The influence of anti-cancer therapies on lymphocyte subpopulations of lung cancer patients.

Introduction: There are limited data on the influence of different anti-cancer therapies on lymphocyte subpopulations and their relationships to survival of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. This study aimed to assess the effect of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, immunochemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery, and antibodies against Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors (VEGF) on B cell, T cell, and NK cell subpopulations, and the survival time of NSCLC patients. Methods: A total of 32 consecutive NSCLC patients were recruited at Pulmonology Clinic, Leipzig from January 2018 to March 2020 and enrolled in this study. Immunophenotyping was done using a FACS Canto II flow cytometer (BD Biosciences) before the administration of the planned therapy and during therapy with up to 7 observational windows for each patient targeting 130 immunologic parameters. Results: Absolute transitional B cells was significantly increased after immunotherapy (p = 0.032), immunochemotherapy (p = 0.030), and antibodies against VEGF (p = 0.024). Similarly, absolute counts and percentage of B cells were significantly increased after adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.023). However, absolute counts and percentage of transitional B cells are significantly decreased after chemotherapy (p = 0.001). Activated cytotoxic T cells were significantly increased after immunotherapy (p = 0.031) and immunochemotherapy (p = 0.030). The overall survival rate of NSCLC patients was 31%. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study suggests that different types of anti-cancer therapies affect lymphocyte subpopulations of NSCLC patients. Further large-scale and multicentre studies are required to confirm our results and to evaluate the prognostic value of lymphocyte subpopulations.

Icenticaftor, a CFTR Potentiator, in COPD: A Multicenter, Parallel-Group, Double-Blind Clinical Trial.

Rationale: CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) dysfunction is associated with mucus accumulation and worsening chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) symptoms. Objectives: The aim of this phase IIb dose-finding study was to compare a CFTR potentiator, icenticaftor (QBW251), with placebo in patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis. Methods: Patients with COPD on triple therapy for at least three months were randomized to six treatment arms (icenticaftor 450, 300, 150, 75, or 25 mg or placebo twice daily [b.i.d.]) in a 24-week, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind study. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in trough FEV1 after 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in trough FEV1 and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS) total and cough and sputum scores after 24 weeks. Multiple comparison procedure-modeling was conducted to characterize dose-response relationship. Rescue medication use, exacerbations, and change in serum fibrinogen concentration after 24 weeks were assessed in exploratory and post hoc analyses, respectively. Measurements and Main Results: Nine hundred seventy-four patients were randomized. After 12 weeks of icenticaftor treatment, no dose-response relationship for change from baseline in trough FEV1 was observed; however, it was observed for E-RS cough and sputum score. A dose-response relationship was observed after 24 weeks for trough FEV1, E-RS cough and sputum and total scores, rescue medication use, and fibrinogen. A dose of 300 mg b.i.d. was consistently the most effective. Improvements for 300 mg b.i.d. versus placebo were also seen in pairwise comparisons of these endpoints. All treatments were well tolerated. Conclusions: The primary endpoint was negative, as icenticaftor did not improve trough FEV1 over 12 weeks. Although the findings must be interpreted with caution, icenticaftor improved trough FEV1; reduced cough, sputum, and rescue medication use; and lowered fibrinogen concentrations at 24 weeks. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04072887).

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.] / S2k-Leitlinie zur fachärztlichen Diagnostik und Therapie von Asthma 2023.

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

Quality of life with cemiplimab plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Patient-reported outcomes from phase 3 EMPOWER-Lung 3.

BACKGROUND: EMPOWER-Lung 3, a randomized 2:1 phase 3 trial, showed clinically meaningful and statistically significant overall survival improvement with cemiplimab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This study evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: PROs were assessed at day 1 (baseline), the start of each treatment cycle (every 3 weeks) for the first six doses, and then at start of every three cycles, using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Quality of Life-Lung Cancer Module (QLQ-LC13) questionnaires. Prespecified analyses included a longitudinal mixed-effect model comparing treatment arms and a time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration (TTD) analysis performed for global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) and all scales from the questionnaires. Between-arm TTD comparisons were made using a stratified log-rank test and proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 312 patients were assigned to receive cemiplimab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy and 154 to receive placebo plus chemotherapy; 391 (83.9%) were male and the median age was 63.0 years (range, 25-84). For pain symptoms (EORTC QLQ-C30), a statistically significant overall improvement from baseline (-4.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8.36 to -1.60, p = .004) and a statistically significant delay in TTD (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.60, p < .0001) favoring cemiplimab plus chemotherapy were observed. Statistically significant delays in TTD, all favoring cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, were also observed in functioning and symptom scales. A significant overall improvement from baseline in GHS/QoL was seen for cemiplimab plus chemotherapy compared with nonsignificant overall change from baseline for placebo plus chemotherapy (1.69, 95% CI, 0.20-3.19 vs. 1.08, 95% CI, -1.34 to 3.51; between arms, p = .673). No analyses yielded statistically significant PRO results favoring placebo plus chemotherapy for any QLQ-C30 or QLQ-LC13 scale. CONCLUSION: Cemiplimab plus chemotherapy resulted in significant overall improvement in pain symptoms and delayed TTD in cancer-related and lung cancer-specific symptoms and functions.

Mometasone/Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium (MF/IND/GLY) and MF/IND at Different MF Strengths versus Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Xinafoate (FLU/SAL) and FLU/SAL+ Tiotropium in Patients with Asthma.

Background: Once-daily, single-inhaler mometasone furoate/indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide (MF/IND/GLY, an ICS/LABA/LAMA) and MF/IND (an ICS/LABA) via Breezhaler® have been approved for the maintenance treatment of patients with asthma inadequately controlled with medium-or high-dose ICS or medium-or high-dose ICS/LABA treatment. Objective: Once-daily (o.d.) formulations of MF/IND/GLY and MF/IND at different MF dose strengths have been compared with twice-daily (b.i.d.) fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate (FLU/SAL), and b.i.d. FLU/SAL+ o.d. tiotropium (TIO) in the PALLADIUM, IRIDIUM and ARGON studies. Methods: The similarity in study design and consistent outcomes in these studies prompted the pooling of data in this review to better characterise these novel once-daily controller formulations. Results: Pooled data from PALLADIUM and IRIDIUM studies showed comparable or greater efficacy with o.d. MF/IND formulations versus b.i.d. FLU/SAL. The o.d. MF/IND/GLY was superior to b.i.d. FLU/SAL in the IRIDIUM study, and similar to, if not more efficacious than b.i.d. FLU/SAL + o.d. TIO in the ARGON study. Conclusion: These formulations therefore provide novel once-daily treatment options for patients across asthma severity and flexibility for clinicians to step-up or step-down the treatment using the same device and formulations.

Effectiveness of Extrafine Single Inhaler Triple Therapy in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in Germany - The TriOptimize Study.

Purpose: Real-word evidence on the effectiveness of switching from dual therapies or triple therapies (multiple inhalers) to extrafine single-inhaler triple therapy (efSITT), which consists of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) beclomethasone, the long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) formoterol and the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) glycopyrronium, in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. The impact of switching to efSITT on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), COPD specific symptoms, lung function and treatment adherence were assessed in routine clinical care. Patients and Methods: Patients were recruited at 148 sites in Germany between 2017 and 2020 in this multicenter, non-interventional observational study. Demographics, clinical data and treatment history were collected at baseline. HRQoL (measured by COPD Assessment Test [CAT]), lung function and adherence (measured by Test of Adherence to Inhalers [TAI]) were assessed at baseline and after six months. Descriptive analyses were conducted by prior treatment and GOLD groups as well as for the overall population. Results: 55.1% of the 2623 included patients were male. Mean age was 65.8 years. 57.5% of the patients were previously treated with ICS+LABA+LAMA (multiple inhalers), 23.9% with ICS/LABA (single or two inhalers) and 18.6% with LAMA/LABA (single or two inhalers). After six months, largest mean improvements in the total CAT score were observed in the ICS/LABA (-3.9) and LAMA/LABA (-3.9) prior treatment groups as well as in patients in GOLD group B (-2.9). In the overall population, the CAT items for cough, phlegm, and dyspnea decreased on average by -0.4 points each. After six months, FEV1 increased by 2.0 percentage points in relation to predicted values. The percentages of measured sRtot and RV of predicted values decreased by 24.5 and 4.4 percentage points, respectively. The percentage of patients with good adherence increased from 67.8% to 76.5%. Conclusion: Treatment switch to efSITT resulted in an improvement of HRQoL, COPD specific symptoms, lung function parameters and adherence under real-world conditions.

Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer: final results from the non-interventional study NADIR.

OBJECTIVE: Real-world evidence on the application of the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor lipegfilgrastim for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) is limited. The NADIR study aimed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of lipegfilgrastim as primary or secondary prophylaxis in patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: The non-interventional study NADIR (German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) Number DRKS00005711) enrolled 156 patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and 145 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who received lipegfilgrastim during chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was the incidence of severe neutropenia (CTCAE grade 3/4) and FN. The analysis was stratified for age groups (≤65 years vs. >65 years). RESULTS: Approximately half of the patients were aged >65 years (SCLC 54.5%; NSCLC 46.9%). Intention of antineoplastic treatment was mostly palliative (SCLC 89.1%; NSCLC 73.1%). Patients with high FN risk (SCLC 44.9%; NSCLC 28.3%) mostly received lipegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis (SCLC 81.4%; NSCLC 70.7%). FN was reported in 1.9% SCLC and 1.4% NSCLC patients. At least one severe neutropenia was documented in 30.1% SCLC and 17.9% NSCLC patients. For NSCLC patients aged >65 years, less severe neutropenia was reported as compared to younger patients (14.7% vs. 20.8%). Lipegfilgrastim-related adverse events were reported in 10.3% SCLC and 7.7% NSCLC patients. CONCLUSION: Lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice of patients with lung cancer showed similar effectiveness and safety as compared to the pivotal trial. Interestingly, in older patients severe neutropenia was reported less frequently. While most patients with high FN risk received lipegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis as recommended, there are still 20-30% of patients at high FN risk without primary prophylaxis who could benefit from better adherence to guidelines.

Cemiplimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial.

First-line cemiplimab (anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)) monotherapy has previously shown significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥50%. EMPOWER-Lung 3 ( NCT03409614 ), a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, examined cemiplimab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for aNSCLC, irrespective of PD-L1 expression or histology. In this study, 466 patients with stage III/IV aNSCLC without EGFR, ALK or ROS1 genomic tumor aberrations were randomized (2:1) to receive cemiplimab 350 mg (n = 312) or placebo (n = 154) every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks in combination with four cycles of platinum-doublet chemotherapy (followed by pemetrexed maintenance as indicated). In total, 57.1% (266/466 patients) had non-squamous NSCLC, and 85.2% (397/466 patients) had stage IV disease. The primary endpoint was OS. The trial was stopped early per recommendation of the independent data monitoring committee, based on meeting preset OS efficacy criteria: median OS was 21.9 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 15.5-not evaluable) with cemiplimab plus chemotherapy versus 13.0 months (95% CI, 11.9-16.1) with placebo plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.93; P = 0.014). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred with cemiplimab plus chemotherapy (43.6%, 136/312 patients) and placebo plus chemotherapy (31.4%, 48/153 patients). Cemiplimab is only the second anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent to show efficacy in aNSCLC as both monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy for both squamous and non-squamous histologies.

Cardiovascular safety of mometasone/indacaterol and mometasone/indacaterol/glycopyrronium once-daily fixed-dose combinations in asthma: pooled analysis of phase 3 trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate cardiovascular safety of two new inhaled fixed-dose combinations for treatment of asthma: (i) the inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta2-agonist (ICS/LABA) mometasone furoate/indacaterol acetate (MF/IND), (ii) the ICS/LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) MF/IND/glycopyrronium bromide (GLY). METHODS: Patient-level data were pooled from four randomized trials, including 52-week studies PALLADIUM (n = 2216) and IRIDIUM (n = 3092), 24-week study ARGON (n = 1426), and 12-week study QUARTZ (n = 802). Cardio-/cerebrovascular (CCV) event frequencies were examined in the following comparisons: (1) LABA effect: pooled-dose MF/IND vs. pooled-dose MF; (2) LAMA effect: pooled-dose MF/IND/GLY vs. pooled-dose MF/IND; (3) ICS-dose effects: (a) high-dose MF/IND vs. medium-dose MF/IND, (b) high-dose MF/IND/GLY vs. medium-dose MF/IND/GLY; (4) intra-class effects: (a) high-dose MF/IND vs. Fluticasone/Salmeterol (F/S), (b) high-dose MF/IND/GLY vs. F/S + Tiotropium (TIO). Risk estimates (percentage of patients with ≥1 CCV event) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each comparison. RESULTS: The frequency of CCV events was low, without notable differences between comparison groups. Risk estimates and corresponding RDs (95% CIs) were as follows: (1) pooled-dose MF/IND = 2.35%, pooled-dose MF = 2.18%, RD = 0.17% (-1.00%, 1.34%); (2) pooled-dose MF/IND/GLY = 3.65%, pooled-dose MF/IND = 3.77%, RD = -0.12% (-1.63%, 1.39%); (3a) high-dose MF/IND = 3.69%, medium-dose MF/IND = 3.35%, RD = 0.34% (-1.25%, 1.94%); (3b) high-dose MF/IND/GLY = 2.84%, medium-dose MF/IND/GLY = 2.02%, RD = 0.82% (-0.49%, 2.13%); (4a) high-dose MF/IND = 3.69%, F/S = 2.82%, RD = 0.87% (-0.66%, 2.40%); (4b) high-dose MF/IND/GLY = 1.26%, F/S + TIO = 1.05%, RD = 0.21% (-1.26%, 1.68%). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of increased cardiovascular risk attributable to the addition of IND to MF or addition of GLY to MF/IND. Similarly, no evidence of increased cardiovascular risk was observed with an increase in the ICS-dose or relative to F/S ± TIO.

Efficacy and Safety of Lipegfilgrastim in Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy in a Real-World Setting: Results of an Analysis of Pooled Data from Two Non-Interventional European Studies.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a common and serious complication in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This analysis was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim, a glycoPEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: Data from two European non-interventional studies (NIS NADIR and NIS LEOS) investigating lipegfilgrastim for primary and secondary prophylaxis were pooled. Outcomes included the incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN), use of anti-infectives and antimycotics, and adverse events and their relationship to lipegfilgrastim. RESULTS: The safety population included 361 patients with lung cancer (median age, 66 years [range, 36-88]), of whom 322 had received 2 or more consecutive cycles of lipegfilgrastim (efficacy population [primary prophylaxis, 75.5%; secondary prophylaxis, 16.5%]). Almost 40% of the patients were considered to have a high risk (>20%) of FN, and around 60% had an intermediate risk (10-20%). For all cycles, FN was reported in 3 patients (0.9%), neutropenia in 14 (4.3%), and grade 4 neutropenia in 9 (2.8%). Anti-infectives were used in 27 patients (8.4%) and antimycotics in 6 (1.9%). The incidence rates were lower for the patients' first cycle (FN, 0.4%; neutropenia, 0.8%; grade 4 neutropenia, 0.8%; anti-infectives, 0.6%; antimycotics, 0.6%). Adverse drug reactions considered lipegfilgrastim related were reported in 35 patients (9.7%), and serious adverse drug reactions in 10 (2.8%). None of the fatal events reported in 28 patients (7.8%) were lipegfilgrastim related. CONCLUSION: Lipegfilgrastim administered to patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety to that reported in published pivotal trials.

Fixed-dose combination of indacaterol/glycopyrronium/mometasone furoate once-daily versus salmeterol/fluticasone twice-daily plus tiotropium once-daily in patients with uncontrolled asthma: A randomised, Phase IIIb, non-inferiority study (ARGON).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of once-daily (o.d.) fixed-dose combination of indacaterol (IND), glycopyrronium (GLY) and mometasone furoate (MF) via Breezhaler® versus concurrent administration of salmeterol/fluticasone (SAL/FLU) twice-daily (b.i.d.) via Accuhaler®+Tiotropium (TIO) o.d. via Respimat® was evaluated in patients with uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: Patients (aged ≥18 years), symptomatic (Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ]-7 ≥1.5) despite treatment with long-acting ß2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid medium- or high-dose, received IND/GLY/MF high- (150/50/160 µg) or medium-dose (150/50/80 µg) o.d. or SAL/FLU high-dose (50/500 µg) b.i.d.+Tio 5 µg o.d. for 24 weeks. The primary objective was to confirm the non-inferiority of either dose of IND/GLY/MF to SAL/FLU high dose + TIO in terms of Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). Additional endpoints: ACQ-7, lung function, health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]), exacerbations, and safety after 24 weeks. RESULTS: IND/GLY/MF high- and medium-dose met the primary endpoint, confirming non-inferiority to SAL/FLU high dose + TIO for AQLQ (least square mean treatment difference [Δ]: 0.073 and -0.038, respectively; both p < 0.001). IND/GLY/MF high-dose improved ACQ-7 (Δ: -0.124; p = 0.004), trough FEV1 (Δ: 96 mL; p < 0.001), peak expiratory flow (morning [Δ: 9.56 L/min; p = 0.005], evening [Δ: 9.15 L/min; p = 0.006]) and SGRQ (Δ: -2.00; p = 0.04) versus SAL/FLU high dose + TIO. Improvements in these endpoints were comparable for IND/GLY/MF medium-dose and SAL/FLU high dose + TIO. Adverse events were generally comparable across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: IND/GLY/MF high- and medium-dose o.d. via a single inhaler were non-inferior to SAL/FLU high-dose b.i.d. + TIO o.d. via two inhalers for AQLQ. IND/GLY/MF high-dose o.d. improved lung function, asthma control and health status versus SAL/FLU high dose + TIO, while IND/GLY/MF medium-dose had comparable efficacy but at a corresponding lower steroid dose.

Once-daily mometasone plus indacaterol versus mometasone or twice-daily fluticasone plus salmeterol in patients with inadequately controlled asthma (PALLADIUM): a randomised, double-blind, triple-dummy, controlled phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting ß2-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) are considered safe and efficacious in asthma management. Most available FDCs require twice-daily dosing to achieve optimum therapeutic effect. The objective of the PALLADIUM study was to assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily FDC of mometasone furoate plus indacaterol acetate (MF-IND) versus mometasone furoate (MF) monotherapy in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. METHODS: This 52-week, double-blind, triple-dummy, parallel-group, phase 3 study recruited patients from 316 centres across 24 countries. Patients aged 12 to 75 years with a documented diagnosis of asthma for at least 1 year, percentage of predicted FEV1 of 50-85%, and an Asthma Control Questionnaire 7 score of at least 1·5 despite treatment with medium-dose or high-dose ICS or low-dose ICS plus LABA were included. A history of asthma exacerbations was not a study requirement. Participants were randomily assigned (1:1:1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive one of the following treatments for 52 weeks: high-dose MF-IND (320 µg, 150 µg) or medium-dose MF-IND (160 µg, 150 µg) once daily via Breezhaler; high-dose MF (800 µg [400 µg twice daily]) or medium-dose MF (400 µg once daily) via Twisthaler; or high-dose fluticasone propionate-salmeterol xinafoate (FLU-SAL; 500 µg, 50 µg) twice daily via Diskus. Participants received placebo via inhalation through the Breezhaler, Twisthaler, or Diskus devices in the mornings and evenings, as appropriate. The primary endpoint was improvement in trough FEV1 with high-dose and medium-dose MF-IND versus respective MF doses from baseline at 26 weeks, analysed in the full analysis set by means of a mixed model for repeated measures. High-dose MF-IND once daily was compared with high-dose FLU-SAL twice daily for non-inferiority on improving trough FEV1 at week 26 with a margin of -90 mL using mixed model for repeated measures as one of the secondary endpoints. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02554786, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 29, 2015, and May 4, 2018, 2216 patients were randomly assigned (high-dose MF-IND, n=445; medium-dose MF-IND, n=439; high-dose MF, n=442; medium-dose MF, n=444; high-dose FLU-SAL, n=446), of which 1973 (89·0%) completed the study treatment and 234 (10·6%) prematurely discontinued study treatment. High-dose MF-IND (treatment difference [Δ] 132 mL [95% CI 88 to 176]; p<0·001) and medium-dose MF-IND (Δ 211 mL [167 to 255]; p<0·001) showed superiority in improving trough FEV1 over corresponding MF doses from baseline at week 26. High-dose MF-IND was non-inferior to high-dose FLU-SAL in improving trough FEV1 from baseline at week 26 (Δ 36 mL [-7 to 80]; p=0·101). Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar across the treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Once-daily FDC of ICS and LABA (MF-IND) significantly improved lung function over ICS monotherapy (MF) at week 26; high-dose MF-IND was non-inferior to twice-daily combination of ICS and LABA (high-dose FLU-SAL) for improvement in trough FEV1. The combination of MF-IND provides a novel once-daily dry powder option for asthma control. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

AVAiLABLE NIS - AVASTIN® in lung cancer treatment in routine oncology practice in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab (Avastin®), a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy has become a routine treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The post-authorization, non-interventional study 'AVAiLABLE' assessed the effectiveness and safety of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment. METHODS: Nine hundred and eighty-seven adult patients (mean age 61.5 years, 59.8% male) with non-resectable advanced, metastatic or recurrent, predominantly non-squamous NSCLC were evaluated at 185 sites across Germany. 72.8% of the patients had stage IV disease at start of observation, 90.1% had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma and 80.8% met the bevacizumab label 'NSCLC other than predominantly squamous cell histology'. According to bevacizumab label, chemotherapy plus bevacizumab was recommended, followed by bevacizumab maintenance therapy. Effectiveness endpoints included response rates and progression-free survival (PFS); safety endpoints comprised adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Patients were followed until progression or intolerable toxicity. Data were evaluated by descriptive statistical methods. RESULTS: Median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 7.1; 8.4), overall response rate (ORR) 45.6% and disease control rate (DCR) 75%. The majority of patients (72.7%) achieved partial response or stable disease. Complete response was reached by 2.3%. 33.6% of patients experienced an ADR of grade ≥ 3. Bevacizumab-related ADRs of grade ≥ 3 occurred in 5.7% of patients, with the highest incidence for leukopenia, neutropenia, and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the non-interventional study 'AVAiLABLE' confirmed the effectiveness and safety of bevacizumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC in accordance with previous studies. No new safety signals were identified. Maintenance therapy with bevacizumab was well tolerated and safe even over extended periods (> 20 cycles). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02596958; registered on 4 November 2015.

Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes with Budesonide plus Formoterol Spiromax for Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Real-World, Observational Trial.

BACKGROUND: The fixed-dose combination of budesonide/formoterol (B/F) has been available in the Spiromax® dry powder inhaler since 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess patient satisfaction, inhaler use errors, and disease control in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treated with B/F Spiromax. METHODS: This non-interventional, prospective, 12-week study enrolled consecutive asthma or COPD patients who had recently begun treatment with B/F Spiromax or were switched from another inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist combination to B/F Spiromax in routine clinical practice. Patients recruited from 243 specialist respiratory clinics or general practices in Germany were assessed for patient satisfaction (Satisfaction with Inhalers and Preference questionnaire), inhaler application errors (modified Easy Low Instruction over Time checklist), disease control, and safety. RESULTS: The population included 3,943 patients: asthma n = 2,707 (68.7%); COPD n = 1,236 (31.3%). At baseline, 60.1% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their previous inhaler, and this increased to 88.8% at week 12 of B/F Spiromax use. Overall, 62.1% of pre-treated patients preferred B/F Spiromax to their old inhaler. The frequency of any handling error observed with B/F Spiromax at week 12 was lower than at baseline (11.9 vs. 25.5% of patients, respectively). After 12 weeks, 77.4% were assessed as having improved (minimally, much, or very much) overall health status versus baseline. Guideline-defined disease severity (as rated by physicians) and patient-reported symptom severity improved during the study in both asthma and COPD patients. B/F Spiromax was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: B/F Spiromax was associated with high patient satisfaction, low device handling error rate, and improvements in clinical outcomes in real-world clinical practice.

High strength extrafine pMDI beclometasone/formoterol (200/6 µg) is effective in asthma patients not adequately controlled on medium-high dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: A high strength of beclomethasone/formoterol fumarate (BDP/FF) in a pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI), which contains extrafine BDP (200 µg/actuation) and FF (6 µg/actuation) has been developed to treat those asthmatics who are not adequately controlled on previous treatments. METHODS: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel group study was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of pMDI BDP/FF 200/6 (two actuations bid) with BDP 100 µg (four actuation bid) in a population of 376 randomized adult asthmatics not adequately controlled with high dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or medium dose of ICS plus long acting ß2agonists (LABA). RESULTS: The primary endpoint [change from baseline over the entire treatment period in average pre-dose morning peak expiratory flow (PEF)] demonstrated the superiority of BDP/FF over BDP monotherapy, with an adjusted mean difference of 19 L/min, which is above the minimal important clinical difference reported for this parameter. Overall, BDP/FF and BDP showed a similar improvement of symptom-based parameters and of the use of rescue medication after 3-month treatment. The safety profile of the two drugs was comparable, although BDP monotherapy, but not BDP/FF, slightly reduced the levels of serum cortisol. CONCLUSIONS: The study proved that pMDI BDP/FF 200/6 µg was superior to BDP alone in improving lung function with comparable safety profiles. Therefore it may be considered as an effective treatment for adults with asthma not adequately controlled with high dose of ICS monotherapy or medium dose of ICS/LABA combinations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01577082 , date 06/04/2012.

The Pharmacological Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are markedly less effective against chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) than against asthma, and also have worse side effects. Whether ICS should be used to treat COPD is currently a matter of debate. METHODS: This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) carried out in May 2015. We analyzed clinical trials of ICS for the treatment of COPD with a duration of at least one year, along with meta-analyses and COPD guidelines. RESULTS: ICS lower the frequency and severity of COPD exacerbations in comparison to monotherapy with a long-acting ß2-agonist, but have no effect on mortality. Compared to placebo, ICS monotherapy lessens the decline of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) over one year by merely 5.80 mL (statistically insignificant; 95% confidence interval: [-0.28; 11.88]) and only marginally improve quality of life. ICS use in patients with COPD increases the risk of pneumonia. A combination of ICS with a long-acting bronchodilator improves FEV1 by 133 mL [105; 161] and lowers the frequency of severe exacerbations by 39% . The frequency of exacerbations is lowered mainly in patients who have many exacerbations; thus, ICS treatment is suitable only for patients with grade III or IV COPD. CONCLUSION: ICS monotherapy has no clinically useful effect on pulmonary function in COPD. The main form of drug treatment for COPD is with broncho - dilators, either alone or in combination with ICS. ICS can be given to patients with grade III or IV COPD to make exacerbations less frequent. Patients with an asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) can benefit from ICS treatment.