Dataset Information

Clinical Effectiveness of Budesonide/Formoterol Fumarate Easyhaler^® for Patients with Poorly Controlled Obstructive Airway Disease: a Real-World Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The effectiveness of inhaled therapies can be influenced by many factors, including the type of inhaler, which may have clinical implications. We report a real-world, multicenter, open-label, non-randomized, non-interventional study conducted by 200 pulmonologists across 200 centers in Hungary. The effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol inhalation therapy in daily clinical practice, delivered via the Bufomix Easyhaler^®, was evaluated in patients with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO).

Methods

Effectiveness was assessed after 12 weeks of treatment by spirometry, the Asthma Control Test, mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test and modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale. Patient satisfaction with the Bufomix Easyhaler^® and physicians' assessments (ease of use and time taken to learn the technique) were also assessed.

Results

A total of 1498 patients with obstructive airway disease were evaluated (asthma: n = 621; COPD: n = 778; ACO: n = 99), of whom 455 (30.4%) were newly diagnosed inhaler-naïve patients and 1043 (69.6%) were switching from other inhalers. Significant improvements in lung function, disease control and health-related quality of life measures (all p ≤ 0.002) were reported after 12 weeks of Bufomix Easyhaler^® use. Improvements were observed in both inhaler-naïve patients and those who switched to a Bufomix Easyhaler^® from other devices. After switching, 72.4% of patients regarded the Bufomix Easyhaler^® as 'very good' and > 90.0% of physicians described the Bufomix Easyhaler^® as easy to teach; 73.8% and 98.9% of patients learned the technique within 5 and 10 min of teaching, respectively.

Conclusion

Twelve weeks' treatment with the Bufomix Easyhaler^® resulted in significant improvements in disease control and quality of life. The Bufomix Easyhaler^® was considered easy to use, and most patients were satisfied with the inhaler. Results confirm the real-world effectiveness of the Bufomix Easyhaler^® in the treatment of adult outpatients with obstructive airway disease.

Funding

Orion Corp., Orion Pharma.

SUBMITTER: Tamasi L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6096955 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In real-life practice, asthma remains poorly controlled, with a considerable burden on patients' quality of life. Budesonide/formoterol (B/F) Easyhaler® has demonstrated similar dose consistency, therapeutic equivalence, and equivalent bronchodilator efficacy to B/F Turbuhaler®, but no real-life comparisons are yet available in patients switching from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. METHODS:The primary objective of this real-life, non-interventional, observational study was to show non-inferiority of asthma control when adult patients in Swedish primary care with persistent asthma switched from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. At visit 1, baseline demographic and endpoint data were recorded, and eligible patients switched to B/F Easyhaler®. The study comprised a control visit (visit 2) and a concluding examination (visit 3) after 12 weeks. Asthma control was assessed using the Asthma Control Test (ACT). The mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and lung function test were performed, and participants and investigators answered questionnaires about ease-of-use and teaching. RESULTS:A total of 117 patients were enrolled in the on-treatment population; 81 (64.8%) were female. At visit 3, B/F Easyhaler® demonstrated non-inferiority to B/F Turbuhaler®; the mean difference in change from baseline ACT was statistically significant (18.9 vs. 20.7, respectively; p?<?0.0001) and met the non-inferiority criteria of B/F Easyhaler® being greater than - 1.5 points versus the reference product. Asthma was well controlled in 62 (53.0%) patients at baseline, increasing to 83 patients (70.9%) at visit 3. Patients experienced statistically significant improvements in mini-AQLQ score after B/F Easyhaler® treatment and lung function remained stable across the treatment period. B/F Easyhaler® was easy to learn and prepare for use. CONCLUSION:This real-life, non-interventional, non-inferiority study in adults with persist asthma demonstrates equivalent or better disease control when patients switch from B/F Turbuhaler® to B/F Easyhaler®. A further study with direct comparison between treatments could add to the understanding of inhaler switch. FUNDING:Orion Corporation, Orion Pharma.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Persistent symptoms, poor disease control, and reduced quality of life (QoL) are common in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Current therapies are only partially effective and inhaler misuse contributes to insufficient disease control and poor outcomes. This real-world study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol fumarate (B/F) Easyhaler® in everyday clinical practice in Hungary. METHODS:Post hoc, subgroup analyses of this 12-week, real-world, multicenter, open-label study were conducted in adults diagnosed with asthma or COPD. Endpoints included the change in patient-reported outcome measures; i.e., symptoms and disease control measured by Asthma Control Test or COPD Assessment Test and health-related (HR)QoL measured by mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire or modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale. Changes in lung function and patient satisfaction with B/F Easyhaler versus their previous inhaler were also evaluated. Results were stratified by the inhaler device used at visit 1 (baseline, when patients switched device); comparisons were made with B/F Easyhaler use after 12 weeks, assessed at visit 3. RESULTS:In total, 398 and 563 patients with asthma and COPD, respectively, were analyzed. Significant improvements (p < 0.0001) in symptoms and disease control, HRQoL, and lung function were reported 12 weeks after switching treatment to B/F Easyhaler from the most commonly used devices (≥ 10% of patients). Significant increases in patient satisfaction were also reported versus comparators. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with asthma or COPD who switched to B/F Easyhaler from their previous inhaler due to lack of disease control achieved significant improvements in symptoms and disease control, HRQoL, and lung function within 12 weeks of real-world use with significant increase in patient satisfaction also observed. Such comparative information may reassure clinicians and patients that may be viewed as an appropriate and potentially beneficial treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:OGYÉI/13942-5/2016 (National Pharmaceutical Institute of Pharmacy and Nutrition of Hungary). FUNDING:Orion Corporation, Orion Pharma. Plain language summary available for this article.

