Preference, satisfaction and errors with two dry powder inhalers in patients with COPD.

OBJECTIVE: To assess preference, satisfaction and critical errors with a novel, breath-actuated, multi-dose dry powder inhaler (DPI; Genuair®/Pressair™), versus a widely used, single-dose DPI (HandiHaler®) in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, cross-over study, patients (aged ≥ 40 years) inhaled placebo once daily through both inhalers for 2 weeks in addition to current medication. The primary end point was percentage of patients who preferred Genuair to HandiHaler. Overall patient satisfaction (5-point scale: 1 = very dissatisfied; 5 = very satisfied), critical errors and willingness to continue using each inhaler (0 = not willing; 100 = definitely willing) were assessed. RESULTS: Of 130 patients randomised, 105 were included in the intent-to-treat population (71.4% male; mean age 65.7 years). After 2 weeks, significantly more patients preferred Genuair than HandiHaler (79.1 vs 20.9%; p < 0.0001). Overall satisfaction scores (4.6 vs 3.8; p < 0.0001) and willingness to continue use scores (84.0 vs 62.5; p < 0.0001) were significantly higher with Genuair versus HandiHaler. Significantly fewer patients made ≥ 1 critical error with Genuair only compared with HandiHaler only (2.9 vs 19.0%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: After 2 weeks' practice, patients preferred and were more willing to continue using Genuair than HandiHaler. Genuair was associated with higher patient satisfaction and fewer critical errors than HandiHaler.

Immunologic effects and tolerability profile of in-season initiation of a standardized-quality grass allergy immunotherapy tablet: a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults with grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: The summary of product characteristics of the grass allergy immunotherapy tablet (AIT) (Phleum pratense grass pollen allergen extract) states that clinical effect may be observed in the first pollen season of treatment, if treatment is initiated ≥2 months (8 weeks) before the start of the grass pollen season. However, because patients with grass allergy may first present to physicians during the season, immediate treatment initiation (ie, in-season initiation) may increase treatment compliance and reduce the risk for disease progression compared with asking patients to return before the next pollen season to initiate treatment. This "in-season approach" may offer more patients the potentially beneficial treatment option of specific immunotherapy. However, to date, the immunomodulatory effects and tolerability of in-season treatment initiation is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the immunologic effects and tolerability of in-season initiation of treatment with the grass AIT. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was carried out in Germany and Austria. Adults with grass pollen allergy (positive skin-prick test and specific grass-pollen immunoglobulin [Ig] E) and grass pollen-induced moderate to severe persistent rhinoconjunctivitis were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive once-daily grass AIT or placebo, starting during the 2008 grass pollen season and continuing for 8 to 10 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline in IgE-blocking factor (serum components competing with IgE for allergen binding). Secondary end points included changes from baseline in specific IgE and IgG(4) and measures of tolerability (assessed mainly by adverse events [AEs]). Blood samples for immunologic assessment were obtained by the investigators at baseline and after treatment. All AEs observed by the investigator and/or reported by the patient were recorded throughout the trial and follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 276 patients were enrolled and formed the full analysis set (mean age, 35 years; 55% men, 45% women; 99% white; mean weight, 76 kg; history of asthma, 41%; mean duration of grass allergy, 15.1 years). No major differences in medical history were found between the grass AIT group (n = 219) and the placebo group (n = 57). The change from baseline in mean concentration of IgE-blocking factor was significantly greater with grass AIT compared with placebo (+0.14 vs +0.05; P < 0.0001). The changes from baseline in specific IgE and specific IgG(4) concentrations were significantly greater with AIT compared with placebo (IgE, +0.59 vs +0.21 log kU/L; IgG(4), +0.18 vs +0.04 log relative units; both, P < 0.0001). At least 1 AE was reported in 58% of patients in the AIT group and in 40% of patients in the placebo group. Most AEs considered related to AIT were mild or moderate events in the mouth, throat, and/or ears (eg, oral pruritus). Four serious AEs were reported in the AIT group (sinusitis, road traffic accident, salmonellosis, meniscus lesion), but all were considered unlikely to be related to treatment. Three percent of the grass AIT group and 2% of the placebo group were withdrawn from the trial due to an AE. CONCLUSIONS: In-season initiation of grass AIT was associated with an immunomodulatory response in terms of induction of IgE-blocking factor, specific IgE, and specific IgG(4). In-season initiation of grass AIT was generally well tolerated in this group of adults with moderate to severe grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. These findings are consistent with those related to the preseasonal initiation of AIT therapy.

A practical guide to bioelectrical impedance analysis using the example of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a simple, inexpensive, quick and non-invasive technique for measuring body composition. The clinical benefit of BIA can be further enhanced by combining it with bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA). However, there is a substantial lack of information on the practical aspects of BIA/BIVA for those primarily interested in learning how to use and interpret this method in practice. The purpose of this article is to provide some guidance on the use of BIA/BIVA with special attention to practical considerations.This report reflects the authors' practical experience with the use of single-frequency BIA in combination with BIVA, particularly in COPD patients. First, the method and principles of BIA/BIVA are briefly described. Then, a practice-oriented approach to the interpretation and analysis of characteristic examples of altered nutritional and fluid status as seen with BIA/BIVA in COPD patients (e.g. malnutrition in obese and underweight patients with COPD, water retention) is presented.As our examples show BIA/BIVA is an attractive and easy-to-learn tool for quick nutritional assessment and is therefore of great clinical benefit in daily practice.