When is dual bronchodilation indicated in COPD?

Benefits of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium in Patients with COPD Receiving only LAMA at Baseline: Pooled Analysis of the TONADO® and OTEMTO® Studies

INTRODUCTION

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy report recommends long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) or long-acting β₂-agonists (LABA) as first-line treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but many patients remain symptomatic on monotherapy and escalation to dual-bronchodilator therapy may be warranted.

METHODS

TONADO^® 1&2 and OTEMTO^® 1&2 assessed lung function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe (OTEMTO) or moderate-to-very-severe (TONADO) COPD. This pooled post hoc analysis included patients treated with LAMA monotherapy at baseline who were randomised to receive either 5 µg tiotropium (LAMA) or 5/5 µg tiotropium/olodaterol (LAMA/LABA). We assessed changes from baseline and responder rates for trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI).

RESULTS

Overall, 151 patients received tiotropium; 148 received tiotropium/olodaterol. Mean differences from baseline with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were + 0.074 l (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.033, 0.115; P = 0.0004) for trough FEV₁, - 2.675 (95% CI - 5.060, - 0.291; P = 0.0280) for SGRQ and 1.148 (95% CI 0.564, 1.732; P = 0.0001) for TDI. Patients were more likely to respond when treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium for trough FEV₁ (odds ratio [OR] 3.14, 95% CI 1.94, 5.06; P < 0.0001), SGRQ (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.93, 2.40; P = 0.0980) and TDI (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.71, 4.60; P < 0.0001). Minimum clinically important difference from baseline in any of the analysed outcomes (FEV₁ ≥ 0.1 l, SGRQ ≥ 4.0 points or TDI ≥ 1.0 point) was more likely in patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32, 4.51; P = 0.0046).

CONCLUSION

In patients with COPD receiving only LAMA monotherapy, treatment escalation to tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in lung function, health status and breathlessness. These results support early therapy optimisation to dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in patients receiving tiotropium alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TONADO^® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431274). TONADO^® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431287). OTEMTO^® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 17 October 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01964352). OTEMTO^® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 10 December 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02006732).

Adding a Second Bronchodilator in COPD: A Meta-Analysis on the Risk of Specific Cardiovascular Serious Adverse Events of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Fixed-Dose Combination

Dual bronchodilation therapy represents the cornerstone for the treatment of COPD. A large retrospective study reports that adding a second long-acting bronchodilator in patients with COPD significantly increases the risk of heart failure. Nevertheless, retrospective studies are characterized by limitations including misdiagnosis and inaccuracy of recordkeeping. This study aimed to ascertain whether tiotropium/olodaterol (T/O) 5/5 μg fixed-dose combination (FDC) may modulate the risk of main cardiovascular outcomes in COPD patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A meta-analysis (CRD42017070100) was performed by selecting RCTs reporting raw data from the ClinicalTrials.gov database concerning the impact of T/O 5/5 µg FDC vs. monocomponents on the occurrence of specific cardiovascular serious adverse events: arrhythmia, heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Data were reported as relative risk and 95% Confidence Interval, and the risk of publication bias assessed via Egger's test. Eighty six full text articles were identified, and 10 RCTs published in 7 studies between 2015 and 2018 were included into the analysis. Data obtained from 12,690 COPD patients (44.47% T/O FDC, 55.53% monocomponents) were extracted. T/O 5/5 μg FDCs did not significantly modulate (p-value > 0.05) the risk of arrhythmia (1.02, 0.55 - 1.92), heart failure (0.88, 0.41 - 1.92), myocardial infarction (1.15, 0.70 - 1.87), and stroke (0.98, 0.44 - 2.16) vs. monocomponents. No significant publication bias affected the effect estimates of this meta-analysis. The results of this quantitative synthesis indicate that dual bronchodilation with T/O 5/5 μg FDC is characterized by an acceptable cardiovascular safety profile in COPD patients.

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus tiotropium or glycopyrronium in long-acting bronchodilator-naïve COPD patients: A pooled analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50 μg once daily (q.d.) has demonstrated greater improvements in lung function, patient-reported outcomes and lower exacerbation rates versus mono long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. However, data are limited on initial treatment with IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d. versus mono LAMA in COPD patients, not previously on maintenance treatment with long-acting bronchodilators (LABD).

METHODS

A pooled analysis of ARISE, SHINE and SPARK trials was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d. versus open-label (OL) tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg q.d. and GLY 50 μg q.d. in COPD patients, not on maintenance treatment with LABD at study entry (LABD-naïve). Efficacy was assessed after 24/26 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 998 LABD-naïve patients were included (IND/GLY: 353; OL TIO: 328; GLY: 317). Patients treated with IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d. experienced greater improvements in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ) versus OL TIO 18 μg q.d. (least squares mean treatment difference (Δ): 0.086 L) and GLY 50 μg q.d. (Δ: 0.080 L) after 24/26 weeks. Improvements in electronic diary (eDiary) symptom scores, transition dyspnoea index (TDI) focal score, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and rescue medication use were also greater with IND/GLY versus OL TIO and GLY. Greater proportion of patients achieved minimal clinically important difference in trough FEV1 , TDI and SGRQ with IND/GLY versus OL TIO and GLY.

CONCLUSION

LABD-naïve patients treated with IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d. achieved improvements in lung function, daily symptoms, dyspnoea, health-related quality of life and rescue medication use versus those who received single LAMA.

Personalized and typical concurrent risk of limitations in social activity and mobility in older persons with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy

PURPOSE

We define personalized concurrent risk (PCR) as the subject-specific probability of an index outcome within a defined interval of time, while currently at risk for a separate outcome, where the outcomes are not mutually exclusive and can be jointly modeled with a shared random intercept. We further define typical concurrent risk as the risk obtained by setting the random intercept to null.

METHODS

Drawing data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (cohorts 2008-2013), we jointly model limitations in social activity and mobility over two years among older community-dwelling persons with both hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The joint model uses inverse probability of treatment weighting based on each participant's baseline propensity of polypharmacy (≥5 classes of medication).

RESULTS

Even among participants with the same covariates, older persons with multiple chronic conditions exhibit wide-ranging heterogeneity of the treatment effect from polypharmacy, a risk factor for negative health outcomes among older persons. The magnitude of the PCRs is dominated by the value of the subject-specific random effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Estimates of PCR and typical concurrent risk can be calculated from national or institutional data sets and may facilitate the practice of personalized care for older patients with multiple chronic conditions.

Pharmacological Profile of AZD8871 (LAS191351), a Novel Inhaled Dual M3 Receptor Antagonist/β 2-Adrenoceptor Agonist Molecule with Long-Lasting Effects and Favorable Safety Profile

AZD8871 is a novel muscarinic antagonist and β ₂-adrenoceptor agonist in development for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This study describes the pharmacological profile of AZD8871 in in vitro and in vivo assays. AZD8871 is potent at the human M₃ receptor (pIC₅₀ in binding assays: 9.5) and shows kinetic selectivity for the M₃ (half-life: 4.97 hours) over the M₂ receptor (half-life: 0.46 hour). It is selective for the β ₂-adrenoceptor over the β ₁ and β ₃ subtypes (3- and 6-fold, respectively) and shows dual antimuscarinic and β ₂-adrenoceptor functional activity in isolated guinea pig tissue (pIC₅₀ in electrically stimulated trachea: 8.6; pEC₅₀ in spontaneous tone isolated trachea: 8.8, respectively), which are sustained over time. AZD8871 exhibits a higher muscarinic component than batefenterol in human bronchi, with a shift in potency under propranolol blockade of 2- and 6-fold, respectively, together with a persisting relaxation (5.3% recovery at 8 hours). Nebulized AZD8871 prevents acetylcholine-induced bronchoconstriction in both guinea pig and dog with minimal effects on salivation and heart rate at doses with bronchoprotective activity. Moreover, AZD8871 shows long-lasting effects in dog, with a bronchoprotective half-life longer than 24 hours. In conclusion, these studies demonstrate that AZD8871 is a dual-acting molecule with a high muscarinic component and a long residence time at the M₃ receptor; moreover, its preclinical profile in animal models suggests a once-daily dosing in humans and a favorable safety profile. Thus, AZD8871 has the potential to be a next generation of inhaled bronchodilators in respiratory diseases.

Population-based study of LAMA monotherapy effectiveness compared with LABA/LAMA as initial treatment for COPD in primary care

This epidemiological study aimed to describe and compare the characteristics and outcomes of COPD patients starting treatment with a long-acting anti-muscarinic (LAMA) or a combination of a long-acting beta-2 agonist (LABA)/LAMA in primary care in Catalonia (Spain) over a one-year period. Data were obtained from the Information System for the Development in Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP), a population database containing information of 5.8 million inhabitants (80% of the population of Catalonia). Patients initiating treatment with a LAMA or LABA/LAMA in 2015 were identified, and information about demographic and clinical characteristics was collected. Then, patients were matched 1:1 for age, sex, FEV1%, history of exacerbations, history of asthma and duration of treatment, and the outcomes between the two groups were compared. During 2015, 5729 individuals with COPD started treatment with a LAMA (69.8%) or LAMA/LABA (30.2%). There were no remarkable differences between groups except for a lower FEV1 and more previous hospital admissions in individuals on LABA/LAMA. The number of tests and referrals was low and decreased in both groups during follow-up. For the same severity status, the evolution was similar with a reduction in exacerbations in both groups. Treatment was changed during follow-up in up to 34.2% of patients in the LABA/LAMA and 26.3% in the LAMA group, but adherence was equally good for both. Our results suggest that initial therapy with LAMA in monotherapy may be adequate in a significant group of mild to moderate patients with COPD and a low risk of exacerbations managed in primary care.

A single rather than combined long-acting inhaler therapy may be adequate for most patients when treating mild to moderate chronic lung disease. Marc Miravitlles at the Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, Barcelona, Spain, and co-workers have shown that, in the initial stages of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), treatment with an inhaled drug called a long-acting anti-muscarinic agent (LAMA) is as effective as an alternative inhaler that combines LAMA with another drug (LABA). The researchers identified 5729 COPD patients from Catalonia starting on inhaled treatment in 2015 and followed up on their progress after 1 year. Patients starting on LAMA monotherapy were matched closely in terms of demographics and previous medical history to those starting on LAMA/LABA treatment. The team found no remarkable differences in clinical characteristics between the groups over the year.

Optimal Bronchodilation for COPD Patients: Are All Long-Acting β₂-Agonist/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists the Same?

Bronchodilators provide improvements in lung function and reductions in symptoms and exacerbations, and are the mainstay of pharmacological management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease strategy recommends the use of a combination of long-acting β₂-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABA/LAMA) as the first-line treatment option in the majority of symptomatic patients with COPD. This review provides an indirect comparison of available LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) through discussion of important efficacy and safety data from the key literature, with the objective of providing physicians with a framework for informed decision-making. LABA/LAMA FDCs provided greater benefits compared with placebo and similar or greater benefits compared with tiotropium and salmeterol/fluticasone in improving lung function, dyspnea, health-related quality of life, reducing rescue medication use and preventing exacerbations, although with some variability in efficacy between individual FDCs; further, tolerability profiles were comparable among LABA/LAMA FDCs. However, there is a disparity in the amount of evidence generated for different LABA/LAMA FDCs. Thus, this review shows that all LABA/LAMA FDCs may not be the same and that care should be taken when extrapolating individual treatment outcomes to the entire drug class. It is important that physicians consider the efficacy gradient that exists among LABA/LAMA FDCs, and factors such as inhaler devices and potential biomarkers, when choosing the optimal bronchodilator treatment for long-term management of patients with COPD.

The Role of Fixed-Dose Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in Treating COPD

The incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is rising in the United States, and the disease represents a significant source of morbidity and mortality. Primary care providers face many challenges in COPD diagnosis and treatment, as different clinical phenotypes require personalized treatment approaches. Patient adherence and inhaler technique also contribute to treatment outcomes. Around 48% of primary care providers are unaware of guidelines and recommendations for COPD diagnosis and treatment, which may lead to misdiagnosis or undertreatment of COPD symptoms. Inadequately treated COPD can impair patients' quality of life and ability to perform everyday activities. Long-acting bronchodilator therapy is the cornerstone treatment for patients with COPD; combinations of bronchodilators of different pharmacological classes have shown improved efficacy vs monotherapy. We review the rationale behind fixed-dose dual bronchodilator therapy, evidence for the 4 currently Food and Drug Administration-approved long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilators/long-acting β₂-agonists fixed combinations, patient suitability for the available inhaler devices, and practical guidance to optimize personalized care for patients with COPD.

Considerations for the Correct Diagnosis of COPD and Its Management With Bronchodilators

COPD is often misdiagnosed and inappropriately treated in many patients. COPD is a distinct disease from adult-onset asthma; however, some patients with COPD may present with several forms of airway disease described as asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). Bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) both have a place in standard maintenance treatment of COPD and asthma; however, recommendations for use differ widely. In patients with COPD, long-acting bronchodilators are effective initial monotherapy treatment, whereas ICS monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment in patients with asthma. Clinicians need to be confident in their diagnosis to ensure that correct treatment is given because misguided treatment decisions can result in significantly increased safety risks for patients. This review highlights the differences in diagnosis and treatment between COPD, asthma, and ACO and discusses the data supporting guideline recommendations for use of bronchodilators in COPD treatment in contrast to asthma or ACO.

Russian guidelines for the management of COPD: algorithm of pharmacologic treatment

The high prevalence of COPD together with its high level of misdiagnosis and late diagnosis dictate the necessity for the development and implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in order to improve the management of this disease. High-quality, evidence-based international CPGs need to be adapted to the particular situation of each country or region. A new version of the Russian Respiratory Society guidelines released at the end of 2016 was based on the proposal by Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease but adapted to the characteristics of the Russian health system and included an algorithm of pharmacologic treatment of COPD. The proposed algorithm had to comply with the requirements of the Russian Ministry of Health to be included into the unified electronic rubricator, which required a balance between the level of information and the simplicity of the graphic design. This was achieved by: exclusion of the initial diagnostic process, grouping together the common pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures for all patients, and the decision not to use the letters A-D for simplicity and clarity. At all stages of the treatment algorithm, efficacy and safety have to be carefully assessed. Escalation and de-escalation is possible in the case of lack of or insufficient efficacy or safety issues. Bronchodilators should not be discontinued except in the case of significant side effects. At the same time, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) withdrawal is not represented in the algorithm, because it was agreed that there is insufficient evidence to establish clear criteria for ICSs discontinuation. Finally, based on the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease statement, the proposed algorithm reflects and summarizes different approaches to the pharmacological treatment of COPD taking into account the reality of health care in the Russian Federation.

The Role of Tiotropium+Olodaterol Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in the Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Bronchodilator therapy is central to the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and are recommended as the preferred treatment by the Global Obstructive Lung Disease Initiative (GOLD). Long acting anti-muscarinics (LAMA) and long acting β₂ agonists (LABA) are both more effective than regular short-acting drugs but many patients remain symptomatic despite monotherapy with these drugs. Combination therapy with LAMA and LABA increases the therapeutic benefit while minimizing dose-dependent side effects of long-acting bronchodilator therapy. The TOviTO programme has investigated the benefits of treatment with a combination of tiotropium and olodaterol administered via a single inhaler. Tiotropium+olodaterol 5/5 μg significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) area under the curve from 0 to 3 hours, trough FEV₁ health status and breathlessness versus the mono-components and placebo. Tiotropium+olodaterol 5/5 μg also increased endurance time and reduced dynamic hyperinflation during constant work rate cycle ergometry. On the basis of these and other studies the 2017 GOLD report recommends escalating to dual bronchodilator therapy in patients in groups B and C if they remain symptomatic or continue to have exacerbations and as initial therapy for patients in group D.