Efficacy and safety of solifenacin combined with biofeedback in children with overactive bladder.

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder is a common chronic urological disorder in children, liable to impact normal social activities, disrupt sleep and even impair self-esteem. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of solifenacin combined with biofeedback for paediatric overactive bladder. METHOD: Forty-five children with overactive bladder were enrolled and divided into three groups: 15 patients in Group A were treated with solifenacin, 15 cases in Group B with biofeedback, and the other 15 patients in Group C with the combination of solifenacin plus biofeedback. Each group was subdivided into the non-urge incontinence (non-UI) and urge incontinence (UI) groups. The remission rates were compared among the three groups at 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks from the beginning of treatment. The side effects of solifenacin were recorded and followed up. RESULT: After 2 weeks since initial treatment, the complete response rates were 33.3% (5/15), 20.0% (3/15), and 53.3% (8/15) in the three groups. At 4 weeks, the complete remission rates were 46.7% (7/15), 33.3% (5/15), and 60.0% (9/15) respectively. Moreover, the complete remission rates of the UI groups were higher than the non-UI groups (p < 0.05). At 8 weeks, the complete response rates were 53.3% (8/15), 40.0% (6/15), and 67.7% (10/15). At 12 weeks, the complete response rates were 67.8% (10/15), 60.0% (9/15), and 86.7% (13/15). The complete response rates were higher and urodynamic parameters were improved obviously in group C than the other two groups (p < 0.05) during the follow-ups. The median voiding frequency decreased and median functional bladder capacity increased obviously in Group C after 4 weeks (p < 0.05). Dry mouth was observed in 2 patients (4.4%). 2 patients experienced constipation (4.4%), and neither case was severe. The symptoms of these four patients had relieved by reducing the dose of solifenacin. CONCLUSION: Solifenacin combined with biofeedback had good efficacy and compliance for children experiencing overactive bladder. It took only 2 weeks to achieve the complete response rate over 50%, especially for the improvement of UI symptoms.

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.

Clinical outcomes of long-term inhaled combination therapies in patients with bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Few studies have reported which inhaled combination therapy, either bronchodilators and/or inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), is beneficial in patients with bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction. Our study compared the efficacy and safety among different inhaled combination therapies in patients with bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction. METHODS: Our retrospective study analyzed the patients with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity < 0.7 and radiologically confirmed bronchiectasis in chest computed tomography between January 2005 and December 2021. The eligible patients underwent baseline and follow-up spirometric assessments. The primary endpoint was the development of a moderate-to-severe exacerbation. The secondary endpoints were the change in the annual FEV1 and the adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the blood eosinophil count (BEC). RESULTS: Among 179 patients, the ICS/long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), ICS/LABA, and LABA/LAMA groups were comprised of 58 (32.4%), 52 (29.1%), and 69 (38.5%) patients, respectively. ICS/LABA/LAMA group had a higher severity of bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction, than other groups. In the subgroup with BEC ≥ 300/uL, the risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbation was lower in the ICS/LABA/LAMA group (adjusted HR = 0.137 [95% CI = 0.034-0.553]) and the ICS/LABA group (adjusted HR = 0.196 [95% CI = 0.045-0.861]) compared with the LABA/LAMA group. The annual FEV1 decline rate was significantly worsened in the ICS/LABA group compared to the LABA/LAMA group (adjusted ß-coefficient=-197 [95% CI=-307--87]) in the subgroup with BEC < 200/uL. CONCLUSION: In patients with bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction, the use of ICS/LABA/LAMA and ICS/LABA demonstrated a reduced risk of exacerbation compared to LABA/LAMA therapy in those with BEC ≥ 300/uL. Conversely, for those with BEC < 200/uL, the use of ICS/LABA was associated with an accelerated decline in FEV1 in comparison to LABA/LAMA therapy. Further assessment of BEC is necessary as a potential biomarker for the use of ICS in patients with bronchiectasis and airflow obstruction.

Efficacy and Safety of High-Dose Vitamin D Supplementation vs Solifenacin or Standard Urotherapy for Overactive Bladder Dry in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: We investigated the efficacy and safety of high-dose vitamin D supplementation (VDS) plus standard urotherapy (SU) in managing overactive bladder dry in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-arm, randomized clinical trial was performed at an academic center in China between January 2023 and June 2023. Eligible patients (n=303) were randomized to receive 8 weeks of high-dose VDS (vitamin D3 drops encapsulated as soft capsules, 2400 IU/d) plus SU (VDS + SU group; n=100), solifenacin (5-10 mg/d) plus SU (SOL + SU group; n=102), or SU alone (SU group; n=101). Reduction in voiding frequency was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes encompassed improvement in urgency, nocturia, quality of life score, pediatric lower urinary tract symptom score, and participant satisfaction. Treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded within each group. RESULTS: Participants had a median age of 82.0 months and their baseline mean vitamin D level was 22.64 ng/mL. The VDS + SU group showed greater improvements in voids/d than the SOL + SU group (median difference 3.0; 95% CI, 2.0 to 3.5; P < .001) and the SU group (median difference 4.0; 95% CI, 3.0 to 5.0; P < .001) after intervention. The VDS + SU group also showed the greatest improvement in quality of life and pediatric lower urinary tract symptom scores. Patient satisfaction was similar between the SOL + SU and SU groups. The VDS + SU group did not exhibit a heightened risk of treatment-emergent adverse events compared to the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose VDS plus SU was effective and well-tolerated in managing overactive bladder dry in children, suggesting its potential as a novel therapeutic option for this population.

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.

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.

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.

Lack of Clinical Control in COPD Patients Depending on the Target and the Therapeutic Option.

Introduction: According to the Global Initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD), when a treatment is not achieving an appropriate response it should be switched taking into account the predominant treatable trait to target (dyspnea or exacerbations). The objective of the present study was to investigate the lack of clinical control according to the target and medication groups. Materials and Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the CLAVE study, an observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study which evaluated the clinical control, and related-factors, in a cohort of 4801 patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The primary endpoint was the percentage of uncontrolled patients defined as COPD Assessment Test (CAT) >16 or presence of exacerbations in the last 3 months despite receiving long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and/or long-acting antimuscarinic antagonist (LAMA) with or without inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Secondary objectives included the description of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients by therapeutic group and the identification of characteristics potentially associated with the lack of control of COPD including low adherence measured by the test to adherence to inhalers (TAI). Results: In the dyspnea pathway, lack of clinical control was of 25.0% of patients receiving LABA or LAMA in monotherapy, 29.5% by those with LABA + LAMA, 38.3% with LABA + ICS and 37.0% with triple therapy (LABA + LAMA + ICS). In the exacerbation pathway, percentages were 87.1%, 76.7%, 83.3%, and 84.1%, respectively. Low physical activity and high Charlson comorbidity index were independent factor of non-control in all therapeutic groups. Additional factors were lower post-bronchodilator FEV1 and poor adherence to inhalers. Conclusion: There are still room for improvement in COPD control. From the pharmacological perspective, every step in treatment have a pool of uncontrolled patients in which a step-up could be considered according to a trait to target strategy.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy for mild-to-moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a study protocol for a randomised and interventional study.

INTRODUCTION: Bronchodilators, including long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) and long-acting beta 2 agonists (LABA), are the main treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of triple therapy (inhaled corticosteroids/LAMA/LABA) has also been reported. However, the effect of triple therapy on patients with mild-to-moderate COPD has not yet been clarified. This study aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of triple therapy, compared with LAMA/LABA combination therapy, for lung function and health-related quality of life in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD and identify baseline characteristics and biomarkers to predict responders and non-responders to triple therapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, parallel-group study. Mild-to-moderate patients with COPD will be randomised to receive fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol or umeclidinium/vilanterol for 24 weeks. A total of 668 patients will be enrolled from March 2022 to September 2023 from 38 sites in Japan. The primary endpoint is the change in the trough forced expiration volume in 1 s after 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints are responder rates based on the COPD assessment test score and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score after 24 weeks of treatment. The safety endpoint is the occurrence of any adverse events. We will also investigate safety in terms of changes in microbial colonisation in sputum and antimycobacterium avium complex antibodies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and informed consent documents were approved by the Saga University Clinical Research Review Board (approval number: CRB7180010). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients. Recruitment of the patients began in March 2022. The results will be disseminated through scientific peer-reviewed publications and domestic and international medical conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: UMIN000046812 and jRCTs031190008.

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.

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.

Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Trial of Peroneal Electrical Transcutaneous Neuromodulation vs Solifenacin in Treatment-naïve Patients With Overactive Bladder.

PURPOSE: We investigated the safety and efficacy of peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation using the URIS neuromodulation system in a home-based setting in comparison with standard treatment using solifenacin in treatment-naïve female patients with overactive bladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients were screened, of whom 77 were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to 12 weeks of treatment with daily peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation or solifenacin 5 mg. The primary endpoint was safety; efficacy assessments included proportion of responders, defined as subjects with ≥50% reduction in bladder diary-derived variables; Overactive Bladder-Validated 8-question Screener, and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions questionnaire; and treatment satisfaction after 12 weeks of therapy. RESULTS: Seventy-one out of 77 randomized patients completed the study. In the peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation group 6/51 (12%) patients reported a treatment-related adverse event vs 12/25 (48%) in the solifenacin group (P < .001). No clinically significant changes were observed in any other safety endpoint. The proportions of responders in the peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation group vs the solifenacin group were 87% vs 74% with respect to Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale grade 3 urgency episodes, 87% vs 75% with respect to grade 3+4 urgency episodes, and 90% vs 94% with respect to urgency incontinence episodes. In post hoc analyses we observed significant improvement over time in multiple efficacy variables in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation is a safe and effective method for overactive bladder treatment associated with a significantly lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events compared to solifenacin and a considerably better benefit-risk profile.