Cargando…
Effect of chronic mucus hypersecretion on treatment responses to inhaled therapies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Post hoc analysis of the IMPACT trial
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Chronic mucus hypersecretion (CMH) is a clinical phenotype of COPD. This exploratory post hoc analysis assessed relationship between CMH status and treatment response in IMPACT. METHODS: Patients were randomized to once‐daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9804213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35970518 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/resp.14339 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Chronic mucus hypersecretion (CMH) is a clinical phenotype of COPD. This exploratory post hoc analysis assessed relationship between CMH status and treatment response in IMPACT. METHODS: Patients were randomized to once‐daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg, FF/VI 100/25 μg or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg and designated CMH+ if they scored 1/2 in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) questions 1 and 2. Endpoints assessed by baseline CMH status included on‐treatment exacerbation rates, change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second, SGRQ total score, COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score, proportion of SGRQ and CAT responders at Week 52 and safety. RESULTS: Of 10,355 patients in the intent‐to‐treat population, 10,250 reported baseline SGRQ data (CMH+: 62% [n = 6383]). FF/UMEC/VI significantly (p < 0.001) reduced on‐treatment moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus FF/VI and UMEC/VI in CMH+ (rate ratio: 0.87 and 0.72) and CMH− patients (0.82 and 0.80). FF/UMEC/VI significantly (p < 0.05) reduced on‐treatment severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI in CMH+ (0.62) and CMH− (0.74) subgroups. Similar improvements in health status and lung function with FF/UMEC/VI were observed, regardless of CMH status. In CMH+ patients, FF/VI significantly (p < 0.001) reduced on‐treatment moderate/severe and severe exacerbation rates versus UMEC/VI (0.83 and 0.70). CONCLUSION: FF/UMEC/VI had a favourable benefit: risk profile versus dual therapies irrespective of CMH status. The presence of CMH did not influence treatment response or exacerbations, lung function and/or health status. However, CMH did generate differences when dual therapies were compared and the impact of CMH should be considered in future trial design. |
---|