Cargando…

Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review

Several fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of long-acting bronchodilators (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA] plus a long-acting β(2)-agonist [LABA]) are available for the treatment of COPD. Studies of these FDCs have demonstrated substantial improvements in lung function (forced expiratory volu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Price, David, Østrem, Anders, Thomas, Mike, Welte, Tobias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5221557/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28115839
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S116719
_version_ 1782492842988404736
author Price, David
Østrem, Anders
Thomas, Mike
Welte, Tobias
author_facet Price, David
Østrem, Anders
Thomas, Mike
Welte, Tobias
author_sort Price, David
collection PubMed
description Several fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of long-acting bronchodilators (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA] plus a long-acting β(2)-agonist [LABA]) are available for the treatment of COPD. Studies of these FDCs have demonstrated substantial improvements in lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) in comparison with their respective constituent monocomponents. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms and health status, as well as exacerbation rates, have been reported compared with a LABA or LAMA alone, but results are less consistent. The inconsistencies may in part be owing to differences in study design, methods used to assess study end points, and patient populations. Nevertheless, these observations tend to support an association between improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and improvements in symptom-based outcomes. In order to assess the effects of FDCs on PROs and evaluate relationships between PROs and changes in lung function, we performed a systematic literature search of publications reporting randomized controlled trials of FDCs. Results of this literature search were independently assessed by two reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving any conflicting results. In total, 22 Phase III randomized controlled trials of FDC bronchodilators in COPD were identified, with an additional study including a post-literature search (ten for indacaterol–glycopyrronium once daily, eight for umeclidinium–vilanterol once daily, three for tiotropium–olodaterol once daily, and two for aclidinium–formoterol twice daily). Results from these studies demonstrated that the LAMA–LABA FDCs significantly improved lung function compared with their component monotherapies or other single-agent treatments. Furthermore, LABA–LAMA combinations also generally improved symptoms and health status versus monotherapies, although some discrepancies between lung function and PROs were observed. Overall, the safety profiles of the FDCs were similar to placebo. Further research is required to examine more closely any relationship between lung function and PROs in patients receiving LABA–LAMA combinations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5221557
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52215572017-01-23 Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review Price, David Østrem, Anders Thomas, Mike Welte, Tobias Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Review Several fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of long-acting bronchodilators (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA] plus a long-acting β(2)-agonist [LABA]) are available for the treatment of COPD. Studies of these FDCs have demonstrated substantial improvements in lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) in comparison with their respective constituent monocomponents. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms and health status, as well as exacerbation rates, have been reported compared with a LABA or LAMA alone, but results are less consistent. The inconsistencies may in part be owing to differences in study design, methods used to assess study end points, and patient populations. Nevertheless, these observations tend to support an association between improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and improvements in symptom-based outcomes. In order to assess the effects of FDCs on PROs and evaluate relationships between PROs and changes in lung function, we performed a systematic literature search of publications reporting randomized controlled trials of FDCs. Results of this literature search were independently assessed by two reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving any conflicting results. In total, 22 Phase III randomized controlled trials of FDC bronchodilators in COPD were identified, with an additional study including a post-literature search (ten for indacaterol–glycopyrronium once daily, eight for umeclidinium–vilanterol once daily, three for tiotropium–olodaterol once daily, and two for aclidinium–formoterol twice daily). Results from these studies demonstrated that the LAMA–LABA FDCs significantly improved lung function compared with their component monotherapies or other single-agent treatments. Furthermore, LABA–LAMA combinations also generally improved symptoms and health status versus monotherapies, although some discrepancies between lung function and PROs were observed. Overall, the safety profiles of the FDCs were similar to placebo. Further research is required to examine more closely any relationship between lung function and PROs in patients receiving LABA–LAMA combinations. Dove Medical Press 2016-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5221557/ /pubmed/28115839 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S116719 Text en © 2017 Price et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Price, David
Østrem, Anders
Thomas, Mike
Welte, Tobias
Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title_full Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title_fullStr Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title_full_unstemmed Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title_short Dual bronchodilation in COPD: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
title_sort dual bronchodilation in copd: lung function and patient-reported outcomes – a review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5221557/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28115839
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S116719
work_keys_str_mv AT pricedavid dualbronchodilationincopdlungfunctionandpatientreportedoutcomesareview
AT østremanders dualbronchodilationincopdlungfunctionandpatientreportedoutcomesareview
AT thomasmike dualbronchodilationincopdlungfunctionandpatientreportedoutcomesareview
AT weltetobias dualbronchodilationincopdlungfunctionandpatientreportedoutcomesareview