Safety of indacaterol in the treatment of patients with COPD

Real-world Safety and Efficacy of Indacaterol Maleate in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Evidence from the Long-term Post-marketing Surveillance in Japan

Objective Evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of indacaterol maleate in a real-life setting is limited. The objective of this post-marketing surveillance was to evaluate the real-life safety and efficacy of indacaterol maleate in Japanese patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods This was a 52-week post-marketing surveillance conducted between April 2012 and December 2018. The safety endpoints included the incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The efficacy endpoints included the physician-reported global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE), change from baseline in the COPD assessment test (CAT) results, forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and %FEV1 following 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks of indacaterol administration. Results Of the 1,846 enrolled patients, 1,726 were included in the safety and efficacy analyses. The mean age of the patients was 72.5 years old. Cough, pneumonia and COPD worsening were the most common AEs reported, while pneumonia (1.04%) was the most common SAE, and cough (1.68%) was the most common ADR. GETE showed that 69.70% of patients achieved an excellent/good/moderate response following indacaterol treatment. The CAT score decreased, and lung function parameters (FVC, FEV1 and %FEV1) improved across all the COPD stages following treatment with indacaterol. Conclusion Indacaterol showed a favorable safety and tolerability profile in Japanese patients with COPD without new safety signals observed in real-life settings. These findings demonstrated that indacaterol is an effective maintenance treatment in real-life practice for Japanese patients with COPD.

Post-inhalation cough with therapeutic aerosols: Formulation considerations

This review provides an assessment of post-inhalation cough with therapeutic aerosols. Factors that increase cough may be mitigated through design of the drug, formulation, and device. The incidence of cough is typically less than 5% for drugs with a nominal dose less than 1 mg, including asthma and COPD therapeutics. Cough increases markedly as the dose approaches 100 mg. This is due to changes in the composition of epithelial lining fluid (e.g., increases in osmolality, proton concentration). Whether an individual exhibits cough depends on their degree of sensitization to mechanical and chemical stimuli. Hypersensitivity is increased when the drug, formulation or disease result in increases in lung inflammation. Cough related to changes in epithelial lining fluid composition can be limited by using insoluble neutral forms of drugs and excipients.

Relationship of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators with cardiovascular outcomes among patients with stable COPD: a meta-analysis and systematic review of 43 randomized trials

Background: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2–agonists (LABAs) are the mainstay of maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although previous studies have supported inhaled long-acting bronchodilators (ILABs) for overall cardiovascular safety, the risk of specific cardiovascular outcomes such as arrhythmia, heart failure and stroke is still unknown.

Materials and methods: We systematically searched from PubMed, the Embase database and the Cochrane Library for published studies on ILABs and COPD, from its inception to November 10, 2018, with no language restrictions. The RRs and corresponding 95% CIs were pooled to evaluate ILAB/placebo.

Results: Finally, 43 randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with placebo, ILABs do not increase the risk of overall and specific cardiovascular adverse events (AEs); on the contrary, they can reduce the incidence of hypertension (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55–0.98;I²19.9%; P= 0.221). However, when stratified according to the specific agents of ILABs, olodaterol might reduce the risk of overall cardiovascular adverse events (OCAEs) (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.49–0.88;I²27.5%; P= 0.000), and the protective effect of lowing blood pressure disappeared. Similarly, the use of inhaled LABA might increase the risk of cardiac failure (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04–2.84;I²0%; P= 0.538), but this risk disappeared when stratified according to the specific agents of LABA. Besides, formoterol might decrease the risk of cardiac ischemia (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.91; I²0%; P= 0.676).

Conclusions: Overall, the use of ILABs was not associated with overall cardiovascular AEs in patients with stable COPD. When stratified according to the specific agents of LABA, olodaterol might reduce the risk of OCAE; and formoterol might decrease the risk of cardiac ischemia. LABA might reduce the incidence of hypertension, but might increase the risk of heart failure. Therefore, COPD patients with a history of heart failure should use it with caution.

Inhaled therapies and cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapy includes a multi-dimensional approach, taking into account both symptoms of the patient and the number of acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs). There are three main pharmaceutical classes currently available including long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), long-acting β₂-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). COPD is a major risk factor for most cardiovascular diseases, and cardiac comorbidities are very common in COPD patients. Both LAMA and LABA have a considerable impact on cardiac function by stimulating cardiac β2-adrenergic receptors or inhibiting the heart M₂ muscarinic receptors. ICS alone or in combination has never been associated with a real cardiovascular risk.

AREAS COVERED

This review explores the data published on the safety of COPD therapy and the implications for current pharmacotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Several studies have confirmed the good safety profile of bronchodilators available both in monotherapy and in association with other bronchodilators of different classes or with ICS despite the device used. Cardiovascular events in clinical trials are generally low and balanced between groups. The actual cardiovascular risk of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) in an unselected COPD population will need to be investigated through post-marketing surveillance studies and observational studies.

Comprehensive assessment of the safety of olodaterol 5 µg in the Respimat® device for maintenance treatment of COPD: comparison with the long-acting β2-agonist formoterol

This analysis provides a comprehensive clinical assessment of the long-term safety of the licensed dose of olodaterol (5 µg once daily [QD] via Respimat® inhaler) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by exploring the occurrence of acknowledged side effects of long-acting β2-agonists as well as those included in the olodaterol and formoterol labels. We analysed pooled data from two replicate, double-blind studies of olodaterol (5 µg QD via Respimat®) compared to formoterol (12 µg twice daily [BID]) or placebo over 48 weeks (1222.13, NCT00793624; 1222.14, NCT00796653). Patients could continue their background treatment. The analysis considered adverse events (AEs) typically associated with β2-agonists, including cardiovascular events, as well as administration-related events. Descriptive statistics were provided for the incidence of AEs and aggregated AEs. The analysis included 1379 patients: 460 placebo, 459 olodaterol and 460 formoterol; AEs were reported by 70.9, 71.7 and 69.1% of patients, respectively. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates of cardiac AEs (arrhythmia and myocardial ischaemia) and cough were numerically lower in the olodaterol group than the formoterol group, while nasopharyngitis, throat irritation, metabolism and psychiatric disorders were numerically higher in the olodaterol group. The most frequent event in the olodaterol group was nasopharyngitis (placebo 8.0%; olodaterol 12.9%; formoterol 10.0%). Except for cough (incidence rate ratio of 0.46 [95% confidence interval 0.24, 0.89] in favour of olodaterol), there were no significant differences between active groups. In conclusion, olodaterol 5 µg QD was well tolerated over 48 weeks with a typical β2-agonist safety profile comparable to formoterol 12 µg BID.

Global scientific collaboration in COPD research

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the multiple collaboration types, quantitatively evaluate the publication trends and review the performance of institutions or countries (regions) across the world in COPD research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scientometric methods and social network analysis were used to survey the development of publication trends and understand current collaboration in the field of COPD research based on the Web of Science publications during the past 18 years.

RESULTS

The number of publications developed through different collaboration types has increased. Growth trends indicate that the percentage of papers authored through multinational and domestic multi-institutional collaboration (DMIC) have also increased. However, the percentage of intra-institutional collaboration and single-authored (SA) studies has reduced. The papers that produced the highest academic impact result from international collaboration. The second highest academic impact papers are produced by DMIC. Out of the three, the papers that are produced by SA studies have the least amount of impact upon the scientific community. A handful of internationally renowned institutions not only take the leading role in the development of the research within their country (region) but also play a crucial role in international research collaboration in COPD. Both the amount of papers produced and the amount of cooperation that occurs in each study are disproportionally distributed between high-income countries (regions) and low-income countries (regions). Growing attention has been generated toward research on COPD from more and more different academic domains.

CONCLUSION

Despite the rapid development in COPD research, collaboration in the field of COPD research still has room to grow, especially between different institutions or countries (regions), which would promote the progress of global COPD research.

Safety and Effectiveness of Indacaterol in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients in South Korea

BACKGROUND

Inhaled indacaterol (Onbrez Breezhaler), a long-acting β₂-agonist, is approved in over 100 countries, including South Korea, as a once-daily bronchodilator for maintenance and treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Here, we present an interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance study conducted to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of indacaterol in the Korean population.

METHODS

This was an open-label, observational, prospective study in which COPD patients, who were newly prescribed with indacaterol (150 or 300 µg), were evaluated for 12 or 24 weeks. Safety was assessed based on the incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Effectiveness was evaluated based on physician's assessment by considering changes in symptoms and lung function, if the values of forced expiratory volume in 1 second were available.

RESULTS

Safety data were analyzed in 1,016 patients of the 1,043 enrolled COPD patients receiving indacaterol, and 784 patients were included for the effectiveness analysis. AEs were reported in 228 (22.44%) patients, while 98 (9.65%) patients reported SAEs. The COPD condition improved in 348 patients (44.4%), while the condition was maintained in 396 patients (50.5%), and only 40 patients (5.1%) exhibited worsening of ailment as compared with baseline. During the treatment period, 90 patients were hospitalized while nine patients died. All deaths were assessed to be not related to the study drug by the investigator.

CONCLUSION

In real-life clinical practice in South Korea, indacaterol was well tolerated in COPD patients, and can be regarded as an effective option for their maintenance treatment.

The law of mass action and the pharmacological concentration-effect curve: resolving the paradox of apparently non-dose-related adverse drug reactions

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions are sometimes described as being 'non-dose-related' because no relationship has been found between increasing doses and either the intensity of the response or the proportion of individuals in whom the response occurs; furthermore, hypersensitivity reactions are often regarded as being non-dose-related, even if different doses have not been studied. However, the law of mass action implies that all pharmacological effects are concentration related and should increase in intensity with increasing dose. We set out to explain this paradox.

METHODS

We searched for published adverse drug reactions that have been described as non-dose-related and analysed them.

RESULTS

We identified four categories of explanations that resolve the paradox: (i) the reaction is not real; it may have occurred by chance or there may be methodological problems, such as bias or confounding factors; (ii) the dose-response curve for the adverse effect reaches a maximum at doses lower than were studied (i.e. a hypersusceptibility reaction); this underpins the use of test doses to predict the possibility of an adverse reaction at therapeutic doses; (iii) susceptibility to the adverse reaction differs widely among individuals; and (iv) imprecision or inaccuracy in the measurement of either dose or effect obscures dose responsiveness. This last explanation encompasses: (a) reactions related to cumulative dose; (b) dissociation between dose and concentration through saturable pharmacokinetics; and (c) variability in the measurement of the effect.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

If an adverse drug reaction appears to be non-dose-related, the reasons should be sought, having these mechanisms in mind.

A real-world evaluation of indacaterol and other bronchodilators in COPD: the INFLOW study

AIM

INFLOW (INdacaterol eFfectiveness and utiLizatiOn in COPD: real World evaluation) was a prospective, noninterventional study assessing the effectiveness and safety of long-acting bronchodilators in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from the Middle East, Asia, and South Africa.

METHODS

Patients newly prescribed or switched to indacaterol or other long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), or tiotropium (monotherapy or in combination) were evaluated over 6 months. The primary endpoint was the clinical COPD questionnaire overall score at the end of the study.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from 1,710 patients (mean postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second, 59% predicted) who received indacaterol (n=1,179), other LABA (n=68), tiotropium (n=271), indacaterol plus tiotropium (n=167), or other LABA plus tiotropium (n=25). Across treatments, clinical COPD questionnaire overall score improved from baseline by 0.81-1.26 points (all P<0.0001), 63%-84% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied, and physicians rated effectiveness as good/very good in 63%-80% of cases. The indacaterol inhaler was rated easy/very easy to use by the majority of patients, and physicians considered its use clearly understood by most patients. All treatments had acceptable tolerability.

CONCLUSION

In real life clinical practice across a diverse region, indacaterol and other long-acting bronchodilators improved health status and were well regarded by patients and physicians.

Positioning new pharmacotherapies for COPD

COPD imposes considerable worldwide burden in terms of morbidity and mortality. In recognition of this, there is now extensive focus on early diagnosis, secondary prevention, and optimizing medical management of the disease. While established guidelines recognize different grades of disease severity and offer a structured basis for disease management based on symptoms and risk, it is becoming increasingly evident that COPD is a condition characterized by many phenotypes and its control in a single patient may require clinicians to have access to a broader spectrum of pharmacotherapies. This review summarizes recent developments in COPD management and compares established pharmacotherapy with new and emerging pharmacotherapies including long-acting muscarinic antagonists, long-acting β-2 sympathomimetic agonists, and fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β-2 sympathomimetic agonists as well as inhaled cortiocosteroids, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and targeted anti-inflammatory drugs. We also review the available oral medications and new agents with novel mechanisms of action in early stages of development. With several new pharmacological agents intended for the management of COPD, it is our goal to familiarize potential prescribers with evidence relating to the efficacy and safety of new medications and to suggest circumstances in which these therapies could be most useful.

Turning a molecule into a medicine: the development of indacaterol as a novel once-daily bronchodilator treatment for patients with COPD

Indacaterol is the first once-daily, long-acting β2-adrenergic agonist (LABA) approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Indacaterol was developed using a combination of informed drug design and molecular chemistry to generate a β2-adrenergic agonist with a fast onset and long duration of action, enabling once-daily dosing with an acceptable safety profile. Early preclinical studies with indacaterol demonstrated these characteristics, and this promising molecule was taken into clinical development, originally for asthma treatment. Subsequent safety concerns over LABA monotherapy in patients with asthma redirected indacaterol's development to centre on COPD, where a good evidence base and guideline recommendations for bronchodilator monotherapy existed. Clinical development was initially complicated by different inhaler devices and differing doses of indacaterol. Using a phase III innovative adaptive-design clinical trial (INHANCE), indacaterol 150 and 300 μg once-daily doses were selected to be taken forward into the phase III INERGIZE programme. This programme delivered placebo-controlled and active-comparator data, including comparisons with formoterol, tiotropium and salmeterol/fluticasone, as well as the use of indacaterol in combination with tiotropium. Together, these studies provided a comprehensive assessment of the benefit-risk profile of indacaterol, allowing for regulatory submission. Indacaterol was first approved at once-daily doses of 150 and 300 μg in the European Union in 2009, followed by 150 µg in Japan (2011) and China (2012), and 75 μg in the United States (2011). To date, indacaterol is approved and marketed in more than 100 countries worldwide for once-daily maintenance treatment of COPD.

Diagnosis and pharmacotherapy of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the finnish guidelines

The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim initiated and managed the update of the Finnish national guideline for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The Finnish COPD guideline was revised to acknowledge the progress in diagnosis and management of COPD. This Finnish COPD guideline in English language is a part of the original guideline and focuses on the diagnosis, assessment and pharmacotherapy of stable COPD. It is intended to be used mainly in primary health care but not forgetting respiratory specialists and other healthcare workers. The new recommendations and statements are based on the best evidence available from the medical literature, other published national guidelines and the GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) report. This guideline introduces the diagnostic approach, differential diagnostics towards asthma, assessment and treatment strategy to control symptoms and to prevent exacerbations. The pharmacotherapy is based on the symptoms and a clinical phenotype of the individual patient. The guideline defines three clinically relevant phenotypes including the low and high exacerbation risk phenotypes and the neglected asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). These clinical phenotypes can help clinicians to identify patients that respond to specific pharmacological interventions. For the low exacerbation risk phenotype, pharmacotherapy with short-acting β2 -agonists (salbutamol, terbutaline) or anticholinergics (ipratropium) or their combination (fenoterol-ipratropium) is recommended in patients with less symptoms. If short-acting bronchodilators are not enough to control symptoms, a long-acting β2 -agonist (formoterol, indacaterol, olodaterol or salmeterol) or a long-acting anticholinergic (muscarinic receptor antagonists; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, umeclidinium) or their combination is recommended. For the high exacerbation risk phenotype, pharmacotherapy with a long-acting anticholinergic or a fixed combination of an inhaled glucocorticoid and a long-acting β2 -agonist (budesonide-formoterol, beclomethasone dipropionate-formoterol, fluticasone propionate-salmeterol or fluticasone furoate-vilanterol) is recommended as a first choice. Other treatment options for this phenotype include combination of long-acting bronchodilators given from separate inhalers or as a fixed combination (glycopyrronium-indacaterol or umeclidinium-vilanterol) or a triple combination of an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting β2 -agonist and a long-acting anticholinergic. If the patient has severe-to-very severe COPD (FEV1  < 50% predicted), chronic bronchitis and frequent exacerbations despite long-acting bronchodilators, the pharmacotherapy may include also roflumilast. ACOS is a phenotype of COPD in which there are features that comply with both asthma and COPD. Patients belonging to this phenotype have usually been excluded from studies evaluating the effects of drugs both in asthma and in COPD. Thus, evidence-based recommendation of treatment cannot be given. The treatment should cover both diseases. Generally, the therapy should include at least inhaled glucocorticoids (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, fluticasone furoate, fluticasone propionate or mometasone) combined with a long-acting bronchodilator (β2 -agonist or anticholinergic or both).

Review of drug safety and efficacy of arformoterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

The global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease guidelines recommend maintenance therapy using long-acting bronchodilators for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who have daily symptoms. Arformoterol is the (R, R) - enantiomer of the racemic formoterol and is more potent than (R, R/ S, S) - formoterol.

AREAS COVERED

Currently, arformoterol is one of two nebulized long-acting β-agonists on the market. It has a low incidence of cardiovascular side effects with incidence of arrhythmia and ischemia similar to placebo. β-adrenergic adverse effects are infrequent, numerically lower than formoterol, but have a quicker onset of action than salmeterol. There was no observed clinical tolerance over 12 months. arformoterol is safe in combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroids, tiotropium and rescue inhalers. A 12-month Phase IV trial found no increased risk of respiratory death or COPD exacerbation-related hospitalizations. arformoterol can potentially benefit patients with hyperinflation and low inspiratory flow rates.

EXPERT OPINION

The introduction of the centers for medicare and medicaid services penalization for COPD readmissions may boost the appeal of long-acting bronchodilators as new discharge medications. With the advent of ultra long-acting bronchodilators, its potential as a once daily agent in isolation or combination with these new therapies needs further study.

One-year safety and efficacy study of arformoterol tartrate in patients with moderate to severe COPD

BACKGROUND

Arformoterol tartrate (arformoterol, 15 μg bid) is a nebulized long-acting β2-agonist approved for maintenance treatment of COPD.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Patients (aged ≥ 40 years with baseline FEV1 ≤ 65% predicted, FEV1 > 0.50 L, FEV1/FVC ≤ 70%, and ≥ 15 pack-year smoking history) received arformoterol (n = 420) or placebo (n = 421) for 1 year. The primary assessment was time from randomization to respiratory death or first COPD exacerbation-related hospitalization.

RESULTS

Among 841 patients randomized, 103 had ≥ 1 primary event (9.5% vs 15.0%, for arformoterol vs placebo, respectively). Patients who discontinued treatment for any reason (39.3% vs 49.9%, for arformoterol vs placebo, respectively) were followed for up to 1 year postrandomization to assess for primary events. Fewer patients receiving arformoterol than placebo experienced COPD exacerbation-related hospitalizations (9.0% vs 14.3%, respectively). Twelve patients (2.9%) receiving arformoterol and 10 patients (2.4%) receiving placebo died during the study. Risk for first respiratory serious adverse event was 50% lower with arformoterol than placebo (P = .003). Numerically more patients on arformoterol (13; 3.1%) than placebo (10; 2.4%) experienced cardiac serious adverse events; however, time-to-first cardiac serious adverse event was not significantly different. Improvements in trough FEV1 and FVC were greater with arformoterol (least-squares mean change from baseline vs placebo: 0.051 L, P = .030 and 0.075 L, P = .018, respectively). Significant improvements in quality of life (overall St. George's Hospital Respiratory Questionnaire and Clinical COPD Questionnaire) were observed with arformoterol vs placebo (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Arformoterol demonstrated an approximately 40% lower risk of respiratory death or COPD exacerbation-related hospitalization over 1 year vs placebo. Arformoterol was well-tolerated and improved lung function vs placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00909779; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Update on ultra-long-acting β agonists in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

For the last two decades, long-acting β agonists (LABAs) have been a cornerstone in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). They relax airway smooth muscle and augment expiratory airflow, which reduces hyperinflation and improves dyspnea, functional capacity and quality of life. In recent years, Indacaterol, a LABA with an ultra-long duration of action (ultra-LABA), which only requires once-daily dosing, was approved by the FDA. The clinical efficacy of indacaterol is comparable, and, in some aspects better, than the currently available LABAs.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy, safety and potential role of the ultra-LABAs in COPD management.

EXPERT OPINION

Ultra-LABAs are effective bronchodilators with a prolonged duration of action. By decreasing dosing frequency, ultra-LABAs potentially may improve respiratory medication adherence, which is associated with better survival and less healthcare utilization. In addition to their salubrious benefits, β agonists may produce untoward effects. Increased mortality and hospitalizations among patients with left ventricular heart failure, who were treated with β agonists, has caused concern about their use in patients with COPD and heart disease. Further experience and testing will determine the optimal role of ultra-LABAs in the management of COPD.

Recent advances in COPD disease management with fixed-dose long-acting combination therapies

Combinations of two long-acting bronchodilators and long-acting bronchodilators with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended therapies in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Three fixed-dose combination products have recently been approved for the treatment of COPD (the long-acting β2-agonist plus long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LABA/LAMA] combinations glycopyrronium/indacaterol [QVA149] and umeclidinium/vilanterol, and the LABA/ICS fluticasone furoate/vilanterol), with others currently in late-stage development. LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS combination therapies demonstrate positive effects on both lung function and patient-reported outcomes, with significant improvements observed with LABA/LAMA combinations compared with placebo, each component alone and other comparators in current use. No new safety concerns have been observed with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators. Combinations of two long-acting bronchodilators represent a new and convenient treatment option in COPD. This review summarizes published efficacy and safety data from clinical trials of both LABA/LAMA and novel LABA/ICS combinations in patients with COPD.

Indacaterol therapy in moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: findings from a single-center primary care cohort

Background

Once-daily long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) are an important treatment option, either alone or in combination with other inhaled long-acting bronchodilators in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Aims/objectives

To audit the effectiveness of indacaterol as maintenance therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage II/III).

Methods

This was a single-center audit of a primary care COPD cohort comprising all patients treated with indacaterol following treatment escalation (as per National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines) or failure with other therapies. The sample was restricted to patients treated for a minimum of 12 months with indacaterol, for whom preswitching and follow-up spirometry as well as exacerbation frequency data were available (GOLD spirometry guidelines). Pulmonary function was assessed by spirometry (recorded as forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁] expressed as percentage predicted). Relevant self-reported qualitative information was recorded in descriptive terms for quality of life (QoL) assessment.

Results

A total of 15 patients met the audit inclusion criteria (66.6% male, mean age 64.9±7.7 years). COPD disease duration ranged from 1 to 22 years; 93% had GOLD stage II or III COPD. Follow-up ranged in duration from 12 to 27 months. Indacaterol was associated with a significant reduction in exacerbation frequency compared with the 12 months prior to initiation (P=0.02). In those patients who experienced three or more exacerbations/year, mean exacerbation rate fell from 5.43±1.07 to 2.43±0.2 after 12 months treatment with indacaterol (P=0.02). A reduction in dyspnea was noted in 53% of patients. Similarly, improvements in exercise tolerance and well-being were self-reported in 67% and 93%, respectively.

Conclusion

Indacaterol was found to be an effective LABA as an escalation or switch medication in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Indacaterol was effective both as monotherapy and in combination with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist. Switching to indacaterol from a LABA/inhaled corticosteroid fixed-combination inhaler significantly reduced the number of acute exacerbations and also improved self-reported QoL.

New developments in the management of COPD: clinical utility of indacaterol 75 μg

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a global health challenge and a major cause of mortality worldwide. Bronchodilators, particularly long-acting β₂-agonists and long-acting antimuscarinic agents, used singly or in combination, aim to improve lung function, reduce symptoms, prevent exacerbations, and enhance quality of life of COPD patients. Indacaterol is a novel, inhaled, long-acting β₂-agonist, with rapid onset of action and once-daily dosing providing 24-hour bronchodilation. Currently, the recommended dose differs between Europe (150 μg; maximum 300 μg) and USA (75 μg), the latter is lower than that assessed in the majority of the conducted studies. This review summarises published evidence regarding the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of indacaterol at a dose of 75 μg. Indacaterol 75 μg was found to be superior than placebo regarding lung function, dyspnea, health status, use of rescue medication, and rate of exacerbations. Furthermore, indacaterol 75 μg was well tolerated, while the most frequent adverse effect was deterioration of COPD occurring at a frequency similar to placebo, without major cardiovascular adverse effects. In conclusion, indacaterol 75 μg, administered once daily, is efficacious and has an excellent tolerability and safety profile, and is therefore a valid alternative in the treatment of COPD patients.

Use of indacaterol for the treatment of COPD: a pharmacokinetic evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Indacaterol is a β2-agonist with a rapid onset of action and a bronchodilating effect that lasts for 24 h.

AREAS COVERED

This review considers indacaterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, in whom it is rapidly absorbed into the systemic circulation with serum levels measurable after 5 min and Cmax being reached approximately 15 min post-dose. Its disposition kinetics are characterized by at least two phases, a relatively fast decline of the concentrations within the first 12 h, followed by a terminal elimination phase. The increase in systemic exposure is dose-proportional, but systemic concentrations are low at the recommended doses. Indacaterol is relatively highly bound to plasma proteins regardless of concentration. Metabolic clearance and/or biliary clearance account for the majority of its systemic excretion. Weight, age, gender and ethnicity significantly influence its pharmacokinetic profile, but it is not necessary to adjust the dose based on these covariates. Substrates, inhibitors or inducers of UGT1A1 and CYP3A may also affect the pharmacokinetic profile of indacaterol.

EXPERT OPINION

Blood concentrations of indacaterol are unable to predict its bronchodilator effects. Furthermore, at the recommended doses, systemic concentrations of indacaterol are low and this is the likely reason for its safe profile.

Role of indacaterol, a once-daily bronchodilator, in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by progressive airflow obstruction that can lead to lung destruction and dyspnea. Although there has been a slight reduction in mortality in recent decades, COPD is still a serious health problem that has enormous costs and utilizes significant medical resources. There have been a number of pharmacologic interventions that have been developed for the treatment of COPD. Current guidelines recommend the use of long-acting bronchodilators for the treatment of moderate and severe stage COPD, since they have been shown to improve lung function, respiratory symptoms, and quality of life. Indacaterol is a once-daily beta2-agonist (β2-agonist) delivered by a single-dose dry powder inhaler used for the treatment of COPD. It is currently approved at a dose of 75 μg in the United States and a dose of 150 μg with a maximal dose of 300 μg in Europe and other countries. Several studies show that indacaterol was statistically superior to both long-acting β2-agonist, formoterol and salmeterol, as well as, noninferior to tiotropium. Indacaterol is generally well tolerated and has a good safety profile. Other studies show that there is an additive bronchodilator response with the addition of indacaterol to tiotropium, which would provide a once-daily treatment option for patient with moderate to severe COPD. This review discusses the pharmacokinetic, comparative efficacy and safety data for indacaterol.

Comparative efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are faced with an increasingly difficult choice regarding the optimal bronchodilator for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) given the number of new treatments. The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of indacaterol 75/150/300 μg once daily (OD), glycopyrronium bromide 50 μg OD, tiotropium bromide 18 μg/5 μg OD, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily (BID), formoterol 12 μg BID, and placebo for moderate to severe COPD.

METHODS

Forty randomized controlled trials were combined in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest were trough and post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and responders (≥4 points), and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score and responders (≥1 point) at 6 months.

RESULTS

Indacaterol was associated with a higher trough FEV1 than other active treatments (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: 152 mL (95% credible interval (CrI): 126, 179); 160 mL (95% CrI: 133, 187)) and the greatest improvement in SGRQ score (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: -3.9 (95% CrI -5.2, -2.6); -3.6 (95% CrI -4.8, -2.3)). Glycopyrronium and tiotropium 18 μg resulted in the next best estimates for both outcomes with minor differences (difference for glycopyrronium versus tiotropium for trough FEV1 and SGRQ: 18 mL (95% CrI: -16, 51); -0.55 (95% CrI: -2.04, 0.92).

CONCLUSION

In terms of trough FEV1 and SGRQ score indacaterol, glycopyrronium, and tiotropium are expected to be the most effective bronchodilators.

Role of indacaterol and the newer very long-acting β2-agonists in patients with stable COPD: a review

Bronchodilators are central drugs in the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Indacaterol was the first agent of the novel family of very long-acting β2-agonists to be used as an inhaled bronchodilator for COPD and provides 24-hour therapeutic action, thus allowing once-daily administration. Data from clinical trials show that indacaterol has a bronchodilator effect similar to that of the anticholinergic tiotropium bromide and slightly higher efficacy compared with the long-acting β2-agonists, salmeterol and formoterol. Moreover, the safety profile is excellent and comparable with that of placebo. Concerning adherence with drug treatment and real-life management in respect to long-acting β2-agonists, once-daily dosing makes indacaterol more convenient for COPD patients and is likely to enhance patient adherence. Other very long-acting β2-agonists currently in development include vilanterol, olodaterol, and carmoterol, and these have shown good characteristics for clinical use in the studies reported thus far.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in China: the potential role of indacaterol

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is becoming a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in China, with tobacco smoking, biomass fuel use and genetic susceptibility being the major risk factors. COPD poses a high economic burden with the total expenditure per patient costing 40% and nearly one-third of an average family income in urban and rural areas of China, respectively. Despite the use of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease strategy document being recommended for the diagnosis and management of COPD, the majority of patients with COPD go undiagnosed or are not managed appropriately by physicians. Long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) have long been used for symptomatic management of COPD, with salmeterol and formoterol being the commonly used twice-daily treatments. Indacaterol is the first once-daily LABA, approved at a dose of 150 µg once daily in China. Several phase III studies have shown that indacaterol 150 µg improves lung function, breathlessness, health status, exacerbations, rescue medication use and symptoms, as compared with placebo and other bronchodilators, in patients with COPD, with a rapid onset of action following first dose and a good safety and tolerability profile. In this review we elaborate on the efficacy and safety results from several such studies.

