Long term survival after admission for COPD exacerbation: A comparison with the general population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Life expectancy data of COPD patients in comparison to the general population are primarily based upon long-term population cohort studies. These studies are limited by a poor definition of clinically significant COPD. The key element in the course of COPD is a clinical exacerbation. Therefore, this study investigated 15-year survival following hospitalization for an exacerbation of COPD in comparison to the general population. METHODS: A number of 4229 subjects was studied, including 845 hospitalized COPD patients and 3384 age and sex matched controls. Mortality risks were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and hazard rate ratios for death were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models, for each Gold Class separately. RESULTS: Overall 15-year survival was 7.3% in the COPD group and 40.6% in the general population. Survival was 24%, 11.1%, 5.3% and 0% for COPD GOLD I-IV. The mean life expectancy following hospitalization was 9.7, 7.1, 6.1 and 3.4 years for stage GOLD I-IV and 10.2 years for the general population. Overall, negative prognostic factors were age, male gender, low FEV1, low TLCO, respiratory insufficiency, Charlson comorbidity class, ICU-admission and exacerbation frequency. Factors differed among GOLD stages. CONCLUSIONS: The 15-year survival for hospitalized COPD patients is reduced by 82% in comparison to the general population. This indicates a more deleterious course of clinically significant COPD in comparison to population cohorts. As such, every possible effort should be taken to reduce exacerbations in a personalized way.

In Vitro, Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic, and Safety Comparisons of Single and Combined Administration of Tiotropium and Salmeterol in COPD Patients Using Different Dry Powder Inhalers.

In vitro Andersen cascade impactor-sized mass (ISM) and aerodynamic fine particle mass (FPM) <5 µm for tiotropium and salmeterol combined in a novel inhalation powder formulation containing 7.5 µg tiotropium/25 µg salmeterol (TSHH) were similar (within ±15%) to reference products containing 18 µg of tiotropium (Spiriva® HandiHaler®) (TioHH) and 50 µg of salmeterol (Serevent® Diskus®) (SalD). The pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of the novel fixed-dose TSHH formulation administered once daily was compared with the single-agent therapies TioHH (once daily [qd]) and SalD (twice daily [bid]) and with the jointly administered combination of TioHH (qd) plus SalD (bid) in a randomized, 22-week, open-label, four-way crossover study in 50 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). For tiotropium, TSHH and TioHH were bioequivalent based on mean steady-state plasma area under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUC), while the urinary excretion amount was higher for TSHH and not bioequivalent to TioHH. Tiotropium peak plasma concentrations at steady state (C max,ss) were 40% higher with TSHH. For salmeterol, substantial differences were observed in plasma AUCs and Cmax,ss. No significant differences in 8-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s or forced vital capacity were detected for the TSHH (qd) against the combination of TioHH (qd) with SalD (bid). Maintenance therapy with tiotropium plus salmeterol as TSHH or as the jointly administered reference products is superior to either agent alone, safe, and well tolerated in COPD patients. In vitro results were not predictive of clinical PK findings for both tiotropium and salmeterol for the TSHH dry powder inhaler product.

Stepping-across controlled asthmatic patients to extrafine beclometasone/formoterol combination.

