Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction with Budesonide/Formoterol Easyhaler® Among Patients with Asthma or COPD Switching from Previous Treatment: a Real-World Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Galffy G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6966925 | 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:IntroductionThe 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).MethodsEffectiveness 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionTwelve 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.FundingOrion Corp., Orion Pharma.

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: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:Pulmonary surfactants are essential components of lung homeostasis. In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), surfactant expression decreases in lungs whereas, there is a paradoxical increase in protein expression in plasma. The latter has been associated with poor health outcomes in COPD. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship of surfactants and other pneumoproteins in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid and plasma to airflow limitation and the effects of budesonide/formoterol on this relationship.We recruited (clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT00569712) 7 smokers without COPD and 30 ex and current smokers with COPD who were free of exacerbations for at least 4 weeks. All subjects were treated with budesonide/formoterol 400/12 µg twice a day for 4 weeks. BAL fluid and plasma samples were obtained at baseline and the end of the 4 weeks. We measured lung-predominant pneumoproteins: pro-Surfactant Protein-B (pro-SFTPB), Surfactant Protein-D (SP-D), Club Cell Secretory Protein-16 (CCSP-16) and Pulmonary and Activation-Regulated Chemokine (PARC/CCL-18) in BAL fluid and plasma.BAL Pro-SFTPB concentrations had the strongest relationship with airflow limitation as measured by FEV1/FVC (Spearman rho=0.509; p=0.001) and FEV1% of predicted (Spearman rho= 0.362; p=0.028). Plasma CCSP-16 concentrations were also significantly related to airflow limitation (Spearman rho=0.362; p=0.028 for FEV1% of predicted). The other biomarkers in BAL fluid or plasma were not significantly associated with airflow limitation. In COPD subjects, budesonide/formoterol significantly increased the BAL concentrations of pro-SFTPB by a median of 62.46 ng/ml (p=0.022) or 48.7% from baseline median value.Increased severity of COPD is associated with reduced Pro-SFTPB levels in BAL fluid. Short-term treatment with budesonide/formoterol increases these levels in BAL fluid. Long term studies will be needed to determine the clinical relevance of this observation.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction with Budesonide/Formoterol Easyhaler® Among Patients with Asthma or COPD Switching from Previous Treatment: a Real-World Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets