Dual combination therapy versus long-acting bronchodilators alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Oba Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6517098 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6481546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinicians are faced with an increasingly difficult choice regarding the optimal bronchodilator for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) given the number of new treatments. The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of indacaterol 75/150/300 μg once daily (OD), glycopyrronium bromide 50 μg OD, tiotropium bromide 18 μg/5 μg OD, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily (BID), formoterol 12 μg BID, and placebo for moderate to severe COPD.MethodsForty randomized controlled trials were combined in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest were trough and post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and responders (≥4 points), and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score and responders (≥1 point) at 6 months.ResultsIndacaterol was associated with a higher trough FEV1 than other active treatments (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: 152 mL (95% credible interval (CrI): 126, 179); 160 mL (95% CrI: 133, 187)) and the greatest improvement in SGRQ score (difference for indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus placebo: -3.9 (95% CrI -5.2, -2.6); -3.6 (95% CrI -4.8, -2.3)). Glycopyrronium and tiotropium 18 μg resulted in the next best estimates for both outcomes with minor differences (difference for glycopyrronium versus tiotropium for trough FEV1 and SGRQ: 18 mL (95% CrI: -16, 51); -0.55 (95% CrI: -2.04, 0.92).ConclusionIn terms of trough FEV1 and SGRQ score indacaterol, glycopyrronium, and tiotropium are expected to be the most effective bronchodilators.
| S-EPMC4014806 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Fixed dose combination (FDC) dual bronchodilators that co-administer a long acting ?2 -adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) and a long acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) are a new class of inhaled treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This review focuses on the clinical evidence for the benefit of LABA/LAMA FDCs compared with monocomponent treatments, and also compared with active comparators that are widely used for the treatment of COPD, namely tiotropium and salmeterol-fluticasone. Novel FDC dual bronchodilators include QVA149 and umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI). Long term clinical trials show that QVA149 and UMEC/VI are superior to monocomponent therapy in terms of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), although the FEV1 improvement was limited to approximately 80-90% of the added monocomponent values. This suggests that the effect of combining a LABA and a LAMA is not fully additive. LABA/LAMA FDC were associated with the largest mean changes in symptoms and health status that were above the minimal clinically important difference, in contrast to the monocomponents. Furthermore, these LABA/LAMA FDCs demonstrated superiority over the active comparators tiotropium and salmeterol-fluticasone in terms of trough FEV1 and patient-reported outcomes. LABA/LAMA FDCs offer a simplified means of maximizing bronchodilation for COPD patients, with the improvements in lung function being mirrored by benefits in terms of symptoms and exacerbations. The use of LABA/LAMA FDCs in clinical practice is set to grow and further studies are needed to define their optimal place in treatment guidelines.
| S-EPMC4415707 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFew randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual maintenance therapies for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus other dual and mono-bronchodilator therapies in symptomatic patients with COPD.MethodsA systematic literature review (October 2015-November 2020) was performed to identify RCTs ≥ 8 weeks long in adult patients with COPD that compared LAMA/LABA combinations against any long-acting bronchodilator-containing dual therapy or monotherapy. Data extracted on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, rescue medication use and moderate/severe exacerbation rate were analysed using an NMA in a frequentist framework. The primary comparison was at 24 weeks. Fixed effects model results are presented.ResultsThe NMA included 69 full-length publications (including 10 GSK clinical study reports) reporting 49 studies. At 24 weeks, UMEC/VI provided statistically significant greater improvements in FEV1 versus all dual therapy and monotherapy comparators. UMEC/VI provided similar improvements in SGRQ total score compared with all other LAMA/LABAs, and significantly greater improvements versus UMEC 125 μg, glycopyrronium 50 μg, glycopyrronium 18 μg, tiotropium 18 μg and salmeterol 50 μg. UMEC/VI also provided significantly better outcomes versus some comparators for TDI focal score, rescue medication use, annualised moderate/severe exacerbation rate, and time to first moderate/severe exacerbation.ConclusionUMEC/VI provided generally better outcomes compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and consistent improvements in lung function (measured by change from baseline in trough FEV1 at 24 weeks) versus dual therapies. Treatment with UMEC/VI may improve outcomes for symptomatic patients with COPD compared with alternative maintenance treatments.
| S-EPMC9525347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and suboptimal peak inspiratory flow rate (sPIFR) may not benefit optimally from dry powder inhalers (DPI) because of inadequate inspiratory flow. Nebulized bronchodilators may provide a better alternative. We compared bronchodilation with the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) revefenacin for nebulization versus the DPI LAMA tiotropium, in patients with COPD and sPIFR (< 60 L/min against the resistance of Diskus®). This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, 28-day Phase 3b study in patients with COPD enrolled based on sPIFR. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) on Day 29 for revefenacin for nebulization versus tiotropium HandiHaler® DPI. We enrolled 206 patients with mean (standard deviation) age, 65 (8) years; percent predicted FEV1, 37 (16)%; PIFR, 45 (12) L/min. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, revefenacin improved trough FEV1 from baseline; however, the difference versus tiotropium was not significant (least squares [LS] mean difference [standard error], 17.0 [22.4] mL, P=0.4461). In a prespecified analysis of patients with FEV1 < 50% predicted, revefenacin produced an LS mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]), 49.1 (6.3-91.9) mL in trough FEV1 and 103.5 (7.7-199.3) mL in forced vital capacity versus tiotropium. Revefenacin produced >100 mL increase in FEV1 in 41.6% versus 34.4% of patients with tiotropium in ITT and 41.4% versus 25.7% of patients in FEV1 < 50% predicted populations. Revefenacin did not produce significant improvements in FEV1 versus tiotropium in the ITT population, but increased trough FEV1 in patients with FEV1 < 50% predicted and sPIFR. Clinical Trial Registration (www.Clinicaltrials.gov): Study 0149 (NCT03095456).
| S-EPMC7006701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the 4th leading cause of mortality worldwide. Long-acting bronchodilators are considered first line therapies for patients with COPD but their effects on mortality are not well known. We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of long-acting bronchodilators on total mortality in stable COPD. METHODS: Using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Systematic Review databases, we identified high quality randomized controlled trials of tiotropium, formoterol, salmeterol, formoterol/budesonide or salmeterol/fluticasone in COPD that had a follow-up of 6 months or longer and reported on total mortality. Two reviewers independently abstracted data from the original trials and disagreements were resolved by iteration and consensus. RESULTS: Twenty-seven trials that included 30,495 patients were included in the review. Relative risk (RR) for total mortality was calculated for each of the study and pooled together using a random-effects model. The combination of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta-2 agonist (LABA) therapy was associated with reduced total mortality compared with placebo (RR, 0.80; p = 0.005). Neither tiotropium (RR, 1.08; p = 0.61) nor LABA by itself (RR, 0.90; p = 0.21) was associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of ICS and LABA reduced mortality by approximately 20%. Neither tiotropium nor LABA by itself modifies all-cause mortality in COPD.
| S-EPMC2876086 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6464543 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6486274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical trials of COPD pharmacotherapy typically involve aging populations with moderate-to-severe COPD, but the latter is often diagnosed by spirometric criteria that are not age-appropriate across the continuum of lung function. We have therefore re-evaluated the clinical effect of combination therapy (salmeterol plus fluticasone) in moderate-to-severe COPD, using more age-appropriate spirometric criteria from the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) and trial data from Towards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH).MethodsOf the 6112 TORCH participants, 5688 (93.1%) had GLI-based moderate-to-severe COPD (mean age 64.8 years). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and the primary comparison was combination therapy vs. placebo. Secondary outcomes included COPD and cardiovascular (CV) mortality and pneumonia. A modified intention-to-treat analysis evaluated differences in time-to-event over a three-year period, using Cox proportional hazards models with statistical significance at p < 0.010 (acknowledging repeated significance testing).ResultsRelative to placebo, combination therapy yielded a statistically non-significant reduction in all-cause mortality-adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR] 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 0.95), p = 0.012. Relative to placebo, combination therapy also yielded statistically non-significant reductions in COPD and CV mortality-adjHR 0.75 (95% CI: 0.55, 1.02), p = 0.068 and adjHR 0.76 (95% CI: 0.53, 1.09), p = 0.135, respectively. In contrast, combination therapy yielded a statistically significant increased risk of pneumonia, relative to placebo-adjHR 1.80 (95% CI: 1.46, 2.21), p < 0.001.ConclusionIn GLI-based moderate-to-severe COPD, combination therapy yields a statistically significant increased risk of pneumonia but the reductions in mortality are not statistically significant, although could potentially be clinically meaningful.
| S-EPMC6519718 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there is a lack of guidelines for the use of short-acting bronchodilators (SABD) in people admitted to hospital for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), despite routine use in practice and risk of cardiac adverse events.AimTo review the evidence that underpins use and optimal dose, in terms of risk versus benefit, of SABD for inpatient management of AECOPD and collate the results for future guidelines.MethodsMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, clinicaltrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched (inception to November 2017) for published and ongoing studies. Included studies were randomised controlled trials or controlled clinical trials investigating the effect of SABD (β2-agonist and/or ipratropium) on inpatients with a diagnosis of AECOPD. This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and a pre-defined protocol. Due to heterogeneous methodologies, meta-analysis was not possible so the results were synthesised qualitatively.ResultsOf 1378 studies identified, 10 met inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis of 10 studies revealed no significant differences in most outcomes of interest relative to dose, delivery via inhaler or nebuliser, and type of β2-agonist used. However, some evidence demonstrated significantly increased cardiac side effects with increased dosage of β2-agonist (45% versus 24%), P<0.05).ConclusionThis review identified a paucity of methodologically rigorous evidence evaluating use of SABD among AECOPD. The available evidence did not identify any additional benefits for participants receiving higher doses of short-acting β2-agonists compared to lower doses, or based on type of delivery method or β2-agonists used. However, there was a small increase in some adverse events for participants using higher doses of β2-agonists.
| S-EPMC6264607 | biostudies-literature