Spotlight on fluticasone furoate/vilanterol trifenatate for the once-daily treatment of asthma: design, development and place in therapy

iBCS: 3. A Biopharmaceutics Classification System for Orally Inhaled Drug Products

In this article, we specify for the first time a quantitative biopharmaceutics classification system for orally inhaled drugs. To date, orally inhaled drug product developers have lacked a biopharmaceutics classification system like the one developed to navigate the development of immediate release of oral medicines. Guideposts for respiratory drug discovery chemists and inhalation product formulators have been elusive and difficult to identify due to the complexity of pulmonary physiology, the intricacies of drug deposition and disposition in the lungs, and the influence of the inhalation delivery device used to deliver the drug as a respirable aerosol. The development of an inhalation biopharmaceutics classification system (iBCS) was an initiative supported by the Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI). The goal of the PQRI iBCS working group was to generate a qualitative biopharmaceutics classification system that can be utilized by inhalation scientists as a "rule of thumb" to identify desirable molecular properties and recognize and manage CMC product development risks based on physicochemical properties of the drug and the deposited lung dose. Herein, we define the iBCS classes quantitatively according to the dose number and permeability. The proposed iBCS was evaluated for its ability to categorize marketed inhaled drugs using data from the literature. The appropriateness of the classification of each drug was assessed based on published development, clinical and nonclinical data, and mechanistic physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling. The inhaled drug product development challenges for each iBCS classification are discussed and illustrated for different classes of marketed inhaled drugs. Finally, it is recognized that discriminatory laboratory methods to characterize regional lung deposition, dissolution, and permeability will be key to fully realizing the benefits of an iBCS to streamline and derisk inhaled drug development.

Pharmacotherapeutic management of asthma in the elderly patient

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome with variable phenotypes. Reversible airway obstruction and airway hyper-responsiveness often with an atopic or eosinophilic component is common in the elderly asthmatic. Asthma chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS), a combination of atopy-mediated airway hyper-responsiveness and a history of smoking or other environmental noxious exposures, can lead to some fixed airway obstruction and is also common in elderly patients. Little specific data exist for the treating the elderly asthmatic, thus requiring the clinician to extrapolate from general adult data and asthma treatment guidelines.

AREAS COVERED

A stepwise approach to pharmacotherapy of the elderly patient with asthma and ACOS is offered and the literature supporting the use of each class of drugs reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Inhaled, long-acting bronchodilators in combination with inhaled corticosteroids represent the backbone of treatment for the elderly patient with asthma or ACOS . Beyond these medications used as direct bronchodilators and topical anti-inflammatory agents, a stepwise approach to escalation of therapy includes multiple options such as oral leukotriene receptor antagonist or 5-lipoxygense inhibitor therapy, oral phosphodiesterase inhibitors, systemic corticosteroids, oral macrolide antibiotics and if evidence of eosinophilic/atopic component disease exists then modifying monoclonal antibody therapies.

The pharmacological management of asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS)

Introduction: Asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS) is a disease phenotype that shares T helper lymphocyte cell Th1/neutrophilic/non-Type-2 Inflammation pathways thought to be key in COPD and Th2/eosinophilic/Type-2 inflammatory pathways of asthma. The pharmacology of treating ACOS is challenging in severe circumstances.Areas covered: This review evaluates the stepwise treatment of ACOS using pharmacological treatments used in both COPD and asthma. The most common medications involve the same inhalers used to treat COPD and asthma patients. Advanced stepwise therapies for ACOS patients are based on patient characteristics and biomarkers. Very few clinical trials exist that focus specifically on ACOS patients.Expert opinion: After inhalers, advanced therapies including phosphodiesterase inhibitors, macrolides, N-acetylcysteine and statin therapy for those ACOS patients with a COPD appearance and exacerbations are available. In atopic ACOS patients with exacerbations, advanced asthma therapies (leukotriene receptor antagonists and synthesis blocking agents.) are used. ACOS patients with elevated blood eosinophil/IgE levels are considered for immunotherapy or therapeutic monoclonal antibodies blocking specific Th2/Type-2 interleukins or IgE. Symptom control, stabilization/improvement in pulmonary function and reduced exacerbations are the metrics of success. More pharmacological trials of ACOS patients are needed to better understand which patients benefit from specific treatments.Abbreviations: 5-LOi: 5-lipoxygenase inhibitor; ACOS: asthma - COPD overlap syndrome; B₂AR: Beta₂ adrenergic receptors; cAMP: cyclic adenosine monophosphate; cGMP: cyclic guanosine monophosphate; CI: confidence interval; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CRS : chronic rhinosinusitis; cys-LT: cysteinyl leukotrienes; DPI: dry powder inhaler; EMA: European Medicines Agency; FDA: US Food and Drug Administration; FDC: fixed-dose combination; FeNO: exhaled nitric oxide; FEV₁: forced expiratory volume in one second; FVC: forced vital capacity; GM-CSF: granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor; ICS : inhaled corticosteroids; IL: interleukin; ILC2: Type 2 innate lymphoid cells; IP₃: Inositol triphosphate; IRR: incidence rate ratio; KOLD: Korean Obstructive Lung Disease; LABA: long-acting B₂ adrenergic receptor agonist; LAMA: long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist; LRA: leukotriene receptor antagonist; LT: leukotrienes; MDI: metered-dose inhalers; M_N: M-subtype muscarinic receptors; MRA: muscarinic receptor antagonist; NAC: N-acetylcysteine; NEB: nebulization; OR: odds ratio; PDE: phosphodiesterase; PEFR: peak expiratory flow rate; PGD2: prostaglandin D2; PRN: as needed; RR: risk ratio; SABA: short-acting B₂ adrenergic receptor agonist; SAMA: short-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist; SDMI: spring-driven mist inhaler; Th1: T helper cell 1 lymphocyte; Th2: T helper cell 2 lymphocytes; TNF-α: tumor necrosis factor alpha; US : United States.

Comparing biologicals and small molecule drug therapies for chronic respiratory diseases: An EAACI Taskforce on Immunopharmacology position paper

Chronic airway diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), together with their comorbidities, bear a significant burden on public health. Increased appreciation of molecular networks underlying inflammatory airway disease needs to be translated into new therapies for distinct phenotypes not controlled by current treatment regimens. On the other hand, development of new safe and effective therapies for such respiratory diseases is an arduous and expensive process. Antibody-based (biological) therapies are successful in treating certain respiratory conditions not controlled by standard therapies such as severe allergic and refractory eosinophilic severe asthma, while in other inflammatory respiratory diseases, such as COPD, biologicals are having a more limited impact. Small molecule drug (SMD)-based therapies represent an active field in pharmaceutical research and development. SMDs expand biologicals' therapeutic targets by reaching the intracellular compartment by delivery as either an oral or topically based formulation, offering both convenience and lower costs. Aim of this review was to compare and contrast the distinct pharmacological properties and clinical applications of SMDs- and antibody-based treatment strategies, their limitations and challenges, in order to highlight how they should be integrated for their optimal utilization and to fill the critical gaps in current treatment for these chronic inflammatory respiratory diseases.

Anti-inflammatory duration of action of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol trifenatate in asthma: a cross-over randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone furoate/Vilanterol trifenatate (FF/VI) is an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonist combination with a prolonged bronchodilator duration of action. We characterised the time-course of onset and offset of airway anti-inflammatory action of FF/VI, as assessed by fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and compared this to the bronchodilator duration of action.

METHODS

A single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period, crossover study was undertaken in 28 steroid-naïve adults with asthma. Participants with an FEV1 ≥ 60% predicted, reversible airway disease, and FeNO > 40 ppb received FF/VI 100/25 mcg or placebo once daily for 14 days. FeNO and peak expiratory flow were measured twice-daily during treatment and during a 21-day washout period. FEV1 was measured for five days from treatment cessation. The primary outcome measure was FeNO change from baseline ratio for 21 days following treatment cessation.

RESULTS

In the 27 subjects who completed the study, median (range) baseline FeNO was 87 ppb (42-212). FF/VI 100/25 mcg reduced FeNO by day 3, ratio FF/VI versus placebo 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.61-0.86) with the maximum reduction occurring at day 14, 0.32 (0.27-0.37). Following cessation of treatment FeNO remained suppressed for 18 days, ratio on day 18 0.77 (0.59-1.00), whereas improvements in FEV1 and peak flow were maintained for 3 to 4 days post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-inflammatory duration of action of FF/VI is consistent with the high glucocorticoid receptor affinity and long lung retention of fluticasone furoate. The anti-inflammatory effect of FF/VI was of greater duration than its bronchodilator effect in adults with mild asthma. Funding GlaxoSmithKline (201499).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT02712047 .

Efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus twice-daily inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in patients with uncontrolled asthma: An open-label, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A variety of different fixed-dose combinations of inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂-agonists (ICS/LABA) are available for the treatment of asthma. The aim of this 24-week, open-label, multicenter, Phase IIIb randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI; 100/25 or 200/25 μg) compared with twice-daily fixed combinations of ICS/LABA (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol [FP/S] and budesonide/formoterol [BUD/F]) as maintenance therapy in patients with uncontrolled asthma treated with ICS alone.

METHODS

Adult patients with documented physician-diagnosed asthma ≥1 year with an Asthma Control Test (ACT) score ≥15 and < 20 were included. The primary study endpoint was change from baseline in ACT total score at Week 12.

RESULTS

Overall, 423 patients were randomized to receive study medication in France and Germany. The least-squares mean change (standard error) in ACT total score at Week 12 was 3.6 units with FF/VI and 2.8 with usual ICS/LABA, giving a treatment difference of 0.8 (95% confidence interval 0.1, 1.5; p = 0.033). Non-inferiority of FF/VI to usual ICS/LABA was confirmed at Weeks 6, 18 and 24. The observed safety profile for FF/VI in this study was in line with previous experience with FF/VI.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that, in a tightly controlled randomized controlled trial setting, once-daily FF/VI provides similar asthma control over 24 weeks to usual, twice-daily ICS/LABA in patients with asthma that is uncontrolled on ICS alone. FF/VI was well tolerated.

The Salford Lung Study: a pioneering comparative effectiveness approach to COPD and asthma in clinical trials

The Salford Lung Study (SLS) of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a practical, community-based, randomized, open-label pragmatic study on the efficacy and safety of the once-daily dry powder inhaler that combines the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF) with the long-acting beta₂ agonist vilanterol (VI). The asthma component of the SLS is not yet reported but the COPD component, done over a 12-month period, found a statistically significant 8.4% reduction in COPD exacerbations when compared to usual care. No differences in adverse events, including serious adverse events and pneumonia, were noted. The importance of real-world findings, such as those found in the SLS COPD trial with inhaled FF/VI, is discussed in comparison to classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with inhaled FF/VI in COPD patients. The real-world, community-based pragmatic RCT like the SLS provides additional generalizable data with direct clinical applicability and potential usefulness in the development of practice guidelines. The results from the SLS, along with those of large and small RCTs, are supportive of the use of once-daily FF/VI in COPD maintenance therapy.

Combination therapy for the treatment of pulmonary mold infections

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary mold infections are caused by ubiquitous organisms found in soil, water, and decaying vegetation, including Aspergillus spp., the Mucormycetes, hyaline molds, and dematiaceous (black) molds. Areas covered: These infections are often a challenge to diagnose and even more difficult to treat. Recently, antifungal combination therapy has emerged as a promising strategy to treat some forms of invasive mycoses, including pulmonary mold infections. Historically, this approach has been limited due to non-uniform interpretation criteria, variations in pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic properties of antifungals used in combination, and an inability to predict clinical success based on in vitro data and animal models. However, recent advances have helped mitigate some of these challenges. Expert commentary: In this paper, we explore what is known about the antifungal combination therapy in the treatment of pulmonary mold infections and explore how it may impact clinical practice. We pay particular attention to novel combinations and the challenges associated with the development of new antifungal agents.