Search

Background: Triple therapy is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who remain symptomatic despite dual therapy. The optimal timing of triple therapy following an exacerbation of COPD is unknown. The outcomes of prompt (≤ 30 days) vs. delayed (31–180 days) initiation of single-inhaler triple therapy with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) following an exacerbation of COPD were examined. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of linked English primary (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and secondary (Hospital Episode Statistics) care data. Patients aged ≥ 35 years with COPD were indexed on the first and/or earliest date of exacerbation between November 15, 2017 and March 31, 2019 with subsequent FF/UMEC/VI initiation within 180 days. Patients were required to be continuously registered with a general practitioner for ≥ 12 months prior to and following index. Subsequent exacerbations, direct medical costs, and hospital readmissions were compared between prompt and delayed initiators. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for measured confounders between cohorts. Results: Overall, 1599 patients were included (prompt: 393, delayed: 1206). After weighting, prompt initiators had numerically lower moderate/severe exacerbations compared with delayed initiators (rate ratio: 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76–1.01, p = 0.0587). Both all-cause and COPD-related 30-day hospital readmissions were significantly lower among patients with prompt initiation compared with delayed initiators (all-cause: 23.6% vs. 34.6%, odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.36–0.95], p = 0.0293; COPD-related: 20.3% vs. 30.6%, odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.35–0.96], p = 0.0347). Prompt initiators also had numerically lower all-cause total costs and significantly lower COPD-related costs per-person-per year compared with delayed initiators (COPD-related: £742 vs. £801, p = 0.0016). Conclusion: Prompt initiation of FF/UMEC/VI following a moderate/severe exacerbation was associated with fewer subsequent exacerbations, fewer hospital readmissions, and lower COPD-related medical costs compared with delayed initiation. Plain language summary: Triple therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who still experience symptoms while taking dual therapy (LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA). Triple therapy can be taken using single or multiple inhalers. The best time to start triple therapy for patients who may benefit from it following a short-term worsening (flare-up) of their COPD symptoms is unknown. This study assesses the effect of starting treatment with triple therapy sooner compared with later in patients with COPD. Patients who experienced a flare-up of their COPD symptoms were split into two groups – those who started taking triple therapy (via a single inhaler) within 30 days of their symptom flare-up and those who started taking triple therapy 31–180 days following their symptom flare-up. Over the 12 months following the initial flare-up, patients who started triple therapy earlier (within 30 days) had fewer subsequent symptom flare-ups, fewer hospital admissions, and lower healthcare costs compared with patients who started triple therapy later (31–180 days). These findings suggest that doctors should consider prescribing triple therapy (via a single inhaler) to their patients with COPD straight away if they experience a flare-up of their symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This correction notice addresses errors in a study published in Respiratory Research regarding the benefits of prompt initiation of a specific inhaler for patients with COPD in England. The errors were related to the costs associated with the treatment and impacted certain statements in the "Results," "Discussion," and "Conclusions" sections of the article. The corrected information indicates that prompt initiators had numerically lower all-cause total costs and similar COPD-related costs compared to delayed initiators. The authors apologize for the discrepancies and any inconvenience caused. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Compared with multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) demonstrated improved lung function and meaningful improvements in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Assessment Test score. This real-world study compared the effectiveness of switching patients with COPD in England from MITT to once-daily SITT with FF/UMEC/VI by evaluating rates of COPD exacerbation, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and associated direct medical costs., Methods: Retrospective cohort pre-post study using linked primary care electronic health record and secondary care administrative datasets. Patients diagnosed with COPD at age ≥35 years, with smoking history, linkage to secondary care data and continuous GP registration for 12 months pre-switch and 6 months post-switch to FF/UMEC/VI were included. Index date was the first initiation of an FF/UMEC/VI prescription immediately following MITT use from 15 November 2017 to 30 September 2019. Baseline was 12 months prior to index, with outcomes assessed 6/12 months pre-switch and post-switch, and stratified by prior COPD exacerbation status., Results: We included 2533 patients (mean [SD] age: 71.1 [9.9] years; 52.1% male). In the 6 months post-switch, there were significant decreases in the proportion of patients experiencing ≥1 moderate-to-severe (36.2%-28.9%), moderate only (24.4%-19.8%) and severe only (15.4%-11.8%) COPD exacerbation (each, p<0.0001) compared with the 6 months pre-switch. As demonstrated by rate ratios, there were significant reductions in exacerbation rates of each severity overall (p<0.01) and among patients with prior exacerbations (p<0.0001). In the same period, there were significant decreases in the rate of each COPD-related HCRU and total COPD-related costs (-24.9%; p<0.0001)., Conclusion: Patients with COPD switching from MITT to once-daily SITT with FF/UMEC/VI in a primary care setting had significantly fewer moderate and severe exacerbations, and lower COPD-related HCRU and costs, in the 6 months post-switch compared with the 6 months pre-switch., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KJR, CC, RS and ASI are employed by and/or hold stocks/shares in GSK; ASI is also a part-time member of the McMaster University faculty. AC was an employee of and/or held stocks/shares in GSK at the time of study. RPW, LJC, OKIM and MS are employees of Adelphi Real World; Adelphi Real World received funds from GSK to conduct the analysis. VLB was an employee of Adelphi Real World at the time of study, and is now employed by, and holds stocks/shares in Bayer Plc. DMGH reports personal fees from Aerogen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL Behring, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi. CFV has given presentations at symposia and/or served on scientific advisory boards sponsored by Aerogen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Grifols, GSK, Insmed, MedUpdate, Menarini, Novartis, Nuvaira, Roche and Sanofi., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

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 β 2 -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., Competing Interests: GR, CCo, KJR, and ASI are employees of GSK and hold stocks and shares at GSK. ASI also holds an unpaid faculty position at McMaster University. AC was an employee of GSK and held stocks and shares at GSK at the time of the study. FJFH is an employee of the Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, part of the Germany lung research Foundation (DZL). JKQ holds a position at Imperial College London and has received grants or contracts paid to this institution outside the scope of the submitted work from the Medical Research Council, Health Data Research UK, GSK, Boehringer Ingelheim, Asthma + Lung UK, and AstraZeneca. JKQ has also received payment for advisory board participation, teaching or lectures from GSK, AstraZeneca, and Insmed. CCa, TT, RWo, and RWi are employees of Adelphi Real World. VB and JY were employees of Adelphi Real World at the time of the study. Adelphi Real World is a business that provides consulting and other research services to pharmaceutical, device, government, and non-government organizations which received funding from GSK to conduct the study. Adelphi Real World employees work with a variety of companies and organizations and are expressly prohibited from receiving any payment or honoraria directly from these organizations for services rendered. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2023 Requena et al.)

Background: Available data on the relationship between COPD symptoms, disease outcomes, and mortality are currently limited. This study investigated the clinical characteristics, outcomes, healthcare utilization, and prescribing practices across GOLD 2017 groups (A, B, C, and D) in a large-scale, population-based cohort of COPD patients managed in an English primary care setting., Patients and Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients aged ≥35 years, with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD and ≥1 record of pulmonary function testing in their medical history. Medical Research Council dyspnea score and exacerbation history were used to define patients' GOLD 2017 classification. Patients were identified using the UK Clinical Practice Research Database and were followed for 12 months., Results: Eligible COPD patients' (N=42,331; mean [SD] age, 69.5 [10.7] years; 54% males), GOLD 2017 categorizations were: Group A: 49.1%, Group B: 30.5%, Group C: 8.2%, Group D: 12.1%. Overall, 37.7% of patients experienced ≥1 moderate COPD exacerbation. The rate of moderate exacerbations per person per year (PPPY) was highest in GOLD group D (0.72), followed by C (0.53), B (0.22), and A (0.15), while the rate of exacerbations leading to hospitalization PPPY was much higher in D (0.27) than in B (0.10), C (0.08), or A (0.03). Overall, 56.4% of patients visited their general practitioner ≥5 times in the 12 months of follow-up. Time-to-event analysis suggested that breathlessness contributed to exacerbation severity and frequency. One-year mortality was highest in GOLD groups D and B. The most frequent prescribed maintenance therapies were inhaled corticosteroids with long-acting β 2 -agonists, multiple-inhaler triple therapy, or long-acting muscarinic antagonist, irrespective of GOLD classification., Conclusion: The burden of COPD remains substantial in England. Stratification of this large primary care population according to GOLD criteria predicted the risk of COPD exacerbations. Understanding populations of patients with COPD may enable the optimization of patient care., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following conflicts of interest during the last three years in relation to this article: KJR, CC, GA, and ASI are employees of, and hold shares in, GlaxoSmithKline. LBS was an employee of, and held shares in, GlaxoSmithKline, during the time the study was conducted. GA and KJR are currently affiliated with Speciality & Primary Care, GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK. LBS is currently affiliated with Medical Affairs, Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc., Novato, CA, USA. ASI is also an unpaid part-time professor at McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. CB was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline during the time the study was conducted. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 Sansbury et al.)