Dataset Information

In Vitro Dosing Performance of the ELLIPTA® Dry Powder Inhaler Using Asthma and COPD Patient Inhalation Profiles Replicated with the Electronic Lung (eLung™).

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the in vitro dose delivery characteristics of approved asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies delivered via the ELLIPTA(®) dry powder inhaler across inhalation endpoints representative of the target patient population, using the Electronic Lung (eLung™) to replicate inhaler-specific patient inhalation profiles that were previously recorded in vivo.Selected profiles, representative of the range of inhalation endpoints achieved by patients with all severities of asthma and COPD, were replicated using the eLung breathing simulator in conjunction with an oropharyngeal cast. A Next Generation Impactor was coupled to the eLung to determine the aerodynamic particle size distribution of the ex-throat dose (ETD) of asthma and COPD therapies delivered via the ELLIPTA inhaler. Delivered dose (DD), ETD, and fine particle dose (FPD; defined as a mass of active substance less than 5??m) were determined for fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25??g and 200/25??g (asthma and COPD), umeclidinium (UMEC)/VI 62.5/25??g (COPD only), FF 100??g and 200?g monotherapy (asthma only), and UMEC 62.5??g monotherapy (COPD only).Inhalation profiles replicated by eLung covered a wide range of peak inspiratory flow rates (41.6-136.9?L/min), pressure drops (1.2-13.8?kPa), and inhaled volumes through the inhaler (0.7-4.2L). DD was consistent across the range of patient representative inhalation parameters for all components (FF, VI, and UMEC) of each therapy assessed; although ETD and FPD were also generally consistent, some small variation was observed. Dose delivery was consistent for each of the components, whether delivered as mono- or combination therapy.The in vitro performance of the ELLIPTA inhaler has been demonstrated for the delivery of FF/VI, UMEC/VI, FF monotherapy, and UMEC monotherapy. Across a range of inspiratory profiles, DD was consistent, while ETD and FPD showed little flow dependency.

SUBMITTER: Hamilton M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4685503 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

In Vitro Dosing Performance of the ELLIPTA® Dry Powder Inhaler Using Asthma and COPD Patient Inhalation Profiles Replicated with the Electronic Lung (eLung™).

Hamilton Melanie M Leggett Richard R Pang Cheng C Charles Stephen S Gillett Ben B Prime David D

Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery 20150915 6

<h4>Background</h4>To evaluate the in vitro dose delivery characteristics of approved asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies delivered via the ELLIPTA(®) dry powder inhaler across inhalation endpoints representative of the target patient population, using the Electronic Lung (eLung™) to replicate inhaler-specific patient inhalation profiles that were previously recorded in vivo.<h4>Methods</h4>Selected profiles, representative of the range of inhalation endpoints achie ...[more]

