Selective androgen receptor modulation for muscle weakness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomised control trial.

BACKGROUND: Selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) increase muscle mass via the androgen receptor. This phase 2A trial investigated the effects of a SARM, GSK2881078, in conjunction with exercise, on leg strength in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and impaired physical function. METHODS: 47 postmenopausal women and 50 men with COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 s 30%-65% predicted; short physical performance battery score: 3-11) were enrolled into a randomised double-blind, placebo control trial. Patients were randomised 1:1 to once daily placebo or oral GSK2881078 (females: 1.0 mg; males: 2.0 mg) for 13 weeks with a concurrent home-exercise programme, involving strength training and physical activity. Primary endpoints were change from baseline in leg strength at 90 days (one-repetition maximum; absolute (kg) and relative (% change)) and multiple safety outcomes. Secondary endpoints included lean body mass, physical function and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: GSK2881078 increased leg strength in men. The difference in adjusted mean change from baseline and adjusted mean percentage change from baseline between treatment and placebo were: for women, 8.0 kg (90% CI -2.5 to 18.4) and 5.2% (90% CI -4.7 to 15.0), respectively; for men, 11.8 kg (90% CI -0.5 to 24.0) and 7.0% (90% CI 0.5 to 13.6), respectively. Lean body mass increased, but no changes in patient-reported outcomes were observed. Reversible reductions in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and transient elevations in hepatic transaminases were the main treatment-related safety findings. CONCLUSIONS: GSK2881078 was well tolerated and short-term treatment increased leg strength, when expressed as per cent predicted, in men with COPD more than physical training alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03359473.

Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Therapy in Patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA), as compared with dual therapy (either inhaled glucocorticoid-LABA or LAMA-LABA), are uncertain. METHODS: In this randomized trial involving 10,355 patients with COPD, we compared 52 weeks of a once-daily combination of fluticasone furoate (an inhaled glucocorticoid) at a dose of 100 µg, umeclidinium (a LAMA) at a dose of 62.5 µg, and vilanterol (a LABA) at a dose of 25 µg (triple therapy) with fluticasone furoate-vilanterol (at doses of 100 µg and 25 µg, respectively) and umeclidinium-vilanterol (at doses of 62.5 µg and 25 µg, respectively). Each regimen was administered in a single Ellipta inhaler. The primary outcome was the annual rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations during treatment. RESULTS: The rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in the triple-therapy group was 0.91 per year, as compared with 1.07 per year in the fluticasone furoate-vilanterol group (rate ratio with triple therapy, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.90; 15% difference; P<0.001) and 1.21 per year in the umeclidinium-vilanterol group (rate ratio with triple therapy, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81; 25% difference; P<0.001). The annual rate of severe exacerbations resulting in hospitalization in the triple-therapy group was 0.13, as compared with 0.19 in the umeclidinium-vilanterol group (rate ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.78; 34% difference; P<0.001). There was a higher incidence of pneumonia in the inhaled-glucocorticoid groups than in the umeclidinium-vilanterol group, and the risk of clinician-diagnosed pneumonia was significantly higher with triple therapy than with umeclidinium-vilanterol, as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.92; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Triple therapy with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations than fluticasone furoate-vilanterol or umeclidinium-vilanterol in this population. Triple therapy also resulted in a lower rate of hospitalization due to COPD than umeclidinium-vilanterol. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; IMPACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02164513 .).

Validity and responsiveness of the Daily- and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity in COPD (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments.

BACKGROUND: The Daily-PROactive and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combines questionnaire with activity monitor data to measure patients' experience of physical activity. Their amount, difficulty and total scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) but require further psychometric evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To test reliability, validity and responsiveness, and to define minimal important difference (MID), of the D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments, in a large population of patients with stable COPD from diverse severities, settings and countries. METHODS: We used data from seven randomised controlled trials to evaluate D-PPAC and C-PPAC internal consistency and construct validity by sex, age groups, COPD severity, country and language as well as responsiveness to interventions, ability to detect change and MID. RESULTS: We included 1324 patients (mean (SD) age 66 (8) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 55 (17)% predicted). Scores covered almost the full range from 0 to 100, showed strong internal consistency after stratification and correlated as a priori hypothesised with dyspnoea, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. Difficulty scores improved after pharmacological treatment and pulmonary rehabilitation, while amount scores improved after behavioural physical activity interventions. All scores were responsive to changes in self-reported physical activity experience (both worsening and improvement) and to the occurrence of COPD exacerbations during follow-up. The MID was estimated to 6 for amount and difficulty scores and 4 for total score. CONCLUSIONS: The D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments are reliable and valid across diverse COPD populations and responsive to pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and changes in clinically relevant variables.

FULFIL Trial: Once-Daily Triple Therapy for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

RATIONALE: Randomized data comparing triple therapy with dual inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited. OBJECTIVES: We compared the effects of once-daily triple therapy on lung function and health-related quality of life with twice-daily ICS/LABA therapy in patients with COPD. METHODS: The FULFIL (Lung Function and Quality of Life Assessment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with Closed Triple Therapy) trial was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study comparing 24 weeks of once-daily triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol 100 µg/62.5 µg/25 µg; ELLIPTA inhaler) with twice-daily ICS/LABA therapy (budesonide/formoterol 400 µg/12 µg; Turbuhaler). A patient subgroup remained on blinded treatment for up to 52 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were change from baseline in trough FEV1 and in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at Week 24. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population (n = 1,810) at Week 24 for triple therapy (n = 911) and ICS/LABA therapy (n = 899), mean changes from baseline in FEV1 were 142 ml (95% confidence interval [CI], 126 to 158) and -29 ml (95% CI, -46 to -13), respectively, and mean changes from baseline in SGRQ scores were -6.6 units (95% CI, -7.4 to -5.7) and -4.3 units (95% CI, -5.2 to -3.4), respectively. For both endpoints, the between-group differences were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There was a statistically significant reduction in moderate/severe exacerbation rate with triple therapy versus dual ICS/LABA therapy (35% reduction; 95% CI, 14-51; P = 0.002). The safety profile of triple therapy reflected the known profiles of the components. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the benefits of single-inhaler triple therapy compared with ICS/LABA therapy in patients with advanced COPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02345161).

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler versus a multi-dose inhaler in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination 50/250 µg (FSC) Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® system, a single unit dose inhaler, with the multi-dose FSC Diskus® inhaler in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: This multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, two-way cross-over study compared 12 weeks' treatment of FSC administered twice daily using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in trough morning forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Day 85, and the pre-defined non-inferiority criteria was: the lower limit of the confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -45 mL. Secondary endpoints included change in breathlessness (as measured by transition dyspnoea index (TDI)) and COPD-specific health status measures. RESULTS: The LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 was 116 mL in the Rotacaps/Rotahaler group and 91 mL in the Diskus group (difference in model-adjusted LS mean change: 25 mL (95% CI 2 mL, 47 mL)), the lower limit of the CI for the treatment difference being greater than the protocol-defined criterion for non-inferiority i.e. -45 mL. Data for breathlessness, COPD-specific health status and safety parameters were similar following FSC treatment via either inhaler. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with Diskus in patients with COPD. The risk:benefit profile for the two inhalers was comparable.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler and a multi-dose inhaler in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: In developing countries, there is a need for access to affordable inhaled respiratory medicines. This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC) 50/250 µg Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® compared with FSC 50/250 µg Diskus®. METHODS: A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy study evaluated 12 weeks, twice daily treatment of FSC 50/250 µg administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus inhaler in a crossover design in patients with asthma (pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 40%-85% of predicted, FEV1 reversibility ≥12%, prior stable dose with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/long acting beta-agonist). The primary efficacy endpoint, change from baseline in trough morning FEV1 at Day 85, was analysed using a model for repeated measures analysis. The pre-defined criterion for non-inferiority was the lower limit of the CI (0.025, one-sided significance level) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -125 mL. Secondary endpoints included serial FEV1 measurements, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), rescue medication use, day- and night-time asthma symptoms, Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores, and serial cortisol measured over 12 h (area under the curve (AUC0-12)). RESULTS: Treatment with FSC 50/250 µg via Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus resulted in a similar LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 (231 mL and 203 mL respectively). The difference in the model-adjusted LS mean change was 28 mL (95% CI -24 mL, 80 mL), fulfilling the criterion for non-inferiority. Data for all secondary endpoints were similar for the two treatments, supporting the primary endpoint findings. Both treatments were well tolerated and demonstrated similar safety profiles. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with administration using Diskus in patients with asthma, and suggests there is no difference in the risk:benefit profile between the two FSC inhalers.

The PROactive instruments to measure physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

No current patient-centred instrument captures all dimensions of physical activity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our objective was item reduction and initial validation of two instruments to measure physical activity in COPD.Physical activity was assessed in a 6-week, randomised, two-way cross-over, multicentre study using PROactive draft questionnaires (daily and clinical visit versions) and two activity monitors. Item reduction followed an iterative process including classical and Rasch model analyses, and input from patients and clinical experts.236 COPD patients from five European centres were included. Results indicated the concept of physical activity in COPD had two domains, labelled "amount" and "difficulty". After item reduction, the daily PROactive instrument comprised nine items and the clinical visit contained 14. Both demonstrated good model fit (person separation index >0.7). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the bidimensional structure. Both instruments had good internal consistency (Cronbach's α>0.8), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.9) and exhibited moderate-to-high correlations (r>0.6) with related constructs and very low correlations (r<0.3) with unrelated constructs, providing evidence for construct validity.Daily and clinical visit "PROactive physical activity in COPD" instruments are hybrid tools combining a short patient-reported outcome questionnaire and two activity monitor variables which provide simple, valid and reliable measures of physical activity in COPD patients.

A meta-analysis of four randomized clinical trials to confirm the reliability and responsiveness of the Shortness of Breath with Daily Activities (SOBDA) questionnaire in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by non-reversible airflow limitation. A common symptom of COPD is dyspnea or shortness of breath. Dyspnea may vary daily, with a large impact on patients' lives. Previous clinical trials used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures that quantified dyspnea at discrete intervals and hence did not reflect this variability. Recently the Shortness of Breath with Daily Activities (SOBDA) questionnaire was developed as a PRO measure of dyspnea utilizing a daily diary. This confirmatory post hoc meta-analysis of SOBDA data from a large clinical study program further supports the questionnaire and clarifies the minimum threshold of SOBDA response. METHODS: Data from four clinical trials (DB2113361, NCT01313637; DB2113373, NCT01313650; DB2113360, NCT01316900; DB2113374, NCT01316913) were analyzed. These 24-week trials were randomized, blinded studies investigating the efficacy and safety of several COPD treatments. These post hoc analyses focused on the SOBDA questionnaire properties. This electronic-diary consists of 13 items completed daily, in which patients rate their breathlessness level during common daily activities. Resultant SOBDA scores were compared with related, commonly used assessments: modified Medical Research Council Research Dyspnea Scale (mMRC), Baseline Dyspnea Index (BDI), Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). The consistency, reliability, validity (convergent, known groups), and responsiveness of the SOBDA questionnaire was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 4967 patients with COPD provided data for these analyses. The SOBDA questionnaire had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.936), high test-retest reliability (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.86) and convergent validity with related measures (SGRQ total score, Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.59; CAT, Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient = 0.50). SOBDA scores were statistically significantly lower in responders (as defined by TDI, SGRQ, CAT, and trough FEV1 levels) versus non-responders (p < 0.001 for all assessments and all time points). Using an anchor-based method, the threshold of a minimum response was calculated as a SOBDA score change of -0.2 (SOBDA score range = 1-4). CONCLUSIONS: The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the SOBDA questionnaire as a PRO measure to quantify dyspnea was supported in a large clinical trial population of patients with moderate-very severe COPD.

Qualitative interviews of patients with COPD and muscle weakness enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating a new anabolic treatment: patient perspectives of disease experience, trial participation and outcome assessments.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and muscle weakness can cause impaired physical function, significantly impacting patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Loss of muscle strength is usually assessed through clinical and performance outcome (PerfO) assessments, which consists of tasks performed in a standardized manner, providing evidence of a patient's functional ability. However, evidence documenting the patient experience of COPD and muscle weakness is limited. METHODS: This two-stage qualitative study used semi-structured interviews in patients aged 45-80 years with COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1s [FEV1]/forced vital capacity ratio < 0.70, and FEV1% predicted of 30-80%) and muscle weakness. In Stage 1, 30-minute concept elicitation interviews were conducted with participants recruited across three US sites to explore impacts on physical functioning and activities of daily living. In Stage 2, interviews were performed with participants exiting a Phase IIa trial investigating the efficacy of a selective androgen receptor modulator (GSK2881078) on leg strength, whereby PerfOs were used to evaluate strength and physical functioning endpoints. These participants completed either 60-minute in-depth (n = 32) or 15-minute confirmatory (n = 35) interviews exploring trial experience, completion of outcome measures, disease experience and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: In Stage 1 (n = 20), most participants described their muscles as weak (83.3%). Difficulties with walking (100%) and lifting heavy objects (90%) were reported. In Stage 2, 60-minute interviews, all participants (n = 32) reported a positive trial experience. Most participants reported that the home exercise program was easy to fit into daily life (77.8%), the PROactive daily diary was easy to complete (100%) and wearable sensors were easy to use (65.6%). However, technical issues were reported (71%), and few participants (19.4%) found physical assessments easy to complete. Improvements in muscle strength and functional limitations were reported by most participants. The shorter 15-minute confirmatory interviews (n = 35) supported the in-depth interview results. CONCLUSION: The qualitative interviews generated in-depth evidence of key concepts relevant to patients with COPD and muscle weakness and support the assessments of patient strength and physical function as outcome measures in this population in future studies. TRIAL NUMBER: GSK Stage 1: 206869; Stage 2: 200182, NCT03359473; Registered December 2, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03359473 .

Item selection, reliability and validity of the Shortness of Breath with Daily Activities (SOBDA) questionnaire: a new outcome measure for evaluating dyspnea in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by irreversible, progressive obstruction of lung airflow. Dyspnea (shortness of breath [SOB]) is the COPD symptom which most negatively impacts patients' daily activities. To assess how SOB affects daily activities, 37 items were drafted through focus group discussions and cognitive interviews with COPD patients to develop a patient-reported outcome instrument: the Shortness of Breath with Daily Activities questionnaire (SOBDA). Psychometric analysis was conducted to reduce the number of items and evaluate the measurement properties of the final SOBDA. METHODS: Prospective, observational study of 334 COPD patients, recruited from 24 pulmonology and internal medicine clinics in the United States. The 37-item SOBDA was administered to patients each evening for 28 days using an electronic diary. Patients answered every item and rated their level of SOB experienced that day during specific activities. Item selection was conducted by examining item characteristics, dimensionality, and Rasch model analysis results. The decision to delete an item was based on psychometric evidence, content validity, and expert clinical input. The final SOBDA instrument was evaluated for internal consistency, reproducibility, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-four items from the 37-item pool were removed following the item selection process: nine items were removed due to high item-to-item correlations; five due to floor effects; three due to infrequent activity; one due to gender bias; two due to low factor loadings; three due to unordered response options; and one due to expert's discretion. Internal consistency and reproducibility of the final SOBDA were demonstrated by Cronbach Alpha = 0.87, and intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.91. Convergent validity was demonstrated by high correlation with the CRQ-SAS (0.60) and SGRQ-C (0.61). Known groups validity was demonstrated by significant difference between ratings of the mMRC and clinical global rating of severity. Evaluation of the ability to detect change was not performed owing to too few responders at the end of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Through the empirical item reduction process, 13 items were selected from the 37-item pool generated during qualitative development. The final 13-item SOBDA is a reliable and valid instrument for use in clinical trials.

Mepolizumab improvements in health-related quality of life and disease symptoms in a patient population with very severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: psychometric and efficacy analyses from the SYNAPSE study.

BACKGROUND: Although the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures (e.g. the 22-item Sino-nasal Outcomes Test [SNOT-22]) in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) have been defined, these definitions have not been extensively studied in patients with very severe CRSwNP, as defined by recurrent disease despite ≥ 1 previous surgery and a current need for further surgery. Therefore, the psychometric properties of the symptoms visual analogue scales (VAS) were evaluated, and meaningful within-patient change thresholds were calculated for VAS and SNOT-22. METHODS: SYNAPSE (NCT03085797), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 52-week trial, assessed the efficacy and safety of 4-weekly mepolizumab 100 mg subcutaneously added to standard of care in very severe CRSwNP. Enrolled patients (n = 407) completed symptom VAS (six items) daily and SNOT-22 every 4 weeks from baseline until Week 52. Blinded psychometric assessment of individual and composite VAS was performed post hoc, including anchor-based thresholds for meaningful within-patient changes for VAS and SNOT-22, supported by cumulative distribution function and probability density function plots. The effect of mepolizumab versus placebo for 52 weeks on VAS and SNOT-22 scores was then determined using these thresholds using unblinded data. RESULTS: Internal consistency was acceptable for VAS and SNOT-22 scores (Cronbach's α-coefficients ≥ 0.70). Test-retest reliability was demonstrated for all symptom VAS (Intra-Class Correlation coefficients > 0.75). Construct validity was acceptable between individual and composite VAS and SNOT-22 total score (r = 0.461-0.598) and between individual symptom VAS and corresponding SNOT-22 items (r = 0.560-0.780), based upon pre-specified ranges. Known-groups validity assessment demonstrated generally acceptable validity based on factors associated with respiratory health, with all VAS responsive to change. Mepolizumab treatment was associated with significantly increased odds of meeting or exceeding meaningful within-patient change thresholds, derived for this very severe cohort using six anchor groups for individual VAS (odds ratio [OR] 2.19-2.68) at Weeks 49-52, and SNOT-22 (OR 1.61-2.96) throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms VAS and SNOT-22 had acceptable psychometric properties for use in very severe CRSwNP. Mepolizumab provided meaningful within-patient improvements in symptom severity and health-related quality of life versus placebo, indicating mepolizumab provides substantial clinical benefits in very severe CRSwNP.

Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) often have blocked or runny noses, and loss of sense of smell. They can also have sac-like growths in their nose called nasal polyps, which often require surgical removement. The symptoms of CRS with nasal polyps can affect quality of life. In a clinical study named SYNAPSE, a new treatment option called mepolizumab reduced the size and severity of nasal polyps in patients suffering from very severe CRS with nasal polyps, compared with placebo. Mepolizumab also reduced the need for nasal polyp surgery. The SYNAPSE study also measured if 1 year of mepolizumab treatment improved patients' symptoms and quality of life. This was evaluated by asking patients to complete two separate tasks. These tasks were rating symptoms on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and completing a quality of life questionnaire called SNOT-22. The objective of this analysis was to see if these questionnaires accurately assessed a patient's quality of life. The analysis also assessed how many patients had major improvements in their symptoms with mepolizumab. Overall, data from 407 patients in the SYNAPSE study was analyzed. Results showed that both the VAS and SNOT-22 questionnaires accurately captured CRS symptoms and quality of life. In addition, patients treated with mepolizumab for 1 year had improvements in quality of life compared with placebo. In conclusion, these findings suggest that the VAS and SNOT-22 questionnaires are appropriate evaluation tools for patients with very severe CRS with nasal polyps. The findings also show that mepolizumab treatment is beneficial for these patients.

How do children and their caregivers perceive the benefits of inhaled asthma therapy?

OBJECTIVE: Although well reported in adults, there is relatively little data on how children with asthma and their parents describe their attitudes to the disease, expectations of therapy, and perception of treatment benefit. We investigated this to determine if they differed from reports by adults with asthma. METHODS: We recruited families with an asthmatic child (4-11 years) who had recently been prescribed a change in treatment [starting inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy (ICS) or changing from ICS to inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß(2)-agonist combination therapy (ICS/LABA)]. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the parents and the children if aged 7-11 years. RESULTS: We interviewed 28 parents and 13 children. All children on ICS/LABA had been changed from ICS monotherapy because of poor asthma control. Pediatric asthma had a significant impact on the whole family and both parents and children hoped the new medication would improve symptoms, increase their participation in physical activities, and decrease unscheduled visits to the GP (General Practitioner)/hospital. Positive effects of treatment change were reported by both parents and children, particularly in those changing from ICS to ICS/LABA. The most commonly reported benefits were reduced cough and wheeze, increased participation in sport or play activities, and reduced rescue medication use. These effects resulted in fewer visits to the GP/hospital and better attendance at school. CONCLUSIONS: While asthma symptoms prevent adults and children from participating in different types of activities (e.g., school, employment), children and their parents report the same benefits as previously reported in adults with asthma.

Patient experience of moderate asthma attacks: qualitative research in the USA and Germany.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information available on the impact of moderate asthma exacerbations, often called "asthma attacks" (i.e., those not requiring hospitalisation or treatment with systemic corticosteroids) on patients' lives. This multi-country qualitative study explored the patient experience of these events. METHODS: Semi-structured concept elicitation interviews were conducted in the USA and Germany with adult patients with asthma who had experienced a moderate asthma exacerbation in the prior 30 days. Physicians with experience in managing patients with asthma were also interviewed. Interviews explored patients' experience of symptoms and impact of moderate exacerbations and associated exacerbation triggers and treatment patterns. Physicians were also asked about their interpretation of a clinical definition and treatment of a moderate exacerbation. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patient (n = 20 in the USA, n = 8 in Germany) and six physician (n = 3 in the USA, n = 3 in Germany) interviews were conducted. During their moderate exacerbation, all patients reported experiencing shortness of breath, which many considered to be severe and the most bothersome symptom. Wheezing was also reported by all patients and considered severe by two thirds of patients. Most patients also reported coughing and chest tightness. All or almost all patients reported that moderate exacerbation caused fatigue/tiredness and impacted their physical functioning, emotional functioning, activities of daily living and work/school life. Most patients reported using rescue or maintenance inhalers to alleviate symptoms of the exacerbation. Conceptual saturation (i.e., the point at which no new concepts are likely to emerge with continued data collection) was achieved. Findings were used to develop a patient-focused conceptual model of the experience of moderate asthma exacerbations, outlining concepts related to triggers, symptoms, impact, and treatment from the patient perspective. Physician data was consistent with patient reports and complemented the conceptual model. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from concept elicitation interviews highlight the increased frequency, duration and severity of asthma symptoms and increased rescue medication use during moderate asthma exacerbations compared with the typical daily asthma experience, which have a substantial impact on patients' lives.

Higher COPD Assessment Test Score Associated With Greater Exacerbations Risk: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IMPACT Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the InforMing the PAthway of COPD Treatment (IMPACT) trial, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This post hoc analysis tested the relationship between baseline health status, risk of future exacerbations, and efficacy outcomes. METHODS: IMPACT was a Phase 3, double-blind, 52-week trial in patients with symptomatic COPD (COPD Assessment Test [CAT] score ≥10) and ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the prior year randomized 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25mcg, FF/VI 100/25mcg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25mcg. Annual rate of on-treatment moderate/severe exacerbations, lung function, and safety were analyzed by continuous baseline CAT score. RESULTS: Moderate/severe exacerbation rates increased with increasing baseline CAT scores in FF/UMEC/VI and UMEC/VI arms. There was a very small increase in on-treatment pneumonia rates at higher baseline CAT scores across all treatment arms. FF/UMEC/VI reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI (i.e., the inhaled corticosteroid effect) consistently across the range of CAT scores. The reduction with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI (i.e., the long-acting muscarinic antagonist effect) was greatest at lower CAT scores and appeared lesser at higher CAT scores. Improvements in lung function were observed with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI, regardless of baseline CAT score. CONCLUSIONS: The CAT score was predictive of exacerbation risk. Worse baseline health status was associated with higher moderate/severe exacerbation and pneumonia rates. Irrespective of baseline CAT score, FF/UMEC/VI improved lung function, and reduced the annual moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus dual therapy. Results indicate an overall favorable benefit-risk profile of triple versus dual therapy, irrespective of CAT score. Clinical Trial Registration:GSK (CTT116855/NCT02164513).