Tiotropium bromide inhalation powder: a review of its use in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Effects of co-application of tiotropium bromide and traditional Chinese medicine on patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a muilticenter, randomized, controlled trial study

Background

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a common, preventable, and treatable disease. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has shown promising potential in COPD treatment. and we conducted a multi-center RCT to evaluate the effectiveness of TCM-based therapy in stable COPD patients.

Methods

In this multicenter, double-blind RCT, a total of 200 patients were supposed to be assigned to either trial or control group randomly. Both groups received Tiotropium (18 μg) from month 0 to month 12. Trial group received additional TCM granules, while control group received a placebo from month 0 to month 6. Symptom assessment, total effective rate, lung function measurements, hospitalization rates, and quality of life were evaluated at month 0, month 6, and month 12. Adverse events were assessed at month 12.

Results

Of the initial 105 patients (aged 40-80) who completed the study, 51 were in trial group and 54 were in control group. At month 6, significant differences were observed between two groups in total effective rate (p = 0.020), sputum score (p = 0.047), changes in FVC% (p = 0.047) and FEV1 (p = 0.046). At month 12, significant differences were observed in sputum score (p = 0.020), FVC (p = 0.042), and change in FEV1 (p = 0.013). Compared to baseline, they both demonstrated improvements in symptoms, acute exacerbation, lung function, quality of life, and exercise tolerance.

Conclusion

TCM treatment effectively improved total effective rate, sputum symptom, FVC%, FEV1, and exhibited prolonged efficacy in improving sputum symptoms and FEV1 in stable COPD patients.Clinical trial registration:https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=6029 identifier ChiCTR-TRC-13003531.

The history, current state and perspectives of aerosol therapy

Nebulization is a very effective method of drug administration. This technique has been popular since ancient times when inhalation of plants rich in tropane alkaloids with spasmolytic and analgesic effects was widely used. Undoubtedly, the invention of anasthesia in the 19th century had an influence on the development of this technique. It resulted in the search for devices that facilitated anasthesia such as pulveriser or hydronium. From the second half of the 21st century, when the first DPI and MDI inhalers were launched, the constant development of aerosol therapy has been noticed. This is due to the fact that nebulization, compared with other means of medicinal substance application (such as oral and intravenous routes of administration), is safer and it exhibits a positive dose/efficacy ratio connected to the reduction of the dose. It enables drugs administration through the lung and possesses very fast onset action. Therefore, various drugs prescribed in respiratory diseases (such as corticosteroids, β-agonists, anticholinergics) are present on the market in a form of an aerosol.

Inspiratory Flow Parameters Through Dry Powder Inhalers in Healthy Volunteers and Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Device Resistance Does Not Limit Use in COPD

Introduction

Achieving correct inhalation technique through an inhaler to ensure effective drug delivery is key to managing symptoms in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, many patients struggle to use their inhalers correctly, with the resultant reduction in therapeutic benefit. Consequently, appropriate inhaler choice is important to maximize clinical benefit. The primary objective of this study was to characterize inspiratory flow parameters across two Easyhaler^® inhalers and the HandiHaler^® inhaler in patients with COPD and healthy volunteers.

Methods

In this randomized, open-label, crossover study, subjects (100 patients with COPD; 100 healthy volunteers) were trained to perform inhalations of placebo powder via two variants of Easyhaler and placebo capsules via the HandiHaler inhalers. Subjects then performed three placebo inhalations through each inhaler in a random sequence. Inspiratory flow parameters were assessed, including peak inspiratory flow (PIF), for each inhaler. A parallel sub-study was conducted in patients with COPD from the main study to assess correct use of the inhalers, patient’s preference, ability to learn to use the inhalers, and the feasibility of the In-Check Dial device to measure PIF values.

Results

Mean PIF rates and inspiratory volumes through the three inhalers were similar between patients with COPD and healthy volunteers, and all subjects achieved the 30 L/min PIF required for effective use of Easyhaler. Almost 70% of the 88 patients enrolled in the sub-study used the Easyhaler and HandiHaler inhalers without errors. The Easyhaler was preferred by 51% of patients, while 25% favored the HandiHaler. Teaching the use of both inhalers to almost 70% of patients was very easy. The In-Check Dial PIF values and those obtained via spirometry were strongly correlated (p<0.0001) for all three inhalers.

Conclusion

The respiratory performance of patients with COPD does not appear to be a limiting factor in the use of Easyhaler.

Drivers of absolute systemic bioavailability after oral pulmonary inhalation in humans

There are few studies in humans dealing with the relationship between physico-chemical properties of drugs and their systemic bioavailability after administration via oral inhalation route (Fpulm). Getting further insight in the determinants of Fpulm after oral pulmonary inhalation could be of value for drugs considered for a systemic delivery as a result of poor oral bioavailability, as well as for drugs considered for a local delivery to anticipate their undesirable systemic effects. To better delineate the parameters influencing the systemic delivery after oral pulmonary inhalation in humans, we studied the influence of physico-chemical and permeability properties obtained in silico on the rate and extent of Fpulm in a series of 77 compounds with or without marketing approval for pulmonary delivery, and intended either for local or for systemic delivery. Principal component analysis (PCA) showed mainly that Fpulm was positively correlated with Papp and negatively correlated with %TPSA, without a significant influence of solubility and ionization fraction, and no apparent link with lipophilicity and drug size parameters. As a result of the small sample set, the performance of the different models as predictive of Fpulm were quite average with random forest algorithm displaying the best performance. As a whole, the different models captured between 50 and 60% of the variability with a prediction error of less than 20%. Tmax data suggested a significant positive influence of lipophilicity on absorption rate while charge apparently had no influence. A significant linear relationship between Cmax and dose (R² = "0.79) highlighted that Cmax was primarily dependent on dose and absorption rate and could be used to estimate Cmax in humans for new inhaled drugs.

Healthcare Resource Utilization, Exacerbations, and Readmissions Among Medicare Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease After Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Therapy Initiation with Soft Mist versus Dry Powder Inhalers

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often managed with inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), yet real-world data on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) by inhaler type are lacking. This study compared HRU after LAMA initiation with a soft mist inhaler (SMI) versus a dry powder inhaler (DPI).

Patients and Methods

Inclusion criteria were COPD diagnosis, age ≥40 years, LAMA initiation (index date = first LAMA SMI or DPI claim 9/1/14—6/30/18), and Medicare Advantage enrollment 1 year pre-index (baseline) to ≥30 days post-index (follow-up). Patients were followed to the earliest of discontinuation, switch, disenrollment, 1 year, or study end (7/31/18). Exclusion criteria were asthma, cystic fibrosis, or lung cancer diagnoses, unavailable demographics, multiple index LAMAs, or baseline LAMA use. Cohorts (SMI or DPI) were balanced on baseline characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Outcomes included per patient per month (PPPM) COPD-related HRU encounters, and exacerbations (defined as moderate [ambulatory visit with corticosteroid or antibiotic within ±7 days] or severe [emergency visit or inpatient admission]); and 30-day readmissions following COPD-related hospitalizations.

Results

After weighting, cohorts (SMI [n=5360] and DPI [n=22,880]) were similar in age (72 and 73 years, respectively), gender (both 52% female), and COPD severity score (31.3 and 31.5, respectively). Cohorts had similar counts of follow-up HRU encounters. However, the SMI cohort had fewer (mean ± standard deviation) COPD-related exacerbations (0.054±0.082 vs DPI cohort 0.059±0.088 PPPM, p<0.001) overall. Moreover, the SMI cohort had fewer severe exacerbations (0.030±0.058 vs DPI: 0.034±0.065 PPPM, p<0.001). Hospitalizations among SMI patients had a lower adjusted odds of readmission versus hospitalizations among DPI patients (odds ratio: 0.656, 95% confidence interval= 0.460, 0.937; p=0.020).

Conclusion

SMI initiators had significantly fewer COPD-related exacerbations than DPI initiators. In addition, lower odds of readmissions were observed following COPD-related hospitalizations among the SMI cohort, as compared with the DPI cohort.

Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Suffer from Worse Periodontal Health-Evidence from a Meta-Analysis

Background and Objective: It is widely accepted that there is an association between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and periodontitis. However, whether the periodontal status of the COPD patients is worse than that of the non-COPD subjects is seldom assessed. The findings currently available are inconsistent, some even contradictory. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the periodontal health status of COPD patients and non-COPD subjects. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched for all of the eligible studies which comparing the periodontal status between COPD patients and non-COPD subjects. The results of periodontal parameters in each study were extracted and the mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each parameter were calculated to determine their overall effects. Results: In total, 14 studies involving 3348 COPD patients and 20612 non-COPD controls were included and 9 periodontal indexes were analyzed. The mean differences (95% CIs) between COPD and non-COPD subjects for probing depth, clinical attachment loss, level of alveolar bone loss, plaque index, oral hygiene index, bleeding index, bleeding on probing, gingival index, and remaining teeth were 0.261 (0.020-0.501), 0.480 (0.280-0.681), 0.127 (0.000-0.254), 0.226 (0.043-0.408), 0.802 (0.326-1.279), 0.241 (-0.106 to 0.588), 6.878 (5.489-8.266), 0.364 (0.036-0.692), and -3.726 (-5.120 to -2.331), respectively. Conclusion: In summary, this meta-analysis demonstrates that the COPD patients suffer from worse periodontal health status, indicated by deeper periodontal pockets, high level of clinical attachment loss, worse oral hygiene, more inflammation and bleeding in the gingival tissue, and lower number of remaining teeth. Nevertheless, considering the limitations in our meta-analysis, more high-quality, and well-designed studies focusing on the periodontal health of the COPD patients are required to validate our conclusion.

The Role of Tiotropium+Olodaterol Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in the Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Bronchodilator therapy is central to the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and are recommended as the preferred treatment by the Global Obstructive Lung Disease Initiative (GOLD). Long acting anti-muscarinics (LAMA) and long acting β₂ agonists (LABA) are both more effective than regular short-acting drugs but many patients remain symptomatic despite monotherapy with these drugs. Combination therapy with LAMA and LABA increases the therapeutic benefit while minimizing dose-dependent side effects of long-acting bronchodilator therapy. The TOviTO programme has investigated the benefits of treatment with a combination of tiotropium and olodaterol administered via a single inhaler. Tiotropium+olodaterol 5/5 μg significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) area under the curve from 0 to 3 hours, trough FEV₁ health status and breathlessness versus the mono-components and placebo. Tiotropium+olodaterol 5/5 μg also increased endurance time and reduced dynamic hyperinflation during constant work rate cycle ergometry. On the basis of these and other studies the 2017 GOLD report recommends escalating to dual bronchodilator therapy in patients in groups B and C if they remain symptomatic or continue to have exacerbations and as initial therapy for patients in group D.

Muscarinic Receptor Antagonists

Parasympathetic activity is increased in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma and appears to be the major reversible component of airway obstruction. Therefore, treatment with muscarinic receptor antagonists is an effective bronchodilator therapy in COPD and also in asthmatic patients. In recent years, the accumulating evidence that the cholinergic system controls not only contraction by airway smooth muscle but also the functions of inflammatory cells and airway epithelial cells has suggested that muscarinic receptor antagonists could exert other effects that may be of clinical relevance when we must treat a patient suffering from COPD or asthma. There are currently six muscarinic receptor antagonists licenced for use in the treatment of COPD, the short-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (SAMAs) ipratropium bromide and oxitropium bromide and the long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) aclidinium bromide, tiotropium bromide, glycopyrronium bromide and umeclidinium bromide. Concerns have been raised about possible associations of muscarinic receptor antagonists with cardiovascular safety, but the most advanced compounds seem to have an improved safety profile. Further beneficial effects of SAMAs and LAMAs are seen when added to existing treatments, including LABAs, inhaled corticosteroids and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors. The importance of tiotropium bromide in the maintenance treatment of COPD, and likely in asthma, has spurred further research to identify new LAMAs. There are a number of molecules that are being identified, but only few have reached the clinical development.

Why choose tiotropium for my patient? A comprehensive review of actions and outcomes versus other bronchodilators

PURPOSE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are leading causes of morbidity and mortality. This narrative review provides an appraisal of the pharmacological and clinical characteristics of tiotropium in COPD and asthma, and examines how these compare with other long-acting bronchodilators. The evidence base is placed into context by relating it to factors affecting clinicians' choice of therapy.

MAIN FINDINGS

Desirable attributes of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) maintenance therapy include effective pharmacological bronchodilation, improved lung function, exacerbation efficacy, and positive effects on symptom control, exercise capacity and quality of life across a broad patient population. Tolerability and convenience of use are also important for patient well-being and treatment adherence. Tiotropium shows higher affinity for muscarinic receptors than ipratropium, and prolonged binding to the M₃ receptor compared with other LAMAs. In COPD, tiotropium has demonstrated improved lung function and exacerbation prevention compared with placebo or long-acting β₂-agonists, similar exacerbation efficacy to other LAMAs, and enhanced symptom control and health status versus placebo. UniTinA-asthma^® showed the benefits of add-on tiotropium in patients with uncontrolled mild to moderate and severe asthma. Tiotropium is well tolerated, with an incidence of adverse events similar to placebo, except for known infrequent side effects of anticholinergics. Tiotropium HandiHaler^® and Respimat^® augment inhaler choice in COPD.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

With over 10 years' prescribing history and 50 million patient-years of use, tiotropium has the benefit of a more extensive clinical evidence base than other long-acting bronchodilators, with demonstrated efficacy and safety in COPD and symptomatic asthma.

Tiotropium formulations and safety: a network meta-analysis

Tiotropium is now delivered via two different inhaler devices: the original Handihaler 18 μg once daily, which uses a powder formulation; and the newer Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) 5 μg once daily. It has been questioned whether the two devices can be assumed to have the same safety profile, although the TIOSPIR trial showed that tiotropium when administered via Respimat SMI 5 μg is not less safe than Handihaler 18 μg. Therefore, we have carried out a safety evaluation of tiotropium Handihaler 18 µg versus tiotropium Respimat SMI 5 µg and 2.5 µg, via systematic review and network meta-analysis of the currently available clinical evidence. The results of our meta-analysis with an extremely large number of patients analysed demonstrate that the safety profile of tiotropium HandiHaler is generally superior to that of tiotropium Respimat SMI, although no statistical difference was detected between these two devices. However, the SUCRA analysis favoured tiotropium Respimat SMI with regards to serious adverse events (AEs). We do not believe that using Respimat SMI rather that HandiHaler exposes patients to higher risks of real AEs. Rather, we believe that there may be a different cardiovascular (CV) response to muscarinic receptors blockage in individual patients. Therefore, it will be essential to make all possible efforts to proactively identify patients at increased risk of CV AEs when treated with tiotropium or another antimuscarinic drug.

Bronchodilator efficacy of 18 μg once-daily tiotropium inhalation via Discair® versus HandiHaler® in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label, Phase IV trial

PURPOSE

To compare the bronchodilator efficacy of 18 μg once-daily tiotropium inhalation administered via Discair^® versus HandiHaler^® in adults with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-eight patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were enrolled in this randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label, Phase IV non-inferiority trial. Patients were randomly assigned to a test group (n=29, inhalation with Discair) or a reference group (n=29, inhalation with HandiHaler). The primary efficacy parameter was the average maximum change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁, in L). Change in forced vital capacity (FVC, in L), %FEV₁ and %FVC, the standardized area under the response-time curve (AUC) for the absolute change in FEV₁ and FVC, time to onset and peak of response, and safety data were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The test inhaler was non-inferior to the reference inhaler in terms of maximum change in FEV₁ at 24 h (unadjusted change: 0.0017 L [95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.0777, 0.0812]; change adjusted for time to reach maximum change in FEV₁ and smoking in pack-years: 0.0116 L [95% CI: -0.0699, 0.0931]), based on a non-inferiority margin of 0.100 L. There were also no significant differences between the two groups in maximum change in FVC value from baseline (0.3417 L vs 0.4438 L, P=0.113), percent change from baseline (22.235 vs 20.783 for FEV₁, P=0.662; 16.719 vs 20.337 for FVC, P=0.257), and AUC_{0-24 h} (2.949 vs 2.833 L for FEV₁, P=0.891; 2.897 vs 4.729 L for FVC, P=0.178). There were no adverse events, serious adverse events, or deaths.

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that the Discair was non-inferior to the HandiHaler. More specifically, these devices had similar clinical efficacy in terms of time-dependent response over 24 h for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

A systematic review of comparative studies of tiotropium Respimat® and tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: does inhaler choice matter?