PMID: 26372465

Similar Datasets

Project description:Two studies were undertaken to characterize the maximal effort inhalation profiles of healthy subjects and patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) through a moderate-resistance dry powder inhaler (DPI). Correlations between inhaler-specific inhalation characteristics and inhaler-independent lung function parameters were investigated.Healthy subjects (n?=?15), patients with mild, moderate, or severe asthma (n?=?45), and patients with mild, moderate, severe, or very-severe COPD (n?=?60) were included in the studies. Inhalation pressure drop versus time profiles were recorded using an instrumented ELLIPTA® DPI or bespoke resistor component with equivalent resistivity. Inhaler-independent lung function assessments included pharyngometry, spirometry, plethysmography, and diffusion.For the inhaler-specific inhalation profiles, the mean maximal effort peak inspiratory flow rates (PIFRs) varied across the subgroups from 65.8-110.6 L/min (range: 41.6-142.9). Peak pressure drop, PIFR, inhaled volume, and average inhalation flow rate (primary endpoints) did not differ markedly between healthy subjects and patients with asthma or mild COPD. Moderate, severe, and very-severe COPD patients demonstrated lower mean peak pressure drops, PIFRs and inhaled volumes, which tended to decrease with increasing COPD severity. Severe and very-severe COPD patients demonstrated shorter mean inhalation times compared with all other participants. Inhaler-independent lung function parameters were consistent with disease severity, and statistically significant (p?<?0.05) strong correlations (R?>?0.7) with components of the inhaler-specific inhalation profiles were observed in the COPD cohort; correlations in the asthma cohort tended to be weaker.All participants achieved a maximal effort PIFR???41.6?L/min through the moderate resistance of the ELLIPTA inhaler. Patients with asthma achieved similar inhalation profiles to healthy subjects, but increasing COPD severity tended to reduce a patient's inhalation capability. Correlation analyses suggest that some lung function parameters may be a useful indicator of ability to inhale efficiently through a moderate-resistance DPI, such as the ELLIPTA inhaler.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients receiving inhaled medication, dissatisfaction with and difficulty in using the inhaler can affect treatment adherence. The incidence of handling errors is typically higher in the elderly than in younger people. The aim of the study was to assess inhaler preference for and handling errors with the ELLIPTA® dry powder inhaler (DPI), (GSK), compared with the established BREEZHALER™, a single-dose capsule DPI (Novartis), in inhalation device-naïve Japanese volunteers aged ≥40 years.MethodsIn this open-label, nondrug interventional, crossover DPI preference study comparing the ELLIPTA DPI and BREEZHALER, 150 subjects were randomized to handle the ELLIPTA or BREEZHALER DPIs until the point of inhalation, without receiving verbal or demonstrative instruction (first attempt). Subjects then crossed over to the other inhaler. Preference was assessed using a self-completed questionnaire. Inhaler handling was assessed by a trained assessor using a checklist. Subjects did not inhale any medication in the study, so efficacy and safety were not measured.ResultsThe ELLIPTA DPI was preferred to the BREEZHALER by 89% of subjects (odds ratio [OR] 70.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 33.69-146.01; P-value not applicable for this inhaler) for ease of use, by 63% of subjects (OR 2.98, CI 1.87-4.77; P<0.0001) for ease of determining the number of doses remaining in the inhaler, by 91% for number of steps required, and by 93% for time needed for handling the inhaler. The BREEZHALER was preferred to the ELLIPTA DPI for comfort of the mouthpiece by 64% of subjects (OR 3.16, CI 1.97-5.06; P<0.0001). The incidence of handling errors (first attempt) was 11% with ELLIPTA and 68% with BREEZHALER; differences in incidence were generally similar when analyzed by age (< or ≥65 years) or sex.ConclusionThese data, obtained in an inhalation device-naïve population, suggest that the ELLIPTA DPI is preferred to an established alternative based on its ease-of-use features and is associated with fewer handling errors.

Project description:BackgroundMedications for respiratory disorders including asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are typically delivered to the lung by means of a handheld inhaler. Patient preference for and ability to use the inhaler may influence their adherence to maintenance therapy, and adherence may affect treatment outcomes. In this study, patient experience of using a dry powder inhaler (DPI), the ELLIPTA™ DPI, in clinical trials of a new maintenance therapy for asthma and COPD was investigated. The ELLIPTA DPI has been designed to contain two separate blister strips from which inhalation powder can be delivered, and to be simple to use with a large, easy-to-read dose counter.MethodsSemi-structured, in-depth, qualitative interviews were carried out 2-4 weeks after patients had completed one of six phase IIIa clinical trials using the ELLIPTA DPI. Interview participants were asked about their satisfaction with various attributes of the inhaler and their preference for the ELLIPTA DPI relative to currently-prescribed inhalers, and responses were explored using an inductive content analysis approach. Participants also rated the performance of the inhaler on several criteria, using a subjective 1-10 scale.ResultsParticipants with asthma (n = 33) and COPD (n = 42) reported high levels of satisfaction with the ELLIPTA DPI. It was frequently described as straightforward to operate and easy to use by interview participants. Ergonomic design, mouthpiece fit, and dose counter visibility and ease of interpretation emerged as frequently cited drivers of preference for the ELLIPTA DPI compared with their current prescribed inhaler. Of participants with asthma, 71% preferred the ELLIPTA DPI to DISKUS™ and 60% to metered dose inhalers. Of participants with COPD, 86% preferred the ELLIPTA DPI to DISKUS, 95% to HandiHaler™, and 85% to metered dose inhalers. Overall average performance scores were >9 (out of 10) in participants with asthma and COPD.ConclusionThe ELLIPTA DPI was associated with high patient satisfaction and was preferred to other inhalers by interview participants with asthma and COPD. The development of an inhaler that is regarded as easy and intuitive to use may have positive implications for adherence to therapy in asthma and COPD.

Project description:BackgroundThe chronic and progressive nature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requires self-administration of inhaled medication. Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are increasingly being used for inhalation therapy in COPD. Important considerations when selecting DPIs include inhalation effort required and flow rates achieved by patients. Here, we present the comparison of the peak inspiratory flow rate (PIF) values achieved by COPD patients, with moderate to very severe airflow limitation, through the Breezhaler®, the Ellipta® and the HandiHaler® inhalers. The effects of disease severity, age and gender on PIF rate were also evaluated.MethodsThis randomized, open-label, multicenter, cross-over, Phase IV study recruited patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation (Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease 2014 strategy), aged ≥40 years and having a smoking history of ≥10 pack years. No active drug or placebo was administered during the study. The inhalation profiles were recorded using inhalers fitted with a pressure tap and transducer at the wall of the mouthpiece. For each patient, the inhalation with the highest PIF value, out of three replicate inhalations per device, was selected for analysis. A paired t-test was performed to compare mean PIFs between each combination of devices.ResultsIn total, 97 COPD patients were enrolled and completed the study. The highest mean PIF value (L/min ± SE) was observed with the Breezhaler® (108 ± 23), followed by the Ellipta® (78 ± 15) and the HandiHaler® (49 ± 9) inhalers and the lowest mean pressure drop values were recorded with the Breezhaler® inhaler, followed by the Ellipta® inhaler and the HandiHaler® inhaler, in the overall patient population. A similar trend was consistently observed in patients across all subgroups of COPD severity, within all age groups and for both genders.ConclusionsPatients with COPD were able to inhale with the least inspiratory effort and generate the highest mean PIF value through the Breezhaler® inhaler when compared with the Ellipta® and the HandiHaler® inhalers. These results were similar irrespective of patients' COPD severity, age or gender.Trial registrationThe trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02596009 on 4 November 2015.

Project description:BackgroundInhaler selection is important when managing respiratory conditions; a patient's inhalation technique should be appropriate for the selected device, and patients should ideally be able to use a device successfully regardless of disease severity. The NEXThaler is a multidose dry-powder inhaler with a breath-actuated mechanism (BAM) and dose counter that activates only following inhalation, so effectively an 'inhalation counter'. We assessed inspiratory flow through the NEXThaler in two studies and examined whether inhalation triggered the BAM.MethodsThe two studies were open-label, single-arm, and single visit. One study recruited patients with asthma aged???18 years; the other recruited patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) aged???40 years. All patients inhaled twice through a placebo NEXThaler. The inspiratory profile through the device was assessed for each inhalation using acoustic monitoring, with flow at and time to BAM firing, peak inspiratory flow (PIF), and total inhalation time assessed.ResultsA total of 40 patients were enrolled in the asthma study: 20 with controlled asthma and 20 with partly controlled/uncontrolled asthma. All patients were able to trigger the BAM, as evidenced by the inhalation counter activating on closing the device. Mean flow at BAM firing following first inhalation was 35.0 (range 16.3-52.3) L/min; mean PIF was 64.6 (35.0-123.9) L/min. A total of 72 patients were enrolled in the COPD study, with data analysed for 69 (mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s 48.7% predicted [17-92%]). As with the asthma study, all patients, regardless of airflow limitation, were able to trigger the BAM. Mean flow at BAM firing following first inhalation was 41.9 (26.6-57.1) L/min; mean PIF was 68.0 (31.5-125.4) L/min. Device usability was rated highly in both studies, with 5 min sufficient to train the patients, and a click heard shortly after inhalation in all cases (providing feedback on BAM firing).ConclusionsInhalation flows triggering the BAM in the NEXThaler were similar between patients with controlled and partly controlled/uncontrolled asthma, and were similar across COPD airflow limitation. All enrolled patients were able to activate the device.

Dataset Information

In Vitro Dosing Performance of the ELLIPTA® Dry Powder Inhaler Using Asthma and COPD Patient Inhalation Profiles Replicated with the Electronic Lung (eLung™).

Publications

In Vitro Dosing Performance of the ELLIPTA® Dry Powder Inhaler Using Asthma and COPD Patient Inhalation Profiles Replicated with the Electronic Lung (eLung™).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets