Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
1.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 19: 1433-1445, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38948907

RESUMEN

Background: Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were reported less frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic. We report real-world data on COPD exacerbation rates before and during this pandemic. Methods: Exacerbation patterns were analysed using electronic medical records or claims data of patients with COPD before (2017-2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020 through early 2022) in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States. Data from each country were analysed separately. The proportions of patients with COPD receiving maintenance treatment were also estimated. Results: The proportion of patients with exacerbations fell 45-78% across five countries in 2020 versus 2019. Exacerbation rates in most countries were reduced by >50% in 2020 compared with 2019. The proportions of patients with an exacerbation increased in most countries in 2021. Across each country, seasonal exacerbation increases seen during autumn and winter in pre-pandemic years were absent during the first year of the pandemic. The percentage of patients filling COPD prescriptions across each country increased by 4.53-22.13% in 2019 to 9.94-34.17% in 2021. Conclusion: Early, steep declines in exacerbation rates occurred in 2020 versus 2019 across all five countries and were accompanied by a loss of the seasonal pattern of exacerbation.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Francia/epidemiología , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Pandemias , Italia/epidemiología , Factores de Tiempo , Estaciones del Año
2.
Respir Res ; 22(1): 144, 2021 May 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33971856

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The OSMO study assessed the efficacy of switching to mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma that was uncontrolled whilst receiving omalizumab. The objective of this analysis was to assess the proportion of patients achieving pre-defined improvements in up to four efficacy outcomes and the relationship between patient baseline characteristics and treatment response. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of OSMO study data (GSK ID:204471; ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT02654145). Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma uncontrolled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids, other controller(s) and omalizumab subcutaneously (≥ 4 months) were switched to mepolizumab 100 mg administered subcutaneously. Endpoints included the proportion of responders-i.e. patients achieving a pre-defined clinical improvement in ≥ 1 of the following outcomes: (1) Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score (≥ 0.5-points), (2) St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (≥ 4-points), (3) pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1; ≥ 100 mL), all at Week 32, and (4) annualised rate of clinically significant exacerbations (≥ 50% reduction). RESULTS: Of the 145 patients included, 94%, 83%, 63% and 31% were responders for ≥ 1, ≥ 2, ≥ 3 and 4 outcomes, respectively; 75% and 78% were ACQ-5 and SGRQ score responders, and 50% and 69% were FEV1 and exacerbation responders. Subgroup analyses demonstrated improvements irrespective of baseline blood eosinophil count, prior omalizumab treatment regimen/duration, comorbidities, prior exacerbation history, maintenance oral corticosteroid use, ACQ-5 and SGRQ scores, and body weight/body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: After switching to mepolizumab, almost all patients with uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma on omalizumab achieved a beneficial response in ≥ 1 clinical outcome. Improvements were observed regardless of baseline characteristics. Trial registration This manuscript is a post hoc analysis of data from the OSMO study. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02654145. Registered January 13, 2016.


Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Omalizumab/uso terapéutico , Eosinofilia Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Antiasmáticos/efectos adversos , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/fisiopatología , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Sustitución de Medicamentos/efectos adversos , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado , Humanos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Omalizumab/efectos adversos , Eosinofilia Pulmonar/diagnóstico , Eosinofilia Pulmonar/fisiopatología , Calidad de Vida , Recuperación de la Función , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31114180

RESUMEN

Background: There are currently limited real-world data on the clinical burden of illness in patients with COPD who continue to exacerbate despite receiving triple therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the burden of COPD in patients with and without a phenotype characterized by a high blood eosinophil count and high risk of exacerbations while receiving triple therapy. Methods: This retrospective cohort study (GSK ID: 207323/PRJ2647) used UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink records linked with Hospital Episode Statistics. Eligible patients had a COPD medical diagnosis code recorded between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2014, and a blood eosinophil count recorded on/after that date. Patients were followed from index date (first qualifying blood eosinophil count) until December 31, 2015. The study phenotype was defined as ≥2 moderate/≥1 severe acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) in the year prior to the index date, current use of multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), and blood eosinophil count ≥150 cells/µL on the index date. Outcomes measured during follow-up included moderate/severe AECOPDs, severe AECOPDs, all-cause mortality, primary care (GP) clinical consultations, and non-AECOPD-related unscheduled hospitalizations. Results: Of 46,814 patients eligible for inclusion, 2512 (5.4%) met the definition of the study phenotype. Adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) of moderate/severe AECOPDs and all-cause mortality in patients with the study phenotype versus those without were 2.32 (2.22, 2.43) and 1.26 (1.16, 1.37), respectively. For GP visits and non-AECOPD-related unscheduled hospitalizations, adjusted rate ratios (95% CI), in patients with the study phenotype versus those without, were 1.09 (1.05, 1.12) and 1.31 (1.18, 1.46), respectively. Conclusion: Patients with COPD and raised blood eosinophil counts who continue to exacerbate despite MITT represent a distinct subgroup who experience substantial clinical burden and account for high healthcare expenditure. There is a need for more effective management and therapeutic options for these patients.


Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Costo de Enfermedad , Eosinofilia/sangre , Eosinófilos , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración por Inhalación , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bases de Datos Factuales , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Quimioterapia Combinada , Eosinofilia/diagnóstico , Eosinofilia/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nebulizadores y Vaporizadores , Fenotipo , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/sangre , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido/epidemiología
4.
Chron Respir Dis ; 16: 1479973118815692, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30789018

RESUMEN

Correct use and ease of use of a placebo dry powder inhaler was evaluated in two single-arm, United States-multicenter, phase-IV studies in adults with asthma ( n = 259) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; n = 278) who were receiving maintenance inhaler therapy. Subjects demonstrating correct placebo inhaler use within three attempts at screening were instructed to take once-daily inhalations from the inhaler for 28 ± 2 days (continuing usual maintenance), followed by randomization to complete one of two versions of an ease-of-use questionnaire and reassessment for correct inhaler use. At study end, 96% asthma/93% COPD subjects rated the placebo inhaler as "easy" or "very easy" to use while demonstrating correct use. Furthermore, 99% asthma/99% COPD subjects indicated it was "easy" or "very easy" to determine number of doses remaining, and 81%/84%, respectively, indicated they would be "likely" or "very likely" to request their current medication in the inhaler, if available. Adverse event (AE) rates were 12% asthma/15% COPD, most frequently headache (3%/3%). Treatment-related AEs were reported in one subject with asthma (cough) and four subjects with COPD (cough, n = 3; back pain, n = 1). At study end, most subjects with asthma or COPD operated the placebo inhaler correctly and found it easy to use.


Asunto(s)
Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhaladores de Polvo Seco , Prioridad del Paciente , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración por Inhalación , Asma/fisiopatología , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
5.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29386888

RESUMEN

Background: Patients with COPD are at risk for life-threatening pneumonia. Although anatomical abnormalities in the thorax may predispose to pneumonia, those abnormalities identified on routine chest X-rays (CXRs) in patients with COPD have not been studied to better understand pneumonia risk. Methods: We conducted a post hoc exploratory analysis of data from two replicate year-long clinical trials assessing the impact of fluticasone furoate-vilanterol versus vilanterol alone on COPD exacerbations (GSK studies: HZC102871/NCT01009463 and HZC102970/NCT01017952). Abnormalities on baseline CXRs from 179 patients who developed pneumonia and 50 randomly selected patients who did not were identified by blinded consensus readings conducted by two radiologists. Positive and negative likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to evaluate the markers for subsequent pneumonia development during the 1-year study period. Results: Baseline characteristics distinguishing the pneumonia and non-pneumonia groups included a lower body mass index (24.9 vs 27.5 kg/m2, P=0.008), more severe airflow obstruction (mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1]/forced vital capacity ratio: 42.3% vs 47.6%, P=0.003), and prior pneumonia (36% vs 20%, P=0.030). Baseline CXR findings with the highest diagnostic ORs were: elevated hemi-diaphragm (OR: 6.87; 95% CI: 0.90, 52.26), thick tracheal-esophageal stripe (OR: 4.39 [0.25, 78.22]), narrow cardiac silhouette (OR: 2.91 [0.85, 9.99]), calcified pleural plaque/mid-chest pleural thickening (OR: 2.82 [0.15, 53.76]), and large/prominent pulmonary artery shadow (OR: 1.94 [0.95, 3.97]). The presence of a narrow cardiac silhouette at baseline was associated with a statistically significant lower mean pre-bronchodilator FEV1 (P=0.040). There was also a trend for a lower mean pre-bronchodilator FEV1 in patients with a large/prominent pulmonary artery shadow at baseline (P=0.095). Conclusion: Findings on routine CXR that relate to pathophysiological mechanisms of pneumonia could help determine pneumonia risk in patients with COPD.


Asunto(s)
Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Neumonía/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico por imagen , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Androstadienos/administración & dosificación , Alcoholes Bencílicos/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Clorobencenos/administración & dosificación , Combinación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado , Glucocorticoides/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Neumonía/etiología , Neumonía/fisiopatología , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/complicaciones , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Capacidad Vital
6.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28280319

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Alcoholes Bencílicos/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Clorobencenos/administración & dosificación , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Quinuclidinas/administración & dosificación , Bromuro de Tiotropio/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Argentina , Alcoholes Bencílicos/efectos adversos , Broncodilatadores/efectos adversos , Clorobencenos/efectos adversos , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Análisis de los Mínimos Cuadrados , Modelos Logísticos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Quinuclidinas/efectos adversos , Recuperación de la Función , Sudáfrica , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Factores de Tiempo , Bromuro de Tiotropio/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos , Capacidad Vital
7.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25246783

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Estimation suggests that at least 4 million people die, annually, as a result of chronic respiratory disease (CRD). The Global Alliance against Chronic Respiratory Diseases (GARD) was formed following a mandate from the World Health Assembly to address this serious and growing health problem. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of CRD in Russian symptomatic patients and to evaluate the frequency of major risk factors for CRD in Russia. METHODS: A cross-sectional, population-based epidemiological study using the GARD questionnaire on adults from 12 regions of the Russian Federation. Common respiratory symptoms and risk factors were recorded. Spirometry was performed in respondents with suspected CRD. Allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic bronchitis (CB) were defined by the presence of related symptoms according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma and the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines; asthma was defined based on disease symptoms; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was defined as a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume per 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio <0.7 in symptomatic patients, following the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines. RESULTS: The number of questionnaires completed was 7,164 (mean age 43.4 years; 57.2% female). The prevalence of asthma symptoms was 25.7%, AR 18.2%, and CB 8.6%. Based on patient self-reported diagnosis, 6.9% had asthma, 6.5% AR, and 22.2% CB. The prevalence of COPD based on spirometry in patients with respiratory symptoms was estimated as 21.8%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of respiratory diseases and risk factors was high in Russia when compared to available data. For bronchial asthma and AR, the prevalence for related symptoms was higher than self-reported previous diagnosis.


Asunto(s)
Bronquitis Crónica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Rinitis Alérgica/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bronquitis Crónica/diagnóstico , Bronquitis Crónica/fisiopatología , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Humanos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Rinitis Alérgica/diagnóstico , Rinitis Alérgica/fisiopatología , Factores de Riesgo , Federación de Rusia/epidemiología , Espirometría , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Capacidad Vital , Adulto Joven
8.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24855350

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia poses a significant risk in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but data are limited on the disease phenotypes most susceptible to pneumonia. METHODS: Cluster analysis using a data-driven recursive partitioning algorithm was employed using baseline data from two pooled one-year randomized exacerbation trials (n=3,255) of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol or vilanterol alone to identify distinct patient groups at greatest risk of pneumonia or serious (hospitalization or death) pneumonia. RESULTS: Five clusters were identified. Patients at greater risk of first pneumonia had more severe obstruction (forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity <46%) and either a body mass index <19 kg/m(2) (hazard ratio 7.8, 95% confidence interval 4.7-13.0; n=144) or a pneumonia history and greater comorbidities (hazard ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 3.0-7.7; n=374) relative to the cluster with the lowest pneumonia risk (reference; n=1310). Multiple comorbidities and use of psychoanaleptics also contributed to an increased risk of pneumonia in more obstructed patients. Independent of cluster, use of inhaled corticosteroids was associated with pneumonia (hazard ratio 1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.25-2.84) and serious pneumonia (hazard ratio 2.92, 95% confidence interval 1.40-6.01). CONCLUSION: Cluster analysis can identify patient populations at risk for serious safety outcomes and inform risk management strategies to optimize patient management. The greatest risk for pneumonia was in subjects with multiple pneumonia risk factors.


Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/efectos adversos , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/efectos adversos , Androstadienos/efectos adversos , Alcoholes Bencílicos/efectos adversos , Broncodilatadores/efectos adversos , Clorobencenos/efectos adversos , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Neumonía/inducido químicamente , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración por Inhalación , Corticoesteroides/administración & dosificación , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Androstadienos/administración & dosificación , Alcoholes Bencílicos/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Clorobencenos/administración & dosificación , Análisis por Conglomerados , Comorbilidad , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía/diagnóstico , Neumonía/mortalidad , Neumonía/terapia , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA