Therapeutic effect of long-acting muscarinic antagonist for treating uncontrolled asthma assessed using impulse oscillometry.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the incorporation of LAMAs into asthma therapy has been expected to enhance symptom control. However, a significant number of patients with asthma continue to experience poorly managed symptoms. There have been limited investigations on LAMA-induced airway alterations in asthma treatment employing IOS. In this study, we administered a LAMA to patients with poorly controlled asthma, evaluated clinical responses and respiratory function, and investigated airway changes facilitated by LAMA treatments using the IOS. METHODS: Of a total of 1282 consecutive patients with asthma, 118 exhibited uncontrolled symptoms. Among them, 42 switched their treatment to high-dose fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) (ICS/LABA/LAMA). The patients were then assessed using AHQ-33 or LCQ and ACT. Spirometry parameters (such as FEV1 or MMEF) and IOS parameters (such as R20 or AX) were measured and compared before and after exacerbations and the addition of LAMA. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, 17 who switched to FF/UMEC/VI caused by dyspnea exhibited decreased pulmonary function between period 1 and baseline, followed by an increase in pulmonary function between baseline and period 2. Significant differences were observed in IOS parameters such as R20, R5-R20, Fres, or AX between period 1 and baseline as well as between baseline and period 2. Among the patients who switched to inhaler due to cough, 25 were classified as responders (n = 17) and nonresponders (n = 8) based on treatment outcomes. Among nonresponders, there were no significant differences in spirometry parameters such as FEV1 or PEF and IOS parameters such as R20 or AX between period 1 and baseline. However, among responders, significant differences were observed in all IOS parameters, though not in most spirometry parameters, between period 1 and baseline. Furthermore, significant differences were noted between baseline and period 2 in terms of FEV1, %MMEF, %PEF, and all IOS parameters. CONCLUSION: ICS/LABA/LAMA demonstrates superiority over ICS/LABA in improving symptoms and lung function, which is primarily attributed to the addition of LAMA. Additionally, IOS revealed the effectiveness of LAMA across all airway segments, particularly in the periphery. Hence, LAMA can be effective against various asthma phenotypes characterized by airway inflammation, even in real-world cases.

Long-term safety of once-daily indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate high-dose, and indacaterol acetate/mometasone furoate high-dose, in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma: Results from two open-label, 52-week studies.

INTRODUCTION: The 52-week long-term safety of once-daily indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone furoate (IND/GLY/MF) high-dose (150/50/160 µg) and IND/MF high-dose (150/320 µg) was evaluated in two studies enrolling Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma. METHODS: Study 1 (IND/GLY/MF) and Study 2 (IND/MF) were 52-week, phase III, open-label, single-arm, multicenter studies conducted in Japanese adult patients with inadequately controlled asthma. The primary endpoint was incidence and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) over 52-weeks. RESULTS: In Study 1, 94 patients received IND/GLY/MF high-dose and 84 (89.4%) patients completed the 52-week study treatment; in Study 2, 51 patients received IND/MF high-dose and 48 (94.1%) patients completed the 52-week study treatment. In Study 1, 68.1% and 6.4% of 94 patients reported ≥1 AE and ≥1 serious AE (SAE) respectively. In Study 2, 78.4% of 51 patients reported ≥1 AE; no patients reported SAEs. The most commonly reported AEs were asthma (exacerbation; 30.9% and 54.9%) and nasopharyngitis (18.1% and 29.4%) in Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. Severe AEs including asthma (exacerbation) were reported in 13.8% and 13.7% of patients in Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. In Study 1, 10 patients (10.6%) reported treatment-related AEs, of which dysphonia (9 patients [9.6%]) was the most commonly reported; no treatment-related AEs were reported in Study 2. In Study 1, one death (not study drug-related) was reported after study discontinuation (92 days after last dose of study medication). CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily IND/GLY/MF and IND/MF high-dose were well-tolerated in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled asthma. No unexpected safety findings were observed.Supplemental data for this article is available online at.

How can the findings of the EMAX trial on long-acting bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease be applied in the primary care setting?

This review addresses outstanding questions regarding initial pharmacological management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Optimizing initial treatment improves clinical outcomes in symptomatic patients, including those with low exacerbation risk. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy improves lung function versus LAMA or LABA monotherapy, although other treatment benefits have been less consistently observed. The benefits of dual bronchodilation in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk, and its duration of efficacy and cost effectiveness in this population, are not yet fully established. Questions remain on the impact of baseline symptom severity, prior treatment, degree of reversibility to bronchodilators, and smoking status on responses to dual bronchodilator treatment. Using evidence from EMAX (NCT03034915), a 6-month trial comparing the LAMA/LABA combination umeclidinium/vilanterol with umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapy in symptomatic patients with COPD at low exacerbation risk who were inhaled corticosteroid-naïve, we describe how these findings can be applied in primary care.

[CQ IN THE LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF ADULT ASTHMATIC PATIENTS WHO ARE NOT ADEQUATELY CONTROLLED WITH INHALED CORTICOSTEROIDS MONOTHERAPY, WHICH IS MORE BENEFICIAL: ADDING A LONG ACTING BETA2 AGONIST OR A LONG ACTING MUSCARINIC ANTAGONIST?]

Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) are preferred add-on treatment for adult asthmatic patients whose symptoms cannot be controlled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone. However, over the last decade, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) have gained approval for use in treating asthma, and their efficacy is anticipated. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to investigate whether the addition of LABA or LAMA is more beneficial for the long-term management of adult asthmatic patients poorly controlled on ICS monotherapy. We extracted eight relevant randomized controlled trials (represented in 18 articles) conducted by June 2022 form the corresponding Cochrane review and additional searches through medical databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and ICHUSHI (https://www.jamas.or.jp/)). While the LAMA add-on group showed a significantly better improvement in some respiratory function tests, the difference between groups did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). On the other hand, the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, a quality of life metric, was significantly higher in the LABA add-on group, but the difference also did not surpass the MCID. Because no outcomes exceeded the MCID, we could not determine whether adding LABA or LAMA on ICS is more beneficial in the long-term management of adult asthmatic patients. Given that no significant differences were found in the incidence of adverse events (including serious ones), when specific adverse events associated with one treatment occur, switching to the other treatment (from LABA to LAMA, or vice versa) can be considered as an option.

Reduced All-Cause Mortality in the ETHOS Trial of Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Parallel-Group Study.

Rationale: In the phase III, 52-week ETHOS (Efficacy and Safety of Triple Therapy in Obstructive Lung Disease) trial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (NCT02465567), triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF) significantly reduced all-cause mortality compared with glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF). However, 384 of 8,509 patients were missing vital status at Week 52 in the original analyses.Objectives: To assess the robustness of the ETHOS mortality findings after additional data retrieval for patients missing Week 52 vital status in the original analyses.Methods: Patients with moderate to very severe COPD and prior history of exacerbation received twice-daily dosing with 320/18/9.6 µg of BGF (BGF 320), 160/18/9.6 µg of BGF (BGF 160), 18/9.6 µg of GFF, or 320/9.6 µg of budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BFF) (all delivered via a single metered-dose Aerosphere inhaler). Time to death (all-cause) was a prespecified secondary endpoint.Measurements and Main Results: In the final retrieved dataset, which included Week 52 vital status for 99.6% of the intent-to-treat population, risk of death with BGF 320 was significantly lower than GFF (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.80; unadjusted P = 0.0035). There were no significant differences in mortality when comparing BGF 320 with BFF (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.16; P = 0.1721), nor were significant differences observed when comparing BGF 160 against either dual comparator. Results were similar when the first 30, 60, or 90 days of treatment were excluded from the analysis. Deaths from cardiovascular causes occurred in 0.5%, 0.8%, 1.4%, and 0.5% of patients in the BGF 320, BGF 160, GFF, and BFF groups, respectively.Conclusions: Using final retrieved vital status data, triple therapy with BGF 320 reduced the risk of death compared with GFF, but was not shown to significantly reduce the risk of death compared with BFF, in patients with COPD. Triple therapy containing a lower dose of inhaled corticosteroid (BGF 160) was not shown to significantly reduce the risk of death compared with the dual therapy comparators.

Extrafine triple therapy and asthma exacerbation seasonality: TRIMARAN and TRIGGER post hoc analyses.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown seasonal variation in asthma exacerbations, peaking over the winter months. A single-inhaler triple therapy containing extrafine formulations of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), long-acting ß2-agonist formoterol fumarate (FF), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium (G) is in development for asthma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate whether calendar season impacted the relative effect of BDP/FF/G versus BDP/FF on moderate and severe asthma exacerbations. METHODS: TRIMARAN and TRIGGER were double-blind 52-week studies comparing BDP/FF/G with BDP/FF (TRIMARAN medium-dose ICS; TRIGGER high-dose) in adults with uncontrolled asthma (Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score ≥1.5), prebronchodilator FEV1 less than 80% predicted, history of 1 or more asthma exacerbation, who had been receiving ICS/long-acting ß2-agonist for at least 4 weeks before entry. Moderate and severe asthma exacerbations were captured throughout each study. In these post hoc analyses, the annual moderate and severe exacerbation rate was calculated for each month, with rate ratios determined from events grouped by season. RESULTS: In patients who received BDP/FF alone, there was a marked seasonal effect on the occurrence of asthma exacerbations, with the rate highest in the winter months. However, the addition of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist component to BDP/FF reduced this seasonal variation, especially during the winter, such that the relative effect of BDP/FF/G versus BDP/FF was greatest in the winter (significant 20.3% reduction [P = .0008]). Reductions in the other seasons ranged between 8.6% and 12.0%. CONCLUSIONS: These post hoc analyses indicate that inhaled triple therapy with extrafine BDP/FF/G reduces seasonal peaks in moderate and severe exacerbations, and confirm the overall utility of adding long-acting muscarinic antagonist to ICS/long-acting ß2-agonist in the management of asthma.

[SEVERE INFANTILE ASTHMA TREATED WITH LONG-ACTING MUSCARINIC ANTAGONIST: A CASE SERIES].

BACKGROUND: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) are used for long-term treatment of bronchial asthma in adults. Its use in the management of pediatric bronchial asthma, however, is currently not approved in Japan. Nonetheless, there have been a few reports of its use in children, particularly in cases of severe bronchial asthma or those without atopic disease that are refractory to existing treatment protocols. We report the progress of LAMA in infantile asthma patients. CASES: Three out of four patients had LAMA introduced at 3 to 5 years of age after being diagnosed with asthma at 1 to 3 years old. Three patients had non-IgE-related asthma and an underlying disease, such as Apert and Noonan syndrome, while one patient had severe IgE-related asthma without a pre-existing disease. In all cases, conventional long-term medications such as medium to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists, were given. However, severe bronchial asthma persisted, with some patients having uncontrolled secretions. Since uncontrolled severe-persistent bronchial asthma results in repeated hospitalization and intensive care unit admission, we introduced LAMA, specifically 2.5µg/day of tiotropium (Tio). After the introducing Tio, none of the patients had an acute exacerbation that required hospitalization and the frequency of wheezing was reduced. LAMA was administered for up to 19 months, with no adverse events. CONCLUSION: The results of this series suggest that LAMA is an effective and safe option for uncontrolled infantile asthma.

Which LABA/LAMA should be chosen in COPD patients in real life?

BACKGROUND: Given COPD heterogeneity, we do not know if some LABA/LAMAs are more suitable for some COPD phenotypes. This real-life database study aimed to evaluate retrospectively the 4 LABA/LAMA effectiveness and highlight possible specificities that could better guide us in choosing the right LABA/LAMA to be used. METHODS: We searched for subjects (1,779) adherent to umeclidinium/vilanterol (UM/VI), indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY), aclidinium/formoterol (ACLI/FOR) and tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) treatments in our prescribing/dispensing database. Prescriptions for systemic corticosteroids (SC), antibiotics and salbutamol during one year of LABA/LAMA treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: A better adherence was found in individuals taking IND/GLY (10.42 ± 1.86 packages/year) compared with UM/VI (10.09 ± 1.9; p = 0.008), ACLI/FOR (9.8 ± 1.8; p = 0.001) and TIO/OLO (10.1 ± 2.1; p = 0.047). The number of patients that were prescribed at least one package of SC/year and their package numbers/year were similar in males/females, across age groups and in "non-frequent exacerbators" with the 4 LABA/LAMAs. More SC were taken by frequent exacerbators, whereas fewer SC/antibiotic packages were prescribed to subjects aged >80 years with all treatments. In patients treated with ACLI/FOR or TIO/OLO, lower risks to having antibiotic prescriptions were observed when UM/VI (0.698[0.516-0.945] and 0.696[0.491-0.985; p = 0.020 and p = 0.041) and IND/GLY (0.597[0.445-0.802] and 0.595[0.423-0.836]; p = 0.001 and p = 0.003) were considered as landmarks. Lower risks for salbutamol prescriptions were detected with UM/VI (0.678[0.480-0.958]; p = 0.027) and TIO/OLO (0.585[0.365-0.937]; p = 0.026) when ACLI/FOR was used as a reference. CONCLUSION: According to our retrospective database study, each LABA/LAMA could have a specific efficacy profile in COPD that might be considered for personalized therapy. However, head-to-head targeted trials aimed to assess the impact of different LABA/LAMAs on COPD are needed to confirm/disprove such results.

Efficacy and Safety of Inhaled Glycopyrronium Bromide in COPD: A Randomized, Parallel Group, Dose-Ranging Study (GLIMMER).

This Phase II, randomized, parallel group study was conducted as part of US regulatory requirements to identify the most appropriate dose of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium bromide (GB) for use in a single-inhaler triple-therapy combination with the inhaled corticosteroid beclomethasone dipropionate plus the long-acting ß2-agonist formoterol fumarate. Eligible subjects were adults with COPD and post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 40-80% predicted. Subjects were randomized to receive inhaled double-blind GB 6.25, 12.5, 25 or 50 µg or placebo, all twice daily (BID), or open-label tiotropium 18 µg once daily for six weeks. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of GB versus placebo in terms of FEV1 area under the curve between 0 and 12 h at Week 6. Of 733 subjects randomized, 682 (93.0%) completed the study. For the primary endpoint, all GB doses were superior to placebo (p < 0.05), with a dose-response up to 25 µg BID, and 25 and 50 µg BID both superior to 6.25 µg BID (p < 0.05). Results for the secondary spirometry endpoints were consistent with the primary endpoint. Overall, the efficacy of GB 25 and 50 µg BID was broadly consistent with that of tiotropium. The incidence of adverse events, both overall and for the most common preferred terms, was low and similar in all treatment groups, including placebo (overall, 22.3-29.3%). Based on the totality of the efficacy and safety data, the optimal GB dose is 25 µg BID.

2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group.

The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group was coordinated and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health. It is designed to improve patient care and support informed decision making about asthma management in the clinical setting. This update addresses six priority topic areas as determined by the state of the science at the time of a needs assessment, and input from multiple stakeholders:A rigorous process was undertaken to develop these evidence-based guidelines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Evidence-Based Practice Centers conducted systematic reviews on these topics, which were used by the Expert Panel Working Group as a basis for developing recommendations and guidance. The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), an internationally accepted framework, in consultation with an experienced methodology team for determining the certainty of evidence and the direction and strength of recommendations based on the evidence. Practical implementation guidance for each recommendation incorporates findings from NHLBI-led patient, caregiver, and clinician focus groups. To assist clincians in implementing these recommendations into patient care, the new recommendations have been integrated into the existing Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3) asthma management step diagram format.

