Effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium on ventilation and perfusion in COPD: a randomized trial.

RATIONALE: The long-acting ß2-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist combination indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) elicits bronchodilation, improves symptoms, and reduces exacerbations in COPD. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lung with hyperpolarized gas and gadolinium contrast enhancement enables assessment of whole lung functional responses to IND/GLY. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was assessment of effect of IND/GLY on global ventilated lung volume (%VV) versus placebo in COPD. Lung function, regional ventilation and perfusion in response to IND/GLY were also measured. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study assessed %VV and pulmonary perfusion in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD after 8 days of once-daily IND/GLY treatment (110/50 µg) followed by 8 days of placebo, or vice versa, using inhaled hyperpolarized 3He gas and gadolinium contrast-enhanced MRI, respectively. Lung function measures including spirometry were performed for each treatment after 8 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 31 patients randomized, 29 completed both treatment periods. IND/GLY increased global %VV versus placebo (61.73% vs. 56.73%, respectively, least squares means treatment difference: 5.00% [90% CI 1.40 to 8.60]; P = 0.025). IND/GLY improved whole lung index of ventilation volume to perfusion volume (V/Q) ratio versus placebo; 94% (90% CI 83 to 105) versus 86% (90% CI 75 to 97; P = 0.047), respectively. IND/GLY showed a trend to improve diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (+ 0.66 mL/min/mmHg; P = 0.082). By Day 8, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) was increased by 0.32 L versus placebo (90% CI 0.26 to 0.38; P < 0.0001), substantiating earlier findings and providing evidence of assay sensitivity for this trial. CONCLUSIONS: IND/GLY improved lung ventilation assessed by 3He MRI after 1 week of treatment. This observation may provide mechanistic support for the symptomatic clinical benefit shown with IND/GLY in COPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02634983).

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in Chinese patients with anti-histamine refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria.

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is characterized by the spontaneous development of wheals, itching, and/or angioedema, for ≥6 weeks. In China, non-sedating H1-antihistamines (H1AH) are the recommended first-line treatment, with escalation up to 4× the standard dose in symptomatic patients to achieve control. Treatment options for Chinese patients who remain symptomatic on H1AH treatment are limited. This 20-week randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study investigated the efficacy and safety of omalizumab as an add-on therapy for the treatment of patients with CSU who remained symptomatic despite H1AH treatment in China. Adult patients (N = 418) diagnosed with refractory CSU for ≥6 months were randomized (2:2:1) to receive omalizumab 300 mg (OMA300), omalizumab 150 mg (OMA150) or placebo, subcutaneously, every 4 weeks. Primary outcome was change from baseline to week 12 in weekly itch severity score (ISS7). Safety was assessed by rates of adverse events (AEs). Demographic and disease characteristics at baseline were comparable across treatment groups. At week 12, statistically significant greater decreases from baseline were observed in ISS7 with OMA300 (least square mean difference [LSM]: -4.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.70, -2.77; p < 0.001) and OMA150 (LSM: -3.79; 95% CI: -5.24, -2.33; p < 0.001) versus placebo. Incidence of treatment-emergent AEs over 20 weeks was slightly higher with OMA300 (71.3%) compared to OMA150 and placebo groups (64.7% and 63.9%, respectively). The incidences of serious AEs were balanced between groups. This study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in Chinese adult patients with CSU who remained symptomatic despite H1AH therapy.

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma: An analytic comparison of data from randomized controlled trials between Chinese and Caucasians.

BACKGROUND: Omalizumab has > 15 years of real-world evidence of effectiveness in Caucasian patients. In August 2017, it was approved as an add-on therapy for the management of moderate-to-severe asthma in China. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in Chinese and Caucasian patients. METHODS: This analysis included clinical trial data from a Chinese study (NCT01202903) and four studies with predominantly Caucasian patients (008, 009, EXTRA and INNOVATE). The following outcomes were analyzed: change from baseline in morning peak expiratory flow (mPEF), percentage predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), patient-reported outcomes (PROs), asthma exacerbation and safety. Further, a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) was also assessed. RESULTS: In the Chinese study, omalizumab significantly improved the mPEF from baseline vs placebo at Weeks > 4-8 through > 16-20; however, the change in mPEF did not reach statistical significance at Week 24. A similar trend towards improvement in mPEF was observed in the studies with Caucasians (INNOVATE, 008 and 009). In all studies, omalizumab showed greater improvement in %predicted FEV1, AQLQ score, and GETE score vs placebo. In addition, asthma symptom scores and seasonal exacerbations were lower, especially during winter, in the Chinese study, and was comparable to studies in Caucasians. PK/PD analyses showed that steady-state PK of omalizumab; free or total immunoglobulin E levels were similar in all studies. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical efficacy and safety of omalizumab was comparable among Chinese and Caucasian patients with moderate-to-severe asthma supporting therapeutic effectiveness, irrespective of race, ethnicity and geographical factors.

Pregnancy outcomes in the omalizumab pregnancy registry and a disease-matched comparator cohort.

BACKGROUND: The Observational Study of the Use and Safety of Xolair (omalizumab) during Pregnancy (EXPECT) pregnancy registry was a prospective observational study established in 2006 to evaluate perinatal outcomes in pregnant women exposed to omalizumab and their infants. OBJECTIVE: This analysis compares EXPECT outcomes with those from a disease-matched population of pregnant women not treated with omalizumab. Data from a substudy of platelet counts among newborns are also presented. METHODS: The EXPECT study enrolled 250 women with asthma exposed to omalizumab during pregnancy. The disease-matched external comparator cohort of women with moderate-to-severe asthma (n = 1153), termed the Quebec External Comparator Cohort (QECC), was created by using data from health care databases in Quebec, Canada. Outcome estimates were age adjusted based on the maternal age distribution of the EXPECT study. RESULTS: Among singleton infants in the EXPECT study, the prevalence of major congenital anomalies was 8.1%, which was similar to the 8.9% seen in the QECC. In the EXPECT study 99.1% of pregnancies resulted in live births, which was similar to 99.3% in the QECC. Premature birth was identified in 15.0% of EXPECT infants and 11.3% in the QECC. Small for gestational age was identified in 9.7% of EXPECT infants and 15.8% in the QECC. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of an increased risk of major congenital anomalies among pregnant women exposed to omalizumab compared with a disease-matched unexposed cohort. Given the observational nature of this registry, however, an absence of increased risk with omalizumab cannot be definitively established.

Capturing Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with EXACT. A Subanalysis of FLAME.

RATIONALE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations accelerate lung function decline, reduce quality of life, and increase mortality. A subset of patients (n = 457) from the FLAME (Effect of Indacaterol Glycopyrronium vs. Fluticasone Salmeterol on COPD Exacerbations) study used the Exacerbations of COPD Tool (EXACT) to capture symptom-defined exacerbations. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone on symptom-defined exacerbations measured using EXACT, and to assess differences between these events and exacerbations requiring healthcare resource use (HCRU). METHODS: All patients in FLAME used an electronic diary to record and detect symptom deteriorations; HCRU-related exacerbations were confirmed by investigators. In patients using the EXACT questionnaire, the onset, recovery, and magnitude of symptom-defined exacerbations were identified by changes in total scores relative to baseline. We analyzed the annualized rate and time to first symptom-defined (EXACT) exacerbation and assessed differences between symptom-defined and HCRU events in terms of number, severity, and concordance. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A nonsignificant 17% reduction in the annualized rate of symptom-defined (EXACT) exacerbations (rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.14; P = 0.242) and a numerically longer time to first symptom-defined exacerbation were observed with indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56-1.03; P = 0.075). These results were consistent with data from the overall FLAME population. Of the symptom-defined (EXACT) events, 23.5% corresponded to HCRU events, and 22.2% of HRCU events were captured by EXACT (κ index, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15-0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of the exacerbation definition used, our findings support the use of long-acting ß2 agonists/long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists as the preferred treatment option for patients at risk of future exacerbations. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01782326).

Indacaterol-Glycopyrronium versus Salmeterol-Fluticasone for COPD.

