Search

James F Donohue,1 Tara Rheault,2 Margot MacDonald-Berko,2 Thomas Bengtsson,3 Kathleen Rickard2 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Verona Pharma plc, Raleigh, NC, USA; 3Stat Mind AB, Lund, SwedenCorrespondence: Tara Rheault, Verona Pharma, 8045 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC, 27617, USA, Tel +1 646-530-2126, Email tara.rheault@veronapharma.comAbstract: Ensifentrine is a novel, potent, and selective dual inhibitor of phosphodiesterase (PDE)3 and PDE4 designed for delivery by inhalation that combines effects on airway inflammation, bronchodilation and ciliary function in bronchial epithelia. In Phase 2 studies in subjects with COPD, ensifentrine demonstrated clinically meaningful bronchodilation and improvements in symptoms and health-related quality of life when administered alone or in combination with current standard of care therapies. Ensifentrine is currently in late-stage clinical development for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. This review summarizes non-clinical data as well as Phase 1 and Phase 2 efficacy and safety results of nebulized ensifentrine relevant to the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD.Keywords: RPL554, nebulized therapy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, clinical efficacy, drug development

James F Donohue,1 J Stuart Elborn,2 Peter Lansberg,3 Afzal Javed,4 Solomon Tesfaye,5 Hope Rugo,6 Sita Ratna Devi Duddi,7,8 Niraksha Jithoo,9 Pai-Hui Huang,10 Kannan Subramaniam,11 Nagendra Ramanjinappa,12 Arkady Koltun,13 Shari Melamed,13 Juliana CN Chan14 1UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Queen’s University, Belfast, UK; 3University Medical Center, Groningen, the Netherlands; 4Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK & Pakistan Psychiatric Research Centre, Coventry, UK; 5Sheffield Teaching Hospitals and the University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; 6University of California San Francisco Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA, USA; 7International Alliance of Patients’ Organisations, London, United Kingdom; 8DakshamA Health and Education, Delhi, India; 9Viatris Ltd, Johannesburg, South Africa; 10Viatris Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Taipei, Taiwan; 11Viatris Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand; 12Viatris Ltd, Bangalore, India; 13Viatris Ltd, Canonsburg, PA, USA; 14Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Hong Kong Institute of Diabetes and Obesity, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Regions of the People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Juliana CN Chan, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Hong Kong Institute of Diabetes and Obesity, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Regions of the People’s Republic of China, Tel +852 3505 3138, Email jchan@cuhk.edu.hkAbstract: According to the United Nations High-Level Meeting 2018, five non-communicable diseases (NCDs) including cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, diabetes mellitus, cancer, and mental health conditions accounted for two-thirds of global deaths. These five NCDs share five common risk factors including tobacco use, unhealthy diets, physical inactivity, alcohol use, and air pollution. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face larger burden of NCDs than high-income countries (HICs), due to differences in ecological, technological, socioeconomic and health system development. Based on high-level evidence albeit mainly from HICs, the burden caused by NCDs can be reduced by affordable medicines and best practices. However, “know-do” gaps, ie, gaps between what we know in science and what we do in practice, has limited the impact of these strategies, especially in LMICs. Implementation science advocates the use of robust methodologies to evaluate sustainable solutions in health, education and social care aimed at informing practice and policies. In this article, physician researchers with expertise in NCDs reviewed the common challenges shared by these five NCDs with different clinical courses. They explained the principles of implementation science and advocated the use of an evidence-based framework to implement solutions focusing on early detection, prevention and empowerment, supplemented by best practices in HICs and LMICs. These successful stories can be used to motivate policymakers, payors, providers, patients and public to co-design frameworks and implement context-relevant, multi-component, evidence-based practices. In pursuit of this goal, we propose partnership, leadership, and access to continuing care as the three pillars in developing roadmaps for addressing the multiple needs during the journey of a person with or at risk of these five NCDs. By transforming the ecosystem, raising awareness and aligning context-relevant practices and policies with ongoing evaluation, it is possible to make healthcare accessible, affordable and sustainable to reduce the burden of these five NCDs.Keywords: non-communicable diseases, know-do gaps, implementation science, evidence-based practices, healthcare policies

James F Donohue,1 Ayca Ozol-Godfrey,2 Thomas Goodin,2 Shahin Sanjar2 1Department of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Marlborough, MA, USACorrespondence: James F DonohueDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USAEmail James_donohue@med.unc.eduPurpose: Rescue medication use is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and tends to increase with symptoms and disease severity. An analysis of baseline rescue medication use was conducted to inform on patient phenotypes and subsequent effects on lung function, symptoms, and safety following 12 weeks of nebulized glycopyrrolate (GLY) 25 μg twice daily or placebo in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD.Patients and Methods: Pooled data from the 12-week, placebo-controlled GOLDEN 3 and 4 studies (n=781) were used to assign patients into quarters based on baseline rescue medication use (ie, average puffs-per-day) during the run-in period. Placebo-adjusted trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and EXAcerbations of COPD Tool-Respiratory Symptoms (EXACT-RS) total score data were reported; safety was evaluated by reviewing the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs).Results: Baseline rescue medication use was a proxy for disease severity, evidenced by decreased lung function, increased health status scores, symptom scores and use of background long-acting β 2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids across quarters and treatment groups. Treatment with GLY led to greater improvements from baseline in trough FEV1, SGRQ and EXACT-RS scores compared with placebo in all rescue medication use quarters. Additionally, the SGRQ and EXACT-RS exhibited greater improvement with increased baseline rescue medication use with GLY treatment. In the Q4 patients, SGRQ (≥ 4-unit reduction) or EXACT-RS (≥ 2-unit reduction) responders were significantly greater with GLY compared with placebo. AE and SAE incidences were similar across quartiles.Conclusion: These results suggest that baseline rescue medication use assessments may be useful in the management of COPD. Treatment with nebulized GLY improved lung function and symptom scores, regardless of baseline rescue medication use. These results support the use of nebulized GLY for the treatment of COPD, independent of baseline rescue medication use.Keywords: COPD, glycopyrrolate, LAMA, rescue medication use

James F Donohue,1 Donald A Mahler,2,3 Sanjay Sethi4 1Pulmonary Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA; 3Director of Respiratory Services, Valley Regional Hospital, Claremont, NH, USA; 4University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USACorrespondence: James F DonohueUNC School of Medicine, 4125 Bioinformatics Building CB#7020, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-0001, USATel +1 984-974-5703Fax +1 984-974-5737Email James_Donohue@med.unc.eduAbstract: Bronchodilation with muscarinic antagonists, β2-agonists, and inhaled corticosteroids remains the foundation of pharmaceutical treatment for patients with stable COPD. These drugs are delivered from a variety of devices, including dry powder inhalers, pressurized metered-dose inhalers, soft-mist inhalers, or nebulizers. Nebulized delivery is often preferable in patients who are elderly, are cognitively impaired, are unable to generate sufficient inspiratory force to use their inhaler, have difficulty coordinating hand-breath activity, are too dyspneic to hold their breath for a sufficient time, and/or may be acutely ill. Revefenacin, a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist for nebulization recently approved by the US FDA for the treatment of patients with COPD, was discovered and developed using “duration and lung selectivity-by-design.” This strategy selected a molecule with a high lung-selective index to maximize bronchodilation and limit systemic anti-muscarinic side effects. In early-phase clinical studies, revefenacin for nebulization led to a rapid onset of bronchodilation that was sustained for 24 hrs in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Revefenacin also demonstrated minimal systemic exposure and good tolerability in these studies. Statistically and clinically significant improvements in lung function (ie, peak and/or trough FEV1) relative to placebo were observed with revefenacin in Phase III clinical trials of up to 3 months in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. Revefenacin was well tolerated in Phase III clinical trials with a low incidence of systemic antimuscarinic adverse events, which is consistent with its lung-selective design. There was no evidence of an increased risk of major cardiovascular events. Patient-reported outcome data from clinical trials indicated statistically significant improvements in several disease-specific measures. Revefenacin 175 μg for nebulization provides an effective once-daily treatment option for patients with moderate to very severe COPD who require or prefer nebulized therapy.Keywords: long-acting muscarinic antagonist, LAMA, bronchodilator, inhaled, once daily, nebulizer

Dave Singh,1 Anthony D D’Urzo,2 James F Donohue,3 Edward M Kerwin,4 Eduard Molins,5 Ferran Chuecos,5 Anna Ribera,5 Diana Jarreta5 1Medicines Evaluation Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; 2Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; 3Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina Pulmonary Critical Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 4Clinical Research Institute, Medford, OR, USA; 5BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence: Dave SinghMedicines Evaluation Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M23 9QZ, UK Tel +44 161 946 4073Fax +44 161 946 1459Email DSingh@meu.org.ukBackground: Ideally, treatment recommendations for maintenance therapy-naïve 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-naïve 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-naïve with long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA). Additionally, a post-hoc subgroup analysis was conducted for maintenance therapy-naïve 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-naïve 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-naïve 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-naïve 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-naïve patients. Intervention with dual bronchodilator therapy as a first maintenance treatment for COPD may provide greater benefits than LAMA or LABA monotherapy.Keywords: COPD, treatment-naïve, LAMA, LABA

Sohini Ghosh,1 Roy A Pleasants,2 Jill A Ohar,3 James F Donohue,1 M Bradley Drummond1 1Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; 3Department of Medicine, Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy, and Immunology, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA Purpose: Adequate peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) is required for drug dispersion with dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Prevalence of PIFR discordance (suboptimal PIFR with prescribed inhalers) and factors influencing device-specific PIFR are unclear in COPD. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of PIFR discordance and associated clinical factors in a stable COPD population. Patients and methods: An observational, single-center, cohort study was conducted including 66 outpatients with COPD. PIFR was measured using the In-Check™ Dial with applied resistance of prescribed inhalers. Participants were defined as discordant if measured PIFR was Results: The median age of the COPD participants was 69.4 years, 92% were white and 47% were female. A total of 48% were using low–medium resistance DPIs (Diskus®/Ellipta®) and 76% used high-resistance DPI (Handihaler®). A total of 40% of COPD participants were discordant to prescribed inhalers. Female gender was the only factor consistently associated with lower PIFR. Shorter height was associated with reduced PIFR for low–medium resistance (r=0.44; P=0.01), but not high resistance (r=0.20; P=0.16). There was no correlation between PIFR by In-Check™ dial and PIFR measured by standard spirometer. Conclusion: PIFR is reduced in stable COPD patients, with female gender being the only factor consistently associated with reduced PIFR. Discordance with prescribed inhalers was seen in 40% of COPD patients, suggesting that many COPD patients do not generate adequate inspiratory force to overcome prescribed DPIs resistance in the course of normal use. Keywords: pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive, dry powder inhaler, peak inspiratory flow rate, drug delivery systems

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 (

James F Donohue,1 Vamsi K Bollu,2 Donald E Stull,3 Lauren M Nelson,4 Valerie SL Williams,4 Michael D Stensland,5 Nicola A Hanania6 1Department of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 2Worldwide Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, 3Data Analytics and Design Strategy, 4Psychometrics, RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, 5Agile Outcomes Research, Inc., Rochester, MN, 6Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA Background: Symptom severity is the largest factor in determining subjective health in COPD. Symptoms (eg, chronic cough, dyspnea) are associated with decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We evaluated the impact of arformoterol on HRQoL in COPD patients, measured by St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Post hoc growth mixture model (GMM) analysis examined symptom response profiles. Methods: We examined data from a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12-month safety trial of twice-daily nebulized arformoterol 15 µg (n=420) versus placebo (n=421). COPD severity was assessed by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) status. GMM analysis identified previously unknown patient subgroups and examined the heterogeneity in response to SGRQ Symptoms scores. Results: SGRQ Total score improved by 4.24 points with arformoterol and 2.02 points with placebo (P=0.006). Significantly greater improvements occurred for arformoterol versus placebo in SGRQ Symptoms (6.34 vs 4.25, P=0.031) and Impacts (3.91 vs 0.97, P=0.001) scores, but not in Activity score (3.57 vs 1.75, P=0.057). GMM identified responders and nonresponders based on the SGRQ Symptoms score. End-of-study mean difference in SGRQ Symptoms scores between these latent classes was 20.7 points (P

James F Donohue,1 Keith A Betts,2 Ella Xiaoyan Du,2 Pablo Altman,3 Pankaj Goyal,4 Dorothy L Keininger,4 Jean-Bernard Gruenberger,4 James E Signorovitch5 1Department of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 2Analysis Group, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 3Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA; 4Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland; 5Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA, USA Purpose: Long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) have demonstrated efficacy in patients with COPD in clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy of all available dosages of all LABA monotherapies using a network meta-analysis.Methods: A systematic literature review identified 33 randomized controlled trials of LABA monotherapies (salmeterol 50 µg twice daily [BID]; formoterol 12 µg BID; indacaterol 75, 150, and 300 µg once daily [OD]; olodaterol 5 and 10 µg OD, and vilanterol 25 µg OD). Clinical efficacy was evaluated at 12 and 24 weeks in terms of trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), transition dyspnea index focal score, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire total score, and rate of COPD exacerbations. The relative effectiveness of all LABA monotherapies was estimated by Bayesian network meta-analysis.Results: At 12 and 24 weeks, indacaterol 300 and 150 µg OD were associated with statistically significant improvement in trough FEV1 compared to all other LABA monotherapies; vilanterol 25 µg OD was superior to formoterol 12 µg BID. At 12 weeks, indacaterol 75 µg OD was associated with significant improvement in trough FEV1 compared to formoterol 12 µg BID and olodaterol (5 and 10 µg OD); salmeterol 50 µg BID was superior to formoterol 12 µg BID and olodaterol 5 µg OD. Indacaterol 300 µg OD was also associated with significant improvement in transition dyspnea index focal score compared to all other LABAs at 12 or 24 weeks. Indacaterol 150 µg OD had significantly better results in exacerbation rates than olodaterol 5 µg and olodaterol 10 µg OD.Conclusion: Indacaterol 300 µg, followed by 150 and 75 µg, were the most effective LABA monotherapies for moderate to severe COPD. Keywords: COPD, long-acting β2-agonists, network meta-analysis, systematic literature review, indacaterol

