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.

Evaluation of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol for the treatment of COPD: a systematic review.

Introduction: Recently, the generic formulation of FP/SAL FDC has been approved in COPD. Although FP/SAL FDC has been the first long-acting FDC approved in COPD, no systematic review assessed the effect of this combination for the treatment of COPD by considering specifically Phase IV studies. The aim of this review was to systematically assess the effect of FP/SAL FDC in COPD patients enrolled in Phase IV studies.Areas covered: The question of this systematic review was to examine the evidence regarding the impact of FP/SAL FDC for the treatment of COPD by searching for Phase IV studies in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.Expert opinion: Generic drugs represent an effective cost-saving step for health-care budgets in the treatment of COPD and should be used in agreement with current recommendations and prescription accuracy. FP/SAL FDC is recommended for the initiation therapy just in a small percentage of symptomatic patients that are at high risk of exacerbation with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells per µl. At follow-up, FP/SAL FDC can be escalated to triple ICS/LABA/LAMA combination or switched to LABA/LAMA combination by considering symptoms, exacerbations, lack of response to ICS, inappropriate original indication, and ICS-related adverse events such as pneumonia.

Preventing Clinically Important Deterioration of COPD with Addition of Umeclidinium to Inhaled Corticosteroid/Long-Acting ß2-Agonist Therapy: An Integrated Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing clinically important measures of disease progression is essential for evaluating therapeutic effects on disease stability in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis assessed whether providing additional bronchodilation with the long-acting muscarinic antagonist umeclidinium (UMEC) to patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) therapy would improve disease stability compared with ICS/LABA therapy alone. METHODS: This integrated post hoc analysis of four 12-week, randomized, double-blind trials (NCT01772134, NCT01772147, NCT01957163, NCT02119286) compared UMEC 62.5 µg with placebo added to open-label ICS/LABA in symptomatic patients with COPD (modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score ≥ 2). A clinically important deterioration (CID) was defined as: a decrease from baseline of ≥ 100 mL in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), an increase from baseline of ≥ 4 units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, or a moderate/severe exacerbation. Risk of a first CID was evaluated in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in patients stratified by Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification, exacerbation history and type of ICS/LABA therapy. Adverse events (AEs) were also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 1637 patients included in the ITT population received UMEC + ICS/LABA (n = 819) or placebo + ICS/LABA (n = 818). Additional bronchodilation with UMEC reduced the risk of a first CID by 45-58% in the ITT population and all subgroups analyzed compared with placebo (all p < 0.001). Improvements were observed in reducing FEV1 (69% risk reduction; p < 0.001) and exacerbation (47% risk reduction; p = 0.004) events in the ITT population. No significant reduction in risk of a SGRQ CID was observed. AE incidence was similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Symptomatic patients with COPD receiving ICS/LABA experience frequent deteriorations. Additional bronchodilation with UMEC significantly reduced the risk of CID and provided greater short-term stability versus continued ICS/LABA therapy in these patients. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline (study number: 202067). Plain language summary available for this article.

Characteristics and health care resource use of subjects with COPD in the year before initiating LAMA monotherapy or LAMA+LABA combination therapy: A U.S. database study.

PURPOSE: To characterize subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) newly initiated on long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) or dual LAMA/long-acting ß2-adrenergic agonist (LABA) therapy. DESIGN: This pilot/preliminary analysis was a retrospective crosssectional study of subjects with COPD from the Optum Impact National Managed Care Benchmark Database. METHODOLOGY: Subjects with at least one LAMA prescription in the index period (July 2008-June 2009) were included and stratified by treatment. Data were collected in the year before the index date and included comorbidities, medication use, COPD-related costs, health care resource use, and exacerbations. RESULTS: Of 5,311 eligible subjects, 2,057 initiated LAMA therapy (LAMA cohort) and 191 initiated LAMA+LABA therapy (LAMA+LABA cohort). The Charlson comorbidity index was slightly lower in the LAMA+LABA cohort than the LAMA cohort (mean±SD: 0.63±1.13 vs. 0.66±1.28), but the number of prescriptions was higher (mean±SD: 42.9±23.2 vs. 30.5±27.2). The LAMA+LABA cohort had higher short-acting inhaled ß2 agonist (56.0% vs. 35.7%), oral corticosteroid (37.7% vs. 32.6%), and home oxygen therapy use (14.1% vs. 3.2%) than the LAMA cohort. Total medical costs were greater in the LAMA+LABA cohort than the LAMA cohort (mean±SD: $3,320.40±4085.9 vs. $1,226.20±3602.9), although emergency department ($11.00±66.8 vs. $30.70±259.2) and outpatient visit ($39.60±163.1 vs. $41.70±424.3) costs were lower. Resource use and exacerbation incidence were similar between cohorts. CONCLUSION: In this first look, subjects with COPD initiating LAMA or LAMA+LABA therapy exhibited different clinical and resource use characteristics in the year before treatment. Subjects receiving LAMA+LABA were older, with higher COPD co-medication use, more prescriptions, and associated higher pharmacy costs compared with subjects initiating LAMA. These differences may reflect a higher severity of COPD in those starting LABA+LAMA treatment.

Budesonide/salmeterol in fixed-dose combination for the treatment of asthma.

Fixed dose combinations (FDC) of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta agonist (LABA) are well established in asthma treatment. The budesonide/salmeterol (B/S) FDC is now about to reach the market. It is provided as powder in hard capsules of two strengths: 120/20µg and 240/20µg when expressed as delivered doses, equivalent to 150/25µg and 300/25µg when expressed as nominal doses. Its development involved 9 pharmacokinetic (320 subjects), 3 phase II (123 subjects) and 4 phase III (1206 patients with different asthma severity) studies. Delivery is effectuated via low resistance inhaler device, Axahaler®, generating also fine particles targeting the small airways. B/S safety, assessed in 1401 subjects, did not outline novel concerns specific for this FDC. In conclusion, the B/S dry powder FDC can be used for asthma treatment in adults not adequately controlled on ICS alone, or to maintain control of ICS/LABA treated patients, in whom switching to alternative FDC is indicated.

A clinical study of Maxing-Shigan decoction combined with salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease / 国际中医中药杂志

Objective To evaluate the therapeutic effect of Maxing-Shigan decoction combined with salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods A total of 86 patients with acute exacerbation of COPD were enrolled and randomly divided into a salmeterol/fluticasone group (41 patients) and a combined treatment group (45 patients). The salmeterol/fluticasone group was treated by salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation, and the combined treatment group by Maxing-Shigan decoction combined with salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation. Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) was detected by a immunonephelometric assay, and Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) in hemocytes was detected by flow cytometry. The score of the syndromes in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), such as cough, sputum, gasping and shortness of breath, as well as pulmonary function and therapeutic effect were evaluateds. Results After the treatment, the serum C-reactive protein in the combined treatment group was significantly lower than that in the salmeterol/fluticasone group (4.3 ± 1.2 mg/L vs. 8.4 ± 2.5 mg/L;t=5.417, P<0.01), and the TLR9 expression was significantly higher (1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.4;t=3.418, P<0.05). The scores of the syndromes in TCM, such as cough (1.7 ± 0.6 vs. 3.8 ± 1.1;t=2.859, P<0.05), sputum (1.6 ± 0.4 vs. 3.9 ± 1.2;t=3.027, P<0.05), gasping (1.2 ± 0.5 vs. 3.4 ± 1.3;t=3.416, P<0.05) and shortness of breath (1.5 ± 0.7 vs. 3.7 ± 1.6;t=3.468, P<0.05) in the combined treatment group were significantly lower than those in the salmeterol/fluticasone group. The forced expiratory volume in first second (75.4 ± 5.8 L vs. 62.8 ± 6.9 L;t=3.526, P<0.05) and the percentage of forced expiratory volume in first second to forced vital capacity (85.7%± 10.3%vs. 71.9%± 15.4%;t=5.648, P<0.01) in the combined treatment group were significantly higher than those in the salmeterol/fluticasone group. The time to symptoms alleviated (3.4 ± 0.7 d vs. 5.6 ± 1.2 d; t=3.256, P<0.05) and the use dose was (1.8 ± 0.2) ×103μg vs. (5.3 ± 0.4)×103μg, and use times of salmeterol/fluticasone (7.4 ± 1.3 vs. 16.5 ± 3.4;t=4.574, P<0.05) in the combined treatment group were significantly decreased than those in the salmeterol/fluticasone group. The total effective rate in in the combined treatment group were significantly decreased than those in the salmeterol/fluticasone group (84.4% vs. 73.2%; χ2=4.519, P<0.05). Conclusion Maxing-Shigan decoction combined with salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation can improve the pulmonary function in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD, its effiency is suppior to salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation alone.

Predictors of response to tiotropium versus salmeterol in asthmatic adults.

BACKGROUND: Tiotropium has activity as an asthma controller. However, predictors of a positive response to tiotropium have not been described. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe individual and differential responses of asthmatic patients to salmeterol and tiotropium when added to an inhaled corticosteroid, as well as predictors of a positive clinical response. METHODS: Data from the double-blind, 3-way, crossover National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Asthma Clinical Research Network's Tiotropium Bromide as an Alternative to Increased Inhaled Glucocorticoid in Patients Inadequately Controlled on a Lower Dose of Inhaled Corticosteroid (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00565266) trial were analyzed for individual and differential treatment responses to salmeterol and tiotropium and predictors of a positive response to the end points FEV1, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), and asthma control days (ACDs). RESULTS: Although approximately equal numbers of patients showed a differential response to salmeterol and tiotropium in terms of morning PEF (n = 90 and 78, respectively) and ACDs (n = 49 and 53, respectively), more showed a differential response to tiotropium for FEV1 (n = 104) than salmeterol (n = 62). An acute response to a short-acting bronchodilator, especially albuterol, predicted a positive clinical response to tiotropium for FEV1 (odds ratio, 4.08; 95% CI, 2.00-8.31; P < .001) and morning PEF (odds ratio, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.12-4.01; P = 0.021), as did a decreased FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio (FEV1 response increased 0.39% of baseline for every 1% decrease in FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio). Higher cholinergic tone was also a predictor, whereas ethnicity, sex, atopy, IgE level, sputum eosinophil count, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, asthma duration, and body mass index were not. CONCLUSION: Although these results require confirmation, predictors of a positive clinical response to tiotropium include a positive response to albuterol and airway obstruction, factors that could help identify appropriate patients for this therapy.