Blog
About

7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparative efficacy of indacaterol 150 μg and 300 μg versus fixed-dose combinations of formoterol + budesonide or salmeterol + fluticasone for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease – a network meta-analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective:

          To compare efficacy of indacaterol to that of fixed-dose combination (FDC) formoterol and budesonide (FOR/BUD) and FDC salmeterol and fluticasone (SAL/FP) for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) based on the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

          Methods:

          Fifteen placebo-controlled RCTs were included that evaluated: indacaterol 150 μg (n = 5 studies), indacaterol 300 μg (n = 4), FOR/BUD 9/160 μg (n = 2), FOR/BUD 9/320 μg (n = 3), SAL/FP 50/500 μg (n = 5), and SAL/FP 50/250 μg (n = 1). Outcomes of interest were trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1), total scores for St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and transition dyspnea index (TDI). All trials were analyzed simultaneously using a Bayesian network meta-analysis and relative treatment effects between all regimens were obtained. Treatment-by-covariate interactions were included where possible to improve the similarity of the trials.

          Results:

          Indacaterol 150 μg resulted in a higher change from baseline (CFB) in FEV 1 at 12 weeks compared to FOR/BUD 9/160 μg (difference in CFB 0.11 L [95% credible intervals: 0.08, 0.13]) and FOR/BUD 9/320 μg (0.09 L [0.06, 0.11]) and was comparable to SAL/FP 50/250 μg (0.02 L [−0.04, 0.08]) and SAL/FP 50/500 μg (0.03 L [0.00, 0.06]). Similar results were observed for indacaterol 300 μg at 12 weeks and indacaterol 150/300 μg at 6 months. Indacaterol 150 μg demonstrated comparable improvement in SGRQ total score at 6 months versus FOR/BUD (both doses), and SAL/FP 50/500 μg (−2.16 point improvement [−4.96, 0.95]). Indacaterol 150 and 300 μg demonstrated comparable TDI scores versus SAL/FP 50/250 μg (0.21 points (−0.57, 0.99); 0.39 [−0.39, 1.17], respectively) and SAL/FP 50/500 μg at 6 months.

          Conclusion:

          Indacaterol monotherapy is expected to be at least as good as FOR/BUD (9/320 and 9/160 μg) and comparable to SAL/FP (50/250 and 50/500 μg) in terms of lung function. Indacaterol is also expected to be comparable to FOR/BUD (9/320 and 9/160 μg) and SAL/FP 50/500 μg in terms of health status and to SAL/FP (50/250 and 50/500 μg) in terms of breathlessness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Maintenance therapy with budesonide and formoterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

          Lung function in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved acutely by oral corticosteroids and bronchodilators. Whether clinical improvement can be maintained by subsequent inhaled therapy is unknown. COPD patients (n=1,022, mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 36% predicted) initially received formoterol (9 microg b.i.d.) and oral prednisolone (30 mg o.d.) for 2 weeks. After this time, patients were randomised to b.i.d. inhaled budesonide/formoterol 320/9 microg, budesonide 400 microg, formoterol 9 microg or placebo for 12 months. Postmedication FEV1 improved by 0.21 L and health-related quality of life using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) by 4.5 units after run-in. Fewer patients receiving budesonide/formoterol withdrew from the study than those receiving budesonide, formoterol or placebo. Budesonide/formoterol patients had a prolonged time to first exacerbation (254 versus 96 days) and maintained higher FEV1 (99% versus 87% of baseline), both primary variables versus placebo. They had fewer exacerbations (1.38 versus 1.80 exacerbations per patient per year), had higher prebronchodilator peak expiratory flow, and showed clinically relevant improvements in SGRQ versus placebo (-7.5 units). Budesonide/formoterol was more effective than either monocomponent in both primary variables. Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (Symbicort) maintains the benefit of treatment optimisation, stabilising lung function and delaying exacerbations more effectively than either component drug alone or placebo.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MCID.

            The SGRQ is a disease-specific measure of health status for use in COPD. A number of methods have been used for estimating its minimum clinically important difference (MCID). These include both expert and patient preference-based estimates. Anchor-based methods have also been used. The calculated MCID from those studies was consistently around 4 units, regardless of assessment method. By contrast, the MCID calculated using distribution-based methods varied across studies and permitted no consistent estimate. All measurements of clinical significance contain sample and measurement error. They also require value judgements, if not about the calculation of the MCID itself then about the anchors used to estimate it. Under these circumstances, greater weight should be placed upon the overall body of evidence for an MCID, rather than one single method. For that reason, estimates of MCID should be used as indicative values. Methods of analysing clinical trial results should reflect this, and use appropriate statistical tests for comparison with the MCID. Treatments for COPD that produced an improvement in SGRQ of the order of 4 units in clinical trials have subsequently found wide acceptance once in clinical practice, so it seems reasonable to expect any new treatment proposed for COPD to produce an advantage over placebo that is not significantly inferior to a 4-unit difference.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Global strategy for the diagnosis, management and prevention of COPD

              (2016)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of COPD
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                2011
                2011
                08 June 2011
                : 6
                : 329-344
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Mapi Values, Boston, MA, USA;
                [2 ]Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland;
                [3 ]Novartis Horsham Research Centre, Horsham, UK;
                [4 ]Respiratory Division, Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Jeroen Jansen, Mapi Values, 133 Portland Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA, Tel +1 617 720 0001, Fax +1 617 720 0004, Email jeroen.jansen@ 123456mapivalues.com
                Article
                copd-6-329
                10.2147/COPD.S18759
                3119108
                21697997
                © 2011 Cope et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Categories
                Review

                Respiratory medicine

                indacaterol, copd, network meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article