The Role of Nebulized Therapy in the Management of COPD: Evidence and Recommendations

Prevalence and Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the Gulf Countries with a Focus on Inhaled Pharmacotherapy

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a preventable, progressive disease and the third leading cause of death worldwide. The epidemiological data of COPD from Gulf countries are very limited, as it remains underdiagnosed and underestimated. Risk factors for COPD include tobacco cigarette smoking, water pipe smoking (Shisha), exposure to air pollutants, occupational dusts, fumes, and chemicals. Inadequate treatment of COPD leads to worsening of disease. The 2024 GOLD guidelines recommend use of inhaled bronchodilators, corticosteroids, and adjunct therapies for treatment and management of COPD patients based on an individual assessment of the severity of symptoms and risk of exacerbations. This article reviews COPD pharmacotherapy in the Gulf countries and explores the role of nebulization in the management of COPD in this region. Methods: To review the COPD pharmacotherapy in the Gulf Countries, literature search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar databases (before December 2022), using search terms such as COPD, nebulization, inhalers/inhalation, aerosols, and Gulf countries. Relevant articles from the reference list of identified studies were reviewed. Consensus statements, expert opinion, and other published review articles were included. Results: In the Gulf countries, pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), dry powder inhalers (DPIs), soft mist inhalers, and nebulizers are used for drug delivery to COPD patients. pMDIs and DPIs are most prone to errors in technique and other common device handling errors. Nebulization is another mode of inhalation drug delivery, which is beneficial in certain patient populations such as the elderly and patients with cognitive impairment, motor or neuromuscular disorders, and other comorbidities. Conclusion: There is no major difference between Gulf countries and rest of the world in the approach to management of COPD. Nebulizers should be considered for patients who have difficulties in accessing or using MDIs and DPIs, irrespective of geographical location.

Interchanging Reusable and Disposable Nebulizers Used with Home-Based Compressors May Result in Inconsistent Dosing: A Laboratory Investigation with Device Combinations Supplied to the US Healthcare Environment

INTRODUCTION

Reusable nebulizer-compressor combinations deliver inhaled medications for patients with chronic lung diseases. On hospital discharge, the patient may take home the disposable nebulizer that was packaged and combine it with their home compressor. Though this practice may reduce waste, it can increase variability in medication delivery. Our study compared several reusable and disposable nebulizers packaged with compressor kits used in the US. We included a common disposable hospital nebulizer that may not be supplied with popular home kits but may be brought home after a hospitalization or emergency department visit. We focused on fine droplet mass < 4.7 μm aerodynamic diameter (FDM<4.7 μm), associated with medication delivery to the airways of the lungs.

METHODS

We evaluated the following nebulizer-compressor combinations (n = 5 replicates): 1. OMBRA® Table Top Compressor with MC 300® reusable and Airlife™ MistyMax™ 10® disposable nebulizer, 2. Sami-the-Seal® compressor with SideStream® reusable and disposable nebulizers and Airlife™ MistyMax 10™ disposable nebulizer, 3. VIOS® compressor with LC Sprint® reusable, and VixOne® and Airlife™ MistyMax™ disposable nebulizers, 4. Innospire® Elegance® compressor with SideStream® reusable and disposable nebulizers and Airlife™ MistyMax 10™ disposable nebulizer, 5. Willis-the-Whale® compressor with SideStream® reusable and disposable nebulizers and Airlife™ MistyMax 10™ disposable nebulizer, 6. Pari PRONEB® Max compressor with LC Sprint® reusable and Airlife™ MistyMax 10™ disposable nebulizer. We placed a 3-ml albuterol solution (0.833 mg/ml) in each nebulizer. A bacterial/viral filter was attached to the nebulizer mouthpiece to capture emitted medication, with the filter exit coupled to a simulator of a tidal breathing adult (rate = 10 cycles/min; Vt = 600 ml; I/E ratio = 1:2). The filter was replaced at 1-min intervals until onset of sputter. Droplet size distributions (n = 5 replicates/system) were determined in parallel by laser diffractometry.

RESULTS

Cumulative FDM<4.7 μm varied from 381 ± 33 μg for the best performing combination (Proneb/LC-Sprint) to 150 ± 21 μg for the system with the lowest output (VIOS®/MistyMax 10™).

CONCLUSIONS

Substituting one nebulizer for another can result in large differences in medication delivery to the lungs.

[Delphi Consensus of Argentine Pulmonologists on the Management of Patients with COPD in Real Life]

Introduction

COPD is the third cause of death globally and in Argentina COPD has a prevalence of 14.5%, but the management of patients in real life is unknown. The objectives of this work were: a) To know the opinions of pulmonologists in Argentina who manage patients with COPD in different aspects of daily practice. b) Compare our findings with specialists from Spain and c) Consider our results to plan future directives in the management of COPD in our country.

Material and methods

89 pulmonologists from Argentina, experts in COPD, participated in a Delphi consensus, who responded to a survey with five domains. a) Adherence to treatment, b) Control of COPD, c) Treatable features, d) Inhalation devices and e) Accessibility to therapeutic resources.

Results

After two rounds of questions, total consensus was achieved in 77.6% of the statements and discriminating by domain: Treatment adherence: 5/9 (55.5%). COPD control: 10/14 (71.4%). Treatable traits: 6/6 (100%). Inhalation devices: 10/14 (71.4%) and Accessibility to treatment: 6/6 (100%). In most of the affirmations, the results were similar to those obtained by Spanish pulmonologists.

Conclusions

Pulmonologists from Argentina manage COPD patients in a similar way and with minimal differences with our Spanish colleagues. It became evident that, in daily practice, there are factors that negatively impact access to the indicated treatments. Our work could serve as a starting point to improve this situation.

Patient and social factors related to nebulizer use in COPD patients at the transition of care: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Transition from hospital to home is a vulnerable period for patients with COPD exacerbations, with a high risk for readmission and mortality. Twenty percent of patients with an initial hospitalization for a COPD exacerbation are readmitted to a hospital within 30 days, costing the health care system over $15 billion annually. While nebulizer therapy directed at some high-risk COPD patients may improve the transition from hospital to home, patient and social factors are likely to contribute to difficulties with their use. Current literature describing the COPD patient's experience with utilizing nebulizer therapy, particularly during care transitions, is limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore underlying COPD patient and social factors contributing to practical difficulties with nebulizer use at the care transition from hospital to home.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study conducted between September 2020 and June 2022. Patients were included if they were ≥ 40 years old, had a current diagnosis of COPD, had an inpatient admission at a hospital, and were discharged directly to home with nebulizer therapy. Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews with patients were conducted covering a broad range of patient and social factors and their relationships with nebulizer use and readmission. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was performed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted, and subjects had a mean age of 64 ± 8.4 years, 62% were female, and 76% were White. The predominant interview themes were health care system interactions and medication management. The interviews highlighted that discharge counseling methods and depth of counseling from hospitals were inconsistent and were not always patient-friendly. They also suggested that patients could appropriately identify, set up, and utilize their nebulizer treatment without difficulties, but additional patient education is required for nebulizer clean up and maintenance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our interviews suggest that there is room for improvement within the health care system for providing consistent, effective discharge counseling. Also, COPD patients discharged from a hospital on nebulizer therapy can access and understand their treatment but require additional education for nebulizer clean up and maintenance.

The 2023 GOLD Report: Updated Guidelines for Inhaled Pharmacological Therapy in Patients with Stable COPD

Over the past 22 years, annual GOLD Reports have documented important changes in guidance and recommendations for uniformly treating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with the goal of improving outcomes in patients suffering from this condition. The most recent GOLD Report, released in 2023, shows continued refinement in several areas, including more precise definitions of COPD and exacerbations of COPD, a new set of parameters to assess exacerbation severity, an updated COPD assessment tool, updated guidelines for initial and follow-up treatment, new information regarding the association between pharmacological triple therapy and reduction in mortality, and new discussions of inhaler device choice and adherence to COPD medications. Whereas we do not address all of the new or updated material in GOLD's 2023 Report, we summarize key changes in GOLD's recommendations regarding inhalation therapy for stable COPD and frame these changes in the context of previous GOLD recommendations.

Pharmacotherapies in Older Adults with COPD: Challenges and Opportunities

Older adults have a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which will likely increase substantially in the coming decades owing to aging populations and increased long-term exposure to risk factors for this disease. COPD in older adults is characterized by low-grade chronic systemic inflammation, known as inflamm-aging. It contributes substantially to age-associated pulmonary changes that are clinically expressed by reduced lung function, poor health status, and limitations in activities of daily living. In addition, inflamm-aging has been associated with the onset of many comorbidities commonly encountered in COPD. Furthermore, physiologic changes that are often seen with aging can influence the optimal treatment of older patients with COPD. Therefore, variables such as pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, polypharmacy, comorbidities, adverse drug responses, drug interactions, method of administration, and social and economic issues that impact nutrition and adherence to therapy must be carefully evaluated when prescribing medication to these patients because each of them alone or together may affect the outcome of treatment. Current COPD medications focus mainly on alleviating COPD-related symptoms, so alternative treatment approaches that target the disease progression are being investigated. Considering the importance of inflamm-aging, new anti-inflammatory molecules are being evaluated, focusing on inhibiting the recruitment and activation of inflammatory cells, blocking mediators of inflammation thought to be important in the recruitment or activation of these inflammatory cells or released by these cells. Potential therapies that may slow the aging processes by acting on cellular senescence, blocking the processes that cause it (senostatics), eliminating senescent cells (senolytics), or targeting the ongoing oxidative stress seen with aging need to be evaluated.

