Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

Real-World Effectiveness of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for COPD: Impact of Diabetes Comorbidity

Type 2 diabetes is a frequent comorbidity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, with the GOLD treatment recommendations asserting that the presence of diabetes be disregarded in the choice of treatment.

In a cohort of COPD patients with frequent exacerbations, initiators of single-inhaler triple therapy or dual bronchodilators were compared on the incidence of COPD exacerbation and pneumonia over one year, adjusted by propensity score weighting and stratified by type 2 diabetes.

The COPD cohort included 1,114 initiators of triple inhalers and 4,233 of dual bronchodilators (28% with type 2 diabetes). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation with triple therapy was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.86-1.25) among COPD patients with type 2 diabetes and 0.74 (0.65-0.85) in those without. The incidence of severe pneumonia was elevated with triple therapy among patients with type 2 diabetes (HR 1.77; 1.14-2.75).

Triple therapy in COPD is effective among those without, but not those with, type 2 diabetes. Future therapeutic trials in COPD should consider diabetes comorbidity.

Benefits of budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate on lung function and exacerbations of COPD: a post-hoc analysis of the KRONOS study by blood eosinophil level and exacerbation history

BACKGROUND

Japanese guidelines recommend triple inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and no concurrent asthma diagnosis who experience frequent exacerbations and have blood eosinophil (EOS) count ≥ 300 cells/mm3, and in patients with COPD and asthma with continuing/worsening symptoms despite receiving dual ICS/LABA therapy. These post-hoc analyses of the KRONOS study in patients with COPD and without an asthma diagnosis, examine the effects of fixed-dose triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) versus dual therapies on lung function and exacerbations based on blood EOS count - focusing on blood EOS count 100 to < 300 cells/mm3 - as a function of exacerbation history and COPD severity.

METHODS

In KRONOS, patients were randomized to receive treatments that included BGF 320/14.4/10 µg, glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (GFF) 14.4/10 µg, or budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BFF) 320/10 µg via metered dose inhaler (two inhalations twice-daily for 24 weeks). These post-hoc analyses assessed changes from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) over 12-24 weeks and moderate or severe COPD exacerbations rates over 24 weeks. The KRONOS study was not prospectively powered for these subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Among patients with blood EOS count 100 to < 300 cells/mm3, least squares mean treatment differences for lung function improvement favored BGF over BFF in patients without an exacerbation history in the past year and in patients with moderate and severe COPD, with observed differences ranging from 62 ml to 73 ml across populations. In this same blood EOS population, moderate or severe exacerbation rates were reduced for BGF relative to GFF by 56% in patients without an exacerbation history in the past year, by 47% in patients with moderate COPD, and by 50% in patients with severe COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

These post-hoc analyses of patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD from the KRONOS study seem to indicate clinicians may want to consider a step-up to triple therapy in patients with persistent/worsening symptoms with blood EOS count > 100 cells/mm3, even if disease severity is moderate and there is no recent history of exacerbations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT02497001 (registration date, 13 July 2015).

Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids from Patients with COPD; Effect on Exacerbation Frequency and Lung Function: A Systematic Review

Background

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy has been demonstrated to reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations. It should only be prescribed to COPD patients who are not adequately controlled by dual long-acting bronchodilator therapy and who have ≥2 exacerbations per year and a blood eosinophil count ≥300cells/µL. ICS therapy is widely prescribed outside guidelines to COPD patients, making ICS withdrawal an important consideration. This systematic review aims to provide an up-to-date analysis of the effect of ICS withdrawal on exacerbation frequency, change in lung function (FEV1) and to determine the proportion of COPD patients who resume ICS therapy following withdrawal.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies which compared ICS withdrawal with ICS continuation treatment were included. Cochrane Central, Web of Science, CINHAL, Embase and OVID Medline were searched. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quality assessment of RCTs was conducted using GRADE. Meta-analysis of post-hoc analyses of RCTs of ICS withdrawal, stratified by blood eosinophil count (BEC), was undertaken.

Results

Ten RCTs (6642 patients randomised) and 6 observational studies (160,029 patients) were included in the results. When ICS was withdrawn and long-acting bronchodilator therapy was maintained, there was no consistent difference in exacerbation frequency or lung function change between the ICS withdrawal and continuation trial arms. The evidence for these effects was of moderate quality. There was insufficient evidence to draw a firm conclusion on the proportion of patients who resumed ICS therapy following withdrawal (estimated range 12-93% of the participants).

Discussion

Withdrawal of ICS therapy from patients with COPD is safe and feasible but should be accompanied by maintenance of bronchodilation therapy for optimal outcomes.

Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol for the Management of COPD in a UK Primary Care Population: Real-World Use and Early Medication Success

Purpose

Real-life research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol (BGF) in routine COPD primary care management. We assessed the frequency of medication success among patients with COPD who initiated BGF using real-world data.

Patients and Methods

Patients with a recorded diagnostic COPD code who started BGF with ≥2 prescriptions within 90-days were identified in the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database and followed from first prescription until censoring at the end of follow-up (180-days), death, leaving database or end of data at 24/10/2022. The primary outcome was medication success at 90-days post-BGF initiation, defined as no major cardiac or respiratory event (ie no complicated COPD exacerbation, hospitalization for any respiratory event, myocardial infarction, new/hospitalized heart failure, and death) and no incidence of pneumonia. Medication success was also assessed at 180-days post-BGF initiation. Overall real-life medication success was claimed if the lower 95% confidence interval (CI) for the proportion of patients meeting the primary outcome was ≥70% (defined a priori).

Results

Two hundred eighty-five patients were included. Prior to BGF initiation, these patients often had severe airflow obstruction (mean ppFEV1: 54.5%), were highly symptomatic (mMRC ≥2: 77.9% (n = 205/263); mean CAT score: 21.7 (SD 7.8)), with evidence of short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) over-use (≥3 inhalers/year: 62.1%, n=179/285), repeat OCS prescriptions (≥2 courses/year: 33.0%, n = 95/285) and multiple primary care consultations (≥2 visits/year: 61.1%, n = 174/285). Overall, 39.6% of patients (n = 113/285) switched from previous triple therapies. Real-life medication success was achieved by 96.5% of patients (n = 275/285 [95% CI: 93.6, 98.3]) during 90-days treatment with BGF and by 91.8% (n = 169/184 [95% CI: 86.9, 95.4]) of patients at 180-days. The prescribed daily dose of SABA remained stable over the study period.

Conclusion

The majority of patients initiating BGF experienced real-life medication success reflecting the absence of severe cardiopulmonary events. These benefits were apparent after 90-days of treatment and sustained over 180-days.

Monitoring COPD patients: systemic and bronchial eosinophilic inflammation in a 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

High blood eosinophils seem to predict exacerbations and response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of our study was to prospectively evaluate for 2 years, blood and sputum eosinophils in COPD patients treated with bronchodilators only at recruitment.

METHODS

COPD patients in stable condition treated with bronchodilators only underwent monitoring of lung function, blood and sputum eosinophils, exacerbations and comorbidities every 6 months for 2 years. ICS was added during follow-up when symptoms worsened.

RESULTS

63 COPD patients were enrolled: 53 were followed for 1 year, 41 for 2 years, 10 dropped-out. After 2 years, ICS was added in 12/41 patients (29%) without any statistically significant difference at time points considered. Blood and sputum eosinophils did not change during follow-up. Only FEV1/FVC at T0 was predictive of ICS addition during the 2 year-follow-up (OR:0.91; 95% CI: 0.83-0.99, p = 0.03). ICS addition did not impact on delta (T24-T0) FEV1, blood and sputum eosinophils and exacerbations. After 2 years, patients who received ICS had higher blood eosinophils than those in bronchodilator therapy (p = 0.042). Patients with history of ischemic heart disease increased blood eosinophils after 2 years [p = 0.03 for both percentage and counts].

CONCLUSIONS

Blood and sputum eosinophils remained stable during the 2 year follow-up and were not associated with worsened symptoms or exacerbations. Almost 30% of mild/moderate COPD patients in bronchodilator therapy at enrollment, received ICS for worsened symptoms in a 2 year-follow-up and only FEV1/FVC at T0 seems to predict this addition. History of ischemic heart disease seems to be associated with a progressive increase of blood eosinophils.

Observational studies to emulate randomized trials: Some real-world barriers

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) forms the basis for drug approval by regulatory agencies. Observational studies using existing data from healthcare databases now also provide real-world evidence (RWE) in regulatory decision-making. Several initiatives are assessing the value of RWE by conducting observational studies that emulate published RCTs. While many RCTs are straightforward to emulate, others are challenging. We describe three RCT design aspects that pose challenges for observational studies. First are trials that enrol already treated subjects who must discontinue these treatments at the time of randomization, which can distort the comparison with observational studies. Second is the inclusion of a run-in phase, especially to exclude non-compliant subjects from the trial. Third are trials that evaluate the effect of weaning off treatment. In conclusion, future randomized trials that aim to be emulated by observational studies could consider study designs that allow emulation and thus provide valid and complementary RWE.

Bu-Fei Yi-Shen Granules Reduce Acute Exacerbations in Patients with GOLD 3-4 COPD: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease characterized by frequent acute exacerbations (AEs), especially in severe and very severe cases. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Bu-fei Yi-shen granules (BYGs) for COPD.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 348 COPD patients with GOLD 3-4 COPD. The patients were randomly assigned into experimental or control groups in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the experimental group were prescribed BYG, while those in the control group were administered a placebo, orally, twice daily, with 5 days on and 2 days off per week for 52 weeks. The outcomes included AEs, pulmonary function, clinical signs and symptoms, dyspnea scores (mMRC), quality of life scores, and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT).

Results

A total of 280 patients completed the trial, including 135 patients in the experimental group and 145 in the control group. Compared to the control group, significant differences were observed in frequencies of AEs (mean difference: -0.35; 95% CI: -0.61, -0.10; P = 0.006) and AE-related hospitalizations (-0.18; 95% CI: -0.36, -0.01; P = 0.04), 6MWD (40.93 m; 95% CI: 32.03, 49.83; P < 0.001), mMRC (-0.57; 95% CI: -0.76, -0.37; P < 0.001), total symptoms (-2.18; 95% CI: -2.84, -1.53; P < 0.001), SF-36 (11.60; 95% CI: 8.23, 14.97; P < 0.001), and mCOPD-PRO (-0.45; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.33; P < 0.001) after treatment. However, there were no significant differences in mortality, pulmonary function, and mESQ-PRO scores (P > 0.05). No obvious adverse events were observed.

Conclusion

BYG, as compared to a placebo, could significantly reduce the frequencies of AEs and AE-related hospitalizations for GOLD 3-4 COPD patients. Clinical symptoms, treatment satisfaction, quality of life, and exercise capacity improved. There was no significant improvement in mortality and pulmonary function.

2023 Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline on Pharmacotherapy in Patients With Stable COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the reality that airflow obstruction assessed by spirometry only partially reflects disease severity, a thorough clinical evaluation of the patient should include assessment of symptom burden and risk of exacerbations that permits the implementation of evidence-informed pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions. This guideline provides recommendations from a comprehensive systematic review with a meta-analysis and expert-informed clinical remarks to optimize maintenance pharmacologic therapy for individuals with stable COPD, and a revised and practical treatment pathway based on new evidence since the 2019 update of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Guideline. The key clinical questions were developed using the Patients/Population (P), Intervention(s) (I), Comparison/Comparator (C), and Outcome (O) model for three questions that focuses on the outcomes of symptoms (dyspnea)/health status, acute exacerbations, and mortality. The evidence from this systematic review and meta-analysis leads to the recommendation that all symptomatic patients with spirometry-confirmed COPD should receive long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy. Those with moderate to severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ≥ 2) and/or impaired health status (COPD Assessment Test ≥ 10) and a low risk of exacerbations should receive combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ẞ2-agonist (LAMA/LABA). For those with a moderate/severe dyspnea and/or impaired health status and a high risk of exacerbations should be prescribed triple combination therapy (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroids) azithromycin, roflumilast or N-acetylcysteine is recommended for specific populations; a recommendation against the use of theophylline, maintenance systemic oral corticosteroids such as prednisone and inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy is made for all COPD patients.

Real-world comparative effectiveness of three single-inhaler dual bronchodilators for the treatment of COPD

BACKGROUND

Single-inhaler dual bronchodilators are now recommended as initial treatment of COPD for patients with multiple exacerbations or with moderate or severe dyspnoea. It is unclear whether there are differences in effectiveness among commonly used dual bronchodilators.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of COPD patients, aged ≥40 years, treated during 2017-2020, from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a real-world practice setting. Inhaled corticosteroid-naïve patients initiating vilanterol-umeclidinium (VIL-UME) were compared with those initiating olodaterol-tiotropium (OLO-TIO) or indacaterol-glycopyrronium (IND-GLY) dual bronchodilators primarily on the incidence of moderate and severe COPD exacerbation over 1 year, and corresponding hazard ratios (HRs), after adjustment by propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

The cohort included 15 224 initiators of VIL-UME, 5536 initiators of OLO-TIO and 5059 initiators of IND-GLY. The HR of a moderate or severe exacerbation with VIL-UME was 0.91 (95% CI 0.85-0.97) compared with OLO-TIO and 0.96 (95% CI 0.89-1.03) compared with IND-GLY. The risk of severe exacerbation was not different for VIL-UME when compared with OLO-TIO (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86-1.26) and IND-GLY (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.28). All-cause mortality was lower with VIL-UME compared with IND-GLY (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98), but not compared with OLO-TIO (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.04).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, the three dual bronchodilator combinations were similarly effective on the risk of a severe exacerbation of COPD. However, the VIL-UME and IND-GLY combinations may confer slightly superior effectiveness than OLO-TIO on the risk of moderate or severe exacerbation. The potential lower mortality with VIL-UME warrants further investigation.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD

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

Clinical and economic outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease initiating maintenance therapy with tiotropium bromide/olodaterol or fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend dual long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs)/long-acting β₂agonists (LABAs) as maintenance therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Escalation to triple therapy (TT) (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroid) is conditionally recommended for patients with continued exacerbations on dual LAMA/ LABA therapy. Despite this guidance, TT use is widespread across COPD severities, which could impact clinical and economic outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare COPD exacerbations, pneumonia events, and disease-related and all-cause health care resource utilization and costs (in 2020 US dollars) in patients initiating fixed-dose combinations of either LAMA/ LABA (tiotropium/olodaterol [TIO + OLO]) or TT (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF + UMEC + VI]). METHODS: This retrospective observational study of administrative claims included patients with COPD aged 40 years or older initiating TIO + OLO or FF + UMEC + VI from June 2015 to November 2019. TIO + OLO and FF + UMEC + VI cohorts in the overall and maintenance-naive populations were 1:1 propensity score matched on baseline demographics, comorbidities, COPD medications, health care resource utilization, and costs. Multivariable regression compared clinical and economic outcomes up to 12 months in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO postmatched cohorts. RESULTS: After matching, there were 5,658 and 3,025 pairs in the overall and maintenance-naive populations, respectively. In the overall population, the risk of any (moderate or severe) exacerbation was 7% lower in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO initiators (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.86-1.0; P = 0.047). There was no difference in the adjusted risk of any exacerbation in the maintenance-naive population (aHR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.88-1.10). Pneumonia risk was not statistically different between cohorts in the overall (aHR = 1.12; 95% CI = 0.98-1.27) and maintenance-naive (aHR = 1.13; 95% CI = 0.95-1.36) populations. COPD- and/or pneumonia-related adjusted total annualized costs (95% CI) were significantly greater for FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall ($17,633 [16,661-18,604] vs $14,558 [13,709-15,407]; P < 0.001; differences [% of relative increase] = $3,075 [21.1%]) and maintenancenaive ($19,032 [17,466-20,598] vs $15,004 [13,786-16,223]; P < 0.001; $4,028 [26.8%]) populations, with significantly higher pharmacy costs with FF + UMEC + VI (overall: $6,567 [6,503-6,632] vs $4,729 [4,676-4,783]; P < 0.001; $1,838 [38.9%]; maintenance-naive: $6,642 [6,560-6,724] vs $4,750 [4,676-4,825]; P < 0.001; $1,892 [39.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: A lower risk of exacerbation was observed with FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall population but not among the maintenance-naive population. Patients with COPD initiating TIO + OLO had lower annualized costs than FF + UMEC + VI initiators in the overall and maintenance-naive populations. Thus, in the maintenance-naive population, initiation with dual LAMA/LABA therapy per practice guidelines can improve real-world economic outcomes. Study registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05127304). DISCLOSURES: The study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc (BIPI). To ensure independent interpretation of clinical study results and enable authors to fulfill their role and obligations under the ICMJE criteria, BIPI grants all external authors access to relevant clinical study data. In adherence with the BIPI Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data, scientific and medical researchers can request access to clinical study data after publication of the primary manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal, regulatory activities are complete and other criteria are met. Dr Sethi has received honoraria/ fees for consulting/speaking from Astra-Zeneca, BIPI, and GlaxoSmithKline. He has received consulting fees for serving on data safety monitoring boards from Nuvaira and Pulmotect. He has received consulting fees from Apellis and Aerogen. His institution has received research funds for his participation in clinical trials from Regeneron and AstraZeneca. Ms Palli was an employee of BIPI at the time the study was conducted. Drs Clark and Shaikh are employees of BIPI. Ms Buysman and Mr Sargent are employees and Dr Bengtson was an employee of Optum, which was contracted by BIPI to conduct this study. Dr Ferguson reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; grants from Novartis, Altavant, and Knopp; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Verona, Theravance, Teva, and GlaxoSmithKline; and personal fees from Galderma, Orpheris, Dev.Pro, Syneos, and Ionis outside the submitted work. He was a paid consultant for BIPI for this study. The authors received no direct compensation related to the development of the manuscript. BIPI was given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations.

Triple therapy in COPD: understanding the data

Effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapy on exacerbation risk and mortality in COPD is exaggerated in IMPACT and ETHOS trials from confounding by prior ICS discontinuation: effectiveness fades in analyses and studies with no prior ICS discontinuation https://bit.ly/3tOgNdW.