Any Decrease in Lung Function is Associated With Worse Clinical Outcomes: Post Hoc Analysis of the IMPACT Interventional Trial

This article does not contain an abstract.

Taxonomic and functional restoration of tallgrass prairie soil microbial communities in comparison to remnant and agricultural soils

Restoring ecosystems requires the re-establishment of diverse soil microbial communities that drive critical ecosystem functions. In grasslands, restoration and management require the application of disturbances like fire and grazing. Disturbances can shape microbial taxonomic composition and potentially functional composition as well. We characterized taxonomic and functional gene composition of soil communities using whole genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing to determine how restored soil communities differed from pre-restoration agricultural soils and original remnant soils, how management affects soil microbes, and whether restoration and management affect the number of microbial genes associated with carbohydrate degradation. We found distinct differences in both taxonomic and functional diversity and composition among restored, remnant, and agricultural soils. Remnant soils had low taxonomic and functional richness and diversity, as well as distinct composition, indicating that restoration of agricultural soils does not re-create soil microbial communities that match remnants. Prescribed fire management increased functional diversity, which also was higher in more recently planted restorations. Finally, restored and post-fire soils included high abundances of genes encoding cellulose-degrading enzymes, so restorations and their ongoing management can potentially support functions important in carbon cycling.

Years After a Fire, Biocrust Microbial Communities are Similar to Unburned Communities in a Coastal Grassland

Microbial communities are integral for ecosystem processes and their taxonomic composition and function may be altered by a disturbance such as fire. Biocrusts are composed of macroscopic and microscopic organisms and are important for a variety of ecosystem functions, such as nutrient cycling and erosion control. We sought to understand if biocrust community composition and function were altered 1 year after a prescribed fire and 6 years after a wildfire in a coastal California grassland on San Clemente Island. We used shotgun metagenomic sequencing and measurements of chlorophyll content, exopolysaccharide production related to soil stability, and nitrogen fixation. There were no differences in the community composition between unburned samples and the samples burned in the prescribed fire and wildfire. Chlorophyll content differed between the prescribed fire and the controls; however, there were no measured differences in exopolysaccharide production, and nitrogen fixation. However, the wildfire and their respective unburned samples had different functions based on the gene annotations. We compiled one Actinobacteria metagenome-assembled genome from the shotgun sequences which had genes for oxidative and heat stress tolerance. These results suggest that the biocrust community can reach a community composition and function similar to the unburned biocrusts within a year after a prescribed burn and 6 years after a wildfire. However, legacy effects of the wildfire may present themselves in the differences between functional gene sequences. Due to their ability to match the undisturbed community composition and function within years and without intervention, future restoration work should consider the biocrusts in their restoration plans as they may provide valuable ecosystem functions after a disturbance.

Mortality Risk and Serious Cardiopulmonary Events in Moderate-to-Severe COPD: Post Hoc Analysis of the IMPACT Trial

Background

In the InforMing the Pathway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate (FF) /umeclidinium (UMEC) /vilanterol (VI) significantly reduced severe exacerbation rates and all-cause mortality (ACM) risk versus UMEC/VI among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This post hoc analysis aimed to define the risk of ACM during and following a moderate/severe exacerbation, and further determine the benefit-risk profile of FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI using a cardiopulmonary composite adverse event (AE) endpoint.

Methods

The 52-week, double-blind IMPACT trial randomized patients with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 exacerbation in the prior year 2:2:1 to once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25mcg, FF/VI 100/25mcg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25mcg. Post hoc endpoints included the risk of ACM during, 1-90 and 91-365 days post moderate or severe exacerbation and time-to-first cardiopulmonary composite event.

Results

Of the 10,355 patients included, 5034 (49%) experienced moderate/severe exacerbations. Risk of ACM was significantly increased during a severe exacerbation event compared with baseline (hazard ratio [HR]: 41.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.49-64.15]; p<0.001) but not significantly different at 1-90 days post-severe exacerbation (HR: 2.13 [95% CI: 0.86-5.29]; p=0.102). Moderate exacerbations did not significantly increase the risk of ACM during or after an exacerbation. Cardiopulmonary composite events occurred in 647 (16%), 636 (15%), and 356 (17%) patients receiving FF/UMEC/VI, FF/VI, and UMEC/VI, respectively; FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced cardiopulmonary composite event risk versus UMEC/VI by 16.5% (95% CI: 5.0-26.7; p=0.006).

Conclusion

Results confirm a substantial mortality risk during severe exacerbations, and an underlying CV risk. FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced the risk of a composite cardiopulmonary AE versus UMEC/VI.

How can the findings of the EMAX trial on long-acting bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease be applied in the primary care setting?

This review addresses outstanding questions regarding initial pharmacological management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Optimizing initial treatment improves clinical outcomes in symptomatic patients, including those with low exacerbation risk. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy improves lung function versus LAMA or LABA monotherapy, although other treatment benefits have been less consistently observed. The benefits of dual bronchodilation in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk, and its duration of efficacy and cost effectiveness in this population, are not yet fully established. Questions remain on the impact of baseline symptom severity, prior treatment, degree of reversibility to bronchodilators, and smoking status on responses to dual bronchodilator treatment. Using evidence from EMAX (NCT03034915), a 6-month trial comparing the LAMA/LABA combination umeclidinium/vilanterol with umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapy in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk who were inhaled corticosteroid-naïve, we describe how these findings can be applied in primary care.

Effect of chronic mucus hypersecretion on treatment responses to inhaled therapies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Post hoc analysis of the IMPACT trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Chronic mucus hypersecretion (CMH) is a clinical phenotype of COPD. This exploratory post hoc analysis assessed relationship between CMH status and treatment response in IMPACT.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg, FF/VI 100/25 μg or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg and designated CMH+ if they scored 1/2 in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) questions 1 and 2. Endpoints assessed by baseline CMH status included on-treatment exacerbation rates, change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second, SGRQ total score, COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score, proportion of SGRQ and CAT responders at Week 52 and safety.

RESULTS

Of 10,355 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 10,250 reported baseline SGRQ data (CMH+: 62% [n = 6383]). FF/UMEC/VI significantly (p < 0.001) reduced on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in CMH+ (rate ratio: 0.87 and 0.72) and CMH- patients (0.82 and 0.80). FF/UMEC/VI significantly (p < 0.05) reduced on-treatment severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI in CMH+ (0.62) and CMH- (0.74) subgroups. Similar improvements in health status and lung function with FF/UMEC/VI were observed, regardless of CMH status. In CMH+ patients, FF/VI significantly (p < 0.001) reduced on-treatment moderate/severe and severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI (0.83 and 0.70).

CONCLUSION

FF/UMEC/VI had a favourable benefit: risk profile versus dual therapies irrespective of CMH status. The presence of CMH did not influence treatment response or exacerbations, lung function and/or health status. However, CMH did generate differences when dual therapies were compared and the impact of CMH should be considered in future trial design.

Single-inhaler triple therapy fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus dual therapy in current and former smokers with COPD: IMPACT trial post hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

Smoking is the major risk factor for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In IMPACT, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy significantly reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates and improved lung function and health status versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI in COPD patients. This post hoc analysis investigated trial outcomes by smoking status.

METHODS

IMPACT was a double-blind, 52-week trial. Patients aged ≥40 years with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the prior year were randomized 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 μg, FF/VI 100/25 μg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg. Endpoints assessed by smoking status at screening included rate and risk of moderate/severe exacerbations, change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score at Week 52. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 10,355 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 3,587 (35%) were current smokers. FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in current (rate ratio 0.85 [95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.95]; P = 0.003 and 0.86 [0.76-0.98]; P = 0.021) and former smokers (0.85 [0.78-0.91]; P < 0.001 and 0.70 [0.64-0.77]; P < 0.001). FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced time-to-first on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in former smokers, and versus FF/VI in current smokers. Similar trends were seen for lung function and health status. Former smokers receiving inhaled corticosteroid-containing therapy had higher pneumonia incidence than current smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

FF/UMEC/VI improved clinical outcomes versus dual therapy regardless of smoking status. Benefits of FF/UMEC/VI versus UMEC/VI were greatest in former smokers, potentially due to relative corticosteroid resistance in current smokers.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

GSK (CTT116855/NCT02164513).

