Inhaled corticosteroid use by exacerbations and eosinophils: a real-world COPD population

Phenotype to Treatable Traits-Based Management in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a heterogeneous respiratory disease driven by various genetic and environmental factors, presents significant challenges in diagnosis and management. Traditional approaches focused on phenotypic classification, but recent paradigms emphasize identifying and addressing treatable traits to personalize treatment strategies. Treatable traits facilitate personalized interventions, optimizing symptom control, and reducing exacerbation risk. Dyspnea and exacerbations, recognized as key traits, guide treatment decisions and follow-up management. Various interventions, including bronchodilators, corticosteroids, and lifestyle modifications, target specific traits like airway inflammation, mucus overproduction, and emphysema. Strategies for assessing and addressing treatable traits during initial encounters and follow-up visits enhance disease monitoring and treatment efficacy. Comprehensive trait assessment demands resources and specialized monitoring, posing barriers to widespread implementation. The lack of standardized protocols and evolving evidence further complicates decision-making and clinical practice. Despite these challenges, the shift toward treatable traits-based management signifies a pivotal advancement in COPD care, emphasizing holistic approaches tailored to individual patient needs. Recognizing and addressing treatable traits offers personalized interventions, enhancing symptom control and disease management. Embracing treatable traits-based approaches holds promise for improving clinical outcomes and enhancing the quality of life for individuals living with COPD.

Glucocorticoid Use in Patients Hospitalized with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations

Objective of the Study

Systemic glucocorticoid therapy can improve the outcomes of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). The study tried to investigate the use of glucocorticoids in AECOPD patients and the factors associated with the physicians' choice.

Methodology

Patients with AECOPD over two periods were divided by the year of 2017 when GOLD and ERS/ATS Guideline for COPD were updated. Data of patients regarding the study was retrieved from medical records. Descriptive statistical analysis was used for the illustration of glucocorticoids use, and hypothesis testing for comparison over the periods.

Results

Between 2010 and 2016, the proportion of ICS use was 522/640 (81.6%) and 341/452 (75.4%) between 2017 and 2020. COPD severity (GOLD C/D classification), bronchial asthma, percentage of neutrophils, and higher PaCO2 were factors associated with physicians' prescription of systemic glucocorticoids between 2010 and 2016. While the use of ICS at the stable stage, counts of neutrophils, and higher PaCO2 were influencing factors between 2017 and 2020. Over the two periods, 1-year recurrent rate decreased from 32.4% to 20.9%, with a significant statistical difference (P<0.001).

Conclusion

The optimized use of glucocorticoids was found after the publishment of 2017 ERS/ATS Guideline for COPD, this improvement was associated with a decreased 1-year recurrence rate among AECOPD patients at our institution, underscoring the positive impact of guideline updates on patient outcomes.

Inhaled Corticosteroids in Subjects with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: An Old, Unfinished History

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the major causes of disability and death. Maintenance use of inhaled bronchodilator(s) is the cornerstone of COPD pharmacological therapy, but inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are also commonly used. This narrative paper reviews the role of ICSs as maintenance treatment in combination with bronchodilators, usually in a single inhaler, in stable COPD subjects. The guidelines strongly recommend the addition of an ICS in COPD subjects with a history of concomitant asthma or as a step-up on the top of dual bronchodilators in the presence of hospitalization for exacerbation or at least two moderate exacerbations per year plus high blood eosinophil counts (≥300/mcl). This indication would only involve some COPD subjects. In contrast, in real life, triple inhaled therapy is largely used in COPD, independently of symptoms and in the presence of exacerbations. We will discuss the results of recent randomized controlled trials that found reduced all-cause mortality with triple inhaled therapy compared with dual inhaled long-acting bronchodilator therapy. ICS use is frequently associated with common local adverse events, such as dysphonia, oral candidiasis, and increased risk of pneumonia. Other side effects, such as systemic toxicity and unfavorable changes in the lung microbiome, are suspected mainly at higher doses of ICS in elderly COPD subjects with comorbidities, even if not fully demonstrated. We conclude that, contrary to real life, the use of ICS should be carefully evaluated in stable COPD patients.

National Development in the Use of Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Repeated Cross-Sectional Studies from 1998 to 2018

Recommendations for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have shifted towards a more restrictive use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). We aimed to identify the nationwide development over time in the use of ICS treatment in COPD. We conducted a register-based repeated cross-sectional study using Danish nationwide registers. On a yearly basis from 1998 to 2018, we included all patients in Denmark ≥ 40 years of age with an ICD-10 diagnosis of COPD (J44). Accumulated ICS use was calculated for each year based on redeemed prescriptions. Patients were divided into the following groups: No ICS, low-dose ICS, medium-dose ICS, or high-dose ICS. From 1998 to 2018, the yearly proportion of patients without ICS treatment increased (from 50.6% to 57.6%), the proportion of patients on low-dose ICS treatment increased (from 11.3% to 14.9%), and the proportion of patients on high-dose ICS treatment decreased (from 17.0% to 9.4%). We demonstrated a national reduction in the use of ICS treatment in COPD from 1998 to 2018, with an increase in the proportion of patients without ICS and on low-dose ICS treatment and a decrease in the proportion of patients on high-dose ICS treatment.

Eligibility of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for inclusion in randomised control trials investigating triple therapy: a study using routinely collected data

BACKGROUND

Randomised control trials (RCTs) with strict eligibility criteria can lead to trial populations not commonly seen in clinical practice. We described the proportion of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in England eligible for RCTs investigating treatment with triple therapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for RCTs investigating triple therapy and eligibility criteria for each trial were extracted. Using routinely collected primary care data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum linked with Hospital Episode Statistics, we defined a population of COPD patients registered at a general practice in England, who were ≥ 40 years old, and had a history of smoking. Inclusion date was January 1, 2020. Patients who died earlier or left the general practice were excluded. Eligibility criteria for each RCT was applied to the population of COPD patients and the proportion of patients meeting each trial eligibility criteria were described.

RESULTS

26 RCTs investigating triple therapy were identified from the literature. The most common eligibility criteria were post-bronchodilator FEV1% predicted 30-80%, ≥ 2 moderate/≥ 1 severe exacerbations 12-months prior, no moderate exacerbations one-month prior and no severe exacerbations three-months prior, and the use of maintenance therapy or ICS use prior to inclusion. After applying each RCT eligibility criteria to our population of 79,810 COPD patients, a median of 11.2% [interquartile range (IQR) 1.8-17.4] of patients met eligibility criteria. The most discriminatory criteria included the presence exacerbations of COPD and previous COPD related medication use with a median of 67.6% (IQR 8.5-73.4) and 63% (IQR 69.3-38.4) of COPD patients not meeting these criteria, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Data from these RCTs may not be generalisable to the wider population of people with COPD seen in everyday clinical practice and real-world evidence studies are needed to supplement trials to understand effectiveness in all people with COPD.

Clinical Management of COPD in the Real World: Can Studies Reveal Errors in Management and Pathways to Improve Patient Care?

Real world data comprise information on health care that is derived from multiple sources outside typical clinical research settings. This review focuses on what real world evidence tells us about problems with the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), problems with the initial and follow-up pharmacological and non-pharmacological management, problems with the management of exacerbations and problems with palliative care. Data from real world studies show errors in the management of COPD with delays to diagnosis, lack of confirmation of the diagnosis with spirometry, lack of holistic assessment, lack of attention to smoking cessation, variable adherence to management guidelines, delayed implementation of appropriate interventions, under-recognition of patients at higher risk of adverse outcomes, high hospitalisation rates for exacerbations and poor implementation of palliative care. Understanding that these problems exist and considering how and why they occur is fundamental to developing solutions to improve the diagnosis and management of patients with COPD.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay of treatment for asthma, but their role in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is debated. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in patients with COPD and frequent or severe exacerbations demonstrated a significant reduction (~25%) in exacerbations with ICS in combination with dual bronchodilator therapy (triple therapy). However, the suggestion of a mortality benefit associated with ICS in these trials has since been rejected by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration. Observational evidence from routine clinical practice demonstrates that dual bronchodilation is associated with better clinical outcomes than triple therapy in a broad population of patients with COPD and infrequent exacerbations. This reinforces guideline recommendations that ICS-containing maintenance therapy should be reserved for patients with frequent or severe exacerbations and high blood eosinophils (~10% of the COPD population), or those with concomitant asthma. However, data from routine clinical practice indicate ICS overuse, with up to 50-80% of patients prescribed ICS. Prescription of ICS in patients not fulfilling guideline criteria puts patients at unnecessary risk of pneumonia and other long-term adverse events and also has cost implications, without any clear benefit in disease control. In this article, we review the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD, drawing on evidence from RCTs and observational studies conducted in primary care. We also provide a practical guide to prescribing ICS, based on the latest global treatment guidelines, to help primary care providers identify patients for whom the benefits of ICS outweigh the risks.

Prognostic risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic literature review

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. COPD exacerbations are associated with a worsening of lung function, increased disease burden, and mortality, and, therefore, preventing their occurrence is an important goal of COPD management. This review was conducted to identify the evidence base regarding risk factors and predictors of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with COPD.

Methods

A literature review was performed in Embase, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Searches were conducted from January 2015 to July 2019. Eligible publications were peer-reviewed journal articles, published in English, that reported risk factors or predictors for the occurrence of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in adults age ≥ 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD.

Results

The literature review identified 5112 references, of which 113 publications (reporting results for 76 studies) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Among the 76 studies included, 61 were observational and 15 were randomized controlled clinical trials. Exacerbation history was the strongest predictor of future exacerbations, with 34 studies reporting a significant association between history of exacerbations and risk of future moderate or severe exacerbations. Other significant risk factors identified in multiple studies included disease severity or bronchodilator reversibility (39 studies), comorbidities (34 studies), higher symptom burden (17 studies), and higher blood eosinophil count (16 studies).

Conclusions

This systematic literature review identified several demographic and clinical characteristics that predict the future risk of COPD exacerbations. Prior exacerbation history was confirmed as the most important predictor of future exacerbations. These prognostic factors may help clinicians identify patients at high risk of exacerbations, which are a major driver of the global burden of COPD, including morbidity and mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-022-02123-5.

Treatment Patterns for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in the United States: Results from an Observational Cross-Sectional Physician and Patient Survey

Purpose

There is a high prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the United States (US). Although guidelines are available for the treatment of COPD, evidence suggests that management of COPD in clinical practice is not always aligned with this guidance. This study aimed to further understand the current use of COPD maintenance medication in the US.

Patients and Methods

This study was an analysis of data from the Adelphi Respiratory Disease Specific Programme (DSP™) 2019. Point-in-time data were collected from participating US physicians and their COPD patients. Physicians were either primary care physicians (PCPs) or pulmonologists, with a minimum workload of ≥3 COPD patients per month. Patients were aged ≥18 years with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of COPD.

Results

In total, 171 physicians completed the survey (92 PCPs and 79 pulmonologists). Mean patient age was 66.4 years, 45% were female, with moderate COPD in 49.4% of patients and severe/very severe in 19.3%. Pulmonologists more frequently prescribed dual bronchodilation and triple therapy than PCPs, whereas inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist was more frequently prescribed by PCPs than pulmonologists. For both physician types, the most common reason for prescribing their patients’ current treatment was 24-hour symptom relief. The majority of PCPs (70.1%) and pulmonologists (71.9%) reported referring to COPD guidelines when making treatment decisions.

Conclusion

Prescribing patterns for COPD patients were found to differ between PCPs and pulmonologists. Improved physician understanding of how to tailor treatment for each patient, based on current symptoms and exacerbation risk, could help optimize patient care in COPD.

Classification of COPD patients and compliance to recommended treatment in Greece according to GOLD 2017 report: the RELICO study

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a multifactorial clinical condition, characterized by chronic progressive (or worsening) respiratory symptoms, structural pulmonary abnormalities, and impaired lung function, and is often accompanied by multiple, clinically significant comorbid disorders. In 2017, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) issued a new report on COPD prevention, diagnosis and management, aiming at personalizing the maintenance therapeutic approach of the stable disease, based on the patients' symptoms and history of exacerbations (ABCD assessment approach). Our objective was to evaluate the implementation of GOLD suggestions in everyday clinical practice in Greece.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study. Sixty-five different variables (demographics, vital sign measurements, COPD-related medical history parameters, comorbidities, vaccination data, COPD severity based on spirometry measurements, COPD stage based on the ABCD assessment approach, COPD treatments) were collected from 3615 nation-wide COPD patients (Greece).

RESULTS

The mean age at the time of initial COPD diagnosis was 63.8 (± 10.2). Almost 60% of the subjects were classified into group B, while the remaining patients were falling into groups A (18%) and D (21%), and only a small minority of patients belonged to Group C, according to the ABCD assessment approach. The compliance of respiratory physicians to the GOLD 2017 therapeutic suggestions is problematic, especially when it comes to COPD patients belonging to Group A.

CONCLUSION

Our data provide valuable information regarding the demographic and medical profile of COPD patients in Greece, the domains which the revised ABCD assessment approach may show some clinical significance on, and the necessity for medical practitioners dealing with COPD patients to adhere closer to international recommendations for the proper management of the disease.

Phenotyping acute exacerbation of COPD: what more can we do for hospitalised patients?

Hospitalised #AECOPD are characterised by multiple facets of aetiology. The clinical interpretation of the composite phenotypes of AECOPD and the robustness of the AECOPD phenotype need to be discussed further. https://bit.ly/3grzQEO.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Different Types of Inhaled Long-Acting β2-Agonist Plus Inhaled Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist vs Inhaled Long-Acting β2-Agonist Plus Inhaled Corticosteroid Fixed-Dose Combinations in COPD A Propensity Score-Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite multiple available fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of inhaled long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) plus long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and LABAs plus inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for COPD, uncertainty remains regarding their comparative effects.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can comparative effectiveness and safety of LABA plus LAMA (LABA/LAMA) and LABA plus ICS (LABA/ICS) FDCs vary by different individual components of the dual combinations in COPD?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a new user, propensity score-inverse probability of treatment weighting cohort study to compare the effectiveness and safety of two frequently used LABA/LAMA FDCs (indacaterol plus glycopyrronium [IND/GLY] and vilanterol plus umeclidinium [VI/UMEC]) vs three commonly prescribed LABA/ICS FDCs (salmeterol plus fluticasone propionate [SAL/FP], formoterol fumarate plus budesonide [FF/BUD], and formoterol fumarate plus beclomethasone dipropionate [FF/BDP]) using the Taiwanese nationwide health-care claims from 2014 through 2017. The primary effectiveness outcome was the annual moderate to severe exacerbation rate, and safety outcomes included risks of severe pneumonia and cardiovascular disease requiring hospitalization. Weighted generalized linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Patients with COPD initiating IND/GLY and VI/UMEC showed an 11% (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.98) and 20% (IRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) reduced annual rate of moderate to severe exacerbations, respectively, than those initiating SAL/FP, but showed a similar rate as those initiating FF/BUD or FF/BDP. Both LABA/LAMA FDCs, compared with SAL/FP and VI/UMEC vs FF/BDP, were associated with a 27% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90) to 42% (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48-0.70) reduced pneumonia risk. Cardiovascular risk was comparable in five groups. An intraclass difference existed in rates of moderate to severe COPD exacerbation and risks of pneumonia among LABA/ICS FDCs, but not between LABA/LAMA FDCs.

INTERPRETATION

Both LABA/LAMAs vs SAL/FP are associated with a lower exacerbation rate and pneumonia risk, but exhibit similar effectiveness and safety outcomes compared with FF/BDP or FF/BUD, suggesting that comparative effects may differ by individual components of the dual therapies in COPD.

COPD in Germany: Use of Diagnostic Measures Including Blood Eosinophil Counts in Daily Practice

BACKGROUND

 Accumulating evidence on the role of blood eosinophils as a biomarker prompted the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) committee to refine the existing treatment algorithm by incorporating eosinophil counts into treatment recommendations. However, there is a lack of data on when, why and how frequently such blood tests and other measures are being performed by German private respiratory specialists.

METHODS

 A questionnaire evaluating doctors' opinions on the use of diagnostic measures at initial diagnosis and during follow-up, including blood eosinophil count in patients with COPD, was completed by 27 respiratory specialists. Medical records from the past 12 months of 251 patients treated by the same physicians were reviewed retrospectively to investigate the use of these measures.

