Cargando…
Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial
BACKGROUND: Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not rece...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6821007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-019-1193-9 |
_version_ | 1783464064640352256 |
---|---|
author | Maltais, François Bjermer, Leif Kerwin, Edward M. Jones, Paul W. Watkins, Michael L. Tombs, Lee Naya, Ian P. Boucot, Isabelle H. Lipson, David A. Compton, Chris Vahdati-Bolouri, Mitra Vogelmeier, Claus F. |
author_facet | Maltais, François Bjermer, Leif Kerwin, Edward M. Jones, Paul W. Watkins, Michael L. Tombs, Lee Naya, Ian P. Boucot, Isabelle H. Lipson, David A. Compton, Chris Vahdati-Bolouri, Mitra Vogelmeier, Claus F. |
author_sort | Maltais, François |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at Week 24. The study was also powered for the secondary endpoint of Transition Dyspnoea Index at Week 24. Other efficacy assessments included spirometry, symptoms, heath status and short-term disease worsening measured by the composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration using three definitions. RESULTS: Change from baseline in trough FEV(1) at Week 24 was 66 mL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 89) and 141 mL (95% CI: 118, 164) greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, respectively (both p < 0.001). Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated consistent improvements in Transition Dyspnoea Index versus both monotherapies at Week 24 (vs umeclidinium: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.68], p = 0.018; vs salmeterol: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.76], p = 0.004) and all other symptom measures at all time points. Regardless of the clinically important deterioration definition considered, umeclidinium/vilanterol significantly reduced the risk of a first clinically important deterioration compared with umeclidinium (by 16–25% [p < 0.01]) and salmeterol (by 26–41% [p < 0.001]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6821007 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68210072019-11-04 Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial Maltais, François Bjermer, Leif Kerwin, Edward M. Jones, Paul W. Watkins, Michael L. Tombs, Lee Naya, Ian P. Boucot, Isabelle H. Lipson, David A. Compton, Chris Vahdati-Bolouri, Mitra Vogelmeier, Claus F. Respir Res Research BACKGROUND: Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at Week 24. The study was also powered for the secondary endpoint of Transition Dyspnoea Index at Week 24. Other efficacy assessments included spirometry, symptoms, heath status and short-term disease worsening measured by the composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration using three definitions. RESULTS: Change from baseline in trough FEV(1) at Week 24 was 66 mL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 89) and 141 mL (95% CI: 118, 164) greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, respectively (both p < 0.001). Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated consistent improvements in Transition Dyspnoea Index versus both monotherapies at Week 24 (vs umeclidinium: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.68], p = 0.018; vs salmeterol: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.76], p = 0.004) and all other symptom measures at all time points. Regardless of the clinically important deterioration definition considered, umeclidinium/vilanterol significantly reduced the risk of a first clinically important deterioration compared with umeclidinium (by 16–25% [p < 0.01]) and salmeterol (by 26–41% [p < 0.001]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group. BioMed Central 2019-10-30 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6821007/ /pubmed/31666084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-019-1193-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis 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 Maltais, François Bjermer, Leif Kerwin, Edward M. Jones, Paul W. Watkins, Michael L. Tombs, Lee Naya, Ian P. Boucot, Isabelle H. Lipson, David A. Compton, Chris Vahdati-Bolouri, Mitra Vogelmeier, Claus F. Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title | Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title_full | Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title_short | Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial |
title_sort | efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with copd not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the emax randomised trial |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6821007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666084 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-019-1193-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maltaisfrancois efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT bjermerleif efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT kerwinedwardm efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT jonespaulw efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT watkinsmichaell efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT tombslee efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT nayaianp efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT boucotisabelleh efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT lipsondavida efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT comptonchris efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT vahdatibolourimitra efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial AT vogelmeierclausf efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolversusumeclidiniumandsalmeterolmonotherapiesinsymptomaticpatientswithcopdnotreceivinginhaledcorticosteroidstheemaxrandomisedtrial |