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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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