Dose-finding evaluation of once-daily treatment with olodaterol, a novel long-acting ß2-agonist, in patients with asthma: results of a parallel-group study and a crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Olodaterol is a novel, inhaled long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) with >24-hour duration of action investigated in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: Two multicentre studies examined the efficacy and safety of 4 weeks' once-daily (QD) olodaterol (2, 5, 10 and 20 µg, with background inhaled corticosteroids) in patients with asthma. One randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study (1222.6; 296 patients) administered treatment in the morning. Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) were performed pre-dose (trough) and ≤3 hours post-dose (weeks 1 and 2), and ≤6 hours post-dose after 4 weeks; primary end point was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) response (change from baseline mean FEV1) after 4 weeks. A second randomised, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled (formoterol 12 µg twice-daily) incomplete-block crossover study (1222.27; 198 patients) administered QD treatments in the evening. PFTs were performed over a 24-hour dosing interval after 4 weeks; primary end point was FEV1 area under the curve from 0-24 hours (AUC0-24) response (change from study baseline [mean FEV1] after 4 weeks). RESULTS: Study 1222.6 showed a statistically significant increase in trough FEV1 response with olodaterol 20 µg (0.147 L; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.059, 0.234; p = 0.001) versus placebo, with more limited efficacy and no evidence of dose response compared to placebo across the other olodaterol doses (2, 5 and 10 µg). Study 1222.27 demonstrated increases in FEV1 AUC0-24 responses at 4 weeks with all active treatments (p < 0.0001); adjusted mean (95 % CI) differences from placebo were 0.140 (0.097, 0.182), 0.182 (0.140, 0.224), 0.205 (0.163, 0.248) and 0.229 (0.186, 0.272) L for olodaterol 2, 5, 10 and 20 µg, respectively, and 0.169 (0.126, 0.211) for formoterol, providing evidence of increased efficacy with higher olodaterol dose. Olodaterol was generally well tolerated, with a few events associated with known sympathomimetic effects, mainly with 20 µg. CONCLUSIONS: The LABA olodaterol has >24-hour duration of action. In patients with asthma, evidence of bronchodilator efficacy was demonstrated with statistically and clinically significant improvements in the primary end point of trough FEV1 response measured in clinics over placebo for the highest administered dose of 20 µg in Study 1222.6, and statistically and clinically significant improvements versus placebo in FEV1 AUC0-24 responses at 4 weeks for all doses tested in Study 1222.27, which also exhibited a dose response. Bronchodilator efficacy was seen over placebo for all olodaterol doses for morning and evening peak expiratory flow in both studies. All doses were well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: NCT00467740 (1222.6) and NCT01013753 (1222.27).

Medical student perceptions of research training on patient care during clerkship.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Background Health Science Research (HSR) is a pre-clerkship component of the University of Toronto (U of T) MD Program. Through online modules and tutorials, students learn to understand and apply research, and write an original research protocol. This study explored students' perceptions on how HSR prepared them to identify, critically appraise and consume research during clerkship. Methods An online 12-item questionnaire surveyed U of T medical students (Class of 2018) who completed HSR in 2016. Basic descriptive statistics were performed; free text responses were analysed via descriptive thematic analysis. Results Twenty six percent (67/262) of students participated. Approximately half either agreed/strongly agreed that HSR helped them to critically appraise research articles (50.7%, 32/63) and assess applicability of results to patient care (50.8%, 32/63). Three themes emerged: i) desire for increased critical appraisal, ii) producing research less important than consuming research, iii) developing a greater appreciation of research during clerkship. Conclusions Students' perceptions on HSR's value during clerkship were modest; they desired greater focus on learning to be consumers of research. These results will refine HS, and our observations may be useful to other educators, as this type of intervention is not represented in existing literature.

Agreement between hospital and primary care on diagnostic labeling for COPD and heart failure in Toronto, Canada: a cross-sectional observational study.

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart failure (HF) are frequently cared for in hospital and in primary care settings. We studied labeling agreement for COPD and HF for patients seen in both settings in Toronto, Canada. This was a retrospective observational study using linked hospital-primary care electronic data from 70 family physicians. Patients were 20 years of age or more and had at least one visit in both settings between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2014. We recorded labeling concordance and associations with clinical factors. We used capture-recapture models to estimate the size of the populations. COPD concordance was 34%; the odds ratios (ORs) of concordance increased with aging (OR 1.84 for age 75+ vs. <65, 95% CI 0.92-3.69) and more inpatient admissions (OR 2.89 for 3+ visits vs. 0 visits, 95% CI 1.59-5.26). HF concordance was 33%; the ORs of concordance decreased with aging (OR 0.39 for 75+ vs. <65, 95% CI 0.18-0.86) and increased with more admissions (OR = 2.39; 95% CI 1.33-4.30 for 3+ visits vs. 0 visits). Based on capture-recapture models, 21-24% additional patients with COPD and 18-20% additional patients with HF did not have a label in either setting. The primary care prevalence was estimated as 748 COPD patients and 834 HF patients per 100,000 enrolled adult patients. Agreement levels for COPD and HF were low and labeling was incomplete. Further research is needed to improve labeling for these conditions.

Canadian Pediatric Asthma Consensus guidelines, 2003 (updated to December 2004): introduction.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma have been published over the last 15 years, there has been little focus on issues relating to asthma in childhood. Since the last revision of the 1999 Canadian asthma consensus report, important new studies, particularly in children, have highlighted the need to incorporate this new information into asthma guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To review the literature on asthma published between January 2000 and June 2003 and to evaluate the influence of new evidence on the recommendations made in the Canadian Asthma Consensus Report, 1999 and its 2001 update with a major focus on pediatric issues. METHODS: Diagnosis of asthma in young children, prevention strategies, pharmacotherapy, inhalation devices, immunotherapy and asthma education were selected for review by small expert resource groups. In June 2003, the reviews were discussed at a meeting under the auspices of the Canadian Network For Asthma Care and the Canadian Thoracic Society. Data published up to December 2004 were subsequently reviewed by the individual expert resource groups. RESULTS: This report evaluates early life prevention strategies and focuses on treatment of asthma in children. Emphasis is placed on the importance of an early diagnosis and prevention therapy, the benefits of additional therapy and the essential role of asthma education. CONCLUSION: We generally support previous recommendations and focus on new issues, particularly those relevant to children and their families. This guide for asthma management is based on the best available published data and the opinion of health care professionals including asthma experts and educators.

Dual bronchodilator therapy with aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Inhaled bronchodilator therapy is a mainstay of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite the number and types of treatments available, the control of symptoms and exacerbations remains suboptimal, and adherence to, and persistence with, inhaled therapy is generally poor. Results from clinical studies suggest that dual bronchodilator therapy with long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting ß2 adrenergic receptor agonists (LABAs) may provide additional benefit over LAMA or LABA monotherapy without additive effects on safety and tolerability. Several combinations of a LAMA plus a LABA have recently become available in a single inhaler for maintenance therapy for adults with moderate-to-severe COPD, including aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate, glycopyrronium/indacaterol and umeclidinium/vilanterol. Here, we review clinical data demonstrating significant improvements in bronchodilation, 24-h symptoms, and health status with aclidinium/formoterol twice daily, and discuss how this treatment can be implemented in clinical practice as part of a patient-focused approach to disease control.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of levalbuterol in subjects with COPD.

The efficacy and safety of nebulized levalbuterol in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was evaluated in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel design study. Randomized subjects (n = 209) received levalbuterol (LEV) 0.63 mg or 1.25 mg, racemic albuterol (RAC) 2.5 mg, or placebo (PBO) TID for 6 weeks. Serial spirometry was completed in-clinic after study drug alone (weeks 0, 2, and 6) or in combination with ipratropium bromide 0.5 mg (week 4). The primary endpoint was the averaged FEV1 AUC(0-8 hrs) over weeks 0, 2 and 6 compared with placebo. Other endpoints included rescue medication use, safety parameters, COPD exacerbations, and global evaluations. All active treatments demonstrated improvements in the percent change in FEV1 AUC(0-8 hrs) over the double-blind period and at each visit vs PBO (p < 0.05). Rescue medication use vs. baseline (doses/day) changed over time: PBO +0.38 +/- 3.3; LEV 0.63 mg +0.07 +/- 3.3; LEV 1.25 mg -0.84 +/- 3.8 (p = 0.02 vs. RAC); RAC +0.97 +/- 2.5. The overall rate of adverse events was PBO 56.4%, LEV 0.63 mg 56.6%, LEV 1.25 mg 67.3%, and RAC 65.4%. Protocol-defined COPD exacerbations occurred in all groups (PBO 12.7%, LEV 0.63 mg 11.3%; LEV 1.25 mg 18.4%; RAC 21.2%). Withdrawals due to COPD exacerbations were significantly higher in the RAC group compared with PBO (PBO 0%; LEV 0.63 mg 1.9%; LEV 1.25 mg 4.1%; RAC 9.6% p = 0.01 vs. PBO). In this study, levalbuterol treatment in subjects with COPD was generally well tolerated, produced significant bronchodilation compared with PBO, and improved clinical control of COPD as evidenced by reductions in rescue medication use compared with PBO and/or RAC.