BACKGROUND: Most guidelines recommend either a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) plus an inhaled glucocorticoid or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) as the first-choice treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who have a high risk of exacerbations. The role of treatment with a LABA-LAMA regimen in these patients is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial. Patients who had COPD with a history of at least one exacerbation during the previous year were randomly assigned to receive, by inhalation, either the LABA indacaterol (110 µg) plus the LAMA glycopyrronium (50 µg) once daily or the LABA salmeterol (50 µg) plus the inhaled glucocorticoid fluticasone (500 µg) twice daily. The primary outcome was the annual rate of all COPD exacerbations. RESULTS: A total of 1680 patients were assigned to the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group, and 1682 to the salmeterol-fluticasone group. Indacaterol-glycopyrronium showed not only noninferiority but also superiority to salmeterol-fluticasone in reducing the annual rate of all COPD exacerbations; the rate was 11% lower in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (3.59 vs. 4.03; rate ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 0.96; P=0.003). The indacaterol-glycopyrronium group had a longer time to the first exacerbation than did the salmeterol-fluticasone group (71 days [95% CI, 60 to 82] vs. 51 days [95% CI, 46 to 57]; hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.91], representing a 16% lower risk; P<0.001). The annual rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was lower in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (0.98 vs. 1.19; rate ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.91; P<0.001), and the time to the first moderate or severe exacerbation was longer in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group than in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.86; P<0.001), as was the time to the first severe exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.00; P=0.046). The effect of indacaterol-glycopyrronium versus salmeterol-fluticasone on the rate of COPD exacerbations was independent of the baseline blood eosinophil count. The incidence of adverse events and deaths was similar in the two groups. The incidence of pneumonia was 3.2% in the indacaterol-glycopyrronium group and 4.8% in the salmeterol-fluticasone group (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Indacaterol-glycopyrronium was more effective than salmeterol-fluticasone in preventing COPD exacerbations in patients with a history of exacerbation during the previous year. (Funded by Novartis; FLAME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01782326.).

Evaluation of exacerbations and blood eosinophils in UK and US COPD populations.

BACKGROUND: Blood eosinophil counts and history of exacerbations have been proposed as predictors of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who may benefit from triple therapy (inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting ß2-agonist and long-acting muscarinic antagonist). METHODS: In a retrospective cohort analysis we examined the profiles of COPD patients from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and US Optum Clinformatics™ Data Mart (Optum) databases with reference to exacerbation frequency and blood eosinophil distribution. RESULTS: Of the 31,437 (CPRD) and 383,825 (Optum) patients with COPD, 15,364 (CPRD) and 139,465 (Optum) met the eligibility criteria and were included. Among patients with ≥2 exacerbations and available eosinophil counts in the baseline period (CPRD, n = 3089 and Optum, n = 13414), 17.0 and 13.3% respectively had eosinophil counts ≥400 cells/µL. Patients with ≥2 exacerbations or eosinophil count ≥400 cells/µL during first year, exacerbated at least once (CPRD, 82.8% vs Optum, 80.6%) or continued to have eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL (76.8% vs 76.5%), respectively in the follow-up year. In both years, a higher variability in the number of exacerbations and eosinophil count was observed in patients with one exacerbation and eosinophil counts between 300 and 400 cells/µL; patients with eosinophil count < 150 cells/µL had the lowest variability. Approximately 10% patients had both ≥2 exacerbations and eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL across the databases. CONCLUSION: A high variability in blood eosinophil counts over two consecutive years was observed in UK and US patients with COPD and should be considered while making treatment decisions. A small proportion of COPD patients had frequent exacerbations and eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL.

Treatment response to indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in exacerbating COPD patients by gender: a post-hoc analysis in the FLAME study.

BACKGROUND: The burden of chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) is increasing in women, with recent evidence suggesting gender differences in disease characteristics and potentially in treatment outcomes. METHODS: FLAME was a 52-week randomized controlled trial in patients with severe-to-very-severe COPD and a history of exacerbations. In this post-hoc analysis, gender-based baseline differences and treatment outcomes between indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 µg once daily (IND/GLY) and salmeterol/fluticasone 50/500 twice daily (SFC) were assessed in terms of rate of exacerbations, time-to-first exacerbation, lung function, health status, and rescue medication use. RESULTS: This post-hoc analysis included 2557 men and 805 women. Baseline characteristics differed between genders, with women being younger, having better lung function and more often experiencing ≥2 exacerbations in the previous year. Compared with SFC, IND/GLY treatment was associated with reductions in the annualized rates of moderate/severe exacerbations (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.81 [0.73-0.91], 0.89 [0.74-1.07] in men and women, respectively). Similarly, time-to-first moderate/severe exacerbation was also delayed (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.79 [0.70-0.89] and 0.76 [0.63-0.91] in men and women, respectively). Results were similar for all (mild/moderate/severe) exacerbations. Improvements in lung function, health status and rescue medication use with IND/GLY vs SFC were comparable between men and women. The smaller sample size for women may account for some observed discrepancies in treatment responses. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were gender differences in baseline characteristics, IND/GLY demonstrated similar trends for exacerbation prevention and lung function improvement in men and women with moderate-to-very-severe COPD and a history of exacerbations compared with SFC. Small differences in the effects seen between genders may be attributed to the different sizes of the two groups and need to be further evaluated in randomized trials that are appropriately powered for gender analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Post hoc analysis of the FLAME study. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01782326 . Registered 1 February 2013.

Long-Term Triple Therapy De-escalation to Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (SUNSET): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Triple-Dummy Clinical Trial.

RATIONALE: There are no studies on withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in patients on long-term triple therapy in the absence of frequent exacerbations. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct de-escalation from long-term triple therapy to indacaterol/glycopyrronium in nonfrequently exacerbating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: This 26-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy study assessed the direct change from long-term triple therapy to indacaterol/glycopyrronium (110/50 µg once daily) or continuation of triple therapy (tiotropium [18 µg] once daily plus combination of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate [50/500 µg] twice daily) in nonfrequently exacerbating patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Primary endpoint was noninferiority on change from baseline in trough FEV1. Moderate or severe exacerbations were predefined secondary endpoints. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 527 patients were randomized to indacaterol/glycopyrronium and 526 to triple therapy. Inhaled corticosteroids withdrawal led to a reduction in trough FEV1 of -26 ml (95% confidence interval, -53 to 1 ml) with confidence limits exceeding the noninferiority margin of -50 ml. The annualized rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations did not differ between treatments (rate ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.40). Patients with ≥300 blood eosinophils/µl at baseline presented greater lung function loss and higher exacerbation risk. Adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD without frequent exacerbations on long-term triple therapy, the direct de-escalation to indacaterol/glycopyrronium led to a small decrease in lung function, with no difference in exacerbations. The higher exacerbation risk in patients with ≥300 blood eosinophils/µl suggests that these patients are likely to benefit from triple therapy. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 02603393).

Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in the prevention of clinically important deterioration in COPD: results from the FLAME study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive disease and a composite endpoint could be an indicator of treatment effect on disease worsening. This post-hoc analysis assessed whether indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) 110/50 µg once daily reduced the risk of clinically important deterioration (CID) versus salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) 50/500 µg twice daily in moderate-to-very severe COPD patients from the FLAME study. METHODS: CID was defined as ≥100 mL decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) or ≥ 4-unit increase in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score or a moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation. Changes from baseline in the rate of moderate and severe exacerbations, time to first moderate-to-severe exacerbation, and change from baseline in the SGRQ score, measured after Week 12 up to Week 52, were assessed by presence of early CID (CID+) or absence of CID (CID-) at Week 12. RESULTS: IND/GLY significantly delayed the time to CID (hazard ratio [HR] (95% confidence interval [CI]), 0.72 [0.67-0.78]; P < 0.0001), and reduced the incidences of CID versus SFC. Additionally, IND/GLY delayed the time to CID in all patient subgroups. After 12 weeks until 52 weeks, CID+ patients had a significantly higher rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations versus CID- patients (P < 0.0001); moreover, CID+ patients experienced moderate-to-severe exacerbations significantly earlier versus CID- patients (P < 0.0001). CID+ patients had a comparable change in the SGRQ total score versus CID- patients. CONCLUSIONS: IND/GLY reduced the risk of CID versus SFC. CID had a significant impact on long-term exacerbation outcomes in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of ≥1 exacerbations in the previous year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01782326 .

Correlations between FEV1 and patient-reported outcomes: A pooled analysis of 23 clinical trials in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials of inhaled bronchodilators, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines recommend that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are assessed alongside lung function. How these endpoints are related is unclear. METHODS: Pooled longitudinal data from 23 randomised controlled COPD studies were analyzed (N = 23,213). Treatments included long-acting ß2 agonists, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABAs or LAMAs) and the LABA/LAMA combination QVA149. Outcome measures were Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores, COPD exacerbation frequency and rescue medication use. Relationships between changes in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (ΔFEV1) and outcomes following treatment were assessed using correlations of data summaries and model-based analysis: generalized linear mixed-effect regression modelling to determine if ΔFEV1 could predict patient outcomes with different treatments. RESULTS: Mean age was 64 years, 73% were male, and most had moderate (45%) or severe (52%) disease. Statistically significant correlations were observed between ΔFEV1 and each outcome measure (exacerbations Rs = 0.05; rescue medication, SGRQ, TDI, r = 0.11-0.16; all p < .001). Patients with greater improvements in trough FEV1 had on average better SGRQ and TDI scores, fewer exacerbations, and used less rescue medication. For SGRQ and TDI scores, minimal clinically important differences were observed over the range of pooled ΔFEV1 values. Model-based predictions confirmed the treatment effect was partly explained by changes in FEV1 from baseline with improvements in PROs observed across all treatments when trough FEV1 improved. Across all endpoints active treatments were better than placebo (p < .0001), and LABA/LAMA treatment resulted in numerically better treatment outcomes than either monocomponent. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that FEV1 improvements post-bronchodilation correlate with PRO improvements. Further improvements in patient outcomes may be expected by maximizing lung function improvements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration details for the 23 randomised controlled studies used in this pooled analysis are supplied in Additional File 4.

Blood Eosinophils and Response to Maintenance Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment. Data from the FLAME Trial.

RATIONALE: Post hoc analyses suggest that blood eosinophils have potential as a predictive biomarker of inhaled corticosteroid efficacy in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). OBJECTIVES: We prospectively investigated the value of blood eosinophils as a predictor of responsiveness to an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist combination versus a long-acting ß2-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist combination for exacerbation prevention. METHODS: We conducted prespecified analyses of data from the FLAME (Effect of Indacaterol Glycopyronium vs Fluticasone Salmeterol on COPD Exacerbations) study, which compared once-daily long-acting ß2-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 µg with twice-daily long-acting ß2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid salmeterol/fluticasone combination 50/500 µg in patients with one or more exacerbations in the preceding year. Subsequent post hoc analyses were conducted to address further cutoffs and endpoints. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We compared treatment efficacy according to blood eosinophil percentage (<2% and ≥2%, <3% and ≥3%, and <5% and ≥5%) and absolute blood eosinophil count (<150 cells/µl, 150 to <300 cells/µl, and ≥300 cells/µl). Indacaterol/glycopyrronium was significantly superior to salmeterol/fluticasone for the prevention of exacerbations (all severities, or moderate or severe) in the <2%, ≥2%, <3%, <5%, and <150 cells/µl subgroups, and at no cutoff was salmeterol/fluticasone superior to indacaterol/glycopyrronium. Furthermore, the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations did not increase with increasing blood eosinophils. The incidence of pneumonia was higher in patients receiving salmeterol/fluticasone than indacaterol/glycopyrronium in both the <2% and ≥2% subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective analyses indicate that indacaterol/glycopyrronium provides superior or similar benefits over salmeterol/fluticasone regardless of blood eosinophil levels in patients with COPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01782326).

Early Changes in eDiary COPD Symptoms Predict Clinically Relevant Treatment Response at 12 Weeks: Analysis from the CRYSTAL Study.

Early detection of treatment response is important in the long-term treatment and management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis evaluated whether early improvement in symptoms, recorded in the first 7 or 14 days via an electronic diary (eDiary) compared with baseline, can predict clinically meaningful treatment responders at 12 weeks. CRYSTAL was a 12-week, randomized, open-label study that demonstrated the increased effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) or glycopyrronium (GLY), after a direct switch from on-going baseline therapies, in patients with symptomatic COPD and moderate airflow obstruction. The co-primary endpoints were trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and transition dyspnea index (TDI) at Week 12. Patients' symptom status was recorded daily in an eDiary. Of 4,389 patients randomized, 3,936 and 3,855 reported symptoms on Days 7 and 14, respectively. Patients who reported an early decrease in symptoms on Day 7 or 14 were more likely to achieve the minimal clinically important difference of ≥100 mL in trough FEV1 or ≥ 1 point in TDI at Week 12. Using stepwise multivariate regression models we identified as best predictors of FEV1 responders the decrease in wheeze on Day 7, and nighttime symptoms and wheeze on Day 14; best predictors of TDI responders were decrease in nighttime symptoms and wheeze on Day 7, and nighttime symptoms, sputum and wheeze on Day 14. Early symptom improvement at Day 7 or 14, especially wheeze and nighttime symptoms, may identify patients with clinically important improvement in lung function and dyspnea at Week 12.

Dual Bronchodilation with Indacaterol Maleate/Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Umeclidinium Bromide/Vilanterol in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe COPD: Results from Two Randomized, Controlled, Cross-over Studies.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two long-acting dual bronchodilator combinations: indacaterol/glycopyrrolate (IND/GLY) versus umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI). METHODS: Studies A2349 and A2350 were replicate, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, cross-over studies in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were randomized to sequential 12-week treatments of twice-daily IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg and once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg, each separated by a 3-week washout. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of IND/GLY compared with UMEC/VI in terms of the 24-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s profile at week 12 (FEV1 AUC0-24). Rescue medication use, symptom control, and safety were assessed throughout. RESULTS: Both treatments delivered substantial bronchodilation over 12 weeks, with improvements in FEV1 AUC0-24h at week 12 of 232 and 185 mL for IND/GLY, and 244 and 203 mL with UMEC/VI in Studies A2349 and A2350, respectively. The primary efficacy objective of non-inferiority of IND/GLY relative to UMEC/VI was not met as the lower bound of the confidence interval for the LS treatment comparison was below the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -20 mL in both studies: -26.9 and -34.2 mL, respectively (LS mean between-treatment differences: -11.5 and -18.2 mL). Both drugs were well tolerated, with AE profiles consistent with their respective prescribing information. CONCLUSIONS: IND/GLY and UMEC/VI provided clinically meaningful and comparable bronchodilation. Non-inferiority of IND/GLY to UMEC/VI could not be declared although between-treatment differences were not clinically relevant. The data support the use of IND/GLY as an efficacious and well tolerated treatment option in patients with COPD. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02487446 and NCT02487498).

Response to Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) by Sex in Patients with COPD: A Pooled Analysis from the IGNITE Program.

In this pooled analysis, we compared the effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) by sex versus other commonly used chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatments and placebo. Male and female patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD who had participated in six randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were analyzed by sex, and any differences noted. The effects of IND/GLY versus salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC), glycopyrronium, tiotropium and placebo, on lung function and the patient-reported outcomes (health status, dyspnea, rescue medication use and symptoms) were assessed by sex after 26 weeks treatment. The analysis population comprised 4719 men and 1389 women. Most baseline parameters differed significantly between men and women. Nonetheless, despite these differences in baseline characteristics, IND/GLY significantly improved lung function versus placebo (p < 0.0001) and all active comparators (p < 0.01) in men and women. Overall, IND/GLY showed better improvement in dyspnea and health status compared with all other treatments in both sex. Greater reduction of rescue medication use was observed with IND/GLY versus placebo and other treatments (all p < 0.01 expect IND/GLY versus SFC). Although some variability was observed, improvements in health status, dyspnea, rescue medication use and symptoms were generally larger in women than in men. Irrespective of sex, IND/GLY provided superior efficacy to monotherapy or SFC in both men and women. Small differences in efficacy response by sex were observed, which should be evaluated further in prospective clinical studies. Nevertheless, the benefits observed with IND/GLY confirm dual bronchodilator as the preferred therapy in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD regardless of sex.

Protocol design and synopsis: Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multiallergen OIT in Children and Adults with Food Allergy (OUtMATCH).

Background: Food allergy is common and causes substantial morbidity and even mortality. Safe and effective treatments for food allergy would therefore be highly desirable, especially for individuals with multiple food allergies. Objectives: Our aim was to describe a phase 3 study on treatment of patients with multiple food allergies with omalizumab. Methods: The study was developed as a collaboration between the Consortium for Food Allergy Research, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and 2 industry sponsors (Genentech and Novartis). Results: The study is currently under way, enrolling participants from age 1 year to age 55 years who are allergic to peanut and at least 2 other foods (including milk, egg, wheat, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut). The study is designed to address 3 major questions. First, stage 1 will study the potential value of omalizumab for the treatment of patients with peanut allergy and at least 2 other common food allergens. Second, stage 2 will directly compare treatment of patients with multifood allergies using omalizumab as monotherapy versus treatment with omalizumab-facilitated multiallergen oral immunotherapy in which omalizumab is used as an adjunctive treatment. Third, stage 3 will address the longer-term outcomes following these treatment approaches, including the introduction of dietary forms of the study foods to induce or maintain desensitization. Conclusions: This phase 3 study will provide important information on the potential of omalizumab to treat patients with multiple food allergies.