Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Generic Versus Brand-Name Fluticasone-Salmeterol to Treat Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first generic maintenance inhaler for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The inhaler, Wixela Inhub (fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris), is a substitutable version of the dry powder inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline). When approving complex generic products like inhalers, the FDA applies a special "weight-of-evidence" approach. In this case, manufacturers were required to perform a randomized controlled trial in patients with asthma but not COPD, although the product received approval for both indications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of generic (Wixela Inhub) and brand-name (Advair Diskus) fluticasone-salmeterol among patients with COPD treated in routine care. DESIGN: A 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study. SETTING: A large, longitudinal health care database. PATIENTS: Adults older than 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (effectiveness outcome) and incidence of first pneumonia hospitalization (safety outcome) in the 365 days after cohort entry. RESULTS: Among 45 369 patients (27 305 Advair Diskus users and 18 064 Wixela Inhub users), 10 012 matched pairs were identified for the primary analysis. Compared with Advair Diskus use, Wixela Inhub use was associated with a nearly identical incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.04]) and first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 0.99 [CI, 0.86 to 1.15]). LIMITATIONS: Follow-up times were short, reflecting real-world clinical practice. The possibility of residual confounding cannot be completely excluded. CONCLUSION: Use of generic and brand-name fluticasone-salmeterol was associated with similar outcomes among patients with COPD treated in routine practice. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Risk of active tuberculosis among COPD patients treated with fixed combinations of long-acting beta2 agonists and inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the incidence of active tuberculosis (TB) among COPD patients using fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol, and to identify any differences between these two groups of patients. METHODS: The study enrolled COPD patients from Taiwan NHIRD who received treatment with fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol for > 90 days between 2004 and 2011. The incidence of active TB was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Among the intention-to-treat population prior to matching, the incidence rates of active TB were 0.94 and 0.61% in the fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol groups, respectively. After matching, the fluticasone/salmeterol group had significantly higher rates of active TB (adjusted HR, 1.41, 95% CI, 1.17-1.70) compared with the budesonide/formoterol group. The significant difference between these two groups remained after a competing risk analysis (HR, 1.45, 95% CI, 1.21-1.74). Following propensity score matching, the fluticasone/salmeterol group had significantly higher rates of active TB compared with the budesonide/formoterol group (adjusted HR, 1.45, 95% CI, 1.14-1.85). A similar trend was observed after a competing risk analysis (HR, 1.44, 95% CI, 1.19-1.75). A higher risk of active TB was observed in the fluticasone/salmeterol group compared with the budesonide/formoterol group across all subgroups, but some differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone/salmeterol carried a higher risk of active TB compared with budesonide/formoterol among COPD patients.

Indacaterol-Glycopyrronium versus Salmeterol-Fluticasone for COPD.

BACKGROUND: Most guidelines recommend either a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) plus an inhaled glucocorticoid or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) as the first-choice treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who have a high risk of exacerbations. The role of treatment with a LABA-LAMA regimen in these patients is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial. Patients who had COPD with a history of at least one exacerbation during the previous year were randomly assigned to receive, by inhalation, either the LABA indacaterol (110 µg) plus the LAMA glycopyrronium (50 µg) once daily or the LABA salmeterol (50 µg) plus the inhaled glucocorticoid fluticasone (500 µg) twice daily. The primary outcome was the annual rate of all COPD exacerbations. RESULTS: A total of 1680 patients were assigned to the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group, and 1682 to the salmeterol-fluticasone group. Indacaterol-glycopyrronium showed not only noninferiority but also superiority to salmeterol-fluticasone in reducing the annual rate of all COPD exacerbations; the rate was 11% lower in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (3.59 vs. 4.03; rate ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.96; P=0.003). The indacaterol-glycopyrronium group had a longer time to the first exacerbation than did the salmeterol-fluticasone group (71 days [95% CI, 60 to 82] vs. 51 days [95% CI, 46 to 57]; hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.91], representing a 16% lower risk; P<0.001). The annual rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was lower in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (0.98 vs. 1.19; rate ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.91; P<0.001), and the time to the first moderate or severe exacerbation was longer in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.86; P<0.001), as was the time to the first severe exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.00; P=0.046). The effect of indacaterol-glycopyrronium versus salmeterol-fluticasone on the rate of COPD exacerbations was independent of the baseline blood eosinophil count. The incidence of adverse events and deaths was similar in the two groups. The incidence of pneumonia was 3.2% in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group and 4.8% in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Indacaterol-glycopyrronium was more effective than salmeterol-fluticasone in preventing COPD exacerbations in patients with a history of exacerbation during the previous year. (Funded by Novartis; FLAME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01782326.).

Safety of Adding Salmeterol to Fluticasone Propionate in Children with Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) have been shown to increase the risk of asthma-related death among adults and the risk of asthma-related hospitalization among children. It is unknown whether the concomitant use of inhaled glucocorticoids with LABAs mitigates those risks. This trial prospectively evaluated the safety of the LABA salmeterol, added to fluticasone propionate, in a fixed-dose combination in children. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, children 4 to 11 years of age who required daily asthma medications and had a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year to receive fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization), as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The statistical design specified that noninferiority would be shown if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio for the primary safety end point was less than 2.675. The main efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation that led to treatment with systemic glucocorticoids, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Among the 6208 patients, 27 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 21 in the fluticasone-alone group had a serious asthma-related event (all were hospitalizations); the hazard ratio with fluticasone-salmeterol versus fluticasone alone was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 2.27), which showed the noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol (P=0.006). A total of 265 patients (8.5%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 309 (10.0%) in the fluticasone-alone group had a severe asthma exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children with asthma, salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone was associated with the risk of a serious asthma-related event that was similar to the risk with fluticasone alone. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; VESTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01462344 .).

The efficacy and safety of fluticasone/salmeterol compared to fluticasone in children younger than four years of age.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone propionate 50 µg/salmeterol xinafoate 25 µg (FP/SAL) is widely used in adults and children with asthma, but there is sparse information on its use in very young children. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, controlled trial conducted in children aged 8 months to 4 years. During a 2-week run-in period, they all received FP twice daily. At randomization, they commenced FP/SAL or FP twice daily for 8 weeks. All were then given FP/SAL only, in a 16-week open-label study continuation. Medications were inhaled through an AeroChamber Plus with attached face mask. The primary end-point was mean change in total asthma symptom scores from baseline to the last 7 days of the double-blind period. Analyses were undertaken in all children randomized to treatment and who received at least one dose of study medication. RESULTS: Three hundred children were randomized 1:1 to receive FP/SAL or FP. Mean change from baseline in total asthma symptom scores was -3.97 for FP/SAL and -3.01 with FP. The between-group difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.21; 95% confidence interval: -2.47, 0.54). No new safety signals were seen with FP/SAL. CONCLUSION: This is the first randomized, double-blind study of this size to evaluate FP/SAL in very young children with asthma. FP/SAL did not show superior efficacy to FP; no clear add-on effect of SAL was demonstrated. No clinically significant differences in safety were noted with FP/SAL usage.

Efficacy and safety of the combination fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol in asthmatic preschoolers: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS) are the cornerstone of asthma management in pediatric patients. However, in some cases, asthma is not adequately controlled on ICS alone. Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) are one of the available additional therapies but their use has rarely been studied among children younger than 5 years. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this observational study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol (FP/SA) in asthmatic children younger than 5 years of age. METHODS: A retrospective study of 796 children under the age of 5 years (2.87 ± 1.22 years, 64.2% males), who were treated with FP/SA was conducted. Hospitalization rates, frequency of wheezing, exercise induced asthma, nocturnal wheeze and drug-related side-effects were recorded through children's medical records. RESULTS: The children had previously received short-acting ß2-agonists (73%), ICS (17%), montelukast (1%), and ICS with montelukast (2%). Mean duration of therapy with FP/SA was 12.45 ± 9.14 months. After adjusting for age, gender, and duration of treatment, a 89% reduction was recorded in annual hospitalization rates (from 27.13% before treatment to 3.01% after FP/SA therapy, p < 0.001), a 71% reduction in incidence of exercise-induced asthma (36.8% vs. after 10.6%, p < 0.001), a 81% reduction in nocturnal asthma (33.7% vs. after: 6.4%, p < 0.001), as well as in frequency of wheezing (p < 0.01),. No previous treatment carry-on effect was observed. No major drug-related side-effects occurred in the study group. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy (FP/SA) is well-tolerated and highly effective in asthmatic children under the age of 5 years.

The pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of single, high-strength doses of fluticasone propionate and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol delivered via a novel multidose dry powder inhaler in adolescents and adults with persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE: Characterize fluticasone propionate (Fp) and combination fluticasone propionate and salmeterol (FS) pharmacokinetic and safety profiles, delivered via a novel, inhalation-driven, multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI). METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, four-period crossover, single-dose study randomized patients aged ≥12 years with persistent asthma to Fp MDPI 200 mcg, FS MDPI 200/12.5 mcg, Fp dry powder inhaler (DPI) 500 mcg (250 mcg × 2 inhalations), or FS DPI 500/50 mcg. Blood samples for determination of Fp and salmeterol pharmacokinetic parameters including Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-inf, tmax, and t½ were collected predose through 36 h postdose (14 time points). Safety assessments comprised adverse events, vital signs, and physical examinations. The institutional review board approved the study protocol. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic analysis set and safety population each included 40 patients. Fp systemic exposure (Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf) was highest for Fp DPI 500 mcg and similar for Fp MDPI 200 mcg, FS MDPI 200/12.5 mcg, and FS DPI 500/50 mcg. Fp geometric mean t½ values were similar across treatments. Salmeterol Cmax was 20% lower and AUC0-t and AUC0-inf were approximately 50% lower with FS MDPI versus FS DPI. Median tmax and geometric mean t½ were similar between FS MDPI and FS DPI. Adverse events were similar across treatments with no relevant changes in vital signs, physical examinations, or hematology test results. CONCLUSIONS: Fp MDPI and FS MDPI produced similar or lower systemic exposure to Fp and salmeterol, despite lower doses, versus conventional DPI devices, suggesting improved efficiency due to formulation and device differences.

Randomized, double-blind trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol delivered via multidose dry powder inhalers in patients with persistent asthma aged 12 years and older.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate (Fp) and Fp/salmeterol (FS) administered via a novel multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI) that is easy to use correctly in asthma patients. METHODS: This phase-3, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study evaluated asthmatic patients (≥12 years of age) previously treated with either low- or mid-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) or ICS/long-acting beta agonists. After a 14- to 21-day run-in, patients were randomized to Fp MDPI 50 mcg, Fp MDPI 100 mcg, FS MDPI 50/12.5 mcg, FS MDPI 100/12.5 mcg, or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. Change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; primary endpoint) was evaluated at week 12, and serial spirometry was collected at day 1 and week 12 (subset of patients). Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The full analysis and serial spirometry subset included 640 and 312 patients, respectively. At week 12, FS MDPI significantly improved FEV1 from baseline at each dose vs corresponding Fp MDPI doses (p < 0.05). Change from baseline in FEV1 for active treatment groups was significantly greater vs placebo (p < 0.05). After 12 weeks, serial spirometry was significantly greater at all time points in the FS MDPI groups vs corresponding Fp MDPI groups (p < 0.05). Improvements in serial spirometry on day 1 were maintained through week 12. AEs were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary function was significantly improved with Fp MDPI and FS MDPI vs placebo and FS MDPI vs Fp MDPI. Active treatments had a safety profile comparable to placebo.

