Efficacy and safety of Once-Daily Vilanterol/Fluticasone furoate MDI in persistent asthma: Phase 3 OD-INHALE Study.

INTRODUCTION: Once-daily inhalers have been shown to improve adherence leading to lesser discontinuation compared to twice- or thrice-daily inhalers in management of asthma. Combination of Vilanterol and Fluticasone Furoate (VI/FF) is approved for management of asthma and COPD and is available as a dry powder inhaler. Pressurized-Metered Dose Inhalers (pMDIs) offer ease-of-use and therapy alternatives for patients with low inspiratory flow. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of a new once-daily pMDI containing VI/FF in individuals diagnosed with persistent asthma. METHODS: This phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled study assessed the non-inferiority of VI/FF (12.5 mcg/50 mcg & 12.5 mcg/100 mcg; 2 puffs once-daily) over Formoterol Fumarate and Fluticasone Propionate (FOR/FP, 6 mcg/125 mcg & 6 mcg/250 mcg; 2 puffs twice-daily) in patients with persistent asthma. Primary outcome was change from baseline in trough FEV1 at the end of study (12 weeks). Adverse events and number of exacerbations were used to evaluate safety. RESULTS: A total of 330 patients were randomized into VI/FF (165) and FOR/FP (165). Trough FEV1 significantly improved in both the groups at week 12, with a mean difference (VI/FF minus FOR/FP) being 54.75 mL (95% CI, 8.42-101.08 mL, p = 0.02). The low dose VI/FF had similar efficacy to that of low dose FOR/FP and high dose VI/FF had similar efficacy to high dose FOR/FP. No serious adverse events were reported during the study. CONCLUSION: Once daily VI/FF pMDI was non-inferior to twice daily FOR/FP pMDI in patients with persistent asthma.

Umeclidinium plus vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Umeclidinium plus vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is an inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting beta2-agonist (LAMA/LABA), recently approved as once-daily maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of UMEC/VI compared with fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol (FP/SAL). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted by a trained medical research librarian across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) for randomized controlled trials comparing UMEC/VI with FP/SAL in COPD patients. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcome was 0-24 h weighted mean (wm) forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), trough FEV1. The secondary outcomes were other lung functions, symptoms, quality of life, and safety. RESULTS: Three studies with 2119 patients were included in the meta-analysis. UMEC/VI showed improvement in 0-24 h wm FEV1 (mean difference (MD) 0.08 L, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.10, P < 0.01, moderate quality) and trough FEV1 (MD 0.09 L, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.11, P < 0.01, moderate quality) in comparison with FP/SAL. UMEC/VI statistically significantly improved all other lung functions compared with FP/SAL. However, there were no significant differences between UMEC/VI and FP/SAL in rescue-medication use, symptomatic endpoints, and health outcomes. UMEC/VI also demonstrated fewer drug-related adverse effects (risk ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.82, P = 0.01, low quality). CONCLUSIONS: UMEC/VI, when compared with FP/SAL, demonstrated significant improvements in lung functions with fewer drug-related adverse effects. However, the conclusion was limited by the scarcity of studies and long-term trials.

Modeled small airways lung deposition of two fixed-dose triple therapy combinations assessed with in silico functional respiratory imaging.

BACKGROUND: Small airways disease plays a key role in the pathogenesis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is a major cause of obstruction; therefore, it is a critical pharmacotherapy target. This study evaluated lung deposition of two inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist single-inhaler triple therapies using in silico functional respiratory imaging (FRI). Deposition was assessed using real-world inhalation profiles simulating everyday use where optimal inhalation may be compromised. METHODS: Three-dimensional airway models were produced from 20 patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. Total, central, and regional small airways deposition as a percentage of delivered dose of budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) 160/7.2/5 µg per actuation and fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UM/VI) 100/62.5/25 µg were evaluated using in silico FRI based on in vitro aerodynamic particle size distributions of each device. Simulations were performed using multiple inhalation profiles of varying durations and flow rates representing patterns suited for a pressurized metered-dose inhaler or dry-powder inhaler (four for BGF, two for FF/UM/VI, with one common profile). For the common profile, deposition for BGF versus FF/UM/VI was compared post-hoc using paired t-tests. RESULTS: Across inhalation profiles, mean total lung deposition was consistently higher with BGF (47.0-54.1%) versus FF/UM/VI (20.8-22.7%) and for each treatment component, with greater deposition for BGF also seen in the central large airways. Mean regional small airways deposition was also greater across inhalation profiles with BGF (16.9-23.6%) versus FF/UM/VI (6.8-8.7%) and for each treatment component. For the common profile, total, central, and regional small airways deposition were significantly greater for BGF versus FF/UM/VI (nominal p < 0.001), overall and for treatment components; notably, regional small airways deposition of the ICS components was approximately five-fold greater with budesonide versus fluticasone furoate (16.1% vs. 3.3%). CONCLUSIONS: BGF was associated with greater total, central, and small airways deposition for all components versus FF/UM/VI. Importantly, using an identical inhalation profile, there was an approximately five-fold difference in small airways deposition for the ICS components, with only a small percentage of the ICS from FF/UM/VI reaching the small airways. Further research is needed to understand if the enhanced delivery of BGF translates to clinical benefits.

Metabolomic changes related to airway inflammation, asthma pathogenesis and systemic activity following inhaled fluticasone furoate/vilanterol: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol trifenatate (FF/VI) is an inhaled therapy for the treatment of asthma, with a prolonged duration of anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory action. This study investigated the global metabolomic and lipidomic profile following treatment with FF/VI or placebo and assessed whether changes correlated with exhaled nitric oxide levels as a measure of airway inflammation. METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period, crossover, repeat-dose study. Adults with asthma (forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≥ 60% predicted; fraction of exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO] > 40 parts per billion) received once-daily FF/VI 100 µg/25 µg or placebo for 14 days, followed by a 21-day washout period. Serum samples were taken at pre-dose (T1), and 15 and 21 days (T2 and T3, respectively) post dose in each period. The metabolomic and lipidomic profiles were analyzed by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry and polar liquid chromatography platforms, and ions were matched to a library of standards for metabolite identification and quantification. FeNO values at each timepoint were evaluated for correlations with the biochemical data. RESULTS: Of 27 randomized participants (mean age 24.5 years, 63% male), 26 provided serum samples for metabolomic analysis. A total of 1969 metabolites were identified, 1634 of which corresponded to a named structure in a reference library. Treatment-related changes in the metabolome were generally subtle, with a modest increase in metabolite perturbations across timepoints. The percentage of metabolites with significant changes (p < 0.05 for all) (increases↑/decreases↓) versus placebo were: 2.1% (1.1%↑/1.0%↓), 6.7% (0.46%↑/6.2%↓) and 11.8% (0.86%↑/10.9%↓) at T1, T2 and T3, respectively. Treatment with FF/VI reduced FeNO levels by 60%, whereas the systemic intermediates involved in NO biosynthesis remained unaffected. Evidence of systemic anti-inflammatory activity was seen in complex lipid pathways, suggesting reduced phospholipase-A2 activity, but without downstream impact on free fatty acids or inflammatory mediators. Consistent with the pathogenesis of asthma, there was evidence of higher fatty acid ß-oxidation and lower glycolysis in the placebo arm; this pattern was reversed in the treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the prolonged airway anti-inflammatory action of FF/VI, this was accompanied by only subtle systemic metabolomic and lipidomic changes. Trial registration Prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT02712047.

Symptom control in patients with asthma using inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (fluticasone furoate/vilanterol or budesonide/formoterol) in the US: a retrospective matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI), an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist therapy, reduces the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and improves lung function and symptom control in patients with asthma. However, real-world data remain limited among asthma patients in the United States (US). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study propensity score (PS) matched adult asthma patients initiating once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with patients initiating twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (B/F) 160/4.5 mcg using a US claims database (January 1, 2015-December 31, 2018). Asthma control was measured by the mean number of short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) canisters dispensed per patient-year (PPY) during follow-up. Time to first, and rates of, overall and severe asthma exacerbations were also measured. RESULTS: After PS matching, 18,531 patients receiving FF/VI were matched to 18,531 patients receiving B/F. Mean SABA canisters dispensed PPY was significantly lower for FF/VI users compared with B/F users (FF/VI: 1.47, B/F: 1.64; p < 0.001). FF/VI use resulted in 13% significantly lower risk of having an overall asthma-related exacerbation and 22% lower risk of a severe exacerbation versus B/F use (overall exacerbation hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.87 [0.82-0.92], p < 0.001; severe exacerbation HR [95% CI]: 0.78 [0.63-0.97], p = 0.027). Asthma-related exacerbation rates per 100 patient-days were also significantly lower for the FF/VI group compared with the B/F group (overall: 0.0475 vs. 0.0558, p < 0.001; severe: 0.0026 vs. 0.0033, p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world practice, initiation of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg in adults with asthma was associated with lower use of SABA and fewer asthma-related exacerbations, which may indicate better asthma control, when compared with use of twice-daily B/F 160/4.5 mcg.

[Experience of using a triple fixed combination in the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease].

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of a fixed triple combination of vilanterol/umeclidinium bromide/fluticasone furoate in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with frequent exacerbations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 46 patients with severe and extremely severe COPD (GOLD 34) with frequent exacerbations. All patients were divided into 2 groups. The 1st group included 22 COPD patients with a content of eosinophils in the peripheral blood of 300 cells/ml, the 2nd group included 24 COPD patients with no signs of eosinophilic inflammation in the peripheral blood. Group 1 patients were recommended therapy with a fixed triple combination of vilanterol/umeclidinium bromide/fluticasone furoate at a dose of 22/55/92 mcg 1 time per day, group 2 patients received vilanterol+umeclidinium bromide at a dose of 22/55 mcg 1 time per day. The duration of follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: After 12 months of treatment with a fixed triple combination of vilanterol/umeclidinium bromide/fluticasone furoate, a statistically significant decrease in peripheral blood eosinophilia was noted in patients with COPD with frequent exacerbations and peripheral blood eosinophilia (p=0.001), as well as a decrease in shortness of breath on the MMRs scale (p=0.001) and the frequency of exacerbations in patients with COPD with frequent exacerbations and eosinophilia (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of a fixed combination of vilanterol/umeclidinium bromide/fluticasone furoate for 12 months allowed to reduce the impact of the disease, improve respiratory function and quality of life in COPD patients with eosinophilia.

Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibility of airflow limitation in patients with COPD with a low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: The double-blind, double-dummy EMAX trial randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg once daily, umeclidinium 62.5 µg once daily, or salmeterol 50 µg twice daily. Bronchodilator reversibility to salbutamol was measured once at screening and defined as an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL 10-30 min post salbutamol. Post hoc, fractional polynomial (FP) modelling was conducted using the degree of reversibility (mL) at screening as a continuous variable to investigate its relationship to mean change from baseline in trough FEV1 and self-administered computerised-Transition Dyspnoea Index (SAC-TDI) at Week 24, Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD (E-RS) at Weeks 21-24, and rescue medication use (puffs/day) over Weeks 1-24. Analyses were conducted across the full range of reversibility (-850-896 mL); however, results are presented for the range -100-400 mL because there were few participants with values outside this range. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) reversibility was 130 mL (156) and the median was 113 mL; 625/2425 (26%) patients were reversible. There was a trend towards greater improvements in trough FEV1, SAC-TDI, E-RS and rescue medication use with umeclidinium/vilanterol with higher reversibility. Improvements in trough FEV1 and reductions in rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol compared with either monotherapy across the range of reversibility. Greater improvements in SAC-TDI and E-RS total scores were observed with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in the middle of the reversibility range. CONCLUSIONS: FP analyses suggest that patients with higher levels of reversibility have greater improvements in lung function and symptoms in response to bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy across the full range of reversibility, suggesting that the dual bronchodilator umeclidinium/vilanterol may be an appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of their level of reversibility.

Medication adherence in patients with asthma using once-daily versus twice-daily ICS/LABAs.

OBJECTIVE: This real-world observational study compared medication adherence and persistence among patients with asthma receiving the once-daily inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA) fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus the twice-daily ICS/LABAs budesonide/formoterol (B/F) and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study conducted using IQVIATM Health Plan Claims Data included patients with asthma ≥18 years of age initiating ICS/LABA therapy with FF/VI, B/F, or FP/SAL between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2016 (index date). Patients had ≥12 months and ≥3 months of continuous eligibility pre- and post-index date, respectively. Patients receiving FF/VI were separately matched 1:1 with patients receiving B/F or FP/SAL using propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable regression to balance baseline covariates between cohorts. The primary endpoint was medication adherence, measured by proportion of days covered (PDC). Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥ 0.5 and PDC ≥ 0.8 and persistence with index medication, measured by time to discontinuation (>45-day gap in therapy). RESULTS: After PSM, 3,764 and 3,339 patients receiving FF/VI were matched with patients receiving B/F or FP/SAL, respectively. Mean PDC was significantly higher for FF/VI versus B/F (0.453 vs 0.345; adjusted p < 0.001) and FP/SAL (0.446 vs 0.341; adjusted p < 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥ 0.5 or PDC ≥ 0.8, and treatment persistence were significantly higher for FF/VI versus B/F and FP/SAL (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, patients initiating FF/VI had better adherence and lower risk of discontinuing treatment versus B/F or FP/SAL, suggesting that once-daily ICS/LABA treatment might improve adherence and persistence compared with twice-daily alternatives.

A randomized controlled trial of long-acting muscarinic antagonist and long-acting ß2 agonist fixed-dose combinations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, combination treatment with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) increases forced expiratory volume in one second and reduces symptoms compared to monotherapy. In Japan, three different once-daily fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) have been prescribed since 2015, although a direct comparison of these FDCs has never been performed. The objective of the present study was to compare the effectiveness, preference, and safety of three LAMA/LABA FDCs-glycopyrronium/indacaterol (Gly/Ind), umeclidinium/vilanterol (Ume/Vil), and tiotropium/olodaterol (Tio/Olo)-in patients with COPD. METHODS: We enrolled 75 COPD outpatients (male:female ratio, 69:6; 77.4 ± 6.9 years). A prospective, randomized, crossover study was conducted on three groups using three FDCs: Gly/Ind; Ume/Vil; and Tio/Olo. Each medication was administered for 4 weeks before crossover (total 12 weeks). After each FDC administration, a respiratory function test and questionnaire survey were conducted. A comparative questionnaire survey of all three LAMA/LABA FDCs was conducted after 12 weeks (following administration of final FDC). RESULTS: No significant differences in COPD Assessment Test or modified Medical Research Council dyspnea questionnaire were reported in the surveys completed after each FDC administration; no significant differences in spirometric items were observed. In the final comparative questionnaire survey, patients reported better actual feeling of being able to inhale following Gly/Ind administration compared with Tio/Olo, although no significant differences in adverse events or other evaluations were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The three LAMA/LABA FDCs administered to COPD patients show similar effects and safety, although some minor individual preference was reported. Trial registration This study retrospectively registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (number UMIN000041342, registered on August 6, 2020).

Efficacy and safety of the dual bronchodilator combination umeclidinium/vilanterol in COPD by age and airflow limitation severity: A pooled post hoc analysis of seven clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and those with more severe airway limitation are perceived to experience reduced efficacy from inhaled bronchodilators, especially those administered in a dry powder inhaler. This study compared the efficacy and safety of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist dry powder combination in elderly patients with COPD and patients with moderate-to-very severe airflow limitation. METHODS: This post hoc pooled analysis of seven randomized studies of ≥12 weeks' duration investigated the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) 62.5/25 µg versus tiotropium (TIO) 18 µg or fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) 250/50 µg. Change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), a common efficacy measure in all trials, proportion of FEV1 responders (≥100 mL increase from baseline) and safety outcomes were analyzed at Day 28, 56, and 84 in patients classified by age (<65, ≥65, and ≥75 years of age) and severity of baseline airflow limitation (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage 2 [moderate] and stage 3/4 [severe/very severe]). A 24-week analysis was also conducted for the UMEC/VI versus TIO comparison. RESULTS: The pooled intent-to-treat population comprised 3821 patients (≥65 years: 44-45%; ≥75 years: 9-10%; GOLD stage 3/4: 50-55%); 2246, 874, and 701 patients received UMEC/VI, TIO, or FP/SAL, respectively. Significant improvements in trough FEV1 at Day 84 were observed with UMEC/VI versus TIO or FP/SAL irrespective of age (all p ≤ 0.029) or GOLD stage (all p < 0.001). The proportion of FEV1 responders at Day 84 was significantly greater with UMEC/VI versus TIO or FP/SAL across all age groups (all p ≤ 0.016) and GOLD stages (all p < 0.001). Safety profiles were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: UMEC/VI consistently demonstrated improved lung function versus TIO and FP/SAL across age and airflow limitation severity subgroups, with no safety concerns, indicating that UMEC/VI provides no loss in efficacy or additional safety concerns for both elderly patients with COPD and patients with severe/very severe airway limitation.

Enantiomeric separation of vilanterol trifenatate by chiral liquid chromatography.

Vilanterol trifenatate is a novel chiral long-acting ß2-agonist developed. Vilanterol combined with inhaled corticosteroids can treat COPD and asthma. A simple liquid chromatographic method is developed for the quantitative determination of R-vilanterol and S-vilanterol (impurity S). HPLC separation was achieved on Chiralpak ID (250 × 4.6 mm; particle size 5 µm) column using hexane-ethanol-ethanolamine (75:25:0.1, v/v/v) as mobile phase at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. The resolution is greater than 3.3. Ethanolamine in the mobile phase is vital to enhance chromatographic efficiency and resolution between the isomers. The method was validated with respect to accuracy, specificity, precision, LOD, LOQ, linearity, and robustness as ICH guidelines.

Fluticasone Furoate, Vilanterol, and Lung Function Decline in Patients with Moderate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Heightened Cardiovascular Risk.

RATIONALE: Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have an accelerated loss of lung function. It is unclear whether drug treatment can modify this in patients with moderately severe disease. OBJECTIVES: In a prespecified analysis of the key secondary outcome in SUMMIT (Study to Understand Mortality and Morbidity), we investigated whether the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone furoate (FF; 100 µg), the long-acting ß-agonist vilanterol (VI; 25 µg), or their combination (FF/VI) modified the rate of decline in FEV1 compared with placebo. We also investigated how baseline covariates affected this decline. METHODS: Spirometry was measured every 12 weeks in this event-driven, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 16,485 patients with moderate COPD and heightened cardiovascular risk. An average of seven spirometric assessments per subject among the 15,457 patients with at least one on-treatment measurement were used in the analysis of rate of FEV1 decline. All statistical comparisons are considered nominal. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The adjusted rates of FEV1 decline were -46 ml/yr (-3.0% of baseline) with placebo, -47 ml/yr (-3.1%) with VI, -38 ml/yr (-2.5%) with FF, and -38 ml/yr (-2.3%) with FF/VI. FF-containing regimens had lower rates of decline than placebo (P < 0.03), and FF/VI had a lower rate of decline than VI alone (P < 0.005). The FEV1 decline was faster in current smokers, those with a lower body mass index, males, and patients with established cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate COPD and heightened cardiovascular risk, FF alone or in combination with VI appears to reduce the rate of FEV1 decline. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01313676).

Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone furoate/vilanterol plus umeclidinium using two inhalers for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 µg has been shown to improve lung function and health status, and reduce exacerbations, versus budesonide/formoterol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the non-inferiority of single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI + UMEC using two inhalers. METHODS: Eligible patients with COPD (aged ≥40 years; ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the 12 months before screening) were randomized (1:1; stratified by the number of long-acting bronchodilators [0, 1 or 2] per day during run-in) to receive 24-week FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg and placebo or FF/VI 100/25 µg + UMEC 62.5 µg; all treatments/placebo were delivered using the ELLIPTA inhaler once-daily in the morning. Primary endpoint: change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Week 24. The non-inferiority margin for the lower 95% confidence limit was set at - 50 mL. RESULTS: A total of 1055 patients (844 [80%] of whom were enrolled on combination maintenance therapy) were randomized to receive FF/UMEC/VI (n = 527) or FF/VI + UMEC (n = 528). Mean change from baseline in trough FEV1 at Week 24 was 113 mL (95% CI 91, 135) for FF/UMEC/VI and 95 mL (95% CI 72, 117) for FF/VI + UMEC; the between-treatment difference of 18 mL (95% CI -13, 50) confirmed FF/UMEC/VI's was considered non-inferior to FF/VI + UMEC. At Week 24, the proportion of responders based on St George's Respiratory Questionnaire Total score was 50% (FF/UMEC/VI) and 51% (FF/VI + UMEC); the proportion of responders based on the Transitional Dyspnea Index focal score was similar (56% both groups). A similar proportion of patients experienced a moderate/severe exacerbation in the FF/UMEC/VI (24%) and FF/VI + UMEC (27%) groups; the hazard ratio for time to first moderate/severe exacerbation with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI + UMEC was 0.87 (95% CI 0.68, 1.12). The incidence of adverse events was comparable in both groups (48%); the incidence of serious adverse events was 10% (FF/UMEC/VI) and 11% (FF/VI + UMEC). CONCLUSIONS: Single-inhaler triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) is non-inferior to two inhalers (FF/VI + UMEC) on trough FEV1 change from baseline at 24 weeks. Results were similar on all other measures of efficacy, health-related quality of life, and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: GSK study CTT200812; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02729051 (submitted 31 March 2016).

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in patients with asthma well controlled on ICS/LABA.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 µg (FF/VI) to twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 µg (FP/SAL) in adults/adolescents with asthma well controlled on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2 agonist (ICS/LABA). METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 24-week study (NCT02301975/GSK study 201378). Patients whose asthma met study-defined criteria for control were randomized 1:1:1 to receive FF/VI, FP/SAL or twice-daily FP 250 µg for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in evening trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Secondary endpoints included rescue-/symptom-free 24-hour periods. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 1504 randomized and treated patients (504 FF/VI; 501 FP/SAL; 499 FP); mean age 43.5 years, 64% female. FF/VI demonstrated non-inferiority (using a margin of -100 mL) to FP/SAL for evening trough FEV1 at Week 24 (ITT: 19 mL [95% confidence interval (CI) -11 to 49]; per protocol population [N = 1336]: 6 mL [95% CI -27 to 40]). Improvement in evening trough FEV1 at Week 24 for both FF/VI (123 mL; p < 0.001) and FP/SAL (104 mL; p < 0.001) was greater than FP. FF/VI increased rescue-/symptom-free 24-hour periods by 1.2%/1.2% compared with FP/SAL. All treatments were well tolerated. On-treatment adverse event (AE) rates were 43% to 45% across arms; there were no drug-related serious AEs. CONCLUSIONS: FF/VI was non-inferior to FP/SAL for evening trough FEV1 at 24 weeks. These data suggest that patients well controlled on FP/SAL could step across to FF/VI without loss of control.

Effect of Fluticasone Furoate and Vilanterol on Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Patients with Moderate Airflow Obstruction.

RATIONALE: Inhaled corticosteroids have been shown to decrease exacerbations in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Their effects in patients with milder airflow obstruction remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: This was an analysis of exacerbations in the SUMMIT (Study to Understand Mortality and Morbidity) study. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized controlled trial, once-daily inhaled placebo, fluticasone furoate (FF; 100 µg), vilanterol (VI; 25 µg), or the combination of FF/VI was administered. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Exacerbations of COPD were an additional predefined endpoint. A total of 1,368 centers in 43 countries and 16,485 patients with moderate COPD and heightened cardiovascular risk were included in the study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Compared with placebo, FF/VI reduced the rate of moderate and/or severe exacerbations by 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22-35; P < 0.001) and the rate of hospitalized exacerbations by 27% (95% CI, 13-39; P < 0.001). These relative effects were similar regardless of whether subjects had a history of exacerbation in the year before the study or an FEV1 <60% or ≥60% of predicted. The number needed to treat was not influenced by baseline FEV1 but was influenced by the history of exacerbations. FF/VI also reduced the rate of exacerbations treated with corticosteroids alone or with corticosteroids and antibiotics but not the rates of those treated with antibiotics alone. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate chronic airflow obstruction experienced a reduction in exacerbations with FF/VI compared with placebo, irrespective of a history of exacerbations or baseline FEV1. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01313676; GSK Study number 113782).

A systematic review with meta-analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol combination for the treatment of stable COPD.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting beta2-agonists as first-line therapy for COPD patients at risk for acute exacerbations and/or severe airflow limitation. This systematic review assesses available evidence on the efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) combination versus each alone, for the treatment of patients with severe to very severe stable COPD. METHODS: Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of >8 weeks of duration were included. Primary end points were pulmonary function, COPD exacerbations and serious adverse events. FF/VI was compared with its mono-components. RESULTS: Five reports with six trials (n = 15,515 patients) met the entry criteria. FF/VI was associated with significant increases in trough FEV1 compared with vilanterol (VI) and fluticasone furoate (FF) (45 mL and 90 mL respectively). FF/VI significantly reduced the number of subjects with at least one moderate to severe exacerbation compared with VI (number needed to treat for benefit [NNTB] = 21) and with FF (NNTB = 26). There were no statistical differences in the rates of serious adverse events, cardiac events and all-cause mortality. On the contrary, FF/VI showed a significant 52% increase in the rate of pneumonia compared with VI monotherapy (5.3% vs. 3.5%). However, there was no difference in the rate of pneumonia when FF/VI was compared with FF alone. CONCLUSIONS: FF/VI combination was associated with a decrease of the rate of COPD exacerbations, without affecting mortality or cardiovascular outcomes in patients with moderate to severe stable COPD. Also, the use of FF was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia.

Dual Bronchodilation with Indacaterol Maleate/Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Umeclidinium Bromide/Vilanterol in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe COPD: Results from Two Randomized, Controlled, Cross-over Studies.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two long-acting dual bronchodilator combinations: indacaterol/glycopyrrolate (IND/GLY) versus umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI). METHODS: Studies A2349 and A2350 were replicate, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, cross-over studies in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were randomized to sequential 12-week treatments of twice-daily IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg and once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg, each separated by a 3-week washout. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of IND/GLY compared with UMEC/VI in terms of the 24-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s profile at week 12 (FEV1 AUC0-24). Rescue medication use, symptom control, and safety were assessed throughout. RESULTS: Both treatments delivered substantial bronchodilation over 12 weeks, with improvements in FEV1 AUC0-24h at week 12 of 232 and 185 mL for IND/GLY, and 244 and 203 mL with UMEC/VI in Studies A2349 and A2350, respectively. The primary efficacy objective of non-inferiority of IND/GLY relative to UMEC/VI was not met as the lower bound of the confidence interval for the LS treatment comparison was below the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -20 mL in both studies: -26.9 and -34.2 mL, respectively (LS mean between-treatment differences: -11.5 and -18.2 mL). Both drugs were well tolerated, with AE profiles consistent with their respective prescribing information. CONCLUSIONS: IND/GLY and UMEC/VI provided clinically meaningful and comparable bronchodilation. Non-inferiority of IND/GLY to UMEC/VI could not be declared although between-treatment differences were not clinically relevant. The data support the use of IND/GLY as an efficacious and well tolerated treatment option in patients with COPD. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02487446 and NCT02487498).

Lung Deflation and Cardiovascular Structure and Function in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Randomized Controlled Trial.

RATIONALE: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease develop increased cardiovascular morbidity with structural alterations. OBJECTIVES: To investigate through a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study the effect of lung deflation on cardiovascular structure and function using cardiac magnetic resonance. METHODS: Forty-five hyperinflated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were randomized (1:1) to 7 (maximum 14) days inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 µg or placebo (7-day minimum washout). Primary outcome was change from baseline in right ventricular end-diastolic volume index versus placebo. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There was a 5.8 ml/m(2) (95% confidence interval, 2.74-8.91; P < 0.001) increase in change from baseline right ventricular end-diastolic volume index and a 429 ml (P < 0.001) reduction in residual volume with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus placebo. Left ventricular end-diastolic and left atrial end-systolic volumes increased by 3.63 ml/m(2) (P = 0.002) and 2.33 ml/m(2) (P = 0.002). In post hoc analysis, right ventricular stroke volume increased by 4.87 ml/m(2) (P = 0.003); right ventricular ejection fraction was unchanged. Left ventricular adaptation was similar; left atrial ejection fraction improved by +3.17% (P < 0.001). Intrinsic myocardial function was unchanged. Pulmonary artery pulsatility increased in two of three locations (main +2.9%, P = 0.001; left +2.67%, P = 0.030). Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol safety profile was similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has consistent beneficial and plausible effects on cardiac function and pulmonary vasculature that may contribute to favorable effects of inhaled therapies. Future studies should investigate the effect of prolonged lung deflation on intrinsic myocardial function. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01691885).

Randomised trial of once-daily vilanterol in children with asthma on inhaled corticosteroid therapy.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are effective maintenance treatments for childhood asthma; however, many children remain uncontrolled. Vilanterol (VI) is an inhaled long-acting beta-2 agonist which, in combination with the ICS fluticasone furoate, is being explored as a once-daily treatment for asthma in children. We evaluated the dose-response, efficacy, and safety of once-daily VI (6.25 µg, 12.5 µg and 25 µg) administered in the evening over 4 weeks, on background fluticasone propionate (FP) in children with asthma inadequately controlled on ICS. METHODS: This was a Phase IIb, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study in children ages 5-11 years with persistent asthma on ICS and as-needed short-acting beta-agonist. The study comprised a 4-week run-in, 4-week treatment period, and 1-week follow-up. From study start, children replaced their current ICS with open-label FP 100 µg twice daily. Children were randomised to receive placebo, VI 6.25 µg, VI 12.5 µg or VI 25 µg once daily. Primary endpoint was treatment difference between VI 25 and placebo groups in mean change from baseline in evening peak expiratory flow averaged over the 4-week treatment. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at Week 4 and change from baseline in percentage of rescue-free and symptom-free 24-h periods. Safety assessments included incidence of adverse events (AEs) and asthma exacerbations. RESULTS: In total, 456 children comprised the intention-to-treat population. The adjusted treatment difference between VI 25 and placebo groups for the primary endpoint was not statistically significant (p = 0.227) so no statistical inference was made for other VI dose comparisons or other endpoints. No difference in change from baseline in trough FEV1 was observed for any VI treatments versus placebo; however, VI 25 resulted in an additional 0.6 rescue-free days and 0.7 symptom-free days per week versus placebo. The incidence of AEs was slightly higher in the VI groups (28-33 %) versus placebo (22 %). Nine children experienced asthma exacerbations during the treatment period. CONCLUSION: VI plus FP did not result in significant improvements in lung function versus placebo plus FP, but was well tolerated at all doses assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01573767 (ClinicalTrials.gov).