RESULTS

 Body plethysmography (100 % of doctors) and chest X-ray (96.3 %) were the most commonly used measures according to the doctor's questionnaire; other measures were COPD assessment test (CAT; 85.2 %) and blood eosinophil count (81.5 %). The evaluation of patients' medical records revealed that body plethysmography was performed in 72.7 %, the CAT in 61.8 % and chest X-ray in 40.6 % of patients. Blood eosinophil count was measured in 7.2 %.

CONCLUSIONS

 In line with the GOLD recommendations, these results confirm that lung function, imaging and patient-reported outcome questionnaires play a crucial role in managing COPD. Our analyses reveal that measurement of the blood eosinophil count gained importance due to physicians' increased awareness of these cells as a useful biomarker. However, this test seems to be performed mainly for initial diagnosis and not on a regular basis.

Adherence to Treatment Recommendations for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - Results from the Swedish National Airway Register

INTRODUCTION

Swedish guidelines adhere to the international GOLD document regarding management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Based on data from the Swedish National Airway Register (SNAR) the aim was to evaluate adherence to guidelines of pharmacological treatment of COPD in Swedish primary and secondary care.

METHODS

During a period of 18 months, data on symptoms (CAT, mMRC), lung function, exacerbation history and pharmacological treatment from 15,595 COPD patients from 853 primary care and 125 secondary care clinics were collected from SNAR. Patients with a co-diagnosis of asthma were excluded. Patients were divided into four treatment groups: no pharmacological treatment, short-acting bronchodilators alone, long-acting bronchodilators alone and ICS alone or in combination with bronchodilators.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 29% were in GOLD group A, 58% in group B, 2% in group C and 11% in group D. CAT score was ≥10 and mMRC score was below 2 in 30.9% of the patients and mMRC score was ≥2 and CAT score <10 in 4.2% of the patients. In 61.4% of the patients, no exacerbation was registered during the last year. Long-acting bronchodilators were prescribed for 78% and ICS for 46% of all patients. In groups A, B, C and D, respectively, 21%, 11%, 11% and 5% did not receive any inhaler therapy; 67%, 81%, 81% and 90% received long-acting bronchodilators; 33%, 46%, 55% and 71% received any ICS containing therapy and 19%, 34%, 39% and 61% received triple therapy.

DISCUSSION

Data from the SNAR indicate that only a minority of COPD patients were untreated. There was a liberal use of ICS containing drug combinations in subjects who do not have an indication for ICS. A considerable proportion of subjects at high risk of exacerbations did not receive ICS treatment.

The association between eosinophilic exacerbation and eosinophilic levels in stable COPD

Background

Blood eosinophil count may predict treatment response in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during acute exacerbations (AE). However, the ability and thresholds of blood eosinophil counts in stable status to predict eosinophilic AECOPD have not been completely investigated.

Methods

This was a retrospective multicenter study performed January 2010 to December 2014. COPD subjects hospitalized with exacerbations, were included. Blood samples were obtained at the time of AE and stable disease at outpatient clinic before or after admission. We identified a blood eosinophil count cut-off point at stable COPD, either taken as a percentage or as absolute value, for identification of eosinophilic exacerbation.

Results

There was significant positive correlation of eosinophil counts between stable COPD and AECOPD. The best cut-off value of blood eosinophil count in stable status for the prediction of eosinophilic COPD exacerbation based on blood eosinophil count ≥ 2% was 300 cells/µL (area under the ROC curve [AUC] 0.614, P = 0.001, 39% sensitivity, 83.8% specificity). When the eosinophilic COPD exacerbation was based on blood eosinophil count ≥ 300 cells/µL, the best cut-off value of blood eosinophil count in stable status for the prediction of eosinophilic COPD exacerbation was also 300 cells/uL (AUC 0.634, P = 0.046, 45.8% sensitivity, 80.9% specificity).

Conclusions

We demonstrated association between blood eosinophil counts at stable COPD and those with AECOPD. The thresholds of blood counts at stable COPD to predict eosinophilic exacerbations was 300 cells/µL. Further and prospective studies in other populations should validate our results.

Blood eosinophils as a biomarker of future COPD exacerbation risk: pooled data from 11 clinical trials

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterised by progressive airflow limitation and chronic inflammation. Predicting exacerbations of COPD, which contribute to disease progression, is important to guide preventative treatment and improve outcomes. Blood eosinophils are a biomarker for patient responsiveness to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS); however, their effectiveness as a predictive biomarker for COPD exacerbations is unclear.

Methods

This post hoc analysis pooled data from 11 Boehringer Ingelheim-sponsored Phase III and IV randomised COPD studies with similar methodologies. Exacerbation data were collected from these studies, excluding patients from the ICS withdrawal arm of the WISDOM® study. Patients were grouped according to their baseline blood eosinophil count, baseline ICS use and number of exacerbations in the year prior to each study.

Results

Exacerbation rate data and baseline eosinophil count were available for 22,125 patients; 45.6% presented with a baseline blood eosinophil count of ≤ 150 cells/μL, 34.3% with 150–300 cells/μL and 20.1% with > 300 cells/μL. The lowest exacerbation rates were observed in patients with ≤ 150 cells/μL, with small increases in exacerbation rate observed with increasing eosinophil count. When stratified by exacerbation history, the annual rate of exacerbations for patients with 0 exacerbations in the previous year increased in line with increasing eosinophil counts (0.38 for ≤ 150 cells/μL, 0.39 for 150–300 cells/μL and 0.44 for > 300 cells/μL respectively). A similar trend was identified for patients with one exacerbation in the previous year, 0.62, 0.66 and 0.67 respectively. For patients with ≥ 2 exacerbations, exacerbation rates fluctuated between 1.02 (≤ 150 cells/μL) to 1.10 (150–300 cells/μL) and 1.07 (> 300 cells/μL). Higher exacerbation rates were noted in patients treated with ICS at baseline (range 0.75 to 0.82 with increasing eosinophil count) compared with patients not on ICS (range 0.45 to 0.49).

Conclusion

We found no clinically important relationship between baseline blood eosinophil count and exacerbation rate. Hence, the current analysis does not support the use of blood eosinophils to predict exacerbation risk; however, previous exacerbation history was found to be a more reliable predictor of future exacerbations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00168844, NCT00168831, NCT00387088, NCT00782210, NCT00782509, NCT00793624, NCT00796653, NCT01431274, NCT01431287, NCT02296138 and NCT00975195.

Graphical abstract

The clinical implications of triple therapy in fixed-dose combination in COPD: from the trial to the patient

The emergence of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of a long-acting ß₂-agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in a single inhalation device has changed the approach to inhaled therapy. Although clinical trials describe the efficacy and safety of these FDCs, their use in daily clinical practice can present challenges for the clinician in two specific scenarios. In patients who are already receiving triple therapy via different devices, switching to FDCs could confer benefits by reducing critical errors in the management of inhalers, improving therapeutic adherence, and lowering costs, while maintaining the same clinical efficacy. In patients who are not receiving triple therapy in different devices and who require a change in treatment, triple therapy FDC has shown benefits in clinical trials. Although methodological differences among the trials advise against direct comparison, clinical results show good efficacy, but also considerable variability, and a number of clinical outcomes have yet to be explored. In the future, trials must be developed to complete clinical efficacy data. Real-world efficacy trials are needed, and studies must be designed to determine the profile of patients who present a greater therapeutic response to each FDC in order to pave the way towards more personalized treatment.

The Clinical Implications of Triple Therapy in Fixed-Dose Combination in COPD: From the Trial to the Patient

The emergence of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of a long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAS), a long-acting anticholinergic agent (LAMA), and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in a single inhalation device has changed the approach to inhaled therapy. Although clinical trials describe the efficacy and safety of these FDCs, their use in daily clinical practice can present challenges for the clinician in two specific scenarios. In patients who are already receiving triple therapy via different devices, switching to FDCs could confer benefits by reducing critical errors in the management of inhalers, improving therapeutic adherence, and lowering costs, while maintaining the same clinical efficacy. In patients who are not receiving triple therapy in different devices and who require a change in treatment, triple therapy FDC has shown benefits in clinical trials. Although methodological differences among the trials advise against direct comparison, clinical results show good efficacy, but also considerable variability, and a number of clinical outcomes have yet to be explored. In the future, trials must be developed to complete clinical efficacy data. Real-world efficacy trials are needed, and studies must be designed to determine the profile of patients who present a greater therapeutic response to each FDC in order to pave to way towards more personalized treatment.