Combination inhaled steroid and long-acting beta₂-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus tiotropium or combination alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rojas-Reyes MX
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6481546 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Both long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their co-administration in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens and to improve efficacy. Three preparations are currently available: fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FPS). budesonide/formoterol (BDF) and mometasone furoate/formoterol (MF/F). OBJECTIVES:To assess the efficacy and safety of combined long-acting beta2-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) preparations, as measured by clinical endpoints and pulmonary function testing, compared with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, which is compiled from systematic searches of multiple literature databases. The search was conducted in June 2013. In addition, we checked the reference lists of included studies and contacted the relevant manufacturers. SELECTION CRITERIA:Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Compared studies combined LABA/ICS with the ICS component. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia. Health-related quality of life (as measured by validated scales), lung function and side effects were secondary outcomes. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed-effect odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous data as mean differences or rate ratios and 95% CIs. MAIN RESULTS:A total of 15 studies of good methodological quality met the inclusion criteria by randomly assigning 7814 participants with predominantly poorly reversible, severe COPD. Data were most plentiful for the FPS combination. Exacerbation rates were significantly reduced with combination therapies (rate ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.94, 6 studies, N = 5601) compared with ICS alone. The mean exacerbation rate in the control (ICS) arms of the six included studies was 1.21 exacerbations per participant per year (range 0.88 to 1.60), and we would expect this to be reduced to a rate of 1.05 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.14) among those given combination therapy. Mortality was also lower with the combination (odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94, 12 studies, N = 7518) than with ICS alone, but this was heavily weighted by a three-year study of FPS. When this study was removed, no significant mortality difference was noted. The reduction in exacerbations did not translate into significantly reduced rates of hospitalisation due to COPD exacerbation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07, 10 studies, N = 7060). Lung function data favoured combination treatment in the FPS, BDF and MF/F trials, but the improvement was small. Small improvements in health-related quality of life were measured on the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) with FPS or BDF compared with ICS, but this was well below the minimum clinically important difference. Adverse event profiles were similar between the two treatments arms, and rates of pneumonia when it was diagnosed by chest x-ray (CXR) were lower than those reported in earlier trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Combination ICS and LABA offer some clinical benefits in COPD compared with ICS alone, especially for reduction in exacerbations. This review does not support the use of ICS alone when LABAs are available. Adverse events were not significantly different between treatments. Further long-term assessments using practical outcomes of current and new 24-hour LABAs will help determine their efficacy and safety. For robust comparisons as to their relative effects, long-term head-to-head comparisons are needed.
| S-EPMC6486274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPneumonia poses a significant risk in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but data are limited on the disease phenotypes most susceptible to pneumonia.MethodsCluster analysis using a data-driven recursive partitioning algorithm was employed using baseline data from two pooled one-year randomized exacerbation trials (n=3,255) of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol or vilanterol alone to identify distinct patient groups at greatest risk of pneumonia or serious (hospitalization or death) pneumonia.ResultsFive clusters were identified. Patients at greater risk of first pneumonia had more severe obstruction (forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity <46%) and either a body mass index <19 kg/m(2) (hazard ratio 7.8, 95% confidence interval 4.7-13.0; n=144) or a pneumonia history and greater comorbidities (hazard ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 3.0-7.7; n=374) relative to the cluster with the lowest pneumonia risk (reference; n=1310). Multiple comorbidities and use of psychoanaleptics also contributed to an increased risk of pneumonia in more obstructed patients. Independent of cluster, use of inhaled corticosteroids was associated with pneumonia (hazard ratio 1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.25-2.84) and serious pneumonia (hazard ratio 2.92, 95% confidence interval 1.40-6.01).ConclusionCluster analysis can identify patient populations at risk for serious safety outcomes and inform risk management strategies to optimize patient management. The greatest risk for pneumonia was in subjects with multiple pneumonia risk factors.
| S-EPMC4019612 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6464543 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines advocate treatment with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators for patients with COPD who have persistent symptoms or continue to have exacerbations while using a single bronchodilator. This study assessed the cost-utility of the fixed dose combination of the bronchodilators tiotropium and olodaterol versus two comparators, tiotropium monotherapy and long-acting β2 agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) combinations, in three European countries: Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands.MethodsA previously published COPD patient-level discrete event simulation model was updated with most recent evidence to estimate lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for COPD patients receiving either tiotropium/olodaterol, tiotropium monotherapy or LABA/ICS. Treatment efficacy covered impact on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), total and severe exacerbations and pneumonias. The unit costs of medication, maintenance treatment, exacerbations and pneumonias were obtained for each country. The country-specific analyses adhered to the Finnish, Swedish and Dutch pharmacoeconomic guidelines, respectively.ResultsTreatment with tiotropium/olodaterol gained QALYs ranging from 0.09 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.11 (the Netherlands) versus tiotropium and 0.23 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.28 (the Netherlands) versus LABA/ICS. The Finnish payer's incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tiotropium/olodaterol was €11 000/QALY versus tiotropium and dominant versus LABA/ICS. The Swedish ICERs were €6200/QALY and dominant, respectively (societal perspective). The Dutch ICERs were €14 400 and €9200, respectively (societal perspective). The probability that tiotropium/olodaterol was cost-effective compared with tiotropium at the country-specific (unofficial) threshold values for the maximum willingness to pay for a QALY was 84% for Finland, 98% for Sweden and 99% for the Netherlands. Compared with LABA/ICS, this probability was 100% for all three countries.ConclusionsBased on the simulations, tiotropium/olodaterol is a cost-effective treatment option versus tiotropium or LABA/ICS in all three countries. In both Finland and Sweden, tiotropium/olodaterol is more effective and cost saving (ie, dominant) in comparison with LABA/ICS.
| S-EPMC8340281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Combined inhaled therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is commonly used, but its benefits remain controversial. We assessed the effect of tiotropium in reducing COPD exacerbations when combined with long-acting ?2 agonists (LABA) and/or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). This new-user cohort study is based on administrative data from 3 Italian regions. We identified adults hospitalized for COPD from 2006 to 2009 who were newly prescribed a fixed LABA/ICS combination (double therapy). We classified patients according to whether tiotropium was also prescribed (triple therapy), using both intention-to-treat and as-treated approaches, and followed them for 1 year. COPD exacerbations were measured as outcomes. Multivariate and propensity score-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs, 95%CI) were calculated with Cox regression models. We identified 5717 new users of LABA/ICS of which 31.9% initiated triple therapy. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the multivariate adjusted HR for moderate, severe, and any exacerbations were 1.02 (95%CI 0.89-1.16), 0.92 (95%CI 0.76-1.12), and 1.08 (95%CI 0.91-1.28), respectively. The propensity score adjustment produced similar results. In the subcohort of patients with previous exacerbations, triple therapy was significantly associated with reduced risk of moderate exacerbations, compared to double therapy (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.48-0.98 in intention-to-treat approach). In conclusion, the addition of tiotropium to LABA/ICS did not reduce COPD exacerbations compared to LABA/ICS alone. A protective role for moderate exacerbations was found in patients at risk of frequent exacerbations. Given the impact of exacerbations on health status and prognosis, it is crucial to target COPD patients for optimal treatment.
| S-EPMC5111769 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6513478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The fractional exhaled nitric oxide measured at an expiratory flow of 50mL/s (FENO50) is a marker of airway inflammation, and high levels are associated with greater response to steroid treatment. In asthma, FENO50 increases with bronchodilation and decreases with bronchoconstriction, the latter potentially causing an underestimate of the degree of airway inflammation when asthma worsens. It is unknown whether the same effect occurs in chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD). Likewise, it is not known whether changes in airway calibre in COPD patients alter flow-independent parameters describing pulmonary nitric oxide exchange, such as the maximal flux of nitric oxide (NO) from the proximal airway compartment (J'awNO) and the distal airway/alveolar concentration of NO (CANO). We recruited 24 patients with COPD and performed FENO analysis at multiple expiratory flows before and after treatment with inhaled ?2-agonist bronchodilator therapy. For the 21 patients analysed, FENO50 rose from 17.1 (1.4) ppb (geometric mean (geometric SD)) at baseline, to 19.3 (1.3) ppb after bronchodilator therapy, an increase of 2.2 ppb (95% CI, 0.7-3.6; P = 0.005). There were non-significant changes in flow-independent NO parameters. The change in FENO50 correlated positively with the change in J'awNO (rs = 0.67, P < 0.001; rs = 0.62, P = 0.002 before and after correction for axial back-diffusion respectively) following bronchodilation. Inhaled bronchodilator therapy can increase exhaled nitric oxide measurements in COPD. The standardisation of inhaled bronchodilator therapy before FENO analysis in COPD patients should therefore be considered in both research and clinical settings.
| S-EPMC4892672 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6517098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide an overview of the existing international and Chinese evidence regarding dual bronchodilator inhalation therapy and to make recommendations for the further improvement of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management in clinical practice in China.BackgroundCOPD is a progressive lung disease that is characterized by persistent airflow limitation and is a major contributor to the disease burden in China. Symptoms in Chinese patients are relatively more severe. Currently, many Chinese COPD patients are undertreated. Dual bronchodilator therapy consisting of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β agonist (LABA) is considered a good choice for COPD patients due to the increased bronchodilation without an increase in adverse events; these combinations can fill in the gap in currently available COPD treatments and provide new pharmacotherapy options for Chinese patients. LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) have become more important in clinical practice and guidelines in China regarding their therapeutic effects and safety.MethodsClinical trials on LAMA/LABA in COPD were retrieved in ClinicalTrials.gov, while important COPD guidelines published in English or Chinese were found in PubMed and Wanfang Database.ConclusionsWe recommend the adoption of a clinical pathway in China that includes an assessment and management algorithm that considers the clinical characteristics in China and classifies the phenotypic characteristics of COPD according to a suitable system. Based on the current information, we can conclude that LAMA/LABA FDCs are a suitable and economically viable choice to reduce symptoms and improve the quality of life (QoL) of patients.
| S-EPMC8662495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVarious combinations of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) have been used as triple therapy for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).ObjectiveOur study was conducted to answer whether there were significant differences among various combinations in efficacy, for reducing exacerbation or mortality, and in safety, for increasing cardiovascular events or pneumonia.MethodWe searched parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ICS/LAMA/LABA with other inhaled drugs in patients with stable COPD for at least 12 weeks in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registries from inception to December 31, 2019. We conducted a network meta-analysis with Bayesian statistics using a random-effects model with heterogeneous variance structure (PROSPERO, CRD42019126757).ResultsNine different combinations of ICS/LAMA/LABA were identified in 21 RCTs containing 29,892 patients with moderate to very severe COPD. We could not find any significant evidence suggesting a better treatment for reducing total exacerbations or all-cause mortality among ICS/LAMA/LABA combinations. There were also no significant differences in moderate to severe exacerbation, COPD-related mortality, or cardiovascular disease-related mortality among ICS/LAMA/LABA combinations, and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was not different. A significantly lower risk of pneumonia was found in fluticasone propionate (FP)/glycopyrrolate/salmeterol (SAL) than FP/tiotropium/SAL {median odds ratio [OR] (95% credible interval [CrI]) = 0 [0-0.72]} and FP/umeclidinium/SAL {median OR (95% Crl) = 0 [0-0.97]}.ConclusionThere were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, including acute exacerbation and all-cause mortality among various ICS/LAMA/LABA combinations in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.
| S-EPMC8315683 | biostudies-literature