The role of indacaterol for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

Indacaterol is the first long-acting β2-agonist (LABAs) approved for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that allows for once-daily (OD) administration. It is rapidly acting, with an onset of action in 5 minutes, like salbutamol and formoterol but with a sustained bronchodilator effect, that last for 24 hours, like tiotropium. In long-term clinical studies (12 weeks to 1 year) in patients with moderate to severe COPD, OD indacaterol 150 or 300 μg improved lung function (primary endpoint) significantly more than placebo, and improvements were significantly greater than twice-daily formoterol 12 μg or salmeterol 50 μg, and noninferior to OD tiotropium bromide 18 μg. Indacaterol was well tolerated at all doses and with a good overall safety profile. Cost-utility analyses show that indacaterol 150 μg has lower total costs and better outcomes than tiotropium and salmeterol. These findings suggest that indacaterol can be considered a first choice drug in the treatment of the patient with mild/moderate stable COPD. However, in people with COPD who remain symptomatic on treatment with indacaterol, adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) is the preferable option. In any case, it is advisable to combine indacaterol with a OD inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), such as mometasone furoate or ciclesonide, in patients with low FEV1, and, in those patients who have many symptoms and a high risk of exacerbations, to combine it with a LAMA and a OD ICS.

Indacaterol for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Inhaled bronchodilators are the first-line therapy for COPD. Indacaterol is a novel addition to existing long-acting bronchodilators.

OBJECTIVES

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) ON efficacy and safety of indacaterol as compared: 1) with placebo at different dosages, 2) with existing bronchodilators; (3) as add-on treatment to tiotropium.

METHODS

We searched 13 electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL, and contacted the manufacturer for unpublished data. Primary outcome was mean FEV1 change at 12(th) week, secondary outcomes included changes in SGRQ, TDI and BODE index at 6 months, exacerbation at 1 year, and worsening of symptoms.

RESULTS

Twelve eligible RCTs of moderate risk of bias included data from 10,977 patients. Compared to placebo, indacaterol improved FEV1 by a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.16 L (95%CI: 0.15, 0.18 L, p<0.001), homogeneously above the minimally important difference of 0.10 L. It offered clinically relevant improvement in all secondary outcomes except exacerbation. Magnitude of benefit did not differ significantly by dosage, but one treatment related death was reported at 300 ug. Efficacy of Indacaterol was similar to formoterol and salmeterol (FEV1 WMD = 0.04 L, 95%CI: 0.01 L, 0.07 L, p = 0.02); and tiotropium (FEV1 WMD = 0.01 L, 95%CI: -0.01, 0.03 L, p = 0.61). The use of indacaterol on top of tiotropium yielded additional improvement on FEV1 (WMD = 0.07 L, 95%CI: 0.05 L, 0.10 L, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Indacaterol is safe and beneficial for patients with COPD at dosage ≤150 ug. It may serve as a good alternative to existing bronchodilators, or as an add-on to tiotropium for unresponsive patients. Use of higher dosage requires further justification.

Indacaterol: a comprehensive review

At present there is no cure for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, some nonpharmacologic treatments, such as rehabilitation and lung volume reduction surgery, as well as pharmacologic intervention, can relieve some of the patient's symptoms and improve quality of life, while also reducing the rate of exacerbations and hospitalizations. There needs to be a paradigm shift away from the unjustified nihilistic approach to COPD towards considering it a preventable and treatable disease. After patients quit smoking and start to lead healthier lifestyles, long-acting bronchodilators, such as long-acting beta-adrenergic agents (LABA) and long-acting antimuscarinic agents (LAMA), are recommended as the cornerstone of treatment for COPD, either as monotherapy or in combination. COPD is characterized by a reduced maximum expiratory flow and slow forced emptying of the lungs, which progress over time and are not completely reversible. In this condition, gas gets trapped in the lungs and pulmonary hyperinflation occurs. LABA and LAMA improve airway patency and deflate the lungs. Indacaterol is the first once-daily LABA approved for treatment of COPD, and is administered by inhalation through the Breezhaler® device. The speed of bronchodilation is similar to that with salbutamol (ie, about five minutes) and longer (ie, 24 hours) than that with traditional LABA, with the same 12-hour effect as salmeterol and formoterol, both of which require twice-daily administration. This is why indacaterol has been called the "ultra-LABA". On the one hand, the fast onset of action provides immediate relief of symptoms, and on the other, its constant 24-hour bronchodilation provides "pharmacologic stenting" which facilitates lung emptying, thereby decreasing trapped gas and pulmonary hyperinflation. Once-daily administration of a fast and long-acting bronchodilator can improve patient adherence with therapy, which is known to be a major problem for many medical treatments. Dose-finding trials have shown that 75 μg is the minimum dose needed to achieve clinically important improvement. However, indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg achieve an even greater improvement in lung function and patient-oriented outcomes. Further, these two doses of indacaterol significantly reduce pulmonary hyperinflation, thereby improving exercise tolerance and ability to perform day-to-day activities. It is more effective on lung volumes at the 300 μg dose than formoterol, and better than salmeterol and tiotropium at the 150 μg dose, at least in the acute setting. It is noteworthy that few studies document these results in patients with COPD and moderate airflow obstruction. These are exactly the kind of patients our research should be concentrating on, in view of the accelerated decay in forced expiratory volume in one second at this stage of the disease. Finally, all the relevant studies show that indacaterol is consistently well tolerated by patients with COPD at every stage, and that it has a high safety profile.

Guidelines for diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Joint ICS/NCCP (I) recommendations

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major public health problem in India. Although several International guidelines for diagnosis and management of COPD are available, yet there are lot of gaps in recognition and management of COPD in India due to vast differences in availability and affordability of healthcare facilities across the country. The Indian Chest Society (ICS) and the National College of Chest Physicians (NCCP) of India have joined hands to come out with these evidence-based guidelines to help the physicians at all levels of healthcare to diagnose and manage COPD in a scientific manner. Besides the International literature, the Indian studies were specifically analyzed to arrive at simple and practical recommendations. The evidence is presented under these five headings: (a) definitions, epidemiology, and disease burden; (b) disease assessment and diagnosis; (c) pharmacologic management of stable COPD; (d) management of acute exacerbations; and (e) nonpharmacologic and preventive measures. The modified grade system was used for classifying the quality of evidence as 1, 2, 3, or usual practice point (UPP). The strength of recommendation was graded as A or B depending upon the level of evidence.

Comparison of indacaterol with tiotropium or twice-daily long-acting β -agonists for stable COPD: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilators are central to the symptomatic management of patients with COPD.Previous data have shown that inhaled indacaterol improved numerous clinical outcomes over placebo.

METHODS

This systematic review explored the efficacy and safety of indacaterol in comparison with tiotropium or bid long-acting β 2 -agonists (TD-LABAs) for treatment of moderate to severe COPD. Randomized controlled trials were identified after a search of different databases of published and unpublished trials.

RESULTS

Five trials (5,920 participants) were included. Compared with tiotropium, indacaterol showed statistically and clinically significant reductions in the use of rescue medication and dyspnea(43% greater likelihood of achieving a minimal clinically important difference [MCID] in the transitional dyspnea index [TDI]; number needed to treat for benefit [NNTB] 5 10). Additionally,the MCID in health status was more likely to be achieved with indacaterol than with tiotropium (OR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.22–1.68; P = .00001; [NNTB ]= 10). Trough FEV 1 was significantly higher at the end of treatment with indacaterol than with TD-LABAs (80 mL, P = .00001). Similarly, indacaterol signifi cantly improved dyspnea (61% greater likelihood of achieving an MCID in TDI, P = .008) and health status (21% greater likelihood of achieving an MCID in St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, P 5 .04) than TD-LABA. Indacaterol showed similar levels of safety and tolerability to both comparators.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that indacaterol may prove useful as an alternative to tiotropium or TD-LABA due to its effects on health status, dyspnea, and pulmonary function.

The safety of long-acting β2-agonists in the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Inhaled long-acting bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Both the twice-daily long-acting β(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) salmeterol and formoterol and the once-daily LABA indacaterol are indicated for use in COPD. This review examines current evidence for the safety of LABAs in COPD, focusing on their effect on exacerbations and deaths.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for placebo-controlled studies evaluating long-term (≥24 weeks) use of formoterol, salmeterol, or indacaterol in patients with stable COPD, published between January 1990 and September 2012. We summarized data relating to exacerbations and adverse events, particularly events related to COPD.

RESULTS

From 20 studies examined (8774 LABA-treated patients), there was no evidence of an association between LABA treatment and increased exacerbations, COPD-related adverse events, or deaths. Where analyzed as an efficacy outcome, LABA treatment was generally associated with significant or numerical reductions in COPD exacerbations compared with placebo. Incidences of COPD-related adverse events were similar for active and placebo treatments. The incidence of adverse events typically associated with the β(2)-agonist drug class such as skeletal muscle tremors and palpitations was low (often <1% of patients), and there were no reports of increased incidence of cardiac arrhythmias. The systemic effects of β(2)-adrenoceptor stimulation, such as high glucose and potassium levels, were considered minor.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence from clinical studies of the safety and tolerability profile of LABAs supports their long-term use in COPD.

Indacaterol 75 μg once daily for the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a North American perspective

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive disease in which patients become increasingly disabled by their symptoms and limited in their activities. Health-related quality of life may be profoundly impaired even in the early stages of the disease. Treatment with long-acting inhaled bronchodilators can improve lung function, symptoms and health status and reduce exacerbations of COPD. This review profiles the efficacy, safety and tolerability of indacaterol, an inhaled β(2)-agonist bronchodilator for once-daily maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. After 12 weeks of treatment with a once-daily dose of 75 µg (the dose approved in the USA and Canada) in patients with moderate to severe COPD, compared with placebo, indacaterol provided significant and clinically relevant levels of bronchodilation [difference in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s: 131 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) 104-159; p < 0.001], together with significant reductions in symptom scores (difference in transition dyspnea index total score: 0.84 points; 95% CI 0.37-1.31; p < 0.001) and improvements in health status (difference in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score: -3.8 units; 95% CI -5.6 to -2.0; p < 0.001). The overall safety and tolerability of once-daily treatment with indacaterol 75 µg for 12 weeks did not differ in any substantial aspect from placebo treatment. Indirect comparisons analyzing pooled clinical data and meta-analyses suggest that treatment with indacaterol 75 µg once daily may be effective in reducing exacerbations of COPD, and that its effects on lung function and health status will be comparable with other currently available inhaled long-acting bronchodilators used for COPD. Treatment with indacaterol 75 µg once daily provides effective bronchodilation, improves dyspnea and health status, and has a well characterized profile of safety and tolerability.

Assessing efficacy of indacaterol in moderate and severe COPD patients: a 12-week study in an Asian population

INTRODUCTION

This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy of indacaterol, a novel inhaled once-daily long-acting β(2)-agonist, by disease severity (GOLD 2005) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD from six Asian countries/areas (Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan).

METHODS

Data from a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in patients randomized to indacaterol 150 μg, indacaterol 300 μg or placebo once daily were analyzed based on baseline disease severity (moderate or severe). Endpoints were: trough FEV(1) (average of 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose values), transition dyspnoea index (TDI) and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) at Week 12. Safety data were collected.

RESULTS

Of 347 patients randomized, 59.7% had moderate, and 40.3% had severe COPD. Least squares means (LSMs) indacaterol-placebo differences in trough FEV(1) at Week 12 exceeded the pre-specified minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.12L and were statistically superior (p < 0.001) for indacaterol (150 μg, 300 μg) versus placebo in the two subgroups [0.19L, 0.20L (moderate); 0.15L, 0.19L (severe) respectively]. LSM TDI scores for both indacaterol doses versus placebo in both subgroups were statistically superior (p < 0.05) and clinically meaningful (≥1 unit). Both indacaterol doses showed improvements in LSM SGRQ total scores at Week 12 which exceeded the MCID (4 units) versus placebo in both subgroups, with indacaterol 300 μg-placebo difference in the severe subgroup being statistically significant (p < 0.01). Overall incidence of adverse events was lower with indacaterol than with placebo across both subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Indacaterol demonstrated clinically relevant improvements versus placebo in lung function, dyspnea and health status in Asian COPD patients irrespective of disease severity.

CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER

NCT00794157.

New clinical insights into chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and their implications for pharmacoeconomic analyses

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, but before the development of several new pharmacological treatments little could be done for COPD patients. Recognition that these new treatments could significantly improve the prognosis for COPD patients has radically changed clinical management guidelines from a palliative philosophy to an aggressive approach intended to reduce chronic symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival. These new treatments have also sparked interest in COPD cost-effectiveness research. Most COPD cost-effectiveness studies have been based on clinical trial populations, limited to direct medical costs, and used standard analysis methods such as Markov modelling, and they have usually found that newer therapies have favourable cost effectiveness. However, new insights into the clinical progression of COPD bring into question some of the assumptions underlying older analyses. In this review, we examine clinical factors unique to COPD and recent changes in clinical perspectives that have important implications for pharmacoeconomic analyses. The main parameters explored include (i) the high indirect medical costs for COPD and their relevance in assessing the societal benefits of new therapy; (ii) the importance of acute deteriorations in COPD, known as exacerbations, and approaches to modelling the cost benefit of exacerbation reduction; (iii) quality/utility instruments for COPD; (iv) the prevalence of co-morbid conditions and confounding between COPD and co-morbid disease utilization; (v) the limitations of Markov modelling; and (vi) the problem of outliers.

Efficacy of indacaterol 75 μg once-daily on dyspnea and health status: results of two double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-week studies

Indacaterol is an inhaled, once-daily, long-acting ®(2)-agonist for the treatment of COPD. Most previous studies were conducted with doses of 150 and/or 300 μg once-daily, and data with the 75 μg dose are limited. Two identically designed studies were, therefore, conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the 75 μg once-daily dose. In two double-blind studies conducted in the USA, patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to treatment with indacaterol 75 μg once-daily (n = 163 and 159) or matching placebo (n = 160 and 159) for 12 weeks. The primary variable was forced expiratory volume in 1 s measured 24 h post-dose after 12 weeks (reported elsewhere). This report describes secondary efficacy endpoints, including transition dyspnea index (TDI) and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores, and the percentages of patients with improvements of or above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥1 in TDI score and ≥4 in SGRQ score). Differences between indacaterol and placebo for TDI total score at week 12 were 1.23 (p < 0.001) and 0.45 (p = 0.16), with odds ratios for achieving the MCID of 2.19 (p = 0.002) and 1.58 (p = 0.065). SGRQ total score decreased (improved) from baseline by 5.8 and 4.9 units with indacaterol at week 12 (2.0 and 0.9 with placebo), with odds ratios for achieving the MCID of 1.80 (p = 0.024) and 1.71 (p = 0.031). Patients receiving indacaterol had statistically significant or numerical improvements in diary-derived symptom variables compared with placebo. Treatment with indacaterol 75 μg may provide useful improvements in patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Tiotropium versus long-acting beta-agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web-based clinical trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co-administration of standard COPD therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all-cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA-treated participants. There was a lower rate of non-fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost-effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease-related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long-acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost-effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol 150 and 300 µg in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients from six Asian areas including Japan: a 12-week, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of indacaterol, a novel inhaled once daily ultra long-acting β(2) -agonist was evaluated in COPD patients in six Asian countries/areas. This study was primarily designed to obtain the regulatory approval of indacaterol in Japan.

METHODS

Moderate-to-severe COPD patients were randomized to indacaterol 150 µg, indacaterol 300 µg or placebo once daily. Efficacy variables: trough FEV(1) (average of 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose values), health status (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire) and transition dyspnoea index at week 12. Safety/tolerability was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 347 patients were randomized (96.5% male, mean (SD) age 66.7 (8.38) years, post-bronchodilator FEV(1) % predicted: 53.7 (12.50)); 88.8% completed. The least squares means (LSM) trough FEV(1) at week 12 for indacaterol 150 µg, indacaterol 300 µg and placebo were 1.34 L, 1.37 L and 1.17 L, respectively, with differences versus placebo exceeding the prespecified minimal clinically important difference of 0.12 L (0.17 L and 0.20 L for indacaterol 150 µg and 300 µg, respectively, both P < 0.001). The week 12 LSM transition dyspnoea index score was statistically superior for both indacaterol doses versus placebo (differences of 1.30 and 1.26, P < 0.001; both exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of 1). At week 12, both indacaterol doses provided statistically significant (P ≤ 0.005) and clinically meaningful (≥4 units) improvements in LSM St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score versus placebo (differences: -4.8 and -5.7 units). Adverse events for indacaterol (49.1%, both doses) were lower than placebo (59.0%) and were mostly mild/moderate in severity; no deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Indacaterol provided clinically significant bronchodilation and improvements in dyspnoea and health status in Asian COPD patients.

Comparative efficacy of indacaterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Long-acting bronchodilators have been shown to improve multiple clinical outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) including lung function, symptoms, dyspnea, quality of life, and exacerbations. Indacaterol is a novel, inhaled, long-acting β2-agonist providing 24-hour bronchodilation with once-daily dosing. It is currently approved for the maintenance treatment of COPD to be administered as 150 or 300 μg once-daily doses as licensed in many countries and 75 μg as licensed in the US by means of a single-dose dry powder inhaler. The data from clinical development support a favorable safety and tolerability profile within the β2-agonist drug class, with no relevant issues identified. Current evidence indicates that indacaterol is suitable for use as first-line monotherapy in COPD patients with moderate disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage II) and beyond that do not require an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) as per GOLD guidelines, or in combination with an ICS in severe or very severe patients with repeated exacerbations. Data from trials with the novel once-daily β2-agonist, indacaterol, indicate superior bronchodilation and clinical efficacy over twice-daily long-acting β2-agonists and at least equipotent bronchodilation as once-daily tiotropium. Bronchodilators are central in the symptomatic management of COPD. It is likely that once-daily dosing of a bronchodilator would be a significant convenience and probably a compliance-enhancing advantage, leading to improved overall clinical outcomes in patients with COPD.