Time‐Dependent Risk of Cardiovascular Events Following an Exacerbation in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Post Hoc Analysis From the IMPACT Trial

Background

The association between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations and increased cardiovascular event risk has not been adequately studied in a heterogenous population with both low and high cardiovascular risk.

Methods and Results

This post hoc analysis of the IMPACT (Informing the Pathway of COPD Treatment) trial (N=10 355 symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at risk of exacerbations) evaluated time‐dependent risk of cardiovascular adverse events of special interest (CVAESI) following exacerbations and impact of exacerbation history, cardiovascular risk factors, and study treatment on this association. Risk (time‐to‐first) of CVAESI or CVAESI resulting in hospitalization or death was assessed during and 1 to 30, 31 to 90, and 91 to 365 days after resolution of moderate or severe exacerbations. CVAESI risk was compared between the period before and during/after exacerbation. CVAESI risk increased significantly during a moderate (hazard ratio [HR], 2.63 [95% CI, 2.08–3.32]) or severe (HR, 21.84 [95% CI, 17.71–26.93]) exacerbation and remained elevated for 30 days following an exacerbation (moderate: HR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.28–2.08]; severe: HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.99–3.11; nonsignificant]) and decreased over time, returning to baseline by 90 days. Risk of CVAESI resulting in hospitalization or death also increased during an exacerbation (moderate: HR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.53–3.97]; severe: HR, 41.29 [95% CI, 30.43–56.03]) and decreased in a similar time‐dependent pattern. Results were consistent regardless of exacerbation history, cardiovascular risk at screening, or study treatment.

Conclusions

Overall risk of cardiovascular events was higher during and in the 30 days following chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations, even among those with low cardiovascular risk, highlighting the need for exacerbation prevention and vigilance for cardiovascular events following exacerbations.

Registration

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02164513; Unique identifier: NCT02164513

Effect of Recent Exacerbation History on the Efficacy of Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Triple Therapy in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the FULFIL Trial

Background

In the FULFIL trial, once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) resulted in reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates and conferred significant improvements in lung function and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) versus twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) dual therapy.

Methods

FULFIL was a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study. Patients ≥40 years of age with symptomatic COPD were randomized 1:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 mcg or BUD/FOR 400/12 mcg. In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized by exacerbation history in the year prior to study entry (≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation [recent exacerbation] versus no recent exacerbation). Endpoints included annual rate of on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbations up to Week 24, annual rate of on-treatment severe exacerbations up to Week 24, change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second at Week 24, and change from baseline in health status as measured by St George’s respiratory questionnaire total score at Week 24.

Results

Of the 1810 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 1180 (65%) had one or more moderate/severe exacerbation in the year prior to entry, while 630 (35%) patients did not. FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR significantly reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates in the recent exacerbation subgroup (mean annualized rate: 0.19 vs 0.29; rate ratio [95% confidence interval [CI]]: 0.64: [0.45, 0.91]; p=0.014) and numerically reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates in the no recent exacerbation subgroup (mean annualized rate: 0.29 vs 0.43; rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.67 [0.43, 1.04]; p=0.073). Severe exacerbation rates were numerically reduced with FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR treatment across both subgroups. FF/UMEC/VI conferred significant improvements in lung function and health status versus BUD/FOR, regardless of recent exacerbation history.

Conclusion

FF/UMEC/VI reduced moderate/severe and severe exacerbation rates and improved lung function and health status versus BUD/FOR in patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of recent exacerbation history.

International Differences in the Frequency of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations Reported in Three Clinical Trials

Rationale: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are an important endpoint in multinational clinical treatment trials, but the observed event rate is often lower than anticipated and appears to vary between countries. Objectives: We investigated whether systematic differences in national exacerbation rates might explain this observed variation. Methods: We reviewed data from three large multicenter international randomized trials conducted over an 18-year period with different designs and clinical severities of COPD, comparing bronchodilator and/or inhaled corticosteroids with bronchodilators alone and/or placebo. Exacerbations were defined by antibiotic and/or oral corticosteroid use (moderate) or need for hospitalization (severe). We calculated crude exacerbation rates in the 30 countries contributing 30 or more patients to at least two trials. We grouped data by exacerbation rate based on their first study contribution. Measurements and Main Results: For the 29,756 patients in 41 countries analyzed, the mean exacerbation rate was two- to threefold different between the highest and lowest tertiles of the recruiting nations. These differences were not explained by demographic features, study protocol, or reported exacerbation history at enrollment. Of the 18 countries contributing to all trials, half of those in the highest and half in the lowest tertiles of exacerbation history remained in these groups across trials. Severe exacerbations showed a different rank order internationally. Conclusions: Countries contributing to COPD trials differ consistently in their reporting of healthcare-defined exacerbations. These differences help explain why large studies have been needed to show differences between treatments that decrease exacerbation risk.

Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in Patients with Advanced COPD: Bayesian Modeling of the Healthcare Resource Utilization Data and Associated Costs from the IMPACT Trial

Objectives

In the IMPACT trial (NCT02164513), triple therapy with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) showed clinical benefit compared with dual therapy with either FF/VI or UMEC/VI in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We used data from IMPACT to determine whether this translated into differences in COPD-related healthcare resource utilization (HRU) costs in a United Kingdom (UK) setting.

Methods

In a within-trial analysis, individual patient data from the IMPACT intention-to-treat (ITT) population were analyzed to estimate rates of COPD-related HRU with FF/UMEC/VI, FF/VI, or UMEC/VI. A Bayesian approach was applied to address issues typically encountered with this kind of data, namely data missing due to early study withdrawal, subjects with zero reported HRU, and skewness. Rates of HRU were estimated under alternate assumptions of data being missing at random (MAR) or missing not at random (MNAR). UK-specific unit costs were then applied to estimated HRU rates to calculate treatment-specific costs.

Results

Under each MNAR scenario, per patient per year (PPPY) rates of COPD-related HRU were lowest amongst those patients who received treatment with FF/UMEC/VI compared with those receiving either FF/VI or UMEC/VI. Although absolute HRU rates and costs were typically higher for all treatment groups under MNAR scenarios versus MAR, final economic conclusions were robust to patient withdrawals.

Conclusions

PPPY rates were typically lower with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI.

Aboveground competition influences density‐dependent effects of cordgrass on sediment biogeochemistry

Interspecific interactions between plants influence plant phenotype, distribution, abundance, and community structure. Each of these can, in turn, impact sediment biogeochemistry. Although the population and community level impacts of these interactions have been extensively studied, less is known about their effect on sediment biogeochemistry. This is surprising given that many plants are categorized as foundation species that exert strong control on community structure. In southern California salt marshes, we used clipping experiments to manipulate aboveground neighbor presence to study interactions between two dominant plants, Pacific cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) and perennial pickleweed (Sarcocornia pacifica). We also measured how changes in cordgrass stem density influenced sediment biogeochemistry. Pickleweed suppressed cordgrass stem density but had no effect on aboveground biomass. For every cordgrass stem lost per square meter, porewater ammonium increased 0.3–1.0 µM. Thus, aboveground competition with pickleweed weakened the effects of cordgrass on sediment biogeochemistry. Predictions about plant–soil feedbacks, especially under future climate scenarios, will be improved when plant–plant interactions are considered, particularly those containing dominant and foundation species.

Groundwater-surface water interactions and flux of organic matter and nutrients in an urban, Mediterranean stream

The chemical quality of dissolved organic matter (DOM) and the speciation of nitrogen exported from urban catchments is of great importance to biogeochemical cycling in riverine and coastal receiving waters. Many urban streams in Mediterranean climates have a flashy hydrologic regime, which would suggest a rapid pulsing and shunting of solutes downstream. However, the role of these systems both as passive pipes for solute transport or as reactors for DOM and nutrient transformation is still an open question for urban, Mediterranean streams. To address this question, we evaluated changes in concentrations of inorganic and organic solutes and DOM optical properties in Alvarado Creek, a perennially-flowing, urban, first-order tributary of the San Diego River in San Diego, CA, USA, during dry weather (baseflow) conditions and during four storm events in 2016-2018. Chloride and sulfate concentrations corroborate the supposed saline groundwater supply that maintains perennial flow and brackish nature in this urban stream. During dry weather, high proportions of protein-like fluorescent component (AC4) and downstream decreases in total dissolved nitrogen (TDN) and nitrate imply in-stream processing (nitrification and denitrification). By contrast, storm hysteresis curves indicate that the supply of DOM and TDN was not exhausted over the duration of a storm event, whereas nitrate was eventually depleted, presumably because nitrification could not keep up with the export of nitrate from source areas. Rapid decreases in chloride during the storm hydrograph coincided with a shift in specific ultraviolet absorbance (SUVA) and fluorescence index (FI) to more terrestrially-derived and aromatic carbon sources, most likely from interflow of stormwater through vadose zone soils. On an annual basis, the export of microbially-derived DOM during dry weather was higher than the export of terrestrially-derived DOM during storm events; both represent important carbon inputs to coastal waters.

Disease Burden and Healthcare Utilization Among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in England

Purpose

Clinical guidelines for COPD management suggest pharmacologic treatment algorithms based on symptoms and exacerbation history. As previous research has suggested that prescribing patterns are not always aligned with these recommendations, this study investigated the burden of disease in patients with COPD receiving, and persisting on, new inhaled maintenance therapy.

Patients and Methods

This was a retrospective observational study using two linked electronic databases containing health records of patients in England. Patients aged ≥35 years with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD, and who initiated a new inhaled respiratory pharmacologic maintenance regimen between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016 (index date) were eligible for inclusion. New treatments could be long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) monotherapy, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA or LAMA/LABA dual therapy, or a multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT; LAMA/LABA/ICS). Patients were required to have 12 months of available medical history prior to, and after, the index date.

Results

In total, 25,350 eligible patients were identified, of these 8282 (mean age: 70.9 years; 51.5% male) persisted with their newly prescribed inhaled therapy for ≥12 months and were included in the analysis. In the 12 months prior to index, 54% of patients had moderate or severe dyspnea (Medical Research Council score ≥3). The most common therapy initiated at index was MITT (42%), followed by ICS/LABA dual therapy (31.2%). The proportion of patients with moderate or severe dyspnea in the post-index period ranged from 29.0% of patients receiving ICS to 64.2% of patients receiving MITT. In the post-index period, 48.1% of patients experienced ≥1 exacerbation and 54.9% had ≥5 general practitioner visits.

Conclusion

Many of the patients with COPD in our study continued to experience symptoms and exacerbations, despite persisting on the same treatment for ≥12 months. This suggests that some patients may benefit from treatment modification in accordance with guideline recommendations.

Higher COPD Assessment Test Score Associated With Greater Exacerbations Risk: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IMPACT Trial

BACKGROUND

In the InforMing the PAthway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This post hoc analysis tested the relationship between baseline health status, risk of future exacerbations, and efficacy outcomes.

METHODS

IMPACT was a Phase 3, double-blind, 52-week trial in patients with symptomatic COPD (COPD Assessment Test [CAT] score ≥10) and ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the prior year randomized 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25mcg, FF/VI 100/25mcg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25mcg. Annual rate of on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbations, lung function, and safety were analyzed by continuous baseline CAT score.

RESULTS

Moderate/severe exacerbation rates increased with increasing baseline CAT scores in FF/UMEC/VI and UMEC/VI arms. There was a very small increase in on-treatment pneumonia rates at higher baseline CAT scores across all treatment arms. FF/UMEC/VI reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI (i.e., the inhaled corticosteroid effect) consistently across the range of CAT scores. The reduction with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI (i.e., the long-acting muscarinic antagonist effect) was greatest at lower CAT scores and appeared lesser at higher CAT scores. Improvements in lung function were observed with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI, regardless of baseline CAT score.

CONCLUSIONS

The CAT score was predictive of exacerbation risk. Worse baseline health status was associated with higher moderate/severe exacerbation and pneumonia rates. Irrespective of baseline CAT score, FF/UMEC/VI improved lung function, and reduced the annual moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus dual therapy. Results indicate an overall favorable benefit-risk profile of triple versus dual therapy, irrespective of CAT score. Clinical Trial Registration:GSK (CTT116855/NCT02164513).

Discordant diagnostic criteria for pneumonia in COPD trials: a review

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a class effect of increasing pneumonia risk in patients with COPD. However, pneumonia incidence varies widely across clinical trials of ICS use in COPD. This review clarifies methodological differences in defining and recording pneumonia events in these trials and discusses factors that could contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. Literature searches and screening yielded 40 relevant references for inclusion. Methods used to capture pneumonia events in these studies included investigator-reported pneumonia adverse events, standardised list of signs or symptoms, radiographic confirmation of suspected cases and/or confirmation by an independent clinical end-point committee. In general, more stringent pneumonia diagnosis criteria led to lower reported pneumonia incidence rates. In addition, studies varied in design and population characteristics, including exacerbation history and lung function, factors that probably contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. As such, cross-trial comparisons are problematic. A minimal set of standardised criteria for diagnosis and reporting of pneumonia should be used in COPD studies, as well as reporting of patients’ pneumonia history at baseline, to allow comparison of pneumonia rates between trials. Currently, within-trial comparison of ICS-containing versus non-ICS-containing treatments is the appropriate method to assess the influence of ICS on pneumonia incidence.

Trials of ICS in COPD use varying methods of reporting pneumonia incidence, which influence the interpretation of results. A minimal set of standardised criteria for pneumonia diagnosis would allow comparison of pneumonia incidence between trials.https://bit.ly/3nbkdoL

Economic Evaluation of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus Umeclidinium or Salmeterol in Symptomatic Non-Exacerbating Patients with COPD from a UK Perspective Using the GALAXY Model

Introduction

Dual bronchodilators are recommended as maintenance treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD in the UK; further evidence is needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness versus monotherapy. Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol from a UK healthcare perspective in patients without exacerbations in the previous year was assessed using post hoc EMAX trial data.

Methods

The validated GALAXY model was populated with baseline characteristics and treatment effects from the non-exacerbating subgroup of the symptomatic EMAX population (COPD assessment test score ≥10) and 2020 UK healthcare and drug costs. Outputs included estimated exacerbation rates, costs, life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost/QALY gained. The base case (probabilistic model) used a 10-year time horizon, assumed no treatment discontinuation, and discounted future costs and QALYs by 3.5% annually. Sensitivity and scenario analyses assessed robustness of model results.

Results

Umeclidinium/vilanterol treatment was dominant versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, providing an additional 0.090 LYs (95% range: 0.035, 0.158) and 0.055 QALYs (−0.059, 0.168) with total cost savings of £690 (£231, £1306) versus umeclidinium, and 0.174 LYs (0.076, 0.286) and 0.204 QALYs (0.079, 0.326) with savings of £1336 (£1006, £2032) versus salmeterol. In scenario and sensitivity analyses, umeclidinium/vilanterol was dominant versus umeclidinium except over a 5-year time horizon (more QALYs at higher total cost; ICER=£4/QALY gained) and at the lowest estimate of the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire treatment effect (fewer QALYs at lower total cost; ICER=£12,284/QALY gained); umeclidinium/vilanterol was consistently dominant versus salmeterol. At willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY, probability that umeclidinium/vilanterol was cost-effective in this non-exacerbating subgroup was 95% versus umeclidinium and 100% versus salmeterol.

