Cargando…

Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibili...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vogelmeier, Claus F., Jones, Paul W., Kerwin, Edward M., Boucot, Isabelle H., Maltais, François, Tombs, Lee, Compton, Chris, Lipson, David A., Bjermer, Leif H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34711232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-021-01859-w
_version_ 1784591960762220544
author Vogelmeier, Claus F.
Jones, Paul W.
Kerwin, Edward M.
Boucot, Isabelle H.
Maltais, François
Tombs, Lee
Compton, Chris
Lipson, David A.
Bjermer, Leif H.
author_facet Vogelmeier, Claus F.
Jones, Paul W.
Kerwin, Edward M.
Boucot, Isabelle H.
Maltais, François
Tombs, Lee
Compton, Chris
Lipson, David A.
Bjermer, Leif H.
author_sort Vogelmeier, Claus F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibility of airflow limitation in patients with COPD with a low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: The double-blind, double-dummy EMAX trial randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg once daily, umeclidinium 62.5 µg once daily, or salmeterol 50 µg twice daily. Bronchodilator reversibility to salbutamol was measured once at screening and defined as an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL 10−30 min post salbutamol. Post hoc, fractional polynomial (FP) modelling was conducted using the degree of reversibility (mL) at screening as a continuous variable to investigate its relationship to mean change from baseline in trough FEV(1) and self-administered computerised-Transition Dyspnoea Index (SAC-TDI) at Week 24, Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD (E-RS) at Weeks 21–24, and rescue medication use (puffs/day) over Weeks 1–24. Analyses were conducted across the full range of reversibility (−850–896 mL); however, results are presented for the range −100–400 mL because there were few participants with values outside this range. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) reversibility was 130 mL (156) and the median was 113 mL; 625/2425 (26%) patients were reversible. There was a trend towards greater improvements in trough FEV(1), SAC-TDI, E-RS and rescue medication use with umeclidinium/vilanterol with higher reversibility. Improvements in trough FEV(1) and reductions in rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol compared with either monotherapy across the range of reversibility. Greater improvements in SAC-TDI and E-RS total scores were observed with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in the middle of the reversibility range. CONCLUSIONS: FP analyses suggest that patients with higher levels of reversibility have greater improvements in lung function and symptoms in response to bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy across the full range of reversibility, suggesting that the dual bronchodilator umeclidinium/vilanterol may be an appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of their level of reversibility. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-021-01859-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8555352
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85553522021-10-29 Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial Vogelmeier, Claus F. Jones, Paul W. Kerwin, Edward M. Boucot, Isabelle H. Maltais, François Tombs, Lee Compton, Chris Lipson, David A. Bjermer, Leif H. Respir Res Research BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibility of airflow limitation in patients with COPD with a low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: The double-blind, double-dummy EMAX trial randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg once daily, umeclidinium 62.5 µg once daily, or salmeterol 50 µg twice daily. Bronchodilator reversibility to salbutamol was measured once at screening and defined as an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 mL 10−30 min post salbutamol. Post hoc, fractional polynomial (FP) modelling was conducted using the degree of reversibility (mL) at screening as a continuous variable to investigate its relationship to mean change from baseline in trough FEV(1) and self-administered computerised-Transition Dyspnoea Index (SAC-TDI) at Week 24, Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms-COPD (E-RS) at Weeks 21–24, and rescue medication use (puffs/day) over Weeks 1–24. Analyses were conducted across the full range of reversibility (−850–896 mL); however, results are presented for the range −100–400 mL because there were few participants with values outside this range. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) reversibility was 130 mL (156) and the median was 113 mL; 625/2425 (26%) patients were reversible. There was a trend towards greater improvements in trough FEV(1), SAC-TDI, E-RS and rescue medication use with umeclidinium/vilanterol with higher reversibility. Improvements in trough FEV(1) and reductions in rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol compared with either monotherapy across the range of reversibility. Greater improvements in SAC-TDI and E-RS total scores were observed with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy in the middle of the reversibility range. CONCLUSIONS: FP analyses suggest that patients with higher levels of reversibility have greater improvements in lung function and symptoms in response to bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy across the full range of reversibility, suggesting that the dual bronchodilator umeclidinium/vilanterol may be an appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of their level of reversibility. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-021-01859-w. BioMed Central 2021-10-28 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8555352/ /pubmed/34711232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-021-01859-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Vogelmeier, Claus F.
Jones, Paul W.
Kerwin, Edward M.
Boucot, Isabelle H.
Maltais, François
Tombs, Lee
Compton, Chris
Lipson, David A.
Bjermer, Leif H.
Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title_full Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title_fullStr Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title_short Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial
title_sort efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the emax trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34711232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-021-01859-w
work_keys_str_mv AT vogelmeierclausf efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT jonespaulw efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT kerwinedwardm efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT boucotisabelleh efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT maltaisfrancois efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT tombslee efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT comptonchris efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT lipsondavida efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial
AT bjermerleifh efficacyofumeclidiniumvilanterolaccordingtothedegreeofreversibilityofairflowlimitationatscreeningaposthocanalysisoftheemaxtrial