BACKGROUND: Asthma management focuses on achieving and maintaining asthma control. Few studies have assessed whether complete and sustained asthma control is maintained in clinical practice after stepping-across ICS/LABA fixed combinations. Aim of this double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel group, controlled study was to demonstrate clinical equivalence between equipotent doses of extrafine beclometasone/formoterol (BDP/F) pMDI and fluticasone/salmeterol (FP/S) Diskus® in maintaining lung function and asthma control. METHODS: A total of 416 asthmatic patients already controlled with FP/S 500/100 µg/day (Diskus®, pMDI or separate inhalers) were randomized to a 12-week treatment with extrafine BDP/F 400/24 µg/day pMDI or FP/S 500/100 µg/day Diskus®. Pre-dose 1-s forced expiratory volume (FEV(1)) was the primary efficacy variable; secondary variables included asthma control questionnaire (ACQ-7) and FEV(1)0-1 h area under the curve (FEV(1)AUC(0-1h)). Safety was assessed through adverse events monitoring and vital signs. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of treatment, pre-dose FEV(1) did not differ between treatments (difference between means 0.01 L; 95% CI -0.03-0.06 L) with no significant changes from baseline in both groups (p = 0.726 and p = 0.783 in BDF/F arm and FP/S, respectively). ACQ-7 score showed that control was maintained after stepping-across to extrafine BDP/F. FEV(1)AUC(0-1h) was significantly higher in BDP/F arm at the beginning (p = 0.004) and at the end of the 12-week treatment period (p = 0.019). No safety issues were reported in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients previously controlled with FP/S in any device formulation can effectively step-across to extrafine BDP/F pMDI, maintaining lung function and asthma control with a 5-min onset of action.

Efficacy and safety profile of fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy compared to its individual components administered concurrently in asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The potent inhaled corticosteroid, fluticasone propionate (fluticasone), and the long-acting ß2-agonist with a rapid onset of action, formoterol fumarate (formoterol), have now been combined in a single aerosol inhaler, fluticasone/formoterol (flutiform). This study investigated the efficacy and safety of fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy compared with its individual components administered concurrently via two separate inhalers. METHODS: Patients ≥ 12 years (N = 210) with mild to moderate-severe persistent, reversible asthma were evenly randomised to 12 weeks of treatment (b.i.d.) with fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy (100/10 µg b.i.d. or 250/10 µg b.i.d.) or fluticasone plus formoterol (Flixotide Evohaler, pMDI, Flovent [HFA]; Foradil, DPI, Foradil Aerolizer) administered concurrently (fluticasone + formoterol; 100 µg + 12 µg b.i.d. or 250 µg + 12 µg b.i.d.) in an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study. The primary objective of this study was to show non-inferiority of fluticasone/formoterol compared with fluticasone + formoterol based on mean post-dose FEV1. RESULTS: The mean FEV1 30-60 minutes post-dose on Day 84 was approximately 2.6 L in both the fluticasone/formoterol combination and the fluticasone + formoterol treatment groups (per protocol sets; treatment difference least squares (LS) mean: -0.03 L; 95% CI: -0.148, 0.081). The lower limit of the 95% CI (-0.148 L) was above the non-inferiority threshold of ≥-0.2 L. Analyses of other pulmonary function tests, patient reported outcomes, rescue medication use, asthma exacerbations and quality of life questionnaires were also comparable. The safety profiles of the two study groups were similar overall. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy had comparable efficacy to its individual components administered concurrently, when measured by post-dose FEV1 in patients aged ≥ 12 years with mild to moderate-severe asthma. The safety and tolerability profile of fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy was similar to that of its individual components administered concurrently. Although this was an open-label study, the results remain compelling: the primary efficacy measure was a physical endpoint and study statisticians were blinded to treatment allocations until analysis was completed.

Prediction and course of symptoms and lung function around an exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Frequent exacerbations induce a high burden to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). We investigated the course of exacerbations in the published COSMIC study that investigated the effects of 1-year withdrawal of fluticasone after a 3-month run-in treatment period with salmeterol/fluticasone in patients with COPD. METHODS: In 373 patients, we evaluated diary cards for symptoms, Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF), and salbutamol use and assessed their course during exacerbations. RESULTS: There were 492 exacerbations in 224 patients. The level of symptoms of cough, sputum, dyspnea and nocturnal awakening steadily increased from 2 weeks prior to exacerbation, with a sharp rise during the last week. Symptoms of cough, sputum, and dyspnea reverted to baseline values at different rates (after 4, 4, and 7 weeks respectively), whereas symptoms of nocturnal awakening were still increased after eight weeks. The course of symptoms was similar around a first and second exacerbation. Increases in symptoms and salbutamol use and decreases in PEF were associated with a higher risk to develop an exacerbation, but with moderate predictive values, the areas under the receiver operating curves ranging from 0.63 to 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: Exacerbations of COPD are associated with increased symptoms that persist for weeks and the course is very similar between a first and second exacerbation. COPD exacerbations are preceded by increased symptoms and salbutamol use and lower PEF, yet predictive values are too low to warrant daily use in clinical practice.

Safety and efficacy of dual therapy with GSK233705 and salmeterol versus monotherapy with salmeterol, tiotropium, or placebo in a crossover pilot study in partially reversible COPD patients.

BACKGROUND: GSK233705 is an inhaled, long-acting muscarinic antagonist in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study was performed to see if the addition of GSK233705 to salmeterol would provide greater bronchodilation than salmeterol or tiotropium alone in COPD. METHODS: In an incomplete-block, three-period, crossover design, dually responsive patients received three of the following five treatments: GSK233705 20 µg plus salmeterol 50 µg twice-daily; GSK233705 50 µg plus salmeterol 50 µg twice-daily; salmeterol 50 µg or placebo, each twice-daily; and tiotropium 18 µg or placebo once-daily for 7 days. Each treatment period was separated by a 14-day washout. The primary efficacy endpoint was morning (trough) forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) on Day 8, following 7 days of treatment. Secondary endpoints included pulmonary function, plethysmography, pharmacokinetics of GSK233705 and salmeterol, adverse events (AEs), electrocardiograms (ECGs), vital signs, and laboratory parameters. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were randomized. The mean % predicted normal postbronchodilator FEV(1) was 55% at screening. Compared with placebo (n = 24), the adjusted mean change from baseline in trough FEV(1) on Day 8 was 215 mL higher with GSK233705 20 µg + salmeterol (n = 23) and 203 mL higher with GSK233705 50 µg + salmeterol (n = 27), whereas with salmeterol (n = 27) and tiotropium (n = 28) the changes were 101 mL and 118 mL higher, respectively. The primary efficacy results were supported by the results from the other secondary lung function assessments. AEs were reported by similar proportions of patients across the treatment groups, with headache the most frequently reported treatment-related AE reported by one subject receiving each of GSK233705 20 µg + salmeterol, tiotropium, and placebo. No significant differences were seen in vital signs, ECGs, or laboratory parameters between the groups. CONCLUSION: The addition of GSK233705 to salmeterol in partially reversible COPD patients resulted in greater bronchodilation than salmeterol or tiotropium alone and was well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily NVA237 in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD: the GLOW1 trial.

BACKGROUND: NVA237 is a once-daily dry-powder formulation of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium bromide in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The glycopyrronium bromide in COPD airways clinical study 1 (GLOW1) evaluated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of NVA237 in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. METHODS: Patients with COPD with a smoking history of ≥ 10 pack-years, post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) < 80% and ≥ 30% predicted normal and FEV1/forced vital capacity < 0.70 were enrolled. Patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with NVA237 50 µg once daily or placebo for 26 weeks with inhaled/intranasal corticosteroids or H1 antagonists permitted in patients stabilized on them prior to study entry. The primary outcome measure was trough FEV1 at Week 12. RESULTS: A total of 822 patients were randomized to NVA237 (n = 552) or placebo (n = 270). Least squares mean (± standard error) trough FEV1 at Week 12 was significantly higher in patients receiving NVA237 (1.408 ± 0.0105 L), versus placebo (1.301 ± 0.0137 L; treatment difference 108 ± 14.8 mL, p < 0.001). Significant improvements in trough FEV1 were apparent at the end of Day 1 and sustained through Week 26. FEV1 was significantly improved in the NVA237 group versus placebo throughout the 24-hour periods on Day 1 and at Weeks 12 and 26, and at all other visits and timepoints. Transition dyspnoea index focal scores and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores were significantly improved with NVA237 versus placebo at Week 26, with treatment differences of 1.04 (p < 0.001) and -2.81 (p = 0.004), respectively. NVA237 significantly reduced the risk of first moderate/severe COPD exacerbation by 31% (p = 0.023) and use of rescue medication by 0.46 puffs per day (p = 0.005), versus placebo. NVA237 was well tolerated and had an acceptable safety profile, with a low frequency of cardiac and typical antimuscarinic adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily NVA237 was safe and well tolerated and provided rapid, sustained improvements in lung function, improvements in dyspnoea, and health-related quality of life, and reduced the risk of exacerbations and the use of rescue medication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01005901.

Tiotropium improves lung function in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with severe asthma remain symptomatic and obstructed despite maximal recommended treatment. Tiotropium, a long-acting inhaled anticholinergic agent, might be an effective bronchodilator in such patients. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of tiotropium (5 and 10 µg daily) administered through the Respimat inhaler with placebo as add-on therapy in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma (Asthma Control Questionnaire score, ≥ 1.5; postbronchodilator FEV1, ≤ 80% of predicted value) despite maintenance treatment with at least a high-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus a long-acting ß2-agonist. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover study with three 8-week treatment periods. The primary end point was peak FEV1 at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: Of 107 randomized patients (54% female patients; mean, 55 years of age; postbronchodilator FEV1, 65% of predicted value), 100 completed all periods. Peak FEV1 was significantly higher with 5 µg (difference, 139 mL; 95% CI, 96-181 mL) and 10 µg (difference, 170 mL; 95% CI, 128-213 mL) of tiotropium than with placebo (both P < .0001). There was no significant difference between the active doses. Trough FEV1 at the end of the dosing interval was higher with tiotropium (5 µg: 86 mL [95% CI, 41-132 mL]; 10 µg: 113 mL [95% CI, 67-159 mL]; both P < .0004). Daily home peak expiratory flow measurements were higher with both tiotropium doses. There were no significant differences in asthma-related health status or symptoms. Adverse events were balanced across groups except for dry mouth, which was more common on 10 µg of tiotropium. CONCLUSION: The addition of once-daily tiotropium to asthma treatment, including a high-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus a long-acting ß2-agonist, significantly improves lung function over 24 hours in patients with inadequately controlled, severe, persistent asthma.

QVA149 demonstrates superior bronchodilation compared with indacaterol or placebo in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled, four-period crossover study assessed the efficacy and safety of once-daily QVA149, a dual bronchodilator consisting of the long-acting ß2-agonist indacaterol and the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium (NVA237), in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Patients (N=154) were randomly assigned to receive QVA149 (indacaterol/NVA237) 300/50 µg, indacaterol 300 µg, indacaterol 600 µg, or placebo, once daily for 7 days with a 7-day washout period between each treatment. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (mean of 23 h 15 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose values) on day 7. Other endpoints included trough FEV1 on day 1, individual time point FEV1 and monitoring and recording of all adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 135 (87.7%) patients completed the study (all randomly assigned patients: mean age 61.7 years, 61.4% male, post-bronchodilator FEV1 52.2% predicted, FEV1/forced vital capacity 47.6%). The estimated treatment difference (95% CI) for trough FEV1 on day 7 between QVA149 and placebo was 226 ml (192 to 260; p<0.001). The estimated treatment difference between QVA149 and indacaterol 300 and 600 µg was 123 ml (89 to 157; p<0.001) and 117 ml (83 to 150; p<0.001), respectively. The improvements in mean trough FEV1 exceeded the predefined minimal clinically important differences of 100­140 ml for QVA149 versus placebo and indacaterol. Similar results were observed on day 1. All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: QVA149 demonstrated rapid and sustained bronchodilation with significant improvements compared with indacaterol monotherapy and placebo in patients with COPD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00570778.

Effects of tiotropium with and without formoterol on airflow obstruction and resting hyperinflation in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: The combination of short-acting beta(2)-agonists and anticholinergics in the treatment of COPD has been well documented, but data on combination of long-acting agents are lacking. METHODS: A randomized, open-label, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study was conducted comparing 2-week treatment periods of tiotropium alone to tiotropium plus formoterol once or twice daily following a 2-week pretreatment period with tiotropium. Lung function (FEV(1), FVC, and resting inspiratory capacity [IC]) serially over 24 h was measured in 95 patients with stable COPD at baseline and after 2 weeks of each treatment. RESULTS: Mean baseline FEV(1) was 1.05 L (38% of predicted). There was a circadian variation in FEV(1), FVC, and IC at baseline that was maintained during all treatment periods. Average FEV(1) (0 to 24 h) improved by 0.08 L with tiotropium, by 0.16 L with tiotropium plus formoterol once daily, and by 0.20 L with tiotropium plus formoterol twice daily (p < 0.01 for all comparisons). Compared with tiotropium alone, add-on formoterol in the morning produced improvement in FEV(1), FVC, and IC for > 12 h. The second add-on dose of formoterol in the evening caused further improvement in FEV(1) for 12 h, but in FVC and IC for < 12 h. Peak increase in FEV(1) was 0.23 L (22% of baseline) with tiotropium and 0.39 L (37% of baseline) with tiotropium plus formoterol (p < 0.0001). Compared with tiotropium alone, add-on formoterol once and twice daily reduced the use of rescue salbutamol during the daytime (p < 0.01) and with add-on formoterol twice daily also during the nighttime (p < 0.05). The combination of tiotropium and formoterol was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of COPD, there is benefit from adding formoterol once or twice daily to tiotropium once daily in terms of improvement in airflow obstruction, resting hyperinflation, and the use of rescue salbutamol.

A 6-month, placebo-controlled study comparing lung function and health status changes in COPD patients treated with tiotropium or salmeterol.

BACKGROUND: Tiotropium, a once-daily anticholinergic, and salmeterol represent two inhaled, long-acting bronchodilators from different pharmacologic classes. A trial was designed to examine the efficacy and safety of both compounds with multiple outcome measures, including lung function, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with COPD. METHODS: A 6-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study of tiotropium, 18 microg once daily via dry-powder inhaler, compared with salmeterol, 50 microg bid via metered-dose inhaler, was conducted in patients with COPD. Efficacy was assessed by 12-h monitoring of spirometry, transition dyspnea index (TDI), and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). RESULTS: A total of 623 patients participated (tiotropium, n= 209; salmeterol, n = 213; and placebo, n = 201). The groups were similar in age (mean, 65 years), gender (75% men), and baseline FEV(1) (mean, 1.08 +/- 0.37 L; percent predicted, 40 +/- 12% [+/- SD]). Compared with placebo treatment, the mean predose morning FEV(1) following 6 months of therapy increased significantly more for the tiotropium group (0.14 L) than the salmeterol group (0.09 L; p < 0.01). The average FEV(1) (0 to 12 h) for tiotropium was statistically superior to salmeterol (difference, 0.08 L; p < 0.001). Tiotropium improved TDI focal score by 1.02 U compared with placebo (p = 0.01), whereas there was no significant change in TDI focal score with salmeterol (0.24 U). Tiotropium was superior to salmeterol in improving TDI focal score (p < 0.05). At 6 months, the mean improvement in SGRQ total score vs baseline was tiotropium, - 5.14 U (p < 0.05 vs placebo); salmeterol, - 3.54 U (p = 0.4 vs placebo); and placebo, - 2.43 U. A statistically higher proportion of patients receiving tiotropium achieved at least a 4-U change in SGRQ score compared to patients receiving placebo. Both active drugs reduced the need for rescue albuterol (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium once daily produces superior bronchodilation, improvements in dyspnea, and proportion of patients achieving meaningful changes in HRQoL compared to twice-daily salmeterol in patients with COPD.