A phase IIb, randomised, parallel-group study: the efficacy, safety and tolerability of once-daily umeclidinium in patients with asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: Patients with asthma uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroids may benefit from umeclidinium (UMEC), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist. METHODS: This Phase IIb, double-blind study included patients with reversible, uncontrolled/partially-controlled asthma for ≥6 months, receiving ≥100 mcg/day fluticasone propionate (or equivalent) for ≥12 weeks. Following a 2-week run-in on open-label fluticasone furoate (FF) 100 mcg, patients were randomised (1:1:1) to receive UMEC 31.25 mcg, UMEC 62.5 mcg or placebo on top of FF 100 mcg once-daily for 24 weeks. As-needed salbutamol was provided. Primary and secondary endpoints were change from baseline in clinic trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and clinic FEV1 3 h post-dose, respectively, at Week 24. Other endpoints included change from baseline in home daily spirometry (trough FEV1, evening FEV1, morning [pre-dose] and evening peak expiratory flow) over 24 weeks. Safety was assessed throughout the study. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 421 patients (UMEC 31.25 mcg: n =139, UMEC 62.5 mcg: n =139, placebo: n =143). UMEC 31.25 mcg and 62.5 mcg demonstrated significantly greater improvements from baseline in clinic trough FEV1 at Week 24 (difference [95% CI]: 0.176 L [0.092, 0.260; p<0.001] and 0.184 L [0.101, 0.268; p<0.001], respectively), clinic FEV1 3 h post-dose at Week 24 (0.190 L [0.100, 0.279; p<0.001] and 0.198 L [0.109, 0.287; p<0.001], respectively) and mean change from baseline in daily home spirometry over 24 weeks versus placebo. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: UMEC is a highly effective bronchodilator that leads to improved lung function when administered as a single bronchodilator on top of FF in subjects with fully reversible, uncontrolled/partially-controlled moderate asthma. These data support a favourable benefit/risk profile for UMEC (31.25 mcg and 62.5 mcg). TRIAL REGISTRATION: GSK study ID: 205832; Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03012061.

Tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a review of clinical development.

BACKGROUND: Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment for Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) groups B, C, and D. MAIN BODY: Tiotropium bromide was the first LAMA available for COPD in clinical practice and, because of its long duration of action, is administered once daily. Tiotropium was initially available as an inhalation powder delivered via a dry-powder inhaler (DPI). Later, tiotropium also became available as an inhalation spray delivered via a soft mist inhaler (SMI). The SMI was designed to overcome or minimize some of the issues associated with other inhaler types (eg, the need for strong inspiratory airflow with DPIs). Results of short- and long-term randomized, controlled clinical trials of tiotropium in patients with COPD indicated tiotropium was safe and significantly improved lung function, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance, and reduced dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, exacerbations, and use of rescue medication compared with placebo or active comparators. These positive efficacy findings triggered the evaluation of tiotropium in fixed-dose combination with olodaterol (a long-acting ß2-agonist). In this review, we provide an overview of studies of tiotropium for the treatment of COPD, with a focus on pivotal studies. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium is safe and efficacious as a long-term, once-daily LAMA for the maintenance treatment of COPD and for reducing COPD exacerbations. The SMI generates a low-velocity, long-duration aerosol spray with a high fine-particle fraction, which results in marked lung drug deposition. In addition, high inspiratory flow rates are not required.

Once-daily single-inhaler versus twice-daily multiple-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD: lung function and health status results from two replicate randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy administered via single or multiple inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been evaluated comprehensively. We conducted two replicate trials comparing single- with multiple-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA combination in COPD. METHODS: 207608 and 207609 were Phase IV, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy non-inferiority trials comparing once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 µg via Ellipta inhaler, with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400/12 µg via metered-dose inhaler plus once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 µg via HandiHaler. Patients had symptomatic COPD and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) < 50% predicted, or FEV1 < 80% predicted and ≥ 2 moderate or 1 severe exacerbations in the prior year. The primary endpoint in both trials was weighted mean change from baseline (wmCFB) in 0-24-h FEV1 at Week 12. Secondary endpoints included CFB in trough FEV1 at Day 84 and 85. Other endpoints included serial FEV1 and health status outcomes at Week 12. Safety was evaluated descriptively. RESULTS: The modified per-protocol population included 720 and 711 patients in studies 207608 and 207609 (intent-to-treat population: 728 and 732). FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0-24-h FEV1 at Week 12 (Study 207608 treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: 15 mL [- 13, 43]; Study 207609: 11 mL [- 20, 41]). FF/UMEC/VI improved trough FEV1 CFB versus BUD/FOR+TIO at Day 84 and 85 (Day 85 treatment difference: Study 207608: 38 mL [10, 66]; Study 207609: 51 mL [21, 82]) and FEV1 at 12 and 24 h post-morning dose at Week 12 in both studies. No treatment differences were seen in health status outcomes. Safety profiles were similar between treatments; pneumonia occurred in 7 (< 1%) patients with FF/UMEC/VI and 9 (1%) patients with BUD/FOR+TIO, across both studies. CONCLUSIONS: FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0-24-h FEV1 at Week 12 in patients with COPD. Greater improvements in trough and serial FEV1 measurements at Week 12 with FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR+TIO, together with similar health status improvements and safety outcomes including the incidence of pneumonia, suggest that once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI triple therapy is a viable option for patients looking to simplify their treatment regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: GSK (207608/207609; NCT03478683/NCT03478696).

Efficacy of revefenacin, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulized therapy, in patients with markers of more severe COPD: a post hoc subgroup analysis.

BACKGROUND: Revefenacin, a once-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist delivered via standard jet nebulizer, increased trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in prior phase 3 trials. We evaluated the efficacy of revefenacin in patients with markers of more severe COPD. METHODS: A post hoc subgroup analysis of two replicate, randomized, phase 3 trials was conducted over 12 weeks. Endpoints included least squares change from baseline in trough FEV1, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) responders, and transition dyspnea index (TDI) responders at Day 85. This analysis included patient subgroups at high risk for COPD exacerbations and compared patients who received revefenacin 175 µg and placebo: severe and very severe airflow limitation (percent predicted FEV1 30%-< 50% and < 30%), 2011 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) D, reversibility (≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL increase in FEV1) to short-acting bronchodilators, concurrent use of long-acting ß agonists and/or inhaled corticosteroids, older age (> 65 and > 75 years), and comorbidity risk factors. RESULTS: Revefenacin demonstrated significant improvements in FEV1 versus placebo at Day 85 among the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and all subgroups. Additionally, there was a greater number of SGRQ and TDI responders in the ITT population and the majority of subgroups analyzed among patients who received revefenacin versus placebo. For the SGRQ responders, the odds of response (odds ratio > 2.0) were significantly greater in the revefenacin arm versus the placebo arm among the severe airflow obstruction, very severe airflow obstruction and 2011 GOLD D subgroups. For the TDI responders, the odds of response (odds ratio > 2.0) were significantly greater among the severe airflow obstruction subgroup and patients aged > 75 years. CONCLUSIONS: Revefenacin showed significantly greater improvements in FEV1 versus placebo in the ITT population and all subgroups. Furthermore, there were a greater number of SGRQ and TDI responders in the ITT population, and in the majority of patient subgroups among patients who received revefenacin versus placebo. Based on the data presented, revefenacin could be a therapeutic option among patients with markers of more severe COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (Studies 0126 [NCT02459080; prospectively registered 22 May 2015] and 0127 [NCT02512510; prospectively registered 28 July 2015]).

Impact of ICS/LABA and LABA/LAMA FDCs on functional and clinical outcomes in COPD: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) and LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) FDCs are extensively used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of the present network meta-analysis was to assess the comparative efficacy of all the currently available dual therapies in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. METHODS: A network meta-analysis (≥3 nodes, Bayesian method) was performed by searching for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared the impact of different LABA/LAMA FDCs vs. ICS/LABA FDCs on both primary and secondary endpoints. The primary endpoints were: the change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and the risk of exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). The secondary endpoints were: peak FEV1, St' George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI), and rescue medication use. RESULTS: Data of 17,734 COPD patients were extracted from 16 RCTs. The length of treatment ranged from 6 weeks to 52 weeks. All LABA/LAMA FDCs, except aclidinium/formoterol, produced a statistically significant improvement compared to ICS/LABAs in trough FEV1. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis indicated that umeclidinium/vilanterol, glycopyrronium/indacaterol and glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate were the most effective FDCs in improving trough FEV1. Across the FDCs analyzed for the risk of AECOPD, glycopyrronium/indacaterol significantly reduced the exacerbation risk compared to fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and resulted the most effective combination in the SUCRA analysis. Similar trend were also observed for the peak FEV1. No significant differences were detected across the investigated FDCs regarding SGRQ, TDI, and use of rescue medication. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis show that LABA/LAMA combinations are consistently more effective than ICS/LABA FDCs for most of the evaluated outcomes. However, differences have also been observed between FDCs belonging to the same class. Across the investigated LABA/LAMA FDCs, glycopyrronium/indacaterol revealed a consistent and robust efficacy profile.

Chemical modification-mediated optimisation of bronchodilatory activity of mepenzolate, a muscarinic receptor antagonist with anti-inflammatory activity.

The treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) usually involves a combination of anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory drugs. We recently found that mepenzolate bromide (1) and its derivative, 3-(2-hydroxy-2, 2-diphenylacetoxy)-1-(3-phenoxypropyl)-1-azoniabicyclo[2.2.2]octane bromide (5), have both anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory activities. We chemically modified 5 with a view to obtain derivatives with both anti-inflammatory and longer-lasting bronchodilatory activities. Among the synthesized compounds, (R)-(-)-12 ((R)-3-(2-hydroxy-2,2-diphenylacetoxy)-1-(3-phenylpropyl)-1-azoniabicyclo[2.2.2]octane bromide) showed the highest affinity in vitro for the human muscarinic M3 receptor (hM3R). Compared to 1 and 5, (R)-(-)-12 exhibited longer-lasting bronchodilatory activity and equivalent anti-inflammatory effect in mice. The long-term intratracheal administration of (R)-(-)-12 suppressed porcine pancreatic elastase-induced pulmonary emphysema in mice, whereas the same procedure with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist used clinically (tiotropium bromide) did not. These results suggest that (R)-(-)-12 might be therapeutically beneficial for use with COPD patients given the improved effects seen against both inflammatory pulmonary emphysema and airflow limitation in this animal model.

Tiotropium added to low- to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) versus low- to medium-dose ICS alone for adults with mild to moderate uncontrolled persistent asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety profile of tiotropium when added to low- to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) regimen versus low- to medium-dose ICS alone for adults with mild to moderate uncontrolled persistent asthma. DATA SOURCES: The online databases Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant data published up to November 14, 2017; we also conducted a supplementary search using clinicaltrials.gov. STUDY SELECTIONS: Only randomized control trials were included in this review. RESULTS: Four studies met our inclusion criteria for this review. In our review, two crossover studies were rated as "high risk" in the domain of "other bias" because a washout was not performed between each intervention. Lung function was significantly improved in the patient group receiving low- to medium-dose ICS with tiotropium. Results were consistent between each of three subgroups (tiotropium dry powder inhaler 18 µg or Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 5 µg, Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 2.5 µg, and Respimat Soft Mist inhaler 1.25 µg). Although no significant difference in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score was found between the two treatment groups, substantial heterogeneity was observed. The incidence of serious adverse events between the two treatment groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium as a once daily add-on to low- to medium-dose ICS may be efficacious and well-tolerated treatment in adults with moderate uncontrolled asthma. However, as only a few studies were identified, more studies of better design and long-term trial duration are required in the future.

A phase IIb randomized, chronic-dosing, incomplete block, cross-over study of glycopyrronium, delivered via metered dose inhaler, compared with a placebo and an active control in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) bronchodilators are key to the pharmacologic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This Phase IIb study investigated the safety and efficacy of four doses of the LAMA glycopyrronium (GP) delivered using co-suspension delivery technology via metered dose inhaler (MDI). The study was part of a wider clinical trial program performed to determine the optimal dose of GP MDI, the LABA formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) MDI, and glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (GFF) MDI fixed-dose combination to be taken forward into Phase III studies. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, 7-day chronic-dosing, three-period incomplete block, cross-over study, patients with moderate-to-severe COPD received two of the four doses of GP MDI (28.8 µg, 14.4 µg, 7.2 µg, and 3.6 µg) twice daily (BID), and either placebo MDI BID or open-label ipratropium MDI 34 µg four times daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC0-12) relative to baseline on Day 7. Secondary and exploratory efficacy endpoints were assessed on Days 1 and 7. Safety and tolerability were evaluated throughout the study. RESULTS: All GP MDI treatments were superior to placebo MDI for the primary efficacy endpoint (all p < 0.0001). However, only GP MDI 28.8 µg and 14.4 µg demonstrated statistical superiority to placebo MDI for all secondary efficacy endpoints analyzed in this study, with the exception of GP MDI 14.4 µg versus placebo MDI for the proportion of patients achieving ≥12% improvement in FEV1. No nominally significant differences were observed between GP MDI 28.8 µg and GP MDI 14.4 µg for any of the endpoints. All doses of GP MDI were well tolerated, with no unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that there was no advantage of GP MDI 28.8 µg compared with GP MDI 14.4 µg. It therefore added to the evidence from the Phase I/II clinical trial program, which identified GP MDI 14.4 µg as the most appropriate dose for use in the Phase III clinical studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01350128). Registered May 09, 2011.

Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and safety of revefenacin (TD-4208), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): Results of two randomized, double-blind, phase 2 studies.

BACKGROUND: Revefenacin (TD-4208) is a potent, lung-selective, long-acting muscarinic antagonist currently in development as a once-daily nebulized therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the pharmacodynamics (bronchodilator activity), pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of single- and multiple-dose administrations of revefenacin in two clinical trials (Study 0059 and Study 0091) in patients with moderate to severe COPD. METHODS: In Study 0059, 32 patients were randomized to receive a single dose of revefenacin (350 or 700 µg), active control ipratropium (500 µg) or placebo inhalation solution administered via standard jet nebulizer in a double-blind, crossover fashion. In Study 0091, 59 patients were randomized to receive once-daily inhalations of revefenacin (22, 44, 88, 175, 350 or 700 µg) or placebo for 7 days in a double-blind, incomplete block, five-way crossover design. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in peak (0-6 h) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) in Study 0059, and trough FEV1 after the final dose (Day 7) in Study 0091. In both studies, secondary endpoints included area under the FEV1-time curve (FEV1 AUC) values from time 12-24 h post dose and FEV1 AUC values from time zero to 24 h post dose. RESULTS: Revefenacin demonstrated a rapid onset and sustained duration of bronchodilator action in both studies. In Study 0059, mean peak FEV1 was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for revefenacin and ipratropium compared to placebo, with differences of 176.8 mL for 350 µg revefenacin, 162.2 mL for 700 µg revefenacin and 190.6 mL for ipratropium. In Study 0091, mean trough FEV1 on Day 7 was significantly higher (p < 0.006) for all revefenacin doses compared to placebo, with differences ranging from 53.5 mL (22 µg dose) to 114.2 mL (175 µg dose). The results for the other spirometry endpoints were consistent with the primary endpoint for each study, demonstrating that the bronchodilator effect of revefenacin lasted more than 24 h following nebulized administration. Revefenacin was rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized, followed by a slow apparent terminal elimination and minimal accumulation with repeated dosing. In both studies, adverse events were generally mild and occurred with similar frequencies in all groups, with no indication of significant systemic anti-muscarinic activity at any dose. CONCLUSIONS: Following single or multiple nebulized-dose administration in patients with COPD, revefenacin demonstrates a rapid onset and sustained duration of bronchodilator effect over 24 h following once-daily administration, with a PK profile that is commensurate with low systemic exposure.