A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Currently available inhaled bronchodilators used as therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) necessitate multiple daily dosing. The present study evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium, a new once-daily anticholinergic in COPD. Patients with stable COPD (age 65.2+/-8.7 yrs (mean+/-SD), n=921) were enrolled in two identical randomized double-blind placebo-controlled 1-yr studies. Patients inhaled tiotropium 18 microg or placebo (mean screening forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 1.01 versus 0.99 L, 39.1 and 38.1% of the predicted value) once daily as a dry powder. The primary spirometric outcome was trough FEV1 (i.e. FEV1 prior to dosing). Changes in dyspnoea were measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index, and health status with the disease-specific St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the generic Short Form 36. Medication use and adverse events were recorded. Tiotropium provided significantly superior bronchodilation relative to placebo for trough FEV1 response (approximately 12% over baseline) (p<0.01) and mean response during the 3 h following dosing (approximately 22% over baseline) (p<0.001) over the 12-month period. Tiotropium recipients showed less dyspnoea (p<0.001), superior health status scores, and fewer COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations (p<0.05). Adverse events were comparable with placebo, except for dry mouth incidence (tiotropium 16.0% versus placebo 2.7%, p<0.05). Tiotropium is an effective, once-daily bronchodilator that reduces dyspnoea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation frequency and improves health status. This suggests that tiotropium will make an important contribution to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy.

Effective delivery of particles with the HandiHaler dry powder inhalation system over a range of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity.

The HandiHaler is a dry powder breath activated inhaler system developed for inhalation therapy for patients with airway disease. Its operation is based on the evacuation of powder from a pierced capsule. We sought to document the inspiratory flow rates attained by patients inspiring through the HandiHaler with various degrees of airflow limitation. Subjects with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were the study's population. An in vitro study of fine particle dose was conducted using an Andersen Cascade Impactor to assess medication delivery at low inspiratory flow rates. Subsequently, an in vivo study was conducted to determine inspiratory flow rates in patients with COPD as measured through a pneumotach with a custom coupler device with and without the HandiHaler. Patients were classified into three approximately equal groups of spirometric severity ranging from mild (46-65% predicted normal forced expiratory volume in 1 sec [FEV1]), to moderate (28-45%) to severe (< or = 27%). The in vitro study indicated delivery of medication at flow rates as low as 20 L/min. Twenty-six men completed the in vivo study (age 66.9 +/- 10.9 years, FEV1 = 1.02 +/- 0.45 l.). The median peak inspiratory flow rates attained in the mild (n = 8), moderate (n = 10), and severe (n = 8) categories were 45, 45.6, and 35.4 L/min respectively. The minimum peak inspiratory flow rates in the three groups were 28.2, 21.6 and 20.4 L/min. The HandiHaler device effectively delivers particles to the lung over a wide range of airflow limitation in patients with COPD.

The spirometric efficacy of once-daily dosing with tiotropium in stable COPD: a 13-week multicenter trial. The US Tiotropium Study Group.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the bronchodilator efficacy and safety of tiotropium and placebo. DESIGN: A 3-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. SETTING: Outpatient. PATIENTS: Four hundred seventy patients with stable COPD (mean FEV(1) = 38.6% predicted). INTERVENTIONS: Tiotropium 18 microg (N = 279) or placebo (N = 191) given once daily via a lactose-based dry-powder inhaler device. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Spirometry was evaluated on days 1, 8, 50, and 92. Data were expressed as the mean trough (ie, before morning dose; 23 to 24 h after previous dose) and average response observed in the 3 h after the dose was received. Tiotropium produced significant improvement in trough FEV(1) and FVC, averaging 12% greater than baseline on day 8; these improvements were maintained on days 50 and 92. The average postdose FEV(1) was 16% greater than baseline on day 1 and 20% greater than baseline on day 92; FVC was 17% greater than baseline on day 1 and 19% greater than baseline on day 92. Tiotropium was significantly more effective than placebo in both trough and average FEV(1) and FVC response (p < 0.001). These spirometric effects were corroborated by significant improvements in daily morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate, as well as a reduction in "as-needed" albuterol use. Symptoms of wheezing and shortness of breath were significantly less in patients receiving tiotropium, and the physician global assessment noted overall improvements with those treated with tiotropium relative to placebo. The most common reported adverse event after tiotropium was dry mouth (9.3% vs 1.6% relative to placebo; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that tiotropium is a safe and effective once-daily anticholinergic bronchodilator and should prove useful as first-line maintenance therapy in COPD.

Long-acting bronchodilation with once-daily dosing of tiotropium (Spiriva) in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Tiotropium (Spiriva; Ba679BR) is a new-generation, long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator that has muscarinic M(1) and M(3) receptor subtype selectivity. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the dose-response characteristics of tiotropium inhalation powder given once daily to stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients (mean FEV(1) = 1.08 L [42% predicted]) were randomized to receive 0, 4.5, 9, 18, or 36 microg tiotropium once daily at noon for 4 wk, with spirometry done before and hourly for 6 h after dosing. Patients measured and recorded their peak expiratory flow rates (PEFRs) three times each day. Significant dose-related improvement in FEV(1) and significant improvement in FVC occurred within 1 h after the first dose of tiotropium as compared with placebo. Over the 29 d of the study, all doses of tiotropium produced significant increases over placebo in trough (i.e., as measured spirometrically at 20 to 24 h after the previous dose and just before the next dose of tiotropium), peak, and 6-h postdose average FEV(1) and FVC, and in PEFR, without a significant difference among the different doses investigated. PEFR gradually returned to pretreatment baseline levels over a 3-wk evaluation period following the discontinuation of tiotropium. The overall safety profile for the tiotropium doses was similar to that for placebo. In summary, tiotropium was shown to be safe and effective in doses ranging from 4.5 to 36 microg delivered once daily. The improvements in spirometry with once-daily dosing confirm the long duration of action of tiotropium reported in single-dose studies, and its sustained improvement of spirometric measures over the 1 mo of testing in the study points to utility of tiotropium as a maintenance bronchodilator for patients with COPD. On the basis of the comparable bronchodilator response at doses from 9 to 36 microg, and advantages suggested by the safety profile at doses below 36 microg in this study, a dose of 18 microg once daily was selected for use in long-term studies of the safety and efficacy of tiotropium.

The combination of ipratropium and albuterol optimizes pulmonary function reversibility testing in patients with COPD.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol results in greater and more consistent pulmonary function test (PFT) response rates than ipratropium bromide or albuterol alone in patients with COPD. DESIGN: Retrospective review of two recently completed 3-month, randomized, double-blind, parallel, multicenter, phase III trials. SETTING: Outpatient. PATIENTS: A total of 1,067 stable patients with COPD. INTERVENTIONS: Ipratropium bromide (36 microg qid), albuterol base (180 microg qid), or an equivalent combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate (42 microg and 240 microg qid, respectively). MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: PFT response rates were analyzed using 12% and 15% increases in FEV1 compared with baseline values and were measured in the various treatment groups on days 1, 29, 57, and 85 in these trials. Regardless of whether a 12% or a 15% increase in FEV1 was used to define a positive response, an equivalent combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate was superior to the individual agents (p < 0.05; all comparisons within 30 min). In addition, a 15% or more increase in FEV1 was seen in > 80% of patients who received the combination of ipratropium and albuterol sulfate during the initial PFT and continued to be observed 3 months after initial testing. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate is superior to the individual agents in identifying PFT reversibility in patients with COPD.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of a combination of ipratropium plus albuterol compared with ipratropium alone and albuterol alone in COPD.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To conduct a post hoc pharmacoeconomic evaluation of two double-blind, randomized, prospective, parallel group studies comparing the long-term efficacy and safety of ipratropium combined with albuterol in a single inhalational canister against either bronchodilator agent alone in patients with COPD. PATIENTS: One thousand sixty-seven patients with COPD. METHODS: The dose of each bronchodilator was two puffs four times a day (42 microg of ipratropium bromide, 240 microg of albuterol sulfate). Pulmonary function testing was performed on days 1, 29, 57, and 85 of treatment. Outcomes, health-care resource consumption, and costs were compared for the three treatment groups over the 85-day study period. A total of 1,067 patients were randomized in the two studies (albuterol alone, n = 347; ipratropium alone, n = 362; albuterol plus ipratropium, n = 358). RESULTS: Improvement in FEV1 and area under the FEV1 response-time curve from time 0 to 4 h (FEV1AUC0-4) was significantly greater for the combination of albuterol plus ipratropium than either agent alone on all test days. Compared with albuterol, patients receiving ipratropium and ipratropium plus albuterol experienced significantly fewer COPD exacerbations and patient-days of exacerbation. In addition, the increased frequency of exacerbations observed in the albuterol group was associated with a significant increase in the number of patient hospital days and antibiotic and corticosteroid use. As a result, the total cost of treatment over the study period was significantly less for ipratropium ($156 per patient) and ipratropium plus albuterol ($197 per patient) than for albuterol ($269 per patient). Increased cost-effectiveness, defined as total estimated treatment cost per mean change in FEV1AUC0-4, was observed in both treatment arms containing ipratropium. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of ipratropium in a pharmacologic treatment regimen is associated with a lower rate of exacerbations in COPD. The result is lower total treatment costs and improved cost-effectiveness.

Extended therapy with ipratropium is associated with improved lung function in patients with COPD. A retrospective analysis of data from seven clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Bronchodilators are routinely used in the long-term therapy of patients with COPD. These drugs are generally evaluated for their short-term bronchodilatory effects. Long-term and short-term benefits, however, are not necessarily equivalent. We evaluated, therefore, the effects of extended therapy with inhaled bronchodilators in patients with COPD. DESIGN: Data were obtained from seven clinical trials in which ipratropium was compared with a beta-agonist over a 90-day treatment interval. This comprised all the available data from clinical trials performed for registration of ipratropium and included 1,445 evaluable patients. Results of pulmonary function tests were evaluated prior to and after short-term administration of bronchodilator both before and after the 90-day treatment period. In addition, data were analyzed after stratification for smoking status and for lung function. RESULTS: Long-term therapy with ipratropium resulted in improvement in baseline (ie, before short-term administration of bronchodilator) FEV1 (28 mL; p < 0.01) and FVC (131 mL; p < 0.01), while long-term therapy with beta-agonist resulted in no significant change in FEV1 (1-mL decline; p > 0.2) or in FVC (20-mL improvement; p > 0.2). The improvement in baseline function in the ipratropium-treated patients was most marked in ex-smokers (average duration of abstinence, 9 years). Short-term administration of ipratropium following the 90-day treatment interval resulted in similar response in average FEV1 (6 mL more improvement after the extended therapy; p > 0.2) and an increased response in average FVC (44 mL more improvement after extended therapy; p < 0.01). In contrast, extended therapy with beta-agonist resulted in significantly less response to the short-term administration of beta-agonist for both FEV1 (49 mL less response; p < 0.0001) and FVC (74 mL less response; p < 0.0001). Assessed as the percentage of patients who achieved a 15% improvement in lung function, most patients responded to both treatments both before and after extended therapy. There was, however, a significant decline in the number of patients who responded after extended therapy, and this was more marked for the beta-agonist treated group. CONCLUSION: Long-term benefits of bronchodilator therapy appear to differ from short-term effects. Extended administration of ipratropium appears to be associated with improved baseline lung function and perhaps with improvement in the response to acute bronchodilation. Extended administration of beta-agonist, in contrast, appears to have little effect on baseline lung function, but may decrease response to acute bronchodilation.

Fenoterol in exercise-induced asthma. Effect of dose on efficacy and duration of action.

The effectiveness of inhaled fenoterol doses of 0.4 mg and 0.8 mg in preventing exercise-induced asthma was investigated in 12 patients. Exercise-induced asthma was prevented by both doses for two hours after administration, but the effect of neither dose was significantly different from that of placebo four hours after. There was no statistically significant difference between the effects of the two fenoterol doses; and only a few patients were protected for more than two hours by the higher dose.

Comparison of oral and inhaled metaproterenol for prevention of exercise-induced asthma.

The effectiveness of inhaled versus oral metaproterenol in preventing exercise-induced asthma (EIA) was studied. Inhaled metaproterenol given 10 min before the exercise significantly reduced the degree of EIA in a group of twenty-four patients, and in 75% of them completely prevented it. The mean percentage decrease in FEV1 was 6.5% with the inhaler and 30.1% with placebo. When inhaled 1 hr before the exercise, metaproterenol was still better than placebo but its effectiveness was considerably lower. Metaproterenol tablets had a slight protective effect given 1 hr before, and none when administered 2 hr before exercise. There was no correlation between the protective effect against EIA and the bronchodilating effect obtained before exercise. Metaproterenol administered by metered-dose inhaler is a very effective prophylactic medication against clinically troublesome EIA, while metaproterenol tablets should not be recommended for this purpose.