Project description:BackgroundBudesonide and formoterol (BF) Spiromax® is a dry powder inhaler designed to deliver BF with maximum ease of use for patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.MethodsA phase 3b, 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled trial in patients (≥12 years) with persistent asthma.Primary objectiveto demonstrate non-inferiority of twice-daily BF Spiromax 160/4.5 mcg to BF Turbuhaler® 200/6 mcg in change from baseline in weekly average of daily trough morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Secondary endpoints included: Patient Satisfaction and Preference Questionnaire scores, change from baseline in evening PEF, trough forced expiratory volume in one second, percentage of symptom-free and rescue-free 24-hour periods, and safety.ResultsThe analysis was based on the per-protocol population (BF Spiromax, n = 290; BF Turbuhaler, n = 284). The least squares mean change from baseline to week 12 in morning PEF was: BF Spiromax, 18.8 L/min and BF Turbuhaler, 21.8 L/min. Non-inferiority of BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler was demonstrated (the lower limit of the 95% two-sided confidence interval was -9.02 L/min, which is greater than -15 L/min [the criteria specified for non-inferiority]). The mean difference in the total performance domains scores for BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler were 0.248 at baseline and 0.353 at week 12 (both, p <0.001), indicating statistical superiority for BF Spiromax. No statistical or numerical differences were recorded in the total convenience domain score between the two devices. Scores for 'device preference' and 'willingness to continue' supported BF Spiromax at baseline and at week 12 (p = 0.0005 vs BF Turbuhaler). No significant between-group differences were observed in the other secondary efficacy endpoints. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in adverse events or asthma exacerbations.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the non-inferiority of BF Spiromax vs BF Turbuhaler in patients (≥12 years) with asthma. More patients preferred the Spiromax device over Turbuhaler for its performance, and were willing to continue therapy with BF Spiromax beyond the 12-week study period.Trial registrationNCT01803555; February 28, 2013.

Project description:BackgroundTriple therapy with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting muscarinic antagonists/long-acting β2-agonists (ICS/LAMA/LABA) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with continued symptoms or exacerbations, despite treatment with LAMA/LABA or ICS/LABA. The pulmonary, extrathoracic, and regional lung deposition patterns of a radiolabeled ICS/LAMA/LABA triple fixed-dose combination budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF 320/18/9.6 μg), delivered via a single Aerosphere metered dose inhaler (MDI) were previously assessed in healthy volunteers and showed good deposition to the central and peripheral airways (whole lung deposition: 37.7%). Here, we report the findings assessing BGF in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.MethodsThis phase I, single-dose, open-label gamma scintigraphy imaging study (NCT03906045) was conducted in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Patients received two actuations of BGF MDI (160/9/4.8 μg per actuation) radiolabeled with technetium‑99‑pertechnetate, not exceeding 5 MBq per actuation. Immediately following each inhalation, patients performed a breath-hold of up to 10 s, then exhaled into an exhalation filter. Gamma scintigraphy imaging of the anterior and posterior views of the lungs and stomach, and a lateral head and neck view, were performed immediately after exhalation. The primary objective of the study was to assess the pulmonary deposition of BGF. Secondary objectives assessed the deposited dose of radiolabeled BGF in the oropharyngeal and stomach regions, on the actuator, and on the exhalation filter in addition to regional airway deposition patterns in the lungs.ResultsThe mean BGF emitted dose deposited in the lungs was 32.1% (standard deviation [SD] 15.6) in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, 35.2% (SD 12.8) in patients with moderate COPD, and 28.7% (SD 18.4) in patients with severe/very severe COPD. Overall, the mean normalized outer/inner ratio was 0.55 (SD 0.19), while the standardized central/peripheral ratio was 2.21 (SD 1.64).ConclusionsRadiolabeled BGF 320/18/9.6 μg was efficiently delivered and deposited throughout the entire lung, including large and small airways, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with similar deposition in patients with moderate COPD and patients with severe/very severe COPD.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03906045. Registered 8 April 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03906045.

Project description:BackgroundFor patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), greater improvements in lung function have been demonstrated for triple versus dual inhaled therapies in traditional spirometry studies. This study was the first to use functional respiratory imaging (FRI), known for increased sensitivity to airway changes versus spirometry, to assess the effect of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) component (budesonide) on lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and a blood eosinophil count > 150 cells/mm3.MethodsPatients in this Phase IIIb (NCT03836677), randomized, double-blind, crossover study received twice-daily budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF) 320/18/9.6 μg fixed-dose triple therapy and glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) 18/9.6 μg fixed-dose dual therapy over 4 weeks, each delivered via a single metered dose Aerosphere inhaler. Primary endpoints were the improvements from baseline for each treatment in specific (i.e. corrected for lobar volume) image-based airway volume (siVaw) and resistance (siRaw) measured via FRI taken at total lung capacity (Day 29). Secondary outcomes included spirometry and body plethysmography. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study.ResultsA total of 23 patients were randomized and included in the intent-to-treat analysis (mean age 64.9 years, 78.3% males, 43.5% current smokers, mean predicted post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 63.6%). BGF and GFF both statistically significantly increased siVaw from baseline at Day 29 (geometric mean ratio [GM], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.72 [1.38, 2.13] and 1.53 [1.28, 1.83], respectively, both p < 0.0001), with a greater increase observed for BGF versus GFF (GM, 95% CI 1.09 [1.03, 1.16], p = 0.0061). Statistically significant reductions in siRaw were also observed with both BGF and GFF (GM, 95% CI 0.50 [0.39, 0.63] and 0.52 [0.40, 0.67], respectively, both p < 0.0001). Additionally, significant improvements from baseline in post-dose FEV1 were observed with BGF and GFF (mean 346 mL, p = 0.0003 and 273 mL, p = 0.0004, respectively). Safety findings were consistent with the known profiles of BGF and GFF.ConclusionsAs observed using FRI, triple therapy with BGF resulted in greater increases in airway volume, and reductions in airway resistance versus long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy with GFF, reflecting the ICS component's contribution in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03836677. Registered 11 February 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03836677.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Incorrect inhaler technique is a common cause of poor asthma control. This two-phase pragmatic study evaluated inhaler technique mastery and maintenance of mastery with DuoResp® (budesonide-formoterol [BF]) Spiromax® compared with Symbicort® (BF) Turbuhaler® in patients with asthma who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ?2-agonists. METHODS:In the initial cross-sectional phase, patients were randomized to a 6-step training protocol with empty Spiromax and Turbuhaler devices. Patients initially demonstrating ?1 error with their current device, and then achieving mastery with both Spiromax and Turbuhaler (absence of healthcare professional [HCP]-observed errors), were eligible for the longitudinal phase. In the longitudinal phase, patients were randomized to BF Spiromax or BF Turbuhaler. Co-primary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving device mastery after three training steps and maintaining device mastery (defined as the absence of HCP-observed errors after 12 weeks of use). Secondary endpoints included device preference, handling error frequency, asthma control, and safety. Exploratory endpoints included assessment of device mastery by an independent external expert reviewing video recordings of a subset of patients. RESULTS:Four hundred ninety-three patients participated in the cross-sectional phase, and 395 patients in the longitudinal phase. In the cross-sectional phase, more patients achieved device mastery after three training steps with Spiromax (94%) versus Turbuhaler (87%) (odds ratio [OR] 3.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05-6.95], p?<?0.001). Longitudinal phase data indicated that the odds of maintaining inhaler mastery at 12 weeks were not statistically significantly different (OR 1.26 [95% CI 0.80-1.98], p =?0.316). Asthma control improved in both groups with no significant difference between groups (OR 0.11 [95% CI -0.09-0.30]). An exploratory analysis indicated that the odds of maintaining independent expert-verified device mastery were significantly higher for patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.25-3.54]). CONCLUSIONS:In the cross-sectional phase, a significantly greater proportion of patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler achieved device mastery; in the longitudinal phase, the proportion of patients maintaining device mastery with Spiromax versus Turbuhaler was similar. An exploratory independent expert-verified analysis found Spiromax was associated with higher levels of device mastery after 12 weeks. Asthma control was improved by treatment with both BF Spiromax and BF Turbuhaler. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT 2013-004630-14 (registration date 23 January 2014); NCT02570425 .

Project description:BackgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a health problem that results in death, commonly due to the development of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Here, by utilizing a mouse model of intratracheal elastase-induced emphysema that presents three different phases of COPD, we sought to observe whether budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate (BGF) triple therapy could prevent COPD-PH in addition to ameliorating COPD progression.MethodsWe utilized intratracheal elastase-induced emphysema mouse model and performed experiments in three phases illustrating COPD progression: inflammatory (1 day post-elastase), emphysema (3 weeks post-elastase) and PH (4 weeks post-elastase), while treatments of BGF and controls (vehicle, one-drug, and two-drug combinations) were started in prior to elastase instillation (inflammatory phase), at day 7 (emphysema), or at day 14 (PH phase). Phenotype analyses were performed in each phase. In vitro, A549 cells or isolated mouse lung endothelial cells (MLEC) were treated with TNFα with/without BGF treatment to analyze NFκB signaling and cytokine expression changes.ResultsWe observed significant reductions in the proinflammatory phenotype observed in the lungs and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) 1 day after elastase administration in mice treated with BGF compared with that in mice administered elastase alone (BALF neutrophil percentage, p = 0.0011 for PBS/Vehicle vs. PBS/Elastase, p = 0.0161 for PBS/Elastase vs. BGF). In contrast, only BGF treatment significantly ameliorated the elastase-induced emphysematous lung structure and desaturation after three weeks of elastase instillation (mean linear intercept, p = 0.0156 for PBS/Vehicle vs. PBS/Elastase, p = 0.0274 for PBS/Elastase vs. BGF). Furthermore, BGF treatment prevented COPD-PH development, as shown by improvements in the hemodynamic and histological phenotypes four weeks after elastase treatment (right ventricular systolic pressure, p = 0.0062 for PBS/Vehicle vs. PBS/Elastase, p = 0.027 for PBS/Elastase vs. BGF). Molecularly, BGF acts by inhibiting NFκB-p65 phosphorylation and subsequently decreasing the mRNA expression of proinflammatory cytokines in both alveolar epithelial and pulmonary endothelial cells.ConclusionOur results collectively showed that BGF treatment could prevent PH in addition to ameliorating COPD progression via the inhibition of inflammatory NFκB signaling.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Long-term use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) has been associated with increased risk of bone and ocular comorbidities. We evaluated the effects of the triple fixed-dose combination budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI), formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, on bone mineral density (BMD) and ocular safety in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS:In this extension study, a subset of patients from the 24-week, phase III, randomized, double-blind KRONOS study (NCT02497001) continued treatment (BGF MDI 320/18/9.6??g, budesonide/formoterol fumarate [BFF] MDI 320/9.6??g or glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate [GFF] MDI 18/9.6??g, as a non-steroidal comparator) for an additional 28?weeks. Primary endpoints were percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD and change from baseline in lens opacities classification system III posterior subcapsular cataract (P) score, both at Week 52. Adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS:In total, 456 patients were included in the safety population (53.1% male, mean age 62.8?years). Changes from baseline in lumbar spine BMD (least squares mean [LSM] range?-?0.12 to 0.38%) and P score (LSM range 0.02-0.15) were small for all treatments. Both BGF MDI and BFF MDI were non-inferior to GFF MDI using margins of -2% (BMD) and 0.5?units (P score). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was generally similar among groups. Rates of confirmed pneumonia were low overall (2.4%) and highest in the GFF MDI group (3.4%), followed by BGF MDI (2.1%) and BFF MDI (1.1%). There were no cumulative adverse effects of treatment over time as the incidence and types of TEAEs, were generally similar in the first 24?weeks of the study and after Week 24. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with COPD, both ICS-containing therapies were non-inferior to GFF MDI for the primary BMD and ophthalmological endpoints. Changes from baseline in all three treatment groups over 52?weeks were small and not clinically meaningful. All treatments were well tolerated with no new or unexpected safety findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02536508. Registered 27 August 2015.