Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Umeclidinium/Vilanterol, and Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Taiwan: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

Background: Long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) combination therapy improved lung function and health-related quality-of-life and reduced exacerbation rates and dyspnea in symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We compared the real-world effects of three fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations for COPD in Taiwan. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated 1-year outcomes after LABA/LAMA combination therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD. Exacerbations and symptoms of COPD, lung functions, and therapy escalation were compared among patients using tiotropium/olodaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol and indacaterol/glycopyrronium. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the baseline characteristics. Results: Data of 1,617 patients were collected. After PSM, time to first moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation was comparable among three groups, while the annualized rates of the exacerbation (episodes/patient/year) in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol (0.19) or umeclidinium/vilanterol (0.17) were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium (0.38). COPD-related symptoms were stable over the treatment period, and there was no significant difference in the changes of symptom scores including CAT and mMRC among three groups at the end of the study period. Conclusion: This study presented valuable real-world outcome in terms of exacerbation and treatment response of COPD patients treated with fixed-dose LABA/LAMA regimens in Taiwan. The annualized rates of moderate-to-severe exacerbation in patients receiving tiotropium/olodaterol or umeclidinium/vilanterol were significantly lower than those receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium, though the time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation was similar among different fixed-dose LABA/LAMA combinations.

Mortality and Exacerbation Risk by Body Mass Index in Patients with COPD in TIOSPIR and UPLIFT.

Rationale: There is an association between body mass index (BMI) and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with underweight individuals having higher mortality risk. Mortality and exacerbation risks among individuals with higher BMI are unclear. Objectives: To examine the relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes in COPD. Methods: This post hoc analysis included data from TIOSPIR (Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat) (N = 17,116) and tiotropium-treated patients in UPLIFT (Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium) (N = 2,986). BMI classes (underweight [BMI < 20 kg/m2], normal weight [BMI 20 to <25 kg/m2], overweight [BMI 25 to <30 kg/m2], obesity class I [BMI 30 to <35 kg/m2], obesity class II [BMI 35 to <40 kg/m2], and obesity class III [BMI ⩾ 40 kg/m2]) were examined for adjusted associations with mortality, exacerbation, and nonfatal cardiovascular event risk using over 50,000 patient-years of cumulative follow-up data. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox regression models. Results: In TIOSPIR, obesity prevalence was 22%, overweight 32%, and underweight 12%. The proportion of females was highest in obesity classes II and III. Overweight and obese participants had better baseline lung function versus other BMI classes; underweight participants were more likely to be current smokers. Underweight participants had a significantly higher risk of death (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.62-2.20; P < 0.0001) and severe exacerbations (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16-1.47; P < 0.0001) versus normal-weight participants; however, overweight and obese participants were at lower to no additional risk. Results from UPLIFT were similar to TIOSPIR. Conclusions: These results suggest that there is a strong association between body weight, COPD events, and risk of death. A holistic management approach taking into account respiratory and cardiovascular risk factors and nutritional status is needed to improve the general well-being of patients with COPD.

Time-to-first exacerbation, adherence, and medical costs among US patients receiving umeclidinium/vilanterol or tiotropium as initial maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) maintenance medication is important for managing symptoms and exacerbation risk, and is associated with reduced mortality, hospitalizations, and costs. This study compared on-treatment exacerbations, medical costs, and medication adherence in patients with COPD initiating treatment with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) or tiotropium (TIO). METHODS: This retrospective matched cohort study selected patients from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database who initiated maintenance treatment with UMEC/VI or TIO between 01/01/2014 and 12/31/2017 (index date defined as the first dispensing). Eligible patients were ≥ 40 years of age and had ≥ 12 months continuous health plan coverage pre- and post-index; ≥ 1 medical claim for COPD pre-index or on the index date; no moderate/severe COPD-related exacerbations on the index date; no asthma diagnosis pre- or post-index; no maintenance medication fills containing inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting ß2-agonists, or long-acting muscarinic antagonists pre-index or on the index date; and no fills for both UMEC/VI and TIO on the index date. Outcomes included time-to-first (Kaplan-Meier analysis) and rates of on-treatment COPD-related moderate/severe exacerbations, medication adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] and proportion of adherent patients [PDC ≥ 0.8]), and COPD-related medical costs per patient per month (PPPM). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: Each cohort included 3929 matched patients. Kaplan-Meier rates of on-treatment COPD-related exacerbations were similar between cohorts (hazard ratio at 12 months; overall: 0.93, moderate: 0.92, severe: 1.07; all p > 0.05). UMEC/VI versus TIO initiators had significantly higher adherence (mean PDC: 0.44 vs 0.37; p < 0.001; proportion with PDC ≥ 0.8: 22.0% vs 16.4%; p< 0.001) and significantly lower mean on-treatment COPD-related total medical costs ($867 vs $1095 PPPM; p = 0.028), driven by lower outpatient visit costs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide valuable information for physicians considering UMEC/VI or TIO as initial maintenance therapy options for patients with COPD.

Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Compared with Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol, Budesonide/Formoterol, and Tiotropium as Initial Maintenance Therapy in Patients with COPD Who Have High Costs and Comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are associated with increased medical costs and risk of exacerbations. This study compared COPD-related medical costs and exacerbations in high-cost, high-comorbidity patients with COPD receiving initial maintenance treatment (IMT) with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL), budesonide/formoterol (B/F), or tiotropium (TIO). METHODS: This retrospective, matched cohort study identified patients from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database who initiated UMEC/VI, FP/SAL, B/F, or TIO between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018 (index date defined as date of the first fill). Eligibility criteria included age ≥40 years at index, ≥1 pre-index COPD diagnosis, no pre-index asthma diagnosis, 12 months of continuous insurance coverage pre-index, and high pre-index costs (≥80th percentile of IMT population) and comorbidities (Quan-Charlson comorbidity index ≥3). Propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounders. On-treatment COPD-related medical costs (primary endpoint) and exacerbations were evaluated. RESULTS: Matched cohorts were well balanced on baseline characteristics (UMEC/VI vs FP/SAL: n=1194 each; UMEC/VI vs B/F: n=1441 each; UMEC/VI vs TIO: n=1277 each). Patients receiving UMEC/VI had significantly lower COPD-related medical costs versus FP/SAL (difference: $6587 per patient per year; P=0.048), and numerically lower costs versus B/F and TIO. Patients initiating UMEC/VI had significantly lower risk of COPD-related severe exacerbation versus FP/SAL (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.78 [0.62, 0.98]; P=0.032), B/F (0.77 [0.63, 0.95]; P=0.016), and TIO (0.79 [0.64, 0.98]; P=0.028). The rate of COPD-related severe exacerbations was significantly lower with UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.73 [0.59, 0.91]; P=0.008) and B/F (0.73 [0.59, 0.93]; P=0.012), and numerically lower versus TIO (0.83 [0.68, 1.04]; P=0.080). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that high-cost, high-comorbidity patients with COPD receiving UMEC/VI compared with FP/SAL, B/F, and TIO as IMT may have lower medical costs and exacerbation risk.

Therapeutic Success of Tiotropium/Olodaterol, Measured Using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), in Routine Clinical Practice: A Multinational Non-Interventional Study.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) is a simple patient-reported tool to measure clinical control of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). OBJECTIVE: This open-label, single-arm, non-interventional study (NCT03663569) investigated changes in CCQ score during treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol in clinical practice. METHODS: Data were included from consenting COPD patients, enrolled in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Switzerland and Ukraine, who were receiving a new prescription for tiotropium/olodaterol according to the treating physician in a real-world environment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of therapeutic success, defined as a 0.4-point decrease in CCQ score after treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol for approximately 6 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 4819 patients were treated; baseline and Week 6 CCQ scores were available for 4700 patients, mostly classified as Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) B (51.6%) or D (42.7%). After 6 weeks' treatment, 81.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 80.24-82.49) of patients achieved therapeutic success; mean improvement in overall CCQ score was 1.02 points (95% CI 1.00-1.05). Improved CCQ score was seen in 92.2% of patients (95% CI 91.43-92.98), 2.5% had no change and 5.3% showed a worsening. When stratified by prior treatment, the greatest benefit was seen in treatment-naïve patients, with 85.7% achieving therapeutic success, compared with 79.5% of those pretreated with long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and 74.2% of those pretreated with LABA or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy. Overall, rescue medication decreased by 1.25 puffs/day (95% CI 1.19-1.31) versus baseline. In total, 29 patients (0.6%) reported drug-related adverse events and 7 patients reported serious adverse events (0.15%). CONCLUSION: In 4700 COPD patients, 6 weeks' treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol, as initial treatment or follow-up to LAMA or LABA monotherapy or LABA/ICS, improved CCQ and decreased rescue medication use. The adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of tiotropium/olodaterol.

Randomized controlled trial of triple versus dual inhaler therapy on small airways in smoking asthmatics.

BACKGROUND: Smoking worsens underlying asthma inflammation and also induces resistance to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Small airways dysfunction measured by impulse oscillometry (IOS) is associated with worse control. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the effects on small airways of adding long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) alone or with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) to ICS in asthmatic smokers. METHODS: Sixteen current smokers were enrolled: mean age 44 year, FEV1 84%, FEF25-75 47%, R5 158%, ACQ 1.69, 20 pack year . Patients were converted to a reference ICS as HFA-BDP during initial run-in at median dose of 800 µg/day. Open label olodaterol 5 µg od (OLO) or olodaterol 5 µg/tiotropium 5 µg od (OLO/TIO) was added to HFA-BDP for median duration of 3 weeks in a randomized cross over design, including run-in and washout periods on HFA-BDP. IOS and spirometry were measured after each treatment (BDP/OLO/TIO or BDP/OLO) and at baseline after run-in and washout (BDP). RESULTS: After chronic dosing, IOS outcomes at trough except for R20 were all significantly improved with OLO/TIO compared to OLO. For the primary end-point of total airway resistance (as R5), the mean difference (95%CI) at trough was 0.06 (0.015-0.10) kPa/l/s, peripheral airways resistance (as R5-R20) 0.03 (0.003-0.06) kPa/l/s, peripheral lung reactance area (as AX) 0.38 (0.08-0.68) kPa/l and resonant frequency (as RF) 2.28 (0.45-4.12) Hz. FEF25-75 at trough was also better with OLO/TIO vs TIO: 0.93 (0.86 - 0.95) l/s while FEV1 was not different. CONCLUSIONS: ICS/LABA/LAMA was superior to ICS/LABA on trough small airway outcomes in asthma patients who smoke.

A Non-Interventional Study of Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Any Triple Combination Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The EVELUT® Study Protocol.

Background: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2020 report recommends that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) suffering from persistent dyspnea, despite long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance therapy, are switched to either a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA combination regimen or LAMA/LABA/ICS triple therapy. However, to date, no studies have investigated the direct switch from LABA/ICS to LAMA/LABA therapy-instead of switching to triple therapy-in a prospective, real-world, non-interventional setting. Methods: EVELUT® (NCT03954132) is an ongoing, prospective, open-label, multicenter, non-interventional study comparing the once-daily fixed-dose combination of tiotropium and olodaterol (tio/olo) versus any triple therapy (LAMA/LABA/ICS) in patients with COPD who are symptomatic despite LABA/ICS maintenance therapy. Patients with acute or frequent COPD exacerbations are excluded from the study. Participants will receive LABA/ICS maintenance treatment until Visit 1, followed by switching of treatment to tio/olo or LAMA/LABA/ICS. The primary endpoints are changes in modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT®) scores after approximately 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints are change in the patients' general condition according to the Physician's Global Evaluation score, the proportion of responders with a change in mMRC score of ≥1 and in CAT® score of ≥2, and patient satisfaction with the inhaler and therapy. The study is expected to enroll approximately 900 patients. Conclusion: EVELUT results are expected to add to the current real-world evidence informing therapeutic decisions for COPD in everyday clinical practice. Trial Registration: The European Union electronic Register of Post-authorisation Studies (EU PAS Register): EUPAS29784; the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM): NIS Study No 7305; Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03954132.

Emerging muscarinic receptor antagonists for the treatment of asthma.

INTRODUCTION: The increased acetylcholine signaling in asthma pathophysiology offers the rationale for the use of LAMAs in the treatment of asthmatic patients. Tiotropium is still the only LAMA approved for use in asthma but there is a real interest in developing novel LAMAs for the treatment of asthma, or at least to extend this indication to other LAMAs already on the market. AREAS COVERED: We examined and discussed trials and research that have studied or are evaluating the role of LAMAs already on the market in asthma and possible novel muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonists. EXPERT OPINION: Glycopyrronium and umeclidinium will soon be included in the GINA strategy with the same current indications of tiotropium. It is likely that the choice of the LAMA will be influenced not so much by its pharmacological profile as by the type of triple therapy chosen. It is extremely difficult to identify a new LAMA that is more effective than tiotropium, but is it plausible that new technologies that will allow delivering the drug in a more targeted way and with a lower risk of adverse effects may represent the real progress in the use of LAMAs in asthma in the coming years.

Real-life effectiveness of indacaterol-glycopyrronium after switching from tiotropium or salmeterol/fluticasone therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD: the POWER study.

PURPOSE: In contrast to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), changes in maintenance pharmacotherapy in clinical practice occur without a washout period. The Prospective cohort study for the real-life effectiveness evaluation of glycOpyrronium With indacatERol combination in the management of COPD in Canada (POWER) study evaluated the real-life effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) following a direct switch from a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA, tiotropium) or long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance treatment (salmeterol/fluticasone [SFC]). METHODS: POWER was a single-cohort, prospective, multicenter, interventional study in which patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, who remained symptomatic on their current treatment of once-daily (od) tiotropium 18 µg or twice-daily (bid) SFC (any dose), were switched to treatment with open-label IND/GLY 110/50 µg od for 16 weeks. Effectiveness end points were change from baseline in trough FEV1, transition dyspnea index (TDI) total scores, and COPD assessment test (CAT) scores at 16 weeks. RESULTS: Trough FEV1 improved by 175 mL at Week 16 in patients who switched to IND/GLY. The change was 176 mL (95% CI: 135-217) when switched from tiotropium and 172 mL (95% CI: 85-258) when switched from SFC fixed-dose combination (FDC). At Week 16, significant improvements were observed in the mean TDI total scores (Δ=2.5) and CAT scores (Δ=-6.5) after the switch to IND/GLY treatment (both P<0.0001). Additionally, IND/GLY was well tolerated in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, and no safety signal was observed. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice settings, a direct switch from previous treatment with either tiotropium or SFC to IND/GLY was safe and provided superior clinically significant improvements in lung function and patient-related outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02202616.

Tiotropium added to low- to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) versus low- to medium-dose ICS alone for adults with mild to moderate uncontrolled persistent asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety profile of tiotropium when added to low- to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) regimen versus low- to medium-dose ICS alone for adults with mild to moderate uncontrolled persistent asthma. DATA SOURCES: The online databases Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant data published up to November 14, 2017; we also conducted a supplementary search using clinicaltrials.gov. STUDY SELECTIONS: Only randomized control trials were included in this review. RESULTS: Four studies met our inclusion criteria for this review. In our review, two crossover studies were rated as "high risk" in the domain of "other bias" because a washout was not performed between each intervention. Lung function was significantly improved in the patient group receiving low- to medium-dose ICS with tiotropium. Results were consistent between each of three subgroups (tiotropium dry powder inhaler 18 µg or Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 5 µg, Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 2.5 µg, and Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 1.25 µg). Although no significant difference in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score was found between the two treatment groups, substantial heterogeneity was observed. The incidence of serious adverse events between the two treatment groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium as a once daily add-on to low- to medium-dose ICS may be efficacious and well-tolerated treatment in adults with moderate uncontrolled asthma. However, as only a few studies were identified, more studies of better design and long-term trial duration are required in the future.

Predicting treatable traits for long-acting bronchodilators in patients with stable COPD.

PURPOSE: There is currently no measure to predict a treatability of long-acting ß-2 agonist (LABA) or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to build prediction models for the treatment response to these bronchodilators, in order to determine the most responsive medication for patients with COPD. METHODS: We performed a prospective open-label crossover study, in which each long-acting bronchodilator was given in a random order to 65 patients with stable COPD for 4 weeks, with a 4-week washout period in between. We analyzed 14 baseline clinical traits, expression profiles of 31,426 gene transcripts, and damaged-gene scores of 6,464 genes acquired from leukocytes. The gene expression profiles were measured by RNA microarray and the damaged-gene scores were obtained after DNA exome sequencing. Linear regression analyses were performed to build prediction models after using factor and correlation analyses. RESULTS: Using a prediction model for a LABA, traits found associated with the treatment response were post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second, bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) to salbutamol, expression of three genes (CLN8, PCSK5, and SKP2), and damage scores of four genes (EPG5, FNBP4, SCN10A, and SPTBN5) (R2=0.512, p<0.001). Traits associated with the treatment response to a LAMA were COPD assessment test score, BDR, expression of four genes (C1orf115, KIAA1618, PRKX, and RHOQ) and damage scores of three genes (FBN3, FDFT1, and ZBED6) (R2=0.575, p<0.001). The prediction models consisting only of clinical traits appeared too weak to predict the treatment response, with R2=0.231 for the LABA model and R2=0.121 for the LAMA model. CONCLUSION: Adding the expressions of genes and damaged-gene scores to the clinical traits may improve the predictability of treatment response to long-acting bronchodilators.

Umeclidinium/vilanterol as step-up therapy from tiotropium in patients with moderate COPD: a randomized, parallel-group, 12-week study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with COPD who remain symptomatic on long-acting bronchodilator monotherapy may benefit from step-up therapy to a long-acting bronchodilator combination. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) in patients with moderate COPD who remained symptomatic on tiotropium (TIO). METHODS: In this randomized, blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group study (NCT01899742), patients (N=494) who were prescribed TIO for ≥3 months at screening (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]: 50%-70% of predicted; modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] score ≥1) and completed a 4-week run-in with TIO were randomized to UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg or TIO 18 µg for 12 weeks. Efficacy assessments included trough FEV1 at Day 85 (primary end point), 0-3 h serial FEV1, rescue medication use, Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Safety evaluations included adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Compared with TIO, UMEC/VI produced greater improvements in trough FEV1 (least squares [LS] mean difference: 88 mL at Day 85 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 45-131]; P<0.001) and FEV1 after 5 min on Day 1 (50 mL [95% CI: 27-72]; P<0.001). Reductions in rescue medication use over 12 weeks were greater with UMEC/VI versus TIO (LS mean change: -0.1 puffs/d [95% CI: -0.2-0.0]; P≤0.05). More patients achieved clinically meaningful improvements in TDI score (≥1 unit) with UMEC/VI (63%) versus TIO (49%; odds ratio at Day 84=1.78 [95% CI: 1.21-2.64]; P≤0.01). Improvements in SGRQ and CAT scores were similar between treatments. The incidence of AEs was similar with UMEC/VI (30%) and TIO (31%). CONCLUSION: UMEC/VI step-up therapy provides clinical benefit over TIO monotherapy in patients with moderate COPD who are symptomatic on TIO alone.

Randomized controlled trials and real-world observational studies in evaluating cardiovascular safety of inhaled bronchodilator therapy in COPD.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) bronchodilators and their combination are recommended for the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although the efficacy of LAMAs and LABAs has been well established through randomized controlled trials (RCTs), questions remain regarding their cardiovascular (CV) safety. Furthermore, while the safety of LAMA and LABA monotherapy has been extensively studied, data are lacking for LAMA/LABA combination therapy, and the majority of the studies that have reported on the CV safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy were not specifically designed to assess this. Evaluation of CV safety for COPD treatments is important because many patients with COPD have underlying CV comorbidities. However, severe CV and other comorbidities are often exclusion criteria for RCTs, contributing to a lack in external validity and generalizability. Real-world observational studies are another important tool to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COPD therapies in a broader population of patients and can improve upon the external validity limitations of RCTs. We examine what is already known regarding the CV and cerebrovascular safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy from RCTs and real-world observational studies, and explore the advantages and limitations of data derived from each study type. We also describe an ongoing prospective, observational, comparative post-authorization safety study of a LAMA/LABA combination therapy (umeclidinium/vilanterol) and LAMA monotherapy (umeclidinium) versus tiotropium, with a focus on the relative merits of the study design.

Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists for Difficult-to-Treat Asthma: Emerging Evidence and Future Directions.

Asthma is a complex disease where many patients remain symptomatic despite guideline-directed therapy. This suggests an unmet need for alternative treatment approaches. Understanding the physiological role of muscarinic receptors and the parasympathetic nervous system in the respiratory tract will provide a foundation of alternative therapeutics in asthma. Currently, several long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are on the market for the treatment of respiratory diseases. Many studies have shown the effectiveness of tiotropium, a LAMA, as add-on therapy in uncontrolled asthma. These studies led to FDA approval for tiotropium use in asthma. In this review, we discuss how the neurotransmitter acetylcholine itself contributes to inflammation, bronchoconstriction, and remodeling in asthma. We further describe the current clinical studies evaluating LAMAs in adult and adolescent patients with asthma, providing a comprehensive review of the current known physiological benefits of LAMAs in respiratory disease.

Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) added to combination long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) versus LABA/ICS for adults with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatment with long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA/ICS) can relieve asthma symptoms and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, but there are limited treatment options for people who do not gain control on combination LABA/ICS. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) are a class of inhaled drug which have been effective for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and are now becoming available for people with asthma to take alongside their LABA/ICS inhaler. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) to combination long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adults whose asthma is not well controlled by LABA/ICS. SEARCH METHODS: We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Review Group Specialised Register (CAGR) up to January 2016. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO trials portal, and reference lists of other reviews, and we contacted trial authors for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies met the inclusion criteria if they compared LAMA as an add-on to LABA/ICS versus LABA/ICS alone for adults with asthma. We included studies reported as full text, those published as abstract only, and unpublished data. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (OCS), validated measures of asthma control, and serious adverse events (including mortality). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened searches and independently extracted details on risk of bias and numerical data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) using a random-effects model. We rated all outcomes using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We found four double-blind, double-dummy trials comparing LAMA to placebo, including 1197 people with asthma taking combination LABA/ICS. One of the trials was designed to study glycopyrronium bromide but was withdrawn prior to enrolment, and the other three all studied tiotropium bromide (mostly 5 µg once daily via Respimat) over 48 to 52 weeks. People in the trials had a mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of 55% of their predicted value, indicating severe asthma.People randomised to take tiotropium add-on had fewer exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids than those continuing to take LABA/ICS alone, but the confidence intervals did not rule out no difference (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.02; moderate quality evidence). Over 48 weeks, 328 out of 1000 people taking their usual LABA/ICS would have to take oral corticosteroids for an exacerbation compared with 271 if they took tiotropium as well (95% CI 218 to 333 per 1000). Analyses comparing the number of exacerbations per patient in each group (rate ratio) and the time until first exacerbation (hazard ratio) were in keeping with the main result. Quality of life, as measured by the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) was no better for those taking tiotropium add-on than for those taking LABA/ICS alone when considered in light of the 0.5 minimal clinically important difference on the scale (MD 0.09, 95% CI - 0.03 to 0.20), and evidence for whether tiotropium increased or decreased serious adverse events in this population was inconsistent (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47; I(2) = 76%).Within the secondary outcomes, exacerbations requiring hospital admission were too rare to tell whether tiotropium was beneficial over LABA/ICS alone. There was high quality evidence showing benefits to lung function (trough FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC)) and potentially small benefits to asthma control. People taking tiotropium add-on were less likely to experience non-serious adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium add-on may have additional benefits over LABA/ICS alone in reducing the need for rescue oral steroids in people with severe asthma. The effect was imprecise, and there was no evidence for other LAMA preparations. Possible benefits on quality of life were negligible, and evidence for the effect on serious adverse events was inconsistent. There are likely to be small added benefits for tiotropium Respimat 5 µg daily on lung function and asthma control over LABA/ICS alone and fewer non-serious adverse events. The benefit of tiotropium add-on on the frequency of hospital admission is still unknown, despite year-long trials.Ongoing and future trials should clearly describe participants' background medications to help clinicians judge how the findings relate to stepwise care. If studies test LAMAs other than tiotropium Respimat for asthma, they should be at least six months long and use accepted and validated outcomes to allow comparisons of the safety and effectiveness between different preparations.