Role of combined indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide (QVA149) for the treatment of COPD in Japan

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) plus long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) versus LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are inhaled medications used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). When two classes of medications are required, a LAMA plus an ICS (LABA+ICS) were previously recommended within a single inhaler as the first-line treatment for managing stable COPD in people in high-risk categories. However, updated international guidance recommends a LAMA plus a LABA (LAMA+LABA). This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of LAMA+LABA versus LABA+ICS for treatment of people with stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an electronic search of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Search Portal, followed by handsearches. Two review authors screened the selected articles. The most recent search was run on 10 September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel or cross-over randomised controlled trials of at least one month's duration, comparing LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS for stable COPD. We included studies conducted in an outpatient setting and irrespective of blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Review Manager 5. Primary outcomes were: participants with one or more exacerbations of COPD; serious adverse events; quality of life, as measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score change from baseline; and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). We used the GRADE framework to rate our certainty of the evidence in each meta-analysis as high, moderate, low or very low.  MAIN RESULTS: This review updates the first version of the review, published in 2017, and increases the number of included studies from 11 to 19 (22,354 participants). The median number of participants per study was 700. In each study, between 54% and 91% (median 70%) of participants were males. Study participants had an average age of 64 years and percentage predicted FEV1 of 51.5% (medians of study means). Included studies had a generally low risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting biases. All but two studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, which had varying levels of involvement in study design, conduct, and data analysis. Primary outcomes The odds of having an exacerbation were similar for LAMA+LABA compared with LABA+ICS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; I2 = 61%; 13 studies, 20,960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The odds of having a serious adverse event were also similar (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15; I2 = 20%; 18 studies, 23,183 participants; high-certainty evidence). Participants receiving LAMA+LABA had a similar improvement in quality of life, as measured by the SGRQ, to those receiving LABA+ICS (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.36 to 0.21; I2 = 78%; 9 studies, 14,437 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) but showed a greater improvement in trough FEV1 (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.08; I2 = 73%; 12 studies, 14,681 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Secondary outcomes LAMA+LABA decreased the odds of pneumonia compared with LABA+ICS from 5% to 3% (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72; I2 = 0%; 14 studies, 21,829 participants; high-certainty evidence) but increased the odds of all-cause death from 1% to 1.4% (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.75; I2 = 0%; 15 studies, 21,510 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The odds of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of four or more points on the SGRQ were similar between LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.25; I2 = 77%; 4 studies, 13,614 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination LAMA+LABA therapy probably holds similar benefits to LABA+ICS for exacerbations and quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, for people with moderate to severe COPD, but offers a larger improvement in FEV1 and a slightly lower risk of pneumonia. There is little to no difference between LAMA+LABA and LAMA+ICS in the odds of having a serious adverse event. Whilst all-cause death may be lower with LABA+ICS, there was a very small number of events in the analysis, translating to a low absolute risk. Findings are based on moderate- to high-certainty evidence from heterogeneous trials with an observation period of less than one year. This review should be updated again in a few years.

Lung function, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of inhaled indacaterol maleate and acetate in asthma patients

Background

Indacaterol maleate delivered with the Breezhaler® inhalation device is a long-acting β₂-agonist approved for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the development of a once daily, inhaled fixed dose combination (FDC) of indacaterol, glycopyrronium bromide (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist), and mometasone furoate (an inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]) for the treatment of patients with asthma, the acetate salt of indacaterol is used instead of the maleate salt. Here, we investigated the lung function, pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of indacaterol maleate 150 μg once daily (o.d.) and indacaterol acetate 150 μg o.d. in comparison with placebo.

Methods

This was a randomised, double-blind, three-period crossover study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03257995) in patients with asthma on background ICS therapy. Patients with percent predicted pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume per second (FEV₁) ≥50% and ≤ 90% were included in the study. Patients received indacaterol maleate 150 μg o.d., indacaterol acetate 150 μg o.d., or placebo on top of stable background ICS in randomised sequence. Trough FEV₁ was assessed after 14 days of treatment. PK of indacaterol salts were assessed at steady state after 14 days of treatment; peak expiratory flow (PEF) rate and rescue medication use were collected with a combined PEF-meter/electronic diary throughout the study.

Results

Of the 54 adult patients (median age of 48 years), 51 patients completed the study. Both indacaterol salts demonstrated statistically significant improvements in trough FEV₁ of 186 mL (maleate) and 146 mL (acetate) compared with placebo (both P < 0.001). FEV₁ AUC_0-4h improved by 248 mL (maleate) and 245 mL (acetate), and PEF by 33 L/min (maleate) and 30.8 L/min (acetate) versus placebo. Systemic exposure of indacaterol (AUC_0-24h,ss and C_max,ss on Day 14) was comparable after administration of both salt forms. Both salt forms demonstrated a good safety profile and were well tolerated, with a difference in the reporting frequency of AEs of coughing (maleate, 23.5%; acetate, 0%).

Conclusions

In patients with asthma, indacaterol maleate and acetate elicited comparable and significant improvements in lung function compared with placebo and achieved comparable systemic exposure. Both indacaterol salts were safe and well tolerated.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03257995 June 06, 2017

Development and Validation of a Stability-Indicating Chromatographic Method for the Determination of Indacaterol Maleate with Glycopyrronium Bromide in Mixture

Introduction:

(COPD) Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease is a partially reversible and treatable lung disease, characterized by progressive limitation of airflow. It is one of the main causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide.

Methods:

An easy, precise and selective reversed-phase liquid chromatographic method, with stabilityindicating assay was established and validated for the determination of indacaterol maleate and glycopyrronium bromide in the mixture. In addition, a forced degradation study was performed for indacaterol maleate, comprised of hydrolysis by acid and base, degradation by oxidation and heat, and photo-degradation. Separation and forced degradation were done by isocratic elution using a reversed phase phenyl column and (methanol: phosphate buffer) at ratio (65:35, v/v) with 3.5 pH buffer as an eluent at 1 mL min-1 as a flow rate. Quantitation was accomplished using a UV detector at 210 nm.

Results:

The method showed good separation of glycopyrronium bromide, indacaterol maleate and its degradation products. Accuracy, linearity, and precision were acceptable over 10-160 µg mL-1 and 10- 80 µg mL-1 concentration range for indacaterol maleate and glycopyrronium bromide, respectively.

Conclusion:

The proposed method does not require any previously done separation steps, making it applicable for the analysis of the drugs under investigation in their pharmaceutically marketed preparations.

Fixed-Dose Combinations of Long-Acting Bronchodilators for the Management of COPD: Global and Asian Perspectives

Maintenance bronchodilator therapy with long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) is the cornerstone treatment for patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of LABA/LAMA are recommended for the majority of symptomatic COPD patients by global guidelines; regional guidelines such as the Japanese and Korean guidelines also provide similar recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA FDCs. This review comprehensively describes the latest clinical evidence from key studies on the efficacy and safety of four approved LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations: indacaterol/glycopyrronium, vilanterol/umeclidinium, formoterol/aclidinium, and olodaterol/tiotropium. Additionally, in this review we describe the rationale behind the use of LABA/LAMA FDC therapy, key findings from the preclinical and clinical trial evaluation of respective LABA and LAMA monocomponents, and the efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA FDCs. Special emphasis is placed on the clinical evidence for the monocomponents and LABA/LAMA FDCs from the Asian population. This detailed overview of the efficacy and safety of LABA/LAMA FDCs in global and Asian COPD patients is envisaged to provide a better understanding of the benefits of these therapies and to inform healthcare providers and patients on their appropriate use.Funding: Novartis Pharma K.K.

Pairwise combinations of chemical compounds that delay yeast chronological aging through different signaling pathways display synergistic effects on the extent of aging delay

We have recently discovered six plant extracts that delay yeast chronological aging. Most of them affect different nodes, edges and modules of an evolutionarily conserved network of longevity regulation that integrates certain signaling pathways and protein kinases; this network is also under control of such aging-delaying chemical compounds as spermidine and resveratrol. We have previously shown that, if a strain carrying an aging-delaying single-gene mutation affecting a certain node, edge or module of the network is exposed to some of the six plant extracts, the mutation and the plant extract enhance aging-delaying efficiencies of each other so that their combination has a synergistic effect on the extent of aging delay. We therefore hypothesized that a pairwise combination of two aging-delaying plant extracts or a combination of one of these plant extracts and spermidine or resveratrol may have a synergistic effect on the extent of aging delay only if each component of this combination targets a different element of the network. To test our hypothesis, we assessed longevity-extending efficiencies of all possible pairwise combinations of the six plant extracts or of one of them and spermidine or resveratrol in chronologically aging yeast. In support of our hypothesis, we show that only pairwise combinations of naturally-occurring chemical compounds that slow aging through different nodes, edges and modules of the network delay aging in a synergistic manner.

Efficacy and safety of direct switch to indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with moderate COPD: the CRYSTAL open-label randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Dual bronchodilation combining a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) is the preferred choice of treatment recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 guidelines for the management of patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The once-daily (q.d.) fixed-dose combination (FDC) of LABA, indacaterol 110 μg and LAMA, glycopyrronium 50 μg (IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d.) demonstrated superior improvements in lung function, dyspnoea and overall health status and better tolerability against LABA or LAMA monotherapies and combination of LABA and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in more than 11,000 patients with moderate-to-severe COPD in several randomised controlled clinical trials.

METHODS

The CRYSTAL study was the first, 12-week, randomised, open-label trial that evaluated the efficacy and safety of a direct switch from previous treatments to IND/GLY 110/50 μg q.d. on lung function and dyspnoea in patients with moderate COPD and a history of up to one exacerbation in the previous year. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to their background therapy and symptom scores and were randomised (3:1) to IND/GLY or to continue with their previous treatments.

RESULTS

The study included 4389 randomised patients, of whom 2160 were in groups switched to IND/GLY (intention-to-treat population). The effect of IND/GLY was superior to LABA + ICS on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1; treatment difference, Δ = +71 mL) and transition dyspnoea index (TDI; [Δ = 1.09 units]), and to LABA or LAMA on trough FEV1 (Δ = +101 mL) and a TDI (Δ = 1.26 units). Improvements in health status and lower rescue medication use were also observed with IND/GLY. The safety profile of the study medication was similar to that observed in previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

IND/GLY demonstrated superior improvements in lung function and dyspnoea after direct switch from previous treatments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01985334 .

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) plus long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) versus LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Three classes of inhaler medications are used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): long-acting beta-agonists (LABA), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). When two classes of medications are required, LAMA plus LABA (LAMA+LABA) and LABA plus ICS (LABA+ICS) are often selected because these combinations can be administered via a single medication device. The previous Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidance recommended LABA+ICS as the first-line treatment for managing stable COPD in high-risk people of categories C and D. However, the updated GOLD 2017 guidance recommends LAMA+LABA over LABA+ICS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of LAMA+LABA versus LABA+ICS for treatment of people with stable COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an electronic search of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (2 February 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (4 June 2016), and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Search Portal (4 June 2016), followed by a handsearch (5 June 2016). Two review authors screened and scrutinised the selected articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual randomised controlled trials, parallel-group trials, and cross-over trials comparing LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS for stable COPD. The minimum accepted trial duration was one month and trials should have been conducted in an outpatient setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (OR), and continuous data as mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence interval (CI) using Review Manager 5. Exacerbations were measured by counting the number of people experiencing one or more exacerbation.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies comprising 9839 participants in our quantitative analysis. Most studies included people with moderate to severe COPD, without recent exacerbations. One pharmaceutical sponsored trial that included only people with recent exacerbations was the largest study and accounted for 37% of participants. All but one study were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, thus we rated them as having a high risk of 'other bias'. The unsponsored study was at high risk of performance and detection bias, and possible selective reporting.Five studies recruited GOLD Category B participants, one study recruited Category D participants, two studies recruited Category A/B participants, and three studies recruited participants regardless of category. Follow-up ranged from 6 to 52 weeks.Compared to the LABA+ICS arm, the results for the pooled primary outcomes for the LAMA+LABA arm were as follows: exacerbations, OR 0.82 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.96, P = 0.01, I2 = 17%, low quality evidence); serious adverse events (SAE), OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.05, P = 0.18, I2 = 0, moderate quality evidence); St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score change from the baseline, MD -1.22 (95% CI -2.52 to 0.07, P = 0.06, I2 = 71%, low quality evidence); and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) change from the baseline, MD 0.08 L (95% CI 0.06 to 0.09, P < 0.0001, I2 = 50%, moderate quality evidence). Compared to the LABA+ICS arm, the results for the pooled secondary outcomes for the LAMA+LABA arm were as follows: pneumonia, OR 0.57 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.79, P = 0.0006, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence); all-cause death, OR 1.01 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.67, P = 0.88, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence); and SGRQ total score change from the baseline of 4 points or greater (the minimal clinically important difference for the SGRQ is 4 points), OR 1.25 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.44, P = 0.002, I2 = 0%, moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of COPD, LAMA+LABA has fewer exacerbations, a larger improvement of FEV1, a lower risk of pneumonia, and more frequent improvement in quality of life as measured by an increase over 4 units or more of the SGRQ. These data were supported by low or moderate quality evidence generated from mainly participants with moderate to severe COPD in heterogeneous trials with an observation period of less than one year. Our findings support the recently updated GOLD guidance.

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in Asian patients with COPD at a high risk of exacerbations: results from the FLAME study

Background

The FLAME study demonstrated that indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY), the fixed-dose combination of a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA, IND) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA, GLY), was superior to salmeterol/fluticasone combination (SFC) in preventing exacerbations in COPD patients with a high risk of exacerbations. In this study, we report a prespecified analysis of the efficacy and safety of IND/GLY versus SFC in Asian patients from the FLAME study.

Patients and methods

Patients from Asian centers with moderate-to-very severe COPD and ≥1 exacerbation in the previous year from the 52-week, randomized FLAME study were included. IND/GLY was compared versus SFC for effects on exacerbations, lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁] and forced vital capacity [FVC]), health status (St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]), rescue medication use, and safety.

Results

A total of 510 Asian patients (IND/GLY, n=250 or SFC, n=260) were included. Compared to the overall FLAME population, the Asian cohort had more males, a shorter duration of COPD, fewer patients using inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) at screening, fewer current smokers, and more patients with very severe COPD. IND/GLY significantly reduced the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (rate ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.58–0.97; P=0.027) and prolonged time to first moderate/severe exacerbation versus SFC (hazard ratio: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.59–1.01; P=0.055). Predose trough FEV₁ and FVC significantly improved in Asian patients (P<0.001). IND/GLY improved SGRQ for COPD (SGRQ-C score; P=0.006) and reduced rescue medication use (P=0.058) at week 52. Pneumonia incidence was 3.6% with IND/GLY and 7.7% with SFC (P=0.046).

Conclusion

In exacerbating Asian COPD patients, IND/GLY was more effective than SFC.

LABA/LAMA combination in COPD: a meta-analysis on the duration of treatment

When there are no randomised clinical trials directly comparing all relevant treatment options, an indirect treatment comparison via meta-analysis of the available clinical evidence is an acceptable alternative. However, meta-analyses may be very misleading if not adequately performed. Here, we propose and validate a simple and effective approach to meta-analysis for exploring the effectiveness of long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combinations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

14 articles with 20 329 patients (combinations n=9292; monocomponents n=11 037) were included in this study. LABA/LAMA combinations were always more effective than the monocomponents in terms of the improvement in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, transition dyspnoea index and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment. No significant publication bias was identified. Significant discrepancies with previous network meta-analyses have been found, with overall differences ranging from 26.7% to 43.3%.

Results from previous network meta-analyses were misleading because no adequate attention was given to formulating the review question, specifying eligibility criteria, correctly identifying studies, collecting appropriate information and deciding what it would be pharmacologically relevant to analyse. The real gradient of effectiveness of LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations remains an unmet medical need; however, it can be investigated indirectly using a high-quality meta-analytic approach.

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium in Japanese patients with COPD: a subgroup analysis from the SHINE study

BACKGROUND

COPD-related deaths are increasing in Japan, with ~5.3 million people at risk.

METHODS

The SHINE was a 26-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study that evaluated safety and efficacy of indacaterol (IND)/glycopyrronium (GLY) 110/50 μg once daily (od) compared with GLY 50 μg od, IND 150 μg od, open-label tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg od, and placebo. The primary end point was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at Week 26. Other key end points included peak FEV1, area under the curve for FEV1 from 5 minutes to 4 hours (FEV1 AUC5 min-4 h), Transition Dyspnea Index focal score, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score, and safety. Here, we present efficacy and safety of IND/GLY in the Japanese subgroup.

RESULTS

Of 2,144 patients from the SHINE study, 182 (8.5%) were Japanese and randomized to IND/GLY (n=42), IND (n=41), GLY (n=40), TIO (n=40), or placebo (n=19). Improvement in trough FEV1 from baseline was 190 mL with IND/GLY and treatment differences versus IND (90 mL), GLY (100 mL), TIO (90 mL), and placebo (280 mL) along with a rapid onset of action at Week 26. IND/GLY showed an improvement in FEV1 AUC5 min-4 h versus all comparators (all P<0.05). All the treatments were well tolerated and showed comparable effect on Transition Dyspnea Index focal score and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score. The effect of IND/GLY in the Japanese subgroup was consistent to overall SHINE study population.

CONCLUSION

IND/GLY demonstrated superior efficacy and comparable safety compared with its monocomponents, open-label TIO, and placebo and may be used as a treatment option for the management of moderate-to-severe COPD in Japanese patients.

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium in Japanese patients with COPD: Pooled analysis of SHINE and ARISE

BACKGROUND

To better evaluate the efficacy and safety of the indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) fixed-dose combination versus tiotropium in Japanese patients, a pooled data analysis was conducted from the SHINE and ARISE studies, which were part of the IND/GLY clinical trial program.

METHODS

Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were included in the analysis. Efficacy in terms of pre-dose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) at Week 12 and Week 24/26 (ARISE/SHINE) and FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose at Day 1, Week 12, and Week 24/26 was evaluated. Health status using the St. George׳s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, rescue medication use (number of puffs/day), safety, and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 340 patients (IND/GLY, n=161; IND, n=41; GLY, n=40; tiotropium, n=79; and placebo, n=19) were included in the analysis that focused on comparing IND/GLY versus tiotropium since they were included in both studies. At Week 12 and Week 24/26, pre-dose FEV₁ was significantly improved with IND/GLY compared with tiotropium (treatment differences=70mL and 80mL, respectively; both P≤0.001). FEV₁ at 30min and 60min post-dose, the SGRQ total score, and rescue medication use were more statistically significant with IND/GLY than with tiotropium for all assessed time-points. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs was similar between the IND/GLY- and tiotropium-treated groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to tiotropium, IND/GLY provided significant improvements in lung function, health status, and rescue medication use, while having a good safety profile in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.