Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Metered Dose Inhaler Formulated Using Co-Suspension Delivery Technology in Japanese Patients with COPD

Effect of low climate impact vs. high climate impact inhalers for patients with asthma and COPD-a nationwide cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma can be treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) delivered by low climate impact inhalers (dry powder inhalers) or high climate impact inhalers (pressurized metered-dose inhalers containing potent greenhouse gasses). ICS delivered with greenhouse gasses is prescribed ubiquitously and frequent despite limited evidence of superior effect. Our aim was to examine the beneficial and harmful events of ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers in patients with asthma and COPD.

METHODS

Nationwide retrospective cohort study of Danish outpatients with asthma and COPD treated with ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers. Patients were propensity score matched by the following variables; age, gender, tobacco exposure, exacerbations, dyspnoea, body mass index, pulmonary function, ICS dose and entry year. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation with exacerbations and all-cause mortality analysed by Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Of the 10,947 patients with asthma and COPD who collected ICS by low or high climate impact inhalers, 2,535 + 2,535 patients were propensity score matched to form the population for the primary analysis. We found no association between high climate impact inhalers and risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization and all-cause mortality (HR 1.02, CI 0.92-1.12, p = 0.77), nor on pneumonia, exacerbations requiring hospitalization, all-cause mortality, or all-cause admissions. Delivery with high climate impact inhalers was associated with a slightly increased risk of exacerbations not requiring hospitalization (HR 1.10, CI 1.01-1.21, p = 0.03). Even with low lung function there was no sign of a superior effect of high climate impact inhalers.

CONCLUSION

Low climate impact inhalers were not inferior to high climate impact inhalers for any risk analysed in patients with asthma and COPD.

Intraclass comparison of inhaled corticosteroids for the risk of pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary airway disorder: a network meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Inhalational corticosteroids (ICS) were observed to increase the pneumonia risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary airway disorder (COPD). However, it is unknown whether any differences exist between the drugs within the ICS class.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the risk of pneumonia associated with different ICS and identify factors that predict pneumonia in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD using a network meta-analysis.

METHOD

Electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google Scholar) were searched for trials comparing ICS in COPD patients. The outcomes were pneumonia and serious pneumonia. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were estimated. Meta-regression was used to identify the predictors. The strength of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies (103,347 participants) were included. Fluticasone (OR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.26, 1.7), mometasone (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.05, 4.6), and beclometasone (OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6) were observed with an increased pneumonia risk compared to placebo. Fluticasone (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3, 1.7) was observed with an increased risk of serious pneumonia. High doses (OR: 1.2; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.4), BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.2), and history of exacerbations in the preceding year predicted the pneumonia risk. Evidence strength was moderate.

CONCLUSION

ICS class differences in pneumonia risk were observed in terms of pooled effect estimates but it is unlikely that any clinically relevant differences exist. Risk-benefit analysis supports ICS use in moderate-severe COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroids with combination inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) commonly involves a combination of long-acting bronchodilators including beta2-agonists (LABA) and muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). LABA and LAMA bronchodilators are now available in single-combination inhalers. In individuals with persistent symptoms or frequent exacerbations, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are also used with combination LABA and LAMA inhalers. However, the benefits and risks of adding ICS to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers as a triple therapy remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of adding an ICS to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers for the treatment of stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase up to 30 November 2022. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP up to 30 November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials of three weeks' duration or longer that compared the treatment of stable COPD with ICS in addition to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers against combination LABA/LAMA inhalers alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were acute exacerbations of COPD, respiratory health-related quality of life, pneumonia and other serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were symptom scores, lung function, physical capacity, and mortality. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for studies that contributed data to our prespecified outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 15,412 participants met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of study participants ranged from 64.4 to 65.3 years; the proportion of female participants ranged from 28% to 40%. Most participants had symptomatic COPD (COPD Assessment Test Score ≥ 10) with severe to very severe airflow limitation (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) < 50% predicted) and one or more moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations in the last 12 months. Trial medications differed amongst studies. The duration of follow-up was 52 weeks in three studies and 24 weeks in one study. We assessed the risk of selection, performance, and detection bias to be low in the included studies; one study was at high risk of attrition bias, and one study was at high risk of reporting bias. Triple therapy may reduce rates of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (rate ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 0.81; n = 15,397; low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis stratifying by blood eosinophil counts showed there may be a greater reduction in rate of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations with triple therapy in participants with high-eosinophils (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75) compared to low-eosinophils (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93) (test for subgroup differences: P < 0.01) (high/low cut-offs: 150 eosinophils/µL in three studies; 200 eosinophils/µL in one study). However, moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity was observed in both high- and low-eosinophil subgroups. These subgroup analyses are observational by nature and thus results should be interpreted with caution. Triple therapy may be associated with reduced rates of severe COPD exacerbations (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.84; n = 14,131; low-certainty evidence). Triple therapy improved health-related quality of life assessed using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold (4-point decrease) (35.3% versus 42.4%, odds ratio (OR) 1.35, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.45; n = 14,070; high-certainty evidence). Triple therapy may result in fewer symptoms measured using the Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.57; n = 3044; moderate-certainty evidence) and improved lung function as measured by change in trough FEV1 (mean difference 38.68 mL, 95% CI 22.58 to 54.77; n = 11,352; low-certainty evidence). However, these benefits fell below MCID thresholds for TDI (1-unit decrease) and trough FEV1 (100 mL), respectively. Triple therapy is probably associated with a higher risk of pneumonia as a serious adverse event compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (3.3% versus 1.9%, OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.18; n = 15,412; moderate-certainty evidence). In contrast, all-cause serious adverse events may be similar between groups (19.7% versus 19.7%, OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03; n = 15,412; low-certainty evidence). All-cause mortality may be lower with triple therapy (1.4% versus 2.0%, OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90; n = 15,397; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that triple therapy may reduce rates of COPD exacerbations (low-certainty evidence) and results in an improvement in health-related quality of life (high-certainty evidence) compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers, but probably confers an increased pneumonia risk as a serious adverse event (moderate-certainty evidence). Triple therapy probably improves respiratory symptoms and may improve lung function (moderate- and low-certainty evidence, respectively); however, these benefits do not appear to be clinically significant. Triple therapy may reduce the risk of all-cause mortality compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers (low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was downgraded most frequently for inconsistency or indirectness. Across the four included studies, there were important differences in inclusion criteria, trial medications, and duration of follow-up. Investigation of heterogeneity was limited due to the small number of included studies. We found limited data on the effects of triple therapy compared to combination LABA/LAMA inhalers in patients with mild-moderate COPD and those without a recent exacerbation history.

Management goals and stable phase management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the Japanese respiratory society guideline for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 2022 (6th edition)

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by airflow obstruction on spirometry and symptoms such as dyspnea on exertion and chronic cough with sputum production, thus making it a significant healthcare issue worldwide. Japanese patients with COPD have unique characteristics compared to patients in Western countries, including older age and lower exacerbation frequency. The Japanese Respiratory Society (JRS) published the 6th edition of the COPD guideline in June 2022. This article introduces the management goals of COPD and describes its management during the stable phase, as outlined in the guideline. Management goals include improving the current status, such as the symptoms, quality of life (QOL), exercise tolerance, and physical activity, and reducing future risks through prevention of exacerbation and suppression of disease progression to prevent shortening of healthy life expectancy. Management plans should include avoidance of causative substances, assessment of disease severity, and personalized treatment plans. Pharmacotherapy using inhalation bronchodilators is a key component of the treatment of stable COPD. Bronchodilators, including short- and long-acting dilators, are commonly used to relieve symptoms and improve QOL. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are used in combination with long-acting bronchodilators, especially in patients with asthma and COPD overlap, or those experiencing frequent exacerbation of eosinophilia. Combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), a long-acting beta 2 agonist (LABA), and ICS is expected to improve QOL and respiratory function and reduce mortality and exacerbation compared to the LAMA + LABA combination. Non-pharmacological therapies, including smoking cessation and pulmonary rehabilitation, should also be considered.

Effect of fracture risk in inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The fracture risk of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with inhaled corticosteroids is controversial. And some large-scale randomized controlled trials have not solved this problem. The purpose of our systematic review and meta-analysis including 44 RCTs is to reveal the effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the fracture risk of COPD patients.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently retrieved randomized controlled trials of inhaled corticosteroids or combinations of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of COPD from PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary outcome was a fracture event. This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022366778).

RESULTS

Forty-four RCTs were performed in 87,594 patients. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.37; P = 0.010), especially ICS/LABA (RR, 1.30; 95%CI, 1.10-1.53; P = 0.002) and triple therapy (RR, 1.49; 95%CI, 1.03-2.17; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture in COPD patients when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses showed that treatment duration ≥ 12 months (RR, 1.19; 95%CI, 1.04-1.38; P = 0.01), budesonide therapy (RR, 1.64; 95%CI., 1.07-2.51; P = 0.02), fluticasone furoate therapy (RR, 1.37; 95%CI, 1.05-1.78; P = 0.02), mean age of study participants ≥ 65 (RR, 1.27; 95%CI, 1.01-1.61; P = 0.04), and GOLD stage III(RR, 1.18; 95%CI, 1.00-1.38; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with an increased risk of fracture. In addition, budesonide ≥ 320 ug bid via MDI (RR, 1.75; 95%CI, 1.07-2.87; P = 0.03) was significantly associated with the increased risk of fracture.

CONCLUSION

Inhalation therapy with ICSs, especially ICS/LABA or triple therapy, increased the risk of fracture in patients with COPD compared with inhaled therapy without ICS. Treatment duration, mean age of participants, GOLD stage, drug dosage form, and drug dose participated in this association. Moreover, different inhalation devices of the same drug also had differences in risk of fracture.

Association of Inhaled Corticosteroids With All-Cause Mortality Risk in Patients With COPD: A Meta-analysis of 60 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have been used widely in the maintenance therapy of COPD. However, whether inhaled therapy containing ICSs can reduce the all-cause mortality risk and the possible benefited patient subgroups is unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does inhaled therapy containing ICSs reduce the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD compared with other inhaled therapies not containing ICSs?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Pooled results were calculated using Peto ORs with corresponding 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Sixty RCTs enrolling 103,034 patients were analyzed. Inhaled therapy containing ICSs (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97), especially triple therapy (Peto OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91), was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk among patients with COPD when compared with inhaled therapy without ICSs. Subgroup analyses revealed that treatment duration of > 6 months (Peto OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), medium-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91), low-dose ICSs (Peto OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97), and budesonide (Peto OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94) were involved in this association. The predictors of this association included eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL or percentage of ≥ 2%, documented history of ≥ 2 moderate and severe exacerbations in the previous year, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stages III or IV, age younger than 65 years, and BMI of ≥ 25 kg/m2, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL (Peto OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95) were the strongest predictor.

INTERPRETATION

Inhaled therapy containing ICSs, especially triple therapy, of longer than 6 months was associated with a reduction in the all-cause mortality risk in patients with COPD. The predictors of this association included medication factors and patient characteristics, among which eosinophil counts of ≥ 200/μL were the strongest predictor.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO; No.: CRD42022304725; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

The Efficacy and Safety of Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol in the Treatment of COPD in the Elderly

Objective

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major and difficult disease of the chronic respiratory system that is common and frequent, with a huge disease burden. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of budesonide/glyburide/formoterol fumarate (BGF) in the treatment of COPD.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The basic features of the seven pieces of literature were identified using the search strategy. The sample size range was 130∼1264.

Results

The effects of BGF increased FEV1 in patients with COPD (mean difference = 2.86, 95%CI: 2.71–3.01, p < 0.00001). The effects of BGF improved in patients with ≥1 TEAE in patients with COPD, and was not statistically significant after treatment (Odds rate = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.85–1.17, p=0.97). The effects of BGF increased in patients with TEAEs related a to study treatment in patients with COPD (odds rate = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.03–1.57, p=0.02). The effects of BGF in decreased patients with serious TEAEs in patients with COPD (odds rate = −0.02, 95% CI: −0.03–−0.00, p=0.04). The effects of BGF decreased the death rate in patients with COPD, and were not statistically significant after treatment (odds rate = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.31–1.97, p=0.59). The effects of BGF decreased the hypertension rate in patients with COPD (odds rate = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.44–1.89, p=0.81), and was not statistically significant after treatment. The effects of BGF increased pneumonia in patients with COPD (odds rate = 1.55, 95% CI: 0.81–2.97, p=0.19), and were not statistically significant after treatment. The effects of BGF increased FEV1, increased patients with TEAEs related a to study treatment, and decreased patients with serious TEAEs in patients with COPD.

Conclusion

This study elucidates the efficacy and safety of BGF in the treatment of COPD with a view to providing a clinical reference.

The Impact of 52-Week Single Inhaler Device Triple Therapy versus Dual Therapy on the Mortality of COPD Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

There are more single inhaler device triple therapy available for COPD patients now. However, the effect of long-term triple therapy fixed dose combination (FDC) on mortality remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of one-year single inhaler device triple therapy, including long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), with dual therapies, comprised of either LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA, on the mortality of patients with COPD. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Embase databases, and clinical trial registry of clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTRP. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared single inhaler device triple and dual therapies for 52 weeks were selected for the meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 6 RCTs were selected for the meta-analysis, including 10,274 patients who received single inhaler device triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC) and 12,395 patients who received ICS/LABA or LABA/LAMA dual therapy. Risk of death was significantly lower in the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC group compared to the LABA/LAMA group (RR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53–0.90, p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in mortality between the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC and ICS/LABA therapy groups (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72–1.24, p = 0.66). In addition, patients receiving ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC therapy had less moderate or severe exacerbations compared with the dual therapy groups (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.73–0.80, p < 0.001 for LABA/LAMA; RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.78–0.90, p < 0.001 for ICS/LABA). By contrast, the risk of pneumonia in the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC group was higher than in the LABA/LAMA group (RR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.21–1.68, p < 0.001). In conclusion, ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC therapy could help improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COPD. However, triple therapy could increase the risk of pneumonia in comparison with LABA/LAMA dual therapy.

Predictive modeling of COPD exacerbation rates using baseline risk factors

Background:

Demographic and disease characteristics have been associated with the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. Using previously collected multinational clinical trial data, we developed models that use baseline risk factors to predict an individual’s rate of moderate/severe exacerbations in the next year on various pharmacological treatments for COPD.

Methods:

Exacerbation data from 20,054 patients in the ETHOS, KRONOS, TELOS, SOPHOS, and PINNACLE-1, PINNACLE-2, and PINNACLE-4 studies were pooled. Machine learning was used to identify predictors of moderate/severe exacerbation rates. Important factors were selected for generalized linear modeling, further informed by backward variable selection. An independent test set was held back for validation.

Results:

Prior exacerbations, eosinophil count, forced expiratory volume in 1 s percent predicted, prior maintenance treatments, reliever medication use, sex, COPD Assessment Test score, smoking status, and region were significant predictors of exacerbation risk, with response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) increasing with higher eosinophil counts, more prior exacerbations, or additional prior treatments. Model fit was similar in the training and test set. Prediction metrics were ~10% better in the full model than in a simplified model based only on eosinophil count, prior exacerbations, and ICS use.

Conclusion:

These models predicting rates of moderate/severe exacerbations can be applied to a broad range of patients with COPD in terms of airway obstruction, eosinophil counts, exacerbation history, symptoms, and treatment history. Understanding the relative and absolute risks related to these factors may be useful for clinicians in evaluating the benefit: risk ratio of various treatment decisions for individual patients.

Clinical trials registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02465567, NCT02497001, NCT02766608, NCT02727660, NCT01854645, NCT01854658, NCT02343458, NCT03262012, NCT02536508, and NCT01970878)

Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol: A Review in COPD

Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (BREZTRI AEROSPHERE™; TRIXEO AEROSPHERE™) is an inhaled fixed-dose combination of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) budesonide, the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) glycopyrronium bromide and the long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) formoterol fumarate approved for the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is delivered via a pressurized metered-dose Aerosphere inhaler and is formulated using co-suspension delivery technology. In two pivotal phase III trials of 24-52 weeks' duration, budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol reduced the rates of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and improved lung function to a greater extent than budesonide/formoterol and/or glycopyrronium/formoterol. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol also demonstrated beneficial effects on dyspnoea, rescue medication requirements and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL), and reduced the risk of all-cause mortality. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol was generally well tolerated, with the tolerability profile being generally similar to that of the individual components. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol provides a useful and convenient option for the maintenance treatment of COPD, including for patients whose disease is inadequately controlled with dual ICS/LABA or LAMA/LABA therapy.

Inhaled Corticosteroids and the Pneumonia Risk in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Whether all types of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) would increase the pneumonia risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the association between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk in COPD patients, and the impact of medication details and baseline characteristics of patients on the association.

Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov) were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ICSs treatment with non-ICSs treatment on the pneumonia risk in COPD patients. Pooled results were calculated using Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: A total of 59 RCTs enrolling 103,477 patients were analyzed. All types of ICSs significantly increased the pneumonia risk (Peto OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.34–1.53). Subgroup analysis showed that there was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk (low-dose: Peto OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.22–1.45; medium-dose: Peto OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28–1.76; and high-dose: Peto OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.45–1.85). Subgroup analyses based on treatment durations and baseline characteristics (severity, age, and body mass index) of patients were consistant with the above results. Subgroup analysis based on severity of pneumonia showed that fluticasone (Peto OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.44–2.14) increased the risk of serious pneumonia, while budesonide and beclomethasone did not.

Conclusions: ICSs treatment significantly increased the risk of pneumonia in COPD patients. There was a dose-response relationship between ICSs treatment and pneumonia risk. The pneumonia risk was related with COPD severity.

Triple versus LAMA/LABA combination therapy for Japanese patients with COPD: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In symptomatic COPD patients with a history of exacerbations, additional treatment with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) to long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) combination therapy is recommended based on the evidence of low incidence of exacerbations but with a caution for pneumonia. However, ethnic differences may affect the response to drugs. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this treatment in the Japanese population (PROSPERO: CRD42020191978).

METHODS

We searched relevant randomized control trials and analyzed the exacerbations, quality of life, lung function, and adverse events including pneumonia and mortality as the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

We identified a total of three RCTs (N = 632). Treatment with ICS/LAMA/LABA triple therapy significantly decreased the exacerbations (rate ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.85) and improved the trough FEV₁ (mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.07) compared to LAMA/LABA therapy. However, triple therapy showed a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia compared to LAMA/LABA (odds ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.58 to 7.22). Concerning other adverse events including mortality, there were no significant difference between these therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current meta-analysis of the Japanese population, we confirmed that triple therapy causes a higher incidence of pneumonia than LAMA/LABA treatment but is a more preferable treatment since it showed a lower incidence of exacerbations and higher trough FEV₁ in patients with symptomatic moderate to severe COPD. However, since the sample sizes were not statistically large enough, further trials involving Japanese patients are needed.