Cargando…
Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials
INTRODUCTION: The long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide is approved in many countries as maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium is available as a dry-powder formulation delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) and is now also approved as...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882367/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27084728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0322-9 |
_version_ | 1782434105208602624 |
---|---|
author | Calverley, Peter M. A. Könen-Bergmann, Michael Richard, Frank Bell, Susan Hohlfeld, Jens M. |
author_facet | Calverley, Peter M. A. Könen-Bergmann, Michael Richard, Frank Bell, Susan Hohlfeld, Jens M. |
author_sort | Calverley, Peter M. A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide is approved in many countries as maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium is available as a dry-powder formulation delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) and is now also approved as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler (5 μg once daily, 2 puffs of 2.5 µg). Several studies have compared the efficacy of tiotropium HandiHaler (18 μg once daily) with different doses of Respimat. We aimed to compare available bronchodilator efficacy data of once-daily Respimat 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 µg, and HandiHaler 18 µg to investigate which dose of tiotropium delivered by Respimat is the closest match to tiotropium HandiHaler. METHODS: Evaluation of six clinical trials (duration from 3 weeks to 2–3 years) that included lung function measures (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s and trough forced vital capacity) as key outcomes. RESULTS: In the six trials, bronchodilator efficacy of Respimat 5 μg and HandiHaler 18 μg was similar; however, reduced bronchodilator efficacy was observed with lower doses of Respimat (1.25 and 2.5 μg). CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of the marketed once-daily dose of Respimat 5 μg for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4882367 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48823672016-06-21 Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials Calverley, Peter M. A. Könen-Bergmann, Michael Richard, Frank Bell, Susan Hohlfeld, Jens M. Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: The long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide is approved in many countries as maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium is available as a dry-powder formulation delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) and is now also approved as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler (5 μg once daily, 2 puffs of 2.5 µg). Several studies have compared the efficacy of tiotropium HandiHaler (18 μg once daily) with different doses of Respimat. We aimed to compare available bronchodilator efficacy data of once-daily Respimat 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 µg, and HandiHaler 18 µg to investigate which dose of tiotropium delivered by Respimat is the closest match to tiotropium HandiHaler. METHODS: Evaluation of six clinical trials (duration from 3 weeks to 2–3 years) that included lung function measures (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s and trough forced vital capacity) as key outcomes. RESULTS: In the six trials, bronchodilator efficacy of Respimat 5 μg and HandiHaler 18 μg was similar; however, reduced bronchodilator efficacy was observed with lower doses of Respimat (1.25 and 2.5 μg). CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of the marketed once-daily dose of Respimat 5 μg for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim. Springer Healthcare 2016-03-28 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4882367/ /pubmed/27084728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0322-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial 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. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Calverley, Peter M. A. Könen-Bergmann, Michael Richard, Frank Bell, Susan Hohlfeld, Jens M. Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title | Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title_full | Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title_fullStr | Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title_short | Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials |
title_sort | tiotropium respimat(®) versus handihaler(®): comparison of bronchodilator efficacy of various doses in clinical trials |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882367/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27084728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0322-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT calverleypeterma tiotropiumrespimatversushandihalercomparisonofbronchodilatorefficacyofvariousdosesinclinicaltrials AT konenbergmannmichael tiotropiumrespimatversushandihalercomparisonofbronchodilatorefficacyofvariousdosesinclinicaltrials AT richardfrank tiotropiumrespimatversushandihalercomparisonofbronchodilatorefficacyofvariousdosesinclinicaltrials AT bellsusan tiotropiumrespimatversushandihalercomparisonofbronchodilatorefficacyofvariousdosesinclinicaltrials AT hohlfeldjensm tiotropiumrespimatversushandihalercomparisonofbronchodilatorefficacyofvariousdosesinclinicaltrials |