Cargando…

Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Umeclidinium (UMEC; long-acting muscarinic antagonist) plus vilanterol (VI; long-acting beta(2) agonist [LABA]) and the LABA/inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This 12-wee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Dave, Worsley, Sally, Zhu, Chang-Qing, Hardaker, Liz, Church, Alison
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4545560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26286141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-015-0092-1
_version_ 1782386761692872704
author Singh, Dave
Worsley, Sally
Zhu, Chang-Qing
Hardaker, Liz
Church, Alison
author_facet Singh, Dave
Worsley, Sally
Zhu, Chang-Qing
Hardaker, Liz
Church, Alison
author_sort Singh, Dave
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Umeclidinium (UMEC; long-acting muscarinic antagonist) plus vilanterol (VI; long-acting beta(2) agonist [LABA]) and the LABA/inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This 12-week, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, double-dummy study compared the efficacy and safety of these treatments in symptomatic patients with moderate-to-severe COPD with no exacerbations in the year prior to enrolment. METHODS: Patients (n = 717) were randomised 1:1 to once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg or twice-daily FP/SAL 500/50 mcg. Endpoints included 0–24 h weighted mean (wm) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) (Day 84; primary), trough FEV(1) (Day 85; secondary), other lung function endpoints, symptoms, quality of life (QoL) and safety. RESULTS: Improvements with UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL were 0.080 L (95 % confidence interval: 0.046–0.113; wmFEV(1)) and 0.090 L (0.055–0.125; trough FEV(1)) (both p < 0.001). UMEC/VI statistically significantly improved all other lung function measures versus FP/SAL. Both treatments demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms (Transition Dyspnoea Index ≥1 unit) and QoL (St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire Total score ≥4 unit decrease from baseline) over 12 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was 28 % (UMEC/VI) and 29 % (FP/SAL); nasopharyngitis and headache were most common. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg over 12 weeks resulted in significant and sustained improvements in lung function versus twice-daily FP/SAL 500/50 mcg in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and with no exacerbations in the year prior to enrolment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01822899 Registration date: March 28, 2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-015-0092-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4545560
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45455602015-08-23 Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial Singh, Dave Worsley, Sally Zhu, Chang-Qing Hardaker, Liz Church, Alison BMC Pulm Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Umeclidinium (UMEC; long-acting muscarinic antagonist) plus vilanterol (VI; long-acting beta(2) agonist [LABA]) and the LABA/inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This 12-week, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, double-dummy study compared the efficacy and safety of these treatments in symptomatic patients with moderate-to-severe COPD with no exacerbations in the year prior to enrolment. METHODS: Patients (n = 717) were randomised 1:1 to once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg or twice-daily FP/SAL 500/50 mcg. Endpoints included 0–24 h weighted mean (wm) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) (Day 84; primary), trough FEV(1) (Day 85; secondary), other lung function endpoints, symptoms, quality of life (QoL) and safety. RESULTS: Improvements with UMEC/VI versus FP/SAL were 0.080 L (95 % confidence interval: 0.046–0.113; wmFEV(1)) and 0.090 L (0.055–0.125; trough FEV(1)) (both p < 0.001). UMEC/VI statistically significantly improved all other lung function measures versus FP/SAL. Both treatments demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms (Transition Dyspnoea Index ≥1 unit) and QoL (St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire Total score ≥4 unit decrease from baseline) over 12 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was 28 % (UMEC/VI) and 29 % (FP/SAL); nasopharyngitis and headache were most common. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg over 12 weeks resulted in significant and sustained improvements in lung function versus twice-daily FP/SAL 500/50 mcg in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and with no exacerbations in the year prior to enrolment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01822899 Registration date: March 28, 2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-015-0092-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4545560/ /pubmed/26286141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-015-0092-1 Text en © Singh et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Singh, Dave
Worsley, Sally
Zhu, Chang-Qing
Hardaker, Liz
Church, Alison
Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title_full Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title_fullStr Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title_full_unstemmed Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title_short Umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in COPD: a randomised trial
title_sort umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in copd: a randomised trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4545560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26286141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-015-0092-1
work_keys_str_mv AT singhdave umeclidiniumvilanterolversusfluticasonepropionatesalmeterolincopdarandomisedtrial
AT worsleysally umeclidiniumvilanterolversusfluticasonepropionatesalmeterolincopdarandomisedtrial
AT zhuchangqing umeclidiniumvilanterolversusfluticasonepropionatesalmeterolincopdarandomisedtrial
AT hardakerliz umeclidiniumvilanterolversusfluticasonepropionatesalmeterolincopdarandomisedtrial
AT churchalison umeclidiniumvilanterolversusfluticasonepropionatesalmeterolincopdarandomisedtrial