Dataset Information

Tiotropium in patients with moderate COPD naive to maintenance therapy: a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: The benefits of pharmacotherapy with tiotropium HandiHaler 18??g for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been previously demonstrated. However, few data exist regarding the treatment of moderate disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage II).To determine whether tiotropium improves lung function/patient-reported outcomes in patients with GOLD stage II COPD naive to maintenance therapy.A randomised 24-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial of tiotropium 18??g once daily (via HandiHaler) was performed in maintenance therapy-naive patients with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio <0.7 and post-bronchodilator FEV1 ?50 and <80%.A total of 457 patients were randomised (238 tiotropium, 219 placebo; mean age 62 years; FEV1 1.93?l (66% predicted)). Tiotropium was superior to placebo in mean change from baseline in post-dose FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 3?h (AUC0-3h) at week 24 (primary endpoint): 0.19 vs. -0.03?l (least-squares mean difference 0.23?l, P<0.001). FVC AUC0-3h, trough and peak FEV1 and FVC were significantly improved with tiotropium versus placebo (P<0.001). Compared with placebo, tiotropium provided numerical improvements in physical activity (P=NS). Physician's Global Assessment (health status) improved (P=0.045) with less impairment on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire (P=0.043) at week 24. The incidence of exacerbations, cough, bronchitis and dyspnoea was lower with tiotropium than placebo.Tiotropium improved lung function and patient-reported outcomes in maintenance therapy-naive patients with GOLD stage II COPD, suggesting benefits in initiating maintenance therapy early.

SUBMITTER: Troosters T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4373257 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tiotropium in patients with moderate COPD naive to maintenance therapy: a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Troosters Thierry T Sciurba Frank C FC Decramer Marc M Siafakas Nikos M NM Klioze Solomon S SS Sutradhar Santosh C SC Weisman Idelle M IM Yunis Carla C

NPJ primary care respiratory medicine 20140520

<h4>Background</h4>The benefits of pharmacotherapy with tiotropium HandiHaler 18 μg for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been previously demonstrated. However, few data exist regarding the treatment of moderate disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage II).<h4>Aims</h4>To determine whether tiotropium improves lung function/patient-reported outcomes in patients with GOLD stage II COPD naive to maintenance therapy.<h4>Methods</h4>A ...[more]

PMID: 24841833

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIndacaterol is a novel, inhaled, once-daily, ultra-long-acting β2-agonist for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This randomized, double-blind study compared the bronchodilator efficacy of indacaterol with that of placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.MethodsIn an incomplete-block, multi-dose, three-period, crossover design, patients received three of the following four treatments: indacaterol 150 μg, indacaterol 300 μg, tiotropium 18 μg and placebo, each once-daily for 14 days. Each treatment period was separated by a 14-day washout. Study drug was supplied daily by blinded, third party study personnel to maintain blinding of patients and investigators. The primary efficacy variable was trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at 24 h post-dose after 14 days. The study was powered to demonstrate non-inferiority of indacaterol to tiotropium for this variable.ResultsA total of 169 patients were randomized (mean age 65 years); 153 (90.5%) completed. Trough FEV1 after 14 days with indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg was statistically and clinically superior to placebo, with differences (95% CI) of 170 (120-220) and 150 (100-200) mL respectively (both p < 0.001). For this endpoint, both doses of indacaterol not only met the criterion for non-inferiority compared with tiotropium, but also achieved numerically higher values, with differences versus tiotropium of 40 and 30 mL for indacaterol 150 and 300 μg, respectively. At 5 min post-dose on Day 1, the mean FEV1 for both indacaterol doses was significantly higher than placebo (by 120 and 130 mL for indacaterol 150 and 300 μg, respectively; p < 0.001) and tiotropium (by 80 mL for both doses; p < 0.001). Adverse events were reported by similar proportions of patients: 31.4%, 29.5%, 28.3% and 28.5% for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg, tiotropium and placebo treatments, respectively.ConclusionsOnce-daily indacaterol provided clinically and statistically significant 24-h bronchodilation. Indacaterol was at least as effective as tiotropium, with a faster onset of action (within 5 min) on the first day of dosing. Indacaterol should prove useful in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, for whom treatment with one or more classes of long-acting bronchodilator is recommended.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00615459, EudraCT number: 2007-004071-19.

Project description:Neuroinflammation is thought to be important in Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis. Mast cells are a key component of the inflammatory network and participate in the regulation of the blood-brain barrier's permeability. Masitinib, a selective oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, effectively inhibits the survival, migration and activity of mast cells. As the brain is rich in mast cells, the therapeutic potential of masitinib as an adjunct therapy to standard care was investigated.A randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study was performed in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease, receiving masitinib as an adjunct to cholinesterase inhibitor and/or memantine. Patients were randomly assigned to receive masitinib (n = 26) (starting dose of 3 or 6 mg/kg/day) or placebo (n = 8), administered twice daily for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) to assess cognitive function and the related patient response rate.The rate of clinically relevant cognitive decline according to the ADAS-Cog response (increase >4 points) after 12 and 24 weeks was significantly lower with masitinib adjunctive treatment compared with placebo (6% vs. 50% for both time points; P = 0.040 and P = 0.046, respectively). Moreover, whilst the placebo treatment arm showed worsening mean ADAS-Cog, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory, and Mini-Mental State Examination scores, the masitinib treatment arm reported improvements, with statistical significance between treatment arms at week 12 and/or week 24 (respectively, P = 0.016 and 0.030; P = 0.035 and 0.128; and P = 0.047 and 0.031). The mean treatment effect according to change in ADAS-Cog score relative to baseline at weeks 12 and 24 was 6.8 and 7.6, respectively. Adverse events occurred more frequently with masitinib treatment (65% vs. 38% of patients); however, the majority of events were of mild or moderate intensity and transitory. Severe adverse events occurred at a similar frequency in the masitinib and placebo arms (15% vs. 13% of patients, respectively). Masitinib-associated events included gastrointestinal disorders, oedema, and rash.Masitinib administered as add-on therapy to standard care during 24 weeks was associated with slower cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease, with an acceptable tolerance profile. Masitinib may therefore represent an innovative avenue of treatment in Alzheimer's disease. This trial provides evidence that may support a larger placebo-controlled investigation.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00976118.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether supported self management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can reduce hospital readmissions in the United Kingdom.DesignRandomised controlled trial.SettingCommunity based intervention in the west of Scotland.ParticipantsPatients admitted to hospital with acute exacerbation of COPD.InterventionParticipants in the intervention group were trained to detect and treat exacerbations promptly, with ongoing support for 12 months.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was hospital readmissions and deaths due to COPD assessed by record linkage of Scottish Morbidity Records; health related quality of life measures were secondary outcomes.Results464 patients were randomised, stratified by age, sex, per cent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, recent pulmonary rehabilitation attendance, smoking status, deprivation category of area of residence, and previous COPD admissions. No difference was found in COPD admissions or death (111/232 (48%) v 108/232 (47%); hazard ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.38). Return of health related quality of life questionnaires was poor (n=265; 57%), so that no useful conclusions could be made from these data. Pre-planned subgroup analysis showed no differential benefit in the primary outcome relating to disease severity or demographic variables. In an exploratory analysis, 42% (75/150) of patients in the intervention group were classified as successful self managers at study exit, from review of appropriateness of use of self management therapy. Predictors of successful self management on stepwise regression were younger age (P=0.012) and living with others (P=0.010). COPD readmissions/deaths were reduced in successful self managers compared with unsuccessful self managers (20/75 (27%) v 51/105 (49%); hazard ratio 0.44, 0.25 to 0.76; P=0.003).ConclusionSupported self management had no effect on time to first readmission or death with COPD. Exploratory subgroup analysis identified a minority of participants who learnt to self manage; this group had a significantly reduced risk of COPD readmission, were younger, and were more likely to be living with others.Trial registrationClinical trials NCT 00706303.

Project description:BackgroundEpstein-Barr virus (EBV) frequently is measured at high levels in COPD using sputum quantitative polymerase chain reaction, whereas airway immunohistochemistry analysis has shown EBV detection to be common in severe disease.Research questionIs valaciclovir safe and effective for EBV suppression in COPD?Study design and methodsThe Epstein-Barr Virus Suppression in COPD (EViSCO) trial was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial conducted at the Mater Hospital Belfast, Northern Ireland. Eligible patients had stable moderate-to-severe COPD and sputum EBV (measured using quantitative polymerase chain reaction) and were assigned randomly (1:1) to valaciclovir (1 g tid) or matching placebo for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was sputum EBV suppression (defined as ≥ 90% sputum viral load reduction) at week 8. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of serious adverse reactions. Secondary outcome measures were FEV1 and drug tolerability. Exploratory outcomes included changes in quality of life, sputum cell counts, and cytokines.ResultsFrom November 2, 2018, through March 12, 2020, 84 patients were assigned randomly (n = 43 to valaciclovir). Eighty-one patients completed trial follow-up and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome. A greater number of participants in the valaciclovir group achieved EBV suppression (n = 36 [87.8%] vs n = 17 [42.5%]; P < .001). Valaciclovir was associated with a significant reduction in sputum EBV titer compared with placebo (-90,404 copies/mL [interquartile range, -298,000 to -15,200 copies/mL] vs -3,940 copies/mL [interquartile range, -114,400 to 50,150 copies/mL]; P = .002). A statistically nonsignificant 24-mL numerical FEV1 increase was shown in the valaciclovir group (difference, -44 mL [95% CI, -150 to 62 mL]; P = .41). However, a reduction in sputum white cell count was noted in the valaciclovir group compared with the placebo group (difference, 2.89 [95% CI, 1.5 × 106-7.4 × 106]; P = .003).InterpretationValaciclovir is safe and effective for EBV suppression in COPD and may attenuate the sputum inflammatory cell infiltrate. The findings from the current study provide support for a larger trial to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes.Trial registryClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03699904; URL: www.Clinicaltrialsgov.

Project description:IntroductionDual bronchodilator therapy is reserved as a second-line treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and provides benefits in lung function and health status versus monotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine whether early initiation of a dual bronchodilator versus monotherapy reduced the risk of deterioration in COPD.MethodsThis post hoc pooled analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) 62.5/25 mcg/day compared with tiotropium (TIO) 18 mcg/day in a maintenance-naïve (MN) subgroup of patients relative to the intent-to-treat (ITT) population from three 6-month active comparator studies (n = 1747). Other treatment arms (UMEC/VI 125/25, VI 25 and UMEC 125) comprised 850 patients in total but were not included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, rescue medication use, and a novel composite endpoint of short-term clinically important deterioration (CID; ≥100 ml decrease in trough FEV1, ≥4-unit increase in SGRQ score, or a COPD exacerbation) were also assessed.ResultsUMEC/VI improved trough FEV1 versus TIO at day 169 [least squares mean (95% confidence interval): MN: 146 ml (102-189) and ITT: 95 ml (71-118); both P < 0.001]. Both UMEC/VI and TIO improved SGRQ and rescue use in the two populations, with greater improvements in rescue use with UMEC/VI versus TIO. UMEC/VI reduced the risk of short-term clinically important deterioration versus TIO [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval: MN: 0.66 (0.51-0.85); ITT: 0.62 (0.54-0.71), both P ≤ 0.001]. Adverse events were similar across both populations and treatments.ConclusionsEarly use of dual-bronchodilator therapy has superior efficacy on lung function and may reduce the risk of short-term deterioration compared to monotherapy in symptomatic patients with COPD.Clinical trial registrationGSK analysis 202066 (NCT01316900/DB2113360, NCT01316913/DB2113374, NCT01777334/ZEP117115).FundingThis study was funded by GSK.

Dataset Information

Tiotropium in patients with moderate COPD naive to maintenance therapy: a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Publications

Tiotropium in patients with moderate COPD naive to maintenance therapy: a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets