Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 6-week, randomized, controlled Phase IIIb study.

ABSTRACT: This randomized, double-blind, Phase IIIb study evaluated the 24-hour bronchodilatory efficacy of aclidinium bromide versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Patients received aclidinium 400 ?g twice daily (morning and evening), tiotropium 18 ?g once daily (morning), or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second area under the curve for the 24-hour period post-morning dose (FEV1 AUC0-24) at week 6. Secondary and additional endpoints included FEV1 AUC12-24, COPD symptoms (EXAcerbations of chronic pulmonary disease Tool-Respiratory Symptoms [E-RS] total score and additional symptoms questionnaire), and safety.Overall, 414 patients were randomized and treated (FEV1 1.63 L [55.8% predicted]). Compared with placebo, FEV1 AUC0-24 and FEV1 AUC12-24 were significantly increased from baseline with aclidinium (? = 150 mL and 160 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001) and tiotropium (? = 140 mL and 123 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001) at week 6. Significant improvements in E-RS total scores over 6 weeks were numerically greater with aclidinium (p < 0.0001) than tiotropium (p < 0.05) versus placebo. Only aclidinium significantly reduced the severity of early-morning cough, wheeze, shortness of breath, and phlegm, and of nighttime symptoms versus placebo (p < 0.05). Adverse-event (AE) incidence (28%) was similar between treatments. Few anticholinergic AEs (<1.5%) or serious AEs (<3%) occurred in any group.Aclidinium provided significant 24-hour bronchodilation versus placebo from day 1 with comparable efficacy to tiotropium after 6 weeks. Improvements in COPD symptoms were consistently numerically greater with aclidinium versus tiotropium. Aclidinium was generally well tolerated.

SUBMITTER: Beier J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3787813 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 6-week, randomized, controlled Phase IIIb study.

Beier Jutta J Kirsten Anne-Marie AM Mróz Robert R Segarra Rosa R Chuecos Ferran F Caracta Cynthia C Gil Esther Garcia EG

COPD 20130702 4

<h4>Background</h4>This randomized, double-blind, Phase IIIb study evaluated the 24-hour bronchodilatory efficacy of aclidinium bromide versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).<h4>Methods</h4>Patients received aclidinium 400 μg twice daily (morning and evening), tiotropium 18 μg once daily (morning), or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second area under the cu ...[more]

PMID: 23819698

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting ?2-agonist in a fixed-dose combination used in the management of patients with COPD. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg against the long-acting muscarinic antagonist aclidinium bromide 400 µg.A five-health-state Markov transition model with monthly cycles was developed using MS Excel to simulate patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and their initial lung-function improvement following treatment with aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg or aclidinium 400 µg. Health states were based on severity levels defined by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2010 criteria. The analysis was a head-to-head comparison without step-up therapy, from the NHS Scotland perspective, over a 5-year time horizon. Clinical data on initial lung-function improvement were provided by a pooled analysis of the ACLIFORM and AUGMENT trials. Management, event costs, and utilities were health state-specific. Costs and effects were discounted at an annual rate of 3.5%. The outcome of the analysis was expressed as cost (UK£) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The analysis included one way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to investigate the impact of parameter uncertainty on model outputs.Aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg provided marginally higher costs (£41) and more QALYs (0.014), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,976/QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were robust to key parameter variations, and the main drivers were: mean baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), risk of exacerbation, FEV1 improvement from aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg, and lung-function decline. The probability of aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg being cost-effective (using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY) versus aclidinium 400 µg was 79%.In Scotland, aclidinium-formoterol 400/12 µg can be considered a cost-effective treatment option compared to aclidinium 400 µg alone in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Project description:A previous Phase IIIb study (NCT01462929) in patients with moderate to severe COPD demonstrated that 6 weeks of treatment with aclidinium led to improvements in 24-hour bronchodilation comparable to those with tiotropium, and improvement of symptoms versus placebo. This post hoc analysis was performed to assess the effect of treatment in the symptomatic patient group participating in the study.Symptomatic patients (defined as those with Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms [E-RS™] in COPD baseline score ?10 units) received aclidinium bromide 400 ?g twice daily (BID), tiotropium 18 ?g once daily (QD), or placebo, for 6 weeks. Lung function, COPD respiratory symptoms, and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were assessed.In all, 277 symptomatic patients were included in this post hoc analysis. Aclidinium and tiotropium treatment improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline to week 6 at all time points over 24 hours versus placebo. In addition, improvements in FEV1 from baseline during the nighttime period were observed for aclidinium versus tiotropium on day 1 (aclidinium 157 mL, tiotropium 67 mL; P<0.001) and week 6 (aclidinium 153 mL, tiotropium 90 mL; P<0.05). Aclidinium improved trough FEV1 from baseline versus placebo and tiotropium at day 1 (aclidinium 136 mL, tiotropium 68 mL; P<0.05) and week 6 (aclidinium 137 mL, tiotropium 71 mL; P<0.05). Aclidinium also improved early-morning and nighttime symptom severity, limitation of early-morning activities, and E-RS Total and domain scores versus tiotropium (except E-RS Chest Symptoms) and placebo over 6 weeks. Tolerability showed similar incidence of AEs in each arm.In this post hoc analysis of symptomatic patients with moderate to severe COPD, aclidinium 400 ?g BID provided additional improvements compared with tiotropium 18 ?g QD in: 1) bronchodilation, particularly during the nighttime, 2) daily COPD symptoms (E-RS), 3) early-morning and nighttime symptoms, and 4) early-morning limitation of activity.

Project description:ObjectiveChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is mainly treated pharmaceutically with bronchodilators. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical benefits of two-times-per-day aclidinium bromide (Acli-BID) compared with once-a-day tiotropium bromide hydrate (Tio-QD) in patients with COPD.DesignThis study was a multicentre, open-label, randomised study.SettingFourcentres in Kagawa prefecture, Japan.ParticipantPatients who were diagnosed to have COPD Grade 2-3 according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2015 criteria were enrolled.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to receive Acli-BID or Tio-QD at a 1:1 ratio, and followed for 8 weeks. Acli-BID was administered in the morning and night, and Tio-QD was administered in the night.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome was forced expiratory volume in one second area under the curve (FEV1AUC0-3), and secondary outcomes were pulmonary function, physical activity, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), the 8-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8) and COPD exacerbations. Adverse events were evaluated during the study.Results44 patients were included in this study. FEV1AUC0-3 at week 8 was 4.62±1.43 L·hour in Acli-BID and 4.73±1.60 L·hour in Tio-QD (mean difference (MD) -0.11 L·hour; 95% CI), -1.04 to 0.83). Significant improvement was observed in activity-related subscales of SGRQ (MD -7.78; 95% CI -14.61 to -0.94) and SF-8 (MD 4.01; 95% CI 0.37 to 7.65), mMRC (MD -0.66; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.13) and rate ratio (0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.99) of exacerbations in the Acli-BID compared with the Tio-QD. Acli-BID and Tio-QD significantly improved sedentary behaviour (MD -35.20 min; 95% CI -67.41 to -2.94 and MD -55.40 min; 95% CI -98.15 to -12.77) within each group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups.ConclusionAcli-BID as with Tio-QD could be one of the therapeutic options for patients with COPD to improve pulmonary function. Also, our results suggest that intervention with bronchodilators enhanced physical activity in patients with COPD.Trial registration numberUMIN 000020020.

Project description:BackgroundCombining two long-acting bronchodilators with complementary mechanisms of action may provide treatment benefits to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that are greater than those derived from either treatment alone. The efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of aclidinium bromide, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and formoterol fumarate, a long-acting β2-agonist, in patients with moderate to severe COPD are presented.MethodsIn this 24-week double-blind study, 1692 patients with stable COPD were equally randomized to twice-daily treatment with FDC aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 12 μg (ACL400/FOR12 FDC), FDC aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 6 μg (ACL400/FOR6 FDC), aclidinium 400 μg, formoterol 12 μg, or placebo administered by a multidose dry powder inhaler (Genuair®/Pressair®)*. Coprimary endpoints were change from baseline to week 24 in 1-hour morning postdose FEV1 (FDCs versus aclidinium) and change from baseline to week 24 in morning predose (trough) FEV1 (FDCs versus formoterol). Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and improvement in Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score at week 24. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsAt study end, improvements from baseline in 1-hour postdose FEV1 were significantly greater in patients treated with ACL400/FOR12 FDC or ACL400/FOR6 FDC compared with aclidinium (108 mL and 87 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001). Improvements in trough FEV1 were significantly greater in patients treated with ACL400/FOR12 FDC versus formoterol (45 mL; p = 0.0102), a numerical improvement of 26 mL in trough FEV1 over formoterol was observed with ACL400/FOR6 FDC. Significant improvements in both SGRQ total and TDI focal scores were observed in the ACL400/FOR12 FDC group at study end (p < 0.0001), with differences over placebo exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of ≥4 points and ≥1 unit, respectively. All treatments were well tolerated, with safety profiles of the FDCs similar to those of the monotherapies.ConclusionsTreatment with twice-daily aclidinium 400 μg/formoterol 12 μg FDC provided rapid and sustained bronchodilation that was greater than either monotherapy; clinically significant improvements in dyspnea and health status were evident compared with placebo. Aclidinium/formoterol FDC may be an effective and well tolerated new treatment option for patients with COPD.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01437397.

Project description:BackgroundApremilast, an oral, small-molecule phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.ObjectiveEvaluate efficacy and safety of apremilast vs. placebo in biologic-naive patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and safety of switching from etanercept to apremilast in a phase IIIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT01690299).MethodsTwo hundred and fifty patients were randomized to placebo (n = 84), apremilast 30 mg BID (n = 83) or etanercept 50 mg QW (n = 83) through Week 16; thereafter, all patients continued or switched to apremilast through Week 104. The primary efficacy endpoint was achievement of PASI-75 at Week 16 with apremilast vs. placebo. Secondary endpoints included achievement of PASI-75 at Week 16 with etanercept vs. placebo and improvements in other clinical endpoints vs. placebo at Week 16. Outcomes were assessed through Week 52. This study was not designed for apremilast vs. etanercept comparisons.ResultsAt Week 16, PASI-75 achievement was greater with apremilast (39.8%) vs. placebo (11.9%; P < 0.0001); 48.2% of patients achieved PASI-75 with etanercept (P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). PASI-75 response was maintained in 47.3% (apremilast/apremilast), 49.4% (etanercept/apremilast) and 47.9% (placebo/apremilast) of patients at Week 52. Most common adverse events (≥5%) with apremilast, including nausea, diarrhoea, upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, tension headache and headache, were mild or moderate in severity; diarrhoea and nausea generally resolved in the first month. No new safety or tolerability issues were observed through Week 52 with apremilast.ConclusionApremilast demonstrated significant efficacy vs. placebo at Week 16 in biologic-naive patients with psoriasis, which was sustained over 52 weeks, and demonstrated safety consistent with the known safety profile of apremilast. Switching from etanercept to apremilast did not result in any new or clinically significant safety findings, and efficacy was maintained with apremilast through Week 52.

Project description:Aclidinium bromide is a new long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) indicated for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of aclidinium was compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium, using a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in moderate-to-severe COPD patients.A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs evaluating aclidinium 400 ?g twice daily (BID), glycopyrronium 50 ?g once daily (OD), tiotropium 18 ?g OD, or tiotropium 5 ?g OD in adults with moderate-to-severe COPD. The outcomes of interest were: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1); St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and proportion of patients achieving ?4 unit change; Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and proportion of patients achieving ?1 point change. The results were synthesized by means of a Bayesian NMA.Twenty-one studies (22,542 patients) were included: aclidinium 400 ?g BID (three studies); tiotropium 5 ?g OD (three studies); tiotropium 18 ?g OD (13 studies); and glycopyrronium 50 ?g OD (two studies). Regarding trough FEV1 at 24 weeks, aclidinium demonstrated comparable efficacy to tiotropium 5 ?g (difference in change from baseline [CFB]), (0.02 L [95% credible interval CrI -0.05, 0.09]); tiotropium 18 ?g (0.02 L [95% CrI -0.05, 0.08]); and glycopyrronium (0.00 L [95% CrI -0.07, 0.07]). Aclidinium resulted in higher improvement in SGRQ score at 24 weeks, compared to tiotropium 5 ?g (difference in CFB, -2.44 [95% CrI -4.82, -0.05]); and comparable results to tiotropium 18 ?g (-1.80 [95% CrI -4.52, 0.14]) and glycopyrronium (-1.52 [95% CrI -4.08, 1.03]). Improvements in TDI score were comparable for all treatments.Maintenance treatment with aclidinium 400 ?g BID is expected to produce similar improvements in lung function, health-related quality of life, and dyspnea compared to tiotropium 5 ?g OD; tiotropium 18 ?g OD; and glycopyrronium 50 ?g OD.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 6-week, randomized, controlled Phase IIIb study.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 6-week, randomized, controlled Phase IIIb study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets