Patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can generate sufficient inspiratory flows via Easyhaler® dry powder inhaler: a pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials

Comparative study of the inhalation parameters of COPD patients through NEXThaler® and Ellipta® dry powder inhalers

The deposition of dry powder aerosol drugs depends on the inhalation parameters of the patients through the inhaler. These data are not directly measured in clinical practice. Their prediction based on the routinely measured spirometric data could help in choosing the appropriate device and optimizing the therapy. The aim of this study was to perform inhalation experiments to find correlations between inhalation parameters of COPD patients through two DPI devices and their native spirometric data, gender, age and disease severity. Another goal was to establish relationships between peak inspiratory flows through NEXThaler® and Ellipta® inhalers and their statistical determinants. Breathing parameters of 113 COPD patients were measured by normal spirometry and while inhaling through the two DPIs. Statistical analysis of the measured data was performed. The average values of peak inspiratory flow through the devices (PIFdev) were 68.4 L/min and 78.0 L/min for NEXThaler® and Ellipta®, respectively. PIFdev values were significantly higher for males than for females, but differences upon age, BMI and disease severity group were not significant. PIFdev values correlated best with their native spirometric counterparts (PIF) and linear relationships between them were revealed. Current results may be used in the future to predict the success of inhalation of COPD patients through DPI devices, which may help in the inhaler choice. By choosing the appropriate device-drug pair for each patient the lung dose can be increased and the efficiency of the therapy improved. Further results of the clinical study will be the subject of a next publication.

Successful Use of Easyhaler® Dry Powder Inhaler in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease; Analysis of Peak Inspiratory Flow from Three Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing pressure to use environmentally friendly dry powder inhalers (DPI) instead of pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDI). However, correct inhalation technique is needed for effective inhaler therapy, and there is persistent concern whether patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can generate sufficient inspiratory effort to use DPIs successfully. The aims of this study were to find clinical predictors for peak inspiratory flow rate (PIF) and to assess whether patients with COPD had difficulties in generating sufficient PIF with a high resistance DPI.

METHODS

Pooled data of 246 patients with COPD from previous clinical trials was analyzed to find possible predictors of PIF via the DPI Easyhaler (PIFEH) and to assess the proportion of patients able to achieve an inhalation flow rate of 30 l/min, which is needed to use the Easyhaler successfully.

RESULTS

The mean PIF was 56.9 l/min and 99% (243/246) of the study patients achieved a PIF ≥ 30 l/min. A low PIF was associated with female gender and lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), but the association was weak and a statistical model including both only accounted for 18% of the variation seen in PIFEH.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, impaired expiratory lung function or patient characteristics do not predict patients' ability to use DPIs in COPD; 99% of the patients generated sufficient PIFEH for successful dose delivery. Considering the targets for sustainability in health care, this should be addressed as DPIs are a potential option for most patients when choosing the right inhaler for the patient.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Two of three included trials were registered under numbers NCT04147572 and NCT01424137. Third trial preceded registration platforms and therefore, was not registered.

Mixing energy as an adjustment tool for aerodynamic behaviour of an inhaled product: In-vitro and in-vivo effects

This paper describes the development of a fixed dose dry powder combination of indacaterol maleate (Inda) and glycopyrronium bromide (Glyco) in Easyhaler® inhaler for a comparative pharmacokinetic (PK) study, as well as the outcome of such a study. The development aim was to produce formulations with three different in vitro dispersibility profiles for both Inda and Glyco. This so-called 'rake' approach allows for quantitation of the candidate formulations relative to the reference product Ultibro® Breezhaler® in terms of the key PK parameters. Three formulations (A, B and C) were produced based on the mixing energy concept. For both APIs, formulation A (lowest mixing energy) displayed the highest fine particle fractions and formulation C (highest mixing energy) the lowest. GMP manufacturing confirmed the performance of the three formulations. The candidate formulations were tested against the reference product in a single dose PK study in healthy volunteers. Clear differences in Inda plasma concentration profiles were observed between the treatments when administered concomitantly with charcoal, with Easyhaler A showing the highest Cmax value and Easyhaler C the lowest. Easyhaler B was bioequivalent to Ultibro Breezhaler with regard to the primary PK parameters of Inda, Cmax and AUC72h. For Glyco, Easyhaler formulations A, B and C provided lower peak concentrations than Ultibro Breezhaler. For AUC72h of Glyco, Easyhaler B was bioequivalent to the reference product. Additional measures for adjustment of formulation performance can be foreseen, whose effects can be predicted based on mixing energy theory.

High inhaler resistance does not limit successful inspiratory maneuver among patients with asthma or COPD

INTRODUCTION

There has been an active discussion on the sustainability of inhaler therapy in respiratory diseases, and it has cast a shadow on pMDIs which rely on propellant with high global warming potential (GWP). DPIs offer a lower GWP and effective alternative, but there has been concern whether all patients can generate sufficient inspiratory effort to disperse the drug. This review focuses on airflow resistance of DPIs and its clinical relevance.

AREAS COVERED

For this narrative review, we searched the literature for studies comparing flow patterns with different devices. We also included a section on clinical trials comparing reliever administration with DPI, pMDI with spacer, and nebulizer during exacerbation.

EXPERT OPINION

The evidence supports the efficacy of DPIs irrespective of respiratory condition or age of the patient even during acute exacerbations. Air flow resistance does not limit the use of DPIs and the patients were able to generate sufficient inspiratory flow rate with almost any device studied. None of 16 identified clinical trials comparing reliever administration via DPIs to other types of devices during exacerbation or bronchial challenge showed statistically significant difference between the device types in FEV1 recovery. DPIs performed as well as other types of inhaler devices even during asthma or COPD exacerbation.

Relationship between Peak Inspiratory Flow and Patient and Disease Characteristics in Individuals with COPD—A Systematic Scoping Review

Optimal delivery of medication via dry powder inhalers, the most commonly prescribed inhaler type, is dependent on a patient achieving a minimum level of inspiratory flow during inhalation. However, measurement of peak inspiratory flow (PIF) against the simulated resistance of a dry powder inhaler is not frequently performed in clinical practice due to time or equipment limitations. Therefore, defining which patient characteristics are associated with lower PIF is critically important to help clinicians optimize their inhaler choice through a more personalized approach to prescribing. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically evaluate patient and disease characteristics determining PIF in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Medline, Cochrane and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant studies on PIF in patients with COPD published in English between January 2000 and May 2021. The quality of evidence was assessed using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation checklist. Of 3382 citations retrieved, 35 publications were included in the review (nine scored as high quality, 13 as moderate, nine as low, and four as very low). Factors correlating with PIF in >70% of papers included both patient characteristics (lower PIF correlated with increased age, female gender, shorter height, decreased handgrip and inspiratory muscle strength, and certain comorbidities) and disease characteristics (lower PIF correlated with markers of lung hyperinflation, lower peak expiratory flow [PEF] and increased disease severity). Other factors correlating with adequate/optimal or improved PIF included education/counseling and exercise/inspiratory muscle training; impaired physical function and errors in inhalation technique/non-adherence were associated with low/suboptimal PIF. In conclusion, clinicians should measure PIF against the simulated resistance of a particular device wherever possible. However, as this often cannot be done due to lack of resources or time, the patient and disease characteristics that influence PIF, as identified in this review, can help clinicians to choose the most appropriate inhaler type for their patients.

Measuring Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are breath actuated, and patients using DPIs need to generate an optimal inspiratory flow during the inhalation maneuver for effective drug delivery to the lungs. However, practical and standardized recommendations for measuring peak inspiratory flow (PIF)—a potential indicator for effective DPI use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)—are lacking. To evaluate recommended PIF assessment approaches, we reviewed the Instructions for Use of the In-Check™ DIAL and the prescribing information for eight DPIs approved for use in the treatment of COPD in the United States. To evaluate applied PIF assessment approaches, we conducted a PubMed search from inception to August 31, 2021, for reports of clinical and real-life studies where PIF was measured using the In-Check™ DIAL or through a DPI in patients with COPD. Evaluation of collective sources, including 47 applicable studies, showed that instructions related to the positioning of the patient with their DPI, instructions for exhalation before the inhalation maneuver, the inhalation maneuver itself, and post-inhalation breath-hold times varied, and in many instances, appeared vague and/or incomplete. We observed considerable variation in how PIF was measured in clinical and real-life studies, underscoring the need for a standardized method of PIF measurement. Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Based on these findings and our clinical and research experience, we propose specific recommendations for PIF measurement to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice.

Switching to the Dry-Powder Inhaler Easyhaler®: A Narrative Review of the Evidence

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Optimal control of these conditions is a constant challenge for both physicians and patients. Poor inhaler practice is widespread and is a substantial contributing factor to the suboptimal clinical control of both conditions. The practicality, dependability, and acceptability of different inhalers influence the overall effectiveness and success of inhalation therapy. In this paper, experts from various European countries (Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Sweden) address inhaler selection with special focus on the Easyhaler^® device, a high- or medium–high resistance dry-powder inhaler (DPI). The evidence examined indicates that use of the Easyhaler is associated with effective control of asthma or COPD, as shown by the generally accepted indicators of treatment success. Moreover, the Easyhaler is widely accepted by patients, is reported to be easy to learn and teach, and is associated with patient adherence. These advantages help patient education regarding correct inhaler use and the rational selection of drugs and devices. We conclude that switching inhaler device to the Easyhaler may improve asthma and COPD control without causing any additional risks. In an era of climate change, switching from pressurized metered-dose inhalers to DPIs is also a cost-effective way to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.