Blog
About

6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The efficacy and safety of triple inhaled treatment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis using Bayesian methods

      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

          Purpose

          Although tiotropium (TIO) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β-agonists are frequently prescribed together, the efficacy of “triple therapy” has not been scientifically demonstrated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using Bayesian methods to compare triple therapy and TIO monotherapy.

          Methods

          We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of triple therapy and TIO monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of triple therapy and TIO monotherapy using Bayesian random effects models.

          Results

          Seven trials were included, and the risk of bias in the majority of the studies was acceptable. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of death and acute exacerbation of disease in the triple therapy and TIO monotherapy groups. Triple therapy improved the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (mean difference [MD], 63.68 mL; 95% credible interval [CrI], 45.29–82.73), and patients receiving triple therapy showed more improvement in St George Respiratory Questionnaire scores (MD, −3.11 points; 95% CrI, −6.00 to −0.80) than patients receiving TIO monotherapy. However, both of these differences were lower than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). No excessive adverse effects were reported in triple therapy group.

          Conclusion

          Triple therapy with TIO and ICSs/long-acting β-agonists was only slightly more efficacious than TIO monotherapy in treating patients with COPD. Further investigations into the efficacy of new inhaled drugs are needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 32

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

          Tiotropium versus salmeterol for the prevention of exacerbations of COPD.

          Treatment guidelines recommend the use of inhaled long-acting bronchodilators to alleviate symptoms and reduce the risk of exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-very-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but do not specify whether a long-acting anticholinergic drug or a β(2)-agonist is the preferred agent. We investigated whether the anticholinergic drug tiotropium is superior to the β(2)-agonist salmeterol in preventing exacerbations of COPD. In a 1-year, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial, we compared the effect of treatment with 18 μg of tiotropium once daily with that of 50 μg of salmeterol twice daily on the incidence of moderate or severe exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD and a history of exacerbations in the preceding year. A total of 7376 patients were randomly assigned to and treated with tiotropium (3707 patients) or salmeterol (3669 patients). Tiotropium, as compared with salmeterol, increased the time to the first exacerbation (187 days vs. 145 days), with a 17% reduction in risk (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.90; P<0.001). Tiotropium also increased the time to the first severe exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.85; P<0.001), reduced the annual number of moderate or severe exacerbations (0.64 vs. 0.72; rate ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.96; P=0.002), and reduced the annual number of severe exacerbations (0.09 vs. 0.13; rate ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.82; P<0.001). Overall, the incidence of serious adverse events and of adverse events leading to the discontinuation of treatment was similar in the two study groups. There were 64 deaths (1.7%) in the tiotropium group and 78 (2.1%) in the salmeterol group. These results show that, in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, tiotropium is more effective than salmeterol in preventing exacerbations. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00563381.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of tiotropium on outcomes in patients with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (UPLIFT): a prespecified subgroup analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

            The beneficial effects of pharmacotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are well established. However, there are few data for treatment in the early stages of the disease. We examined the effect of tiotropium on outcomes in a large subgroup of patients with moderate COPD. The Understanding Potential Long-Term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT) study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial undertaken in 487 centres in 37 countries. 5993 patients aged 40 years or more with COPD were randomly assigned to receive 4 years of treatment with either once daily tiotropium (18 microg; n=2987) or matching placebo (n=3006), delivered by an inhalation device. Randomisation was by computer-generated blocks of four, with stratification according to study site. In a prespecified subgroup analysis, we investigated the effects of tiotropium in patients with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage II disease. Primary endpoints were the yearly rates of decline in prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) and in postbronchodilator FEV(1), beginning on day 30 until completion of double-blind treatment. The analysis included all patients who had at least three measurements of pulmonary function. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00144339. 2739 participants (mean age 64 years [SD 9]) had GOLD stage II disease at randomisation (tiotropium, n=1384; control, n=1355), with a mean postbronchodilator FEV(1) of 1.63 L (SD 0.37; 59% of predicted value). 1218 patients in the tiotropium group and 1157 in the control group had three or more measurements of postbronchodilator pulmonary function after day 30 and were included in the analysis. The rate of decline of mean postbronchodilator FEV(1) was lower in the tiotropium group than in the control group (43 mL per year [SE 2] vs 49 mL per year [SE 2], p=0.024). For prebronchodilator pulmonary function, 1221 patients in the tiotropium group and 1158 in the control group had three or more measurements and were included in the analysis. The rate of decline of mean prebronchodilator FEV(1) did not differ between groups (35 mL per year [SE 2] vs 37 mL per year [SE 2]; p=0.38). Health status, measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, was better at all timepoints in the tiotropium group than in the control group (p
              Bookmark
              • 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

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of COPD
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                2015
                03 November 2015
                : 10
                : 2365-2376
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Healthcare Research Institute, Healthcare System Gangnam Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [2 ]Department of Statistics, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea
                [3 ]Department of Information Statistics, Andong National University, Andong, Republic of Korea
                [4 ]Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [5 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Chang-Hoon Lee, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-Ro Jongno-Gu, Seoul 110-744, Republic of Korea, Tel +82 2 2072 4743, Fax +82 2 762 9662, Email kauri670@ 123456empal.com
                Article
                copd-10-2365
                10.2147/COPD.S93191
                4639518
                © 2015 Kwak et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License

                The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article