Long-acting Muscarinic Antagonist Monotherapy Research Articles

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist and long-acting β2-agonist combination for the treatment of maintenance therapy-naïve patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a narrative review.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Faster lung function impairment occurs earlier in the disease, particularly in mild-to-moderate COPD, highlighting the need for early and effective targeted interventions. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2024 report recommends initial pharmacologic treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combination in group B (0 or 1 moderate exacerbation not leading to hospitalization, modified Medical Research Council score of ⩾2, and COPD Assessment Test™ score of ⩾10) and E (⩾2 moderate exacerbations or ⩾1 exacerbation leading to hospitalization and blood eosinophil count <300 cells/µL) patients. In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), LAMA/LABA combination therapy improved lung function, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, and Transitional Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and reduced the use of rescue medications, exacerbation risk, and risk of first clinically important deterioration (CID), compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapy. However, there is limited evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of LAMA/LABA combination therapy versus LAMA or LABA monotherapy in maintenance therapy-naïve patients. This review discusses the rationale for the early initiation of LAMA/LABA combination therapy in maintenance therapy-naïve patients with COPD. In post hoc analyses of pooled data from RCTs, compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapy, LAMA/LABA combination therapy improved lung function and quality of life and reduced COPD symptoms, risk of first moderate/severe exacerbation, risk of first CID, and use of rescue medication, with no new safety signals. In a real-world study, patients initiating LAMA/LABA had significantly reduced risk of COPD-related inpatient admissions and rate of on-treatment COPD-related inpatient admissions over 12 months than those initiating LAMA. Consequently, LAMA/LABA combination therapy could be considered the treatment of choice in maintenance therapy-naïve patients with COPD, as recommended by the GOLD 2024 report.

Cost-Effectiveness of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus Tiotropium Monotherapy in Patients with Symptomatic Moderate-to-Very Severe COPD in the UK.

For patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who remain symptomatic despite maintenance treatment, clinical management guidelines recommend a stepwise escalation from monotherapy to dual therapy, and from dual therapy to triple therapy. However, in clinical practice, patients are often escalated directly from monotherapy to triple therapy based on disease severity. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of once-daily, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy compared with long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapy with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) in patients with symptomatic moderate-to-very severe COPD, from a UK National Health Service perspective. The validated GALAXY-COPD disease progression model was populated with patient baseline characteristics and treatment effect data from the 12-week GSK Study 207626 comparing FF/UMEC/VI with TIO in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. UK unit costs and drug costs (British Pound, 2021) were applied to healthcare resource utilization and treatments. The base case analysis was conducted over a lifetime horizon, and costs and health outcomes (except for life years [LYs]) were discounted at 3.5% per year. Model outputs included exacerbation rates, healthcare costs, LYs, quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Overall, treatment with FF/UMEC/VI resulted in increased clinical benefit (reduction in total exacerbations and increased overall survival and QALYs), coupled with cost savings (derived from lower maintenance and exacerbation healthcare costs) compared with TIO monotherapy. In the base case analysis, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.393 LYs (95% range: 0.176, 0.655) and 0.443 QALYs (0.246, 0.648), at a cost saving of £880 (£54, £1608) versus TIO. FF/UMEC/VI remained the cost-effective (dominant) treatment option across sensitivity and scenario analyses. FF/UMEC/VI offers greater clinical benefits and is a cost-effective treatment option compared with TIO for the treatment of adult patients with COPD with persistent symptoms and/or who are at risk of exacerbation in the UK.

When is LABA/LAMA Better than LAMA in GOLD Group B or D Patients for Reducing Acute Exacerbations of COPD?

Long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic-antagonist (LAMA) dual therapy has been found to be more effective than LAMA monotherapy in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, among patients with group B or D COPD, the characteristics of patients for whom LABA/LAMA dual therapy is superior to LAMA monotherapy in minimizing acute exacerbations remain unknown. With data from a prospective COPD cohort, subgroup analyses were conducted to determine whether LABA/LAMA dual therapy was superior to LAMA monotherapy in reducing the rate of acute exacerbations in group B and D COPD patients. Group B and D COPD patients taking LAMA or LABA/LAMA were enrolled according to the 2022 Global initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease guidelines. A total of 737 patients were included in this study: 600 with group B COPD and 137 with group D COPD. Compared with patients taking LAMA monotherapy, those taking LABA/LAMA had a significantly lower incidence of acute exacerbations over 1 year. In the subgroup of patients ≥70 years old, there was a significantly lower risk of severe COPD exacerbations among group B patients taking LABA/LAMA than among those taking LAMA monotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.258; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.095-0.703). In contrast, in the subgroup of group D patients with COPD Assessment Test scores ≥25, compared with LAMA monotherapy, LABA/LAMA treatment was associated with lower risk of severe COPD exacerbations (OR, 0.115; 95% CI, 0.018-0.749). The combination of LABA and LAMA was found to be superior to LAMA monotherapy, especially for treating older adults with group B COPD, as well as for group D patients with severe symptoms.

LABA/LAMA as First-Line Therapy for COPD: A Summary of the Evidence and Guideline Recommendations.

Inhaled bronchodilators (alone or in combination) are the cornerstone of treatment for symptomatic patients with COPD, either as initial/first-line treatment or for second-line/treatment escalation in patients who experience persistent symptoms or exacerbations on monotherapy. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2022 report recommends initial pharmacological treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) as monotherapy for most patients, or dual bronchodilator therapy (LABA/LAMA) in patients with more severe symptoms, regardless of exacerbation history. The recommendations for LABA/LAMA are broader in the American Thoracic Society treatment guidelines, which strongly recommend LABA/LAMA combination therapy over LAMA or LABA monotherapy in patients with COPD and dyspnea or exercise intolerance. However, despite consistent guideline recommendations, real-world prescribing data indicate that LAMA and/or LABA without an inhaled corticosteroid are not the most widely prescribed therapies in COPD. This article reviews global and regional/national guideline recommendations for the use of LABA/LAMA in COPD, examines the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of LABA/LAMA versus other therapies and offers a practical guide for clinicians to help ensure appropriate use of LABA/LAMA therapy.

Characteristics of New Users of Single- and Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for COPD in Primary Care in England.

PurposeInhaled triple therapy is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who have poorly controlled symptoms and to reduce the risk of exacerbations. This study assessed the clinical characteristics of new users of single- and multiple-inhaler triple therapy (SITT and MITT) treated in a primary care setting in England.Patients and MethodsThis cross-sectional, observational study used data from an electronic health record database (CPRD Aurum) of COPD patients registered with a primary care practice in England, with linkage to a secondary care database. Patients were required to have initiated a new triple therapy (index) between November 2017 and November 2018 and have ≥12 months of available medical history prior to the index date.ResultsIn total, 3536 patients initiated fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) SITT for the first time: 65% had a Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnea score ≥3, 45% had forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)% predicted <50%, and 64% had a moderate or severe exacerbation in the previous 12 months. The majority (83%) of new FF/UMEC/VI users had a history of MITT use. Immediately prior to FF/UMEC/VI initiation, 46% received MITT, 25% received an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), 12% received long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA, and 14% stepped up directly from LAMA monotherapy. A second cohort of 6540 patients initiated triple therapy (SITT or MITT) for the first time. COPD severity (airflow limitation, exacerbation history) was worse among patients initiating SITT versus MITT. In the 12 months before triple-therapy initiation, ICS/LABA was the most common treatment; a step up from LAMA/LABA was more common among patients initiating FF/UMEC/VI (34%) or beclomethasone/formoterol/glycopyrronium bromide SITT (25%) than MITT (14%).ConclusionFirst-time triple therapy was frequently initiated in patients with COPD inadequately controlled on maintenance therapy. General practitioners in England generally identify appropriate patients who require initiation of triple therapy.

The Impact of the Pay-for-Performance Program on the Outcome of COPD Patients in Taiwan After One Year.

ObjectiveTo investigate the impact of a multidisciplinary intervention on the clinical outcomes of patients with COPD.MethodsThis study retrospectively extracted the data of patients enrolled in the national pay-for-performance (P4P) program for COPD in four hospitals. Only COPD patients who received regular follow-up for at least one year in the P4P program between September 2018 and December 2020 were included.ResultsA total of 1081 patients were included in this study. Among them, 424 (39.2%), 287 (26.5%), 179 (16.6%), and 191 (17.7%) patients were classified as COPD Groups A, B, C, and D, respectively. Dual therapy with long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) was the most used inhaled bronchodilator at baseline (n = 477, 44.1%) patients, followed by LAMA monotherapy (n = 195, 18.0%), triple therapy with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA/LAMA (n = 184, 17.0%), and ICS/LABA combination (n = 165, 15.3%). After one year of intervention, 374 (34.6%) and 323 (29.9%) patients had their pre- and post-bronchodilator-forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) increase of more than 100 mL. Both the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) scores had a mean change of −2.2 ± 5.5 and −0.3 ± 0.9, respectively. The improvement in pulmonary function and symptom score were observed across four groups. The decreased number of exacerbations was only observed in Groups C and D, and not in Groups A and B.ConclusionThis real-world study demonstrated that the intervention in the P4P program could help improve the clinical outcome of COPD patients. It also showed us a different view on the use of dual therapy, which has a lower cost in Taiwan.

Why small particle fixed dose triple therapy? An excursus from COPD pathology to pharmacological treatment evolution.

Although bronchodilators are the cornerstone in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapy, the treatment with a single-agent bronchodilator may not provide adequate symptoms control in COPD. The combination of drugs with different mechanisms of action may be more effective in inducing bronchodilation and preventing exacerbations, with a lower risk of side-effects in comparison with the increase of the dose of a single molecule. Several studies comparing the triple therapy with the association of long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/LABA reported improvement of lung function and quality of life. A significant reduction in moderate/severe exacerbations has been observed with a fixed triple combination of beclometasone dipropionate (BDP), formoterol fumarate (FF) and glycopyrronium (G) in a single inhaler. The TRILOGY, TRINITY and TRIBUTE studies have provided confirming evidence for a clinical benefit of triple therapy over ICS/LABA combination treatment, LAMA monotherapy and LABA/LAMA combination, with prevention of exacerbations being a key finding. A pooled post hoc analysis of the published clinical studies involving BDP/FF/G fixed combination demonstrated a reduction in fatal events in patients treated with ICS-containing medications, with a trend of statistical significance [hazard ratio = 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50–1.02, p = 0.066], that becomes significant if we consider reduction in fatal events for non-respiratory reasons (hazard ratio = 0.65, 95% CI 0.43–0.97, p = 0.037). In conclusion, a fixed combination of more drugs in a single inhaler can improve long-term adherence to the therapy, reducing the risk of exacerbations and hospital resources utilization. The twice a day administration may provide a better coverage of night, particularly in COPD patients who are highly symptomatic. The inhaled extrafine formulation that allows drug deposition in both large and small – peripheral – airways, is the value added.

The ALPACA study: (In)Appropriate LAMA prescribing in asthma: A cohort analysis

IntroductionSince long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) are only indicated as add-on therapy in subjects with moderate-to-severe asthma, there are concerns whether LAMA monotherapy is associated with worse asthma control. AimTo study the prevalence of LAMA monotherapy and its potential association with severe asthma exacerbations (SAE) in patients with asthma. MethodsA cohort study (2007–2017) in the IPCI primary care database, in asthma patients aged 6–50, using LAMA during follow-up. Respiratory prescriptions were retrieved from the electronic medical records based on ATC code. Asthma treatment periods were created and categorized as LAMA mono, dual (LAMA + ICS), or triple therapy (LAMA + ICS + LABA). Relative rates (RR) of SAE, adjusting for patient characteristics, were estimated to compare treatments. ResultsFrom a total of 66,508 asthma patients, 1236 (1.9%) LAMA users were identified. Median age was 41 years, 65.9% were females. LAMA users were responsible for 3596 LAMA treatment periods of which 1390 (38.7%) were LAMA monotherapy, 553 (15.4%) dual therapy and 1653 (46.0%) triple therapy. The RR of SAE during LAMA monotherapy compared to dual therapy was 1.5 (95% CI 0.6–3.8). In patients alternating between mono and dual therapy (but never triple therapy), the RR for LAMA monotherapy increased to 5.7 (95% CI 1.4–23.6). ConclusionsThis observational study shows that when LAMA is prescribed, it is often prescribed without concurrent ICS (LAMA monotherapy). LAMA monotherapy was associated with an increased risk of exacerbations when not used concurrently with ICS. This emphasizes the importance that LAMA should never be prescribed without concomitant ICS use in patients with asthma.

Dual versus single long-acting bronchodilator use could raise acute coronary syndrome risk by over 50%: A population-based nested case-control study.

BackgroundCoronary heart disease occurs more frequently among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to those without COPD. While some research suggests that long‐acting bronchodilators might confer an additional risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), information from real‐world clinical practice about the cardiovascular impact of using two versus one long‐acting bronchodilator for COPD is limited. We undertook a population‐based nested case–control study to estimate the risk of ACS in users of both a long‐acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long‐acting beta2‐agonist (LABA) relative to users of a LAMA.MethodsThe study was based on the primary care PREDICT Cardiovascular Disease Cohort and linked data from regional laboratories and the New Zealand Ministry of Health's national data collections. The underlying cohort (n = 29,993) comprised patients aged 45–84 years, who initiated treatment with a LAMA and/or LABA for COPD between 1 February 2006 and 11 October 2016. 1490 ACS cases were matched to 13,550 controls by date of birth, sex, date of cohort entry (first long‐acting bronchodilator dispensing), and COPD severity.ResultsRelative to current use of LAMA therapy, current use of LAMA and LABA dual therapy was associated with a significantly higher risk of ACS (adjusted OR = 1.72; [95% CI: 1.28–2.31]).ConclusionDual long‐acting bronchodilator therapy, rather than LAMA mono‐therapy, could increase the risk of ACS by more than 50%. This has important implications for decisions about the potential benefit/harm ratio of COPD treatment intensification, given the modest benefits of dual therapy.

COPD Maintenance Therapy with Tiotropium/Olodaterol Compared with Tiotropium: An Analysis in the Absence of Additional ICS Therapy

The American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) dual bronchodilation over LAMA or LABA monotherapy as maintenance therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease suffering from dyspnea or exercise intolerance. Previous studies, which included patients receiving background inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), have shown the benefits of dual bronchodilation over monotherapy. This analysis aimed to confirm the benefits of LAMA/LABA over LAMA alone, without any confounding effects from ICS use. This pooled post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of tiotropium/olodaterol with tiotropium alone in patients from the TONADO® and OTEMTO® clinical trials who were not receiving ICS at study entry or during the studies. We analyzed change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score and Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) score in all patients, by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage, baseline SGRQ score, and Baseline Dyspnea Index score. In this analysis of 1596 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol improved trough FEV1, SGRQ and TDI compared with tiotropium alone. The observed mean differences were: trough FEV1, 0.054 L (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.036, 0.073; p < 0.001); SGRQ, −1.918 (95% CI −2.994, −0.843; p < 0.001); and TDI, 0.575 (95% CI 0.301, 0.848; p < 0.001). Similar improvements were seen in each of the subgroup analyses. Tiotropium/olodaterol therapy significantly improved lung function, symptoms and health status compared with tiotropium alone. In a population free from ICS treatment, these data confirm the benefits of dual bronchodilation versus monotherapy.

LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations versus LAMA monotherapy in the prevention of COPD exacerbations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background:Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with high risk of exacerbations. It is unclear whether long-acting β2-agonist (LABA)/LAMA fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) are more effective than LAMAs alone in preventing exacerbations. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to investigate whether LABA/LAMA FDCs are more effective than LAMA monotherapy in preventing exacerbations.Methods:We searched several databases and manufacturers’ websites to identify relevant randomized clinical trials comparing LABA/LAMA FDC treatment with LAMAs alone ⩾24 weeks. Outcomes of interest were time to first exacerbation and rates of moderate to severe, severe and all exacerbations.Results:We included 10 trials in 9 articles from 2013 to 2018 with a total of 19,369 patients for analysis in this study. Compared with LAMA monotherapy, LABA/LAMA FDCs demonstrated similar efficacy in terms of time to first exacerbation [hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79–1.18; p = 0.71], moderate to severe exacerbations [risk ratio (RR), 0.96; 95% CI 0.90–1.03; p = 0.28], severe exacerbations (RR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.81–1.03; p = 0.15), and a marginal superiority in terms of all exacerbations (RR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.86–1.00; p = 0.04). The incidence of all exacerbation events was lower in the LABA/LAMA FDC group for the COPD patients with a history of previous exacerbations and those with a longer treatment period (52–64 weeks).Conclusion:This study provides evidence that LABA/LAMA FDCs are marginally superior in the prevention of all exacerbations compared with LAMA monotherapy in patients with COPD. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

An Evaluation Of Single And Dual Long-Acting Bronchodilator Therapy As Effective Interventions In Maintenance Therapy-Naïve Patients With COPD.

BackgroundIdeally, 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 methodsA 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]).ResultsTreatment-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.ConclusionThese 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.

Predictors of Symptom Burden in Patients with COPD on LAMA Monotherapy: Multivariable Analysis of a Claims-Linked Survey Study.

IntroductionMany patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) prescribed long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy remain symptomatic. This multivariable analysis of a previously reported claims-linked, cross-sectional survey assessed symptom burden measured by the COPD assessment test (CAT) in patients treated with LAMA monotherapy.MethodsEligible patients aged ≥ 40 years with COPD (≥ 2 International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision-Clinical Modification [ICD-10-CM] diagnosis codes ≥ 30 days apart during the 12-month baseline period) and ≥ 2 claims for LAMA monotherapy in the latter half of the baseline period were identified using claims data from the Optum Research Database. Patients completed a survey and 7-day daily diary; baseline clinical characteristics and resource utilization were assessed from claims data. Association between symptom burden and baseline characteristics was assessed using generalized linear regression modeling with normal distribution and identity link.ResultsOverall, 433 patients prescribed LAMA monotherapy with claims-linked survey and diary data were included in the analysis. Most patients (85.5%) had a mean CAT score ≥ 10; 39.0% had scores ≥ 21. Overall, the factors most related to a clinically meaningful increase in CAT score (≥ 2 points) were being diagnosed with COPD for > 5 years and being a current smoker (2.25 points, P = 0.003 and 2.22 points, P = 0.025, respectively).ConclusionsResults demonstrate that many patients with COPD receiving LAMA monotherapy remain symptomatic, especially those diagnosed > 5 years ago or those who continue to smoke. Use of patient-reported outcomes such as the CAT should be considered part of routine visits for patients with COPD.FundingGlaxoSmithKline (GSK study number 205862 [HO-16-16642]).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s41030-019-00098-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Classification of Patients with COPD on LAMA Monotherapy Using the GOLD Criteria: Analysis of a Claims-Linked Patient Survey Study.

IntroductionTo address the burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommends treatment according to classification of patients by symptom severity and exacerbation risk. This post hoc analysis of a previously reported claims-linked, cross-sectional survey [study 205862 (HO-16-16642)] classified patients with COPD receiving long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy based on the GOLD 2017 categories.MethodsEligible patients who were ≥ 40 years of age, with ≥ 2 claims with International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision-Clinical Modification COPD diagnosis codes J40–J44 ≥ 30 days apart during the 12-month baseline period, and ≥ 2 claims for LAMA monotherapy in the 6 months prior to identification, were identified using claims data from the Optum Research Database. Patients completed a survey assessing modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Dyspnea Scale and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores and demographics; clinical characteristics were assessed from claims and survey data, while exacerbation history was assessed from claims data. GOLD symptom severity classifications were low (groups A and C) for patients with low scores on both the CAT and mMRC scales (scores of < 10 and 0–1, respectively), and high (groups B and D) for patients with high scores on either scale (scores of ≥ 10 and 2–4, respectively).ResultsOf 433 patients included, 85.5% reported a CAT total score ≥ 10, and 45.5% reported mMRC grades 2–4. During the baseline period, 63.7% of patients had ≤ 1 moderate and 0 severe (hospitalized) exacerbations, and 36.3% had ≥ 1 severe or ≥ 2 moderate exacerbation(s). The proportions of patients with each GOLD classification were: A: 9.0%; B: 54.7%; C: 4.6%; D: 31.6%.ConclusionsIn this population, over 85% of LAMA monotherapy users have symptoms and/or exacerbation risk that may necessitate therapy escalation according to 2017 GOLD guidelines.FundingGlaxoSmithKline [study 205862 (HO-16-16642)].

&lt;p&gt;Patient-reported outcomes of dual bronchodilator fixed-dose combination versus bronchodilator monotherapy in individuals with COPD&lt;/p&gt;

Background: This study compared real-world patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), the London Chest Activities of Daily Living (LCADL) scale, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire between individuals with COPD initiating LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combination (FDC) dual therapy versus either long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) monotherapy.Methods: Individuals with COPD aged ≥40 years initiating a LAMA/LABA FDC dual therapy or a LAMA or LABA monotherapy (index date = first prescription date) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 were identified from a large US administrative claims database. Individuals were excluded if they were prescribed an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/LABA two months prior to the index date or were diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, or asthma. The cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) 1:1 for COPD severity using baseline measures. Each participant completed a survey.Results: Surveys were completed by 399 participants in the dual therapy cohort, and 718 participants in the monotherapy cohort. Following PSM, 379 participants remained in each cohort for analysis (monotherapy: 369 LAMA and 10 LABA). The dual therapy cohort reported fewer COPD-related symptoms (CCQ symptom score 2.75 vs 2.97, respectively, P=0.023), and, fewer limitations in leisure activities (LCADL leisure score 4.78 vs 5.17, respectively, P=0.021) versus the monotherapy cohort. No significant differences were found in the WPAI. A greater percentage of participants in the dual therapy cohort stayed on index therapy (63.1%) when compared with the monotherapy cohort (30.3%, P<0.0001).Conclusions: Only 30% of the participants prescribed monotherapy, usually with a LAMA, remained on index therapy alone at the time of survey administration. In the dual therapy cohort, 63% of the participants remained on the index medication and had fewer COPD-related symptoms and fewer limitations in leisure activities compared with participants in the monotherapy cohort.

Patient-Reported Burden of Illness in a Prevalent COPD Population Treated with Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Monotherapy: A Claims-Linked Patient Survey Study.

IntroductionSymptom burden in inadequately controlled chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) considerably impacts quality of life, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs. This claims-linked cross-sectional survey study assessed symptom burden and HCRU among a prevalent population of COPD patients prescribed long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy.MethodsPatients were identified using claims data from the Optum Research Database. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 40 years with 12 months’ continuous enrollment in a US health plan, ≥ 2 medical claims containing COPD diagnosis codes ≥ 30 days apart, and ≥ 2 claims for LAMA monotherapy in the latter half of the 12-month sample identification period. Patients were mailed a cross-sectional survey assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) [COPD assessment test (CAT) and modified medical research council dyspnea scale (mMRC)], clinical characteristics, smoking history, and demographics. Patients also completed the Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT-PRO) daily diary for 7 days. HCRU was assessed from claims data.ResultsThe study included 433 patients with a self-reported healthcare provider COPD diagnosis, and both claims-based and self-reported LAMA monotherapy treatment (mean age 71.0 years; 59.8% female). Most patients (85.5%) reported a high symptom burden (CAT score ≥ 10), 45.5% had high levels of dyspnea (mMRC grade ≥ 2), and 64.4% reported more severe daily symptoms by the EXACT-PRO. Most patients (71.6%) reported high scores on ≥ 2 PROs. More patients with high symptom burden had COPD-related emergency department visits than those with lower disease burden (27.6% vs 12.7%, P = 0.012).ConclusionsIn conclusion, a large proportion of patients with COPD receiving LAMA monotherapy experienced a high symptom burden and may benefit from therapy escalation. Healthcare professionals can use validated PROs to help them assess symptom burden.FundingGlaxoSmithKline (GSK study number: 205862)Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s41030-019-0091-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

VP19 Cost-Effectiveness Of Combination Inhaled Long-Acting Bronchodilators

IntroductionTo inform the development of a national clinical guideline for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), prioritised by the National Clinical Effectiveness Committee (NCEC) in Ireland, a systematic review was conducted to examine the cost-effectiveness of long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) in combination with long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapy.MethodsMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature sources were searched up to 19 June 2018. Studies evaluating cost-effectiveness published post-2008 in English were included. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC-list) and International Society for Pharmacoeconomics (ISPOR) questionnaires were conducted independently by two reviewers. Costs were adjusted to 2017 Irish Euro using consumer price indices and purchasing power parity as per national guidelines.ResultsFrom a total of 8,661 articles identified, nine studies (all cost-utility analyses) were included in the review. Studies ranged from low to high quality and compared LAMA/LABA combination therapy with LAMA monotherapy. The results reported were mixed, ranging from combination therapy being dominated by (that is, more costly and less effective than) LAMA monotherapy to being dominant (that is, less costly and more effective). However, when excluding low quality, less applicable studies, the remaining six studies reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of between EUR 2,770 and EUR 26,462 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Only one study additionally compared LABA monotherapy as a comparator, reporting combination therapy to be even more cost-effective than in the LAMA monotherapy comparison.ConclusionsApplying a cost-effectiveness willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 45,000 per QALY gained, this systematic review found that LAMA/LABA combination therapy is cost-effective compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapy in COPD patients.

The stepwise approach of COPD therapy

The goal of pharmacologic therapy of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is to reduce symptoms, improve exercise intolerance and health-related quality of life, and to reduce exacerbations. Inhaled long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are equally effective for the symptomatic management of COPD. However, LAMAs are more effective than LABAs in the reduction of exacerbations. In patients with symptomatic COPD pharmacologic therapy is usually escalated using the fixed combination of LAMAs and LABAs (dual bronchodilation), which is also superior to LAMA monotherapy in the prevention of exacerbations. Adding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to LABA and LAMA (triple therapy) for a prevention of exacerbations results in a further reduction of exacerbations, especially in those patients with higher blood eosinophil counts. Non-pharmacologic management of COPD patients includes smoking cessation programs, vaccination, pulmonary rehabilitation, and strategies to improve or maintain their physical activity.

Triple therapy in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo compare the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations between triple therapy and dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised...

Initiation of Triple Therapy with Multiple Inhalers in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: An Analysis of Treatment Patterns from a U.S. Retrospective Database Study.

Evidence suggests that real-world treatment patterns of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) do not always follow evidence-based treatment recommendations such as those of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, which recommends treatment escalation based on disease progression. This U.S. database study evaluated treatment patterns in patients with COPD, focusing on time to initiation of triple therapy using multiple inhalers. To (a) estimate time from diagnosis to initiation of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) dual therapy, or LAMA/LABA dual therapy; (b) estimate time to initiation of triple therapy from LAMA monotherapy and ICS/LABA or LAMA/LABA dual therapies; and (c) estimate the likelihood of patient progression to triple therapy. This study was a retrospective analysis of patients with COPD newly started on LAMA monotherapy, ICS/LABA, or LAMA/LABA therapy between July 1, 2010, and March 31, 2013, as identified in Humana's research database. Patients who were fully insured with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance plans and were aged ≥ 40 years at index with at least 1 hospitalization, 1 emergency department, or 1 medical office visit claim with a COPD diagnosis in the pre-index year were included in the analysis. Time from diagnosis to initiation of index therapy and time to triple therapy after index therapy were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the likelihood of progression to triple therapy. Of 13,541 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD, 4,000 received LAMA monotherapy; 8,207 received ICS/LABA therapy; and 77 received LAMA/LABA therapy at index; mean time (± SD) from COPD diagnosis to initiation of triple therapy was 178 (± 134) days, 185 (± 130) days, and 252 (± 124) days, respectively. During the study, 28% (n = 1,130) of patients receiving LAMA monotherapy and 20% (n = 1,647) of patients receiving dual therapy (ICS/LABA, n = 1,615; LAMA/LABA, n = 32) progressed to triple therapy. Of the patients who progressed to triple therapy, 63% and 57% of patients receiving monotherapy and dual therapy, respectively, progressed in the 12 months after the index date. In the 12 months before initiation of triple therapy, approximately 50% of patients in the LAMA monotherapy, ICS/LABA, and LAMA/LABA therapy groups had an exacerbation. In the multivariable analysis, discontinuation of therapy, smoking history, and concomitant use of xanthenes and short-acting beta2-agonists were significant predictors of progression from index therapy to triple therapy. Approximately 25% of patients with COPD progressed to triple therapy within 12 months of initiating treatment with monotherapy or dual therapy. Exacerbations were reported in only 50% of these patients, indicating that the other 50% may have escalated to triple therapy for other reasons. Treatment discontinuation, smoking history, the use of a LAMA, and concomitant medication use were significant predictors of progression to triple therapy. This study was a GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored collaborative research study (HO-14-16145). GlaxoSmithKline funded this study and had a role in study design, data analysis, data interpretation, and writing of this report. Stemkowski is a paid employee of Comprehensive Health Insights, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Humana and was contracted to conduct the study. No funding was provided to Comprehensive Health Insights for manuscript development. At the time of the study, Lane and Tao were paid employees of Comprehensive Health Insights. Stanford is an employee of and stockholder in GlaxoSmithKline.