Perceptions and Attitudes of Patients and Their Family Caregivers on Nebulization Therapy for COPD

Purpose

The aim of the survey was to evaluate attitudes and perceptions toward nebulization therapy for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Indian population.

Patients and methods

A cross-sectional, multicenter, quantitative survey was conducted from July to August 2019 among 103 COPD patients [>40 years, either gender, belonging to socio-economic class (SEC) A or SEC B] and their family caregivers. One-on-one interviews were conducted telephonically via an online survey platform (KoBo data collection tool) using a structured questionnaire. Patients receiving home nebulization were included, and the usage of nebulizers, satisfaction, and benefits and concerns with nebulizers were assessed.

Results

Overall, 47% patients were on handheld inhalers + nebulizer, 54% used nebulizer for >8 weeks, and 27% used nebulizers daily for home maintenance. Majority of the patients (77%) were satisfied with nebulization therapy. Around 70% family caregivers opined that the quality of life of COPD patients improved post-nebulization therapy. The benefits of nebulizers perceived by patients were easier breathing (89%), feeling of well-being (86%), and ease of use (86%), while family caregivers reported reduced hospitalization (76%) and easier breathing (75%). Among those with prior experience with inhalers, 72% felt nebulizers gave long-term relief, while 65% perceived having immediate relief compared to inhaler. Overall, 61% opined that benefits with nebulizers outweighed the inconvenience associated with its use. Key concerns regarding nebulizers cited by patients were time-consuming procedure (50%), feeling of dependency (49%), and social embarrassment (48%), while family caregivers highlighted social embarrassment (45%) and multiple daily use (45%) as major concerns. Majority of the patients (73%) were compliant with their recommended frequency of the nebulizer.

Conclusion

This first-of-its-kind survey highlights that the majority of patients and family caregivers were satisfied with nebulizers and reported improvements in symptoms and reduced hospitalizations with nebulizer therapy. The patients preferred nebulized therapy to inhalers.

Indian Guidelines on Nebulization Therapy

Inhalational therapy, today, happens to be the mainstay of treatment in obstructive airway diseases (OADs), such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is also in the present, used in a variety of other pulmonary and even non-pulmonary disorders. Hand-held inhalation devices may often be difficult to use, particularly for children, elderly, debilitated or distressed patients. Nebulization therapy emerges as a good option in these cases besides being useful in the home care, emergency room and critical care settings. With so many advancements taking place in nebulizer technology; availability of a plethora of drug formulations for its use, and the widening scope of this therapy; medical practitioners, respiratory therapists, and other health care personnel face the challenge of choosing appropriate inhalation devices and drug formulations, besides their rational application and use in different clinical situations. Adequate maintenance of nebulizer equipment including their disinfection and storage are the other relevant issues requiring guidance. Injudicious and improper use of nebulizers and their poor maintenance can sometimes lead to serious health hazards, nosocomial infections, transmission of infection, and other adverse outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to have a proper national guideline on nebulization practices to bridge the knowledge gaps amongst various health care personnel involved in this practice. It will also serve as an educational and scientific resource for healthcare professionals, as well as promote future research by identifying neglected and ignored areas in this field. Such comprehensive guidelines on this subject have not been available in the country and the only available proper international guidelines were released in 1997 which have not been updated for a noticeably long period of over two decades, though many changes and advancements have taken place in this technology in the recent past. Much of nebulization practices in the present may not be evidence-based and even some of these, the way they are currently used, may be ineffective or even harmful. Recognizing the knowledge deficit and paucity of guidelines on the usage of nebulizers in various settings such as inpatient, out-patient, emergency room, critical care, and domiciliary use in India in a wide variety of indications to standardize nebulization practices and to address many other related issues; National College of Chest Physicians (India), commissioned a National task force consisting of eminent experts in the field of Pulmonary Medicine from different backgrounds and different parts of the country to review the available evidence from the medical literature on the scientific principles and clinical practices of nebulization therapy and to formulate evidence-based guidelines on it. The guideline is based on all possible literature that could be explored with the best available evidence and incorporating expert opinions. To support the guideline with high-quality evidence, a systematic search of the electronic databases was performed to identify the relevant studies, position papers, consensus reports, and recommendations published. Rating of the level of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation was done using the GRADE system. Six topics were identified, each given to one group of experts comprising of advisors, chairpersons, convenor and members, and such six groups (A-F) were formed and the consensus recommendations of each group was included as a section in the guidelines (Sections I to VI). The topics included were: A. Introduction, basic principles and technical aspects of nebulization, types of equipment, their choice, use, and maintenance B. Nebulization therapy in obstructive airway diseases C. Nebulization therapy in the intensive care unit D. Use of various drugs (other than bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) by nebulized route and miscellaneous uses of nebulization therapy E. Domiciliary/Home/Maintenance nebulization therapy; public & health care workers education, and F. Nebulization therapy in COVID-19 pandemic and in patients of other contagious viral respiratory infections (included later considering the crisis created due to COVID-19 pandemic). Various issues in different sections have been discussed in the form of questions, followed by point-wise evidence statements based on the existing knowledge, and recommendations have been formulated.

Targeted delivery of inhalable drug particles in a patient-specific tracheobronchial tree with moderate COVID-19: A numerical study

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to severe social and economic disruption worldwide. Although currently no consent has been reached on a specific therapy that can treat COVID-19 effectively, several inhalation therapy strategies have been proposed to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection. These strategies include inhalations of antiviral drugs, anti-inflammatory drugs, and vaccines. To investigate how to enhance the therapeutic effect by increasing the delivery efficiency (DE) of the inhaled aerosolized drug particles, a patient-specific tracheobronchial (TB) tree from the trachea up to generation 6 (G6) with moderate COVID-19 symptoms was selected as a testbed for the in silico trials of targeted drug delivery to the lung regions with pneumonia alba, i.e., the severely affected lung segments (SALS). The 3D TB tree geometry was reconstructed from spiral computed tomography (CT) scanned images. The airflow field and particle trajectories were solved using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based Euler-Lagrange model at an inhalation flow rate of 15 L/min. Particle release maps, which record the deposition locations of the released particles, were obtained at the inlet according to the particle trajectories. Simulation results show that particles with different diameters have similar release maps for targeted delivery to SALS. Point-source aerosol release (PSAR) method can significantly enhance the DE into the SALS. A C++ program has been developed to optimize the location of the PSAR tube. The optimized simulations indicate that the PSAR approach can at least increase the DE of the SALS by a factor of 3.2× higher than conventional random-release drug-aerosol inhalation. The presence of the PSAR tube only leads to a 7.12% change in DE of the SALS. This enables the fast design of a patient-specific treatment for reginal lung diseases.

Pilot Study to Investigate the Benefits of the InnoSpire Go Mesh Nebulizer Compared to Jet Nebulizers in the Treatment of Stable COPD

Background: Nebulizers are widely used for the delivery of aerosols to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer has been designed to improve upon the ease of use and convenience of existing nebulizers for the treatment of COPD. Methods: This was a pilot, single-center, randomized, open-label crossover study conducted over 2 months to investigate the use of the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer compared to the patient's own compressor driven jet nebulizer in ambulatory patients with stable COPD. Patient preference was assessed at the end of the study; quality of life, symptom scores, treatment time, and satisfaction were assessed at multiple points during the study. Results: Data for 17 patients were eligible for analysis, patients had a mean age of 64.6 years, and 64.7% were graded 3 on the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale. All patients preferred the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer over their own compressor driven jet nebulizer (p < 0.001). Nebulization of study drugs using the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer was associated with statistically significant increases in health-related quality of life over baseline (Dyspnea p = 0.003, Emotion p = 0.043, Mastery p = 0.011). A mixed model analysis of Borg dyspnea scores before and after exercise showed significantly (p = 0.043) lower scores for the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer compared with the compressor driven nebulizers. Patient satisfaction was statistically significantly higher for each of 10 questions covering ease of use, confidence, burden of use, satisfaction, and how well the device fit into their lifestyle. Treatment time was significantly shorter with the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Patients preferred and were more satisfied with the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer. Nebulization of study drugs using the InnoSpire Go mesh nebulizer resulted in improved quality of life compared with baseline, and treatments were delivered in a shorter period than the compressor driven jet nebulizers. Clinical Trial Registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03933462.

Measuring Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are breath actuated, and patients using DPIs need to generate an optimal inspiratory flow during the inhalation maneuver for effective drug delivery to the lungs. However, practical and standardized recommendations for measuring peak inspiratory flow (PIF)—a potential indicator for effective DPI use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)—are lacking. To evaluate recommended PIF assessment approaches, we reviewed the Instructions for Use of the In-Check™ DIAL and the prescribing information for eight DPIs approved for use in the treatment of COPD in the United States. To evaluate applied PIF assessment approaches, we conducted a PubMed search from inception to August 31, 2021, for reports of clinical and real-life studies where PIF was measured using the In-Check™ DIAL or through a DPI in patients with COPD. Evaluation of collective sources, including 47 applicable studies, showed that instructions related to the positioning of the patient with their DPI, instructions for exhalation before the inhalation maneuver, the inhalation maneuver itself, and post-inhalation breath-hold times varied, and in many instances, appeared vague and/or incomplete. We observed considerable variation in how PIF was measured in clinical and real-life studies, underscoring the need for a standardized method of PIF measurement. Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Based on these findings and our clinical and research experience, we propose specific recommendations for PIF measurement to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice.

Usability Prototype Smart Portable Nebulizer for Self-care with Respiratory Disorders at Home

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of patients with shortness of breath due to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requires the development of a nebulizer design that is easy, fast, inexpensive, and has reusability for sufferers in the community. AIM: This study aims to design and assemble a prototype of a portable smart nebulizer for patients with respiratory disorders. METHODS: The research design used an experimental approach with the design and assembly of a nebulizer which aims to analyze the operating results of the prototype of a portable smart nebulizer device with standard health calibration test equipment, and compare it with a mesh nebulizer as a control. CONCLUSIONS: The prototype of the portable smart nebulizer had met the expected standard calibration of the instrument with the functioning of the component features of the device smartly, although it still requires improvement of the tool when used on patients.

A Systematic Review of Published Algorithms for Selecting an Inhaled Delivery System in COPD

RATIONALE

Medication for treatment of COPD is available in many different delivery systems; however, national and international guidelines do not provide recommendations on how to select the optimal system for an individual patient.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review of published algorithms for inhaler selection in out-patients with COPD.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were search for articles on inhaler selection published between January 1, 1990 and March 10, 2021. The results were reviewed for articles containing an algorithm for inhaler selection. The quality of publications containing an algorithm was assessed using the JBI SUMARI text and opinion critical appraisal checklist. Individual steps recommended in the algorithms and the order in which they were considered were extracted independently by the two authors using the JBI text and opinion data extraction tool. Textual syntheses and a table of factors included were used to appraise and compare algorithms.

RESULTS

The search identified 1016 publications. After removing duplicate studies (n = 409), 607 abstracts were examined. Nine different algorithms or hierarchical recommendations for device selection were identified. All nine publications were considered of good quality. Most algorithms contain only a few decision steps. There were significant differences between the algorithms. None of the algorithms have been validated. Three domains for factors included in the algorithms were identified: patient factors, device attributes, and HCP factors. Patient factors were considered most frequently (19 times) compared with device attributes (10 times) and HCP factors (7 times). Five specific attribute/factors with at least three rankings in different algorithms, were identified as key factors for device selection.

CONCLUSION

Although the algorithms generally provide step-by-step approaches based on a literature review and/or the experiences of the different authors, none were developed using item generation/reduction methodology nor included input from patients with COPD. There were considerable differences between the algorithms; however, the review identified key factors that should be considered by HCPs when selecting therapy. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021244475).

In Vitro Evaluation of Aerosol Delivery by Hand-Held Mesh Nebulizers in an Adult Spontaneous Breathing Lung Model

Background: Drug inhalation is common mode of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of aerosol devices in a simulated COPD adult lung model using five commercially available hand-held mesh nebulizers. Materials and Methods: Five nebulizers (PARI VELOX^®, Omron NE-U22, Aeroneb^® Go, APEX PY001, and Pocket Air^®) were tested with a unit dose of 5.0 mg/2.5 mL salbutamol. An in vitro lung model (compliance: 0.06 L/cm H₂O, resistance: 20 cm H₂O/L/sec) was constructed to simulate parameters (tidal volume of 500 mL, respiratory rate of 15 breaths/min, inspiratory time of 1 second) of an adult patient with COPD. A bacterial filter was attached at the bronchi level for drug collection, referring as inhaled mass. After nebulization, the inhaled mass (%), dose remaining on each component (%), particle size characteristics, and nebulizer performances were analyzed. Particle size characteristics were analyzed using an 8-stage Anderson Cascade Impactor. The salbutamol particles deposited were eluted and analyzed using a spectrophotometer at 276 nm. The inhaled mass (%), dose remaining on each component (%), particle size distribution, and nebulizer performance were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Sheffee post hoc tests. Results: Pocket Air and APEX PY001 showed the greatest inhaled mass and the lowest dose in the mouthpiece connection. The largest and smallest mass median aerodynamic diameters were found with Omron NE-U22 and PARI VELOX, respectively. In addition, the output rate and inhaled aerosol rate (IAR) of PARI VELOX were higher than those of other nebulizers. Conclusions: This study showed that the performance of commercially available mesh nebulizers varied. Aerosol particles deposited on different auxiliary equipment directly influenced the output rate and IAR of the mesh nebulizer. Clinical validation of the drug IAR is necessary to avoid overdose and reduce drug wastage.

Effect of functional principle, delivery technique, and connection used on aerosol delivery from different nebulizers: An in-vitro study

OBJECTIVE

Nebulizers can be divided according to their functional principle into jet, ultrasonic and vibrating mesh nebulizers with intermittent or continuous aerosol delivery and may be used with many different adapters and connections and all can influence their efficiency. The aim of the present work was to evaluate the effect functional principle, delivery technique, and connection used on aerosol delivered from four different nebulizers.

METHODS

Four nebulizers were used in the study; three of them were jet nebulizers (JNs; AeroEclipse, NebuTech, En ful Kit) and one of them was Aerogen Solo vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN). AeroEclipse and NebuTech are intermittent output nebulizers, while the rest are continuous output nebulizers. Aerogen Solo was used with either a standard T-piece or Aerogen Ultra holding chamber, and En ful Kit was used with a standard T-piece or Circulaire II holding chamber. 2 ml of salbutamol was nebulized to determine the total emitted dose (TED) and aerodynamic droplet characteristics of the emitted aerosol from the 6 different sets (4 nebulizers with T-piece and 2 holding chambers).

RESULTS

The mean ± SD TED from VMN was significantly higher than all the JNs (p < 0.05). Aerogen Ultra with VMN did not show a significant effect on TED compare to T-piece, but it significantly increased (p < 0.05) fine particle dose (FPD; 3091.5 ± 189.4 μg) and fine particle fraction (FPF; 72.7 ± 3.6%). However, the Circulaire II with En ful Kit had significantly higher TED, FPD, and FPF compared to T-piece (p < 0.05). Intermittent JNs (AeroEclipse and NebuTech) had significantly higher TED (p < 0.05) compared to the continuous JNs (En ful Kit) with no significant effect on the other parameters studied. AeroEclipse had the highest MMAD and Aerogen Solo Ultra has the lowest in MMAD.

CONCLUSIONS

The functional principle, delivery technique, and connection used had a significant effect on aerosol delivered from nebulizers. VMNs are significantly better than JNs. Intermittent delivery has significantly better TED than continuous delivery. Holding chamber with both VMNs and JNs improved aerosol delivery compared to standard T-piece.

Efficacy and safety of revefenacin for nebulization in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease taking concomitant ICS/LABA or LABA: subgroup analysis from phase III trials

Background:

Combinations of a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) are used for patients with persistent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations on bronchodilator monotherapy. In this prespecified subgroup analysis, we assessed the efficacy and safety of the LAMA revefenacin in patients with COPD taking concomitant LABA, including ICS/LABA (LABA subgroup).

Methods:

Efficacy data were obtained from two 12-week, replicate, placebo-controlled trials and safety data were pooled from the 12-week and a 52-week tiotropium-controlled trial. Patients received revefenacin 175 µg or placebo in the 12-week or tiotropium 18 µg in the 52-week studies. The efficacy endpoint was least squares (LS) mean change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁). Clinical health outcomes were assessed using the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ).

Results:

Revefenacin produced similar improvements from baseline in trough FEV₁ in the non-LABA and LABA subgroups [placebo-adjusted LS mean change (95% confidence interval) in day 85 trough FEV₁, 150.9 (110.3−191.6) ml and 139.2 (82.9−195.5) ml; p < 0.0001 versus placebo]. Similar improvements were observed in SGRQ scores in the non-LABA and LABA subgroups [−3.3 (−5.4 to −1.2) and −3.4 (−6.3 to −0.6)]. Improvements in lung function and health outcomes were observed regardless of airflow obstruction severity. Revefenacin was well tolerated with more adverse events reported in the LABA than the non-LABA subgroup.

Conclusions:

Once daily revefenacin for nebulization can be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients who require concomitant use of LABA with or without ICS.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers:

NCT02512510, NCT02459080, NCT02518139

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Breath-Triggered Drug Release System for Preterm Neonates

A major disadvantage of inhalation therapy with continuous drug delivery is the loss of medication during expiration. Developing a breath-triggered drug release system can highly decrease this loss. However, there is currently no breath-triggered drug release directly inside the patient interface (nasal prong) for preterm neonates available due to their high breathing frequency, short inspiration time and low tidal volume. Therefore, a nasal prong with an integrated valve releasing aerosol directly inside the patient interface increasing inhaled aerosol efficiency is desirable. We integrated a miniaturized aerosol valve into a nasal prong, controlled by a double-stroke cylinder. Breathing was simulated using a test lung for preterm neonates on CPAP respiratory support. The inhalation flow served as a trigger signal for the valve, releasing humidified surfactant. Particle detection was performed gravimetrically (filter) and optically (light extinction). The integrated miniaturized aerosol valve enabled breath-triggered drug release inside the patient interface with an aerosol valve response time of <25 ms. By breath-triggered release of the pharmaceutical aerosol as a bolus during inhalation, the inhaled aerosol efficiency was increased by a factor of >4 compared to non-triggered release. This novel nasal prong with integrated valve allows breath-triggered drug release directly inside the nasal prong with short response time.

Enhanced alveo pulmonary deposition of nebulized ciclesonide for attenuating airways inflammations: a strategy to overcome metered dose inhaler drawbacks

Ciclesonide (CIC), an inhaled corticosteroid for bronchial asthma is currently available as metered dose inhaler (CIC–MDI) which possesses a major challenge in the management of the elderly, critically ill patients and children. In this work, nebulized CIC nano-structure lipid particles (CIC-NLPs) were prepared and evaluated for their deep pulmonary delivery and cytotoxicity to provide additional clinical benefits to patients in controlled manner and lower dose. The bio-efficacy following nebulization in ovalbumin (OVA) induced asthma Balb/c mice compared to commercial (CIC–MDI) was also assessed. The developed NLPs of 222.6 nm successfully entrapped CIC (entrapment efficiency 93.3%) and exhibited favorable aerosolization efficiency (mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) 2.03 μm and fine particle fraction (FPF) of 84.51%) at lower impactor stages indicating deep lung deposition without imparting any cytotoxic effect up to a concentration of 100 μg/ml. The nebulization of 40 µg dose of the developed CIC-NLPs revealed significant therapeutic impact in the mitigation of the allergic airways inflammations when compared to 80 µg dose of the commercial CIC–MDI inhaler (Alvesco^®). Superior anti-inflammatory and antioxidative stress effects characterized by significant decrease (p< .0001) in inflammatory cytokines IL-4 and 13, serum IgE levels, malondialdehyde (MDA), nitric oxide (NO), TNF-α, and activated nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) activity were obvious with concomitant increase in superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity. Histological examination with inhibition of inflammatory cell infiltration in the respiratory tract was correlated well with observed biochemical improvement.

Clinical Characterization of Nursing Facility Residents With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

To describe clinical characteristics, medication use, and low peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) (< 60 L/min) prevalence in nursing facility residents with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

PATIENTS AND SETTING

Residents 60 years of age and older with a COPD diagnosis and≥ 6 months' nursing facility residence, were enrolled between December 2017 and February 2019 from 26 geographically varied United States nursing facilities.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Data, extracted from residents' charts, included demographic/clinical characteristics, COPD-related medications, exacerbations and hospitalizations within the past 6 months, and functional status from the most recent Minimum Data Set. At enrollment, residents completed the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Dyspnea Scale and COPD Assessment Test (CAT™). Spirometry and PIFR were also assessed.

RESULTS

Residents' (N = 179) mean age was 78.0 ± 10.6 years, 63.7% were female, and 57.0% had low PIFR. Most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension (79.9%), depression (49.2%), and heart failure (41.9%). The average forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1₁) % predicted was 45.9% ± 20.9%. On the CAT, 78.2% scored≥ 10 and on the mMRC Dyspnea Scale, 74.1% scored≥ 2, indicating most residents had high COPD symptom burden. Only 49.2% were receiving a scheduled long-acting bronchodilator (LABD). Among those with low PIFR prescribed a LABD, > 80% used dry powder inhalers for medication delivery.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights underutilization of scheduled LABD therapy in nursing facility residents with COPD. Low PIFR was prevalent in residents while the majority used suboptimal medication delivery devices. The findings highlight opportunities for improving management and outcomes for nursing facility residents with COPD.

The Role of the Pharmacist in Inhaler Selection and Education in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Objective: To review the role of pharmacists in educating and monitoring patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on inhalation technique. Data Sources: A PubMed search (January 2000 to May 2020) was performed using the following keywords and associated medical subject headings: adherence, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/COPD, education, inhaler, pharmacist, and technique. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The search was conducted to identify English language articles highlighting the importance of correct inhaler technique in COPD management and benefits of pharmacist inhaler training such as improved adherence, quality of life (QoL), and disease control. Randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, observational studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis reporting pharmacist training were included. Data Synthesis: This review summarizes that incorrect inhaler use negatively affects treatment outcomes, prognosis, and QoL. Pharmacists are in a unique position to educate and monitor patients with COPD on optimal inhaler technique and an individualized, multifactorial approach to COPD management involving pharmacists could provide cost-effective patient care and improve adherence and minimize inhaler misuse. Several strategies used by pharmacists can optimize patient inhaler use, such as face-to-face technique demonstrations, the "teach-back" method, telemonitoring, instructional videos, or informational leaflets. An individualized action plan involving education and regular monitoring of inhaler use further enhances optimal adherence and disease management. Conclusions: As pharmacists are easily accessible to both patients and health care providers, they are ideally placed to play an important role in the enhancement of education on, and continuous assessment of, optimal inhaler technique, thereby improving adherence, disease control, and QoL.

The emerging role of nebulization for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at home

Inhalation therapy is the cornerstone of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. However, for many COPD patients who are managed at home, nebulization therapy offers an effective alternative treatment and fulfills the gap of catering to the specific population of patients who are unable to use handheld inhaler devices appropriately. The present review highlights key aspects, namely selection of the right beneficiaries for home nebulization, available drugs in nebulized formulations for the treatment of COPD, and the importance of care, cleaning, and maintenance, which are prerequisites for ensuring successful nebulization therapy.

Healthcare resource utilization and exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with nebulized glycopyrrolate in the USA: a real-world data analysis

AIMS

This study compared medication use, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and exacerbations among individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who initiated glycopyrrolate/eFlow Closed System nebulizer 25 mcg/mL glycopyrrolate (hereafter GLY) in a real-world setting before and after treatment initiation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective claims and hospital charge master data were used to identify individuals ≥ 40 years of age diagnosed with COPD who initiated GLY between 1 April 2018 and 28 February 2019 (first prescription claim = index date). Patients were excluded if they had ≥1 asthma diagnosis in the 6-month pre-index period. The proportion of patients with COPD-related medications, other outpatient HRU, hospitalizations, and exacerbations were compared between the 6-month pre-index and 6-month follow-up periods. Among patients utilizing the service, per-person utilization rates were compared between the two periods.

RESULTS

Among patients initiating GLY (n = 767), the mean age was 71.4 years, 56.1% were female, and the mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2.0. The mean number of GLY claims per person was 3.8 during the follow-up period. Compared to the pre-index period, a lower proportion of patients had claims for COPD medications including oral corticosteroids (62.1% vs. 69.1%, p = .0001) and fixed-dose SAMA/SABA (26.1% vs. 33.0%, p < .0001) and a higher proportion of patients had claims for LABA (29.7% vs. 22.6%, p < .0001) during the follow-up period. Fewer patients had ≥1 COPD-related physician office visit (42.4% vs. 49.8%, p < .0001), radiology test (40.7% vs. 46.5%, p = .005), or moderate exacerbation (48.0% vs. 53.2%, p = .01) after initiating GLY. Among patients with linkage to inpatient data (n = 316), fewer were hospitalized (7.9% vs. 13.0%, p = .037) and hospital length of stay was shorter (1.9 vs. 3.6 days, p = .017) after initiating GLY/eFlow.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients initiating GLY in a real-world setting, COPD medications, hospitalizations, other HRU, and exacerbations decreased after treatment initiation compared with the 6-month pre-index period.

In Vitro Effect of Different Airflow Rates on the Aerosol Properties of Nebulized Glycopyrrolate in the eFlow® Closed System and Tiotropium Delivered in the HandiHaler®

INTRODUCTION

Personalized therapy for patients with COPD requires appropriate choice of drug and delivery device. Inhalers and nebulizers vary in their drug delivery characteristics, particularly the need for passive or active patient inhalation for appropriate drug dispersal and delivery. In this in vitro analysis, we assessed the aerosol performance and drug delivery of two long-acting muscarinic antagonists, glycopyrrolate (GLY; 25 µg solution; 1 ml) and tiotropium (TIO; 18 µg powder) through their respective delivery systems: the eFlow® Closed System (CS) vibrating membrane nebulizer and the HandiHaler® dry-powder inhaler (DPI).

METHODS

The aerosol performances of the eFlow® CS nebulizer and the HandiHaler® were determined using the Next Generation cascade Impactor. The delivered dose of GLY and TIO was determined using different breathing patterns, which varied in tidal volume and peak inspiratory flow rate, respectively, to simulate breathing conditions ranging from normal to severe obstruction.

RESULTS

Aerodynamic particle analysis showed generally similar mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD, range, 3.6-4.6 µm) and fine particle fraction (FPF, range, 48.2%-63.7%) with GLY delivered using the eFlow® CS nebulizer under all breathing patterns tested. TIO, delivered via the HandiHaler®, showed variations in MMAD (range, 3.8-5.8 µm) and FPF (range, 16.1%-32.4%) under different inspiratory flow rates. The majority of GLY was deposited in stages 2-5 of the impactor, which corresponds with particle sizes in the respirable range (< 5 µm), whereas a large proportion of TIO was deposited in the throat/mouthpiece pre-separator, irrespective of test conditions. The median residual dose of GLY with eFlow® CS was notably lower compared to that of TIO with HandiHaler® (2.4%-4.4% vs. 40%-67%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

These simulation results highlight the different deposition patterns generated by a DPI device and a vibrating membrane nebulizer, which may help inform device selection and treatment decision in COPD management.

Maintenance Therapy with Nebulizers in Patients with Stable COPD: Need for Reevaluation

Patients with stable COPD rely heavily on inhaled bronchodilators and corticosteroids to control symptoms, maximize quality of life, and avoid exacerbations and costly hospitalizations. These drugs are typically delivered by hand-held inhalers or nebulizers. The majority of patients are prescribed inhalers due to their perceived convenience, portability, and lower cost, relative to nebulizers. Unfortunately, poor inhaler technique compromises symptom relief in most of these patients. In contrast to one or two puffs through an inhaler, nebulizers deliver a drug over many breaths, through tidal breathing, and hence are more forgiving to poor inhalation technique. To what extent susceptibility to errors in their use may influence the relative effectiveness of these two types of inhalation device has received little attention in COPD research. In 2005, a systematic review of the literature concluded that nebulizers and inhalers are equally effective in patients who are adequately trained to use their inhalation device. This conclusion was based on two small clinical trials that only examined objective measures of lung function. Since then, additional studies have found that maintenance therapy administered by nebulizers could improve patients' reported feelings of symptom relief, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment, compared to therapy administered by inhalers. Because it has been 15 years since the publication of the systematic review, in this article we summarize the results of studies that compared the effectiveness of inhalers with that of nebulizers in patients with stable COPD and discuss their implications for clinical practice and need for future research.

Pharmacology and Therapeutics of Bronchodilators Revisited

Bronchodilators remain the cornerstone of the treatment of airway disorders such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is therefore considerable interest in understanding how to optimize the use of our existing classes of bronchodilator and in identifying novel classes of bronchodilator drugs. However, new classes of bronchodilator have proved challenging to develop because many of these have no better efficacy than existing classes of bronchodilator and often have unacceptable safety profiles. Recent research has shown that optimization of bronchodilation occurs when both arms of the autonomic nervous system are affected through antagonism of muscarinic receptors to reduce the influence of parasympathetic innervation of the lung and through stimulation of β ₂-adrenoceptors (β ₂-ARs) on airway smooth muscle with β ₂-AR-selective agonists to mimic the sympathetic influence on the lung. This is currently achieved by use of fixed-dose combinations of inhaled long-acting β ₂-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists (LAMAs). Due to the distinct mechanisms of action of LAMAs and LABAs, the additive/synergistic effects of using these drug classes together has been extensively investigated. More recently, so-called "triple inhalers" containing fixed-dose combinations of both classes of bronchodilator (dual bronchodilation) and an inhaled corticosteroid in the same inhaler have been developed. Furthermore, a number of so-called "bifunctional drugs" having two different primary pharmacological actions in the same molecule are under development. This review discusses recent advancements in knowledge on bronchodilators and bifunctional drugs for the treatment of asthma and COPD. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Since our last review in 2012, there has been considerable research to identify novel classes of bronchodilator drugs, to further understand how to optimize the use of the existing classes of bronchodilator, and to better understand the role of bifunctional drugs in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Observational Real-World Study to Assess Clinical Characteristics and Device Satisfaction in Patients with COPD Treated with Glycopyrrolate/eFlow® CS

Purpose

To assess clinical characteristics and device satisfaction of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with glycopyrrolate/eFlow^® Closed System (CS) nebulizer (further referred to as eFlow) under real-world conditions.

Participants and Methods

Patients with COPD currently using eFlow were identified by the study sponsor. Consenting patients who met study inclusion criteria completed a cross-sectional survey that included a device satisfaction questionnaire. Means, medians, and standard deviations were calculated.

Results

Sixty-six patients met inclusion criteria and completed the survey. Participants' mean ± standard deviation age was 64.9 ± 11.9 years and the majority were white (86.4%) and female (59.1%). Almost two-thirds were former smokers. Thirty-nine (59.1%) reported their COPD to be severe/very severe and 38 (57.6%) reported a COPD exacerbation resulting in a hospitalization, ER visit, or medication modification over the past 12 months. Among 55 participants who had previously used another type of nebulizer, 44 (80%) were overall "much more"/"somewhat more" satisfied with the eFlow compared with their previous nebulizer(s). Regardless of prior nebulizer use, 60 (90.9%) participants were "satisfied"/"very satisfied" overall with the eFlow. Assembly and disassembly, operation, and cleaning were perceived as being "easy"/"very easy" by at least 65% of participants. Among all participants, 57 (86.4%) were "confident"/"very confident" of glycopyrrolate administration. On a Likert scale of 1 ("I don't like it") to 7 ("I like it a lot"), mean scores were at least 5.9 for portability, ease of cleaning, size, weight, short administration time, and relative silence of the device. Over 80% of participants said they "probably"/"definitely" would continue to use eFlow.

Conclusion

Based on this real-world study, the majority of patients were highly satisfied with, and confident in, using eFlow.

Long-acting dual bronchodilator therapy (indacaterol/glycopyrronium) versus nebulized short-acting dual bronchodilator (salbutamol/ipratropium) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Most guidelines recommend long-acting bronchodilators over short-acting bronchodilators for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The available evidence for the guidelines was based on dry powder or pressurized metered dose inhalers, but not nebulizations. Nevertheless, there is considerable, poorly evidenced based, use of short acting nebulized bronchodilators.

METHODS

This was an investigator initiated, randomized, active controlled, cross-over, double-blind and double-dummy single centre study in patients with stable COPD. The active comparators were indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 μg as Ultibro® via Breezhaler® (IND/GLY) and salbutamol/ipratropium 2,5/0,5 mg via air driven nebulization (SAL/IPR), both given as a single dose on separate days. The primary end point was the area under the FEV₁ curve from baseline till 6 h. Secondary end points included change in Borg dyspnoea score, adverse events and change in hyperinflation measured by the inspiratory capacity.

RESULTS

A total of 33 COPD patients completed the trial and were evaluable, most of them were ex-smokers. The difference between the tested regimens for the primary endpoint, FEV₁ AUC 0-6 h, 2965 ± 1544 mL (mean ± SD) for IND/GLY versus 3513 ± 1762 mL for SAL/IPR, was not significant (P = 0.08). The peak in FEV1 was higher and was reached faster with SAL/IPR compared to IND/GLY. No other significant differences were detected for the secondary endpoints including the Borg score, or adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with stable COPD, dry powder long-acting single inhalation of a LABA and a LAMA (IND/GLY) was not superior compared to nebulized short-acting salbutamol plus ipratropium (SAL/IPR) in its bronchodilating effects over 6 h.The effects of the nebulization kicked in faster and peaked higher. The observed differences may be caused by the difference in dosing between the two regimens. The improvement in Borg dyspnoea score did not favour the nebulization. Long-term outcomes were not assessed in this study.

Efficacy of revefenacin, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulized therapy, in patients with markers of more severe COPD: a post hoc subgroup analysis

Background

Revefenacin, a once-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist delivered via standard jet nebulizer, increased trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in prior phase 3 trials. We evaluated the efficacy of revefenacin in patients with markers of more severe COPD.

Methods

A post hoc subgroup analysis of two replicate, randomized, phase 3 trials was conducted over 12 weeks. Endpoints included least squares change from baseline in trough FEV₁, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) responders, and transition dyspnea index (TDI) responders at Day 85. This analysis included patient subgroups at high risk for COPD exacerbations and compared patients who received revefenacin 175 μg and placebo: severe and very severe airflow limitation (percent predicted FEV₁ 30%–< 50% and < 30%), 2011 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) D, reversibility (≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL increase in FEV₁) to short-acting bronchodilators, concurrent use of long-acting β agonists and/or inhaled corticosteroids, older age (> 65 and > 75 years), and comorbidity risk factors.

Results

Revefenacin demonstrated significant improvements in FEV₁ versus placebo at Day 85 among the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and all subgroups. Additionally, there was a greater number of SGRQ and TDI responders in the ITT population and the majority of subgroups analyzed among patients who received revefenacin versus placebo. For the SGRQ responders, the odds of response (odds ratio > 2.0) were significantly greater in the revefenacin arm versus the placebo arm among the severe airflow obstruction, very severe airflow obstruction and 2011 GOLD D subgroups. For the TDI responders, the odds of response (odds ratio > 2.0) were significantly greater among the severe airflow obstruction subgroup and patients aged > 75 years.

Conclusions

Revefenacin showed significantly greater improvements in FEV₁ versus placebo in the ITT population and all subgroups. Furthermore, there were a greater number of SGRQ and TDI responders in the ITT population, and in the majority of patient subgroups among patients who received revefenacin versus placebo. Based on the data presented, revefenacin could be a therapeutic option among patients with markers of more severe COPD.

Trial registration

Clinical trials registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (Studies 0126 [NCT02459080; prospectively registered 22 May 2015] and 0127 [NCT02512510; prospectively registered 28 July 2015]).

Future Trends in Nebulized Therapies for Pulmonary Disease

Aerosol therapy is a key modality for drug delivery to the lungs of respiratory disease patients. Aerosol therapy improves therapeutic effects by directly targeting diseased lung regions for rapid onset of action, requiring smaller doses than oral or intravenous delivery and minimizing systemic side effects. In order to optimize treatment of critically ill patients, the efficacy of aerosol therapy depends on lung morphology, breathing patterns, aerosol droplet characteristics, disease, mechanical ventilation, pharmacokinetics, and the pharmacodynamics of cell-drug interactions. While aerosol characteristics are influenced by drug formulations and device mechanisms, most other factors are reliant on individual patient variables. This has led to increased efforts towards more personalized therapeutic approaches to optimize pulmonary drug delivery and improve selection of effective drug types for individual patients. Vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN) are the dominant device in clinical trials involving mechanical ventilation and emerging drugs. In this review, we consider the use of VMN during mechanical ventilation in intensive care units. We aim to link VMN fundamentals to applications in mechanically ventilated patients and look to the future use of VMN in emerging personalized therapeutic drugs.

Trends and Factors Associated with Nebulized Therapy Prescription in Older Adults with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease from 2008 to 2015

Background: Medical management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) includes nebulized therapy as an option for inhalational drug delivery. A broad variety of short- and long-acting bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids in the nebulized form are available. Despite this, limited information exists on the pattern and predictors of nebulized prescription. We examined the trend and factors associated with prescription of nebulized therapy among Medicare beneficiaries with COPD. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study of 5% Medicare beneficiaries with COPD (n = 66,032) who were enrolled in parts A, B, and D and received nebulized prescription from 2008 to 2015 was conducted. This sample has shown to be representative of the entire fee-for-service Medicare population. The primary outcome was a prescription of nebulized medications. Reliever nebulized medications included short-acting beta agonist (SABA), short-acting muscarinic agents (SAMAs), and a combination of SABA and SAMA, while maintenance nebulized medications included long-acting beta agonists, long-acting muscarinic agents, and corticosteroid solutions as well as combinations of these agents. The secondary outcome was prescription of other inhaler respiratory medications not administered with a nebulizer. Results: Overall, 38.9% patients were prescribed nebulized medication and their prescription significantly declined from 42.4% in 2008 to 35.1% in 2015, majority of which was related to decreased prescriptions of nebulized relievers. Factors associated with the prescription of nebulized medications include female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.09), dual eligibility or low-income subsidy beneficiaries (OR = 1.49; CI = 1.44-1.53), hospitalization for COPD in the previous year (OR = 1.29; CI = 1.25-1.34), home oxygen therapy (OR = 2.29; CI = 2.23-2.36), pulmonary specialist visit (OR = 1.24; CI = 1.20-1.27), and moderate (OR = 1.61; CI = 1.57-1.65) or high (OR = 1.52; CI = 1.46-1.59) severity of COPD. Conclusion: Between 2008 and 2015, prescriptions for nebulized therapy for COPD declined among Medicare beneficiaries, probably related to increase in use of maintenance non-nebulized medications.

The Confusing World of Dry Powder Inhalers: It Is All About Inspiratory Pressures, Not Inspiratory Flow Rates

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) all have the ability to aerosolize dry powders, but they each offer different operating mechanisms and resistances to inhaled airflow. This variety has resulted in both clinician and patient confusion concerning DPI performance, use, and effectiveness. Particularly, there is a growing misconception that a single peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) can determine a patient's ability to use a DPI effectively, regardless of its design or airflow resistance. For this review article, we have sifted through the relevant literature concerning DPIs, inspiratory pressures, and inspiratory flow rates to provide a comprehensive and concise discussion and recommendations for DPI use. We ultimately clarify that the controlling parameter for DPI performance is not the PIFR but the negative pressure generated by the patient's inspiratory effort. A pressure drop ∼≥1 kPa (∼10 cm H2O) with any DPI is a reasonable threshold above which a patient should receive an adequate lung dose. Overall, we explore the underlying factors controlling inspiratory pressures, flow rates and dispensing, and dispersion characteristics of the various DPIs to clarify that inspiratory pressures, not flow rates, limit and control a patient's ability to generate sufficient flow for effective DPI use.

Revefenacin for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Introduction: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive condition characterized by irreversible or incompletely reversible airflow limitation. Long-acting bronchodilators, including β₂ agonists (LABA) and muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), serve as the standard of care for maintenance therapy in COPD. Individualizing therapy to optimize selection of delivery device has the potential to improve medication adherence and clinical outcomes among COPD patients.Areas covered: Revefenacin (Yupelri) is the only LAMA approved for once-daily administration via standard jet nebulizer for the maintenance therapy in patients with COPD. Revefenacin has a unique biphenyl carbamate tertiary amine structure, differing from the quaternary amine structure of previously approved LAMAs. Here we summarize the available clinical data for this new agent and discuss its potential place in the treatment of COPD.Expert opinion: Based on available clinical trial data, revefenacin appears to be an effective and safe option for long-term maintenance therapy of COPD. Revefenacin offers a once-daily option for LAMA therapy for patients who prefer or require nebulized drug delivery. The availability of this agent can allow patients to combine nebulized therapies that could improve clinical outcomes in appropriately selected patients with COPD.

Revefenacin: A Once-Daily, Long-Acting Bronchodilator For Nebulized Treatment Of COPD

Bronchodilation with muscarinic antagonists, β2-agonists, and inhaled corticosteroids remains the foundation of pharmaceutical treatment for patients with stable COPD. These drugs are delivered from a variety of devices, including dry powder inhalers, pressurized metered-dose inhalers, soft-mist inhalers, or nebulizers. Nebulized delivery is often preferable in patients who are elderly, are cognitively impaired, are unable to generate sufficient inspiratory force to use their inhaler, have difficulty coordinating hand-breath activity, are too dyspneic to hold their breath for a sufficient time, and/or may be acutely ill. Revefenacin, a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulization recently approved by the US FDA for the treatment of patients with COPD, was discovered and developed using "duration and lung selectivity-by-design." This strategy selected a molecule with a high lung-selective index to maximize bronchodilation and limit systemic anti-muscarinic side effects. In early-phase clinical studies, revefenacin for nebulization led to a rapid onset of bronchodilation that was sustained for 24 hrs in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Revefenacin also demonstrated minimal systemic exposure and good tolerability in these studies. Statistically and clinically significant improvements in lung function (ie, peak and/or trough FEV1) relative to placebo were observed with revefenacin in Phase III clinical trials of up to 3 months in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. Revefenacin was well tolerated in Phase III clinical trials with a low incidence of systemic antimuscarinic adverse events, which is consistent with its lung-selective design. There was no evidence of an increased risk of major cardiovascular events. Patient-reported outcome data from clinical trials indicated statistically significant improvements in several disease-specific measures. Revefenacin 175 μg for nebulization provides an effective once-daily treatment option for patients with moderate to very severe COPD who require or prefer nebulized therapy.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of revefenacin in subjects with impaired renal or hepatic function

Purpose

Revefenacin, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulization, has been shown to improve lung function in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Here we report pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety results from two multicenter, open-label, single-dose trials evaluating revefenacin in subjects with severe renal impairment (NCT02578082) and moderate hepatic impairment (NCT02581592).

Subjects and methods

The renal impairment trial enrolled subjects with normal renal function and severe renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m²). The hepatic impairment trial enrolled subjects with normal hepatic function and moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class B). Subjects received a single 175-µg dose of revefenacin through nebulization. PK plasma samples and urine collections were obtained at multiple time points for 5 days following treatment; all subjects were monitored for adverse events.

Results

In the renal impairment study, the maximum observed plasma revefenacin concentration (C_max) was up to 2.3-fold higher and area under the concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC_inf) was up to 2.4-fold higher in subjects with severe renal impairment compared with those with normal renal function. For THRX-195518, the major metabolite of revefenacin, the corresponding changes in C_max and AUC_inf were 1.8- and 2.7-fold higher, respectively. In the hepatic impairment study, revefenacin C_max and AUC_inf were 1.03- and 1.18-fold higher, respectively, in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment compared with those with normal hepatic function. The corresponding changes in THRX-195518 C_max and AUC_inf were 1.5- and 2.8-fold higher, respectively.

Conclusion

Systemic exposure to revefenacin increased modestly in subjects with severe renal impairment but was similar between subjects with moderate hepatic impairment and normal hepatic function. The increase in plasma exposure to THRX-195518 in subjects with severe renal or moderate hepatic impairment is unlikely to be of clinical consequence given its low antimuscarinic potency, low systemic levels after inhaled revefenacin administration, and favorable safety profile.

Aerosolization Performance of Jet Nebulizers and Biopharmaceutical Aspects

In this work, 13 jet nebulizers, some of which in different configurations, were investigated in order to identify the biopharmaceutical constraints related to the quality attributes of the medicinal products, which affect their safety, efficiency, compliance, and effectiveness. The aerosolization parameters, including the aerosol output, aerosol output rate, mass median aerodynamic diameter, and fine particle fraction, were determined according to the European Standard EN 13544-1, using sodium fluoride as a reference formulation. A comparison between the aerosol output nebulization time and the fine particle fraction displayed a correlation between the aerosol quality and the nebulization rate. Indeed, the quality of the nebulization significantly increased when the rate of aerosol emission was reduced. Moreover, the performance of the nebulizers was analyzed in terms of respirable delivered dose and respirable dose delivery rate, which characterize nebulization as the rate and amount of respirable product that could be deposited into the lungs. Depending on which of these two latter parameters was used, the nebulizers showed different performances. The differences, in terms of the rate and amount of delivered aerosol, could provide relevant information for the appropriate choice of nebulizer as a function of drug product, therapy, and patient characteristics.

A mesh nebulizer is more effective than jet nebulizer to nebulize bronchodilators during non-invasive ventilation of subjects with COPD: A randomized controlled trial with radiolabeled aerosols

BACKGROUND

Beneficial effects from non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in acute COPD are well-established, but the impact of nebulization during NIV has not been well described.

AIM

To compare pulmonary deposition and distribution across regions of interest with administration of radiolabeled aerosols generated by vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN) and jet nebulizer (JN) during NIV.

METHODS

A crossover single dose study involving 9 stable subjects with moderate to severe COPD randomly allocated to receive aerosol administration by the VMN Aerogen and the MistyNeb jet nebulizer operating with oxygen at 8 lpm during NIV. Radiolabeled bronchodilators (fill volume of 3 mL: 0.5 mL salbutamol 2.5 mg + 0.125 mL ipratropium 0.25 mg and physiologic saline up to 3 mL) were delivered until sputtering during NIV (pressures of 12 cmH2O and 5 cmH2O - inspiratory and expiratory, respectively) using an oro-nasal facemask. Radioactivity counts were performed using a gamma camera and regions of interest (ROIs) were delimited. Aerosol mass balance based on counts from the lungs, upper airways, stomach, nebulizer, circuit, inspiratory and expiratory filters, and mask were determined and expressed as a percentage of the total.

RESULTS

Both inhaled and lung doses were greater with VMN (22.78 ± 3.38% and 12.05 ± 2.96%, respectively) than JN (12.51 ± 6.31% and 3.14 ± 1.71%; p = 0.008). Residual drug volume was lower in VMN than in JN (3.08 ± 1.3% versus 46.44 ± 5.83%, p = 0.001). Peripheral deposition of radioaerosol was significantly lower with JN than VMN.

CONCLUSIONS

VMN deposited > 3 fold more radioaerosol into the lungs of moderate to severe COPD patients than JN during NIV.

Revefenacin, a once-daily, lung-selective, long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulized therapy: Safety and tolerability results of a 52-week phase 3 trial in moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Prior replicate 12-week phase 3 trials demonstrated that once-daily doses of revefenacin inhalation solution at 88 μg and 175 μg produced significant bronchodilation over 24 h post dose in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective was to characterize the safety profile of revefenacin 88 μg and 175 μg over 52 weeks of treatment.

METHODS

In this randomized, parallel-group, 52-week trial (NCT02518139), 1055 participants with moderate to very severe COPD received revefenacin 88 μg or 175 μg in a double-blind manner, or open-label active control tiotropium.

RESULTS

Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable across all treatment groups (n [%] patients; revefenacin 88 μg, 272 [74.7%]; 175 μg, 242 [72.2%]; tiotropium, 275 [77.2%]). Numerically fewer COPD exacerbations (n [%] patients) were observed with revefenacin 175 μg (73 [21.8%]) than with 88 μg (107 [29.4%]) or tiotropium (100 [28.1%]). Serious AEs were comparable with revefenacin 88 μg (58 [15.9%] and tiotropium (58 [16.3%]), but were lower with revefenacin 175 μg (43 [12.8%]), and mortality was low. In patients using revefenacin 88 μg or tiotropium with a concurrent long-acting β-agonist (LABA) product, the incidence of AEs was slightly higher than without concurrent LABA. LABA did not affect the incidence of AEs for patients who received revefenacin 175 μg.

CONCLUSIONS

Revefenacin was generally well tolerated over 52 weeks of treatment, and had a safety profile that supports its use as a long-term once-daily bronchodilator for the nebulized treatment of COPD.

Medication management patterns among Medicare beneficiaries with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who initiate nebulized arformoterol treatment

Purpose: Global evidence-based treatment strategies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend using long-acting bronchodilators (LABDs) as maintenance therapy. However, COPD patients are often undertreated. We examined COPD treatment patterns among Medicare beneficiaries who initiated arformoterol tartrate, a nebulized long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA), and identified the predictors of initiation. Methods: Using a 100% sample of Medicare administrative data, we identified beneficiaries with a COPD diagnosis (ICD-9 490-492.xx, 494.xx, 496.xx) between 2010 and 2014 who had ≥1 year of continuous enrollment in Parts A, B, and D, and ≥2 COPD-related outpatient visits within 30 days or ≥1 hospitalization(s). After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, three cohorts were identified: (1) study group beneficiaries who received nebulized arformoterol (n=11,886), (2) a subset of the study group with no LABD use 90 days prior to initiating arformoterol (n=5,542), and (3) control group beneficiaries with no nebulized LABA use (n=220,429). Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of arformoterol initiation. Odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p values were computed. Results: Among arformoterol users, 47% (n=5,542) had received no LABDs 90 days prior to initiating arformoterol. These beneficiaries were being treated with a nebulized (50%) or inhaled (37%) short-acting bronchodilator or a systemic corticosteroid (46%), and many received antibiotics (37%). Compared to controls, beneficiaries who initiated arformoterol were significantly more likely to have had an exacerbation, a COPD-related hospitalization, and a pulmonologist or respiratory therapist visit prior to initiation (all p<0.05). Beneficiaries with moderate/severe psychiatric comorbidity or dual-eligible status were significantly less likely to initiate arformoterol, as compared to controls (all p<0.05). Conclusion: Medicare beneficiaries who initiated nebulized arformoterol therapy had more exacerbations and hospitalizations than controls 90 days prior to initiation. Findings revealed inadequate use of maintenance medications, suggesting a lack of compliance with evidence-based treatment guidelines.

The Role of Revefenacin in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic inflammatory lung disease characterized by progressive and persistent airflow limitation that is not fully reversible. Revefenacin is an investigational long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), in late-stage development as a nebulized inhalation solution, which has been designed to produce long-acting bronchodilation, consistent with once-daily dosing, and with a high degree of lung-selectivity. It is more selective for muscarinic type 3 (M3) than muscarinic type 2 (M2) or muscarinic type 1 (M1) receptors. Its dissociation half-life for M3 is 82 minutes and 6.9 minutes for M1, respectively. The bronchoprotective effect is seen as early as five-minute post-dose and is sustained for up to 24 hours. The estimated 24-hour potency (expressed as the concentration of dosing solution) is 45.0 mg/ml. Once-daily dose of revefenacin provided long-term improvement in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). It improved day 28 trough FEV1 over placebo significantly (p < 0.001). M3: M2 receptor half-life is 12 compared to the other antagonists that have M3: M2 receptor half-life around 6.0. A 24-hour serial spirometry, on day 84, showed that revefenacin 88 or 175 µg was associated with significant (p <0.01) improvements in trough FEV1 at all time points compared with placebo. Revefenacin is generally well-tolerated and unlike the other anti-muscarinics, it has no systemic anti-cholinergic adverse effects.

Improvements in Lung Function with Nebulized Revefenacin in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate to Very Severe COPD: Results from Two Replicate Phase III Clinical Trials

Background

Revefenacin, a novel, lung-selective, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, has been developed for nebulized therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We present the results of replicate Phase III efficacy and safety studies of revefenacin in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

Methods

In 2 double-blind, parallel-group studies, (Study 0126 and Study 0127), patients ≥ 40 years old were randomized to revefenacin 88 μg, revefenacin 175 μg or placebo administered once daily by standard jet nebulizer for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was 24-hour trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) on day 85. Secondary efficacy endpoints included overall treatment effect (OTE) on trough FEV₁ and peak FEV₁ (0-2 hours after first dose). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events.

Results

At day 85, revefenacin 88 µg and 175 µg improved trough FEV₁ versus placebo in Study 0126 (by 79 mL [p=0.0003] and 146 mL [p<0.0001]) and Study 0127 (by 160 mL and 147 mL; both p<0.0001). Compared with placebo, pooled data of revefenacin 88 µg and 175 µg increased OTE trough FEV₁ by 115 mL and 142 mL (both p<0.001) and increased peak FEV₁ by 127 mL and 129 mL (both p<0.0001). Revefenacin 175 µg demonstrated greater improvements in FEV₁ in concomitant long-acting beta2-agonist patients and in more severe patients than revefenacin 88 µg. Adverse events were minor.

Conclusion

Revefenacin, administered once daily for 12 weeks to patients with moderate to very severe COPD, demonstrated clinically significant improvements in trough FEV₁ and OTE FEV₁. Revefenacin was generally well tolerated with no major safety concerns.

Efficacy and safety of a novel, nebulized glycopyrrolate for the treatment of COPD: effect of baseline disease severity and age; pooled analysis of GOLDEN 3 and GOLDEN 4

Background

The efficacy and safety of nebulized glycopyrrolate inhalation solution (GLY), administered twice daily (BID) via the innovative eFlow^® Closed System nebulizer (PARI Pharma GmbH, Starnberg, Germany), were demonstrated in two replicate, placebo-controlled, 12-week Phase III studies (GOLDEN 3 and GOLDEN 4). This report evaluates the efficacy and safety of GLY by baseline disease severity and age in the pooled GOLDEN 3 and GOLDEN 4 patient population (N=1,294).

Methods

Patients were grouped by baseline predicted post-bronchodilator FEV₁ (<50%, ≥50%) and age (<65, ≥65, ≥75 years).

Results

GLY (25 and 50 μg BID) produced significant improvements in trough FEV₁ in FEV₁% predicted <50% (0.070 L, 0.079 L) and ≥50% (0.112 L, 0.126 L) subgroups (P<0.01 vs placebo), and in patients aged <65 (0.056 L, 0.086 L), ≥65 (0.140 L, 0.124 L), and ≥75 (0.144 L, 0.120 L) years (P<0.05 vs placebo). St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score was significantly improved with GLY 25 and 50 μg BID (P<0.05 vs placebo) in FEV₁% predicted <50% (−3.237, −3.061) and ≥50% (−3.392, −2.322) and in <65 years (−3.447, −2.318) and ≥65 years (−3.053, −3.098) subgroups. In patients aged ≥75 years, GLY 25 μg reduced SGRQ total score by −6.278 units (P<0.01 vs placebo). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between GLY and placebo across all subgroups, and the overall incidence of cardiovascular events was low.

Conclusions

Nebulized GLY improved lung function and health status and was well tolerated over 12 weeks in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, irrespective of baseline disease severity and age.

Clinical trial registration

NCT02347761, NCT02347774.

Health-Related Quality of Life Improvements in Moderate to Very Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients on Nebulized Glycopyrrolate: Evidence from the GOLDEN Studies

Background: Symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may diminish patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We report effects of Longhala™ Magnair™ (glycopyrrolate) Inhalation Solution, a drug/device combination of the long-acting antimuscarinic glycopyrrolate administered using the eFlow® closed system (eFlow CS) nebulizer, on HRQoL from the Glycopyrrolate for Obstructive Lung Disease Via Electronic Nebulizer (GOLDEN) clinical studies. Methods: Data consisted of a pooled analysis of 2 phase 3, 12-week efficacy studies (GOLDEN-3 and -4) of glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS (25 or 50 mcg twice daily [BID]) versus placebo, and a 48-week, open-label safety study (GOLDEN-5) of glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS 50 mcg BID versus tiotropium 18 mcg once daily in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. Change from baseline in HRQoL was measured via the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Results are provided as mean changes in SGRQ Total score and as response analysis (≥4-point improvement [responder], no change, and ≥4-point worsening in Total score) using analysis of covariance or logistic regression, as applicable. Results: Atotal of 1293 patients were evaluated from GOLDEN-3 and -4 and 1086 from GOLDEN-5. Glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS significantly improved SGRQ Total and component scores. The percentage of SGRQ responders in pooled GOLDEN-3/4 was 46.8% for glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS 25 mcg, 41.7% for glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS 50 mcg, and 34.5% for placebo. SGRQ Total and component score improvements were similar between glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS and tiotropium in GOLDEN-5. Conclusions: The drug/device combination of glycopyrrolate/eFlow CS significantly improved HRQoL, as measured by the SGRQ, offering a potential maintenance treatment option in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02347761, NCT02347774, NCT02276222.

Pharmacological properties of revefenacin (TD-4208), a novel, nebulized long-acting, and lung selective muscarinic antagonist, at human recombinant muscarinic receptors and in rat, guinea pig, and human isolated airway tissues

Revefenacin (TD‐4208) is a novel, long‐acting, and lung‐selective muscarinic cholinergic receptor (mAChR) antagonist in development as a nebulized inhalation solution for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This study evaluated the pharmacology of revefenacin at human recombinant mAChRs and in airway tissues from rats, guinea pigs, and humans. At human recombinant mAChRs, revefenacin displayed high affinity (pK_I = 8.2‐9.8) and behaved as a competitive antagonist (pKI, apparent = 9.4‐10.9) at the five human recombinant mAChRs. Kinetic studies demonstrated that revefenacin dissociated significantly slower from the hM₃ (t_1/2 = 82 minutes) compared to the hM₂ (t_1/2 = 6.9 minutes) mAChR at 37°C, thereby making it kinetically selective for the former subtype. Similarly, in functional studies, revefenacin‐mediated antagonism of acetylcholine (ACh)‐evoked calcium mobilization responses were reversed less rapidly at hM₃ compared to the hM₂ mAChR. In isolated tracheal tissues from rat and guinea pig and isolated bronchial tissues from humans, revefenacin potently antagonized mAChR‐mediated contractile responses. Furthermore, the antagonistic effects of revefenacin in rat, guinea pig, and human airway tissues were slowly reversible (t_1/2 of 13.3, >16, and >10 hours, respectively). These data demonstrate that revefenacin is a potent, high affinity, and selective functional mAChR antagonist with kinetic selectivity for the hM₃ receptor and produces potent and long‐lasting antagonism of mAChR‐mediated contractile responses in rat, guinea pig, and human airway tissue. These data suggest that revefenacin has the potential to be a potent once‐daily dosed inhaled bronchodilator in COPD patients.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Post-acute/Long-term Care Settings: Seizing Opportunities to Individualize Treatment and Device Selection

INTRODUCTION

The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in post-acute/long-term care (PA/LTC) settings is high, and many patients do not receive guideline-recommended care.

METHODS

An interprofessional expert panel of PA/LTC professionals convened to discuss the unmet medical needs in patients with COPD in PA/LTC settings, and to make recommendations for the assessment of COPD patients to individualize the selection of maintenance treatment.

RESULTS

Unmet needs observed in patients with COPD are described in addition to new tools for assessing individual patient abilities and appropriate device selection for maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSION

COPD management in PA/LTC settings needs to be reevaluated and updated to help reduce exacerbations, hospitalizations, and readmissions.

Inhalation device options for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by chronic respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation, resulting from abnormalities in the airway and/or damage to the alveoli. Primary care physicians manage the healthcare of a large proportion of patients with COPD. In addition to determining the most appropriate medication regimen, which usually includes inhaled bronchodilators with or without inhaled corticosteroids, physicians are charged with optimizing inhalation device selection to facilitate effective drug delivery and patient adherence. The large variety of inhalation devices currently available present numerous challenges for physicians that include: (1) gaining knowledge of and proficiency with operating different device classes; (2) identifying the most appropriate inhalation device for the patient; and (3) providing the necessary education and training for patients on device use. This review provides an overview of the inhalation device types currently available in the United States for delivery of COPD medications, including information on their successful operation and respective advantages and disadvantages, factors to consider in matching a device to an individual patient, the need for device training for patients and physicians, and guidance for improving treatment adherence. Finally, the review will discuss established and novel tools and technology that may aid physicians in improving education and promoting better adherence to therapy.