The epoch of dual bronchodilation: the first direct comparisons and meta-analyzes
https://doi.org/10.18093/0869-0189-2018-28-1-96-103
Abstract
The aim of this review was to summarize recently published data on dual bronchodilation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Four fixed combinations of long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) and long-acting muscarinic receptor agonists (LAMA), vilanterol/umeclidinium, olodaterol/tiotropium, glycopyrronium/indacaterol, and formoterol/aclidinium, have been approved by regulatory organs of Russia, Europe, and USA. Indirect comparisons of effects of these combinations on forced expiratory parameters showed equal bronchodilation. Inhalational devices for each combination are different. Respimat soft-mist inhaler was characterized by high and effective drug deposition in the lungs, Ellipta dry powder inhaler was easy-to-use and was characterized by a low rate of crucial mistakes with the inhaler technique. We found three published direct comparative studies of LABA/LAMAs. An open-label direct non-inferiority study of vilanterol/umeclidinium vs olodaterol/tiotropium showed advantages of vilanterol/umeclidinium Ellipta inhaler. Two similar direct comparative trials of glycopyrronium/indacaterol 27.5/15.6 µg b.i.d. vs vilanterol/umeclidinium 25/62.5 µg q.d. did not reach the primary endpoint of non-inferiority; secondary endpoints were descriptive. Between-group differences were small and statistically insignificant. Conclusion. The results of meta-analyses and direct comparative trials are not sufficient to choose the best dual bronchodilator as the drug efficacy is determined by multiple factors. A direct open-label comparative trial that demonstrated superiority of vilanterol/umeclidinium Ellipta inhaler over olodaterol/tiotropium Respimat inhaler became the first step on this way.
About the Authors
A. A. Vizel'Russian Federation
Aleksandr A. Vizel', Doctor of Medicine, Professor, Head of Department of Phthisiology and Pulmonology/
ul. Butlerova 49, Kazan', 420012, Tatarstan Republic.
I. Yu. Vizel'
Russian Federation
Irina Yu. Vizel', Doctor of Medicine, Assistant Lecturer, Department of Phthisiology and Pulmonology.
ul. Butlerova 49, Kazan', 420012, Tatarstan Republic.
References
1. Blanco I., Diego I., Bueno P. et al. Geographical distribution of COPD prevalence in Europe, estimated by an inverse distance weighting interpolation technique. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2017; 13: 57–67. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S150853.
2. Chuchalin A.G., Khaltaev N., Antonov N.S. et al. Chronic respiratory diseases and risk factors in 12 regions of the Russian Federation. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2014; 9: 963–974. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S67283.
3. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2018 Report. © 2018 Global Initiative forChronic Obstructive Lung Disease, Inc. Available at: http://goldcopd.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/GOLD-2018-WMS.pdf
4. Feldman G.J., Sousa A.R., Lipson D.A. et al. Comparative efficacy of once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol and tiotropium/olodaterol therapy in symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized study. Adv. Ther. 2017; 34 (11): 2518–2533. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-017-0626-4.
5. Российское респираторное общество. Обновленный проект клинических рекомендаций: Хроническая обструктивная болезнь легких. 2016. Доступно по: http://spulmo.ru/obrazovatelnye-resursy/federalnye-klinicheskie-rekomendatsii/ [Дата обращения 12.02.2018]. / Russian Respiratory Society. Updated Project of Clinical Guidelines: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2016. Available at: http://spulmo.ru/obrazovatelnye-resursy/federalnye-klinicheskie-rekomendatsii/ (in Russian).
6. Rodrigo G.J., Price D., Anzueto A. et al. LABA/LAMA combinations versus LAMA monotherapy or LABA/ICS in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2017; 12: 907–922. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S130482.
7. Wedzicha J.A., Zhong N., Ichinose M. et al. Indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in Asian patients with COPD at a high risk of exacerbations: results from the FLAME study. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2017; 12: 339–349. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S125058.
8. Calzetta L., Rogliani P., Matera M.G., Cazzola M. A systematic review with meta-analysis of dual bronchodilation with LAMA/LABA for the treatment of stable COPD. Chest. 2016; 149 (5): 1181–1196. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.646.
9. Schlueter M., Gonzalez-Rojas N., Baldwin M. et al. Comparative efficacy of fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting β2-agonists: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ther. Adv. Respir. Dis. 2016; 10 (2): 89–104. DOI: 10.1177/1753465815624612.
10. Sion K.Y.J., Huisman E.L., PunekarIan Y. S. et al. A network meta-analysis of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations in COPD. Pulm. Ther. 2017; 3: 297–316. DOI: 10.1007/s41030-017-0048-0.
11. Calzetta L., Ora J., Cavalli F. et al. Impact of LABA/LAMA combination on exercise endurance and lung hyperinflation in COPD: a pair-wise and network meta-analysis. Respir. Med. 2017; 129: 189–198. DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2017.06.020.
12. Bateman E.D., Ferguson G.T., Barnes N. et al. Dual bronchodilation with QVA149 versus single bronchodilator therapy: the SHINE study. Eur. Respir. J. 2013; 42 (6): 1484–1494. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00200212.
13. Buhl R., Maltais F., Abrahams R. et al. Tiotropium and olodaterol fixed-dose combination versus mono-components in COPD (GOLD 2–4). Eur. Respir. J. 2015; 45 (4): 969–979. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00136014.
14. Miravitlles M., Chapman K.R., Chuecos F. et al. The efficacy of aclidinium/formoterol on lung function and symptoms in patients with COPD categorized by symptom status: a pooled analysis. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2016; 11: 2041–2053. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S114566.
15. Kerwin E., Ferguson G.T., Sanjar S. et al. Dual bronchodilation with indacaterol maleate/glycopyrronium bromide compared with umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD: Results from two randomized, controlled, cross-over studies. Lung. 2017; 195 (6): 739–747. DOI: 10.1007/s00408-017-0055-9.
16. Donohue J.F. Minimal clinically important differences in COPD lung function. COPD; 2005; 2 (1): 111–124.
17. Cazzola M., MacNee W., Martinez F.J. et al. ATS/ERS Task Force. Outcomes for COPD pharmacological trials: from lung function to biomarkers. Eur. Respir. J. 2008; 31 (2): 416–468. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00099306.
18. Jones P.W., Beeh K.M., Chapman K.R. et al. Minimal clinically important differences in pharmacological trials. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2014; 189 (3): 250–255. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201310-1863PP.
19. Chapman K.R., Beeh K.M., Beier J. et al. A blinded evaluation of the efficacy and safety of glycopyrronium, a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist, versus tiotropium, in patients with COPD: the GLOW5 study. BMC Pulm. Med. 2014; 14: 4. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2466-14-4.
20. Feldman G., Maltais F., Khindri S. et al. A randomized, blinded study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium 62.5 μg compared with tiotropium 18 μg in patients with COPD. Int. J. COPD. 2016; 11 (1): 719–730. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S102494.
21. Agustí A., de Teresa L., De Backer W. et al. A comparison of the efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol with twice-daily fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in moderate to very severe COPD. Eur. Respir. J. 2014; 43 (3): 763–772. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00054213.
22. Ichinose M., Fujimoto T., Fukuchi Y. Tiotropium 5 μg microg via Respimat and 18 μg microg via HandiHaler; efficacy and safety in Japanese COPD patients. Respir. Med. 2010; 104 (2): 228–236. DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2009.11.011.
23. Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products: Evaluation of Medicines for Human Use. London, 27 July 2000. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003658.pdf
24. Westwood M., Bourbeau J., Jones P.W. et al. Relationship between FEV1 change and patient-reported outcomes in randomised trials of inhaled bronchodilators for stable COPD: a systematic review. Respir. Res. 2011; 12: 40. DOI: 10.1186/1465-9921-12-40.
25. Zider A.D., Wang X., Buhr R.G. et al. Reduced COPD exacerbation risk correlates with improved FEV1: a meta-regression analysis. Chest. 2017; 152 (3): 494–501. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.04.174.
26. Tashkin D.P., Rennard S.I., Martin P. et al. Efficacy and safety of budesonide and formoterol in one pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results of a 6-month randomized clinical trial. Drugs. 2008; 68 (14): 1975–2000.
27. García-Río F., Soler-Cataluña J.J., Alcazar B. et al. Requirements, strengths and weaknesses of inhaler devices for COPD patients from the expert prescribers' point of view: Results of the EPOCA Delphi consensus. COPD. 2017; 14 (6): 573–580. DOI: 10.1080/15412555.2017.1365120.
28. Ciciliani A.M., Langguth P., Wachtel H. In vitro dose comparison of Respimat® inhaler with dry powder inhalers for COPD maintenance therapy. Int. J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 2017; 12: 1565–1577. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S115886.
29. Molimard M., Raherison C., Lignot S. et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation and inhaler device handling: real-life assessment of 2935 patients. Eur. Respir. J. 2017; 49: 1601794. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01794-2016.
30. van der Palen J., Thomas M., Chrystyn H. et al. A randomised open-label cross-over study of inhaler errors, preference and time to achieve correct inhaler use in patients with COPD or asthma: comparison of ELLIPTA with other inhaler devices. NPJ Prim. Care Respir. Med. 2016; 26: 16079. DOI: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2016.79.
Review
For citations:
Vizel' A.A., Vizel' I.Yu. The epoch of dual bronchodilation: the first direct comparisons and meta-analyzes. PULMONOLOGIYA. 2018;28(1):96-103. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18093/0869-0189-2018-28-1-96-103