BACKGROUND

In many countries worldwide, the long-acting anticholinergic drug tiotropium is available as a dry powder formulation delivered by means of the HandiHaler® inhalation device and as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler. Tiotropium HandiHaler® is a single-dose, dry powder, breath-actuated inhaler that provides delivered doses and lung deposition of tiotropium that are, over a wide range, not influenced by the severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium Respimat® is a propellant-free, multi-dose inhaler that delivers a metered dose of medication as a fine, slow-moving, long-lasting soft mist, independently of patient inspiratory effort. The high fine-particle fraction of droplets produced by the Respimat® inhaler optimizes the efficiency of drug delivery to the lungs.

METHODS

To help inform the choice of tiotropium inhaler for prescribers and patients, this systematic review summarizes the available pharmacokinetic, efficacy and safety data from comparative studies of tiotropium Respimat® and tiotropium HandiHaler® in COPD, focusing on the licensed once-daily doses of 5 and 18 μg, respectively. Data sources reviewed include publications and abstracts identified from database searches.

RESULTS

Published evidence from comparative studies suggests that tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg and tiotropium HandiHaler® 18 μg provide similar clinical outcomes in patients with COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that physicians can base their decision about an inhaler for tiotropium on factors other than efficacy or safety. These could be patient preference for a particular inhaler, ease of use and the efficiency of drug delivery, with the aim of optimizing adherence and clinical outcomes with long-term tiotropium maintenance therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus glycopyrronium in moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Canada, Spain, Sweden, and the UK

OBJECTIVES

Tiotropium (TIO), Spiriva® Handihaler®, is a well-established bronchodilator, LAMA (long acting muscarinic antagonist), for the treatment of moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Clinical evidence from the SPARK trial suggests that TIO is superior to glycopyrronium (GLY), Seebri® Breezhaler®, in terms of severe exacerbations. This modeling study assessed the cost-effectiveness of TIO versus GLY for Canada (CAN), Spain (ESP), Sweden (SWE), and the UK, making use of this new clinical evidence.

METHODS

A Markov cohort model, with moderate to very severe (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease II-IV) COPD patients, was populated with efficacy data from the Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT) and SPARK trials as well as costs, utilities, and epidemiological data relevant for each country. Treatment efficacy was modeled as improvements in lung function, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and as a lowering of the risk of exacerbations (rate of exacerbations). Risks of exacerbations differed between cohorts based on data from SPARK. Health and cost outcomes were simulated over an approximate lifetime horizon, starting from the age of 65 years. Robustness of results was validated in deterministic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Over the lifetime horizon, patients treated with TIO accumulated -623 (CAN), 1,066 (ESP), 1,137 (SWE), and -169 (UK), respectively, in incremental costs (€2014). TIO generated better health outcomes compared to GLY in all countries, 0.21 (CAN), 0.25 (ESP), 0.23 (SWE), and 0.23 (UK) in incremental QALYs. The cost per QALY gained was found to be €4,281 and €1,137 for ESP and SWE, respectively, while TIO was found to be cost saving in CAN and the UK. The results were mainly driven by the relative risk of severe exacerbations found in SPARK (GLY/TIO relative risk: 1.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.97, P=0.025).

CONCLUSION

The results from this study show that TIO is a cost-effective treatment compared to GLY in moderate to very severe COPD. The cost per QALY is well below the existing implicit and explicit willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Treatment options for moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

The appropriate drug management of COPD is still based on the use of bronchodilators, possibly associated with an anti-inflammatory agent. However, there are still fundamental questions that require clarification to optimise their use and major unmet clinical needs that must be addressed.

AREAS COVERED

The advances obtained with the pharmacological options currently consolidated and the different approaches that are often used in an attempt to respond to unmet therapeutic needs are reviewed Expert opinion: In view of the unsatisfactory status of current treatments for COPD, there is an urgent need for alternative and more effective therapeutic approaches that will help to relieve patient symptoms and affect the natural course of COPD, inhibiting chronic inflammation and reversing the disease process or preventing its progression. However, new pharmacologic options have proved difficult to develop. Therefore, it is mandatory to optimize the use of the treatment options at our disposal. However, there are still fundamental questions regarding their use, including the step-up and step-down pharmacological approach, that require clarification to optimise the use of these drugs. It is likely that phenotyping COPD patients would help in identifying the right treatment for each COPD patient and improve the effectiveness of therapies.

One-year mortality associated with COPD treatment: a comparison of tiotropium and long-acting beta2-agonists in three Italian regions: results from the OUTPUL study

Purpose

Long‐acting bronchodilators, i.e. beta‐2‐agonists (LABA) and tiotropium are commonly used in COPD treatment. Choice of a specific agent is based on effectiveness and safety. Evidence yields controversial results with respect to mortality. The present study compared one‐year mortality associated to treatment with tiotropium versus LABA.

Methods

A population‐based cohort study using data from Italian health information systems was performed. Patients aged 45+ years, discharged with COPD diagnosis in 2006–2009 were identified. Through record linkage with drug claims, patients who received a first prescription of LABA or tiotropium within 6 months after discharge were enrolled. The main analysis was restricted to naïve users (no prior use of either LABA or tiotropium). We used ‘intention to treat’ (ITT) and ‘as treated’ (AT) approaches. We followed patients for a maximum of 12 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated by Cox regression including quintiles of propensity score. In sensitivity analysis patients receiving tiotropium + LABA combination were included in the tiotropium group.

Results

Among the 33 891 enrolees, 28% were exposed to Tio, 56% to LABA, 16% to both. Overall mean age was 74 years and the mortality rate was 122/1000 person‐years (py) at the ITT analysis and 108/1000 py at the AT analysis. The adjusted HR for tiotropium only compared with LABA only was 1.06 (95%CI: 0.94–1.20) at the ITT analysis and 1.00 (95%CI: 0.93–1.08) at the AT analysis. Results were robust in sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

In this real‐world study use of tiotropium was not associated with an increased risk of one‐year mortality compared with LABA. © 2016 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Tiotropium Respimat®: A Review of Its Use in Asthma Poorly Controlled with Inhaled Corticosteroids and Long-Acting β2-Adrenergic Agonists

Tiotropium bromide (Spiriva®) solution for inhalation via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler is a long-acting anticholinergic agent approved in the EU for the add-on maintenance treatment of asthma in adults currently receiving maintenance therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) (≥800 µg budesonide per day or equivalent) and a long-acting β2-adrenergic agonist (LABA) and who have experienced at least one severe exacerbation in the previous year. Tiotropium Respimat® added to maintenance ICS/LABA treatment significantly improved lung function after 6 months' treatment and extended the time to the first asthma exacerbation in two well-designed, replicate, phase III trials in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite treatment with an ICS (≥800 µg budesonide/day or equivalent) and a LABA. Tiotropium Respimat® was also associated with a reduced incidence of severe asthma exacerbations and an increase in the median time to asthma worsening. The drug was well tolerated in asthma patients throughout 48 weeks' treatment, with a generally similar incidence of serious adverse events in tiotropium Respimat® and placebo treatment groups. Thus, in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite receiving high-dose ICS and a LABA, tiotropium Respimat® provides a valuable treatment option.

Safety and efficacy of tiotropium in patients switching from HandiHaler to Respimat in the TIOSPIR trial

OBJECTIVES

This post hoc analysis of TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) evaluated safety and exacerbation efficacy in patients with stable (≥ 2 months) use of tiotropium HandiHaler 18 µg (HH18) prior to study entry, to evaluate whether there was a difference in risk for patients who switched from HH18 to tiotropium Respimat 2.5 µg (R2.5) or 5 g (R5).

SETTING

TIOSPIR (n=17,135) was an international, Phase IIIb/IV, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, event-driven trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients from TIOSPIR with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and postbronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced vital capacity ≤ 0.70, receiving HH18 before study entry, were analysed (n=2784).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to once-daily tiotropium R2.5 (n=914), R5 (n=918) or HH18 (n=952) for 2-3 years.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

time to death (safety) and time to first COPD exacerbation (efficacy).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

number of exacerbations and time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in all groups. Respimat had a similar mortality risk versus HH18 (vital status follow-up, HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.87; 0.64 to 1.17; R5: 0.79; 0.58 to 1.07) with no significant differences in the risk and rates of exacerbations and severe exacerbations across treatment groups. Risk of MACE and fatal MACE was similar for Respimat versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI MACE R2.5: 0.73; 0.47 to 1.15; R5: 0.69; 0.44 to 1.08; fatal MACE R2.5: 0.57; 0.27 to 1.19; R5: 0.67; 0.33 to 1.34). Overall risk of a fatal event (on treatment) was lower for R5 versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.78; 0.55 to 1.09; R5: 0.62; 0.43 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis indicates that it is safe to switch patients from tiotropium HandiHaler to tiotropium Respimat, and that the efficacy is maintained over the switch.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01126437; Post-results.

Long-acting Inhaled Bronchodilator and Risk of Vascular Events in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Taiwan Population

A combination of long-acting anticholinergic agents (LAACs) and long-acting β2-adrenergic receptor agonist (LABA) is effective in improving lung function in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with monotherapy. However, evidence on whether this combination increases the incidence of stroke or other cardiac events remains sparse. The objective of the present study was to investigate the incidence of stroke and other cardiovascular diseases in COPD patients treated with LAAC, LABA, or a combination of the 2.We conducted this population-based study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (1997-2008), identifying COPD patients and their prescribed medication from the International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision codes 490-492 or 496. A multivariate Cox proportional-hazards model was used to compare the risk of stroke and other cardiovascular diseases over the 11-year period after treatment with LAAC or LABA only or in combination.Of the 596 COPD patients (mean age 70 y), 196 were treated with LAAC, 318 with LABA, and 82 were treated with a combination. The overall incidence of stroke (8.53%) significantly increased in the combination group compared with LAAC (2.04%) or LABA (1.26%) only. In the Cox regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio over the 11-year survey period for stroke in patients treated with the combination compared with LABA only was 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.99) and for LAAC, it was 0.31 (95% confidence interval, 0.02-2.32).This cohort study using a large health insurance database showed that treating patients with COPD, with a combination of LAAC and LABA, may be associated with an increased hazard of stroke compared with treatment with either agent alone. We should be particularly cautious about comedication of LAAC and LABA in patients with COPD.

Safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat versus HandiHaler in patients naive to treatment with inhaled anticholinergics: a post hoc analysis of the TIOSPIR trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who were naive to anticholinergics before the TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) trial may reflect patients seen in practice, in particular in primary care. In addition, investigating safety in these patients avoids the potential bias in patients who previously received anticholinergics and may be tolerant of their effects.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patients naive to anticholinergic therapy who were treated with tiotropium Respimat 2.5 or 5 μg had different safety and efficacy outcomes than patients treated with tiotropium HandiHaler 18 μg.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of patients who were not receiving anticholinergics before TIOSPIR (N=6,966/17,135) was conducted. Primary end points were risk of death from any cause and risk of COPD exacerbation. Secondary outcomes included severe exacerbation and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Additional analysis of exacerbations was carried out in anticholinergic-naive patients with moderate (GOLD II) disease.

