Search

[Background] The global prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has increased markedly in recent decades. Given the scarcity of resources available to address global health challenges and respiratory medicine being relatively under-invested in, it is important to define research priorities for COPD globally. In this paper, we aim to identify a ranked set of COPD research priorities that need to be addressed in the next 10 years to substantially reduce the global impact of COPD., [Methods] We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to identify global COPD research priorities., [Results] 62 experts contributed 230 research ideas, which were scored by 34 researchers according to six pre-defined criteria: answerability, effectiveness, feasibility, deliverability, burden reduction, and equity. The top-ranked research priority was the need for new effective strategies to support smoking cessation. Of the top 20 overall research priorities, six were focused on feasible and cost-effective pulmonary rehabilitation delivery and access, particularly in primary/community care and low-resource settings. Three of the top 10 overall priorities called for research on improved screening and accurate diagnostic methods for COPD in low-resource primary care settings. Further ideas that drew support involved a better understanding of risk factors for COPD, development of effective training programmes for health workers and physicians in low resource settings, and evaluation of novel interventions to encourage physical activity., [Conclusions] The experts agreed that the most pressing feasible research questions to address in the next decade for COPD reduction were on prevention, diagnosis and rehabilitation of COPD, especially in low resource settings. The largest gains should be expected in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) settings, as the large majority of COPD deaths occur in those settings. Research priorities identified by this systematic international process should inform and motivate policymakers, funders, and researchers to support and conduct research to reduce the global burden of COPD., National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Health Data Research UK.

Resume Objectif Faciliter la distinction entre l’asthme et la maladie pulmonaire obstructive chronique (MPOC) en pratique de premiere ligne de tous les jours, et fournir des strategies therapeutiques pratiques a l’aide de cas de spirometrie pour illustrer comment reconnaitre le chevauchement clinique et spirometrique entre l’asthme et la MPOC. Sources d’information Les approches decrites ici s’appuient sur les lignes directrices factuelles et sur l’expertise des auteurs, y compris des observations de recherches menees par les auteurs dans les domaines de l’asthme, de la prise en charge de la MPOC et des examens de spirometrie en premiere ligne. Message principal Certains patients presentent des caracteristiques cliniques communes a l’asthme et a la MPOC. Ces deux maladies sont associees a un certain degre d’inflammation des voies respiratoires, mediee par l’expression accrue de proteines inflammatoires. Il existe toutefois des differences evidentes entre l’asthme et la MPOC pour ce qui est de l’inflammation presente dans les poumons. La confusion diagnostique entre la MPOC et l’asthme survient le plus souvent chez les patients âges qui se plaignent de symptomes respiratoires, surtout en contexte de tabagisme ou d’exposition professionnelle. Les diagnostics cliniques d’asthme et de MPOC sont fondes sur les antecedents du patient, les symptomes, l’examen physique et les mesures objectives de la fonction respiratoire. La spirometrie apres bronchodilatation est toujours necessaire pour confirmer un nouveau diagnostic de MPOC et elle doit egalement etre realisee avant la bronchodilatation pour poser un diagnostic d’asthme. Dans de nombreux cas, toutefois, il n’est pas evident d’interpreter les resultats de la spirometrie. Conclusion Il est essentiel de bien comprendre la nature et la portee du chevauchement spirometrique entre l’asthme et la MPOC afin de concevoir une strategie therapeutique qui s’appuie sur des facteurs qui incluent les antecedents medicaux et familiaux, les signes et les symptomes, et l’interpretation claire des donnees de spirometrie. Cette information sera utilisee differemment aupres de chaque patient pour arriver au bon diagnostic clinique et selectionner le traitement le plus approprie.

Objective To facilitate distinction between asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in day-to-day primary care practice, and provide practical treatment strategies using spirometric cases to outline how to recognize the clinical and spirometric overlap between asthma and COPD. Sources of information The approaches described here were developed using evidence-based guidelines and the expertise of the authors, including research findings by the authors in the areas of asthma, COPD management, and spirometric testing in primary care. Main message There are patients with clinical or spirometric features of both asthma and COPD. Both asthma and COPD are associated with some degree of inflammation of the respiratory tract, mediated by the increased expression of inflammatory proteins. However, there are clear differences between asthma and COPD in the pattern of inflammation that occurs in the lungs. Diagnostic confusion between COPD and asthma is most likely to arise in older patients with respiratory complaints, particularly against a background that includes cigarette smoke or workplace exposure. Both asthma and COPD are clinical diagnoses based on patient history, symptoms, physical examination findings, and objective measures of lung function. Postbronchodilator spirometry is always needed to confirm a new diagnosis of COPD and should also be performed prebronchodilator for the diagnosis of asthma. However, in many cases, the interpretation of spirometry results is not straightforward. Conclusion Understanding the nature and extent of the spirometric overlap between asthma and COPD is critical for tailoring a therapeutic strategy that is based on factors that include medical and family history, signs and symptoms, and a clear interpretation of spirometry data. This information will be leveraged differently for individual patients to arrive at the correct clinical diagnosis and to select the most appropriate therapy.

Background Ideally, treatment recommendations for maintenance therapy-naive patients with COPD should be based on studies conducted specifically in this population. We have reviewed evidence from previous studies of pharmacological treatments in maintenance therapy-naive patients with COPD and performed a new post-hoc analysis of dual bronchodilator treatment in this population, aiming to assess the effectiveness of these interventions. Materials and methods A literature review identified clinical trials that included analyses of patients with COPD who were maintenance therapy-naive with long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). Additionally, a post-hoc subgroup analysis was conducted for maintenance therapy-naive patients with COPD in two large phase III, randomized, double-blind, 24-week trials investigating the efficacy of aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) fixed-dose combination versus monotherapy or placebo (ACLIFORM [NCT01462942] and AUGMENT [NCT01437397]). Results Treatment-naive patients with COPD often represent a population of patients at the earliest stage at which most patients seek treatment. Of nine relevant studies identified, all reported positive findings for efficacy of LABA, LAMA, or LABA/LAMA treatment in maintenance therapy-naive populations. Improvements were observed in lung function, symptoms, and health status versus monotherapy or placebo. Post-hoc analysis of ACLIFORM and AUGMENT demonstrated that AB/FF was effective in improving lung function in patients who had received no prior maintenance therapy. AB/FF showed improvements in 1 hr post-dose FEV1, trough FEV1, and patient-reported outcomes versus placebo and monotherapies. Combined with reviews of previous studies in maintenance therapy-naive patients, these findings suggest that earlier intervention with a dual bronchodilator maintenance therapy, such as AB/FF, may provide significantly greater benefits than LAMA or LABA mono-bronchodilator therapy as a first maintenance treatment for COPD. Conclusion These data show that therapeutic intervention is effective in treatment-naive patients. Intervention with dual bronchodilator therapy as a first maintenance treatment for COPD may provide greater benefits than LAMA or LABA monotherapy.

In this guideline update, we highlight important and new findings related to pharmacological therapy of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that should change clinical practice and improve...

There is increasing focus on understanding the nature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during the earlier stages. Mild COPD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage 1 or the now-withdrawn GOLD stage 0) represents an early stage of COPD that may progress to more severe disease. This review summarises the disease burden of patients with mild COPD and discusses the evidence for treatment intervention in this subgroup. Overall, patients with mild COPD suffer a substantial disease burden that includes persistent or potentially debilitating symptoms, increased risk of exacerbations, increased healthcare utilisation, reduced exercise tolerance and physical activity, and a higher rate of lung function decline versus controls. However, the evidence for treatment efficacy in these patients is limited due to their frequent exclusion from clinical trials. Careful assessment of disease burden and the rate of disease progression in individual patients, rather than a reliance on spirometry data, may identify patients who could benefit from earlier treatment intervention. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-019-1108-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction: Aclidinium/formoterol is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) dual bronchodilator used as a maintenance treatment for patients with chronic obs...

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the proportion of patients with symptoms suggestive of asthma and normal lung function who exhibit airway hyperreactivity with methacholine challenge testing (MCT) in primary care. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Primary care lung clinic in Toronto, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 69 patients presenting to the lung clinic who had symptoms compatible with asthma, normal spirometry test results, and were referred for MCT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics, frequency counts, independent t tests, and [Image: see text] (2) tests were used to examine differences in the proportion of clinical and demographic variables identified in patients with or without a positive MCT result. Effect size was determined between MCT-positive and MCT-negative patients for both categorical ([Image: see text] coefficient) and continuous (Hedges g) data. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (30.4%) had positive MCT results, and 48 patients (69.6%) had negative MCT results. Family history of asthma and reduced baseline and postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second were associated with a positive MCT result. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study provide insight into the utility of simple spirometry for asthma diagnosis and the need to further clarify the role of MCT in the primary care setting.

Persistent ill health after acute COVID-19-referred to as long COVID, the post-acute COVID-19 syndrome, or the post-COVID-19 condition-has emerged as a major concern. We undertook an international consensus exercise to identify research priorities with the aim of understanding the long-term effects of acute COVID-19, with a focus on people with pre-existing airways disease and the occurrence of new-onset airways disease and associated symptoms. 202 international experts were invited to submit a minimum of three research ideas. After a two-phase internal review process, a final list of 98 research topics was scored by 48 experts. Patients with pre-existing or post-COVID-19 airways disease contributed to the exercise by weighting selected criteria. The highest-ranked research idea focused on investigation of the relationship between prognostic scores at hospital admission and morbidity at 3 months and 12 months after hospital discharge in patients with and without pre-existing airways disease. High priority was also assigned to comparisons of the prevalence and severity of post-COVID-19 fatigue, sarcopenia, anxiety, depression, and risk of future cardiovascular complications in patients with and without pre-existing airways disease. Our approach has enabled development of a set of priorities that could inform future research studies and funding decisions. This prioritisation process could also be adapted to other, non-respiratory aspects of long COVID.

Several algorithms exist to facilitate spirometric interpretation in clinical practice, yet there is a lack of consensus on how spirometric criteria for asthma, COPD, and restrictive disorders should be incorporated into spirometry interpretation algorithms suitable for use in day-to-day primary care management. The purpose of this review was to identify and describe the variability that exists among spirometry interpretation algorithms and how this might be relevant to the interpretation of spirometric data of common conditions encountered in primary care. MEDLINE, Embase, and mainstream search engines were used to identify all English-language spirometry interpretation algorithm–related material between January 1990 and December 2018. Eight variations in spirometry interpretation algorithms were identified via specific a priori assumptions that each spirometry interpretation algorithm should contain content consistent with national and international guidelines related to spirometry interpretation. Of the 26 spirometry interpretation algorithms identified, 5 were deemed impractical for day-to-day use in primary care (19%), 23 lacked a logic string leading to the postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC (88%), 4 relied on postbronchodilator change in FEV1 to distinguish between asthma and COPD (15%), 24 lacked a prompt for bronchodilator challenge when FEV1/FVC was considered to be at a normal level (92%), 12 did not indicate whether the data represented a prebronchodilator or postbronchodilator scenario (46%), 7 did not include a logic string that considers mixed obstructive/restrictive defect (27%), 23 did not contain a prompt to refer for methacholine challenge testing when spirometry appeared normal (88%), and 2 spirometry interpretation algorithms did not include a logic string leading to restrictive disorder (8%). Our review suggests that there is considerable variability among spirometry interpretation algorithms available as diagnostic aids and that there is a need for standardization of spirometry interpretation algorithms in primary care.

Glycopyrronium is a once daily (o.d.) long-acting muscarinic antagonist that is approved for maintenance treatment of COPD. This post-hoc pooled analysis of two phase III studies, GLycopyrronium bromide in COPD airWays 1 and 2 (GLOW1 and GLOW2), evaluated the effects of glycopyrronium compared with placebo and tiotropium over 26-52 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.Patients aged≥40 years were randomised to 26 weeks' treatment with glycopyrronium 50 μg o.d. or placebo (GLOW1) or 52 weeks' treatment with glycopyrronium 50 μg o.d., placebo, or open-label tiotropium 18 μg o.d. (GLOW2). The primary efficacy endpoint in both studies was trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at Week 12. Other outcomes included additional spirometry endpoints, moderate or severe exacerbations, dyspnoea, health status, rescue medication use and safety. Serial spirometry over 24 hours was conducted in a subset of patients.Of 1888 subjects randomised, 98.2% were analysed (glycopyrronium 1059, tiotropium 267, placebo 528). Least squares mean (LSM) trough FEV1 was significantly higher with glycopyrronium versus placebo at Week 12 (treatment difference±standard error [SE]: 103±11.2 mL; p0.001), as well as at Day 1 and Weeks 26 and 52. More patients achieved≥100 mL increase in trough FEV1 from baseline with glycopyrronium versus placebo at all assessments (p0.001). Glycopyrronium significantly improved FEV1 immediately after the first dose on Day 1 versus placebo (90 mL at 5 minutes, 144 mL at 15 minutes; both p0.001) and versus tiotropium (43 mL at 5 minutes, 65 mL at 15 minutes; both p0.001). Glycopyrronium significantly improved other spirometry endpoints and provided clinically meaningful 24 hour bronchodilation versus placebo at most timepoints from Day 1 onwards (p0.05). Time to first moderate or severe exacerbation was significantly prolonged with glycopyrronium versus placebo over 26 and 52 weeks (36% and 33%, respectively; both p 0.001). Glycopyrronium provided significantly greater relief of dyspnoea, improved health status and reduced rescue medication use versus placebo. Glycopyrronium was safe and well tolerated.Glycopyrronium 50 μg o.d. provided early bronchodilation after the first dose that was sustained for 24 hours, and reduced the risk of exacerbations compared with placebo, with efficacy at least equivalent to tiotropium.NCT01005901 and NCT00929110.

COPD causes considerable health and economic burden worldwide, with incidence of the disease expected to continue to rise. Inhaled bronchodilators, such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), are central to the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. Clinical studies have demonstrated that combined LAMA + LABA therapies improve efficacy while retaining a safety profile similar to LAMA or LABA alone. This has led to the development of several LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies, which provide patients with the convenience of two active compounds in a single inhaler. GFF MDI (Bevespi Aerosphere®) is an FDC of glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate 18/9.6 µg formulated using innovative co-suspension delivery technology for administration via metered dose inhaler (MDI). GFF MDI was developed to make a treatment option available for patients who have a requirement or preference to use an MDI, rather than a dry powder or soft mist inhaler. Now that several LAMA/LABA FDCs have been approved for use in COPD, we review the impact of dual-bronchodilator treatment on COPD therapy and discuss recent clinical studies that are helping to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how LAMA/LABA FDCs can improve patient outcomes.

Glycopyrronium is a once-daily, inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) demonstrating similar efficacy to inhaled tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD; however, the benefit of LAMAs on COPD symptoms has been variable. COPD is a progressive disease in which many patients develop an acute or sustained deterioration. Data on the prevention of clinically important deteriorations (CID) using LAMAs are limited. A pooled analysis was performed on four Phase III trials (n = 2936) that compared the efficacy of glycopyrronium (n = 1859) with tiotropium (n = 1077). The primary endpoint was significant delay and/or reduction in the occurrence of CID. CID was defined as any of the following: ≥100 mL decrease from baseline in pre-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), ≥4 point increase in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score or a moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation occurring after the first dose of study medication. A sustained CID was a CID occurring on ≥2 consecutive visits 4 weeks apart or for ≥50% of all available subsequent visits. Baseline characteristics for the overall population were similar. Patients had moderate (62%) or severe (38%) COPD. Mean post-bronchodilator FEV1 was approximately 55% predicted, and mean FEV1 reversibility was 16.7 and 18.6% in the glycopyrronium and tiotropium groups, respectively. Both glycopyrronium and tiotropium significantly reduced time to CID and sustained CID versus placebo (p, Chronic lung disease: Potential alternative treatment option A novel inhaled drug shows promise in treating moderate to severe chronic lung disease. Guidelines recommend long-term treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) inhalers. Tiotropium is a common COPD LAMA. Now, Anthony D’Urzo at the University of Toronto, Canada, together with an international research team, have carried out a pooled analysis of results from four clinical trials to compare the efficacy of a novel LAMA, glycopyrronium, with tiotropium. In these trials, 2936 patients were treated with either glycopyrronium or tiotropium, and the health status of patients using glycopyrronium was also compared with those given a placebo. Glycopyrronium was as effective as tiotropium in delaying or preventing clinically important deteriorations in patient health. The risk of deteriorations was significantly lower in the glycopyrronium group than the placebo group.

COPD is characterized by persistent airflow limitation, progressive breathlessness, cough, and sputum production. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are one of the recommended first-choice therapeutic options for patients with COPD, and several new agents have been developed in recent years. A literature search identified 14 published randomized, placebo-controlled studies of the efficacy and safety of LAMAs in patients with COPD, with improvements seen in lung function, exacerbations, breathlessness, and health status. A greater weight of evidence currently exists for glycopyrronium (GLY) and tiotropium than for umeclidinium and aclidinium, especially in terms of exacerbation reductions. To date, there have been few head-to-head clinical studies of the different LAMAs. Available data indicate that GLY and aclidinium have similar efficacy to tiotropium in terms of improving lung function, dyspnea, exacerbations, and health status. Overall, evidence demonstrates that currently available LAMAs provide effective and generally well-tolerated therapy for patients with COPD. Delivery devices for the different LAMAs vary, which may affect individual patient’s adherence to and preference for treatment. Subtle differences between individual therapeutic options may be important to individual patients and the final treatment choice should involve physician’s and patient’s experiences and preferences.

RATIONALE: Since the last published Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) COPD guideline in 2007 and the 2008 update – highlights for primary care, many new clinical trials have challenged COPD treatment...

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by symptoms of cough, dyspnea, chest tightness, and wheeze. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have been recommended as initial therapy in the treatment of persistent asthma in all guidelines, as they have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality. However, high-dose regimens and long-term use of ICS may be associated with a variety of side effects, similar to those observed with systemic corticosteroid therapy. These side effects include impaired growth in children, osteoporosis, fractures, glaucoma, cataracts, and skin thinning. The current recommendations on ICS use in asthma management will be reviewed in this article with a view to highlight treatment strategies that strike an optimal balance between safety and efficacy.

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways characterized by varying degrees of bronchoconstriction and airway hyperresponsiveness, leading to classic symptoms of airway obstruction tha...

Rationale: Adults may exhibit characteristics of both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a situation recently described as asthma–COPD overlap (ACO). There is a paucity of inf...

Aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) 400/12 µg is a twice-daily long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist and long-acting β2 agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual-bronchodilator maintenance therapy used to relieve symptoms and reduce future risk of exacerbations in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To date, there have been several clinical studies and post hoc analyses of AB/FF, assessing treatment outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. These studies have looked at a range of outcomes, including lung function parameters, patient-reported symptom scores, quality-of-life measures assessing impaired health and perceived well-being, and the frequency, duration, and severity of exacerbations. In light of the major 2017 revision to the Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommendations, and the subsequent updates, we present an update on the latest evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of AB/FF. This review discusses the clinical relevance of the improvements in lung function, symptoms, quality of life, and exacerbations in patients with COPD reported in the phase III and IV trials of AB/FF. Given the current concerns over unnecessary inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use in COPD, we also touch briefly on the use of blood eosinophils as a biomarker for identifying those patients with COPD already using LAMA/LABA therapy for whom the addition of ICS might be of benefit.

Anthony D D’Urzo,1 Dave Singh,2 James F Donohue,3 Edward M Kerwin,4 Anna Ribera,5 Eduard Molins,5 Ferran Chuecos,5 Diana Jarreta,5 Esther Garcia Gil5 1Department of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; 2Medicines Evaluation Unit, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; 3Division of Pulmonary Diseases & Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 4Clinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, Medford, OR, USA; 5AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain Background: Aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg is a twice-daily maintenance bronchodilator for COPD. This post hoc study evaluated aclidinium/formoterol vs aclidinium 400 µg, formoterol 12 µg, or placebo in patient subgroups. Patients and methods: Data were pooled from two 24-week Phase III clinical trials (ACLIFORM and AUGMENT). Patients (N=3,394) were analyzed by baseline airflow obstruction severity (moderate/severe), age (

Background ‘Clinically important deterioration’ (CID) is a composite endpoint measuring worsening of the key clinical features of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), namely lung function, patient-reported outcomes, and exacerbations. ACLIFORM and AUGMENT were two 24-week, randomized, double-blind, phase III studies assessing twice-daily (BID) aclidinium bromide (AB) 400 μg/formoterol fumarate (FF) 12 μg. This pooled post-hoc analysis assessed the effects of AB/FF 400/12 μg on both first and sustained CID events versus placebo and monotherapies in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Methods A first CID event was defined as the occurrence of a moderate/severe exacerbation or the worsening from baseline in ≥1 of the following: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1; ≥100 mL), Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score (≥1 unit), or St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (≥4 units). A ‘sustained’ CID was defined as a worsening maintained at all subsequent visits from appearance to week 24 or a moderate/severe exacerbation at any time. CID events were assessed at three visits (weeks 4, 12, and 24); trough FEV1 was also measured at weeks 1 and 18. Results AB/FF 400/12 μg reduced the risk of a first CID event by 45% versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, p

The global prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is rising, although the disease is often underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed as asthma. Early diagnosis and intervention in the primary care setting may improve outcomes and reduce the overall burden of COPD and its comorbidities. Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment in international and national guidelines, with long-acting agents administered alone or as part of a combination regimen in patients who are persistently symptomatic and/or at high risk of COPD exacerbations. Here, we report results of a systematic literature search to review the evidence supporting several approved bronchodilator monotherapies, as well as dual bronchodilator treatment, combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroids plus one or two bronchodilators and other emerging COPD treatment options.

SUMMARY The goals for management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as per the latest Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2013 revision include reducing both symptoms (modified medical research council dyspnea score and/or COPD assessment tool) and future risk (severity of airflow limitation and/or exacerbation history in the previous year). Bronchodilators remain central to the management of COPD; a combination of long-acting bronchodilators from different pharmacological classes is recommended to achieve maximal bronchodilation in patients not controlled with monotherapy alone. Presently, several issues related to COPD management remain unaddressed, perhaps due to the paucity of evidence – when should bronchodilator therapy be stepped up, what is the value of early diagnosis and treatment of COPD; how appropriate is long-acting bronchodilator therapy in early disease, and what is the role of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD? The intent of this review is to ad...

This was a 52-week, double-blind, extension study in which COPD patients previously treated with twice-daily (BID) aclidinium bromide 200 μg or 400 μg during a 12-week lead-in study (ACCORD COPD I) continued the same treatment, while patients previously receiving placebo were rerandomized (1:1) to aclidinium 200 μg or 400 μg BID. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of aclidinium treatment. Efficacy outcomes included bronchodilation, health status, and rescue medication use. A total of 467 patients completed the lead-in study and 291 patients consented to participate in the extension. At study end, the percentages of patients who reported a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) were similar for both treatments (200 μg, 77.4%; 400 μg, 73.7%). Incidence of anticholinergic TEAEs was low and similar for both treatments, with dry mouth reported in only 1 patient (400 μg). Cardiac TEAEs were reported by a similarly low percentage of patients (

Introduction Aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) 400/12 μg efficacy and safety was demonstrated in two 6-month Phase III studies (AUGMENT and ACLIFORM) and a 12-month study in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-month AUGMENT extension investigated the long-term safety and tolerability of AB/FF 400/12 μg ( NCT01572792 ). Methods Patients were randomised in AUGMENT (1:1:1:1:1) to twice-daily AB/FF 400/12 μg, AB/FF 400/6 μg, AB 400 μg, FF 12 μg or placebo. Patients completing AUGMENT were invited to continue the same treatment in the extension. Adverse events (AEs), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), laboratory tests, electrocardiograms and vital signs were recorded. Efficacy was assessed. Results Of 1322 patients completing AUGMENT, 921 enrolled and 780 completed the extension. AE incidence was low and comparable across treatment groups; most common were nasopharyngitis (range 4.8%–9.3%), urinary tract infection (range 4.1%–8.8%) and upper respiratory tract infection (range 2.7%–5.5%). Serious AEs (SAEs) and MACE were low (ranges 6.8%–7.7% and 0.5%–1.5%, respectively). Significant improvements in bronchodilation and dyspnoea were maintained over 52 weeks versus placebo. Trends towards improvements in other symptoms and health status were observed versus placebo and monotherapies. AB/FF combinations increased the time to first exacerbation by approximately 30% versus placebo (p Conclusion AB/FF 400/12 μg was well tolerated over 52 weeks with low incidences of AEs, SAEs and MACE that were comparable across treatment groups. Improvements in bronchodilation, symptoms and health status were maintained across 52 weeks.

Identifying patients at risk of exacerbations and managing them appropriately to reduce this risk represents an important clinical challenge. Numerous treatments have been assessed for the prevention of exacerbations and their efficacy may differ by patient phenotype. Given their centrality in the treatment of COPD, there is strong rationale for maximizing bronchodilation as an initial strategy to reduce exacerbation risk irrespective of patient phenotype. Therefore, in patients assessed as frequent exacerbators (>1 exacerbation/year) we propose initial bronchodilator treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/ long-acting β2-agonist (LABA). For those patients who continue to experience >1 exacerbation/year despite maximal bronchodilation, we advocate treating according to patient phenotype. Based on currently available data on adding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to a LABA, ICS might be added to a LABA/LAMA combination in exacerbating patients who have an asthma-COPD overlap syndrome or high blood eosinophil counts, while in exacerbators with chronic bronchitis, consideration should be given to treating with a phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitor (roflumilast) or high-dose mucolytic agents. For those patients who experience frequent bacterial exacerbations and/or bronchiectasis, addition of mucolytic agents or a macrolide antibiotic (e.g. azithromycin) should be considered. In all patients at risk of exacerbations, pulmonary rehabilitation should be included as part of a comprehensive management plan. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-016-0425-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background As COPD is a progressive disease, it is important to assess the effect of treatment on disease deterioration. Aim To assess the ability of aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) dual therapy to reduce the risk of deterioration vs placebo (PBO) and monotherapies in COPD. Methods Data were pooled from two 24-week Phase III studies (ACLIFORM [NCT01462942] and AUGMENT [NCT1437397]). Patients received twice-daily AB/FF 400/12 µg, AB 400 µg, FF 12 µg or PBO. The composite endpoint 9clinically important deterioration9 (CID) was defined as ≥1 of the following changes from baseline at any visit: trough FEV 1 decrease ≥100 mL, TDI focal score decrease ≥1, SGRQ total score increase ≥4, or ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation. CID was considered sustained if maintained at all subsequent visits from appearance of CID to Week 24, including at last visit. Results The intent-to-treat population included 3394 patients (mean age: 63.5 y; 48.4% predicted FEV 1 ). AB/FF reduced the risk of a composite CID first event vs PBO (p 1 vs PBO (p Conclusion AB/FF 400/12 µg twice daily reduced the risk of first CID vs PBO, AB and FF, and also reduced sustained events vs PBO and FF.

Bronchodilators play a pivotal role in the management of symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Inhaled short-acting bronchodilators are used for all stages of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, primarily for the immediate relief of symptoms; inhaled long-acting bronchodilators are recommended for maintenance therapy in patients with moderate-to-very severe disease and those with daily symptoms. When symptoms are not adequately controlled by a single bronchodilator, combining bronchodilators of different classes may prove effective. Several long-acting β(2)-agonists and long-acting muscarinic antagonists with 24-h duration of action and inhalers combining different classes of long-acting, once-daily bronchodilators are in development. The place of these agents in the treatment algorithm will be determined by their efficacy and safety profiles and their long-term impact on relevant clinical outcomes.

This Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg versus placebo in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.In this 12-week, double-blind, multicenter trial, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to inhaled twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg, aclidinium 400 μg, or placebo. Primary and secondary endpoints were changes from baseline in trough FEV₁ and peak FEV₁ at Week 12, respectively. Health status (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]), COPD symptoms (Transitional Dyspnea Index [TDI], night and early morning symptoms), and safety were also assessed.A total of 561 patients (mean age, 64 ± 9 years) with a mean baseline FEV₁ of 1.36 ± 0.54 L (47.2% of predicted value) were randomized. At Week 12, aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg showed significant improvements from baseline in mean (95% CI) trough FEV₁ compared with placebo by 86 (45, 127) mL and 124 (83,164) mL, respectively, and in peak FEV₁ by 146 (101, 190) mL and 192 (148, 236) mL, respectively (p ≤ 0.0001 for all). Both aclidinium doses also provided significant improvements in SGRQ, TDI and almost all COPD symptom scores compared with placebo (p0.05 for all). Incidences of adverse events (AEs) were similar across treatment groups. The incidence of anticholinergic AEs was low and similar across groups (dry mouth: 0.5%-1.6%; constipation: 0%-1.1%).Treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD patients with twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg was associated with significant improvements in bronchodilation, health status, and COPD symptoms. Both doses were well tolerated and had safety profiles similar to placebo.This ACCORD I study (AClidinium in Chronic Obstructive Respiratory Disease I) was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00891462) as "Efficacy and Safety of Aclidinium Bromide for Treatment of Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)".

Results from two clinical trials of mometasone furoate administered via a dry powder inhaler (MF-DPI) were reviewed to evaluate the consistency of effects of MF-DPI administered once-daily in the evening (QD PM) or twice-daily (BID) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults with persistent asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. HRQOL data were collected from two 12-week, randomized, double-blind trials: in study 1 (n = 268), patients received MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (1 inhalation), MF-DPI 200 microg BID, or placebo; in study 2 (n = 400), patients received MF-DPI 200 microg QD PM, MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (1 inhalation), MF-DPI 200 microg BID, MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (2 inhalations of 200 microg), or placebo. In both studies, HRQOL was assessed using the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-item Short Form (SF-36) and an asthma-specific module. MF-DPI was associated with consistent, statistically significant improvements in asthma-specific total scores, breathlessness, asthma concerns, and physical symptoms compared with placebo in both trials (p < 0.05 vs. placebo). MF-DPI improved SF-36 Physical Component Summary scores at all doses except 200 microg QD PM. In conclusion, the results from two placebo-controlled trials suggest that MF-DPI 400 microg/d, administered once or twice-daily, produces consistent, statistically, and clinically significant improvement in HRQOL measures in patients with persistent asthma.

Previous studies have raised concerns regarding the safety of regular use of beta2-agonists for treating asthma. Few studies have explored the safety of at least 1 year of use of racemic albuterol, and none have examined long-term dosing of levalbuterol.To examine the long-term safety of levalbuterol hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) vs racemic albuterol HFA administered via metered-dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with stable asthma.Patients with mild to moderate asthma (mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEVI], 68.3% of predicted) 12 years or older participated in a multicenter, parallel-group, open-label study. Patients were randomized to levalbuterol HFA MDI (90 microg; 2 actuations of 45 microg; n = 496) or racemic albuterol HFA MDI (180 microg; 2 actuations of 90 microg; n = 250) for 52 weeks of 4 times daily dosing. The primary end point was the incidence of postrandomization adverse events. Asthma exacerbations and pulmonary parameters were also assessed.The overall incidence of adverse events was similar for levalbuterol (72.0%) and racemic albuterol (76.8%). Rates of beta-mediated adverse events, serious adverse events, and discontinuations because of adverse events were low (15%) and were comparable between groups. Rates of asthma adverse events for levalbuterol and racemic albuterol were 18.3% and 19.6%, respectively. Mean percentage of predicted FEV1 improved after dosing and was stable for both groups.In this trial, up to 52 weeks of regular use of levalbuterol HFA MDI or racemic albuterol HFA MDI was well tolerated, and no deterioration of lung function was detected during the study period.

Mometasone furoate dry-powder inhaler (MF-DPI) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) used for the treatment of persistent asthma in patients agedor= 12 years. MF-DPI has low systemic bioavailability and high glucocorticoid receptor affinity compared with most other ICSs and modifies inflammatory mediators involved in the pathogenesis of asthma. MF-DPI, unlike other available ICSs, is approved for initiation as a once-daily in the afternoon (q.d. PM) regimen. Studies show that MF-DPI 200 or 400 microg q.d. PM treatment significantly improves lung function and symptom control in patients with mild, moderate or severe asthma. MF-DPI 400 microg q.d. PM is reported to be equivalent to fluticasone propionate 250 microg b.i.d. and beclometasone dipropionate 168 microg b.i.d. and more efficacious than budesonide 400 microg, b.i.d. or q.d. MF-DPI is generally well tolerated, with minimal effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

Inhaled LAMAs are recommended for COPD patients in all GOLD groups (A,B,CD 50% predicted normal) without baseline exacerbation risk. Efficacy of GLY and TIO was analyzed by mean change from baseline at 12 wks for trough FEV 1 (tFEV 1 ), SGRQ score, and TDI score. Of 2599 patients (GLY=1628, TIO=971), 7.6%, 52.6%, 2.8% and 37.0% were classed in GOLD groups A, B, C and D respectively. GLY showed significant improvement in tFEV 1 in patients in all groups after 12 treatment wks compared with baseline; TIO showed significant improvement only in BD p=0.0036)]. GLY significantly improved dyspnea in patients in all GOLD groups, similar to TIO. GLY and TIO showed similar and significant improvement in SGRQ only in GOLD groups B&D. In conclusion, GLY and TIO significantly improved dyspnea (in all GOLD groups) and health status (GOLD Groups B&D). GLY provided significant improvement in tFEV 1 in patients in all GOLD groups, while TIO showed statistically significant improvement in tFEV 1 only in patients in group B&D. GOLD 2015.

Background: ACLIFORM (NCT01462942) and AUGMENT (NCT01437397) were 24-wk, randomised, double-blind, Phase III studies of twice-daily (BID) aclidinium/formoterol (ACL/FOR) fixed-dose combination (FDC) in patients (pts) with COPD and moderate to severe airflow obstruction (AO). Pooled data were stratified by AO severity. Methods: Pts received FDC 400/12 μg, FDC 400/6 μg, ACL 400 μg, FOR 12 μg or placebo (PBO), BID. Assessments: change from baseline in morning pre-dose (trough) and 1-hr morning post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) at Wk 24 and Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) score (pre-planned), moderate or severe exacerbations and adverse events (AEs). Results: Data included 3398 pts (mean age 63.5 yrs; 60.5% male; 58.7% moderate, 40.8% severe AO). Both FDCs improved trough FEV 1 , post-dose FEV 1 and TDI vs PBO for both AO severities (Table). Exacerbation rate was significantly lower in pts with severe AO receiving FDC 400/12 µg and ACL 400 µg vs PBO (both p Conclusions: ACL/FOR FDC 400/12 µg improved bronchodilation and dyspnoea in pts with moderate or severe AO and reduced exacerbations in pts with severe AO. AEs were similar, regardless of AO severity.

Background: Combining two bronchodilators with different mechanisms of action may provide additional benefits versus monotherapy in patients with COPD. Aim: To assess the effect of twice-daily (BID) aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate fixed-dose combination (FDC) on bronchodilation in patients with moderate to severe COPD by pooling data from the ACLIFORM (NCT01462942) and AUGMENT (NCT01437397) trials in a pre-specified analysis. Method: Patients were randomised to aclidinium/formoterol FDC 400/12 or 400/6 µg, aclidinium 400 µg, formoterol 12 µg or placebo BID. Co-primary endpoints were change from baseline in 1-hour morning post-dose FEV 1 versus aclidinium and morning pre-dose (trough) FEV 1 versus formoterol at Week 24. Results: The intent-to-treat population included 3394 patients (mean age: 63.5 years; % predicted FEV 1 : 48.4). The FDCs produced significant improvements in the co-primary endpoints at the first time point assessed; these improvements were sustained at Week 24 (table). Bronchodilation was significant at the first time point post-dose (Day 1, 5 min post-dose: 108–120 mL vs placebo, p 1 was significantly improved with the FDCs versus placebo and both monotherapies at each visit (all p Conclusion: Both doses of aclidinium/formoterol FDC demonstrated rapid, sustained improvements in lung function over 24 weeks versus placebo and the monotherapies in patients with COPD.

Glycopyrronium (GLY) and tiotropium (TIO) are inhaled LAMAs recommended for COPD patients in all GOLD groups (A,B,CD BD ≥7/ 2 and lung function (FEV 1 ; 50% predicted normal) not considering baseline exacerbation risk. Efficacy of GLY and TIO was measured by mean change from baseline at 12 weeks for trough FEV 1 (tFEV1), health status (SGRQ score) and dyspnea (TDI score). Out of 2599 patients (GLY=1628; TIO=971),30.6% and 26.7% were in the low-symptom groups AC 29.7% and 13.1% patients were in the high-symptom groups BD there was no significant difference between GLY and TIO. In conclusion, GLY improved lung function, dyspnea and health status in COPD patients in all GOLD groups, similar to TIO. GOLD 2015 Ozalevli et al 2006 J Eval Clin Pract 12 ; 532–538.

Background The combination of aclidinium bromide, a long-acting anticholinergic, and formoterol fumarate, a long-acting beta2-agonist (400/12 μg twice daily) achieves improvements in lung function greater than either monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is approved in the European Union as a maintenance treatment. The effect of this combination on symptoms of COPD and exacerbations is less well established. We examined these outcomes in a pre-specified analysis of pooled data from two 24-week, double-blind, parallel-group, active- and placebo-controlled, multicentre, randomised Phase III studies (ACLIFORM and AUGMENT). Methods Patients ≥40 years with moderate to severe COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]/forced vital capacity

Introduction: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (in fixed combinations with long-acting β2-agonists [LABAs]) are frequently prescribed for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), outside their labeled indications and recommended treatment strategies and guidelines, despite having the potential to cause significant side effects. Areas covered: Although the existence of asthma in patients with asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) clearly supports the use of anti-inflammatory treatment (typically an ICS/LABA combination, as ICS monotherapy is usually not indicated for COPD), the current level of ICS/LABA use is not consistent with the prevalence of ACOS in the COPD population. Data have recently become available showing the comparative efficacy of fixed bronchodilator combinations (long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]/LABA with ICS/LABA combinations). Additionally, new information has emerged on ICS withdrawal without increased risk of exacerbations, under cover of effective bronchodilation. Expert opinion: For patients with COPD who do not have ACOS, a LAMA/LABA combination may be an appropriate starting therapy, apart from those with mild disease who can be managed with a single long-acting bronchodilator. Patients who remain symptomatic or present with exacerbations despite effectively delivered LAMA/LABA treatment may require additional drug therapy, such as ICS or phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors. When prescribing an ICS/LABA, the risk:benefit ratio should be considered in individual patients.

Spirometry is recommended for the diagnosis of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in international guidelines and may be useful for distinguishing asthma from COPD. Numerous spirometry interpretation algorithms (SIAs) are described in the literature, but no studies highlight how different SIAs may influence the interpretation of the same spirometric data. We examined how two different SIAs may influence decision making among primary-care physicians. Data for this initiative were gathered from 113 primary-care physicians attending accredited workshops in Canada between 2011 and 2013. Physicians were asked to interpret nine spirograms presented twice in random sequence using two different SIAs and touch pad technology for anonymous data recording. We observed differences in the interpretation of spirograms using two different SIAs. When the pre-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC (forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity) ratio was >0.70, algorithm 1 led to a ‘normal’ interpretation (78% of physicians), whereas algorithm 2 prompted a bronchodilator challenge revealing changes in FEV1 that were consistent with asthma, an interpretation selected by 94% of physicians. When the FEV1/FVC ratio was 12% and 200 ml, 76% suspected asthma and 10% suspected COPD using algorithm 1, whereas 74% suspected asthma versus COPD using algorithm 2 across five separate cases. The absence of a post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC decision node in algorithm 1 did not permit consideration of possible COPD. This study suggests that differences in SIAs may influence decision making and lead clinicians to interpret the same spirometry data differently. Variations among algorithms used to interpret ‘blow’ tests for diagnosis of asthma and lung disease may be skewing test results. The researchers, led by Anthony D'Urzo from the University of Toronto in Canada, had 113 primary care physicians make diagnoses from nine sets of blow test or spirogram results using two different spirogram interpretation algorithms (SIAs). They found for a particular case with impaired blow test results, one SIA resulted in a ‘normal’ diagnosis by 78% of physicians, while the other resulted in a diagnosis of ‘consistent with asthma’ by 94% of doctors. The findings suggest a need to standardise the algorithms in order to minimise differences in interpreting data, and underscore the importance of educating physicians about the pitfalls of using spirograms in isolation.