Characteristics of Users and New Initiators of Single- and Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Germany.

Purpose: To assess patient characteristics of users and new initiators of triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Germany. Patients and Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients with COPD and ≥1 prescription for single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT; fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI] or beclomethasone dipropionate/glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol [BDP/GLY/FOR]) or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), using data from the AOK PLUS German sickness fund (1 January 2015-31 December 2019). The index date was the first date of prescription for FF/UMEC/VI or BDP/GLY/FOR (SITT users), or the first date of overlap of inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting ß2-agonist, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (MITT users). Two cohorts were defined: the prevalent cohort included all identified triple therapy users; the incident cohort included patients newly initiating triple therapy for the first time (no prior use of MITT or SITT in the last 2 years). Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were assessed on the index date and during the 24-month pre-index period. Results: In total, 18,630 patients were identified as prevalent triple therapy users (MITT: 17,945; FF/UMEC/VI: 700; BDP/GLY/FOR: 908; non-mutually exclusive) and 2932 patients were identified as incident triple therapy initiators (MITT: 2246; FF/UMEC/VI: 311; BDP/GLY/FOR: 395; non-mutually exclusive). For both the prevalent and incident cohorts, more than two-thirds of patients experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the preceding 24 months; in both cohorts more BDP/GLY/FOR users experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation, compared with FF/UMEC/VI and MITT users. Overall, 97.9% of prevalent triple therapy users and 86.4% of incident triple therapy initiators received maintenance treatment in the 24-month pre-index period. Conclusion: In a real-world setting in Germany, triple therapy was most frequently used after maintenance therapy in patients with recent exacerbations, in line with current treatment recommendations.

Triple therapy (a combination of three different respiratory inhaled medications) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who experience repeated short-term symptom flare-ups when taking dual therapy (a combination of two different respiratory medications). Previously, patients had to take triple therapy using two or three separate inhalers. More recently, single-inhaler triple therapies have been developed, meaning patients can take all three different medications at the same time via one single inhaler. This study assessed the characteristics of patients who were already receiving triple therapy, or who started triple therapy (either via multiple inhalers or a single inhaler), in Germany between January 2015 and December 2019. In total, 18,630 patients who were already receiving triple therapy during the study period, and 2932 patients who newly started using triple therapy were included. The study reported that more than two-thirds of included patients had experienced at least one flare-up of COPD symptoms in the 2 years before starting triple therapy. Most patients had also received another therapy for COPD before starting triple therapy. A small proportion of patients started taking triple therapy after receiving no other therapy for COPD in the previous 2 years. The results of the study suggest that triple therapy for COPD in Germany is most often used in accordance with recommendations (patients already receiving therapy and experiencing repeated symptom flare-ups).

Treatment Patterns with Mirabegron and Antimuscarinics for Overactive Bladder: A Prospective, Registry Study in Taiwan and South Korea (FAITH).

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess overactive bladder (OAB) treatment patterns and factors associated with effectiveness and persistence. METHODS: A prospective, longitudinal, observational registry study of adults starting OAB therapy with mirabegron or antimuscarinics was undertaken. Primary endpoints were time from treatment initiation to discontinuation/switching; proportion who discontinued/switched; and reasons for discontinuation/switching. Secondary endpoints included OAB Symptom Score (OABSS), OAB Questionnaire: Short Form, and OAB Bladder Assessment Tool scores; factors associated with effectiveness and persistence; and safety. RESULTS: In total, 556 patients initiating mirabegron and 250 initiating antimuscarinics were enrolled. There was no treatment switch, change, or discontinuation in 68.5% of the mirabegron initiator group and median time to treatment change was not reached. Mean initial treatment duration was 130.8 days. In multivariable models, baseline OABSS was the only variable significantly associated with change from baseline in OABSS, and patients with mild and moderate OAB had significantly better persistence with mirabegron than those with severe OAB. Urinary tract infection was the most common adverse event with mirabegron. There was no treatment switch, change, or discontinuation in 60.4% of the antimuscarinics initiator group and median time to treatment change was not reached. Solifenacin was the most frequent initial treatment (66.0%). Mean treatment duration was 122.2 days. In multivariable models, baseline OABSS was the only variable significantly associated with change from baseline in OABSS, while patients with OAB medication in the 12 months before enrollment had significantly better persistence with antimuscarinics than those with no previous OAB medication. Dry mouth was the most common adverse event with antimuscarinics. CONCLUSIONS: Mirabegron and solifenacin were commonly prescribed as first-line OAB medications. There was no treatment switch, change, or discontinuation in more than 60% of the mirabegron initiator and antimuscarinics initiator groups. Mean initial treatment duration was 130.8 days and 122.2 days for mirabegron and antimuscarinics, respectively. Graphical Abstract available for this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03572231.

Safety and efficacy of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron compared with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and overactive bladder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIM: Antimuscarinics and the ß3-adrenoreceptor agonist, mirabegron, are commonly used for treating patients with overactive bladder (OAB) and α1 -adrenoreceptor antagonists (α1 -blockers) are the main pharmacological agents used for treating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). As these conditions commonly occur together, the aim of this systematic review was to identify publications that compared the use of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. A meta-analysis was subsequently conducted to explore the safety and efficacy of these combinations. METHODS: Included records had to be from a parallel-group, randomized clinical trial that was ≥8 weeks in duration. Participants were male with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. The indirect analyses that were identified compared an α1 -blocker plus OAB agent with an α1 -blocker plus placebo. The PubMed/Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, the Excerpta Medica Database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched for relevant records up until March 5, 2020. Safety outcomes included incidences of overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and urinary retention, postvoid residual volume, and maximum urinary flow (Qmax ). Primary efficacy outcomes were micturitions/day, incontinence episodes/day, and urgency episodes/day, and secondary outcomes were Overactive Bladder Symptom Score and International Prostate Symptom Score. A Bayesian network meta-analysis approach was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1039 records identified, 24 were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic groups in terms of the comparisons identified for all the safety and efficacy analyses conducted. Numerically superior results were frequently observed for the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron group compared with the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group for the safety parameters, including TEAEs, urinary retention, and Qmax . For some of the efficacy parameters, most notably micturitions/day, numerically superior results were noted for the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group. Inconsistency in reporting and study variability were noted in the included records, which hindered data interpretation. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic have similar safety and efficacy profiles in male patients with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. Patients may, therefore, benefit from the use of either combination within the clinical setting.

Oxybutynin-associated Cognitive Impairment: Evidence and Implications for Overactive Bladder Treatment.

Anticholinergic medications have long been a mainstay of overactive bladder (OAB) treatment. Oxybutynin, a first-generation anticholinergic, still accounts for more than half of all OAB medication prescriptions, despite associations with impaired memory and cognition, as well as mounting evidence that it may increase the risk of incident dementia. This review details the current literature regarding oxybutynin and cognition, including evidence from preclinical, clinical, and real-world studies that show that oxybutynin binds nonspecifically to muscarinic receptors in the brain and is associated with adverse cognitive outcomes. We also discuss society recommendations to reduce use of oxybutynin and other anticholinergics to treat OAB.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting ß2-agonist fixed-dose combinations vs. long-acting muscarinic antagonist in bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (ICS/LABA) in bronchiectasis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic medical records of bronchiectasis patients initiating ICS/LABA FDC or LAMA between 2007 and 2021. All bronchiectasis diagnoses were made by radiologists using high-resolution computed tomography. RESULTS: Of the 1,736 patients, 1,281 took ICS/LABA FDC and 455 LAMA. Among the 694 propensity score matched patients, ICS/LABA FDC had comparable outcomes to LAMA, with HRs of 1.22 (95% CI 0.81-1.83) for hospitalized respiratory infection, 1.06 (95% CI 0.84-1.33) for acute exacerbation, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.66-1.02) for all-cause hospitalization. Beclomethasone/formoterol (BEC/FOR) or budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) led to a lower risk of acute exacerbation compared to fluticasone/salmeterol (FLU/SAL) (BEC/FOR HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81; BUD/FOR HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.93). BEC/FOR resulted in lower risks of hospitalized respiratory infection (HR 0.48, 95% 0.26-0.86) and all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.55, 95% 0.37-0.80) compared to FLU/SAL. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide important evidence on the effectiveness and safety of ICS/LABA FDC compared with LAMA for bronchiectasis. BEC/FOR and BUD/FOR were associated with better outcomes than FLU/SAL.

Evaluation of Food Effect on the Pharmacokinetics of Velufenacin, a New Muscarinic Receptor Antagonist, in Healthy Subjects.

Velufenacin (DA-8010) is a new muscarinic receptor antagonist under development for the treatment of overactive bladder. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of velufenacin in healthy subjects. A randomized, open-label, single-dose, 4-sequence, 4-treatment, 4-period crossover study was conducted. Subjects received a single oral dose of velufenacin 2.5 or 5 mg in a fasted or fed (high-fat meal) state in each period with a 7-day washout. PK parameters including maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last measurable point were compared between the fed and fasted states. Twenty-seven subjects completed the study. The mean area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last measurable point of the velufenacin 2.5 and 5 mg doses under the fed condition showed a 1.5- and 1.3-fold increase, respectively, compared to the fasted condition. The corresponding values for Cmax were a 2.3- and 2.0-fold increase, respectively. The time to reach Cmax was comparable regardless of the dose or food intake, showing median values of 4.5-5.0 hours. These results suggest a modest increase of velufenacin absorption by food intake. Velufenacin was generally safe and well tolerated at the 2.5 and 5 mg doses regardless of food.

The Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Tolerability of Aclidinium Bromide 400 µg Administered by Inhalation as Single and Multiple (Twice Daily) Doses in Healthy Chinese Participants.

Purpose: To date, aclidinium pharmacokinetic (PK) studies have focused on Caucasian populations, and no data are available for Chinese populations. We aimed to characterize the PK and safety profile of aclidinium and its metabolites (LAS34823 and LAS34850) following single and multiple (twice-daily; BID) dosing in healthy Chinese participants, and to compare PK data between Chinese and Caucasian populations. Materials and methods: In this Phase I, open-label study (NCT03276052), healthy participants from a single site in China received aclidinium bromide 400 µg via a dry powder inhaler. The Day 1 single dose was followed by a washout period of 96 hours. On Days 5 through 8, participants received BID doses. Results: Twenty healthy Chinese participants, aged 18-45 years, were enrolled. Aclidinium absorption was rapid (median time to maximum concentration [tmax] 0.08 hours post-dose following single/multiple doses). LAS34823 had a similar median tmax of 0.08 hours, whereas LAS34850 tmax occurred later (median 2.50-3.00 hours). Aclidinium, LAS34823, and LAS34850 concentrations declined in a bi-phasic manner; geometric mean half-life was 13.5 hours (single dosing) and 21.4 hours (multiple dosing), while steady state was generally achieved after 5 days' continuous dosing. Area under the concentration-time curve during a dosage interval (AUCτ) metabolite to parent ratios for LAS34823 were 2.6 (Day 1) and 2.9 (Day 9), while LAS34850 had ratios of 136.0 and 94.8, respectively. Aclidinium accumulation occurred after 5 days of BID dosing (LS mean accumulation ratio for AUCτ Day 9/Day 1: 214.1% [90% CI, 176.5, 259.6]); LAS34823 accumulation was similar, while LAS34850 accumulation was lower. Between-participant exposure variability was moderate to high for aclidinium and LAS34823, and low for LAS34850. Conclusion: Single and multiple doses of aclidinium were well tolerated in healthy Chinese participants. The safety profile of and exposure to aclidinium was consistent with previous studies conducted in Caucasian populations.

Current optimal pharmacologic therapies for overactive bladder.

INTRODUCTION: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a common syndrome in adults. Current pharmacologic treatment includes antimuscarinic agents and ß-3 adrenoceptor agonists. For non-responders to oral medication, intravesical injection of botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) is an effective option. However, these treatments have potential adverse events and should be cautiously selected for appropriate patients. This review presents the recently published results of clinical trials and studies for patients with OAB and the underlying pathophysiology of OAB. Appropriate medical therapy based on pathophysiology of OAB is also presented. AREAS COVERED: Literature search from Pubmed from 2001 to 2023 including clinical background, pharmacology, and clinical studies for OAB medications. EXPERT OPINION: Treatment of OAB syndrome with any antimuscarinic or ß-3 adrenoceptor agonist is feasible as a first-line approach. For patients with suboptimal therapeutic effect to full-dose antimuscarinics or mirabegron, combination with both drugs can improve efficacy. Intravesical BoNT-A 100-U injection provides therapeutic effects for refractory OAB. Patients who are refractory to initial pharmacotherapies should be investigated for the underlying pathophysiology; then an appropriate medication can be added, such as an α1-blocker or anti-inflammatory agents. Patient education about behavioral modification and therapies should always be provided with oral medication or BoNT-A injection for OAB patients.

Overactive bladder (OAB) causes urgency, frequency, and nocturia, and greatly impacts quality of life. Pharmacological treatment with antimuscarinics, beta-3 adrenoceptor agonists, or in combination can effective improve OAB symptoms. In cases of treatment failure, searching for underlying causes and switching to the other treatment modalities such as Botox injection are also feasible to relieve the bothersome bladder symptoms.

Comparative safety of antimuscarinics versus mirabegron for overactive bladder in Parkinson disease.

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a common non-motor symptom of Parkinson disease (PD), often treated with antimuscarinics or beta-3 agonists. There is lack of evidence to guide OAB management in PD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative safety of antimuscarinics versus beta-3 agonists for OAB treatment in PD. METHODS: We employed a new-user, active-comparator cohort study design. We included Medicare beneficiaries age ≥65 years with PD who were new users of either antimuscarinic or beta-3 agonist. The primary outcome was any acute care encounter (i.e., non-elective hospitalization or emergency department visit) within 90 days of OAB drug initiation. The main secondary outcome was a composite measure of acute care encounters for anticholinergic related adverse events (AEs). Matching on high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) was used to address potential confounding. We used Cox proportional hazards models to examine the association between OAB drug category and outcomes. We repeated analyses for 30- and 180-day follow-up periods. RESULTS: We identified 27,091 individuals meeting inclusion criteria (mean age: 77.8 years). After hdPS matching, antimuscarinic users had increased risks for any acute care encounter (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.37) and encounters for anticholinergic related AEs (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.34) compared to beta-3 agonist users. Similar associations were observed for sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Among persons with PD, anticholinergic initiation was associated with a higher risk of acute care encounters compared with beta-3 agonist initiation. The long-term safety of anticholinergic vs. beta-3 agonist therapy in the PD population should be evaluated in a prospective study.

Comparative Effectiveness of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus Indacaterol/Glycopyrronium on Moderate-to-Severe Exacerbations in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Clinical Practice in England.

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and increased economic healthcare burden for patients with COPD. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) dual therapy is recommended for patients receiving mono-bronchodilator therapy who experience exacerbations or ongoing breathlessness. This study compared two single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies, umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) and indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY), on moderate-to-severe exacerbation rates in patients with COPD in England. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic health record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics) to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a first prescription for single-inhaler UMEC/VI or IND/GLY (index date) between 1 January 2015 and 30 September 2019 (indexing period). Analyses compared UMEC/VI and IND/GLY on moderate-to-severe, moderate, and severe exacerbations, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and direct costs at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, and time-to-first on-treatment exacerbation up to 24 months post-index date. Following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), non-inferiority and superiority of UMEC/VI versus IND/GLY were assessed. Results: In total, 12,031 patients were included, of whom 8753 (72.8%) were prescribed UMEC/VI and 3278 (27.2%) IND/GLY. After IPTW, for moderate-to-severe exacerbations, weighted rate ratios were <1 at 6, 12, and 18 months and equal to 1 at 24 months for UMEC/VI; around the null value for moderate exacerbations and <1 at all timepoints for severe exacerbations. UMEC/VI showed lower HCRU incidence rates than IND/GLY for all-cause Accident and Emergency visits and COPD-related inpatient stays and associated all-cause costs at 6 months post-indexing. Time-to-triple therapy was similar for both treatments. Conclusion: UMEC/VI demonstrated non-inferiority to IND/GLY in moderate-to-severe exacerbation reduction at 6, 12 and 18 months. These results support previous findings demonstrating similarity between UMEC/VI and IND/GLY on reduction of moderate-to-severe exacerbations.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA FDC versus LABA/ICS FDC in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population-based cohort study with a target trial emulation framework.

BACKGROUND: Use of combinations of long-acting ß2 agonists/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABA/LAMA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is increasing. Nevertheless, existing evidence on cardiovascular risk associated with LABA/LAMA versus another dual combination, LABA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), was limited and discrepant. AIM: The present cohort study aimed to examine comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS with a target trial emulation framework, focusing on dual fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies. METHODS: We identified patients with COPD who initiated LABA/LAMA FDC or LABA/ICS FDC from a nationwide Taiwanese database during 2017-2020. The outcome of interest was a hospitalized composite cardiovascular events of acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, heart failure, cardiac dysrhythmia, and ischemic stroke. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for composite and individual cardiovascular events after matching up to five LABA/LAMA FDC initiators to one LABA/ICS FDC initiator using propensity scores (PS). RESULTS: Among 75,926 PS-matched patients, use of LABA/LAMA FDC did not show a higher cardiovascular risk compared to use of LABA/ICS FDC, with a HR of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-1.01) for the composite events, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61-1.05) for acute myocardial infarction, 1.48 (95% CI, 0.68-3.25) for unstable angina, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.80-1.24) for congestive heart failure, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.37-1.05) for cardiac dysrhythmia, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-1.02) for ischemic stroke. The results did not vary substantially in several pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide important reassurance about comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA FDC treatment among patients with COPD.

Addition of long-acting beta2 agonists or long-acting muscarinic antagonists versus doubling the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma with medium dose ICS: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay treatment for persistent asthma. Escalating treatment is required when asthma is not controlled with ICS therapy alone, which would include, but is not limited to, adding a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or doubling the dose of ICS. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of adding a LABA or LAMA to ICS therapy versus doubling the dose of ICS in adolescents and adults whose asthma is not well controlled on medium-dose (MD)-ICS using a network meta-analysis (NMA), and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization ICTRP for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from January 2008 to 19 December 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for studies including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with or were eligible for MD-ICS, comparing it to high-dose (HD)-ICS, ICS/LAMA, or ICS/LABA. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs. Studies were of at least 12 weeks duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to a previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome is asthma exacerbations (moderate and severe). MAIN RESULTS: We included 38,276 participants from 35 studies (median duration 24 weeks (range 12 to 78); mean age 44.1; 38% male; 69% white; mean forced expiratory volume in one second 2.1 litres and 68% of predicted). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA likely reduce and MD-ICS/LAMA possibly reduces moderate to severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.59 to 0.82; moderate certainty; HR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.46 to 0.76; moderate certainty; and HR 0.56, 95% CrI 0.38 to 0.82; low certainty, respectively), whereas HD-ICS probably does not (HR 0.94, 95% CrI 0.70 to 1.24; moderate certainty). There is no clear evidence to suggest that any combination therapy or HD-ICS reduces severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (low to moderate certainty). This study suggests no clinically meaningful differences in the symptom or quality of life score between dual combinations and monotherapy (low to high certainty). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA increase or likely increase the odds of Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) responders at 6 and 12 months compared to MD-ICS (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% CrI 1.23 to 1.76; high certainty; and OR 1.59, 95% CrI 1.31 to 1.94; high certainty at 6 months; and OR 1.61, 95% CrI 1.22 to 2.13; moderate certainty and OR 1.55, 95% CrI 1.20 to 2.00; high certainty at 12 months, respectively). MD-ICS/LAMA probably increases the odds of ACQ responders at 6 months (OR 1.32, 95% CrI 1.11 to 1.57; moderate certainty). No data were available at 12 months. There is no clear evidence to suggest that HD-ICS increases the odds of ACQ responders or improves the symptom or qualify of life score compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA or ICS/LAMA reduces asthma-related or all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). HD-ICS results in or likely results in little or no difference in the included safety outcomes compared to MD-ICS as well as HD-ICS/LABA compared to MD-ICS/LABA. The pairwise meta-analysis shows that MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause adverse events (AEs) and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.96; 4 studies, 2238 participants; moderate certainty; and RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.99; 4 studies, 2239 participants; absolute risk reduction 10 fewer per 1000 participants; moderate certainty, respectively). The NMA evidence is in agreement with the pairwise evidence on treatment discontinuation due to AEs, but very uncertain on all-cause AEs, due to imprecision and heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review findings suggest that MD- or HD-ICS/LABA and MD-ICS/LAMA reduce moderate to severe asthma exacerbations and increase the odds of ACQ responders compared to MD-ICS whereas HD-ICS probably does not. The evidence is generally stronger for MD- and HD-ICS/LABA than for MD-ICS/LAMA primarily due to a larger evidence base. There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA, ICS/LAMA, or HD-ICS/LABA reduces severe asthma exacerbations or SAEs compared to MD-ICS. MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause AEs and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS. The above findings may assist in deciding on a treatment option during the stepwise approach of asthma management. Longer-term safety of higher than medium-dose ICS needs to be addressed in phase 4 or observational studies given that the median duration of included studies was six months.

The Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Non-Frequent Exacerbation Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in the Chinese Population.

Background: We analyzed the clinical characteristics and outcomes in non-frequent exacerbation patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients with stable COPD from 12 hospitals. Non-frequent exacerbation was defined as less than two times of exacerbations in the past year. The non-frequent exacerbation patients were classified into less and more symptomatic groups based on the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC). Finally, the non-frequent exacerbation patients with less and more symptomatic were classified into the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA)+inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LABA+LAMA, and LABA+LAMA+ICS groups. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a CAT score decrease of ≥ 2 during six months of follow-up. We recorded the number of exacerbations and mortality during one year of follow-up. Results: A total of 834 (67.5%) non-frequent exacerbation patients with COPD were included in this study. The non-frequent exacerbation patients had a higher education level and body mass index (BMI), and lower CAT and mMRC scores (P<0.05). In addition, the non-frequent exacerbation patients had lower mortality and risk of future exacerbation, and were more likely to attain MCID (P<0.05). Furthermore, the non-frequent exacerbation patients with more symptomatic COPD treated with LABA+LAMA or LABA+LAMA+ICS were more likely to attain MCID and had a lower risk of future exacerbation (P<0.05). However, there were no significant differences among the different inhalation therapies in non-frequent exacerbation patients with less symptomatic COPD. Conclusion: The non-frequent exacerbation patients with COPD had a higher education level and BMI, a lower symptom burden, and better outcomes. In addition, LABA+LAMA should be recommended to non-frequent exacerbation patients with more symptomatic COPD, while mono-LAMA should be recommended to non-frequent exacerbation patients with less symptomatic COPD as the initial inhalation therapy.

Efficacy and safety of aclidinium/formoterol versus monotherapies and aclidinium versus placebo in Chinese and other Asian patients with moderate-to-severe COPD: The AVANT Phase 3 study.

AVANT was a Phase 3, 24-week, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy and safety of aclidinium/formoterol 400 µg/12 µg combination vs monotherapies and aclidinium vs placebo (1:1:1:1) in Asian patients (∼70% of whom were Chinese) with moderate-to-severe stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Endpoints were analyzed hierarchically to incorporate type I error control. At Week 24, aclidinium/formoterol demonstrated improvements from baseline in 1-h morning post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) vs aclidinium (least squares [LS] mean 92 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] 60, 124 mL; p < 0.001), and in trough FEV1 vs formoterol (LS mean 85 mL; 95% CI 53, 117 mL; p < 0.001). Furthermore, aclidinium provided improvements in trough FEV1 vs placebo (LS mean 134 mL; 95% CI 103, 166 mL; p < 0.001). There was an improvement in transition dyspnea index focal score at Week 24 for aclidinium/formoterol vs placebo (LS mean 0.8; 95% CI 0.2, 1.3; p = 0.005) but not for aclidinium vs placebo (LS mean 0.4; 95% CI -0.1, 1.0; p = 0.132). Improvements in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total scores occurred for aclidinium/formoterol vs placebo (LS mean -4.0; 95% CI -6.7, -1.4; p = 0.003) and aclidinium vs placebo (LS mean -2.9; 95% CI -5.5, -0.3; p = 0.031). Aclidinium/formoterol and aclidinium were well tolerated and safety findings were consistent with known profiles; rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) (aclidinium/formoterol: 54.8%; aclidinium: 47.4%; placebo: 53.9%), serious AEs (7.2, 7.9, and 7.8%, respectively), and AEs leading to discontinuation of study medication (2.3, 1.5, and 2.2%, respectively) were similar between groups.

Patterns and Trends in the Use of Medications for COPD Control in a Cohort of 9476 Colombian Patients, 2017-2019.

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) affects approximately 174 million people worldwide. The objective was to determine the trends of COPD medication use in a group of Colombian patients. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study on prescription patterns of bronchodilators and other medications used in COPD from a population database with follow-up at 12 and 24 months. Patients older than 18 years of age of any sex with a COPD diagnostic code between 2017 and 2019 were included. Sociodemographic variables, medications, treatment schedules for COPD, comorbidities, comedications, and the specialty of the prescriber were considered. Results: Data from 9476 people with COPD was evaluated. The mean age was 75.9 ± 10.7 years, 50.1% were male, and 86.8% were prescribed by a general practitioner. A total of 57.9% had comorbidities, most often hypertension (44.4%). At the baseline measurement, on average, they received 1.6 medications/patient, mainly short-acting antimuscarinics (3784; 39.9%), followed by short-acting ß-agonists (2997, 31.6%) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (2239, 23.6%); more than half (5083, 53.6%) received a long-acting bronchodilator. Prescription of triple therapy (antimuscarinic, ß-agonist, and ICS) went from 645 (6.8%) at baseline to 1388 (20.6%) at the 12-month mark. Conclusion: This group of patients with COPD treated in Colombia frequently received short-acting bronchodilators and ICS, but a growing proportion are undergoing controlled therapy with long-acting bronchodilators, a situation that can improve the indicators of morbidity, exacerbations, and hospitalization.

Safety update: hyoscine hydrobromide patches and serious anticholinergic adverse effects.

Overview of: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Hyoscine hydrobromide patches (Scopoderm 1.5mg Patch or Scopoderm TTS Patch): risk of anticholinergic side effects, including hyperthermia. Drug Safety Update 2023;16:1.

Comparative assessment of efficacy and safety of approved oral therapies for overactive bladder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials databases were systematically searched. The search time frame was from database creation to June 2, 2022. Randomized controlled double-blind trials of oral medication for overactive bladder were screened against the protocol's entry criteria. Trials were evaluated for quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and data were statistically analyzed using Stata 16.0 software. RESULT: A total of 60 randomized controlled double-blind clinical trials were included involving 50,333 subjects. Solifenacin 10mg was the most effective in mean daily micturitions and incontinence episodes, solifenacin 5/10mg in mean daily urinary urgency episodes and nocturia episodes, fesoterodine 8mg in urgency incontinence episodes/d and oxybutynin 5mg in voided volume/micturition. In terms of safety, solifenacin 5mg, ER-tolterodine 4mg, mirabegron, vibegron and ER-oxybutynin 10mg all showed a better incidence of dry mouth, fesoterodine 4mg, ER-oxybutynin 10mg, tolterodine 2mg, and vibegron in the incidence of constipation. Compared to placebo, imidafenacin 0.1mg showed a significantly increased incidence in hypertension, solifenacin 10mg in urinary tract infection, fesoterodine 4/8mg and darifenacin 15mg in headache. CONCLUSION: Solifenacin showed better efficacy. For safety, most anticholinergic drugs were more likely to cause dry mouth and constipation, lower doses were better tolerated. The choice of drugs should be tailored to the patient's specific situation to find the best balance between efficacy and safety.

A treatment prediction strategy for overactive bladder using a machine learning algorithm that utilized data from the FAITH study.

AIMS: To use machine learning algorithms to develop a model to accurately predict treatment responses to mirabegron or antimuscarinic agents in patients with overactive bladder (OAB), using real-world data from the FAITH registry (NCT03572231). METHODS: The FAITH registry data included patients who had been diagnosed with OAB symptoms for at least 3 months and were due to initiate monotherapy with mirabegron or any antimuscarinic. For the development of the machine learning model, data from patients were included if they had completed the 183-day study period, had data for all timepoints and had completed the overactive bladder symptom scores (OABSS) at baseline and end of study. The primary outcome of the study was a composite outcome combining efficacy, persistence, and safety outcomes. Treatment was deemed "more effective" if the composite outcome criteria for "successful," "no treatment change," and "safe" were met, otherwise treatment was deemed "less effective." To explore the composite algorithm, a total of 14 clinical risk factors were included in the initial data set and a 10-fold cross-validation procedure was performed. A range of machine learning models were evaluated to determine the most effective algorithm. RESULTS: In total, data from 396 patients were included (266 [67.2%] treated with mirabegron and 130 [32.8%] treated with an antimuscarinic). Of these, 138 (34.8%) were in the "more effective" group and 258 (65.2%) were in the "less effective" group. The groups were comparable in terms of their characteristic distributions across patient age, sex, body mass index, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Of the six models initially selected and tested, the decision tree (C5.0) model was chosen for further optimization, and the receiver operating characteristic of the final optimized model had an area under the curve result of 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.54-0.85) when 15 was used for the min n parameter. CONCLUSIONS: This study successfully created a simple, rapid, and easy-to-use interface that could be further refined to produce a valuable educational or clinical decision-making aid.

Comparison of pneumonia incidence between long-acting muscarinic antagonist and inhaled corticosteroid plus long-acting beta agonist in patients with COPD.

Few studies have directly compared the incidence of pneumonia in patients on common chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatments such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) with those on inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA). Moreover, risk factors for pneumonia in COPD are still unclear. We aimed to compare the incidence of pneumonia in COPD patients on LAMA and those on ICS/LABA and explored the risk factors associated with pneumonia. This nationwide cohort study used Korean National Health Insurance claim data from January 2002 to April 2016. Patients who received COPD medication, either LAMA or ICS/LABA, with the COPD diagnostic code, were selected. We enrolled patients with good compliance (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%). The primary outcome was pneumonia in COPD patients initiating LAMA or ICS/LABA. We investigated the risk factors associated with pneumonia, including the sub-types of ICS treatments. After propensity score matching, the incidence rate per 1000 person-years of pneumonia was 93.96 for LAMA (n = 1003) and 136.42 for ICS/LABA (n = 1003) patients (p < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for pneumonia in patients on fluticasone/LABA was 1.496 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.204-1.859) compared with LAMA (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, a history of pneumonia was a risk factor associated with pneumonia (HR 2.123; 95% CI 1.580-2.852; p < 0.001). The incidence of pneumonia was higher in COPD patients on ICS/LABA compared with those on LAMA. It is recommended that ICS use be avoided in COPD patients with high pneumonia risk.