RESULTS

Anticholinergic-naive patients had less severe disease than the total TIOSPIR population. Discontinuations because of anticholinergic side effects were infrequent (0.9% overall). Similar to the primary study, patients in the tiotropium Respimat groups had no difference in the risk of death or risk of any or severe exacerbation than patients treated with tiotropium HandiHaler. Risk of MACE was similar across the Respimat and HandiHaler groups. Rates of exacerbations in the subgroup of patients with moderate disease were similar across the Respimat and HandiHaler groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium Respimat and HandiHaler have similar safety and efficacy profiles in patients who are naive to anticholinergic therapy.

Combined bronchodilators (tiotropium plus olodaterol) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a respiratory disease characterized by a progressive decline in lung function, is considered to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators, such as long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), are the cornerstone of maintenance therapy for patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD. For patients not sufficiently controlled on a single long-acting bronchodilator, a combination of different bronchodilators has shown a significant increase in lung function. Tiotropium, a once-daily dosing LAMA, demonstrated sustained improvements in lung function as well as improved health-related quality of life, reduced exacerbations, and increased survival without altering the rate of decline in the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) with fairly tolerable side effects. Olodaterol is a once-daily dosing LABA that has proven to be effective in improving lung function, reducing rescue medication use, and improving dyspnea and health-related quality of life, as well as improving exercise endurance with an acceptable safety profile. The combination of olodaterol and tiotropium provided additional improvements in lung function greater than monotherapy with each drug alone. Several well-designed randomized trials confirmed that the synergistic effect of both drugs in combination was able to improve lung function and health-related quality of life without a significant increase in adverse effects. The objective of this paper is to review available evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of tiotropium, olodaterol, and their combination in patients with COPD.

Tiotropium Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ inhaler: a review of its use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The long-acting anticholinergic agent tiotropium bromide (Spiriva(®)) is available as a solution for inhalation via Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler in the EU and various other countries for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). With the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler there is improved lung deposition of drug (allowing a reduced dosage compared with tiotropium HandiHaler(®)), the delivered drug dose is independent of inspiratory effort and the prolonged duration of the aerosol cloud should make the co-ordination of actuation and inhalation easier. In patients with COPD, tiotropium Respimat(®) improved lung function, COPD exacerbations, health-related quality of life and dyspnoea and was at least as effective as tiotropium HandiHaler(®). Tiotropium Respimat(®) was generally well tolerated in patients with COPD, with anticholinergic adverse events among the most commonly reported adverse events. In the TIOSPIR trial, tiotropium Respimat(®) was noninferior to tiotropium HandiHaler(®) in terms of all-cause mortality, and the risk of cardiovascular mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events did not significantly differ between the two treatment groups. In conclusion, tiotropium Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler is a useful option for the treatment of patients with COPD.

Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus usual care and glycopyrronium in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Sweden

Background

Tiotropium (TIO) is a well-established bronchodilator, LAMA (long-acting anticholinergic), for the treatment of moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Clinical evidence suggests that tiotropium is superior to usual non-LAMA care (UC) but may also have benefits compared to other LAMAs in preventing and limiting the effects of severe exacerbations. The primary objective of this study was to undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis of adding tiotropium to usual care versus usual care alone. A secondary objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium compared to glycopyrronium (GLY), another LAMA. The study was conducted with a Swedish setting in mind.

Methods

A Markov cohort model, incorporating the effects of exacerbations, was populated with efficacy data from the UPLIFT and SPARK trials and epidemiological data relevant for a Swedish patient population. Treatment efficacy of tiotropium was modelled as a lowering of the risk of exacerbations and as a slow-down of overall disease progression. The model followed patients over their remaining life-time.

Results

The base case analysis showed that patients treated with tiotropium gained 0.07 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared to usual care alone at an incremental cost of SEK 15,041, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of SEK 224,850. Compared to glycopyrronium the QALY gained was estimated to 0.23 QALYs in favour of tiotropium at an incremental cost of SEK 2423, yielding a cost per QALY gained of SEK 10,456. The results were mainly driven by differences in the risk of severe exacerbations.

Conclusion

At the current implicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) per QALY threshold in Sweden, the results from this study indicate that tiotropium is a highly cost-effective intervention when added to usual non-LAMA care in the treatment of moderate to very severe COPD in Sweden. In addition, tiotropium is a highly cost-effective intervention when compared to glycopyrronium monotherapy.

Clinical role of dual bronchodilation with an indacaterol-glycopyrronium combination in the management of COPD: its impact on patient-related outcomes and quality of life

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the result of persistent and progressive pathologic abnormalities in the small airways, most often associated with alveolar loss. Smoking cessation is the most effective intervention to slow down the progression of COPD. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators are prescribed for the symptomatic relief at any stage of disease severity. For patients whose COPD cannot be not sufficiently controlled with long-acting bronchodilator monotherapy, international guidelines suggest the possibility of associating a long-acting beta₂ agonist (LABA) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), ie, dual bronchodilation. This is not a new concept as the combination of short-acting agents has been popular in the past. In recent years, several fixed-dose combinations containing a LAMA and a LABA in a single inhaler have been approved by regulatory authorities in several countries. Among the new LAMA/LABA combinations, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg (QVA149) has been shown in a series of clinical trials to be as safe as the single components and placebo, and more effective than placebo and the single components with regard to lung function, symptoms, and patient-oriented outcomes. Furthermore, QVA149 achieved better bronchodilation than salmeterol 50 µg/fluticasone 500 µg twice daily. Compared with tiotropium, a well-recognized treatment for COPD, the percentage of patients that exceed the minimal clinical important difference for dyspnea and health-related quality of life measurements was superior with QVA149. Other patient-oriented outcomes, such as daily symptoms, night-time awakening, and use of rescue medication consistently favored QVA149. Finally, QVA149 was significantly superior to LAMAs for reducing all types of exacerbation. In conclusion, several years after introduction of dual bronchodilation, the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 µg/glycopyrronium 50 µg in a single inhaler for once-daily administration via the Breezhaler^® device (QVA149) has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective treatment for COPD patients.

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.

Combination therapy with indacaterol and glycopyrronium bromide in the management of COPD: an update on the evidence for efficacy and safety

The international guidelines on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend inhaled bronchodilators for maintenance treatment of the disease. These drugs include β2-agonists and muscarinic antagonists, which are both available as short-acting agents (to be used as needed for dyspnea) and long-acting agents. To the latter belong salmeterol and formoterol (long-acting β2-agonists) and indacaterol, vilanterol and olodaterol (very long-acting β2-agonist) as β2-agonists, and tiotropium, aclidinium and glycopyrronium bromide as long-acting muscarinic antagonists. The efficacy and safety of indacaterol and glycopyrronium as monotherapies has been demonstrated in several controlled trials. However, in some patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, symptoms are poorly controlled by bronchodilator monotherapy; in these cases the addition of a second bronchodilator from a different pharmacological class may be beneficial. Here we review the evidence from published randomized trials concerning the efficacy and safety of the once-daily fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combining indacaterol and glycopyrronium.

Tiotropium HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) in COPD: a pooled safety analysis

INTRODUCTION

Tiotropium is prescribed for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) or Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ inhaler (5 μg once daily). The recent TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat(®) (TIOSPIR™) study demonstrated that both exhibit similar safety profiles. This analysis provides an updated comprehensive safety evaluation of tiotropium(®) using data from placebo-controlled HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials.

METHODS

Pooled analysis of adverse event (AE) data from tiotropium HandiHaler(®) 18 μg and Respimat(®) 5 μg randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, clinical trials in patients with COPD (treatment duration ≥4 weeks). Incidence rates, rate ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) trials, both together and separately.

RESULTS

In the 28 HandiHaler(®) and 7 Respimat(®) trials included in this analysis, 11,626 patients were treated with placebo and 12,929 with tiotropium, totaling 14,909 (12,469 with HandiHaler(®); 2,440 with Respimat(®)) patient-years of tiotropium exposure. Mean age was 65 years, and mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 1.16 L (41% predicted). The risk (RR [95% CI]) of AEs (0.90 [0.87, 0.93]) and of serious AEs (SAEs) (0.94 [0.89, 0.99]) was significantly lower in the tiotropium than in the placebo group (HandiHaler(®) and Respimat(®) pooled results), and there was a numerically lower risk of fatal AEs (FAEs) (0.90 [0.79, 1.01]). The risk of cardiac AEs (0.93 [0.85, 1.02]) was numerically lower in the tiotropium group. Incidences of typical anticholinergic AEs, but not SAEs, were higher with tiotropium. Analyzed separately by inhaler, the risks of AE and SAE in the tiotropium groups remained lower than in placebo and similarly for FAEs.

CONCLUSION

This analysis indicates that tiotropium is associated with lower rates of AEs, SAEs, and similar rates of FAEs than placebo when delivered via HandiHaler(®) or Respimat(®) (overall and separately) in patients with COPD.

Efficacy and safety of combining olodaterol Respimat(®) and tiotropium HandiHaler(®) in patients with COPD: results of two randomized, double-blind, active-controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Combining bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action may improve efficacy and reduce risk of side effects compared to increasing the dose of a single agent in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We investigated this by combining two long-acting bronchodilators: once-daily muscarinic antagonist tiotropium and once-daily β2-agonist olodaterol.

METHODS

Two replicate, double-blind, randomized, 12-week studies (ANHELTO 1 [NCT01694771] and ANHELTO 2 [NCT01696058]) evaluated the efficacy and safety of olodaterol 5 μg once daily (via Respimat(®)) combined with tiotropium 18 μg once daily (via HandiHaler(®)) versus tiotropium 18 μg once daily (via HandiHaler(®)) combined with placebo (via Respimat(®)) in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Primary efficacy end points were area under the curve from 0-3 hours of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 AUC0-3) and trough FEV1 after 12 weeks (for the individual trials). A key secondary end point was health status by St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (combined data set).

RESULTS

Olodaterol + tiotropium resulted in significant improvements over tiotropium + placebo in FEV1 AUC0-3 (treatment differences: 0.117 L [P<0.001], ANHELTO 1; 0.106 L [P<0.001], ANHELTO 2) and trough FEV1 (treatment differences: 0.062 L [P<0.001], ANHELTO 1; 0.040 L [P=0.0029], ANHELTO 2); these were supported by secondary end points. These effects translated to improvements in SGRQ total scores (treatment difference -1.85; P<0.0001). The tolerability profile of olodaterol + tiotropium was similar to tiotropium monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

These studies demonstrated that olodaterol (Respimat(®)) and tiotropium (HandiHaler(®)) provided bronchodilatory effects above tiotropium alone in patients with COPD. In general, both treatments were well tolerated.

Information for physicians and pharmacists about drugs that might cause dry mouth: a study of monographs and published literature

BACKGROUND

Over three-quarters of the older population take medications that can potentially cause dry mouth. Physicians or pharmacists rarely inform patients about this adverse effect and its potentially severe damage to the teeth, mouth and general health.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to (1) identify warnings in the literature about dry mouth associated with the most frequently prescribed pharmaceutical products in Canada; and (2) consider how this information might be obtained by physicians, pharmacists and patients.

METHODS

Monographs on the 72 most frequently prescribed medications during 2010 were retrieved from the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS, a standard drug information reference for physicians and pharmacists), the National Library of Medicine's 'DailyMed' database, directly from the manufacturers, and from a systematic search of biomedical journals.

RESULTS

The CPS provided monographs for 43% of the medications, and requests to manufacturers produced the remaining monographs. Mentions of dry mouth were identified in 61% of the products (43% amongst CPS monographs; an additional 43% amongst manufacturers' monographs; 7% in the DailyMed database and 7% from biomedical journals); five medications had contradictory reports in different monographs.

CONCLUSION

Nearly two-thirds (61%) of the most commonly prescribed medications can cause dry mouth, yet warnings about this adverse effect and its potentially serious consequences are not readily available to physicians, pharmacists, dentists or patients.

The pharmacological approach to the elderly COPD patient

The elderly patient (65 years and older) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be a challenge to the clinician. This begins with the correct and early diagnosis, the assessment of disease severity, recognizing complicating comorbidities, determining the burden of symptoms, and monitoring the frequency of acute exacerbations. Comprehensive management of COPD in the elderly patient should improve health-related quality of life, lung function, reduce exacerbations, and promote patient compliance with treatment plans. Only smoking cessation and oxygen therapy in COPD patients with hypoxemia reduce mortality. Bronchodilators, corticosteroids, methylxanthines, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors, macrolide antibiotics, mucolytics, and pulmonary rehabilitation improve some outcome measures such as spirometry measures and the frequency of COPD exacerbations without improving mortality. International treatment guidelines to reduce symptoms and reduce the risk of acute exacerbations exist. Relief of dyspnea and control of anxiety are important. The approach to each patient is best individualized. Earlier use of palliative care should be considered when traditional pharmacotherapy fails to achieve outcome measures and before consideration of end-of-life issues.

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.

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor X-ray structures: potential implications for drug development

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists are widely used as bronchodilating drugs in pulmonary medicine. The therapeutic efficacy of these agents depends on the blockade of M3 muscarinic receptors expressed on airway smooth muscle cells. All muscarinic antagonists currently used as bronchodilating agents show high affinity for all five muscarinic receptor subtypes, thus increasing the likelihood of unwanted side effects. Recent X-ray crystallographic studies have provided detailed structural information about the nature of the orthosteric muscarinic binding site (the conventional acetylcholine binding site) and an 'outer' receptor cavity that can bind allosteric (non-orthosteric) drugs. These new findings should guide the development of selective M3 receptor blockers that have little or no effect on other muscarinic receptor subtypes.

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.

Use of tiotropium in patients with COPD aged 80 years and older

The purpose of this study was to examine clinical features and treatment modality approaches in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), particularly in those aged 80 years and older. Using databases available at Mito Kyodo General Hospital (Japan), the medical records of COPD patients between April 2009 and December 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. The patient population was divided into three age groups; less than 70 years (the <70 age group), between 70–79 years (the 70–79 age group) and 80 years or older (the ≥80 age group). Demographic data, as well as the efficacy and safety of tiotropium, were compared between the three groups. Patients in the ≥80 age group comprised 35.6% of the study population with COPD (n=174). The ≥80 and 70–79 age groups demonstrated a higher proportion of comorbid disease compared with the <70 age group. A subjective improvement of dyspnea on effort as well as no additional adverse effects were observed in the ≥80 age group, similar to the other two age groups. However, higher incidence of acute exacerbation of COPD in patients aged ≥80 years old was found, particularly in those with comorbid disease. The efficacy and safety of tiotropium in COPD patients in the ≥80 age group were almost identical to patients <80 years old, however, physicians must be cautious with acute exacerbation of COPD in the extremely elderly population with comorbid disease.

The effects of nociceptin peptide (N/OFQ)-receptor (NOP) system activation in the airways

The heptadecapeptide nociceptin/orphanin FQ (N/OFQ) is the endogenous ligand for the N/OFQ peptide (NOP) receptor. It is cleaved from a larger precursor identified as prepronociceptin (ppN/OFQ). NOP is a member of the seven transmembrane-spanning G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) family. ppN/OFQ and NOP receptors are widely distributed in different human tissues. Asthma is a complex heterogeneous disease characterized by variable airflow obstruction, bronchial hyper-responsiveness and chronic airway inflammation. Limited therapeutic effectiveness of currently available asthma therapies warrants identification of new drug compounds. Evidence from animal studies suggests that N/OFQ modulates airway contraction and inflammation. Interestingly up regulation of the N/OFQ-NOP system reduces airway hyper-responsiveness. In contrast, inflammatory cells central to the inflammatory response in asthma may be both sources of N/OFQ and respond to NOP activation. Hence paradoxical dysregulation of the N/OFQ-NOP system may potentially play an important role in regulating airway inflammation and airway tone. To date there is no data on N/OFQ-NOP expression in the human airways. Therefore, the potential role of N/OFQ-NOP system in asthma is unknown. This review focuses on its physiological effects within airways and potential value as a novel asthma therapy.

The future of combining inhaled drugs for COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality globally, and its prevalence is projected to continue to increase owing to trends in smoking. Treatment of COPD has evolved from the initial adaptations of drugs and treatment strategies successfully used in asthma into more specific pharmacological strategies following global guidelines. Bronchodilating anticholinergic and beta-2-stimulating agents and anti-inflammatory corticosteroid drugs delivered by inhalators are the mainstay of COPD treatment. Despite significant progress, current pharmacotherapies neither fully alleviate the airway obstruction in COPD, nor reverse the progressive nature of the disease. This review discusses inhalation therapies which have recently become clinically available or are being developed, with focus on combination therapies. There is accumulating evidence that the combination of two or all three drug classes, triple therapy, is superior to single drug therapy. Several fixed combinations of both currently available and novel molecules will be launched for clinical use within the next few years. Also, improved understanding of subgroups within the clinical spectrum of COPD, is likely to offer new potentials to improve COPD care.