Open and Closed Triple Inhaler Therapy in Patients with Uncontrolled Asthma.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kotoulas SC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10366885 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Open and Closed Triple Inhaler Therapy in Patients with Uncontrolled Asthma.
Kotoulas Serafeim-Chrysovalantis SC Tsiouprou Ioanna I Domvri Kalliopi K Ntontsi Polyxeni P Pataka Athanasia A Porpodis Konstantinos K
Advances in respiratory medicine 20230704 4
Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a class of inhalers that has recently been included as add-on therapy in the GINA guidelines, either in a single inhaler device with inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2-agonists (ICS + LABA) (closed triple inhaler therapy) or in a separate one (open triple inhaler therapy). This review summarizes the existing evidence on the addition of LAMAs in patients with persistently uncontrolled asthma despite ICS + LABA treatment based on clinical eff ...[more]
Shared Molecules
Only show the datasets with similarity scores above: 0.5
Threshold
0.5
Similar Datasets
Project description:A significant number of patients with asthma remain uncontrolled despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2 adrenergic bronchodilators (LABA). The addition of long-acting antimuscarinic agents (LAMA) can improve the management of asthma in these patients. Recently, three novel triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA) formulations in a single-inhaler device (SITT) have been investigated in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite ICS/LABA treatment. Here, we review systematically the evidence available to date in relation to SITT in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite ICS-LABA treatment and conclude that SITT is a safe and effective therapeutic alternative in these patients. We also discuss how to position this new therapeutic alternative in their practical clinical management as well as the opportunities and challenges that it may generate for patients, physicians, and payers.
| S-EPMC9290056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe extrafine single inhaler triple therapy (efSITT) containing beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium 87/5/9 μg has proved to be efficacious in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in randomized control trials.ObjectiveTRIWIN study evaluated the effectiveness of efSITT delivering beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium 87/5/9 μg in COPD patients previously treated with multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in a real-world study in Greece.DesignProspective, multicenter, observational, non-interventional study was conducted over 24 weeks.MethodsA total of 475 eligible patients had moderate-to-severe COPD, an indication for treatment with efSITT, and were symptomatic despite receiving MITT. COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score, pulmonary function parameters, use of rescue medication, and adherence to inhaler use were recorded at baseline (Visit 1), 3 (Visit 2), and 6 months (Visit 3) after treatment.ResultsMean CAT score decreased from 21.4 points at Visit 1, to 16.6 at Visit 2 and 15.1 at Visit 3 (p < 0.001 for all pair comparisons). At Visit 3, 79.8% of patients reached a CAT improvement exceeding minimal clinically important difference (⩾2), compared to baseline. Mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (%pred.) increased from 55.4% at Visit 1 to 63.5% at the end of study period (p < 0.001), while mean forced vital capacity (%pred.) increased from 71.1% at Visit 1, to 76.7% at Visit 3 (p < 0.001). The mean Test of Adherence to Inhalers score increased from 42.5 to 45.3 and 46.3 points, for the three visits, respectively (p < 0.001 comparing Visits 1/2 and Visits 1/3; p = 0.006 comparing Visits 2/3). The percentage of patients showing good adherence rose from 33.7% at baseline to 58.3% at Visit 3. The percentage of patients using rescue medication during the last month dropped from 16.2% to 7.4% at the end of study period (p < 0.001). Pulmonary function parameters also improved.ConclusionThe TRIWIN results suggest that extrafine beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate/glycopyrronium is effective in improving health status, pulmonary function, and adherence and in reducing rescue medication use in COPD patients previously treated with MITT, in a real-world setting in Greece.
| S-EPMC11301738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent literature has shown that triple therapy is more effective than dual therapy for individuals with uncontrolled asthma. However, the comparative efficacy between different triple therapies remains unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the comparative efficacy of extra-fine single-inhaler medium-dose (MD) or high-dose (HD) of beclometasone/formoterol/glycopyrronium bromide (BDP/FOR/GLY) compared to other triple therapies in patients whose asthma remains uncontrolled with MD or HD inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2-agonists. A systematic literature review identified randomized control trials on adult patients with uncontrolled asthma. Two separate networks were constructed according to patients' previous inhaled-corticosteroid dosage. Network meta-analyses evaluated severe and moderate-to-severe exacerbations, pre-dose forced expiratory volume, and asthma control questionnaire responses at 52 (± 3) weeks. Among single-inhaler triple therapies, MD BDP/FOR/GLY significantly reduced the risk of severe exacerbations (RR [95% CrI] compared to MD fluticasone/umeclidinium/vilanterol: 0.65 [0.49, 0.89]), while HD BDP/FOR/GLY demonstrated an improved trend in reducing severe and moderate-to-severe exacerbations versus HD indacaterol acetate/glycopyrronium bromide/mometasone, fluticasone/umeclidinium/vilanterol, and salmeterol/fluticasone + tiotropium. HD BDP/FOR/GLY and HD BDP/FOR + tiotropium did not differ significantly. Compared to relevant single-inhaler triple therapies, MD and HD BDP/FOR/GLY are associated with a significant benefit or trend for improvement in terms of reducing the rate of severe and moderate-to-severe exacerbations.
| S-EPMC11794625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe benefits and harms of adding long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) for moderate to severe asthma remain unclear.ObjectiveTo systematically synthesize the outcomes and adverse events associated with triple therapy (ICS, LABA, and LAMA) vs dual therapy (ICS plus LABA) in children and adults with persistent uncontrolled asthma.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ICTRP, FDA, and EMA databases from November 2017, to December 8, 2020, without language restriction.Study selectionTwo investigators independently selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing triple vs dual therapy in patients with moderate to severe asthma.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses, including individual patient-level exacerbation data, were used. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess certainty (quality) of the evidence.Main outcomes and measuresSevere exacerbations, asthma control (measured using the Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ-7], a 7-item list with each item ranging from 0 [totally controlled] to 6 [severely uncontrolled]; minimal important difference, 0.5), quality of life (measured using the Asthma-related Quality of Life [AQLQ] tool; score range, 1 [severely impaired] to 7 [no impairment]; minimal important difference, 0.5), mortality, and adverse events.ResultsTwenty RCTs using 3 LAMA types that enrolled 11 894 children and adults (mean age, 52 years [range, 9-71 years]; 57.7% female) were included. High-certainty evidence showed that triple therapy vs dual therapy was significantly associated with a reduction in severe exacerbation risk (9 trials [9932 patients]; 22.7% vs 27.4%; risk ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77 to 0.90]) and an improvement in asthma control (14 trials [11 230 patients]; standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.06 [95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02]; mean difference in ACQ-7 scale, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01]). There were no significant differences in asthma-related quality of life (7 trials [5247 patients]; SMD, 0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.13]; mean difference in AQLQ score, 0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.13]; moderate-certainty evidence) or mortality (17 trials [11 595 patients]; 0.12% vs 0.12%; risk ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.33 to 2.75]; high-certainty evidence) between dual and triple therapy. Triple therapy was significantly associated with increased dry mouth and dysphonia (10 trials [7395 patients]; 3.0% vs 1.8%; risk ratio, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.38]; high-certainty evidence), but treatment-related and serious adverse events were not significantly different between groups (moderate-certainty evidence).Conclusions and relevanceAmong children (aged 6 to 18 years) and adults with moderate to severe asthma, triple therapy, compared with dual therapy, was significantly associated with fewer severe asthma exacerbations and modest improvements in asthma control without significant differences in quality of life or mortality.
| S-EPMC8135065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Triple inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) therapy is recommended for symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and at risk of exacerbations. However, the benefits versus side-effects of triple inhaled therapy for COPD, based on distinct patient clinical profiles, are unclear. FULFIL, a phase III, randomised, double-blind study, compared 24 weeks of once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 µg using the Ellipta inhaler with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400/12 µg using the Turbuhaler. Subgroup analyses of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total score and exacerbation rates were carried out. Subgroups were defined by COPD medication at screening (ICS+LABA, BUD+FOR, ICS+LABA+LAMA, LAMA alone, tiotropium alone and LAMA+LABA), by disease severity (lung function and exacerbations) and by exacerbation history (exacerbation severity and frequency). In the intent-to-treat population (n=1810) at week 24, FF/UMEC/VI (n=911) versus BUD/FOR (n=899) improved FEV1 and SGRQ Total score and reduced mean annual exacerbation rates in all disease severity and exacerbation history subgroups. FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR improved FEV1 and SGRQ Total score in all medication subgroups and reduced mean annual exacerbation rates in all medication subgroups, except LAMA+LABA. Adverse events were similar across subgroups. These findings support the benefit of FF/UMEC/VI compared with dual ICS/LABA therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD regardless of disease severity or prior treatment and may help to inform clinical decision making.
| S-EPMC5934530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Guidelines recommend that treatment with a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), i.e. triple therapy, is reserved for a select group of symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who continue to exacerbate despite treatment with dual therapy (LABA/LAMA). A number of single-inhaler triple therapies are now available and important clinical questions remain over their role in the patient pathway. We compared the efficacy and safety of single-inhaler triple therapy to assess the magnitude of benefit and to identify patients with the best risk-benefit profile for treatment. We also evaluated and compared study designs and population characteristics to assess the strength of the evidence base. METHODS:We conducted a systematic search, from inception to December 2018, of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD. The primary outcome was the annual rate of moderate and severe exacerbations. RESULTS:We identified 523 records, of which 15 reports/abstracts from six RCTs were included. Triple therapy resulted in the reduction of the annual rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in the range of 15-52% compared with LAMA/LABA, 15-35% compared to LABA/ICS and 20% compared to LAMA. The patient-based number needed to treat for the moderate or severe exacerbation outcome ranged between approximately 25-50 (preventing one patient from having an event) and the event-based number needed to treat of around 3-11 (preventing one event). The absolute benefit appeared to be greater in patients with higher eosinophil counts or historical frequency of exacerbations and ex-smokers. In the largest study, there was a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia in the triple therapy arm. There were important differences in study designs and populations impacting the interpretation of the results and indicating there would be significant heterogeneity in cross-trial comparisons. CONCLUSION:The decision to prescribe triple therapy should consider patient phenotype, magnitude of benefit and increased risk of adverse events. Future research on specific patient phenotype thresholds that can support treatment and funding decisions is now required from well-designed, robust, clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO #CRD42018102125 .
| S-EPMC6829989 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn some RCTs comparing triple therapy with dual therapy in COPD, there might be a bias resulting from the use of multiple inhaler devices. This meta-analysis included only RCTs that compared ICS/LABA/LAMA vs. LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA using a single device.MethodsWe systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD. We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases to investigate the effect of single-inhaler triple therapy in COPD. The primary end points were the effect of single-inhaler triple therapy compared with single-inhaler dual therapy on all-cause mortality, the risk of acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD), and some safety endpoints. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the quality of each randomized trial and the risk of bias.ResultsA total of 25,171 patients suffering from COPD were recruited for the 6 studies. This meta-analysis indicated that single-inhaler triple therapy resulted in a significantly lower rate of all-cause mortality than LABA/LAMA FDC (risk ratio, 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.88). Single-inhaler triple therapy reduced the risk of exacerbation and prolonged the time to first exacerbation compared with single-inhaler dual therapy. The FEV1 increased significantly more under single-inhaler triple therapy than under ICS/LABA FDC (mean difference, 103.4 ml; 95% CI 64.65-142.15). The risk of pneumonia was, however, significantly higher with ICS/LAMA/LABA FDC than with LABA/LAMA FDC (risk ratio, 1.55; 95% CI 1.35-1.80).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that single-inhaler triple therapy is effective in reducing the risk of death of any cause and of moderate or severe exacerbation in COPD patients. However, the risk of pneumonia is higher with ICS/LAMA/LABA FDC than with LABA/LAMA FDC. Trial registration PROSPERO #CRD42020186726.
| S-EPMC8299655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Errors in the use of different inhalers were investigated in patients naive to the devices under investigation in a multicentre, single-visit, randomised, open-label, cross-over study. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma were assigned to ELLIPTA vs DISKUS (Accuhaler), metered-dose inhaler (MDI) or Turbuhaler. Patients with COPD were also assigned to ELLIPTA vs Handihaler or Breezhaler. Patients demonstrated inhaler use after reading the patient information leaflet (PIL). A trained investigator assessed critical errors (i.e., those likely to result in the inhalation of significantly reduced, minimal or no medication). If the patient made errors, the investigator demonstrated the correct use of the inhaler, and the patient demonstrated inhaler use again. Fewer COPD patients made critical errors with ELLIPTA after reading the PIL vs: DISKUS, 9/171 (5%) vs 75/171 (44%); MDI, 10/80 (13%) vs 48/80 (60%); Turbuhaler, 8/100 (8%) vs 44/100 (44%); Handihaler, 17/118 (14%) vs 57/118 (48%); Breezhaler, 13/98 (13%) vs 45/98 (46%; all P<0.001). Most patients (57-70%) made no errors using ELLIPTA and did not require investigator instruction. Instruction was required for DISKUS (65%), MDI (85%), Turbuhaler (71%), Handihaler (62%) and Breezhaler (56%). Fewer asthma patients made critical errors with ELLIPTA after reading the PIL vs: DISKUS (3/70 (4%) vs 9/70 (13%), P=0.221); MDI (2/32 (6%) vs 8/32 (25%), P=0.074) and significantly fewer vs Turbuhaler (3/60 (5%) vs 20/60 (33%), P<0.001). More asthma and COPD patients preferred ELLIPTA over the other devices (all P⩽0.002). Significantly, fewer COPD patients using ELLIPTA made critical errors after reading the PIL vs other inhalers. More asthma and COPD patients preferred ELLIPTA over comparator inhalers.
| S-EPMC5122307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe evaluated the cost-effectiveness of high-dose indacaterol acetate (IND)/glycopyrronium bromide (GLY)/mometasone furoate (MF) (150/50/160 μg, once daily) compared with high-dose salmeterol/fluticasone (SAL/FLU; 50/500 µg, twice daily)+tiotropium (TIO; 5 µg, once daily) (SAL/FLU+TIO) and with high-dose SAL/FLU (50/500 µg, twice daily) for the treatment of inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.Patients and methodsA Markov model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of treatment with high-dose IND/GLY/MF compared with SAL/FLU+TIO and high-dose IND/GLY/MF compared with SAL/FLU. The model included three health states (day-to-day symptoms without exacerbations, day-to-day symptoms with exacerbations, and death) with a 4-week cycle length. A lifetime time horizon was used. Exacerbation rates and utility values were derived from ARGON and IRIDIUM clinical trials. Canadian dollars (CAD$, 2020) were applied.ResultsIND/GLY/MF was the less costly and more effective treatment strategy compared with SAL/FLU+TIO and SAL/FLU in the base-case analyses. IND/GLY/MF had lower costs (CAD $33,501 versus CAD $50,907) and higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (18.37 versus 18.06 QALYs) compared with SAL/FLU+TIO. Compared with SAL/FLU, IND/GLY/MF had lower costs (CAD $33,408 versus CAD $36,577) and higher QALYs (19.33 versus 19.04 QALYs). IND/GLY/MF was the most cost-effective option in all scenarios tested.ConclusionIND/GLY/MF was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD $50,000/QALY in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma versus SAL/FLU+TIO and SAL/FLU in the base case and all scenarios tested.
| S-EPMC8650773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEscalation to single- or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (SITT; MITT) is a recommended option for patients with asthma who remain uncontrolled by medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist; however, characterization of elderly users of triple therapy is limited. This real-world cohort study describes demographics and clinical characteristics of elderly patients with asthma with and without comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who are new users of triple therapy, and asthma treatment patterns preceding triple therapy initiation.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used administrative claims data from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database. Eligible patients were ≥ 65 years of age with asthma or with asthma and comorbid COPD who initiated either triple therapy with single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI; 100/62.5/25 μg) or MITT between September 18, 2017 and September 30, 2020. Demographics, clinical characteristics, healthcare resource utilization, healthcare costs, and asthma treatment patterns were described in the 12-month period before triple therapy initiation (baseline period).ResultsIn total, 15,557 patients were included. Among FF/UMEC/VI initiators with asthma (N = 635) mean age was 73.3 years and 66.6% were female. During the baseline period, > 75% of patients used controller therapy, > 92% used rescue medications, 27.9% experienced ≥ 1 asthma-related exacerbation, with mean annual exacerbation rate of 0.42, and mean all-cause healthcare costs were $23,407. Patients with asthma initiating MITT and patients with asthma and comorbid COPD initiating FF/UMEC/VI or MITT had similar characteristics, healthcare resource utilization, healthcare costs, and asthma treatment patterns to FF/UMEC/VI initiators with asthma.ConclusionsTriple therapy is often initiated following use of other asthma controller medications in real-world practice. Substantial rescue medication use and high disease and economic burden among this elderly patient population suggest that their asthma was not adequately controlled prior to triple therapy initiation. This retrospective study provides an early profile of elderly patients with asthma in the USA.
| S-EPMC11861473 | biostudies-literature