Conclusion

Based on model predictions from a UK perspective, symptomatic patients with COPD and no exacerbations in the prior year receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol are expected to have better outcomes at lower costs versus umeclidinium and salmeterol.

Molecular Mirror Technology Facilitates High-Throughput, Accurate SARS-CoV-2 Testing

Tests to diagnose acute SARS-CoV-2 infection are at the center of controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid tests benefit from providing quick results but suffer from lower sensitivity, while PCR tests usually take longer to provide more reliable results and can be difficult to scale to meet population needs. We evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of a Molecular Mirror assay (MMA) using nucleic acid extraction and a nucleic acid extraction-free method to determine its ability to identify SARS-CoV-2 in nasal specimens from individuals suspected of having SARS-CoV-2. We compared the MMA using nucleic acid extraction to the emergency use authorization (EUA)-approved TaqPath reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) assay to determine its performance characteristics. From 412 total specimens (including 115 previous positives and 297 previous negatives), we found that the positive percent agreement (PPA) was 99.1% (confidence interval [CI], 97.4% to 100.0%) and the negative percent agreement (NPA) was 99.3% (95% CI, 98.4% to 100.0%) for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Using the extraction-free method, we analyzed 109 specimens (51 previous positives and 58 previous negatives) and found that the PPA for the more rapid version of the assay was 87.8% (95% CI, 78.5% to 96.9%) and the NPA was 100.0% (95% CI, 100.0%) for virus detection. The extraction method has performance comparable to what is observed in many PCR-based assays. The extraction-free method has lower PPA but has the advantage of being more rapid and having a higher throughput. Our data offer a proof of concept that nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) detection can be used in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing and may allow for alternative supply chains to increase testing options. IMPORTANCE Accurate diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 infections have been critical for responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Both high-sensitivity/specificity PCR-based tests and lower-sensitivity/specificity rapid antigen assays have been the subject of worldwide supply chain limitations as individual facilities and countries have struggled to meet their population testing needs. We evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of a Molecular Mirror assay (MMA), which uses nuclear magnetic resonance to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids both with and without full nucleic acid extractions. We found that compared to a U.S. emergency use authorization (EUA) approved assay (TaqPath) that uses reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), the MMA had high PPA and NPA with full nucleic acid extractions, and acceptable positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) with an extraction-free protocol. In a landscape marred by supply chain shortages across the world, altered SARS-CoV-2 detection methods such as the MMA can add to testing supplies while providing quality SARS-CoV-2 testing results.

Efficacy and Safety of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Current and Former Smokers with COPD: A Prespecified Analysis of The EMAX Trial

Introduction

Smoking may reduce the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its impact on bronchodilator efficacy is unclear. This analysis of the EMAX trial explored efficacy and safety of dual- versus mono-bronchodilator therapy in current or former smokers with COPD.

Methods

The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated lung function, symptoms, health status, exacerbations, clinically important deterioration, and safety with umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, and salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving ICS. Current and former smoker subgroups were defined by smoking status at screening.

Results

The analysis included 1203 (50%) current smokers and 1221 (50%) former smokers. Both subgroups demonstrated greater improvements from baseline in trough FEV₁ at week 24 (primary endpoint) with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium (least squares [LS] mean difference, mL [95% CI]; current: 84 [50, 117]; former: 49 [18, 80]) and salmeterol (current: 165 [132, 198]; former: 117 [86, 148]) and larger reductions in rescue medication inhalations/day over 24 weeks versus umeclidinium (LS mean difference [95% CI]; current: − 0.42 [− 0.63, − 0.20]; former: − 0.25 − 0.44, − 0.05]) and salmeterol (current: − 0.28 [− 0.49, − 0.06]; former: − 0.29 [− 0.49, − 0.09]). Umeclidinium/vilanterol increased the odds (odds ratio [95% CI]) of clinically significant improvement at week 24 in Transition Dyspnea Index versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.16, 2.06]; former: 1.32 [0.99, 1.75]) and salmeterol (current: 1.37 (1.03, 1.82]; former: 1.60 [1.20, 2.13]) and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms–COPD versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.13, 2.09]; former: 1.50 [1.11, 2.04]) and salmeterol (current: 1.53 [1.13, 2.08]; former: 1.53 [1.12, 2.08]). All treatments were well tolerated in both subgroups.

Conclusions

In current and former smokers, umeclidinium/vilanterol provided greater improvements in lung function and symptoms versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, supporting consideration of dual-bronchodilator therapy in symptomatic patients with COPD regardless of their smoking status.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01855-y.

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often require daily medication to control their COPD. Many patients with COPD are smokers, and smoking is one of the most common causes of COPD. This means that it is important to find out whether COPD medications are effective in both smokers and nonsmokers. We analyzed data from a clinical trial (EMAX) that investigated the use of a combination of two bronchodilators, which are inhaled medications that help to open the airways. We compared umeclidinium/vilanterol, a dual-bronchodilator combination, with a single bronchodilator (either umeclidinium or salmeterol) over 6 months. We found that both current and former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol had larger improvements in lung function than those receiving umeclidinium or salmeterol. Current or former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol used their reliever inhaler less than those treated with umeclidinium or salmeterol. Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol were generally less likely to experience disease worsening compared with umeclidinium or salmeterol if they were former smokers, or compared with salmeterol if they were current smokers. Our findings suggest that umeclidinium/vilanterol may be more effective than a single bronchodilator for daily treatment of patients with COPD who are current or former smokers. Physicians should consider prescribing a combination of two bronchodilators to patients who have symptoms, whether or not they currently smoke, as well as encouraging smoking cessation for all patients.

Genetics plays a limited role in predicting chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment response and exacerbation

BACKGROUND

Combination treatments, targeting multiple disease processes, benefit subjects with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). However, predicting treatment response and exacerbation risk remain challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To identify genetic associations with AECOPD risk and response to combination therapy (fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium bromide and vilanterol).

METHODS

The genetic basis of AECOPD disease was investigated in 19,841 subjects from 23 clinical studies and 2 disease cohorts to identify exacerbation disease targets. AECOPD pharmacogenetic effects were examined in 8439 moderate to severe COPD patients with exacerbation rate, lung function and quality of life endpoints; results were followed up in an additional 2201 subjects.

RESULTS

We did not identify significant associations in the AECOPD disease analysis. In the AECOPD pharmacogenetics analysis, rs56195836 (MAPK8) was significantly associated with moderate to severe exacerbation rate in subjects on fluticasone furoate with baseline blood eosinophils ≥150 cells/μl (P = 1.8 × 10^-8). Post-hoc, one variant was associated with on-treatment moderate to severe exacerbation rate stratifying by exacerbation history. AZU1 rs1962343 was significantly associated in subjects with frequent moderate exacerbation history when treated with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (P = 1.1 × 10^-8). Neither of these signals was supported in independent follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Common genetic variants do not play major roles in AECOPD disease nor predict response to triple therapy or its components in moderate to very severe COPD.

Dual Bronchodilator Therapy as First-Line Treatment in Maintenance-Naïve Patients with Symptomatic COPD: A Pre-Specified Analysis of the EMAX Trial

Introduction

Limited prospective evidence is available to guide selection of first-line maintenance therapy in patients with COPD. This pre-specified analysis of the EMAX trial explored the efficacy and safety of dual- versus mono-bronchodilator therapy in maintenance-naïve and maintenance-treated patients.

Methods

The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated lung function, symptoms (including rescue medication use), exacerbations, and safety with umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, and salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Maintenance-naïve and maintenance-treated subgroups were defined by maintenance bronchodilator use 30 days before screening.

Results

The analysis included 749 (31%) maintenance-naïve and 1676 (69%) maintenance-treated patients. For both subgroups, improvements from baseline in trough FEV₁ at Week 24 (primary endpoint) were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium (mean difference [95% CI]; maintenance-naïve: 44 mL [1, 87]; maintenance-treated: 77 mL [50, 104]), and salmeterol (maintenance-naïve: 128 mL [85, 171]; maintenance-treated: 145 mL [118, 172]), and in rescue medication inhalations/day over 24 weeks versus umeclidinium (maintenance-naïve: −0.44 [−0.73, −0.16]; maintenance-treated: −0.28 [−0.45, −0.12]) and salmeterol (maintenance-naïve: −0.37 [−0.66, −0.09]; maintenance-treated: −0.25 [−0.41, −0.08]). In maintenance-naïve patients, umeclidinium/vilanterol numerically improved scores at Week 24 for Transition Dyspnea Index versus umeclidinium (0.37 [−0.21, 0.96]) and versus salmeterol (0.47 [−0.10, 1.05]) and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms–COPD versus umeclidinium (−0.26 [−1.04, 0.53]) and versus salmeterol (−0.58 [−1.36, 0.20]), with similar improvements seen in maintenance-treated patients. All treatments were well tolerated across both subgroups.

Conclusion

Similar to maintenance-treated patients, maintenance-naïve patients receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol showed greater improvements in lung function and symptoms compared with patients receiving umeclidinium or salmeterol. These findings provide support for the consideration of dual bronchodilator treatment in symptomatic maintenance-naïve patients with COPD.

Plant community composition alters moisture and temperature sensitivity of soil respiration in semi-arid shrubland

Soil respiration (Rs) is the second largest carbon (C) flux to the atmosphere and our understanding of how Rs and its components shift with plant-community composition remains an important question. We used high-frequency soil respiration measurements and root exclusion to evaluate how Rs, autotrophic respiration (Ra) and heterotrophic respiration (Rh) vary between a semi-arid perennial shrub community and annual invasive community. Over two growing seasons, total Rs was 40% higher under annual vegetation compared to shrubs. Partitioning revealed consistently higher Ra under annual vegetation which accounted for most of the difference in Rs. Under annual vegetation, Ra increased soon after the first rain events and remained high despite cooling temperatures while shrub Ra increased only when soil temperature began to warm up. The Rh rates were similar between vegetation types when daily soil temperatures were lower than 20 °C. As soil temperatures increased and soil moisture dropped below 10%, Rh was consistently higher under annual vegetation than shrubs. Seasonal dynamics of Rs and Rh were best modeled with an interaction term between soil moisture and temperature with significantly different model parameters for each vegetation type. Differences in the timing and magnitude of Rs and Ra between vegetation types are consistent with phenological differences between shrubs and annuals. Under annuals, larger Rh at high temperatures suggests that expansion of annual vegetation and future hotter and drier conditions could lead to greater C losses from this semi-arid shrub system.

Trichotorquatus gen. nov. - a new genus of soil cyanobacteria discovered from American drylands1

Cyanobacteria are crucial ecosystem components in dryland soils. Advances in describing α-level taxonomy are needed to understand what drives their abundance and distribution. We describe Trichotorquatus gen. nov. (Oculatellaceae, Synechococcales, Cyanobacteria) based on four new species isolated from dryland soils including the coastal sage scrub near San Diego, California (USA), the Mojave and Colorado Deserts with sites at Joshua Tree National Park and Mojave National Preserve, California (USA), and the Atacama Desert (Chile). The genus is morphologically characterized by having thin trichomes (<4.5 μm wide), cells both shorter and longer than wide, rarely occurring single and double false branching, necridia appearing singly or in rows, and sheaths with a distinctive collar-like fraying and widening mid-filament, the feature for which the genus is named. The genus is morphologically nearly identical with Leptolyngbya sensu stricto but is phylogenetically quite distant from that genus. It is consequently a cryptic genus that will likely be differentiated in future studies based on 16S rRNA sequence data. The type species, T. maritimus sp. nov. is morphologically distinct from the other three species, T. coquimbo sp. nov., T. andrei sp. nov. and T. ladouxae sp. nov. However, these latter three species are morphologically very close and are considered by the authors to be cryptic species. All species are separated phylogenetically based on sequence of the 16S-23S ITS region. Three distinct ribosomal operons were recovered from the genus, lending difficulty to recognizing further diversity in this morphologically cryptic genus.

Early and sustained symptom improvement with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in COPD: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX randomised controlled trial

Background:

In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), both the time needed for patients to gain symptom improvement with long-acting bronchodilator therapy and whether an early response is predictive of a sustained response is unknown. This study aimed to investigate how quickly meaningful symptom responses are seen in patients with COPD with bronchodilator therapy and whether these responses are sustained.

Methods:

Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) was a 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial that randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI), umeclidinium or salmeterol. Daily Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS:COPD) score and rescue salbutamol use were captured via an electronic diary and analysed initially in 4-weekly periods. Post hoc analyses assessed change from baseline in daily E-RS:COPD score and rescue medication use weekly (Weeks 1–8), and association between E-RS:COPD responder status at Weeks 1–4 and later time points.

Results:

In the intent-to-treat population (n = 2425), reductions from baseline in E-RS:COPD scores and rescue medication use were apparent from Day 2 with all treatments. Treatment differences for UMEC/VI versus either monotherapy plateaued by Week 4–8 and were sustained at Weeks 21–24; improvements were consistently greater with UMEC/VI. For all treatments, most patients (60–85%) retained their Weeks 1–4 E-RS:COPD responder/non-responder status at Weeks 21−24. Among patients receiving UMEC/VI who were E-RS:COPD responders at Weeks 1–4, 70% were responders at Weeks 21–24.

Conclusion:

Patients with symptomatic COPD had greater potential for early symptom improvements with UMEC/VI versus either monotherapy. This benefit was generally maintained for 24 weeks. Early monitoring of treatment response can provide clinicians with an early indication of a patient’s likely longer-term response to prescribed bronchodilator treatment and will facilitate appropriate early adjustments in care.

Clinical Trial Registration:

NCT03034915, 2016-002513-22 (EudraCT Number).

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

Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy versus tiotropium monotherapy in patients with COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment guidelines do not currently include recommendations for escalation directly from monotherapy to triple therapy. This 12-week, double-blind, double-dummy study randomized 800 symptomatic moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients receiving tiotropium (TIO) for ≥3 months to once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 mcg via ELLIPTA (n = 400) or TIO 18 mcg via HandiHaler (n = 400) plus matched placebo. Study endpoints included change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) at Days 85 (primary), 28 and 84 (secondary), health status (St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ] and COPD Assessment Test [CAT]) and safety. FF/UMEC/VI significantly improved trough FEV₁ at all timepoints (Day 85 treatment difference [95% CI] 95 mL [62–128]; P < 0.001), and significantly improved SGRQ and CAT versus TIO. Treatment safety profiles were similar. Once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI significantly improved lung function and health status versus once-daily TIO in symptomatic moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients, with a similar safety profile.

Real-World Treatment Patterns of Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy Among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in UK General Practice

Introduction

Until recently, triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has only been available through treatment with multiple inhalers. Evidence on real-world use of multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), including duration of use and treatment patterns, is limited.

Methods

A retrospective, observational study of electronic health records and hospital episodes in patients with COPD initiating MITT between 2013 and 2015 in the UK was performed. This study described patients initiating, treatment persistence and discontinuation, and prior and subsequent COPD treatments.

Results

Eligible patients (N=3825) had a mean age of 69.5 years; most were former or current smokers (95%). The majority (86%) initiated MITT with two inhalers and 14% initiated with three inhalers. Mean duration of use was 5.1 (standard deviation: 4.6) months; 24% of patients persisted for 12 months. Patients who had significantly poorer lung function at baseline (12 months prior to initiating MITT) and had experienced significantly more moderate-to-severe acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) and hospitalizations during the baseline period were more likely to persist for 12 months, compared with those who discontinued within 12 months. Most patients stepped down to an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combination (ICS/LABA; 48%) or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA; 45%) after discontinuing MITT.

Conclusion

Initiation of MITT occurred in patients with clinically relevant symptoms and a history of AECOPD. Persistence varied and was most likely linked to disease severity, although more research is required to fully understand why patients discontinue MITT, the subsequent clinical consequences of therapy discontinuation, and the potential impact of newly available single-inhaler triple therapies.

Treatment of COPD with Long-Acting Bronchodilators: Association Between Early and Longer-Term Clinically Important Improvement

Introduction

This post hoc analysis of the “Early MAXimization of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability” (EMAX) trial investigated whether patients achieving early clinically important improvement (CII) sustained longer-term improvements and lower risk of clinically important deterioration (CID).

Methods

Patients were randomized to umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, or salmeterol for 24 weeks. The patient-reported outcomes (PROs) Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI), Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) were assessed. CII, defined as attaining minimum clinically important differences (MCID) in ≥2 PROs, was assessed at Weeks 4, 12 and 24. CID was defined as a deterioration in CAT, SGRQ, TDI by the MCID and/or a moderate/severe exacerbation from Day 30.

Results

Of 2425 patients, 50%, 53% and 51% achieved a CII at Weeks 4, 12 and 24, respectively. Patients with a CII at Week 4 versus those without had significantly greater odds of achieving a CII at Weeks 12 and 24 (odds ratio: 5.57 [95% CI: 4.66, 6.66]; 4.09 [95% CI: 3.44, 4.86]). The risk of a CID was higher in patients who did not achieve a CII at Week 4 compared with patients who did (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 2.09 [1.86, 2.34]). Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus either monotherapy had significantly greater odds of achieving CII at Weeks 4, 12 and 24.

Conclusion

Achieving a CII at Week 4 was associated with longer-term improvement in PROs and a reduced risk of deterioration. Further research is required to investigate the importance of an early response to treatment on the long-term disease course.

Risk of Exacerbation and Pneumonia with Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Therapy in IMPACT

Rationale: In the IMPACT (Informing the Pathway of COPD Treatment) trial, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy reduced exacerbation risk versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI and mortality risk versus UMEC/VI. However, pneumonia incidence was higher in the inhaled corticosteroid (FF)-containing arms, raising questions about the relative benefit of exacerbation reduction compared with the increased risk of pneumonia.Objectives: Determine benefit-risk of the three treatments by evaluating time-to-first and rates of composite exacerbation or pneumonia outcomes.Methods: We evaluated time-to-first (prespecified) and rates (post hoc) of investigator-reported pneumonia, serious pneumonia leading to hospitalization or death, and the composite endpoints of 1) moderate (required antibiotics/corticosteroids)/severe (hospitalized) exacerbation or pneumonia and 2) severe exacerbation or serious (hospitalized) pneumonia. Analyses were repeated for radiographically confirmed pneumonia (post hoc).Results: Moderate/severe exacerbations occurred in 47%, 49%, and 50% of patients randomized to FF/UMEC/VI, FF/VI and UMEC/VI, and pneumonias in 8%, 7%, and 5%, respectively. FF/UMEC/VI reduced the risk of combined moderate/severe exacerbation or pneumonia (time-to-first) versus FF/VI (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82-0.92]) and UMEC/VI (0.87 [0.81-0.94]), as well as the risk of combined severe exacerbation or serious pneumonia versus UMEC/VI (0.83 [0.72-0.96]). FF/UMEC/VI reduced the rate of combined moderate/severe exacerbation or pneumonia (rate ratio, 0.78 [0.72-0.84]) and combined severe exacerbation or serious pneumonia (rate ratio, 0.76 [0.65-0.89]) versus UMEC/VI. Results were similar for radiographically confirmed pneumonia endpoints.Conclusions: Despite higher incidence of pneumonia in FF-containing arms, these composite exacerbation/pneumonia outcomes support a favorable benefit-risk profile of FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a history of exacerbations.

InforMing the PAthway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial: fibrinogen levels predict risk of moderate or severe exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Fibrinogen is the first qualified prognostic/predictive biomarker for exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The IMPACT trial investigated fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. This analysis used IMPACT trial data to examine the relationship between fibrinogen levels and exacerbation outcomes in patients with COPD.

METHODS

8094 patients with a fibrinogen assessment at Week 16 were included, baseline fibrinogen data were not measured. Post hoc analyses were performed by fibrinogen quartiles and by 3.5 g/L threshold. Endpoints included on-treatment exacerbations and adverse events of special interest (AESIs).

RESULTS

Rates of moderate, moderate/severe, and severe exacerbations were higher in the highest versus lowest fibrinogen quartile (0.75, 0.92 and 0.15 vs 0.67, 0.79 and 0.10, respectively). The rate ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]) for exacerbations in patients with fibrinogen levels ≥ 3.5 g/L versus those with fibrinogen levels < 3.5 g/L were 1.03 (0.95, 1.11) for moderate exacerbations, 1.08 (1.00, 1.15) for moderate/severe exacerbations, and 1.30 (1.10, 1.54) for severe exacerbations. There was an increased risk of moderate/severe exacerbation (hazard ratio [95% CI]: highest vs lowest quartile 1.16 [1.04, 1.228]; ≥ 3.5 g/L vs < 3.5 g/L: 1.09 [1.00, 1.16]) and severe exacerbation (1.35 [1.09, 1.69]; 1.27 [1.08, 1.47], respectively) with increasing fibrinogen level. Cardiovascular AESIs were highest in patients in the highest fibrinogen quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

Rate and risk of exacerbations was higher in patients with higher fibrinogen levels. This supports the validity of fibrinogen as a predictive biomarker for COPD exacerbations, and highlights the potential use of fibrinogen as an enrichment strategy in trials examining exacerbation outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02164513.

Benefit/Risk Profile of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with major healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. International consortia recommend a personalized approach to treatment and management that aims to reduce both symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Recent clinical trials have investigated single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for patients with symptomatic COPD. Here, we review evidence from randomized controlled trials showing the benefits of SITT and weigh these against the reported risk of pneumonia with ICS use. We highlight the challenges associated with cross-trial comparisons of benefit/risk, discuss blood eosinophils as a marker of ICS responsiveness, and summarize current treatment recommendations and the position of SITT in the management of COPD, including potential advantages in terms of improving patient adherence. Evidence from trials of SITT versus dual therapies in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and increased risk of exacerbations shows benefits in lung function and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, the key benefits reported with SITT are significant reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations, with data also suggesting reduced all-cause mortality. These benefits outweigh the ICS-class effect of higher incidence of study-reported pneumonia compared with LAMA/LABA. Important differences in trial design, baseline population characteristics, such as exacerbation history, and assessment of outcomes, have significant implications for interpreting data from cross-trial comparisons. Current understanding interprets the blood eosinophil count as a continuum that can help predict response to ICS and has utility alongside other clinical factors to aid treatment decision-making. We conclude that treatment decisions in COPD should be guided by an approach that considers benefit versus risk, with early optimization of treatment essential for maximizing long-term benefits and patient outcomes.

InforMing the PAthway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT Trial) Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy (Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol) Versus Fluticasone Furoate/Vilanterol and Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients With COPD: Analysis of the Western Europe and North America Regions

BACKGROUND

The InforMing the Pathway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial demonstrated lower moderate/severe exacerbation rates with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a history of exacerbations. Since IMPACT was a global study, post-hoc analyses were conducted by geographic region to investigate potential differences in overall findings.

METHODS

IMPACT was a 52-week, randomized, double-blind trial. Patients with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the prior year were randomized 2:2:1 to once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25µg, FF/VI 100/25µg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25µg. Endpoints assessed in the overall, Western Europe and North America populations included on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation (rates and time-to-first), trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score. Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 10,355 patients were enrolled, 3164 from Western Europe, 2639 from North America. FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in Western Europe (rate ratios 0.82 [95%CI 0.74-0.91], P<.001 and 0.76 [0.67-0.87], P<.001) and in North America (0.87 [0.77-0.97], P=.014 and 0.69 [0.60-0.80], P<.001). FF/UMEC/VI reduced time-to-first moderate/severe exacerbation and improved lung function versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in both regions, and improved SGRQ total score in Western Europe, but not North America. Safety profiles were generally similar between treatment groups/regions; the inhaled corticosteroid class effect of increased pneumonia incidence was seen in North America but not Western Europe.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with intent-to-treat results, FF/UMEC/VI reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rate and risk and improved lung function in Western Europe and North America; however, between-regions differences were seen for SGRQ total score and pneumonia incidence.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02164513.

Single inhaler triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with COPD: subgroup analysis of the China cohort in the IMPACT trial

OBJECTIVES

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is becoming a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in China. In the IMPACT trial, fluticasone furoate[FF]/umeclidinium[UMEC]/vilanterol[VI] single-inhaler triple therapy demonstrated lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations than dual therapy with FF/VI or UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations. This analysis investigates the China cohort and its consistency with the overall ITT population.

METHODS

10,355 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg, FF/VI 100/25 µg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg for 52 weeks. Endpoints included: annual rates of exacerbations, time-to-first on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation and change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) at Week-52. Clinical trial registration is NCT02164513 (CTT116855).

RESULTS

535 patients (5.2%) were from China. Annual on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rate was 0.81 with FF/UMEC/VI versus 0.96 with FF/VI (rate ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 1.11; p = .227) and 0.80 with UMEC/VI (rate ratio: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.44; p = .929). Hazard ratio for time-to-first moderate/severe exacerbation was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.11; p = .218) for FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.27; p = .516) versus UMEC/VI. Significant improvements in mean change from baseline in trough FEV₁ were observed for FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI (treatment difference 137 mL; 95% CI: 86, 188; p < .001) and UMEC/VI (63 mL; 0, 125; p = .050). Health status was improved with FF/UMEC/VI versus both dual therapies. Results were similar to the overall ITT population. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-inhaler triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI reduced the rate and risk of exacerbations, and improved lung function and health status in the China cohort similar to the overall ITT population. No new safety signals were identified.

Prognostic value of clinically important deterioration in COPD: IMPACT trial analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clinically important deterioration (CID) is a multicomponent measure for assessing disease worsening in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis investigated the prognostic value of a CID event on future clinical outcomes and the effect of single-inhaler triple versus dual therapy on reducing CID risk in patients in the IMPACT trial.

METHODS

IMPACT was a phase III, double-blind, 52-week, multicentre trial. Patients with symptomatic COPD and at least one moderate/severe exacerbation in the prior year were randomised 2:2:1 to fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 µg, FF/VI 100/25 µg or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg. CID at the time-point of interest was defined as a moderate/severe exacerbation, ≥100 mL decrease in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s or deterioration in health status (increase of ≥4.0 units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score or increase of ≥2.0 units in COPD Assessment Test score) from baseline. A treatment-independent post hoc prognostic analysis compared clinical outcomes up to week 52 in patients with/without a CID by week 28. A prospective analysis evaluated time to first CID with each treatment.

RESULTS

Patients with a CID by week 28 had significantly increased exacerbation rates after week 28, smaller improvements in lung function and health status at week 52 (all p<0.001), and increased risk of all-cause mortality after week 28 versus patients who were CID-free. FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced CID risk versus dual therapies (all p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevention of short-term disease worsening was associated with better long-term clinical outcomes. FF/UMEC/VI reduced CID risk versus dual therapies; this effect may improve long-term prognosis in this population.

The Effect of Inhaled Corticosteroid Withdrawal and Baseline Inhaled Treatment on Exacerbations in the IMPACT Study. A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Clinical Trial

Rationale: In the IMPACT (Informing the Pathway of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment) trial, fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) significantly reduced exacerbations compared with FF/VI or UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a history of exacerbations.

Objectives: To understand whether inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) withdrawal affected IMPACT results, given direct transition from prior maintenance medication to study medication at randomization.

Methods: Exacerbations and change from baseline in trough FEV₁ and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire results were analyzed by prior ICS use. Exacerbations were also analyzed while excluding data from the first 30 days.

Measurements and Main Results: FF/UMEC/VI significantly reduced the annual moderate/severe exacerbation rate compared with UMEC/VI in prior ICS users (29% reduction; P < 0.001), but only a numerical reduction was seen among prior ICS nonusers (12% reduction; P = 0.115). To minimize impact from ICS withdrawal, in an analysis excluding the first 30 days, FF/UMEC/VI continued to significantly reduce the annual on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rate (19%; P < 0.001) compared with UMEC/VI. The benefit of FF/UMEC/VI compared with UMEC/VI was seen for severe exacerbation rates, regardless of prior ICS use (prior ICS users, 35% reduction; P < 0.001; non-ICS users, 35% reduction; P = 0.018), and overall when excluding the first 30 days (29%; P < 0.001). Improvements from baseline with FF/UMEC/VI compared with UMEC/VI were also maintained throughout the study for both trough FEV₁ and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, regardless of prior ICS use.

Conclusions: These data support the important treatment effects of FF/UMEC/VI combination therapy on exacerbation reduction, lung function, and quality of life that do not appear to be related to abrupt ICS withdrawal.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02164513).

Impact of baseline COPD symptom severity on the benefit from dual versus mono-bronchodilators: an analysis of the EMAX randomised controlled trial

Rationale:

Symptom relief is a key treatment goal in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there are limited data available on the response to bronchodilator therapy in patients at low risk of exacerbations with different levels of symptom severity. This study compared treatment responses in patients with a range of symptom severities as indicated by baseline COPD assessment test (CAT) scores.

Methods:

The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated the benefits of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. This analysis assessed lung function, symptoms, health status, and short-term deterioration outcomes in subgroups defined by a baseline CAT score [<20 (post hoc) and ⩾20 (pre-specified)]. Outcomes were also assessed using post hoc fractional polynomial modelling with continuous transformations of baseline CAT score covariates.

Results:

Of the intent-to-treat population (n = 2425), 56% and 44% had baseline CAT scores of <20 and ⩾20, respectively. Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated favourable improvements compared with umeclidinium and salmeterol for the majority of outcomes irrespective of the baseline CAT score, with the greatest improvements generally observed in patients with CAT scores <20. Fractional polynomial analyses revealed consistent improvements in lung function, symptoms and reduction in rescue medication use with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol across a range of CAT scores, with the largest benefits seen in patients with CAT scores of approximately 10–21.

Conclusions:

Patients with symptomatic COPD benefit similarly from dual bronchodilator treatment with umeclidinium/vilanterol. Fractional polynomial analyses demonstrated the greatest treatment differences favouring dual therapy in patients with a CAT score <20, although benefits were seen up to scores of 30. This suggests that dual bronchodilation may be considered as initial therapy for patients across a broad range of symptom severities, not only those with severe symptoms (CAT ⩾20).

Trial registration: NCT03034915, 2016-002513-22 (EudraCT number).

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

Efficacy of FF/UMEC/VI compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with COPD: subgroup analysis of the Spain cohort in IMPACT

OBJECTIVES

The IMPACT trial has compared the benefit in the reduction of moderate/severe exacerbations of single inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) versus dual therapy with FF/VI (ICS/LABA) and UMEC/VI (LAMA/LABA) in the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive disease (COPD). This study performs a subgroup analysis of the cohort from Spain in the IMPACT study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In IMPACT, a 52-week randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study (N = 10,355), patients ⩾40 years of age with COPD and ⩾1 moderate/severe exacerbations in the previous year were randomized 2:2:1 to once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg, FF/VI 100/25 µg or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg administered via the Ellipta inhaler. Here, we present a subgroup analysis of the 499 patients from Spain, included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in the study. Endpoint assessed included exposure-adjusted rate of moderate and severe exacerbations.

RESULTS

In the Spain cohort, the exposure-adjusted rate of on-treatment moderate/severe COPD exacerbations per year for FF/UMEC/VI was 1.31 versus 1.43 and 1.57 for FF/VI and UMEC/VI, respectively. No new adverse events were identified. The results are consistent with those observed in the overall ITT study population.

CONCLUSION

In the Spain cohort of the IMPACT study, patients receiving triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI had a lower exposure-adjusted rate of exacerbations compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI, similar to the overall population.Study Title: A Phase III, 52 Week, Randomized, Double-blind, 3-arm Parallel Group Study, Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of the Fixed Dose Triple Combination FF/UMEC/VI With the Fixed Dose Dual Combinations of FF/VI and UMEC/VI, All Administered Once-daily in the Morning Via a Dry Powder Inhaler in Subjects With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseURL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=CTT116855/ https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02164513Registration number: GSK (CTT116855/NCT02164513).The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Salbutamol use in relation to maintenance bronchodilator efficacy in COPD: a prospective subgroup analysis of the EMAX trial

Background

Short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) bronchodilators help alleviate symptoms in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and may be a useful marker of symptom severity. This analysis investigated whether SABA use impacts treatment differences between maintenance dual- and mono-bronchodilators in patients with COPD.

Methods

The Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids 1:1:1 to once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg, once-daily umeclidinium 62.5 μg or twice-daily salmeterol 50 μg for 24 weeks. Pre-specified subgroup analyses stratified patients by median baseline SABA use (low, < 1.5 puffs/day; high, ≥1.5 puffs/day) to examine change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), change in symptoms (Transition Dyspnoea Index [TDI], Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD [E-RS]), daily SABA use and exacerbation risk. A post hoc analysis used fractional polynomial modelling with continuous transformations of baseline SABA use covariates.

Results

At baseline, patients in the high SABA use subgroup (mean: 3.91 puffs/day, n = 1212) had more severe airflow limitation, were more symptomatic and had worse health status versus patients in the low SABA use subgroup (0.39 puffs/day, n = 1206). Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium demonstrated statistically significant improvements in trough FEV₁ at Week 24 in both SABA subgroups (59–74 mL; p < 0.001); however, only low SABA users demonstrated significant improvements in TDI (high: 0.27 [p = 0.241]; low: 0.49 [p = 0.025]) and E-RS (high: 0.48 [p = 0.138]; low: 0.60 [p = 0.034]) scores. By contrast, significant reductions in mean SABA puffs/day with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium were observed only in high SABA users (high: − 0.56 [p < 0.001]; low: − 0.10 [p = 0.132]). Similar findings were observed when comparing umeclidinium/vilanterol and salmeterol. Fractional polynomial modelling showed baseline SABA use ≥4 puffs/day resulted in smaller incremental symptom improvements with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium compared with baseline SABA use < 4 puffs/day.

Conclusions

In high SABA users, there may be a smaller difference in treatment response between dual- and mono-bronchodilator therapy; the reasons for this require further investigation. SABA use may be a confounding factor in bronchodilator trials and in high SABA users; changes in SABA use may be considered a robust symptom outcome.

Funding

GlaxoSmithKline (study number 201749 [NCT03034915]).

Effect of Age on the Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple-Therapy Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients With COPD: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Informing the Pathway of COPD Treatment Trial

BACKGROUND

In the Informing the Pathway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial, single-inhaler triple-therapy fluticasone furoate (FF), umeclidinium (UMEC), and vilanterol (VI) reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates vs FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations, with a similar safety profile.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Are trial outcomes with single-inhaler triple-therapy FF/UMEC/VI vs FF/VI and UMEC/VI affected by age in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

IMPACT was a phase III, double-blind, 52-week trial. Patients ≥ 40 years of age with symptomatic COPD and ≥ 1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the previous year were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 μg, FF/VI 100/25 μg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg. End points assessed by age included annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, change from baseline (CFB) in trough FEV₁, proportion of St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) responders (≥ 4 units decrease from baseline in SGRQ total score), and safety.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat population comprised 10,355 patients; 4,724 (46%), 4,225 (41%), and 1,406 (14%) were ≤ 64, 65 to 74, and ≥ 75 years of age, respectively. FF/UMEC/VI reduced on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rates vs FF/VI (% reduction [95% CI]: ≤ 64 years, 8% [-1 to 16]; P = .070; 65-74 years, 22% [14-29]; P < .001; ≥ 75 years, 18% [3-31]; P = .021) and vs UMEC/VI (≤ 64 years, 16% [7-25]; P = .002; 65-74 years, 33% [25-41]; P < .001; ≥ 75 years, 24% [6-38]; P = .012), with greatest rate reduction seen in the 65 to 74 and ≥ 75 years subgroups. Post hoc analyses of CFB in trough FEV₁ and proportion of SGRQ responders at week 52 were significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI than with FF/VI or UMEC/VI in all subgroups. No new safety signals were identified.

INTERPRETATION

FF/UMEC/VI reduced the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations and improved lung function and health status vs FF/VI and UMEC/VI irrespective of age for most end points, with a similar safety profile.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02164513; URL: www.clinicaltrials.govCTT116855.

Snow melt stimulates ecosystem respiration in Arctic ecosystems

Cold seasons in Arctic ecosystems are increasingly important to the annual carbon balance of these vulnerable ecosystems. Arctic winters are largely harsh and inaccessible leading historic data gaps during that time. Until recently, cold seasons have been assumed to have negligible impacts on the annual carbon balance but as data coverage increases and the Arctic warms, the cold season has been shown to account for over half of annual methane (CH₄ ) emissions and can offset summer photosynthetic carbon dioxide (CO₂ ) uptake. Freeze-thaw cycle dynamics play a critical role in controlling cold season CO₂ and CH₄ loss, but the relationship has not been extensively studied. Here, we analyze freeze-thaw processes through in situ CO₂ and CH₄ fluxes in conjunction with soil cores for physical structure and porewater samples for redox biogeochemistry. We find a movement of water toward freezing fronts in soil cores, leaving air spaces in soils, which allows for rapid infiltration of oxygen-rich snow melt in spring as shown by oxidized iron in porewater. The snow melt period coincides with rising ecosystem respiration and can offset up to 41% of the summer CO₂ uptake. Our study highlights this important seasonal process and shows spring greenhouse gas emissions are largely due to production from respiration instead of only bursts of stored gases. Further warming is projected to result in increases of snowpack and deeper thaws, which could increase this ecosystem respiration dominate snow melt period causing larger greenhouse gas losses during spring.

Reduction in All-Cause Mortality with Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rationale: The IMPACT (Informing the Pathway of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment) trial demonstrated a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (ACM) risk with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus UMEC/VI in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at risk of future exacerbations. Five hundred seventy-four patients were censored in the original analysis owing to incomplete vital status information.

Objectives: Report ACM and impact of stepping down therapy, following collection of additional vital status data.

Methods: Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 μg, FF/VI 100/25 μg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg following a run-in on their COPD therapies. Time to ACM was prespecified. Additional vital status data collection and subsequent analyses were performed post hoc.

Measurements and Main Results: We report vital status data for 99.6% of the intention-to-treat population (n = 10,355), documenting 98 (2.36%) deaths on FF/UMEC/VI, 109 (2.64%) on FF/VI, and 66 (3.19%) on UMEC/VI. For FF/UMEC/VI, the hazard ratio for death was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.53–0.99; P = 0.042) versus UMEC/VI and 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.67–1.16; P = 0.387) versus FF/VI. Independent adjudication confirmed lower rates of cardiovascular and respiratory death and death associated with the patient’s COPD.

Conclusions: In this secondary analysis of an efficacy outcome from the IMPACT trial, once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI triple therapy reduced the risk of ACM versus UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations.