Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of a Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler in Older Asthmatics: Comparison to a Dry Powder Inhaler in a 12-Week Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:Asthma control in older asthmatics is often less effective, which may be attributed to small airway dysfunction and poor inhalation technique. We compared the efficacy of 2 inhalers (fluticasone propionate/formoterol treatment using a pressurized metered-dose inhaler [p-MDI group] vs. fluticasone propionate/salmeterol treatment using a dry powder inhaler [DPI group]) in older asthmatics. METHODS:We conducted a 12-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-designed trial in older patients (over 55 years old) with moderate-to-severe asthma, and compared the efficacy and safety for asthma control between the 2 groups. Subgroup analyses on disease duration and air trapping were performed. Clinical parameters, including changes in lung function parameters, inhaler technique and adherence, were compared with monitoring adverse reactions between the 2 groups. RESULTS:A total of 68 patients underwent randomization, and 63 (30 in the p-MDI group and 33 in the DPI group) completed this study. The p-MDI group was non-inferior to the DPI group with regard to the rate of well-controlled asthma (53.3% vs. 45.5%, p < 0.001; a predefined non-inferiority limit of 17%). In subgroup analyses, the proportion of patients who did not reach well-controlled asthma in the p-MDI group was non-inferior to that in the DPI group; the difference was 12.7% among those with a longer disease duration (? 15 years) and 17.5% among those with higher air-trapping (RV/TLC ? 45%), respectively (a predefined non-inferiority limit of 17%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in lung function parameters, inhalation techniques, adherence and adverse reactions between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION:These results suggest that the p-MDI group may be comparable to the DPI group in the management of older asthmatics in aspects of efficacy and safety.

SUBMITTER: Woo SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7061154 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of a Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler in Older Asthmatics: Comparison to a Dry Powder Inhaler in a 12-Week Randomized Trial.

Woo Seong Dae SD Ye Young Min YM Lee Youngsoo Y Lee So Hee SH Shin Yoo Seob YS Park Joo Hun JH Choi Hyunna H Lee Hyun Young HY Shin Hyun Jung HJ Park Hae Sim HS

Allergy, asthma & immunology research 20200501 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>Asthma control in older asthmatics is often less effective, which may be attributed to small airway dysfunction and poor inhalation technique. We compared the efficacy of 2 inhalers (fluticasone propionate/formoterol treatment using a pressurized metered-dose inhaler [p-MDI group] vs. fluticasone propionate/salmeterol treatment using a dry powder inhaler [DPI group]) in older asthmatics.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a 12-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-designed trial in old ...[more]

PMID: 32141259

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThree 52-week studies in COPD have assessed the efficacy and safety of single-inhaler extrafine formulation triple therapy combining beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), formoterol fumarate (FF) and glycopyrronium (G) delivered via pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). BDP/FF/G is now being developed for delivery via multi-dose dry-powder inhaler (DPI; NEXThaler). This study aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of BDP/FF/G DPI vs pMDI for lung function.MethodsMulticenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, three-way cross-over study in patients with COPD and post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) 30-80% predicted. Patients received BDP/FF/G 100/6/10µg via DPI and pMDI, and BDP/FF 100/6µg via pMDI, all two inhalations twice daily for four weeks, with treatments separated by two-week washout. The two co-primary objectives were to demonstrate non-inferiority between the two BDP/FF/G formulations for FEV1 area under the curve between 0 and 12 hours post-dose (AUC0-12h) normalized by time and trough FEV1 at 24 hours, both on Day 28. EudraCT 2017-004405-41.ResultsOf 449 patients screened, 366 were randomized, with 342 (93.4%) completing all three treatment periods. The primary objectives were met, with changes from baseline in FEV1 AUC0-12h and trough FEV1 on Day 28 similar for the two BDP/FF/G formulations, and the confidence intervals for the difference lying entirely within the pre-specified non-inferiority criterion (-50mL): -20 (-35, -6) mL and 3 (-15, 20) mL for AUC0-12h and trough FEV1, respectively. BDP/FF/G pMDI and DPI were statistically superior to BDP/FF for these endpoints (p<0.001). A similar proportion of patients experienced adverse events with each treatment (15.5%, 18.7% and 15.4% with BDP/FF/G DPI and pMDI, and BDP/FF, respectively); the majority were mild or moderate, with few related to treatment.ConclusionExtrafine BDP/FF/G DPI and pMDI demonstrated similar efficacy and safety in patients with COPD, supporting the DPI formulation as a valid alternative.

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: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.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of a Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler in Older Asthmatics: Comparison to a Dry Powder Inhaler in a 12-Week Randomized Trial.

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of a Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler in Older Asthmatics: Comparison to a Dry Powder Inhaler in a 12-Week Randomized Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets