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/...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson, Philip J., Criner, Gerard J., Dransfield, Mark T., Halpin, David M. G., Han, MeiLan K., Lipson, David A., Maghzal, Ghassan J., Martinez, Fernando J., Midwinter, Dawn, Singh, Dave, Tombs, Lee, Wise, Robert A.
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
Descripción
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.