Efficacy and safety of the direct switch to indacaterol/glycopyrronium from salmeterol/fluticasone in non-frequently exacerbating COPD patients: The FLASH randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Combination long-acting ß2 -agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LABA/LAMA) has demonstrated superior clinical outcomes over LABA/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients; however, data from blinded randomized controlled trials on direct switching from LABA/ICS to LABA/LAMA are lacking. FLASH (Assessment of switching salmeterol/Fluticasone to indacateroL/glycopyrronium in A Symptomatic COPD patient coHort) investigated if direct switch, without a washout period, from salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) to indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) in COPD patients improves lung function and is well tolerated. METHODS: In this 12-week, multicentre, double-blind study, patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and up to one exacerbation in previous year, receiving SFC for ≥3 months, were randomized to continue SFC 50/500 µg twice daily (bd) or switch to IND/GLY 110/50 µg once daily (od). Primary endpoint was pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ) at Week 12. RESULTS: In total, 502 patients were randomized (1:1) to IND/GLY or SFC. Patients switched to IND/GLY demonstrated superior lung function (pre-dose trough FEV1 ) versus SFC at Week 12 (treatment difference (Δ) = 45 mL; P = 0.028). IND/GLY provided significant improvements in pre-dose trough forced vital capacity (FVC; Δ = 102 mL; P = 0.002) and numerical improvements in transition dyspnoea index (TDI; Δ = 0.46; P = 0.063). Rescue medication use and COPD assessment test (CAT) scores were comparable between groups. Both treatments had similar safety profiles. CONCLUSION: FLASH demonstrated that a direct switch to IND/GLY from SFC improved pre-dose FEV1 and FVC in COPD patients with up to one exacerbation in the previous year. No new safety signals were identified.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler versus a multi-dose inhaler in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination 50/250 µg (FSC) Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® system, a single unit dose inhaler, with the multi-dose FSC Diskus® inhaler in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: This multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, two-way cross-over study compared 12 weeks' treatment of FSC administered twice daily using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in trough morning forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Day 85, and the pre-defined non-inferiority criteria was: the lower limit of the confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -45 mL. Secondary endpoints included change in breathlessness (as measured by transition dyspnoea index (TDI)) and COPD-specific health status measures. RESULTS: The LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 was 116 mL in the Rotacaps/Rotahaler group and 91 mL in the Diskus group (difference in model-adjusted LS mean change: 25 mL (95% CI 2 mL, 47 mL)), the lower limit of the CI for the treatment difference being greater than the protocol-defined criterion for non-inferiority i.e. -45 mL. Data for breathlessness, COPD-specific health status and safety parameters were similar following FSC treatment via either inhaler. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with Diskus in patients with COPD. The risk:benefit profile for the two inhalers was comparable.

A 6-month safety and efficacy study of fluticasone propionate and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol multidose dry powder inhalers in persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: A novel multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI) that is breath actuated, easy, and intuitive to use has been developed for administering fluticasone propionate (Fp) and Fp/salmeterol (FS). OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of Fp MDPI versus Fp hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) and FS MDPI versus FS dry-powder inhaler (DPI). METHODS: This phase III, 26-week, open-label, active drug-controlled study enrolled subjects ≥12 years old with persistent asthma. Based on entry controller medication (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] or ICS/long-acting beta-agonist), the subjects were randomized to twice-daily mid-strength Fp MDPI 100 µg or Fp HFA 220 µg, high-strength Fp MDPI 200 µg or Fp HFA 440 µg, mid-strength FS MDPI 100/12.5 µg or FS DPI 250/50 µg, or high-strength FS MDPI 200/12.5 µg or FS DPI 500/50 µg in a 3:1 MDPI to Fp HFA or FS DPI ratio. Safety and efficacy were assessed by adverse events (AE) and pulmonary function and asthma symptoms, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 674 subjects were randomized. The AE incidence was similar across treatment groups (upper respiratory tract infections, sinusitis, and nasopharyngitis were most frequent). A higher percentage of subjects in the Fp HFA 440 µg and FS DPI 500/50 µg groups had oral candidiasis versus those who received Fp MDPI 200 µg or FS MDPI 200/12.5 µg, respectively. Serious AEs were similar between the treatments, with no unexpected findings. The incidence of asthma exacerbations was low and generally similar between the groups. Noninferiority was established for all Fp MDPI and FS MDPI doses compared with Fp HFA and FS DPI, respectively, for forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Changes in peak expiratory flow, rescue albuterol use, and symptoms were similar between treatments. CONCLUSION: The safety and efficacy profiles of Fp MDPI and FS MDPI administered at lower doses were generally comparable with those of Fp HFA and FS DPI, respectively, after 26 weeks of treatment.The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT02175771.

Fluticasone propionate and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol multidose dry powder inhalers compared with placebo for persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: A novel, inhalation-driven, multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI) has been developed, which allows for lower doses of fluticasone propionate (Fp) and Fp/salmeterol (FS) for the treatment of patients with asthma. OBJECTIVE: This phase III, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study (NCT02141854) evaluated the efficacy and safety of Fp MDPI and FS MDPI versus placebo MDPI. METHODS: Patients aged ≥12 years with persistent asthma who previously took an inhaled corticosteroid with or without a long-acting beta-agonist entered a 14- to 21-day run-in period, during which they received single-blind, low-dose Fp MDPI 50 µg (1 inhalation twice daily [b.i.d.]) and used albuterol hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) metered-dose inhaler (MDI) for rescue. The patients who continued to meet eligibility criteria (N = 728) were randomized to Fp MDPI (100 or 200 µg), FS MDPI (100 µg/12.5 µg or 200 µg/12.5 µg), or placebo (1 inhalation b.i.d.). Primary efficacy end points were the change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and the baseline-adjusted area under the FEV1 curve 12 hours after the dose at week 12. Secondary efficacy end points were A.M. peak expiratory flow, asthma symptom scores, albuterol HFA MDI use, time to patient withdrawal, Asthma Quality of Life scores, and time to 15% and 12% improvement from baseline in FEV1. Safety end points were monitored. RESULTS: Fp MDPI and FS MDPI significantly improved both primary end points compared with placebo (p < 0.05). FS MDPI significantly improved both end points versus the corresponding Fp MDPI dose (p < 0.05), with improvement also greater for FS MDPI 100 µg/12.5 µg versus Fp MDPI 200 µg (p < 0.05). Both active treatments improved a variety of secondary end points and exhibited a safety profile consistent with the drug classes. CONCLUSION: Delivery of Fp and FS via the novel MDPI provided significant clinical benefits and was well tolerated in patients with persistent asthma.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler and a multi-dose inhaler in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: In developing countries, there is a need for access to affordable inhaled respiratory medicines. This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC) 50/250 µg Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® compared with FSC 50/250 µg Diskus®. METHODS: A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy study evaluated 12 weeks, twice daily treatment of FSC 50/250 µg administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus inhaler in a crossover design in patients with asthma (pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 40%-85% of predicted, FEV1 reversibility ≥12%, prior stable dose with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/long acting beta-agonist). The primary efficacy endpoint, change from baseline in trough morning FEV1 at Day 85, was analysed using a model for repeated measures analysis. The pre-defined criterion for non-inferiority was the lower limit of the CI (0.025, one-sided significance level) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -125 mL. Secondary endpoints included serial FEV1 measurements, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), rescue medication use, day- and night-time asthma symptoms, Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores, and serial cortisol measured over 12 h (area under the curve (AUC0-12)). RESULTS: Treatment with FSC 50/250 µg via Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus resulted in a similar LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 (231 mL and 203 mL respectively). The difference in the model-adjusted LS mean change was 28 mL (95% CI -24 mL, 80 mL), fulfilling the criterion for non-inferiority. Data for all secondary endpoints were similar for the two treatments, supporting the primary endpoint findings. Both treatments were well tolerated and demonstrated similar safety profiles. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with administration using Diskus in patients with asthma, and suggests there is no difference in the risk:benefit profile between the two FSC inhalers.

Dose-ranging study of salmeterol using a novel fluticasone propionate/salmeterol multidose dry powder inhaler in patients with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: New inhalation devices with improved lung delivery may allow the use of lower salmeterol doses for treatment of asthma. OBJECTIVE: To determine the dose of salmeterol administered from a novel fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FS) inhalation-driven, multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI), which provides comparable efficacy and safety to FS dry powder inhaler (DPI). METHODS: This double-blind, six-period crossover, dose-ranging study randomized 72 patients (ages ≥12 years; with persistent asthma and predose maximum forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] of 40-85% of the predicted normal) to treatment sequences (one dose per treatment), which consisted of FS MDPI 100/6.25, 100/12.5, 100/25, 100/50 µg; fluticasone propionate (Fp) MDPI 100 µg; and open-label FS DPI 100/50 µg. The primary efficacy variable was the baseline-adjusted FEV1 area under the curve over 12 hours after the dose (AUC0-12). Pharmacokinetics and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: FEV1 AUC0-12 was significantly higher with all FS MDPI doses and FS DPI versus Fp MDPI (p < 0.0001), and with FS MDPI 100/50 µg versus FS DPI (least squares [LS] mean, 57.88 mL; p = 0.0017). FEV1 AUC0-12 trended toward higher efficacy with FS MDPI 100/25 µg (LS mean, 34.14 mL; p = 0.0624) and was comparable with FS MDPI 100/12.5 µg (LS mean, 3.42 mL; p = 0.8503) versus FS DPI. Salmeterol area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to the time of the last measurable concentration (AUC0-t) for FS MDPI 100/12.5 µg and 100/25 µg was lower versus FS DPI 100/50 µg; AUC0-t for FS MDPI 100/50 µg was higher than FS DPI 100/50 µg. All FS MDPI doses were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: All FS MDPI doses produced greater efficacy versus Fp MDPI. FS MDPI 100/12.5 µg demonstrated similar efficacy to FS DPI 100/50 µg with less salmeterol exposure. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02139644, NCT02175771, and NCT02141854.

Salmeterol/fluticasone through breath-actuated inhaler versus pMDI: a randomized, double-blind, 12 weeks study.

OBJECTIVE: Salmeterol/fluticasone combination (SFC) formulated in a breath-actuated inhaler (BAI) overcomes the co-ordination problem associated with the pressurized-metered dose inhaler (pMDIs). Our aim was to compare the efficacy and the safety of SFC given through the BAI versus the conventional pMDI in moderate-to-severe asthmatics. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, prospective, active-controlled, parallel group, multicenter, 12 weeks study, 150 asthmatics were randomized to receive SFC (25/125 mcg) through either BAI or pMDI. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in pre-dose morning PEFR value at 12 weeks and the secondary efficacy endpoints included, mean change in FEV(1), pre-bronchodilator FVC, pre-dose morning and evening PEFR, symptom scores at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Patient preferences for device and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the mean change in pre-dose morning PEFR in BAI and pMDI groups was 50.72 L/min and 48.82 L/min, respectively (p < 0.0001; both groups) and the difference between the two groups was not significant. Both the treatment groups showed a statistically significant improvement in secondary endpoints at all-time points compared with baseline. The usability questionnaire assessment results showed that the BAI device was preferred by 75% of patients as compared with 25% preferring pMDI. SFC in both BAI and pMDI devices was found to be safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that SFC given through the BAI produces comparable efficacy and safety endpoints as pMDI. Additionally, BAI was the preferred inhaler by patients compared to conventional pMDI.

Randomized equivalence trial: A novel multidose dry powder inhaler and originator device in adult and adolescent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-defined asthma control can be achieved and maintained in patients by treatment with fluticasone propionate-salmeterol (FP-Sal). OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of FP-Sal delivered via a novel multidose dry powder inhaler (mDPI) versus an originator device in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. METHODS: Patients ages 12-65 years (N = 555) were randomized to treatment with FP-Sal novel mDPI 100 µg-50 µg or 500 µg-50 µg, or originator device 100 µg-50 µg or 500 µg-50 µg in a double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, multicenter study. Primary efficacy measures were absolute change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline and the area under the 12-hour serial FEV1 curve at the end of 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary end points included mean changes in FEV1; FEV1 % predicted; morning predose peak expiratory flow; daytime, nighttime, total asthma symptom scores; rescue medication use; percentage of patients with guideline-defined controlled asthma; global efficacy evaluation; patients' device preference; and safety. RESULTS: FP-Sal mDPI and originator device-mediated increases in FEV1 from baseline to the end of treatment were not significantly different, difference in least squares mean, -0.065 L (95% confidence interval, -0.154 to 0.024 L) at 100 µg-50 µg, and -0.032 L (95% confidence interval, -0.121 to 0.057 L) at 500 µg-50 µg). Both doses of FP-Sal mDPI improved FEV1 area under the 12-hour serial FEV1 curve from baseline and all secondary efficacy measures with no significant differences from the originator device at equivalent doses, with similar safety profiles. CONCLUSIONS: FP-Sal mDPI demonstrated equivalent efficacy and safety profile to the originator device and is an alternative in this patient group.

A 15-year-old boy with severe combined immunodeficiency, fungal infection, and weight gain.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) outcomes in X-linked severe combined immune deficiency are most effective when performed with patients <3 months of age and without coexisting morbidity, and with donor cells from a matched sibling. Even under such favorable circumstances, outcomes can be suboptimal, and full cellular engraftment may not be complete, which results in poor B or natural killer cell function. Protein losing enteropathies can accompany persistent immune deficiency disorders with resultant low serum globulins (immunoglobulin A [IgA], IgG, IgM) and lymphopenia. Patients with immune disorders acquire infections that can be predicted by their immune dysfunction. Fungal infections are typically noted in neutropenic (congenital or acquired) and T-cell deficient individuals. Coexisting fungal infections are rare, even in hosts who are immunocompromised, and they require careful evaluation. Antifungal treatment may result in drug-drug interactions with significant complications.

Clinical Response and Cost-Savings Associated With Generic Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Multidose, Dry-Powder Inhaler in Asthma Patients Managed in an Ambulatory Care Practice Setting.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol multidose, dry powder inhaler (MDPI) was the first and only authorized generic inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta agonist (ICS/LABA) combination inhaler at the time of this study. This offers the potential for significant prescription cost-savings for both patients and accountable care organizations. The objective of the study was to demonstrate patients' clinical response to generic fluticasone propionate/salmeterol MDPI when switched from one of its brand name competitors. METHODS: The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at MCPHS University. This was a prospective chart review of a large, multi-center ambulatory care organization in the Greater Boston area. Patients 12 years of age or older who were switched from a brand-name ICS/LABA inhaler to the generic fluticasone/salmeterol MDPI were included in the study. The primary endpoint was worsened asthma control requiring a change in therapy, oral corticosteroid therapy, or hospitalization at or before 12 weeks after the inhaler was switched. RESULTS: In total, 203 patients met inclusion criteria. Of those 203 patients, 35 had a change in therapy due to worsened asthma control (17.2% of patients, 95% CI 12.0% to 22.4%) within 12 weeks. Total projected yearly prescription cost-savings for patients who were switched and remained on the generic inhaler was $581,628. CONCLUSION: Eighty-three percent of patients maintained appropriate asthma control after switching from a brand ICS/LABA inhaler to the generic fluticasone/salmeterol MDPI for 12 weeks. Switching to the generic inhaler resulted in significant prescription cost-savings for the accountable care organization.

Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Compared with Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol, Budesonide/Formoterol, and Tiotropium as Initial Maintenance Therapy in Patients with COPD Who Have High Costs and Comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are associated with increased medical costs and risk of exacerbations. This study compared COPD-related medical costs and exacerbations in high-cost, high-comorbidity patients with COPD receiving initial maintenance treatment (IMT) with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL), budesonide/formoterol (B/F), or tiotropium (TIO). METHODS: This retrospective, matched cohort study identified patients from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database who initiated UMEC/VI, FP/SAL, B/F, or TIO between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018 (index date defined as date of the first fill). Eligibility criteria included age ≥40 years at index, ≥1 pre-index COPD diagnosis, no pre-index asthma diagnosis, 12 months of continuous insurance coverage pre-index, and high pre-index costs (≥80th percentile of IMT population) and comorbidities (Quan-Charlson comorbidity index ≥3). Propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounders. On-treatment COPD-related medical costs (primary endpoint) and exacerbations were evaluated. RESULTS: Matched cohorts were well balanced on baseline characteristics (UMEC/VI vs FP/SAL: n=1194 each; UMEC/VI vs B/F: n=1441 each; UMEC/VI vs TIO: n=1277 each). Patients receiving UMEC/VI had significantly lower COPD-related medical costs versus FP/SAL (difference: $6587 per patient per year; P=0.048), and numerically lower costs versus B/F and TIO. Patients initiating UMEC/VI had significantly lower risk of COPD-related severe exacerbation versus FP/SAL (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.78 [0.62, 0.98]; P=0.032), B/F (0.77 [0.63, 0.95]; P=0.016), and TIO (0.79 [0.64, 0.98]; P=0.028). The rate of COPD-related severe exacerbations was significantly lower with UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.73 [0.59, 0.91]; P=0.008) and B/F (0.73 [0.59, 0.93]; P=0.012), and numerically lower versus TIO (0.83 [0.68, 1.04]; P=0.080). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that high-cost, high-comorbidity patients with COPD receiving UMEC/VI compared with FP/SAL, B/F, and TIO as IMT may have lower medical costs and exacerbation risk.

Symptom Burden and GOLD Classification in Medicare Advantage Patients with COPD Initiating Umeclidinium/Vilanterol or Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Therapy.

Background: Long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) provide greater improvements in lung function and symptoms than inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated symptom burden and Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) categorization among patients who recently initiated umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI; LAMA/LABA) or fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL; ICS/LABA) single-inhaler dual therapy. Methods: COPD-diagnosed Medicare Advantage enrollees aged ≥65 years were identified from the Optum Research Database (ORD). Eligible patients had ≥1 pharmacy claim for UMEC/VI or FP/SAL in the 6-month period before sample identification, with no evidence of triple therapy (ICS/LAMA/LABA), asthma, or lung cancer. Symptom burden was assessed via cross-sectional surveys using the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale. Patients were classified into GOLD categories using patient-reported symptoms and claims-based exacerbation history. Treatment groups were balanced on potential confounders using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). CAT and mMRC scores were analyzed with generalized linear regression models using IPTW propensity scores. Results: The final analytic sample included 789 respondents (UMEC/VI: N=392; FP/SAL: N=397). Approximately 66% patients were classified as GOLD B when assessing symptoms with CAT and mMRC together, or CAT alone; more patients were classified as GOLD A (~40%) than GOLD B (~36%) using mMRC alone. Proportions of patients in each GOLD group were similar between treatment cohorts. Post-IPTW multivariable modeling showed similar symptom burden between treatment groups. Conclusion: After controlling for baseline characteristics, symptom burden was similar between patients receiving UMEC/VI or FP/SAL. GOLD classification using mMRC produced more conservative results compared with CAT, potentially underestimating patient symptoms. Many patients receiving FP/SAL were classified as GOLD A or B, despite GOLD recommending non-ICS-containing therapy in these patients. These findings support the need for routine assessment of symptoms in patients with COPD.