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.

[Standard technical specifications for methacholine chloride (Methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023)].

The methacholine challenge test (MCT) is a standard evaluation method of assessing airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and its severity, and has significant clinical value in the diagnosis and treatment of bronchial asthma. A consensus working group consisting of experts from the Pulmonary Function and Clinical Respiratory Physiology Committee of the Chinese Association of Chest Physicians, the Task Force for Pulmonary Function of the Chinese Thoracic Society, and the Pulmonary Function Group of Respiratory Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Society jointly developed this consensus. Based on the "Guidelines for Pulmonary Function-Bronchial Provocation Test" published in 2014, the issues encountered in its use, and recent developments, the group has updated the Standard technical specifications of methacholine chloride (methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023). Through an extensive collection of expert opinions, literature reviews, questionnaire surveys, and multiple rounds of online and offline discussions, the consensus addressed the eleven core issues in MCT's clinical practice, including indications, contraindications, preparation of provocative agents, test procedures and methods, quality control, safety management, interpretation of results, and reporting standards. The aim was to provide clinical pulmonary function practitioners in healthcare institutions with the tools to optimize the use of this technique to guide clinical diagnosis and treatment.Summary of recommendationsQuestion 1: Who is suitable for conducting MCT? What are contraindications for performing MCT?Patients with atypical symptoms and a clinical suspicion of asthma, patients diagnosed with asthma requiring assessment of the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness, individuals with allergic rhinitis who are at risk of developing asthma, patients in need of evaluating the effectiveness of asthma treatment, individuals in occupations with high safety risks due to airway hyperresponsiveness, patients with chronic diseases prone to airway hyperresponsiveness, others requiring assessment of airway reactivity.Absolute contraindications: (1) Patients who are allergic to methacholine (MCh) or other parasympathomimetic drugs, with allergic reactions including rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face, tongue, and throat), severe dizziness, and dyspnea; (2) Patients with a history of life-threatening asthma attacks or those who have required mechanical ventilation for asthma attacks in the past three months; (3) Patients with moderate to severe impairment of baseline pulmonary function [Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) less than 60% of the predicted value or FEV1<1.0 L]; (4) Severe urticaria; (5) Other situations inappropriate for forced vital capacity (FVC) measurement, such as myocardial infarction or stroke in the past three months, poorly controlled hypertension, aortic aneurysm, recent eye surgery, or increased intracranial pressure.Relative contraindications: (1) Moderate or more severe impairment of baseline lung function (FEV1%pred<70%), but individuals with FEV1%pred>60% may still be considered for MCT with strict observation and adequate preparation; (2) Experiencing asthma acute exacerbation; (3) Poor cooperation with baseline lung function tests that do not meet quality control requirements; (4) Recent respiratory tract infection (<4 weeks); (5) Pregnant or lactating women; (6) Patients currently using cholinesterase inhibitors (for the treatment of myasthenia gravis); (7) Patients who have previously experienced airway spasm during pulmonary function tests, with a significant decrease in FEV1 even without the inhalation of provocative.Question 2: How to prepare and store the challenge solution for MCT?Before use, the drug must be reconstituted and then diluted into various concentrations for provocation. The dilution concentration and steps for MCh vary depending on the inhalation method and provocation protocol used. It is important to follow specific steps. Typically, a specified amount of diluent is added to the methacholine reagent bottle for reconstitution, and the mixture is shaken until the solution becomes clear. The diluent is usually physiological saline, but saline with phenol (0.4%) can also be used. Phenol can reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination, and its presence does not interfere with the provocation test. After reconstitution, other concentrations of MCh solution are prepared using the same diluent, following the dilution steps, and then stored separately in sterile containers. Preparers should carefully verify and label the concentration and preparation time of the solution and complete a preparation record form. The reconstituted and diluted MCh solution is ready for immediate use without the need for freezing. It can be stored for two weeks if refrigerated (2-8 ℃). The reconstituted solution should not be stored directly in the nebulizer reservoir to prevent crystallization from blocking the capillary opening and affecting aerosol output. The temperature of the solution can affect the production of the nebulizer and cause airway spasms in the subject upon inhaling cold droplets. Thus, refrigerated solutions should be brought to room temperature before use.Question 3: What preparation is required for subjects prior to MCT?(1) Detailed medical history inquiry and exclusion of contraindications.(2) Inquiring about factors and medications that may affect airway reactivity and assessing compliance with medication washout requirements: When the goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of asthma treatment, bronchodilators other than those used for asthma treatment do not need to be discontinued. Antihistamines and cromolyn have no effect on MCT responses, and the effects of a single dose of inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers are minimal, thus not requiring cessation before the test. For patients routinely using corticosteroids, whether to discontinue the medication depends on the objective of the test: if assisting in the diagnosis of asthma, differential diagnosis, aiding in step-down therapy for asthma, or exploring the effect of discontinuing anti-inflammatory treatment, corticosteroids should be stopped before the provocation test; if the patient is already diagnosed with asthma and the objective is to observe the level of airway reactivity under controlled medication conditions, then discontinuation is not necessary. Medications such as IgE monoclonal antibodies, IL-4Rα monoclonal antibodies, traditional Chinese medicine, and ethnic medicines may interfere with test results, and clinicians should decide whether to discontinue these based on the specific circumstances.(3) Explaining the test procedure and potential adverse reactions, and obtaining informed consent if necessary.Question 4: What are the methods of the MCT? And which ones are recommended in current clinical practice?Commonly used methods for MCT in clinical practice include the quantitative nebulization method (APS method), Forced Oscillalion method (Astograph method), 2-minute tidal breathing method (Cockcroft method), hand-held quantitative nebulization method (Yan method), and 5-breath method (Chai 5-breath method). The APS method allows for precise dosing of inhaled Methacholine, ensuring accurate and reliable results. The Astograph method, which uses respiratory resistance as an assessment indicator, is easy for subjects to perform and is the simplest operation. These two methods are currently the most commonly used clinical practice in China.Question 5: What are the steps involved in MCT?The MCT consists of the following four steps:(1) Baseline lung function test: After a 15-minute rest period, the subjects assumes a seated position and wear a nose clip for the measurement of pulmonary function indicators [such as FEV1 or respiratory resistance (Rrs)]. FEV1 should be measured at least three times according to spirometer quality control standards, ensuring that the best two measurements differ by less than 150 ml and recording the highest value as the baseline. Usually, if FEV1%pred is below 70%, proceeding with the challenge test is not suitable, and a bronchodilation test should be considered. However, if clinical assessment of airway reactivity is necessary and FEV1%pred is between 60% and 70%, the provocation test may still be conducted under close observation, ensuring the subject's safety. If FEV1%pred is below 60%, it is an absolute contraindication for MCT.(2) Inhalation of diluent and repeat lung function test for control values: the diluent, serving as a control for the inhaled MCh, usually does not significantly impact the subject's lung function. the higher one between baseline value and the post-dilution FEV1 is used as the reference for calculating the rate of FEV1 decline. If post-inhalation FEV1 decreases, there are usually three scenarios: ①If FEV1 decreases by less than 10% compared to the baseline, the test can proceed, continue the test and administer the first dose of MCh. ②If the FEV1 decreases by≥10% and<20%, indicating a heightened airway reactivity to the diluent, proceed with the lowest concentration (dose) of the provoking if FEV1%pred has not yet reached the contraindication criteria for the MCT. if FEV1%pred<60% and the risk of continuing the challenge test is considerable, it is advisable to switch to a bronchodilation test and indicate the change in the test results report. ③If FEV1 decreases by≥20%, it can be directly classified as a positive challenge test, and the test should be discontinued, with bronchodilators administered to alleviate airway obstruction.(3) Inhalation of MCh and repeat lung function test to assess decline: prepare a series of MCh concentrations, starting from the lowest and gradually increasing the inhaled concentration (dose) using different methods. Perform pulmonaryfunction tests at 30 seconds and 90 seconds after completing nebulization, with the number of measurements limited to 3-4 times. A complete Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement is unnecessary during testing; only an acceptable FEV1 measurement is required. The interval between two consecutive concentrations (doses) generally should not exceed 3 minutes. If FEV1 declines by≥10% compared to the control value, reduce the increment of methacholine concentration (dose) and adjust the inhalation protocol accordingly. If FEV1 declines by≥20% or more compared to the control value or if the maximum concentration (amount) has been inhaled, the test should be stopped. After inhaling the MCh, close observation of the subject's response is necessary. If necessary, monitor blood oxygen saturation and auscultate lung breath sounds. The test should be promptly discontinued in case of noticeable clinical symptoms or signs.(4) Inhalation of bronchodilator and repeat lung function test to assess recovery: when the bronchial challenge test shows a positive response (FEV1 decline≥20%) or suspiciously positive, the subject should receive inhaled rapid-acting bronchodilators, such as short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) or short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMA). Suppose the subject exhibits obvious symptoms of breathlessness, wheezing, or typical asthma manifestations, and wheezing is audible in the lungs, even if the positive criteria are not met. In that case, the challenge test should be immediately stopped, and rapid-acting bronchodilators should be administered. Taking salbutamol as an example, inhale 200-400 µg (100 µg per puff, 2-4 puffs, as determined by the physician based on the subject's condition). Reassess pulmonary function after 5-10 minutes. If FEV1 recovers to within 10% of the baseline value, the test can be concluded. However, if there is no noticeable improvement (FEV1 decline still≥10%), record the symptoms and signs and repeat the bronchodilation procedure as mentioned earlier. Alternatively, add Ipratropium bromide (SAMA) or further administer nebulized bronchodilators and corticosteroids for intensified treatment while keeping the subject under observation until FEV1 recovers to within 90% of the baseline value before allowing the subject to leave.Question 6: What are the quality control requirements for the APS and Astograph MCT equipment?(1) APS Method Equipment Quality Control: The APS method for MCT uses a nebulizing inhalation device that requires standardized flowmeters, compressed air power source pressure and flow, and nebulizer aerosol output. Specific quality control methods are as follows:a. Flow and volume calibration of the quantitative nebulization device: Connect the flowmeter, an empty nebulization chamber, and a nebulization filter in sequence, attaching the compressed air source to the bottom of the chamber to ensure airtight connections. Then, attach a 3 L calibration syringe to the subject's breathing interface and simulate the flow during nebulization (typically low flow:<2 L/s) to calibrate the flow and volume. If calibration results exceed the acceptable range of the device's technical standards, investigate and address potential issues such as air leaks or increased resistance due to a damp filter, then recalibrate. Cleaning the flowmeter or replacing the filter can change the resistance in the breathing circuit, requiring re-calibration of the flow.b. Testing the compressed air power source: Regularly test the device, connecting the components as mentioned above. Then, block the opening of the nebulization device with a stopper or hand, start the compressed air power source, and test its pressure and flow. If the test results do not meet the technical standards, professional maintenance of the equipment may be required.c. Verification of aerosol output of the nebulization chamber: Regularly verify all nebulization chambers used in provocation tests. Steps include adding a certain amount of saline to the chamber, weighing and recording the chamber's weight (including saline), connecting the nebulizer to the quantitative nebulization device, setting the nebulization time, starting nebulization, then weighing and recording the post-nebulization weight. Calculate the unit time aerosol output using the formula [(weight before nebulization-weight after nebulization)/nebulization time]. Finally, set the nebulization plan for the provocation test based on the aerosol output, considering the MCh concentration, single inhalation nebulization duration, number of nebulization, and cumulative dose to ensure precise dosing of the inhaled MCh.(2) Astograph method equipment quality control: Astograph method equipment for MCT consists of a respiratory resistance monitoring device and a nebulization medication device. Perform zero-point calibration, volume calibration, impedance verification, and nebulization chamber checks daily before tests to ensure the resistance measurement system and nebulization system function properly. Calibration is needed every time the equipment is turned on, and more frequently if there are significant changes in environmental conditions.a. Zero-point calibration: Perform zero-point calibration before testing each subject. Ensure the nebulization chamber is properly installed and plugged with no air leaks.b. Volume calibration: Use a 3 L calibration syringe to calibrate the flow sensor at a low flow rate (approximately 1 L/s).c. Resistance verification: Connect low impedance tubes (1.9-2.2 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) and high impedance tubes (10.2-10.7 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) to the device interface for verification.d. Bypass check: Start the bypass check and record the bypass value; a value>150 ml/s is normal.e. Nebulization chamber check: Check each of the 12 nebulization chambers daily, especially those containing bronchodilators, to ensure normal spraying. The software can control each nebulization chamber to produce spray automatically for a preset duration (e.g., 2 seconds). Observe the formation of water droplets on the chamber walls, indicating normal spraying. If no nebulization occurs, check for incorrect connections or blockages.Question 7: How to set up and select the APS method in MCT?The software program of the aerosol provocation system in the quantitative nebulization method can independently set the nebulizer output, concentration of the methacholine agent, administration time, and number of administrations and combine these parameters to create the challenge test process. In principle, the concentration of the methacholine agent should increase from low to high, and the dose should increase from small to large. According to the standard, a 2-fold or 4-fold incremental challenge process is generally used. In clinical practice, the dose can be simplified for subjects with good baseline lung function and no history of wheezing, such as using a recommended 2-concentration, 5-step method (25 and 50 g/L) and (6.25 and 25 g/L). Suppose FEV1 decreases by more than 10% compared to the baseline during the test to ensure subject safety. In that case, the incremental dose of the methacholine agent can be reduced, and the inhalation program can be adjusted appropriately. If the subject's baseline lung function declines or has recent daytime or nighttime symptoms such as wheezing or chest tightness, a low concentration, low dose incremental process should be selected.Question 8: What are the precautions for the operation process of the Astograph method in MCT?(1) Test equipment: The Astograph method utilizes the forced oscillation technique, applying a sinusoidal oscillating pressure at the mouthpiece during calm breathing. Subjects inhale nebulized MCh of increasing concentrations while continuous monitoring of respiratory resistance (Rrs) plots the changes, assessing airway reactivity and sensitivity. The nebulization system employs jet nebulization technology, comprising a compressed air pump and 12 nebulization cups. The first cup contains saline, cups 2 to 11 contain increasing concentrations of MCh, and the 12th cup contains a bronchodilator solution.(2) Provocation process: Prepare 10 solutions of MCh provocant with gradually increasing concentrations.(3) Operational procedure: The oscillation frequency is usually set to 3 Hz (7 Hz for children) during the test. The subject breathes calmly, inhales saline solution nebulized first, and records the baseline resistance value (if the subject's baseline resistance value is higher than 10 cmH2O·L-1·s-1, the challenge test should not be performed). Then, the subject gradually inhales increasing concentrations of methacholine solution. Each concentration solution is inhaled for 1 minute, and the nebulization system automatically switches to the next concentration for inhalation according to the set time. Each nebulizer cup contains 2-3 ml of solution, the output is 0.15 ml/min, and each concentration is inhaled for 1 minute. The dose-response curve is recorded automatically. Subjects should breathe tidally during the test, avoiding deep breaths and swallowing. Continue until Rrs significantly rises to more than double the baseline value, or if the subject experiences notable respiratory symptoms or other discomfort, such as wheezing in both lungs upon auscultation. At this point, the inhalation of the provocant should be stopped and the subject switchs to inhaling a bronchodilator until Rrs returns to pre-provocation levels. If there is no significant increase in Rrs, stop the test after inhaling the highest concentration of MCh.Question 9: How to interpret the results of the MCT?The method chosen for the MCT determines the specific indicators used for interpretation. The most commonly used indicator is FEV1, although other parameters such as Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Rrs can also be used to assess airway hyperresponsiveness.Qualitative judgment: The test results can be classified as positive, suspiciously positive, or negative, based on a combination of the judgment indicators and changes in the subject's symptoms. If FEV1 decreases by≥20% compared to the baseline value after not completely inhaling at the highest concentration, the result can be judged as positive for Methacholine bronchial challenge test. If the patient has obvious wheezing symptoms or wheezing is heard in both lungs, but the challenge test does not meet the positive criteria (the highest dose/concentration has been inhaled), and FEV1 decreases between 10% and 20% compared to the baseline level, the result can also be judged as positive. If FEV1 decreases between 15% and 20% compared to the baseline value without dyspnea or wheezing attacks, the result can be judged as suspiciously positive. Astograph method: If Rrs rises to 2 times or more of the baseline resistance before reaching the highest inhalation concentration, or if the subject's lungs have wheezing and severe coughing, the challenge test can be judged as positive. Regardless of the result of the Methacholine bronchial challenge test, factors that affect airway reactivity, such as drugs, seasons, climate, diurnal variations, and respiratory tract infections, should be excluded.Quantitative judgment: When using the APS method, the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness can be graded based on PD20-FEV1 or PC20-FEV1. Existing evidence suggests that PD20 shows good consistency when different nebulizers, inhalation times, and starting concentrations of MCh are used for bronchial provocation tests, whereas there is more variability with PC20. Therefore, PD20 is often recommended as the quantitative assessment indicator. The threshold value for PD20 with the APS method is 2.5 mg.The Astograph method often uses the minimum cumulative dose (Dmin value, in Units) to reflect airway sensitivity. Dmin is the minimum cumulative dose of MCh required to produce a linear increase in Rrs. A dose of 1 g/L of the drug concentration inhaled for 1-minute equals 1 unit. It's important to note that with the continuous increase in inhaled provocant concentration, the concept of cumulative dose in the Astograph method should not be directly compared to other methods. Most asthma patients have a Dmin<10 Units, according to Japanese guidelines. The Astograph method, having been used in China for over twenty years, suggests a high likelihood of asthma when Dmin≤6 Units, with a smaller Dmin value indicating a higher probability. When Dmin is between 6 and 10 Units, further differential diagnosis is advised to ascertain whether the condition is asthma.Precautions:A negative methacholine challenge test (MCT) does not entirely rule out asthma. The test may yield negative results due to the following reasons:(1) Prior use of medications that reduce airway responsiveness, such as ß2 agonists, anticholinergic drugs, antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, theophylline, corticosteroids, etc., and insufficient washout time.(2) Failure to meet quality control standards in terms of pressure, flow rate, particle size, and nebulization volume of the aerosol delivery device.(3) Poor subject cooperation leads to inadequate inhalation of the methacholine agent.(4) Some exercise-induced asthma patients may not be sensitive to direct bronchial challenge tests like the Methacholine challenge and require indirect bronchial challenge tests such as hyperventilation, cold air, or exercise challenge to induce a positive response.(5) A few cases of occupational asthma may only react to specific antigens or sensitizing agents, requiring specific allergen exposure to elicit a positive response.A positive MCT does not necessarily indicate asthma. Other conditions can also present with airway hyperresponsiveness and yield positive results in the challenge test, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic bronchitis, viral upper respiratory infections, allergic alveolitis, tropical eosinophilia, cystic fibrosis, sarcoidosis, bronchiectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, post-cardiopulmonary transplant, congestive heart failure, and more. Furthermore, factors like smoking, air pollution, or exercise before the test may also result in a positive bronchial challenge test.Question 10: What are the standardized requirements for the MCT report?The report should include: (1) basic information about the subject; (2) examination data and graphics: present baseline data, measurement data after the last two challenge doses or concentrations in tabular form, and the percentage of actual measured values compared to the baseline; flow-volume curve and volume-time curve before and after challenge test; dose-response curve: showing the threshold for positive challenge; (3) opinions and conclusions of the report: including the operator's opinions, quality rating of the examination, and review opinions of the reviewing physician.Question 11: What are the adverse reactions and safety measures of MCT?During the MCT, the subject needs to repeatedly breathe forcefully and inhale bronchial challenge agents, which may induce or exacerbate bronchospasm and contraction and may even cause life-threatening situations. Medical staff should be fully aware of the indications, contraindications, medication use procedures, and emergency response plans for the MCT.

Zataria multiflora affects pulmonary function tests, respiratory symptoms, bronchodilator drugs use and hematological parameters in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomized doubled-blind clinical trial.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Zataria multiflora is employed as an antitussive, anti-spasmodic, analgesic and etc. Agent in traditional medicine. The modern medical studies are also confirmed effects of this plant for treatment of respiratory problems via anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant and immunomodulatory properties. AIM OF STUDY: We evaluated efficacy of Z. multiflora on tests of pulmonary function, respiratory symptoms, inhaled bronchodilator drugs use, and hematological factors in COPD patients. METHODS: Patients (n = 45) were randomly grouped in the following three groups: placebo group (P), groups received Z. multiflora extract 3 and 6 mg/kg/day (Z3 and Z6). FEV1 and MEF25-75, respiratory symptoms, inhaled bronchodilator drugs use and hematological factors were evaluated before and 1-2 months after treatment. RESULTS: Z. multiflora led to significant enhancement of FEV1 (p < 0.05 to p < 0.01). Respiratory symptoms were also considerably ameliorated following treatment with extracts for 1 and 2 months compared to baseline values (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001). In groups received extract, inhaled bronchodilator drugs use was remarkably declined at the end of study (both, p < 0.05). Reduction of total WBC was observed 1-2 months after treatment in treated groups with extract compared to baseline values (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001). Neutrophils were remarkably declined in Z3 and Z6 groups after 2-monthes compared to 1-month treatment (p < 0.05 to p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The evidence show therapeutic effect of this herb on COPD patients which could be result from properties that help to decrease inflammation.

The Bronchodilator Potential of Astragalus sarcocolla: An in vitro Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the bronchodilatory mechanism of Astragalus sarcocolla (ASE) extract on tracheal smooth muscles of rabbits. STUDY DESIGN: In-vitro experimental study. Place and Duration of the Study: The animal house of CMH Lahore Medical College, Lahore, and Institute of Dentistry, NUMS, from October 2022 to May 2023. METHODOLOGY: Six rabbits were randomly divided into four groups. After euthanising the rabbit, the trachea was carefully dissected out and stabilised in Kreb's Henseleit solution for 30 minutes and then, stimulated by acetylcholine (Ach) 1µm, under mimicked physiological conditions. Group I served as the control group with tracheal smooth muscles stabilised with 1g tension. In Group II (positive control), tracheal smooth muscles were stimulated by potassium chloride (KCl) (80 mM and 25 mM, respectively) to get maximum tracheal smooth muscle contractions. Later, the tissue was exposed to theophylline with three molar concentrations 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 mM, and cumulative dose response curves were formed. In Group III (ASE group), tracheal smooth muscles were stimulated by KCl (80 mM and 25 mM) and was exposed to increasing concentration of ASE. In group IV, tissue was stimulated by KCl (25 mM) and glibenclamide (3 µM), later exposed to increasing concentration of ASE to confirm the bronchodilatory mechanism. The change in isometric contraction of the tissue was recorded using the force displacement transducer connected to a PowerLab data acquisition system. Concentration response curves were drawn, and median effective concentrations (EC50 values) and percentage inhibition were calculated. Non-linear regression was applied for the analysis of the concentration-response curves. RESULTS: ASE inhibited the KCl-induced low potassium (25 mM) contractions (EC50 = 0.38 mg/ml, 95% CI: 0.04 - 0.38, n = 6). It only partially inhibited the high potassium-induced contractions in tracheal smooth muscles. Pretreatment with glibenclamide showed a rightward shift of the dose-response curve. Theophylline and ASE significantly reduced the low K+ induced smooth muscle contractions in comparison to the control group (p <0.001, each). CONCLUSION: Astragalus sarcocolla extract produced bronchodilator effects through the activation of ATP sensitive potassium channels in isolated rabbit trachea. KEY WORDS: Astragalus sarcocolla, Bronchodilators, ATP-sensitive potassium channels, Effective concentration 50, Concentration response curves.

Tiotropium reduces clinically important deterioration in patients with mild-to-moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A post hoc analysis of the Tie-COPD study.

BACKGROUND: Clinically important deterioration (CID) is a composite endpoint used to holistically assess the complex progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium improves lung function and reduces the rate of COPD exacerbations in patients with COPD of Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage 1 (mild) or 2 (moderate). However, whether tiotropium reduces CID risk in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD remains unclear. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the 24-month Tie-COPD study comparing 18 µg tiotropium with placebo in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD. CID was defined as a decrease of ≥100 mL in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, an increase of ≥2 unit in COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score, or moderate-to-severe exacerbation. The time to the first occurrence of one of these events was recorded as the time to the first CID. Subgroup analyses were conducted among patients stratified by CAT score, modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea score, and GOLD stage at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 841 randomized patients, 771 were included in the full analysis set. Overall, 643 patients (83.4 %) experienced at least one CID event. Tiotropium significantly reduced the CID risk and delayed the time to first CID compared with placebo (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.58, 95 % confidence interval = 0.49-0.68, P < 0.001). Significant reductions in CID risk were also observed in various subgroups, including patients with a CAT score <10, mMRC score <2, and mild COPD. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium reduced CID risk in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD, even in patients with fewer respiratory symptoms or mild disease, which highlights tiotropium's effectiveness in treating COPD patients with mild disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Tie-COPD, NCT01455129).

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.

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.

Clinical standards for the diagnosis and management of asthma in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The aim of these clinical standards is to aid the diagnosis and management of asthma in low-resource settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).METHODS: A panel of 52 experts in the field of asthma in LMICs participated in a two-stage Delphi process to establish and reach a consensus on the clinical standards.RESULTS: Eighteen clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, Every individual with symptoms and signs compatible with asthma should undergo a clinical assessment; Standard 2, In individuals (>6 years) with a clinical assessment supportive of a diagnosis of asthma, a hand-held spirometry measurement should be used to confirm variable expiratory airflow limitation by demonstrating an acute response to a bronchodilator; Standard 3, Pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry should be performed in individuals (>6 years) to support diagnosis before treatment is commenced if there is diagnostic uncertainty; Standard 4, Individuals with an acute exacerbation of asthma and clinical signs of hypoxaemia or increased work of breathing should be given supplementary oxygen to maintain saturation at 94-98%; Standard 5, Inhaled short-acting beta-2 agonists (SABAs) should be used as an emergency reliever in individuals with asthma via an appropriate spacer device for metered-dose inhalers; Standard 6, Short-course oral corticosteroids should be administered in appropriate doses to individuals having moderate to severe acute asthma exacerbations (minimum 3-5 days); Standard 7, Individuals having a severe asthma exacerbation should receive emergency care, including oxygen therapy, systemic corticosteroids, inhaled bronchodilators (e.g., salbutamol with or without ipratropium bromide) and a single dose of intravenous magnesium sulphate should be considered; Standard 8, All individuals with asthma should receive education about asthma and a personalised action plan; Standard 9, Inhaled medications (excluding dry-powder devices) should be administered via an appropriate spacer device in both adults and children. Children aged 0-3 years will require the spacer to be coupled to a face mask; Standard 10, Children aged <5 years with asthma should receive a SABA as-needed at step 1 and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) to cover periods of wheezing due to respiratory viral infections, and SABA as-needed and daily ICS from step 2 upwards; Standard 11, Children aged 6-11 years with asthma should receive an ICS taken whenever an inhaled SABA is used; Standard 12, All adolescents aged 12-18 years and adults with asthma should receive a combination inhaler (ICS and rapid onset of action long-acting beta-agonist [LABA] such as budesonide-formoterol), where available, to be used either as-needed (for mild asthma) or as both maintenance and reliever therapy, for moderate to severe asthma; Standard 13, Inhaled SABA alone for the management of patients aged >12 years is not recommended as it is associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality. It should only be used where there is no access to ICS.The following standards (14-18) are for settings where there is no access to inhaled medicines. Standard 14, Patients without access to corticosteroids should be provided with a single short course of emergency oral prednisolone; Standard 15, Oral SABA for symptomatic relief should be used only if no inhaled SABA is available. Adjust to the individual's lowest beneficial dose to minimise adverse effects; Standard 16, Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) can be used as a preventive medication and is preferable to the use of long-term oral systemic corticosteroids; Standard 17, In exceptional circumstances, when there is a high risk of mortality from exacerbations, low-dose oral prednisolone daily or on alternate days may be considered on a case-by-case basis; Standard 18. Oral theophylline should be restricted for use in situations where it is the only bronchodilator treatment option available.CONCLUSION: These first consensus-based clinical standards for asthma management in LMICs are intended to help clinicians provide the most effective care for people in resource-limited settings.

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.

Theophylline for the management of respiratory disorders in adults in the 21st century: A scoping review from the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Pulmonary Practice and Research Network.

Theophylline is an oral methylxanthine bronchodilator recommended as alternate therapy for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, it is not generally recommended for the treatment of other respiratory disorders such as obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) or hypoxia. Most clinical practice guidelines rely on evidence published prior to the year 2000 to make these recommendations. This scoping review aimed to gather and characterize evidence describing theophylline for the management of respiratory disorders in adults between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2020. Databases searched included Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, Scopus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Studies were included if they were published in English, theophylline was used for any respiratory disorder, and the study outcomes were disease- or patient-oriented. After removal of duplicates, 841 studies were screened and 55 studies were included. Results aligned with current clinical guideline recommendations relegating theophylline as an alternative therapy for the treatment of respiratory disorders, in favor of inhaled corticosteroids and inhaled bronchodilators. This scoping review identified the need for future research including: theophylline versus other medications deemed alternative therapies for asthma and COPD, meta-analyses of low-dose theophylline, and studies evaluating evidence-based patient-oriented outcomes for OSA, hypoxia, ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction, and spinal cord injury-related pulmonary function.

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.

Ethnopharmacological basis and pharmacodynamics prospectives for folkloric claims of Rosa webbiana wall. Ex. Royle in diarrhea and asthma via In vitro, In vivo and In silico techniques.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Rosa webbiana (Family: Rosaceae) is used by South Asian herbalists to treat gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders. AIM OF THE STUDY: This research aimed at multiple targets to verify R. webbiana for treating diarrhea and asthma. In vitro, in vivo, and in silico experiments were planned to demonstrate the antispasmodic and bronchodilator potential of R. webbiana. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The bioactive compounds of R. webbiana were identified and quantified through LC ESI-MS/MS and HPLC. These compounds were predicted for muti-mechanisms of bronchodilator and antispasmodic potential in network pharmacology and molecular docking. In vitro methods (isolated rabbit trachea, bladder, and jejunum tissues) confirmed these multi-mechanisms for antispasmodic and bronchodilator effects. Antiperistalsis, antidiarrheal, and antisecretory experiments were conducted in in-vivo experiments. RESULTS: The phytochemical analysis indicates the presence of rutin (742.91 µg/g), kaempferol (726.32 µg/g), and quercitrin (688.20 µg/g) in Rw. EtOH. These bioactive compounds in network pharmacology interfere with the pathogenic genes of diarrhea and asthma, which are the members of calcium-mediated signaling pathways and showed the stronger binding affinity towards voltage-gated L-type calcium channels, myosin light chain-kinase, Calcium calmodulin-dependent-kinase, Phosphodiesterase-4, and phosphoinositide phospholipase-C in molecular docking. Rw. EtOH elicited a spasmolytic response in isolated jejunum, trachea, and urine preparations by relaxing K+ (80 mM) and CCh (1 µM) spastic contractions. Additionally, it suppressed calcium concentration-response curves to the right, like verapamil. Like dicyclomine, it caused a rightward parallel shift of the CCh curves, followed by a non-parallel shift at higher concentrations with suppression of the maximal response. Like papaverine, it also caused isoprenaline-induced inhibitory CRCs to shift to the left. Verapamil did not potentiate isoprenaline-induced inhibitory CRCs, although it was more efficacious against K+ (80 mM) than CCh (1 µM)-induced contractions. R. webbiana EtOH extract exhibited complete antiperistalsis (21.55%), antidiarrheal (80.33%), and antisecretory (82.59±0.60) activities in vivo experiments at the dose of 300 mg/kg. CONCLUSION: Thus, Rw. EtOH modulated multiple pathways, produced calcium antagonistic, anticholinergic, and phosphodiesterase inhibitory actions, and had antidiarrheal and bronchodilator effects.

Identification of the perpetrator imperatorin in Xin-yi-san-theophylline interaction: observed and predicted herb-drug interaction in rats.

OBJECTIVES: Theophylline is a bronchodilator with a narrow therapeutic index and primarily metabolised by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2. Xin-yi-san (XYS) is a herbal formula frequently used to ameliorate nasal inflammation. This study aimed to investigate the effects of XYS and its ingredient, imperatorin, on theophylline pharmacokinetics in rats. METHODS: The kinetics of XYS- and imperatorin-mediated inhibition of theophylline oxidation were determined. Pharmacokinetics of theophylline were analysed. Comparisons were made with the CYP1A2 inhibitor, fluvoxamine. KEY FINDINGS: XYS extract and its ingredient, imperatorin, non-competitively inhibited theophylline oxidation. Fluvoxamine (50 and 100 mg/kg) and XYS (0.5 and 0.9 g/kg) significantly prolonged the time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (tmax) of theophylline by 3-10 fold. In a dose-dependent manner, XYS and imperatorin (0.1-10 mg/kg) treatments significantly decreased theophylline clearance by 27-33% and 19-56%, respectively. XYS (0.9 g/kg) and imperatorin (10 mg/kg) significantly prolonged theophylline elimination half-life by 29% and 142%, respectively. Compared with the increase (51-112%) in the area under curve (AUC) of theophylline by fluvoxamine, the increase (27-57%) by XYS was moderate. CONCLUSIONS: XYS decreased theophylline clearance primarily through imperatorin-suppressed theophylline oxidation. Further human studies are essential for the dose adjustment in the co-medication regimen.

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.

[Chinese experts consensus statement: diagnosis and treatment of cystic fibrosis (2023)].

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is one of the most common autosomal recessive genetic diseases in Caucasians, but CF patients in China are rare, and it was listed as the first batch of rare diseases in China in 2018. In recent years, CF has been gradually recognized in China, and the number of CF patients reported in China in the past 10 years is more than 2.5 times the total number in the previous 30 years, and the total number of CF patients is estimated to be more than 20 000. The research progress of CF gene modification has led to the innovation of CF treatment. However, the sweat test as an important test for the diagnosis of CF has not been widely implemented in China. At present, the diagnosis and treatment of CF in China still lacks standardized recommendations. In view of these updates, the Chinese Experts Cystic Fibrosis Consensus Committee has formed "the Chinese experts consensus statement: diagnosis and treatment of cystic fibrosis" based on extensive opinion gathering, literatures review, multiple meetings and discussions. This consensus collects 38 core issues related to CF, including pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and patient management. Finally, 32 recommendations were formulated. The consensus used the modified GRADE methodology to grade the evidence evaluation and recommendations. This is the current state of CF consensus in China, and we hope to improve the diagnosis and treatment of CF in China in the future.Summary of recommendationsQuestion 1: How can CF be identified?CF should be suspected if there is: (1) a family history of CF; (2) delayed meconium expulsion or meconium ileus; (3) pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, mainly characterized by long-standing steatorrhea and malnutrition; (4) recurrent lower respiratory tract infections of infantile onset, especially Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA), Staphylococcus aureus infections of respiratory aetiology; (5) chronic sinusitis, especially when combined with juvenile presentation of nasal polyps; (6) chest CT abnormalities such as the presence of air trapping, bronchiectasis (upper lobe predominant); (7) pseudo-Bartter syndrome; (8) absence of vas deferens in males; (9) clubbing in young bronchiectasis patients(1C).Question 2: What are the diagnostic criteria for CF?1.1 Presence of one or more of the characteristic clinical manifestations or family history consistent with CF, and meeting at least one of the following definite diagnostic criteria in 1.2 or 1.3.1.2 Sweat chloride testing:(1) Concentrations of more than 60 mmol/L are diagnostic; (2) concentrations between 30-59 mmol/L are intermediate, and genetic variation must be considered to confirm the diagnosis; (3) concentrations less than 30 mmol/L are considered normal.1.3 Genetic testing:(1) Detection of two disease-causing CFTR(cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) mutations on biallelic alleles; (2) The CFTR variants are of undetermined significance, but tests such as sweat chloride concentration, intestinal current measurement, or nasal mucosal potential difference suggest abnormal CFTR function, then CF is diagnostic(1C).Question 3: What is the diagnostic process for CF arranged?Sweat chloride testing and CFTR gene analysis are recommended in all patients suspected of CF(1D).Question 4: What is the value of sweat chloride testing in the diagnosis of CF?Sweat chloride testing is the gold standard for the clinical diagnosis of CF(1C).Question 5: What is the value of CFTR genetic testing in Chinese CF diagnosis?Biallelic pathogenic variants of CFTR are a definitive diagnosis of CF(1D).Question 6: What is the diagnostic value of imaging for CF?Chest CT is a sensitive test for early stages of lung disease in patients with CF and is appropriate in younger patients and to assess disease progression. The imaging findings of abdominal visceral involvement in CF lack specificity(2C).Question 7: How to evaluate the pancreatic function of CF patients?Fecal elastase may be used as the first indicator to assess pancreatic exocrine function in patients with CF (2C).Question 8: How to diagnose hepatic abnormality of CF?CF related liver disease was diagnosed when CF was confirmed and 2 of the following 4 criteria were met: (1) hepatomegaly and/or splenomegaly confirmed by ultrasound; (2) ALT, AST, and GGT on three consecutive occasions above the upper limit of normal on three consecutive occasions for more than 12 months and excluding other causes; (3) had evidence of liver involvement, portal hypertension, or bile duct dilatation by ultrasound; (4) liver biopsy confirmation (focal biliary cirrhosis or multilobular cirrhosis) may be indicated if the diagnosis is suspected(2D).Question 9: How to identify pulmonary exacerbations in patients with CF?Pulmonary exacerbations are indicated when any 4 of the following 12 signs or symptoms are met: increased sputum; new onset haemoptysis or increased haemoptysis; exacerbation of cough; increased dyspnea; malaise, fatigue, or somnolence; body temperature above 38 ℃; anorexia or weight loss; sinus pain or tenderness; increased sinus secretions; new chest signs; FEV1≥10% decline from previous; imaging changes suggestive of pulmonary infection(2D).Question 10: How to diagnose CF related diabetes?Diagnostic criteria for CF related diabetes are the same as those for diabetes in the population(1D).Question 11: How to evaluate the nutritional status of CF patients?Anthropometric parameters reflecting nutritional status should be assessed regularly. And the goal of nutritional assessment is to evaluate and monitor whether pediatric patients are achieving normal standards of growth and development or whether adult patients are maintaining adequate nutritional status(1C).Question 12: Does CF require pathological examination as a diagnostic basis?Pathohistological biopsy is not recommended as a first-line diagnostic method in patients with a suspected diagnosis of CF(1D).Question 13: Do CF patients need long-term macrolides?At least 6 months of azithromycin treatment is recommended for CF patients with chronic PA infection(2A).Question 14: Do CF patients need long-term inhalation of hypertonic saline?Long term treatment with hypertonic saline is recommended for patients with CF(1A).Question 15: Do CF patients need long-term inhalation of Dornase alfa(DNase)?Long term use of DNase is recommended in patients with CF aged 6 years and older(1A).Question 16: Do CF patients need inhalation of mannitol?Inhaled mannitol therapy is recommended for more than 6 months in patients with CF aged 18 years and older when other inhaled treatments are unavailable or intolerable(2A).Question 17: How to deal with PA found in the sputum culture of CF patients?When sputum cultures from patients with CF are positive for PA, it needs to determine the characteristics of the infection first. The purpose for acute infection is to eradicate PA. Chronic colonization does not need to be eradicated, and the main purpose is to reduce the bacterial load and improve symptoms(1A).Question 18: Do CF patients need inhalation of antibiotics?Inhaled antibiotic therapy is recommended for CF patients with PA infection(1A).Question 19: Do CF patients need inhaled or systemic corticosteroids?In patients with CF without asthma or ABPA, routine inhaled or systemic glucocorticoids are not recommended (2A).Question 20: Do CF patients need to inhale bronchodilators?Bronchodilators can be used in the short term to improve symptoms in patients with CF in the presence of airway obstruction, but the long-term benefit is insufficient (2B).Question 21: Do CF patients need expectorant medicine?Patients with CF can take acetylcysteine orally or aerosolized(2A).Question 22: How to deal with acute pulmonary exacerbation in CF patients?Intensive implementation of non-antimicrobial therapy is recommended during pulmonary exacerbations in patients with CF. Antimicrobials with activity against PA were selected for empirical treatment, and the treatment was adjusted according to the results of bacterial culture and drug susceptibility testing. A 21-day long course of anti-infective therapy is not recommended(1B).Question 23: How to treat CF patients with ABPA?Medical therapy is recommended for CF patients with ABPA who meet any of the following criteria: patients with elevated immunoglobulin E levels and concomitant worsening of pulmonary function and/or pulmonary symptoms, or imaging suggesting new infiltrative foci in the chest(1D).Glucocorticoids are recommended for ABPA exacerbations in CF patients without contraindications(2D).Itraconazole should be added if the patient presents with poor response to corticosteroids, recurrence of ABPA, corticosteroid dependence, or corticosteroid toxicity(2D).Question 24: Is lung transplantation recommended for patients with CF? When is it recommended?Patients with CF may be evaluated for lung transplantation when they meet the following criteria after optimal medical therapy: (1) FEV1<30% predicted; (2) FEV1<40% predicted (<50% predicted in children) with the following: 6-minute walk distance<400 meters; PaCO2>50 mmHg(1 mmHg=0.133 kPa); hypoxia at rest or after activity; pulmonary artery pressure measured by cardiotocography>50 mmHg or right heart dysfunction; continued deterioration despite aggressive supplementation of nutritional support; two exacerbations requiring intravenous antibiotic therapy per year; massive hemoptysis (>240 ml) requiring pulmonary artery embolization; presented with pneumothorax; (3) FEV1<50% predicted and rapid decline in lung function or rapid worsening of symptoms; (4) Presented with an acute exacerbation requiring positive pressure mechanical ventilation(2C).Question 25: How to deal with pancreatic disease in CF patients?Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is recommended in patients with CF pancreatic disease(1A).Question 26:How to deal with hepatobiliary disease in CF patients?Ursodeoxycholic acid is not recommended in asymptomatic patients with CF hepatobiliary disease(2B).Question 27: How to deal with gastrointestinal problems such as acid regurgitation in CF patients?Acid suppression is recommended for CF patients with gastrointestinal symptoms such as acid regurgitation (2B).Question 28: How to deal with CF related diabetes?Insulin therapy is recommended in CF related diabetes(1B).Question 29: How should nutritional support be given to patients with CF?Energy intake in patients with CF is recommended to be 110%-200% of the energy requirement of a healthy person under equivalent physiological conditions. And maintaining adequate protein, appropriate intake of fats, electrolytes, and fat-soluble vitamins are recommanded(1A).Question 30: How should respiratory rehabilitation be performed in patients with CF?Airway clearance therapy and appropriate exercise are recommended for patients with CF(1A).Question 31: What is included in the follow-up of CF patient?Patients with CF should have regular follow-up. Adult patients are recommended to be followed every 3-6 months, and children should be followed more frequently(2A).Question 32: How should CF patients avoid infections?Inpatients and outpatients are recommended to be separated according to microbiota carriage status(1D).Good hand hygiene is recommended for the patients with CF and their contacts(1D).It is recommended that CF patients wear masks in healthcare settings. This may reduce the release of potentially infectious aerosols during coughing (1D).Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for patients with CF>6 months of age and for all family members of patients with CF and all healthcare workers caring for these patients(2D).Palivizumab may be considered for the prevention of respiratory syncytial virus infection in patients with CF under two years of age(2A).

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.

The effects of different inhalation therapies on less symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in a Chinese population: a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) document suggests that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be divided into a less symptomatic group. Moreover, single-inhaled drugs are recommended as initial inhalation therapy for them. However, many less symptomatic patients are provided double or triple-inhaled drugs as initial therapy in the real world. This study aimed to describe the inhalation prescriptions and compare the effects of different inhalation therapies on less symptomatic COPD patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an observational study. Stable COPD patients were recruited and divided into a less symptomatic group including Groups A and C based on the GOLD 2019 document. We collected the data of inhalation therapies prescriptions. 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 groups. All the patients were followed up for 1 year to collect exacerbation and mortality data. RESULTS: We found that only 45.4% of patients in Group A and 43.6% of patients in Group C received reasonable inhalation therapy in reference to the GOLD document. In addition, the LAMA group had a higher forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), FEV1%pred, FEV1/forced vital capacity and peak expiratory flow compared with LABA + ICS, LABA + LAMA and LABA + LAMA + ICS groups. However, we did not find any significant differences of exacerbation, hospitalization and mortality during the follow-up among different inhalation therapies groups on less symptomatic COPD patients. CONCLUSION: Over half of the less symptomatic patients received inhalation therapy that were inconsistent with the GOLD document recommendations in a Chinese population in the real world. In fact, the single inhaled drug of LAMA should be recommended and pulmonary function is not a good indicator for the choice of initial inhalation therapy in less symptomatic COPD patients.KEY MESSAGESOver half of the less symptomatic COPD patients received inhalation therapy that were inconsistent with the GOLD document recommendations in a Chinese population in the real world.The clinicians should offer a single inhaled drug of LAMA to less symptomatic COPD patients and pulmonary function is not a good indicator for the choice of initial inhalation therapy.