Mortality and Exacerbation Risk by Body Mass Index in Patients with COPD in TIOSPIR and UPLIFT.

Rationale: There is an association between body mass index (BMI) and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with underweight individuals having higher mortality risk. Mortality and exacerbation risks among individuals with higher BMI are unclear. Objectives: To examine the relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes in COPD. Methods: This post hoc analysis included data from TIOSPIR (Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat) (N = 17,116) and tiotropium-treated patients in UPLIFT (Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium) (N = 2,986). BMI classes (underweight [BMI < 20 kg/m2], normal weight [BMI 20 to <25 kg/m2], overweight [BMI 25 to <30 kg/m2], obesity class I [BMI 30 to <35 kg/m2], obesity class II [BMI 35 to <40 kg/m2], and obesity class III [BMI ⩾ 40 kg/m2]) were examined for adjusted associations with mortality, exacerbation, and nonfatal cardiovascular event risk using over 50,000 patient-years of cumulative follow-up data. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox regression models. Results: In TIOSPIR, obesity prevalence was 22%, overweight 32%, and underweight 12%. The proportion of females was highest in obesity classes II and III. Overweight and obese participants had better baseline lung function versus other BMI classes; underweight participants were more likely to be current smokers. Underweight participants had a significantly higher risk of death (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.62-2.20; P < 0.0001) and severe exacerbations (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16-1.47; P < 0.0001) versus normal-weight participants; however, overweight and obese participants were at lower to no additional risk. Results from UPLIFT were similar to TIOSPIR. Conclusions: These results suggest that there is a strong association between body weight, COPD events, and risk of death. A holistic management approach taking into account respiratory and cardiovascular risk factors and nutritional status is needed to improve the general well-being of patients with COPD.

Concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use and the risk of pneumonia in COPD: a matched-subgroup post hoc analysis of the UPLIFT® trial.

BACKGROUND: Use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) increases the risk of pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the magnitude of risk with different ICS remains unclear. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT® trial to assess whether pneumonia risk differed by type of ICS (fluticasone propionate [FP], other ICS, or no ICS) in permanent users (defined by use until end of study) or in users at baseline (sensitivity analysis). RESULTS: For the permanent-users analysis, 825 patients receiving FP throughout the trial, 825 patients receiving other ICS and 825 patients not receiving ICS were matched on relevant baseline features 1:1:1. A significantly greater risk of pneumonia was observed for FP versus no ICS: the hazard ratio (HR) for risk of pneumonia was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00, 1.75; p = 0.046) and the rate ratio (RR) was 1.58 (95% CI 1.05, 2.37; p = 0.028). A greater risk was also found for FP versus other ICS: HR 1.28 (95% CI 0.97, 1.68; p = 0.078) and RR 1.48 (95% CI 1.00, 2.19; p = 0.049). A higher proportion of patients on FP were hospitalized with pneumonia (7.9%) versus other ICS (6.7%) or no ICS (5.9%). Whilst other ICS use was associated with the highest number of fatal pneumonia events, the total number of fatal pneumonia incidents was low. A similar pattern was observed in the sensitivity analyses, which included 4002 patients on different treatments at baseline (FP, other ICS, and no ICS) and considered potential switches during the study. CONCLUSION: The results support existing evidence of an increased pneumonia risk with FP use compared with other ICS and no ICS use in patients with COPD. Healthcare professionals should evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of using ICS when making treatment decisions with their patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Post hoc analysis of UPLIFT®. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00144339 . Retrospectively registered September 2, 2005.

Treatment of exacerbations as a predictor of subsequent outcomes in patients with COPD.

RATIONALE: Exacerbations of COPD are managed differently, but whether treatment of one exacerbation predicts the likelihood of subsequent events is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether the treatment given for exacerbations predicted subsequent outcomes. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of 17,135 patients with COPD from TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIR®). Patients treated with tiotropium with one or more moderate to severe exacerbations on study were analyzed using descriptive statistics, logistic and Cox regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Of 8,061 patients with moderate to severe exacerbation(s), demographics were similar across patients with exacerbations treated with antibiotics and/or steroids or hospitalization. Exacerbations treated with systemic corticosteroids alone or in combination with antibiotics had the highest risk of subsequent exacerbation (HR: 1.21, P=0.0004 and HR: 1.33, P<0.0001, respectively), and a greater risk of having a hospitalized (severe) exacerbation (HR: 1.59 and 1.63, P<0.0001, respectively) or death (HR: 1.50, P=0.0059 and HR: 1.47, P=0.0002, respectively) compared with exacerbations treated with antibiotics alone. Initial hospitalization led to the highest risk of subsequent hospitalization (all-cause or COPD related [severe exacerbation], HR: 3.35 and 4.31, P<0.0001, respectively) or death (all-cause or COPD related, HR: 3.53 and 5.54, P<0.0001, respectively) versus antibiotics alone. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that the way exacerbations are treated initially is a useful guide to the patient's subsequent clinical course. Factors that clinicians consider when making treatment choices require further clarification.

Seasonal variations in exacerbations and deaths in patients with COPD during the TIOSPIR® trial.

Background: Although COPD exacerbations are known to occur more frequently in winter, there is little information on hospitalizations and cause-specific mortality. This study aimed to examine seasonal variations in mortality and exacerbations in patients with COPD during the TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIR®) trial. Patients and methods: TIOSPIR was a large-scale, multicenter trial, which assessed the safety and efficacy of tiotropium delivered via HandiHaler® (18 µg once daily) or Respimat® Soft Mist™ (2.5 or 5 µg once daily) inhaler in patients with COPD. Patients were aged ≥40 years, with a smoking history ≥10 pack-years, and post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≤70% and forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ≤0.70. COPD exacerbations and deaths were monitored throughout the trial. The data were pooled to examine seasonal patterns. Southern hemisphere data were shifted by 6 months to align with northern hemisphere seasons. Results: TIOSPIR was conducted in 43 northern (n=15,968) and 7 southern (n=1,148) hemisphere (n=1,148) countries. The median duration of treatment was 835 days, with a mean follow-up of 2.3 years. Among 19,494 exacerbations, there were clear seasonal differences (winter, 6,646 [34.1%]; spring, 4,515 [23.2%]; summer, 3,198 [16.4%]; autumn, 5,135 [26.3%]). Exacerbations peaked in early winter (December in the northern hemisphere and June in the southern hemisphere), respiratory hospitalizations in midwinter, and respiratory deaths in early spring. Conclusion: Although winter poses a 2-fold hazard for COPD exacerbations vs summer, respiratory deaths peak in early spring. These data suggest that seasonal intensification of preventive treatments may impact COPD morbidity and mortality. Trial registration number: NCT01126437.

Demographic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes in Patients from Latin America Versus the Rest of the World: A TIOSPIR® Post-Hoc Analysis / Características demográficas y resultados clínicos en pacientes de Latinoamérica respecto al resto del mundo: un análisis post-hoc de TIOSPIR®

Introduction: Geographical variations may impact outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes between patients enrolled in Latin America compared with the rest of the world (RoW) in the TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIR®) trial. Methods: TIOSPIR(R), a 2-3-year, randomized, double-blind trial (n=17116; treated set), compared safety and efficacy of once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 and 2.5μg with tiotropium HandiHaler® 18μg. This post-hoc analysis pooled data from all treatment arms to assess mortality, exacerbations, cardiac events, and serious adverse events (SAEs) between both regions. Results: At baseline, patients enrolled in Latin America (n=1000) versus RoW (n=16116) were older, with higher pack-years of smoking history and more exacerbations, but less cardiac history. In this analysis, patients in Latin America versus RoW had an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.52 [1.24-1.86]; P<.0001) or moderate-to-severe exacerbation (HR [95% CI]: 1.29 [1.18-1.41]; P<.0001), but a lower risk of severe exacerbation (HR [95% CI]: 0.82 [0.68-0.98]; P=.0333). SAE rates in Latin America were lower versus RoW (incidence rate ratio [IRR] [95% CI]: 0.82 [0.72-0.92]), including cardiac disorders (IRR [95% CI]: 0.68 [0.48-0.97]). Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events were similar (HR [95% CI]: 0.99 [0.71-1.40]; P=.9677). Conclusions: TIOSPIR® patients in Latin America had a higher risk of death or moderate-to-severe exacerbation, but a lower risk of severe exacerbation than those in RoW. Geographical differences may impact outcomes in COPD trials (AU)

Introducción: Las variaciones geográficas pueden afectar a los resultados en la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC). Evaluamos las diferencias en las características basales y los resultados de los pacientes incluidos en Latinoamérica en comparación con el resto del mundo (RdM) en el ensayo TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat(R)® (TIOSPIR(R)). Métodos: TIOSPIR(R), es un estudio aleatorizado, doble ciego de 2-3 años de duración (n=17.116; conjunto tratado), comparó la seguridad y la eficacia del tiotropio Respimat® una vez al día en dosis de 5 y 2,5μg con respecto al tiotropio HandiHaler® 18μg. Este análisis post-hoc reunió datos de todos los brazos de tratamiento para evaluar la mortalidad, las exacerbaciones, los acontecimientos cardíacos y los acontecimientos adversos graves (AAG) entre ambas regiones. Resultados: Al inicio del estudio, los pacientes reclutados en América Latina (n=1.000) versus RdM (n=16.116) eran de mayor edad, con más paquetes/año de consumo de tabaco en sus antecedentes y más exacerbaciones, pero menos antecedentes cardíacos. En este análisis, los pacientes de Latinoamérica versus RdM tenían un mayor riesgo de muerte (razón de riesgo [HR] intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC 95%]: 1,52 [1,24-1,86]; p<0,0001) y de exacerbación moderada a grave (HR [IC 95%]: 1,29 [1,18-1,41]; p<0,0001), pero menor riesgo de exacerbación grave (HR [IC 95%]: 0,82 [0,68-0,98]; p=0,0333). Las tasas de AAG en Latinoamérica fueron más bajas frente al RdM (tasa de incidencia [IRR] [IC 95%]: 0,82 [0,72-0,92]), incluidos los trastornos cardíacos (IRR [IC 95%]: 0,68 [0,48-0,97]). El riesgo de acontecimientos cardiovasculares adversos mayores fue similar (HR [IC 95%]: 0,99 [0,71-1,40]; p=0,9677). Conclusiones: Los pacientes de TIOSPIR® en Latinoamérica tuvieron un mayor riesgo de muerte y de exacerbación moderada a grave, pero un menor riesgo de exacerbación grave que aquellos en el RdM. Las diferencias geográficas pueden afectar los resultados en los ensayos de la EPOC (AU)

Demographic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes in Patients from Latin America Versus the Rest of the World: A TIOSPIR® Post-Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Geographical variations may impact outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes between patients enrolled in Latin America compared with the rest of the world (RoW) in the TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIR®) trial. METHODS: TIOSPIR®, a 2-3-year, randomized, double-blind trial (n=17116; treated set), compared safety and efficacy of once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 and 2.5µg with tiotropium HandiHaler® 18µg. This post-hoc analysis pooled data from all treatment arms to assess mortality, exacerbations, cardiac events, and serious adverse events (SAEs) between both regions. RESULTS: At baseline, patients enrolled in Latin America (n=1000) versus RoW (n=16116) were older, with higher pack-years of smoking history and more exacerbations, but less cardiac history. In this analysis, patients in Latin America versus RoW had an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.52 [1.24-1.86]; P<.0001) or moderate-to-severe exacerbation (HR [95% CI]: 1.29 [1.18-1.41]; P<.0001), but a lower risk of severe exacerbation (HR [95% CI]: 0.82 [0.68-0.98]; P=.0333). SAE rates in Latin America were lower versus RoW (incidence rate ratio [IRR] [95% CI]: 0.82 [0.72-0.92]), including cardiac disorders (IRR [95% CI]: 0.68 [0.48-0.97]). Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events were similar (HR [95% CI]: 0.99 [0.71-1.40]; P=.9677). CONCLUSIONS: TIOSPIR® patients in Latin America had a higher risk of death or moderate-to-severe exacerbation, but a lower risk of severe exacerbation than those in RoW. Geographical differences may impact outcomes in COPD trials.

The Effect of Defining Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease by the Lower Limit of Normal of FEV1/FVC Ratio in Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat Participants.

RATIONALE: There is continuing debate about whether to define airflow obstruction by a post-bronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) below 0.70, or by ratio values falling below the age-dependent lower limit of normal (LLN) derived from general population data. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether using the LLN criterion affects the classification and outcomes of patients previously defined as having chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by the fixed FEV1/FVC ratio. METHODS: We applied the LLN definition to pooled data from the Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat study that used the fixed FEV1/FVC ratio for the clinical diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. RESULTS: A total of 17,072 patients were analyzed; of these, 1,807 (10.6%) patients had a ratio greater than or equal to LLN. Patients with a ratio greater than or equal to LLN had similar risks of death from any cause and fatal major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event as those below LLN. Patients with a ratio below LLN had a significantly lower risk of major adverse CV events (hazard ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55-0.86; P = 0.001), and had significantly greater risks of moderate to severe exacerbation (rate ratio = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.36-1.61; P < 0.0001) and severe exacerbation (rate ratio = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.68-2.40; P < 0.0001) when compared with patients greater than or equal to LLN. Study outcomes by treatment arm (5 µg tiotropium Respimat vs. 18 µg HandiHaler) were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Using the LLN to define airflow obstruction would have excluded patients in the Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat study with a higher risk of nonfatal major adverse CV events and a lower risk of exacerbation; study outcomes by treatment arm (2.5 µg/5 µg tiotropium Respimat vs. 18 µg HandiHaler) remained similar. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01126437).

Determinants of exacerbation risk in patients with COPD in the TIOSPIR study.

BACKGROUND: Exacerbation history is used to grade the risk of COPD exacerbation, but its reliability and relationship to other risk factors and prior therapy is unclear. To examine these interrelationships, we conducted a post hoc analysis of patients in the TIOSPIR trial with ≥2 years' follow-up or who died on treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were grouped by their annual exacerbation rate on treatment into nonexacerbators, infrequent, and frequent exacerbators (annual exacerbation rates 0, ≤1, and >1, respectively), and baseline characteristics discriminating among the groups were determined. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to explore the effect of baseline characteristics on risk of exacerbation, hospitalization (severe exacerbation), and death (all causes). RESULTS: Of 13,591 patients, 6,559 (48.3%) were nonexacerbators, 4,568 (33.6%) were infrequent exacerbators, and 2,464 (18.1%) were frequent exacerbators; 45% of patients without exacerbations in the previous year exacerbated on treatment. Multivariate analysis identified baseline pulmonary maintenance medication as a predictive factor of increased exacerbation risk, with inhaled corticosteroid treatment associated with increased exacerbation risk irrespective of exacerbation history. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm established risk factors for exacerbation, but highlight the limitations of exacerbation history when categorizing patients and the importance of prior treatment when identifying exacerbation risk.

Impact and prevention of severe exacerbations of COPD: a review of the evidence.

Severe exacerbations of COPD, ie, those leading to hospitalization, have profound clinical implications for patients and significant economic consequences for society. The prevalence and burden of severe COPD exacerbations remain high, despite recognition of the importance of exacerbation prevention and the availability of new treatment options. Severe COPD exacerbations are associated with high mortality, have negative impact on quality of life, are linked to cardiovascular complications, and are a significant burden on the health-care system. This review identified risk factors that contribute to the development of severe exacerbations, treatment options (bronchodilators, antibiotics, corticosteroids [CSs], oxygen therapy, and ventilator support) to manage severe exacerbations, and strategies to prevent readmission to hospital. Risk factors that are amenable to change have been highlighted. A number of bronchodilators have demonstrated successful reduction in risk of severe exacerbations, including long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting ß2-agonist mono- or combination therapies, in addition to vaccination, mucolytic and antibiotic therapy, and nonpharmacological interventions, such as pulmonary rehabilitation. Recognition of the importance of severe exacerbations is an essential step in improving outcomes for patients with COPD. Evidence-based approaches to prevent and manage severe exacerbations should be implemented as part of targeted strategies for disease management.

Effect of a single exacerbation on decline in lung function in COPD.

BACKGROUND: COPD exacerbations are associated with accelerated lung function decline, but whether they are causal is unknown. We evaluated the effect of a single exacerbation on rate of lung function change using data from the 4-year Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT®) trial. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of annual rates of decline in FEV1 and FVC before and after a single (and the only) moderate-to-severe exacerbation in patients during UPLIFT® (exacerbator subgroup), compared with changes between the first and second half of the study in a non-exacerbator subgroup. A sensitivity analysis examined annual rates of decline in matched pairs of exacerbators and non-exacerbators. RESULTS: Following the single moderate-to-severe exacerbation, mean annual decline in post-bronchodilator lung function increased compared with the rate of decline before the exacerbation (FEV1 76.5 vs. 39.1 mL/year, p = 0.003; FVC 106.5 vs. 34.7 mL/year, p = 0.011). In non-exacerbators, there were no differences in rates of decline between the first and second halves of the study (post-bronchodilator FEV1 38.2 vs. 41.8 mL/year, FVC 45.3 vs. 43.9 mL/year. Before the single (moderate-to-severe) exacerbation in the exacerbator subgroup, declines in post-bronchodilator FEV1 or FVC were similar to non-exacerbators in the first half of the study; after the single exacerbation they were significantly higher than for non-exacerbators in the second half of the study. The sensitivity analysis showed similar results. CONCLUSION: A single COPD exacerbation may result in significant increase in the rate of decline in lung function.

Discordance in investigator-reported and adjudicated sudden death in TIOSPIR.

Accurate and consistent determination of cause of death is challenging in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. TIOSPIR (N=17 135) compared the safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat 5/2.5 µg with HandiHaler 18 µg in COPD patients. All-cause mortality was a primary end-point. A mortality adjudication committee (MAC) assessed all deaths. We aimed to investigate causes of discordance in investigator-reported and MAC-adjudicated causes of death and their impact on results, especially cardiac and sudden death. The MAC provided independent, blinded assessment of investigator-reported deaths (n=1302) and assigned underlying cause of death. Discordance between causes of death was assessed descriptively (shift tables). There was agreement between investigator-reported and MAC-adjudicated deaths in 69.4% of cases at the system organ class level. Differences were mainly observed for cardiac deaths (16.4% investigator, 5.1% MAC) and deaths assigned to general disorders including sudden death (17.4% investigator, 24.6% MAC). Reasons for discrepancies included investigator attribution to the immediate (e.g. myocardial infarction (MI)) over the underlying cause of death (e.g. COPD) and insufficient information for a definitive cause. Cause-specific mortality varies in COPD, depending on the method of assignment. Sudden death, witnessed and unwitnessed, is common in COPD and often attributed to MI without supporting evidence.

Consistent improvement in health-related quality of life with tiotropium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Novel and conventional responder analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in COPD patients is an important pharmacotherapeutic objective. This study investigated the extent, consistency, and durability of tiotropium maintenance therapy impact on HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD. METHODS: Patients received once-daily tiotropium 18 µg (n = 5244) or placebo (n = 4799) via HandiHaler® (10 trials), or once-daily tiotropium 5 µg (n = 2622) or placebo (n = 2618) via Respimat® inhaler (3 trials). St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores were measured at baseline, and 6 months (13 trials) and 1 year (9 trials) from treatment start. Adjusted mean differences between treatments for change from baseline in total scores were calculated at each time-point for each trial. Responder and deteriorator rates (decrease or increase in score ≥4 units from baseline, respectively), net benefit (responder rate increase plus deteriorator rate decrease), and cumulative improvement and deterioration were determined. RESULTS: Adjusted mean total score differences between treatments for change from baseline were significant (p < 0.05) in favor of tiotropium in 10/13 trials at 6 months and in 8/9 trials at 1 year. In all trials, estimated differences in responder rates between treatments favored tiotropium (significant [p < 0.05]: 5/13 trials at 6 months; 8/9 trials at 1 year). Net benefit favored tiotropium and cumulative improvement rates were consistently greater and deterioration rates consistently lower for tiotropium versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium maintenance therapy significantly and consistently improved HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD patients in a durable manner. These results may provide a benchmark for assessing benefits on HRQoL of other COPD treatments.

TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat® (TIOSPIRTM ): Analysis of Asian cohort of COPD patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) trial showed similar safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles for tiotropium Respimat and HandiHaler in patients with COPD. The TIOSPIR results for patients in Asia are presented here. METHODS: TIOSPIR evaluated once-daily tiotropium Respimat 5 and 2.5 µg with HandiHaler 18 µg in patients with COPD. Primary endpoints included time to death and time to first COPD exacerbation. Safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles were determined for the Asian region, and for Asia (all treatment arms pooled) versus the rest of the world (RoW). RESULTS: In Asia (n = 2356), time to death was similar for Respimat 5 and 2.5 µg versus HandiHaler 18 µg (hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI): 0.96 (0.67, 1.38) and 1.23 (0.87, 1.73)). Risk of COPD exacerbation was similar for Respimat 5 µg, but increased for 2.5 µg versus HandiHaler 18 µg (HR (95% CI): 0.99 (0.85, 1.15) and 1.17 (1.00, 1.35)). Time to death in Asia and RoW was similar (HR (95% CI): 1.15 (0.99, 1.35)). Time to first COPD exacerbation was longer (HR (95% CI): 0.84 (0.78, 0.89)) and exacerbation rates were lower in Asia, but severe exacerbations were more frequent than in the RoW. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar for both regions. CONCLUSION: Similar safety and exacerbation efficacy profiles were observed for tiotropium Respimat 5 µg and HandiHaler 18 µg in patients with COPD from Asia, analogous to the global analysis. Asian patients had lower risk of, and fewer exacerbations overall, but a higher proportion of severe exacerbations than in the RoW.

Defining a COPD composite safety endpoint for demonstrating efficacy in clinical trials: results from the randomized, placebo-controlled UPLIFT® trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials evaluating hard endpoints (mortality, hospitalized exacerbations) require a large number of subjects and prolonged observational periods. We hypothesized that a composite endpoint of respiratory outcomes (CERO) can help evaluate safety and benefit in COPD trials. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 5992 patients enrolled in the 4-year UPLIFT® trial, a randomized trial of tiotropium versus placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were permitted to continue using their usual COPD medications except for other anticholinergics. The CERO included deaths, respiratory failure, hospitalized exacerbations, and trial dropout due to COPD worsening. The incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years and risk ratios (RRs and 95 % CI) were determined at years 1 to 4. The effect of treatments on CERO was similarly assessed. A power analysis helped calculate the sample size needed to achieve outcome differences between treatments. RESULTS: The CERO IRs at years 1 to 4 for tiotropium versus placebo were 16, 13, 11, and 11, and 21, 16, 14, and 13, respectively. The RRs of CERO between tiotropium and placebo at the same time points were: RR-year 0.76 (0.67, 0.86), 0.80 (0.72, 0.88), 0.81 (0.74, 0.89), and 0.84 (0.77, 0.92). Using the IRs and RRs, the sample size (alpha = 0.05 two-sided, 90 % power) for studies of 1, 2, 3, and 4 years would be 1546, 1392, 1216, and 1504 per treatment group, respectively, with 575, 810, 930, 1383 required events, respectively, for hypothetical, event-driven studies. CONCLUSIONS: A composite endpoint incorporating relatively infrequent serious or significant COPD-related safety outcomes could be useful in clinical trials. In UPLIFT®, CERO events were significantly reduced in patients receiving tiotropium compared with placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00144339 .

Effect of tiotropium on COPD exacerbations: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Exacerbation frequency is related to disease progression, quality of life, and prognosis in COPD. Earlier diagnosis, along with interventions aimed at preventing exacerbations and delaying progression, may help reduce the global burden of disease. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators are effective at maintaining symptom relief and are recommended as first-choice therapy for more symptomatic patients and those at risk of exacerbation. METHODS: As prevention of exacerbations is a priority goal in COPD management and a number of different long-acting bronchodilators are available, we conducted a systematic review of exacerbation data from randomized controlled trials (published January 2000 to May 2014) comparing the effect of tiotropium versus placebo and/or other maintenance therapies. RESULTS: Exacerbations were a primary endpoint in 12 publications (five studies: four comparing tiotropium with placebo; one with active comparator) and a secondary endpoint in 17 publications (seven studies: six comparing tiotropium with placebo; one with active comparator). Overall, tiotropium was associated with a longer time to first exacerbation event and fewer exacerbations (including severe exacerbations/hospitalizations) compared with placebo and long-acting ß2-agonists. Tiotropium also showed similar efficacy to glycopyrronium and a fixed long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist combination (glycopyrronium/indacaterol), although not all studies were powered to demonstrate differences in exacerbation outcomes. Exacerbation outcomes were comparable with both formulations of tiotropium (HandiHaler(®) 18 µg/Respimat(®) 5 µg). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this comprehensive systematic review demonstrate tiotropium is beneficial in reducing exacerbation risk versus placebo or other maintenance treatments.

Effect of tiotropium on night-time awakening and daily rescue medication use in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: Several small studies found night-time awakenings due to COPD symptoms were associated with decreased health status. In this study, night-time awakenings in patients with COPD were examined and effects of tiotropium therapy evaluated. METHODS: This study was a post hoc, exploratory, pooled analysis of twin, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials. Patients with stable moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to tiotropium HandiHaler® (n = 550) or placebo (n = 371) and followed for 13 weeks. During a 2-week, pre-treatment baseline period and for 13 weeks on treatment, self-reported night-time awakenings due to COPD symptoms, rescue medication (albuterol) use, and morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were recorded daily. Nightly, COPD-related awakenings were scored: 0 = no awakenings; 1 = 1 awakening; 2 = 2-3 awakenings; or 3 = awake most of the night. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and energy-fatigue questionnaires were completed at baseline and during treatment. RESULTS: Patients were aged 65.2 ± 8.7 years (mean ± SD), with a mean pre-bronchodilator FEV1 of 36.1 ± 13.5 % predicted normal at baseline. Data for night-time awakenings and albuterol use were available for 543 (99 %) patients on tiotropium and 352 (95 %) on placebo. At baseline, 280 (51.5 %) patients on tiotropium and 179 (50.1 %) on placebo reported ≥1 COPD-related night-time awakening per week. Over the 13-weeks' treatment, tiotropium was associated with fewer night-time awakenings, with mean ± SE overall awakening scores per week of 0.356 ± 0.006 compared with 0.421 ± 0.007 for placebo (p < 0.001); means were significantly lower for tiotropium versus placebo in patients with baseline awakenings (p < 0.001), but not for those without baseline awakenings. COPD-related night-time awakenings were associated with increased nocturnal rescue medication use and lower HRQoL ratings in both treatment arms. Following start of treatment, tiotropium decreased patients' use of rescue medication compared with placebo, and morning and evening adjusted means for PEFR were higher for tiotropium compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium is associated with decreased COPD-related night-time awakenings. Night-time awakenings are associated with increased nocturnal rescue medication use and may be a surrogate marker of symptom control in patients with COPD.

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

OBJECTIVES: This post hoc analysis of TIOtropium Safety and Performance In Respimat (TIOSPIR) evaluated safety and exacerbation efficacy in patients with stable (≥ 2 months) use of tiotropium HandiHaler 18 µg (HH18) prior to study entry, to evaluate whether there was a difference in risk for patients who switched from HH18 to tiotropium Respimat 2.5 µg (R2.5) or 5 g (R5). SETTING: TIOSPIR (n=17,135) was an international, Phase IIIb/IV, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, event-driven trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients from TIOSPIR with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and postbronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced vital capacity ≤ 0.70, receiving HH18 before study entry, were analysed (n=2784). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to once-daily tiotropium R2.5 (n=914), R5 (n=918) or HH18 (n=952) for 2-3 years. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: time to death (safety) and time to first COPD exacerbation (efficacy). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: number of exacerbations and time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in all groups. Respimat had a similar mortality risk versus HH18 (vital status follow-up, HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.87; 0.64 to 1.17; R5: 0.79; 0.58 to 1.07) with no significant differences in the risk and rates of exacerbations and severe exacerbations across treatment groups. Risk of MACE and fatal MACE was similar for Respimat versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI MACE R2.5: 0.73; 0.47 to 1.15; R5: 0.69; 0.44 to 1.08; fatal MACE R2.5: 0.57; 0.27 to 1.19; R5: 0.67; 0.33 to 1.34). Overall risk of a fatal event (on treatment) was lower for R5 versus HH18 (HR; 95% CI R2.5: 0.78; 0.55 to 1.09; R5: 0.62; 0.43 to 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that it is safe to switch patients from tiotropium HandiHaler to tiotropium Respimat, and that the efficacy is maintained over the switch. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01126437; Post-results.