Onset of Action of Formoterol versus Salmeterol via Dry Powder Inhalers in Moderate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Comparative effectiveness and safety of inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting β2-agonist fixed-dose combinations vs. long-acting muscarinic antagonist in bronchiectasis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in bronchiectasis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic medical records of bronchiectasis patients initiating ICS/LABA FDC or LAMA between 2007 and 2021. All bronchiectasis diagnoses were made by radiologists using high-resolution computed tomography.

RESULTS

Of the 1,736 patients, 1,281 took ICS/LABA FDC and 455 LAMA. Among the 694 propensity score matched patients, ICS/LABA FDC had comparable outcomes to LAMA, with HRs of 1.22 (95% CI 0.81-1.83) for hospitalized respiratory infection, 1.06 (95% CI 0.84-1.33) for acute exacerbation, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.66-1.02) for all-cause hospitalization. Beclomethasone/formoterol (BEC/FOR) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) led to a lower risk of acute exacerbation compared to fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL) (BEC/FOR HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; BUD/FOR HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.93). BEC/FOR resulted in lower risks of hospitalized respiratory infection (HR 0.48, 95% 0.26-0.86) and all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.55, 95% 0.37-0.80) compared to FLU/SAL.

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide important evidence on the effectiveness and safety of ICS/LABA FDC compared with LAMA for bronchiectasis. BEC/FOR and BUD/FOR were associated with better outcomes than FLU/SAL.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Different Types of Inhaled Long-Acting β2-Agonist Plus Inhaled Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist vs Inhaled Long-Acting β2-Agonist Plus Inhaled Corticosteroid Fixed-Dose Combinations in COPD A Propensity Score-Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite multiple available fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of inhaled long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) plus long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and LABAs plus inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for COPD, uncertainty remains regarding their comparative effects.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can comparative effectiveness and safety of LABA plus LAMA (LABA/LAMA) and LABA plus ICS (LABA/ICS) FDCs vary by different individual components of the dual combinations in COPD?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a new user, propensity score-inverse probability of treatment weighting cohort study to compare the effectiveness and safety of two frequently used LABA/LAMA FDCs (indacaterol plus glycopyrronium [IND/GLY] and vilanterol plus umeclidinium [VI/UMEC]) vs three commonly prescribed LABA/ICS FDCs (salmeterol plus fluticasone propionate [SAL/FP], formoterol fumarate plus budesonide [FF/BUD], and formoterol fumarate plus beclomethasone dipropionate [FF/BDP]) using the Taiwanese nationwide health-care claims from 2014 through 2017. The primary effectiveness outcome was the annual moderate to severe exacerbation rate, and safety outcomes included risks of severe pneumonia and cardiovascular disease requiring hospitalization. Weighted generalized linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Patients with COPD initiating IND/GLY and VI/UMEC showed an 11% (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.98) and 20% (IRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) reduced annual rate of moderate to severe exacerbations, respectively, than those initiating SAL/FP, but showed a similar rate as those initiating FF/BUD or FF/BDP. Both LABA/LAMA FDCs, compared with SAL/FP and VI/UMEC vs FF/BDP, were associated with a 27% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90) to 42% (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48-0.70) reduced pneumonia risk. Cardiovascular risk was comparable in five groups. An intraclass difference existed in rates of moderate to severe COPD exacerbation and risks of pneumonia among LABA/ICS FDCs, but not between LABA/LAMA FDCs.

INTERPRETATION

Both LABA/LAMAs vs SAL/FP are associated with a lower exacerbation rate and pneumonia risk, but exhibit similar effectiveness and safety outcomes compared with FF/BDP or FF/BUD, suggesting that comparative effects may differ by individual components of the dual therapies in COPD.

Formoterol for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Bronchodilators, including long-acting β2-agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists, are the mainstay for treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to prevent exacerbations or reduce symptoms. Formoterol is a highly selective and potent β2-agonist that relaxes airway smooth muscle to significantly improve lung function. Inhaled formoterol works within 5 minutes of administration and provides improvements in spirometry measurements over 12 hours. The lipophilicity of formoterol allows it to form a depot within the smooth muscle to provide a prolonged duration of action. Following therapeutic doses, plasma concentrations are very low or undetectable. Determination of the pharmacokinetics of formoterol following high-dose administration to healthy volunteers revealed that the drug was rapidly absorbed and excreted unchanged in the urine with a half-life of 10 hours. Inhaled formoterol, as monotherapy or in combination with other agents, is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Clinical studies have demonstrated improvements in lung function and COPD symptoms, particularly dyspnea; reductions in the risk of exacerbations; and improvement in patients' health status. The adverse event profile of inhaled formoterol is similar to that of placebo, with few adverse cardiovascular events. Formoterol is a valuable bronchodilator used in the maintenance treatment of COPD. This review describes the mechanism of action, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of inhaled formoterol. It also reviews the results of large, randomized, controlled clinical trials that evaluated the use of formoterol as monotherapy and in combination with inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting muscarinic antagonists, and triple therapy regimens in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe COPD.

Why use long acting bronchodilators in chronic obstructive lung diseases? An extensive review on formoterol and salmeterol

Long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists, formoterol and salmeterol, represent a milestone in the treatments of chronic obstructive lung diseases. Although no specific indications concerning the choice of one molecule rather than another are provided by asthma and COPD guidelines, they present different pharmacological properties resulting in distinct clinical employment possibilities. In particular, salmeterol has a low intrinsic efficacy working as a partial receptor agonist, while formoterol is a full agonist with high intrinsic efficacy. From a clinical perspective, in the presence of low β2-adrenoceptors availability, like in inflamed airways, a full agonist can maintain its bronchodilatory and non-smooth muscle activities while a partial agonist may be less effective. Furthermore, formoterol presents a faster onset of action than salmeterol. This phenomenon, combined with the molecule safety profile, leads to a prompt amelioration of the symptoms, and allows using this drug in asthma as an "as needed" treatment in patients already on regular treatment. The fast onset of action and the full agonism of formoterol need to be considered in order to select the best pharmacological treatment of asthma and COPD.

Extrafine beclomethasone/formoterol compared to fluticasone/salmeterol combination therapy in COPD

Background

The study evaluated the efficacy of beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate (BDP/FF) extrafine combination versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/S) combination in COPD patients.

Methods

The trial was a 12-week multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double dummy study; 419 patients with moderate/severe COPD were randomised to BDP/FF 200/12 μg or FP/S 500/50 μg twice daily. The primary objective was to demonstrate the equivalence between treatments in terms of Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) score and the superiority of BDP/FF in terms of change from pre-dose in the first 30 minutes in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV₁). Secondary endpoints included lung function, symptom scores, symptom-free days and use of rescue medication, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, six minute walking test and COPD exacerbations.

Results

BDP/FF was equivalent to FP/S in terms of TDI score and superior in terms of FEV₁ change from pre-dose (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between treatments in secondary outcome measures, confirming overall comparability in terms of efficacy and tolerability. Moreover, a clinically relevant improvement (>4 units) in SGRQ was detected in the BDP/FF group only.

Conclusion

BDP/FF extrafine combination provides COPD patients with an equivalent improvement of dyspnoea and a faster bronchodilation in comparison to FP/S.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01245569