Joshua S Cohen,1 Matthew C Miles,2 James F Donohue,3 Jill A Ohar2 1United Lung and Sleep Clinic, Saint Paul, MN, USA; 2Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 3University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Abstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditure worldwide. Relaxation of airway smooth muscle with inhaled bronchodilators is the cornerstone of treatment for stable COPD, with inhaled corticosteroids reserved for those with a history of exacerbations. Tiotropium has occupied center stage in COPD treatment for over 10 years and improves lung function, quality of life, exercise endurance, and reduces the risk of COPD exacerbation. Long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) improve lung function, reduce dynamic hyperinflation, increase exercise tolerance, health-related quality of life, and reduce acute exacerbation of COPD. The combination of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and LABAs is thought to leverage different pathways to induce bronchodilation using submaximal drug doses, increasing the benefits and minimizing receptor-specific side effects. Umeclidinium/vilanterol is the first combination of LAMA/LABA to be approved for use in stable COPD in USA and Europe. Additionally, indacaterol/glycopyrronium and aclidinium/formoterol have been approved in Europe and in numerous locations outside USA. Several other agents are in the late stages of development, most of which offer once-daily dosing. The benefits of new LAMA/LABA combinations include improved pulmonary function, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life, and in some cases, reduced exacerbations. These evolving treatments will provide new opportunities and challenges in the management of COPD. Keywords: bronchodilator, fixed-dose combination, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, COPD treatment

James F Donohue Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Dear editor Roskell et al present a systematic review comparing the long-acting beta2 agonists (LABA), olodaterol, and indacaterol in the July edition of the International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.1 The end-points compared for the two LABAs were: change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at week 12; quality of life analyzed by change from baseline in St George’s Respiratory Quotient (SGRQ; total score and proportion of responders) at week 12; transition dyspnea index (TDI), analyzed by change from baseline at week 12; use of rescue medication, analyzed by change from baseline in average number of puffs per day; and proportion of patients experiencing at least one exacerbation, analyzed in trials with a treatment duration of 24 weeks or longer reporting data for this outcome. The authors conclude that olodaterol and indacaterol have similar efficacy in patients with COPD. Read the original article

James F Donohue,1 Nancy Herje,2 Glenn Crater,2 Kathleen Rickard2 1Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2Aerocrine, Inc., Morrisville, NC, USA Objective: To characterize fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels that may be indicative of Th2-mediated airway inflammation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: This single-visit, outpatient study was conducted in 200 patients aged 40 years and older with COPD. All patients underwent spirometry and FeNO testing. COPD severity was classified according to the Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2010 guidelines. Results: Patients who participated in the study had a mean age of 63.9±11.3 years and a mean smoking history of 46±29 pack years. Patients had a mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second % predicted of 53.9%±22.1%. The percentage of patients classified with COPD severity Stage I, II, III, and IV was 13%, 40%, 39%, and 8%, respectively. In addition, according to current procedural terminology codes, 32% of patients were classified as mixed COPD/asthma, 26% as COPD/emphysema, and 42% as all other codes. The mean FeNO level for all patients was 15.3±17.2 parts per billion (ppb). Overall, 89% of patients had a FeNO 50 ppb. The percentages of patients with FeNO in the intermediate or high ranges of FeNO were greatest among patients with mixed COPD/asthma (intermediate, 11.5%; high, 6.6%) compared with COPD/emphysema (intermediate, 8%; high, 0) and all other codes (intermediate, 6.3%; high, 1.3%). Conclusion: Increases in FeNO were identified in a subset of patients with COPD, particularly in those previously diagnosed with both COPD and asthma. Since FeNO is useful for identifying patients with airway inflammation who will have a beneficial response to treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid, these data may have important implications for the management of COPD patients. Keywords: fractional exhaled nitric oxide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, inhaled corticosteroids

George E Taffet,1 James F Donohue,2 Pablo R Altman31Geriatrics Section, Geriatrics and Cardiovascular Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, 2Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 3Medical Affairs, Mylan Specialty L.P., Basking Ridge, NJ, USAAbstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is common in older people, with an estimated prevalence of 10% in the US population aged ≥75 years. Inhaled medications are the cornerstone of treatment for COPD and are typically administered by one of three types of devices, ie, pressurized metered dose inhalers, dry powder inhalers, and nebulizers. However, age-related pulmonary changes may negatively influence the delivery of inhaled medications to the small airways. In addition, physical and cognitive impairment, which are common in elderly patients with COPD, pose special challenges to the use of handheld inhalers in the elderly. Health care providers must take time to train patients to use handheld inhalers and must also check that patients are using them correctly on a regular basis. Nebulizers should be considered for patients unable to use handheld inhalers properly. What follows is a review of issues associated with COPD and its treatment in the elderly patient.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, inhaler, device, cognition, disability, comorbidities, maintenance therapy

James F Donohue1, Dave Singh2, Oliver Kornmann3, David Lawrence4, Cheryl Lassen4, Benjamin Kramer5 1University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2University of Manchester, Medicines Evaluation Unit, Manchester, UK; 3IKF Pneumologie GmbH and Co KG, Clinical Research Centre Respiratory Diseases, Frankfurt, Germany; 4Novartis Horsham Research Centre, Horsham, UK; 5Novartis Pharmaceuticals Inc, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA Purpose: Pooled data were analyzed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of indacaterol, a once-daily inhaled long-acting ß2-agonist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients and methods: Data were pooled from clinical studies of 3–12 months’ duration in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD receiving double-blind indacaterol 75 µg (n = 449), 150 µg (n = 2611), 300 µg (n = 1157), or 600 µg once daily (n = 547); formoterol 12 µg twice daily (n = 556); salmeterol 50 µg twice daily (n = 895); placebo (n = 2012); or tiotropium 18 µg once daily, given open label or blinded (n = 1214). Outcomes were adverse events, serious adverse events and deaths, plasma potassium, blood glucose, and QTc interval and vital signs. Results: The commonest adverse events with indacaterol were COPD worsening, nasopharyngitis, and headache; most cases were mild or moderate and incidence was generally similar to placebo and other active treatments. The risk of acute respiratory serious adverse events (leading to hospitalization, intubation, or death) was not significantly increased with any of the active treatments compared with placebo. COPD exacerbation rates (analyzed in the intent-to-treat population) were significantly reduced with all active treatments versus placebo. Hazard ratios versus placebo for major cardiovascular adverse events were

Purpose: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) initiative was developed to advance the methodology of PROs applicable to chronic diseases. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive chronic disease associated with poor health. This study was designed to examine the correlation of PROMIS health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales and clinical measures among COPD patients. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted comparing patients who were stable (n = 100) with those currently experiencing a COPD exacerbation (n = 85). All PROMIS measures for adults available at the time of the study (2008), disease-targeted and other HRQOL instruments, health literacy, percent predicted FEV1, and a 6-min walk distance were assessed when patients were considered clinically stable. Results: Stable COPD patients reported significantly (p ≤ 0.05) better health-related quality of life on PROMIS domains than patients experiencing an exacerbation. PROMIS domain scores were significantly (p ≤ 0.01) correlated with each of legacy measures. Six-min walk scores were most highly correlated with the PROMIS physical function domain scores (r = 0.53) followed by the fatigue (r = −0.26), social (r = 0.24) and to a lesser extent depression (r = −0.23), and anxiety (r = −0.22) domain scores. Percent predicted FEV1 score was significantly associated with PROMIS physical function scores (r = 0.27). Conclusion: This study provides support for the validity of the PROMIS measures in COPD patients.

COPD is a preventable and treatable disease characterized by airflow limitation that is not fully reversible. The diagnosis of COPD is based on spirometric evidence of airways obstruction following bronchodilator administration. Although it used to be commonly believed that patients with COPD have largely irreversible airflow obstruction, evidence now suggests that a considerable proportion of patients exhibit clinically significant bronchodilator reversibility. The complexity and inherent variability of a patient's acute response to a bronchodilator and the lack of a standardized procedure for assessing bronchodilator reversibility have led to significant confusion surrounding this concept. Although bronchodilator reversibility commonly is defined based on thresholds for improvement in FEV(1), lung volume-based measures of pulmonary function may be of particular importance in patients with severe COPD. The usefulness of acute reversibility to short-acting bronchodilators in predicting a patient's long-term response to bronchodilator maintenance therapy is also unclear, although most studies suggest that a lack of acute response to short-acting bronchodilators does not preclude a beneficial long-term response to maintenance bronchodilator treatment. This review outlines recent findings about the prevalence and usefulness of bronchodilator reversibility in patients with COPD based on the available literature and proposes areas of future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

RATIONALE: Indacaterol is the first once-daily, long-acting inhaled beta(2)-agonist bronchodilator studied in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate greater efficacy of indacaterol versus placebo on FEV(1) at 24 hours post dose (trough) after 12 weeks, to compare efficacy with placebo and tiotropium, and to evaluate safety and tolerability over 26 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to double-blind indacaterol 150 or 300 microg or placebo, or open-label tiotropium 18 microg, all once daily, for 26 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was trough FEV(1) at 12 weeks. Additional analyses (not adjusted for multiplicity) included transition dyspnea index (TDI), health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]), and exacerbations. Serum potassium, blood glucose, and QTc interval were measured. RESULTS: A total of 1,683 patients (age, 63.3 yr; post-bronchodilator FEV(1), 56% predicted; FEV(1)/FVC, 0.53) were randomized to the four treatment arms. Trough FEV(1) at Week 12 increased versus placebo by 180 ml with both indacaterol doses and by 140 ml with tiotropium (all P < 0.001 vs. placebo). At Week 26, for indacaterol 150/300 microg, respectively, versus placebo, TDI increased (1.00/1.18, P < 0.001) and SGRQ total score decreased (-3.3/-2.4, P < 0.01); corresponding results with tiotropium were 0.87 (P < 0.001) for TDI and (-1.0, P = not significant) for SGRQ total score. The incidence of adverse events, low serum potassium, high blood glucose, and prolonged QTc interval was similar across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Indacaterol was an effective once-daily bronchodilator and was at least as effective as tiotropium in improving clinical outcomes for patients with COPD. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00463567). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute guideline recommends that dosing racemic albuterol be administered every 1 to 4 hours for treating patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the hospital. Previously published preliminary and retrospective studies suggested that levalbuterol can be administered every 8 hours for the treatment of bronchoconstriction in hospitalized patients. However, it is unclear how the different dosing regimens affect the total number of nebulizations (scheduled plus as-needed treatments) and the costs of treatment of bronchoconstriction in a hospital setting. Moreover, it is not clear how the different dosing regimens affect symptom outcomes and health status in hospitalized patients with asthma or COPD. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate these issues in hospitalized patients with acute asthma or COPD. Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label study, hospitalized patients aged >/=18 years were randomly assigned to receive 14-day treatment with levalbuterol 1.25 mg q6-8h or racemic albuterol 2.5 mg q1-4h, administered per routine hospital practice at each institution. The primary efficacy end point was total number of nebulizations during hospitalization. Pulmonary function, symptom evaluation (subject general well-being score [SGWB], disease symptom assessment [DSA], and beta-mediated adverse effect scores), hospital costs (excluding medication costs) and hospital length of stay (LOS) were also evaluated. Results: In the intent-to-ttreat population (n = 479; levalbuterol, 241;racemic albuterol, 238), the mean (SE) age was 55.3 (16.9) years, the majority of patients were white (57.8%), and the mean (SE) weight was 80.9 (24.5) kg. Demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 treatment groups, except that there were more females with COPD in the levalbuterol treatment group (63.88%) compared with the racemic albuterol treatment group (45.5%) (P = 0.005). Patients treated with levalbuterol required significantly fewer median total nebulizations (10 vs 12; P = 0.031) and scheduled nebulizations (9 vs 11; P = 0.009) compared with those in the racemic albuterol group. The 2 treatment groups required 0 rescue nebulizations. Mean (SD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second improved from baseline with both levalbuterol and racemic albuterol (0.06 [0.43] and 0.10 [0.37] L, respectively); these improvements were maintained throughout the hospital stay (0.11 [0.48] and 0.16 [0.52] L). DSA and SGWB scores improved significantly from baseline in both treatment groups, and beta-mediated adverse effects mean scores were significantly greater with levalbuterol versus racemic albuterol (P < 0.001). In the levalbuterol and racemic albuterol treatment groups, hospital LOS (70.6 and 65.7 hours, respectively), time to discharge (66.0 and 62.8 hours), and total hospital costs (least squares mean [SE], US $4869.30 [$343.58] and $4899.41 [$343.20]) were similar. Conclusions: In these hospitalized patients with acute asthma or COPD treated with levalbuterol every 6 to 8 hours or racemic albuterol every 1 to 4 hours, significantly fewer total nebulizations were required with levalbuterol, without an increased need for rescue nebulizations during 14 days of hospitalization. Both treatments were associated with improvements from baseline in symptoms and health status. The costs of treating bronchoconstriction in hospitalized patients were similar between the levalbuterol and racemic albuterol groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both short-acting and long-acting beta agonists have been used for many years for the treatment of asthma. Short-acting beta agonists are life-saving and their role as rescue agents is unquestioned, but regular use is not recommended because of safety concerns and the effectiveness of asthma-controller medications. Long-acting beta agonists are effective controller medications but have safety issues, so their use should be restricted to patients who are not optimally controlled on first-line controllers such as inhaled corticosteroids. The effect of the beta receptor genotype on beta agonist response is unclear but could hold promise for proper patient management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Evidence suggests that tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha plays an important role in the pathophysiology of sarcoidosis. Objectives: To assess the efficacy of infliximab in sarcoidosis. Methods: A phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 138 patients with chronic pulmonary sarcoidosis. Patients were randomized to receive intravenous infusions of infliximab (3 or 5 mg/kg) or placebo at Weeks 0, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 and were followed through Week 52. Measurements and Main Results: The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to Week 24 in percent of predicted FVC. Major secondary efficacy parameters included Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire, 6-min walk distance, Borg's CR10 dyspnea score, and the proportion of Lupus Pernio Physician's Global Assessment responders for patients with facial skin involvement. Patients in the combined infliximab groups (3 and 5 mg/kg) had a mean increase of 2.5% from baseline to Week 24 in the percent of predicted FVC, compared with no change in placebo-treated patients (p = 0.038). No significant differences between the treatment groups were observed for any of the major secondary endpoints at Week 24. Results of post hoc exploratory analyses suggested that patients with more severe disease tended to benefit more from infliximab treatment. Conclusions: Infliximab therapy resulted in a statistically significant improvement in % predicted FVC at Week 24. The clinical importance of this finding is not clear. The results of this Phase 2 clinical study support further evaluation of anti-TNF-alpha therapy in severe, chronic, symptomatic sarcoidosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sarcoidosis Health Questionnaire (SHQ) is a health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) instrument we designed in a two-part study to allow patients to describe their satisfaction with life as it is affected by sarcoidosis. In the Development Study, we created the SHQ from a 151-item pool generated from interviews with 107 patients, a search of the relevant literature, and discussion with sarcoidosis experts. Using clinical impact methodology and the questionnaire responses of a separate group of 149 patients, we reduced the total number of items to 29. The final SHQ has three domains: Daily Functioning, Physical Functioning, and Emotional Functioning. In the Validation Study, performed with a different group of 111 patients, we found that the SHQ had good internal consistency reliability, as well as evidence of content, criterion, and construct validity based on its comparison with other measures of HRQL (Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item short form and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire) and of mental health (the Center for Epidemiologic Study-Depression Scale), as well as with clinical variables including spirometry. The SHQ alone was sensitive to differences in HRQL based on the number of involved organ systems. In conclusion, we have developed a self-completed HRQL questionnaire for U.S. patients with sarcoidosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unlabelled: Uridine 5'-triphosphate (UTP) is a naturally occurring agonist for P2Y(2) receptors on the apical surface of ciliated respiratory epithelium. UTP stimulates salt and water transport and cilia beat frequency in human airway epithelium in vitro. Single, inhaled doses of UTP stimulate mucociliary clearance in conscious, intubated sheep and in patients with mild chronic bronchitis (smokers and former smokers), suggesting that UTP may be useful for obtaining deep-lung sputum specimens suitable for diagnostic purposes.Study Objective: UTP is being developed for the cytologic diagnosis of lung cancer under the compound number INS316 Solution for Inhalation (Inspire Pharmaceuticals; Durham, NC). Its ability to improve the quality of expectorated sputum was tested in the current study.Design: Placebo-controlled, double-blind, escalating two-period cross-over study.Setting: Outpatient volunteers.Patients or Participants: Twenty-six patients with mild chronic bronchitis.Intervention: Patients attempted to expectorate a specimen spontaneously, following a single inhaled dose of INS316 (10 to 180 mg), and following placebo.Measurements and Results: Sputum weight, sputum cell content, spirometry, and oxyhemoglobin saturation. Only 28% of these patients were able to expectorate a macrophage-containing, deep-lung specimen spontaneously or following inhalation of placebo. In contrast, 85% of the patients were able to produce a specimen following inhalation of INS316. The average weight of the sputum expectorated was increased fourfold by placebo and 10-fold by INS316. A mild transient decrease in pulmonary function was observed following INS316 administration.Conclusion: A single dose of INS316 safely improves the ability of patients with mild chronic bronchitis to expectorate a deep-lung sputum specimen suitable for cytologic evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The presence of acute reversibility to bronchodilators does not distinguish asthma from COPD. Patients with either condition can benefit from bronchodilators, and should be given a trial to assess their response. Some respond with a change in lung volume with less hyperinflation; others improve their forced inspiratory flow and become much more comfortable. The combination of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) and inhaled steroids is useful in both conditions. While anticholinergics seem to yield the best results in COPD, some patients with asthma benefit from their use. Tiotropium may be the most effective agent as monotherapy in COPD, but the combination of an inhaled steroid and a LABA may produce similar results in improving lung function. Long-acting bronchodilators are effective agents as monotherapy in COPD, but in asthma should be combined with a controller medication. Short-acting beta-agonists should be used intermittently in asthma, but may be used regularly or combined with an anticholinergic in COPD. The roles of stereoisomers, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and type 4 phosphodiesterase inhibitors in asthma and COPD remain uncertain at this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The optimal timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer has been uncertain. RADICALS-RT compared efficacy and safety of adjuvant RT versus an observation policy with salvage RT for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure., Patients and Methods: RADICALS-RT was a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with ≥1 risk factor (pT3/4, Gleason 7-10, positive margins, preoperative PSA≥10 ng/ml) for recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomised 1:1 to adjuvant RT ('Adjuvant-RT') or an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure ('Salvage-RT') defined as PSA≥0.1 ng/ml or three consecutive rises. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned RT schedule (52.5 Gy/20 fractions or 66 Gy/33 fractions) and treatment centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom-from-distant-metastasis (FFDM), designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with Salvage-RT (control) to 95% at 10 years with Adjuvant-RT. Secondary outcome measures were biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used; hazard ratio (HR)<1 favours Adjuvant-RT., Results: Between October 2007 and December 2016, 1396 participants from UK, Denmark, Canada and Ireland were randomised: 699 Salvage-RT, 697 Adjuvant-RT. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years. Ninety-three percent (649/697) Adjuvant-RT reported RT within 6 months after randomisation; 39% (270/699) Salvage-RT reported RT during follow-up. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. With 80 distant metastasis events, 10-year FFDM was 93% for Adjuvant-RT and 90% for Salvage-RT: HR=0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.07, P=0.095]. Of 109 deaths, 17 were due to prostate cancer. Overall survival was not improved (HR=0.980, 95% CI 0.667-1.440, P=0.917). Adjuvant-RT reported worse urinary and faecal incontinence 1 year after randomisation (P=0.001); faecal incontinence remained significant after 10 years (P=0.017)., Conclusion: Long-term results from RADICALS-RT confirm adjuvant RT after radical prostatectomy increases the risk of urinary and bowel morbidity, but does not meaningfully improve disease control. An observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy., Trial Identification: RADICALS, RADICALS-RT, ISRCTN40814031, NCT00541047., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Pharmacotherapies and avoidance of environmental/inhaled toxins are core to managing COPD. Compared to the drugs available 50 years ago, there has been substantial progress with COPD pharmacotherapies, but gaps in adherence and inhaler use persist. Personalizing inhaled pharmacotherapies is now possible with digital technologies by objectively documenting adherence and guiding inhaler technique. Another means to improve existing pharmacotherapies is through phenotyping and biomarkers. This is especially important considering the heterogeneity of the disease COPD. Blood eosinophils are now a recommended biomarker to guide use of inhaled corticosteroids and biologics in COPD. On the near horizon, we will see new inhaled medications as dual phosphodiesterase inhibitors, drugs to treat basic protein abnormalities as in alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency that could have remarkable benefits, and biologic drugs targeting specific cell/mediator types in the COPD population. Characterization of COPD phenotypes, as asthma/COPD overlap and comorbid heart disease are vital to understand how to optimize pharmacotherapies. Importantly, we must determine how to optimize current medications; otherwise, we will repeat the same mistakes with new medications. But as we know so well, as we peel one layer of complexity, we encounter many more questions, all the while dedicated to limiting the burden of COPD., Competing Interests: Dr Pleasants discloses relationships with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Teva. Dr Donohue has disclosed no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by Daedalus Enterprises.)

Background: Replicate, 12-week, phase 3 trials (0126 and 0127) of once-daily nebulized revefenacin 175 μg vs placebo demonstrated significant bronchodilation and improvements in health status in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This post hoc analysis evaluated improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) in both women and men., Methods: Participants were pooled from the two 12-week studies (411 [51%] women and 401 [49%] men). Changes in PROs were assessed overall and separately in men and women., Results: Revefenacin improved SGRQ and CAT total scores from baseline in both studies; improvement in CCQ total score reached significance only in 0126. In pooled data, a greater proportion of patients achieved clinically meaningful response in SGRQ score (≥4-unit decrease from baseline) with revefenacin vs placebo (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.1; P = 0.012). Clinically meaningful responses were also seen in CAT (≥2-unit decrease from baseline) and CCQ (≥0.4-unit decrease from baseline) scores with revefenacin vs placebo. When stratified by sex, improvements from baseline in SGRQ, CAT, and CCQ scores following revefenacin vs placebo reached statistical significance only in women., Conclusions: Maintenance treatment with revefenacin improved health status in patients with moderate to very severe COPD; however, the effect was more pronounced for women than men., Clinicaltrials: GOV: NCT02459080; NCT02512510., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest JFD is a consultant and advisory committee member for Theravance Biopharma US, Inc.; Sunovion Pharmaceuticals; and Mylan, a Viatris company. GTF is a consultant and speaker for and received financial support from Theravance Biopharma US, Inc., and Mylan, a Viatris company. JAO served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Mylan Inc., Reckitt Benckiser, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, and Theravance Biopharma US, Inc.DAL was a contract employee of Theravance Biopharma US, Inc., at the time of this study. RFS is an employee of BioMarin Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; received consulting fees from GSK, Merck, and BreathResearch; and received salary from Pfizer and from Theravance Biopharma US, Inc., where she was employed when these analyses were done. KJ is an employee of Theravance Biopharma US, Inc., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Data collected through ongoing, state-based, cross-sectional health surveys could be used to better understand the contribution of respiratory symptoms to impaired health among the US adult population., Methods: We used the 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System telephone health survey in four states (Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, Texas) to describe the relationship between symptoms, associated factors such as tobacco smoking, and health impairments. Self-reported productive cough, shortness of breath (SOB), and dyspnea on exertion (DOE) were categorized as minimal, moderate, or severe. Data were analyzed using multiple logistic regression models with age as a covariate to assess relationships of symptoms with other factors., Results: Among adults ≥ 18 years, respiratory impairment [current asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or a current moderate or severe symptom] occurred in 39.1% of the population. More than half of adults reporting moderate or severe symptoms had not been diagnosed with asthma or COPD, particularly with DOE and productive cough. Subjects were at greater risk of moderate and severe SOB or productive cough with increasing age, prolonged smoking duration (≥ 20 years), being an ever-smoker, or if reporting COPD, current asthma, or any other comorbidity except cancer. Morbid obesity [body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m 2 ] was associated with severe DOE at a rate similar to current asthma or COPD (25.6%, 95% CI 20.9-30.3%; 20.8%, 95% CI 16.4-25.1%; 21.3%, 95% CI 17.5-25.1%, respectively); it was the most common cause of DOE. SOB was associated with worse general health impairment and limited ambulation compared with other symptoms. Tobacco smoking prevalence and race varied among states, affecting symptom prevalence., Conclusion: In the largest US survey in decades, we provide a current perspective of respiratory symptoms among adults of all ages. While known risk factors were apparent, low-risk persons also frequently reported symptoms and impairments., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction : Aclidinium/formoterol is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β 2 -agonist (LABA) dual bronchodilator used as a maintenance treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of aclidinium/formoterol has been demonstrated consistently in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD versus placebo and monocomponents, with a comparable safety profile. Areas covered : This review examines recent research findings that expand our understanding of the impact of aclidinium/formoterol on the burden of COPD. Reviewed outcomes include improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, health-related quality of life, exercise tolerance, exacerbation rates, and clinically important deteriorations. In addition, the reported cardiovascular safety of aclidinium and current LAMA/LABA treatment recommendations are discussed. Expert opinion : Aclidinium/formoterol reduces disease burden in patients with COPD, including those that are treatment-naïve, without a significant increase in safety risk compared with monotherapies. Furthermore, evidence supports an improvement in lung function over a 24-hour period with aclidinium/formoterol treatment versus monotherapy and placebo, which may offer an advantage over some once-daily LAMA/LABA combinations. In summary, the recent evidence discussed in this review adds weight to the use of LAMA/LABA combinations as an initial therapy for certain patients newly diagnosed with COPD.

Most patients with COPD are recommended to initiate maintenance therapy with a single long-acting bronchodilator, such as a long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting β 2 -agonist. However, many patients receiving mono-bronchodilation continue to experience high symptom burden, suggesting that patients are frequently not receiving optimal treatment. Treatment goals for COPD are often broad and not individually tailored, making initial treatment response assessments difficult. A personalised approach to initial maintenance therapy, based upon an individual's symptom burden and exacerbation risk, may be more appropriate.An alternative approach would be to maximise bronchodilation early in the disease course of all patients with COPD. Evidence suggests that dual bronchodilation has greater and consistent efficacy for lung function and symptoms than mono-bronchodilation, whilst potentially reducing the risk of exacerbations and disease deterioration, with a similar safety profile to mono-bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and symptoms between dual- and mono-bronchodilation have also been demonstrated in maintenance-naïve patients, who are most likely to resemble those at first presentation in a clinical setting. Despite promising results, there are several evidence gaps that need to be addressed to allow decision makers to evaluate the merits of a widespread earlier introduction of dual bronchodilation., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: D. Singh reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline and non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, during the conduct of the study. He reports personal fees from Aerogen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., Cipla, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Glenmark, Gossamerbio, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., Pulmatrix, Teva, Theravance Biopharma, Menarini and Verona Pharma, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: J.F. Donohue reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline and non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, during the conduct of the study. He reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Circassia, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Theravance and Sunovion, and other funding from AstraZeneca, Avillion, Merck, CSA and INSMED, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: I.H. Boucot reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline and non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, during the conduct of the study. She reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline and other funding from GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: N.C. Barnes reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline and non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, during the conduct of the study. He reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline and other funding from GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: C. Compton reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline and non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, during the conduct of the study. He reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline and other funding from GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: F.J. Martinez reports other funding from GlaxoSmithKline, non-financial support from GlaxoSmithKline, and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Raziel, during the conduct of the study. He reports personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Miller Communications, National Society for Continuing Education, PeerView Communications, Chiesi, Sunovion, American Thoracic Society, Rockpointe, Csl Behring, Sanofi/Regeneron, Teva, Canadian Respiratory Network, Physicians Education Resource; non-financial support from ProterrixBio, Gilead, Nitto, Zambon; personal fees, non-financial support and other from Genentech; personal fees from MD Magazine, Methodist Hospital Brooklyn, New York University, UpToDate, WebMD/MedScape, Patara/Respivant, CME Outfitters, Integritas, DevPro, Dartmouth University, IQVIA, Projects in Knowledge, Vindico, Academy for Continuing Healthcare Learning; personal fees and other from Bayer; other from Afferent/Merck, Biogen, Veracyte, Prometic, Bridge Biotherapeutics, Gala, twoXAR, AbbVie; and grants from NIH, Rare Disease Healthcare Communications, ProMedior/Roche, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©The authors 2021.)

Purpose: The purpose of this review is to discuss the development of Wixela™ Inhub™, a generic equivalent of Advair Diskus ® , a fixed-dose combination of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol powder for oral inhalation for patients with asthma whose symptoms are not controlled with inhaled corticosteroids alone and for those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who are at a high risk for exacerbations. We provide an overview of the Inhub device and the bioequivalence studies that have been conducted to date. Briefly, the in vitro performance, improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s, and the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol dose strengths for Wixela Inhub and Advair Diskus were comparable., Conclusion: The bioequivalence demonstrated by the totality of clinical and in vitro data supports the use of Wixela Inhub and provides a treatment option for patients with asthma or COPD.

Background: Revefenacin, a once-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist delivered via standard jet nebulizer, increased trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) 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 FEV 1 , 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 FEV 1 30%-< 50% and < 30%), 2011 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) D, reversibility (≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL increase in FEV 1 ) to short-acting bronchodilators, concurrent use of long-acting β agonists and/or inhaled corticosteroids, older age (> 65 and > 75 years), and comorbidity risk factors., Results: Revefenacin demonstrated significant improvements in FEV 1 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 FEV 1 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]).

Background: Combinations of a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA), long-acting β-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) are used for patients with persistent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations on bronchodilator monotherapy. In this prespecified subgroup analysis, we assessed the efficacy and safety of the LAMA revefenacin in patients with COPD taking concomitant LABA, including ICS/LABA (LABA subgroup)., Methods: Efficacy data were obtained from two 12-week, replicate, placebo-controlled trials and safety data were pooled from the 12-week and a 52-week tiotropium-controlled trial. Patients received revefenacin 175 µg or placebo in the 12-week or tiotropium 18 µg in the 52-week studies. The efficacy endpoint was least squares (LS) mean change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ). Clinical health outcomes were assessed using the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)., Results: Revefenacin produced similar improvements from baseline in trough FEV 1 in the non-LABA and LABA subgroups [placebo-adjusted LS mean change (95% confidence interval) in day 85 trough FEV 1 , 150.9 (110.3-191.6) ml and 139.2 (82.9-195.5) ml; p  < 0.0001 versus placebo]. Similar improvements were observed in SGRQ scores in the non-LABA and LABA subgroups [-3.3 (-5.4 to -1.2) and -3.4 (-6.3 to -0.6)]. Improvements in lung function and health outcomes were observed regardless of airflow obstruction severity. Revefenacin was well tolerated with more adverse events reported in the LABA than the non-LABA subgroup., Conclusions: Once daily revefenacin for nebulization can be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients who require concomitant use of LABA with or without ICS., Clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02512510, NCT02459080, NCT02518139 The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Background: Revefenacin is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist that was recently approved for the nebulized treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although shorter duration studies have documented the efficacy of revefenacin in COPD, longer-term efficacy has not been described. In a recent 52-week safety trial, revefenacin was well tolerated and had a favorable benefit-risk profile. Here we report exploratory efficacy and health outcomes in patients receiving revefenacin 175 μg or 88 μg daily during the 52-week trial., Methods: In this randomized, parallel-group, 52-week trial (NCT02518139), 1055 participants with moderate to very severe COPD received revefenacin 175 μg or 88 μg in a double-blind manner, or open-label active control tiotropium., Results: Over the 52-week treatment period, both doses of revefenacin, as well as tiotropium, elicited significant (all p < 0.0003) improvements from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ). The trough FEV 1 profile (least squares mean change from baseline) for revefenacin 175 μg ranged from 52.3-124.3 mL and the trough FEV 1 profile for tiotropium ranged from 79.7-112.8 mL. In subgroup comparisons, the effect of revefenacin on trough FEV 1 was comparable in patients taking concomitant long-acting β-agonists, with or without inhaled corticosteroids, with patients who were not taking these medications. There were statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in all measured health status outcomes (evaluated using St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, Clinical COPD Questionnaire and Baseline and Transition Dyspnea Index) from 3 months onward, in all treatment arms., Conclusions: Significant sustained improvements from baseline in trough FEV 1 and respiratory health outcomes were demonstrated for 175-μg revefenacin over 52 weeks, further supporting its use as a once-daily bronchodilator for the nebulized treatment of patients with COPD., Trial Registration: NCT02518139 ; Registered 5 August 2015.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is the third leading cause of death and disease burden worldwide. It includes a spectrum of diseases including chronic bronchitis which is characterized by overproduction, hypersecretion and decreased elimination of mucus. Chronic bronchitis has numerous clinical consequences, including predisposition to lower respiratory tract infections, accelerated decline in lung function, increased exacerbation rate and decreased health-related quality of life., Although the inflammatory mechanisms responsible for mucus cell metaplasia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and stable chronic bronchitis are poorly understood, the main goals of therapy are to decrease mucus hypersecretion by controlling inflammation and to increase mucus clearance. Non-pharmacological measures include smoking cessation and chest physiotherapy. Pharmacological interventions include expectorants and mucolytics together with long-acting beta2-adrenergic receptor agonists, anticholinergics, glucocorticoids, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors, antioxidants, and antibiotics., Guaifenesin is an expectorant that is thought to increase hydration and decrease viscosity of mucus leading to improved clearance of accumulated secretions from the upper and lower airway. Although guaifenesin has a Food and Drug Administration Over-the-Counter (OFC) Monograph indication to "help loosen phlegm (mucus) and thin bronchial secretions in patients with stable chronic bronchitis," there is limited published evidence of either mechanism of action or clinical efficacy in this disease state. Here we review the pathophysiology and consequences of chronic mucus hypersecretion and examine the evidence for the use of guaifenesin in patients with stable chronic bronchitis., Competing Interests: All authors participated in a stable chronic bronchitis clinical advisory board meeting supported by Reckitt Benckiser in September 2018 for which they received a consultancy fee. Additionally, J. Ohar reports serving on advisory boards for Theravance, GlaxoSmithKline, Sunovion, AstraZeneca, Mylan and Boehringer Ingelheim, conducting an investigator-initiated study for Sunovion and manuscript preparation for Theravance and Sunovion., (JCOPDF © 2019.)

The cardiovascular safety of revefenacin, an anticholinergic indicated for the maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), was evaluated in phase 3 trials in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. No clinically meaningful changes in 12-lead electrocardiogram recordings were observed with up to 52 weeks of once-daily revefenacin 88 or 175 μg. In a pooled analysis of Studies 0126 and 0127, the incidence of prolonged QT interval corrected for heart rate using the Fridericia correction formula (QTcF; >450 msec) for revefenacin 88 μg (n = 23, 5.6%) and revefenacin 175 μg (n = 23, 5.9%) was similar to that for placebo (n = 22, 5.3%). In Study 0128, the incidence of prolonged QTcF was similar in the revefenacin 175 μg (n = 25, 7.7%) and tiotropium (n = 26, 7.3%) groups and lower in the revefenacin 88 μg (n = 15, 4.2%) group. There were four major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in Study 0126 (one, two, and one in the placebo, revefenacin 88 μg, and revefenacin 175 μg groups, respectively), no MACEs in Study 0127 and 26 MACEs in Study 0128 (9, 10 and 7 in the revefenacin 88 μg, revefenacin 175 μg and tiotropium groups, respectively). In Study 0128, only one MACE was considered possibly/probably related to revefenacin (atrial fibrillation in the revefenacin 175 μg group). Thus, revefenacin may provide beneficial nebulized therapy for patients with COPD without further elevating their risk of cardiovascular events., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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.

Background: Prior replicate 12-week phase 3 trials demonstrated that once-daily doses of revefenacin inhalation solution at 88 μg and 175 μg produced significant bronchodilation over 24 h post dose in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective was to characterize the safety profile of revefenacin 88 μg and 175 μg over 52 weeks of treatment., Methods: In this randomized, parallel-group, 52-week trial (NCT02518139), 1055 participants with moderate to very severe COPD received revefenacin 88 μg or 175 μg in a double-blind manner, or open-label active control tiotropium., Results: Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable across all treatment groups (n [%] patients; revefenacin 88 μg, 272 [74.7%]; 175 μg, 242 [72.2%]; tiotropium, 275 [77.2%]). Numerically fewer COPD exacerbations (n [%] patients) were observed with revefenacin 175 μg (73 [21.8%]) than with 88 μg (107 [29.4%]) or tiotropium (100 [28.1%]). Serious AEs were comparable with revefenacin 88 μg (58 [15.9%] and tiotropium (58 [16.3%]), but were lower with revefenacin 175 μg (43 [12.8%]), and mortality was low. In patients using revefenacin 88 μg or tiotropium with a concurrent long-acting β-agonist (LABA) product, the incidence of AEs was slightly higher than without concurrent LABA. LABA did not affect the incidence of AEs for patients who received revefenacin 175 μg., Conclusions: Revefenacin was generally well tolerated over 52 weeks of treatment, and had a safety profile that supports its use as a long-term once-daily bronchodilator for the nebulized treatment of COPD., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Inhaled fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of a long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) have become the cornerstone for the maintenance treatment of symptomatic COPD patients. In this regard, global COPD treatment guidelines have recognized the importance of inhaler devices as integral contributors to the effectiveness of LABA/LAMA FDCs and recommend regular assessment of inhaler device use by the patients in order to improve long-term clinical outcomes. Optimal disease control is also highly dependent upon patient preferences and adherence to inhaler devices. This review objectively examines and compares the major inhaler devices used to deliver different LABA/LAMA FDCs, discusses the inhaler device characteristics that determine drug deposition in the airways, real-life preference for inhaler devices, and handling of inhaler devices that impact the results of the long-term management of COPD. The introduction of new LABA/LAMA FDCs, new inhaler devices, and more clinical studies have created confusion among physicians in choosing the optimal inhaled therapy for COPD patients; in this context, this review attempts to provide an evidence-based framework for informed decision-making with a particular focus on the inhaler devices.Funding. The preparation of this manuscript was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.