Effects of triple therapy on disease burden in patients of GOLD groups C and D: results from the observational COPD cohort COSYCONET.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials described beneficial effects of inhaled triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and high risk of exacerbations. We studied whether such effects were also detectable under continuous treatment in a retrospective observational setting. METHODS: Data from baseline and 18-month follow-up of the COPD cohort COSYCONET were used, including patients categorized as GOLD groups C/D at both visits (n = 258). Therapy groups were defined as triple therapy at both visits (triple always, TA) versus its complement (triple not always, TNA). Comparisons were performed via multiple regression analysis, propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting to adjust for differences between groups. For this purpose, variables were divided into predictors of therapy and outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 258 patients were eligible (TA: n = 162, TNA: n = 96). Without adjustments, TA patients showed significant (p < 0.05) impairments regarding lung function, quality of life and symptom burden. After adjustments, most differences in outcomes were no more significant. Total direct health care costs were reduced but still elevated, with inpatient costs much reduced, while costs of total and respiratory medication only slightly changed. CONCLUSION: Without statistical adjustment, patients with triple therapy showed multiple impairments as well as elevated treatment costs. After adjusting for differences between treatment groups, differences were reduced. These findings are compatible with beneficial effects of triple therapy under continuous, long-term treatment, but also demonstrate the limitations encountered in the comparison of controlled intervention studies with observational studies in patients with severe COPD using different types of devices and compounds.

The future exacerbation and mortality of different inhalation therapies among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in various GOLD groups: a focus on the GOLD 2017 and GOLD 2023 reports.

BACKGROUND: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2023 report revised the combined assessment, merged the C and D groups into the E group, and revised the initial inhalation therapy recommendation. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze the future exacerbation and mortality of different inhalation therapies among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in various groups based on the GOLD 2017 and GOLD 2023 reports. DESIGN: This is a multicenter and retrospective study. METHODS: Stable COPD patients from the database setup by 12 hospitals were enrolled. The patients were divided into Groups A, B, C, D, and E according to the GOLD 2017 and GOLD 2023 reports. Then, the patients were classified into long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) + inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), LABA + LAMA, and LABA + LAMA + ICS subgroups. Data on exacerbation and death during 1 year of follow-up were collected. RESULTS: A total of 4623 patients were classified into Group A (15.0%), Group B (37.8%), Group C (7.3%), Group D (39.9%), and Group E (47.2%). The exacerbation, frequent exacerbation, and mortality showed no differences between different inhalation therapies in Groups A and C. Patients treated with LABA + LAMA or LABA + LAMA + ICS had a lower incidence of exacerbation and frequent exacerbation than patients treated with LAMA or LABA + ICS in Groups B, D, and E. The exacerbation, frequent exacerbation, and mortality showed no differences between different inhalation therapies after combining Groups A with C. CONCLUSION: Patients in Group A should be recommended to undergo mono-LAMA, while patients in Groups B and E should be recommended treatment with LABA + LAMA, which is consistent with the GOLD 2023 report. However, it is worth considering merging Groups A and C into a single group and recommending mono-LAMA as the initial inhalation therapy.

Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a type of medication delivered via an inhaler device that are commonly used in the treatment of asthma. ICS can also be used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a progressive respiratory condition in which the lungs become worse over time. However, unlike in asthma, ICS are only effective in a small proportion of people with COPD. ICS can cause significant side effects in people with COPD, including pneumonia. Because of this, guidelines written by COPD experts recommend that ICS should largely be prescribed to people with COPD whose symptoms flare up frequently and become difficult to manage (episodes known as exacerbations). Despite this guidance, records collected from routine clinical practice suggest that many healthcare professionals prescribe ICS to people with COPD who do not have frequent exacerbations, putting them at unnecessary risk of side effects. The over-prescription of ICS in COPD may partly be due to the recent introduction of single-inhaler combination therapies, which combine ICS with other medicines (bronchodilators). This 'one inhaler for all' approach is a concerning trend as it goes against global COPD treatment guidelines, which recommend ICS use in only a small proportion of people. This is a plain language summary of a review article originally published in the journal NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine. In this review, we investigate the benefits and risks of ICS use in COPD. Using data from both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, we explain which people benefit from ICS use, and why health regulatory bodies have concluded that ICS do not help people with COPD to live longer. Lastly, we provide practical guidance for doctors and people with COPD regarding when ICS should be prescribed and when they should be withdrawn.

Is it preferable to administer a bronchodilator once- or twice-daily when treating COPD?

Nocturnal and early morning symptoms are common and uncomfortable in many patients with COPD, and are likely to affect their long-term outcomes. However, it is still debated whether it is better to give long-acting bronchodilators once- or twice-daily to symptomatic COPD patients. The functional link between circadian rhythms of autonomic tone and airway calibre explains why the timing of administration of bronchodilators in chronic airway diseases can induce different effects when taken at different biological (circadian) times. However, the timing also depends on the pharmacological characteristics of the bronchodilator to be used. Because the profile of bronchodilation produced by once-daily vs. twice-daily long-acting bronchodilators differs throughout 24 h, selecting long-acting bronchodilators may be customized to specific patient preferences based on the need for further bronchodilation in the evening. This is especially helpful for people who experience respiratory symptoms at night or early morning. Compared to placebo, evening bronchodilator administration is consistently linked with persistent overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive. The current evidence indicates that nocturnal and early morning symptoms control is best handled by a LAMA taken in the evening. In contrast, it seems preferable to use a LABA for daytime symptoms. Therefore, it can be speculated that combining a LAMA with a LABA can improve bronchodilation and control symptoms better. Both LAMA and LABA must be rapid in their onset of action. Aclidinium/formoterol, a twice-daily combination, is the most studies of the available LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of impact on daytime and nocturnal symptoms.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Switching Following Moderate/Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation in Patients with Commercial or Medicare Insurance in the United States.

Purpose: There is limited literature regarding real-world treatment patterns of patients with COPD, particularly since the introduction of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol in 2017. Here, we evaluated treatment patterns of patients with COPD before and after a COPD exacerbation. Patients and Methods: Retrospective, descriptive study using medical and pharmacy claims data and enrollment information from the Optum® Clinformatics® Data Mart database. Patients aged ≥40 years with ≥1 COPD exacerbation on or after September 18, 2017 were included. The index date was the last day of the first COPD exacerbation (ie day of visit for a moderate exacerbation or discharge date for a severe exacerbation). The baseline period was 12 months prior to index and the follow-up period (≥3 months) spanned from index until the earliest of health plan disenrollment, end of data availability (September 30, 2020), or death. Treatment patterns were evaluated during baseline and follow-up, with a focus on medication switching in the 90 days pre- and post-index. Results: COPD exacerbations were identified in 307,727 patients (125,942 severe; 181,785 moderate). Mean age at index was 72.8 years; 56.3% were female. Before and after first exacerbation, 37.7% and 48.2% of patients used ≥1 controller medication, respectively. In the 90 days pre-index, ICS, LABA, and LAMA medications were used by 27.5% of patients. Of these users, 64.3% remained on the same medication class, 21.7% discontinued, and 14.1% switched medication in the 90 days post-index. Among switchers, 44.0% switched to triple therapy. Most common switches were ICS/LABA to ICS/LABA/LAMA (20.7%) and LAMA to ICS/LABA/LAMA (16.4%). Conclusion: Many COPD exacerbations occur among patients not on controller medications. Although the percentage of patients receiving a controller medication increased following a first exacerbation, it remained below 50%. Of patients receiving controller medications pre-exacerbation, only a small proportion escalated to triple therapy post-exacerbation.

The Role of Long-Acting Antimuscarinic Agents in the Treatment of Asthma.

The journey of using anticholinergics in the treatment of asthma started with anticholinergic-containing plants such as Datura stramonium and Atropa belladonna, followed by ipratropium bromide and continued with tiotropium, glycopyrronium, and umeclidinium. Although antimuscarinics were used in the maintenance treatment of asthma over a century ago, after a long time (since 2014), it has been recommended to be used as an add-on long-acting antimuscarinic agent (LAMA) therapy in the maintenance treatment of asthma. The airway tone controlled by the vagus nerve is increased in asthma. Allergens, toxins, or viruses cause airway inflammation and inflammation-related epithelial damage, increased sensory nerve stimulation, ganglionic and postganglionic acetylcholine (ACh) release by inflammatory mediators, intensification of ACh signaling at M1 and M3 muscarinic ACh receptors (mAChRs), and dysfunction of M2 mAChR. Optimal anticholinergic drug for asthma should effectively block M3 and M1 receptors, but have minimal effect on M2 receptors. Tiotropium, umeclidinium, and glycopyrronium are anticholinergic agents with this feature. Tiotropium has been used in a separate inhaler as an add-on treatment to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA), and glycopyrronium and umeclidinium have been used in a single inhaler as a combination of ICS/LABA/LAMA in asthma in recent years. Guidelines recommend this regimen as an optimization step for patients with severe asthma before initiating any biologic or systemic corticosteroid therapy. In this review, the history of antimuscarinic agents, their effectiveness and safety in line with randomized controlled trials, and real-life studies in asthma treatment will be discussed according to the current data.

Open and Closed Triple Inhaler Therapy in Patients with Uncontrolled Asthma.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a class of inhalers that has recently been included as add-on therapy in the GINA guidelines, either in a single inhaler device with inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß2-agonists (ICS + LABA) (closed triple inhaler therapy) or in a separate one (open triple inhaler therapy). This review summarizes the existing evidence on the addition of LAMAs in patients with persistently uncontrolled asthma despite ICS + LABA treatment based on clinical efficacy in the reduction of asthma symptoms and exacerbations, the improvement in lung function, and its safety profile.

Pharmacokinetic considerations surrounding triple therapy for uncontrolled asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Solid pharmacological rationale and clinical evidence support the use of a combination of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting ß2-agonist, and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist in severe asthma, which clinically results in increased lung function, improved symptoms, and decreased exacerbation rates. AREAS COVERED: We examined the pharmacokinetic issues associated with triple therapy for uncontrolled asthma. We considered the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the three drug classes, the role of inhalers in influencing their pharmacokinetic behavior, and the impact of severe asthma on the pharmacokinetics of inhaled drugs. EXPERT OPINION: The pharmacokinetics of ICSs and bronchodilators are not affected to a great extent by severe asthma, according to a detailed review of the currently accessible literature. Compared to healthy people, patients with severe asthma show only minor variations in a few pharmacokinetic characteristics, which are unlikely to have therapeutic significance and do not require particular attention. However, the difficulty of obtaining pharmacokinetic profiles of the three drugs included in a triple therapy suggests that the clinical response should be followed over time, which can be considered a good surrogate indicator of whether the drugs have reached sufficient concentrations in the lung to exert a valid pharmacological action.

Investigating the rationale for COPD maintenance therapy prescription across Europe, findings from a multi-country study.

This study aims to understand healthcare professionals' thoughts and motivations about optimal management and treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We conducted a DELPHI survey through an online questionnaire distributed to 220 panellists from six European countries and a discrete choice experiment to describe the relationship between selected clinical criteria and the initial COPD treatment of choice. One hundred twenty-seven panellists (general practitioners [GPs] and pulmonologists) completed the survey. Despite the familiarity and use (89.8%) of the GOLD classification for initial treatment selection, a frequent use of LAMA/LABA/ICS was noted. In fact, panellists agreed that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are over-prescribed in the primary care setting. Our study showed that GPs felt less confident than pulmonologists with ICS withdrawal. This mismatch observed between best practice and behaviour indicates the need to increase awareness and efforts to improve the adherence to guidelines in clinical practice.

Clinical and economic outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease initiating maintenance therapy with tiotropium bromide/olodaterol or fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend dual long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs)/long-acting ß2agonists (LABAs) as maintenance therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Escalation to triple therapy (TT) (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroid) is conditionally recommended for patients with continued exacerbations on dual LAMA/LABA therapy. Despite this guidance, TT use is widespread across COPD severities, which could impact clinical and economic outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare COPD exacerbations, pneumonia events, and disease-related and all-cause health care resource utilization and costs (in 2020 US dollars) in patients initiating fixed-dose combinations of either LAMA/LABA (tiotropium/olodaterol [TIO + OLO]) or TT (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF + UMEC + VI]). METHODS: This retrospective observational study of administrative claims included patients with COPD aged 40 years or older initiating TIO + OLO or FF + UMEC + VI from June 2015 to November 2019. TIO + OLO and FF + UMEC + VI cohorts in the overall and maintenance-naive populations were 1:1 propensity score matched on baseline demographics, comorbidities, COPD medications, health care resource utilization, and costs. Multivariable regression compared clinical and economic outcomes up to 12 months in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO postmatched cohorts. RESULTS: After matching, there were 5,658 and 3,025 pairs in the overall and maintenance-naive populations, respectively. In the overall population, the risk of any (moderate or severe) exacerbation was 7% lower in FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO initiators (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.86-1.0; P = 0.047). There was no difference in the adjusted risk of any exacerbation in the maintenance-naive population (aHR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.88-1.10). Pneumonia risk was not statistically different between cohorts in the overall (aHR = 1.12; 95% CI = 0.98-1.27) and maintenance-naive (aHR = 1.13; 95% CI = 0.95-1.36) populations. COPD- and/or pneumonia-related adjusted total annualized costs (95% CI) were significantly greater for FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall ($17,633 [16,661-18,604] vs $14,558 [13,709-15,407]; P < 0.001; differences [% of relative increase] = $3,075 [21.1%]) and maintenancenaive ($19,032 [17,466-20,598] vs $15,004 [13,786-16,223]; P < 0.001; $4,028 [26.8%]) populations, with significantly higher pharmacy costs with FF + UMEC + VI (overall: $6,567 [6,503-6,632] vs $4,729 [4,676-4,783]; P < 0.001; $1,838 [38.9%]; maintenance-naive: $6,642 [6,560-6,724] vs $4,750 [4,676-4,825]; P < 0.001; $1,892 [39.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: A lower risk of exacerbation was observed with FF + UMEC + VI vs TIO + OLO in the overall population but not among the maintenance-naive population. Patients with COPD initiating TIO + OLO had lower annualized costs than FF + UMEC + VI initiators in the overall and maintenance-naive populations. Thus, in the maintenance-naive population, initiation with dual LAMA/LABA therapy per practice guidelines can improve real-world economic outcomes. Study registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05127304). DISCLOSURES: The study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc (BIPI). To ensure independent interpretation of clinical study results and enable authors to fulfill their role and obligations under the ICMJE criteria, BIPI grants all external authors access to relevant clinical study data. In adherence with the BIPI Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data, scientific and medical researchers can request access to clinical study data after publication of the primary manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal, regulatory activities are complete and other criteria are met. Dr Sethi has received honoraria/fees for consulting/speaking from Astra-Zeneca, BIPI, and GlaxoSmithKline. He has received consulting fees for serving on data safety monitoring boards from Nuvaira and Pulmotect. He has received consulting fees from Apellis and Aerogen. His institution has received research funds for his participation in clinical trials from Regeneron and AstraZeneca. Ms Palli was an employee of BIPI at the time the study was conducted. Drs Clark and Shaikh are employees of BIPI. Ms Buysman and Mr Sargent are employees and Dr Bengtson was an employee of Optum, which was contracted by BIPI to conduct this study. Dr Ferguson reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; grants from Novartis, Altavant, and Knopp; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Verona, Theravance, Teva, and GlaxoSmithKline; and personal fees from Galderma, Orpheris, Dev.Pro, Syneos, and Ionis outside the submitted work. He was a paid consultant for BIPI for this study. The authors received no direct compensation related to the development of the manuscript. BIPI was given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations.

Treatment patterns in patients with stable COPD in China: analysis of a prospective, 52-week, nationwide, observational cohort study (REAL).

BACKGROUND: Underdiagnosis and undertreatment pose major barriers to optimal management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in China. OBJECTIVE: The REAL trial was performed to generate reliable information on real-world COPD management, outcomes and risk factors among Chinese patients. Here, we present study outcomes related to COPD management. DESIGN: It is a 52-week, prospective, observational, multicentre study. METHODS: Outpatients (aged ⩾40 years) enrolled from 50 secondary and tertiary hospitals across six geographic regions of China were followed up for 12 months, with two onsite visits and by telephone every 3 months following baseline. RESULTS: Between June 2017 and January 2019, 5013 patients were enrolled and 4978 included in the analysis. Mean [standard deviation (SD)] age was 66.2 (8.9) years, the majority of patients were male (79.5%) and mean (SD) time since COPD diagnosis was 3.8 (6.2) years. The most common treatments at each study visit were inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting beta-agonists (ICSs/LABAs; 28.3-36.0%), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; 13.0-16.2%) and ICS/LABA + LAMA (17.5-18.7%), but up to 15.8% of patients at each visit received neither ICS nor long-acting bronchodilators. The use of ICS/LABA, LAMA and ICS/LABA + LAMA differed across regions and hospital tiers; up to fivefold, more patients received neither ICS nor long-acting bronchodilators in secondary (17.3-25.4%) versus tertiary hospitals (5.0-5.3%). Overall, rates of nonpharmacological management were low. Direct treatment costs increased with disease severity, but the proportion of direct treatment costs incurred due to maintenance treatment decreased with disease severity. CONCLUSION: ICS/LABA, LAMA and ICS/LABA + LAMA were the most frequently prescribed maintenance treatments for patients with stable COPD in China, although their use differed between region and hospital tier. There is a clear need for improved COPD management across China, particularly in secondary hospitals. REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on 20 March 2017 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03131362; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03131362). PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Treatment patterns in patients with COPD in ChinaBackground: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic inflammatory lung disease characterized by progressive and irreversible airflow limitation. In China, many patients with this disease do not receive a diagnosis or appropriate treatment.Objective: This study aimed to generate reliable information on the treatment patterns among patients with COPD in China to help inform future management strategies.Study design and methods: Patients (aged ⩾40 years) were enrolled from 50 hospitals across 6 regions of China and physicians collected data over the course of 1 year during routine outpatient visits.Results: The majority of patients were receiving long-acting inhaled treatments, which are recommended to prevent worsening of the disease. Up to 16% of patients in this study, however, did not receive any of these recommended treatments. The proportion of patients who received long-acting inhaled treatments differed across regions and hospital tiers; there were about five times more patients in secondary hospitals (about 25%) who did not receive these treatments compared with those in tertiary hospitals (about 5%). Guidelines recommend that pharmacological treatment should be complemented by nondrug treatment, but this was only received by a minority of patients in this study. Patients with higher disease severity incurred greater direct treatment costs compared with those with milder disease. Maintenance treatment costs made up a smaller proportion of overall direct costs for patients with higher disease severity (60-76%) compared with patients with milder disease (81-94%).Conclusion: Long-acting inhaled treatments were the most frequently prescribed maintenance treatments among patients with COPD in China, but their use differed between region and hospital tier. There is a clear need to improve disease management across China, especially in secondary hospitals.

Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Utilization and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Initiating Single-Inhaler Long-Acting ß2-Agonist/Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Dual Therapy in Primary Care in England.

Purpose: Selection of treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may impact clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs. We aimed to characterize these outcomes along with treatment patterns, for patients with COPD following initiation of single-inhaler long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy in the primary care setting in England. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic medical record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care administrative data (Hospital Episode Statistics) in England to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a prescription for one of four single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies between 1st June 2015-31st December 2018 (indexing period). Outcomes were assessed during a 12-month follow-up period from the index date (date of earliest prescription of a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA within the indexing period). Incident users were those without previous LAMA/LABA dual therapy prescriptions prior to index; this manuscript focuses on a subset of incident users: non-triple therapy users (patients without concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use at index). Results: Of 10,991 incident users included, 9888 (90.0%) were non-triple therapy users, indexed on umeclidinium/vilanterol (n=4805), aclidinium/formoterol (n=2109), indacaterol/glycopyrronium (n=1785) and tiotropium/olodaterol (n=1189). At 3 months post-index, 63.3% of non-triple therapy users remained on a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA, and 22.1% had discontinued inhaled therapy. Most patients (86.9%) required general practitioner consultations in the first 3 months post-index. Inpatient stays were the biggest contributor to healthcare costs. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs), adherence, time-to-triple therapy, time-to-first on-treatment moderate-to-severe AECOPD, time-to-index treatment discontinuation, HCRU and healthcare costs were similar across indexed therapies. Conclusion: Patients initiating treatment with single-inhaler LAMA/LABA in primary care in England were unlikely to switch treatments in the first three months following initiation, but some may discontinue respiratory medication. Outcomes were similar across indexed treatments.

Open-inhaler versus single-inhaler triple therapy (long-acting muscarinic antagonist, inhaled corticosteroid, and long-acting ß2-agonist) in asthma patients: a narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the use of open-inhaler (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] plus long-acting ß2-agonist [LABA] with separate add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) versus single-inhaler triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA combination) and the merits of add-on LAMA to ICS/LABA in patients with uncontrolled asthma. DATA SOURCES: Original research articles were identified from PubMed using the search term "triple therapy asthma." Information was also retrieved from the ClinicalTrials.gov website. STUDY SELECTIONS: Articles detailing the use of add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open-inhaler triple therapy), and closed triple therapy compared with ICS plus LABA dual therapy, addressing patient symptoms, exacerbations, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Open-inhaler triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of hospitalizations and emergency department visits and a decrease in ICS dose, oral corticosteroids use, and antibiotics use. Exacerbations and acute respiratory events were also reduced. Single-inhaler triple therapy showed a greater improvement in lung function, asthma control, and health status and was noninferior to open-inhaler triple therapy for Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores. Single-inhaler triple therapy may also lead to improved therapy adherence. CONCLUSION: Add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open- or single-inhaler triple therapy) improves the response in patients who remain symptomatic and provides a reasonable alternative to ICS dose escalation in treatment-refractory patients.

Prevalence of Uncontrolled Asthma despite Treatment with Medium- or High-Dose ICS/LABA Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Japan: The KOCU (KnOwing the Controlled statUs of Asthma in Japan) Study.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence on the prevalence of uncontrolled asthma upon the standard of care in Japan is scarce and inconsistent. We report the prevalence of uncontrolled asthma using the Japanese Guidelines for Asthma (JGL) 2018 and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2019 classifications in patients who are currently receiving standard-of-care treatment in a real-life setting. METHODS: In this prospective, 12-week, noninterventional study, patients with asthma aged 20-75 years and continuously treated with medium- or high-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA, with or without other controller(s), were assessed for their asthma control status. The demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and adherence to prescribed treatments were assessed for patients classified as either controlled or uncontrolled. RESULTS: Of 454 patients, 53.7% and 36.3% of the patients reported their asthma as uncontrolled based on the JGL and GINA criteria, respectively. Uncontrolled asthma was even higher (JGL, 75.0%; GINA, 63.5%) within the subpopulation of 52 patients receiving long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; i.e., ICS/LABA/LAMA subpopulation). Sensitivity analysis by propensity matching identified significant odds ratios of controlled versus uncontrolled asthma for several demographics and clinical characteristics: male; sensitization to animals, fungi, or birch; comorbidities including food allergy or diabetes; and history of exacerbation were associated with the risk of uncontrolled asthma. No significant changes in PROs were observed. CONCLUSION: The frequency of uncontrolled asthma in the study population was high, as per JGL and GINA guidelines, despite good adherence to ICS/LABA treatment and other prescribed treatments over 12 weeks.

Combination therapy with long-acting bronchodilators and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves clinical symptoms and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and reduces exacerbation risk. However, there is a growing concern that LAMA/LABA therapy may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the use of LAMA/LABA combination therapy modifies the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs of LAMA/LABA or LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the management of patients with COPD that reported on cardiovascular end-points. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke. RESULTS: A total of 51 RCTs enrolling 91 021 subjects were analysed. Both dual LAMA/LABA (1.6% versus 1.3%; relative risk 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81) and triple therapy (1.6% versus 1.4%; relative risk 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) significantly increased the risk of MACE compared with ICS/LABA. The excess risk was most evident in RCTs in which the average underlying baseline risk for MACE was >1% per year. Compared with LAMA only, LABA only or placebo, dual LAMA/LABA therapy did not significantly increase the risk of MACE, though these comparisons may have lacked sufficient statistical power. CONCLUSION: Compared with ICS/LABA, dual LAMA/LABA or triple therapy increases cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD. This should be considered in the context of the incremental benefits of these therapies for symptoms and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD, especially in those with a MACE risk of >1% per year.

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of different inhaled therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with frequent cough.

BACKGROUND: Cough is a common symptom in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients with cough may exhibit various clinical characteristics and experience varying outcomes based on inhaled therapies they receive. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the clinical characteristics and outcomes of various inhaled therapies in COPD patients with frequent cough. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Of these patients, the median cough score in COPD assessment test (CAT) was two. Patients were classified into frequent cough group if they scored two or over in the first item of CAT and infrequent cough group otherwise. Patients with frequent cough were then divided into long-acting antimuscarinic (LAMA), long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA)/LAMA, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/LABA and ICS/LABA/LAMA groups. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) (CAT scores decreased ≥2 from baseline) and the improvement of cough (cough score decreased ≥1 from baseline) were collected in the six-month follow-up. Frequent exacerbations (experiencing at least two exacerbations) were collected in the one-year follow-up. RESULTS: Of 906 patients, 581 (64.1%) patients reported frequent cough at the initial visit. Frequent cough was associated with the current smokers and CAT scores (p < 0.05). The MCID showed no significant difference between frequent cough and infrequent cough groups in the follow-up. More patients with frequent cough experienced future frequent exacerbations compared to those with infrequent cough. After receiving inhaled therapies, 62% of patients with frequent cough got the cough improved. More patients with frequent cough treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA attained MCID and fewer experienced exacerbations than those treated with LAMA or ICS/LABA (p < 0.05). The change in cough score showed no difference among various inhaled therapies in patients with frequent cough. CONCLUSION: COPD patients with frequent cough were related to current smokers and higher CAT scores. These patients had a higher incidence of frequent exacerbations than those with infrequent cough. Patients with frequent cough who were treated with LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA/LAMA were more likely to attain MCID and at a lower risk of exacerbation than those treated with LAMA or ICS/LABA.

Effectiveness and tolerability of dual and triple combination inhaler therapies compared with each other and varying doses of inhaled corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend a higher-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) when asthma is not controlled with medium-dose (MD) ICS/long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) combination therapy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual (ICS/LABA) and triple therapies (ICS/LABA/LAMA) compared with each other and with varying doses of ICS in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma. SEARCH METHODS: We searched multiple databases for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks of study duration from 2008 to 18 February 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched studies, including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with, or were eligible for, MD-ICS/LABA, comparing dual and triple therapies. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to the previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations and asthma-related hospitalisations (moderate to severe and severe exacerbations). MAIN RESULTS: We included 17,161 patients with uncontrolled asthma from 17 studies (median duration 26 weeks; mean age 49.1 years; male 40%; white 81%; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (MEF 1)1.9 litres and 61% predicted). The quality of included studies was generally good except for some outcomes in a few studies due to high attrition rates. Medium-dose (MD) and high-dose (HD) triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.71 to 0.99] and 0.69 [0.58 to 0.82], respectively) (high-certainty evidence), but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA. High-dose triple therapy likely reduces steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations compared to MD triple therapy (HR 0.83 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.996], [moderate certainty]). Subgroup analyses suggest the reduction in steroid-requiring exacerbations associated with triple therapies may be only for those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year but not for those without. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause adverse events (AEs) and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.79 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.90], [high certainty] and 0.50 [95% CrI 0.30 to 0.84], [moderate certainty], respectively). Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to dual therapy (high certainty). The evidence suggests triple therapy results in little or no clinically important difference in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Medium-dose and HD triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations, but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA especially in those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year. High-dose triple therapy is likely superior to MD triple therapy in reducing steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations. Triple therapy is unlikely to result in clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the MCIDs. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause AEs and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA. Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related SAEs compared to dual therapy. HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA, although long-term safety of higher rather than MD- ICS remains to be demonstrated given the median duration of included studies was six months. The above findings may assist deciding on a treatment option when asthma is not controlled with MD-ICS/LABA.

Pharmacotherapy of LAMA/LABA inhaled therapy combinations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical overview.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA)/ß2-agonist (LABA) combinations represent a significant improvement in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to their remarkable ability to improve lung function, dyspnea, quality of life, and exercise capacity compared to mono-components. AREAS COVERED: This article aims to report the latest information on the clinical impact of dual bronchodilation in COPD. EXPERT OPINION: The available data supports the use of inhaled LAMA/LABA FDCs in treating COPD patients, particularly those with severe or very severe disease. These combinations provide short - and long-term benefits to COPD patients without increasing the dose of the single components, which reduces the risk of adverse events while ensuring an improvement in clinical efficacy. Unfortunately, head-to-head studies comparing all exiting LABA/LAMA combinations are relatively few. Since each available LAMA/LABA combination has a unique efficacy/safety profile that must be considered for personalized COPD therapy, further randomized controlled trials and real-world studies lasting at least one year are needed to assess what differences, if any, there are in terms of clinical outcomes when dual LAMA/LABA inhalers are compared to LAMA or LABA single inhalers, and to compare different LAMA/LABA FDCs.

Economic impact of implementing prescription of single-inhaler triple therapies versus current multiple-inhaler triple therapies for COPD in the Apulia Region.

BACKGROUND: The most impacting direct costs associated to COPD for the National Health Systems (NHS) are those related to accesses to the emergency room and hospital admissions, due to the onset of one or more COPD exacerbations. At the same time, severe COPD treatment, that often require a combination of medicaments, represents a substantial economic burden for the National Health Systems (NHS). This study aimed to evaluate the potential saving deriving from the implementation in the prescription of the two currently available single-inhaler triple therapies (SITTs) versus the currently used multiple-inhaler triple therapies (MITTs) in an eligible COPD population residing in the Apulia Region. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed hypothesizing the progressive replacement of the different MITTs on the reference market (Scenario A) with the pre-established SITTs, assuming a degree of penetration of 30%, 50% and 100% (Scenario B). Drug costs were based on prices published on the Official Gazette and therapy durations were based on prescribing information over the year 2019 (IQVIA™ prescription dataset). RESULTS: Our analysis showed that the extemporaneous MITT with the highest prevalence on the reference market was the inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (ICS/LABA) combination plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). This association of medicaments was paradoxically also the one associated to the highest expense value. The expanded use of a pre-established ICS/LAMA/LABA SITT was associated to a significant economic saving, ranging from a minimum of -€ 1,108,814 (SITT use: 30%) to a maximum of -€ 3,658,950 (SITT use: 100%). The cheapest pre-established SITT contained the fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) combination. CONCLUSION: A pre-fixed ICS/LAMA/LABA SITT is cost-saving, compared to the different currently used extemporaneous MITTs. Clinicians should consider the potential benefits of finding less expensive regimens while maintaining adequate efficacy in the prescriptive decision making process of COPD patients.

Different inhaled corticosteroid doses in triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis is necessary to evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple therapy with different doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We selected 26 parallel randomized controlled trials (41,366 patients) comparing triple therapy with ICS/long-acting beta-agonist (LABA), LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and LAMA in patients with stable COPD for ≥ 12 weeks from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registries (search from inception to June 30, 2022). Triple therapy with high dose (HD)-ICS exhibited a lower risk of total exacerbation in pre-specified subgroups treated for ≥ 48 weeks than that with low dose (LD)-ICS (odds ratio [OR] = 0.66, 95% credible interval [CrI] = 0.52-0.94, low certainty of evidence) or medium dose (MD)-ICS (OR = 0.66, 95% CrI = 0.51-0.94, low certainty of evidence). Triple therapy with HD-ICS exhibited a lower risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbation in pre-specified subgroups with forced expiratory volume in 1 s < 65% (OR = 0.6, 95% CrI = 0.37-0.98, low certainty of evidence) or previous exacerbation history (OR = 0.6, 95% CrI = 0.36-0.999, very low certainty of evidence) than triple therapy with MD-ICS. Triple therapy with HD-ICS may reduce acute exacerbation in patients with COPD treated with other drug classes including triple therapy with LD- or MD-ICS or dual therapies.