent than tiotropium bromide alone in patients with COPD. In addition, exacerbation rates were lower and HR-QOL was improved with tiotropium bromide plus budesonide/formoterol versus tiotropium bromide alone. Although the addition of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate to tiotropium bromide did not reduce the COPD exacerbation rate, it did improve lung function and HR-QOL. Tiotropium bromide inhalation powder is generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with anticholinergic adverse events (e.g. dry mouth, constipation, gastrointestinal obstruction, dysuria) among the most commonly reported adverse events. The UPLIFT® trial showed no significant difference between tiotropium bromide and placebo recipients in the risk of stroke, and the risk of serious cardiac adverse events (including congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction) was significantly lower with tiotropium bromide than with placebo. The absence of a detrimental effect on cardiovascular outcomes was supported by the results of a meta-analysis and pooled analyses. In addition, on-treatment mortality was lower with tiotropium bromide than with placebo in the UPLIFT® trial. Pooled analyses showed significantly lower cardiovascular mortality with tiotropium bromide than with placebo, with a meta-analysis demonstrating no significant difference between patients receiving tiotropium bromide and controls in cardiovascular mortality. Results of modelled pharmacoeconomic analyses conducted from a healthcare payer perspective in several developed countries suggest that tiotropium bromide is a cost-effective option in patients with COPD. In conclusion, tiotropium bromide inhalation powder is a useful option for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD.