Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- COPD (2)
- Asthma and allergic disorders (1)
- Bronchodilator agents (1)
- CAT (1)
- COPD course and therapy (1)
- Drug therapy (1)
- Epidemiology (1)
- Exacerbations (1)
- Observational (1)
- Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive (1)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Background: Treatment of asthma does not always comply with asthma guidelines (AG). This may be rooted in direct or indirect resistance on the doctors’ and/or patients’ side or be caused by the healthcare system. To assess whether patients’ concepts and attitudes are really an implementation barrier for AG, we analysed the patients’ perspective of a “good asthma therapy” and contrasted their wishes with current recommendations.
Methods: Using a qualitative exploratory design, topic centred focus group (FG) discussions were performed until theoretical saturation was reached. Inclusion criteria were an asthma diagnosis and age above 18. FG sessions were recorded audio-visually and analysed via a mapping technique and content analysis performed according to Mayring (supported by MAXQDA®). Participants’ speech times and the proportion of time devoted to different themes were calculated using the Videograph System® and related to the content analysis.
Results: Thirteen men and 24 women aged between 20 and 77 from rural and urban areas attended five FG. Some patients had been recently diagnosed with asthma, others years previously or in childhood. The following topics were addressed: (a) concern about or rejection of therapy components, particularly corticosteroids, which sometimes resulted in autonomous uncommunicated medication changes, (b) lack of time or money for optimal treatment, (c) insufficient involvement in therapy choices and (d) a desire for greater empowerment, (e) suboptimal communication between healthcare professionals and (f) difficulties with recommendations conflicting with daily life. Primarily, (g) participants wanted more time with doctors to discuss difficulties and (h) all aspects of living with an impairing condition.
Conclusions: We identified some important patient driven barriers to implementing AG recommendations. In order to advance AG implementation and improve asthma treatment, the patients’ perspective needs to be considered before drafting new versions of AG. These issues should be addressed at the planning stage.
Trial registration: DRKS00000562 (German Clinical Trials Registry).
Background: No observational studies have evaluated the "real-world" effectiveness of dual bronchodilation comprising a long-acting β2-agonist plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonist vs that of triple therapy (long-acting β2-agonist plus long-acting muscarinic antagonist plus inhaled corticosteroid) in COPD.
Materials and methods: DACCORD is a non-interventional, observational clinical study that recruited patients following COPD maintenance therapy initiation or change in maintenance therapy between or within therapeutic class. Given the non-interventional nature of the study, the decision to initiate or change medication had to be made by the patients’ physicians prior to inclusion in DACCORD. We used a matched-pairs analysis to compare disease progression in two patient groups: those receiving dual bronchodilation vs those receiving triple therapy (each group n=1,046).
Results: In two subgroups of patients matched according to a broad range of demographic and disease characteristics, over 1 year, fewer patients receiving dual bronchodilation exacerbated than those receiving triple therapy (15.5% vs 26.6%; P<0.001), with a greater improvement from baseline in COPD Assessment Test total score at 1 year (mean±SD -2.9±5.8 vs -1.4±5.5; P<0.001). When analyzed according to prior therapy, the highest rate of exacerbations was in patients on triple therapy prior to the study who remained on triple therapy. Those changing from mono-bronchodilator to dual bronchodilation had the greatest COPD Assessment Test total score improvement.
Conclusion: In this "real-life" cohort of patients with COPD, most of whom had not exacerbated in the 6 months prior to entry, triple therapy did not seem to improve outcomes compared with dual bronchodilation in terms of either exacerbations or health status. Our analyses clearly demonstrate the potential impact of prior medication on study results, something that should be taken into account when interpreting the results even of controlled clinical trials.
Introduction: The 2017 update to the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy document includes recommendations for treatment intensification or step-down in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although recognises that limited supporting information is available.
DACCORD is an ongoing observational, non-interventional study, recruiting patients following COPD maintenance treatment change or initiation, a subset of whom were receiving a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) plus a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) fixed-dose combination (FDC) on entry. Since there were no requirements in terms of prior medication (and no washout before commencing LABA/LAMA FDC), this provides an opportunity to generate "real world" data to test the GOLD 2017 recommendations.
Methods: To reduce heterogeneity, the current analyses include patients receiving indacaterol/glycopyrronium at baseline, and who, prior to the study, were receiving no COPD maintenance medication ("none"), LABA or LAMA monotherapy ("mono"), LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS; "LABA/ICS"), or triple therapy ("triple"). At the baseline visit, data collected included: demographic and disease characteristics; COPD Assessment Test (CAT); and exacerbations in the 6 months prior to entry. At 3, 6, 9 and 12 months data on exacerbations were collected, with CAT recorded at 3 and 12 months.
Results: A total of 2724 patients were included in the baseline analyses: 795, 954, 598 and 377 in the "none", "mono", "LABA/ICS" and "triple" subgroups, respectively. There were no clinically relevant differences in baseline demographics between the four groups. In terms of disease characteristics, the "triple" group had the highest proportion of patients with a disease duration of more than 1 year since diagnosis and with severe/very severe airflow limitation, but a similar percentage of non-exacerbators compared to the "none" group.
Over the 1-year follow-up, the majority of patients in all four subgroups did not exacerbate (exacerbation rates 0.16, 0.19, 0.21, and 0.26 in the "none", "mono", "LABA/ICS" and "triple" groups, respectively). At 12 months, 61.4%, 65.0%, 71.0% and 52.4% of patients had a clinically relevant improvement in CAT score.
Conclusions: Overall, the results support the GOLD recommendations in suggesting that a switch from a mono-bronchodilator or LABA plus ICS to LABA/LAMA FDC is a valid treatment option for patients with COPD. The results also validate the use of a LABA/LAMA FDC as initial maintenance treatment for COPD, and provide first "real world" evidence to support the newly added "step down" recommendation (from triple to LABA/LAMA FDC).
Introduction: DACCORD is an observational, non-interventional study being conducted in German primary and secondary care centres. The study aims to describe the impact of disease (including exacerbations) and treatments over 2 years on ‘real-life’ patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Materials and methods: Patients had a clinical and spirometry diagnosis of COPD, were aged ≥40 years and, on recruitment, were initiating or changing COPD maintenance medication. The only exclusion criteria were asthma and randomised clinical trial participation. Exacerbations data were collected every 3 months. COPD medication, COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) were recorded at baseline and after 1 and 2 years.
Results: A total of 6122 patients were recruited, 3137 (51.2%) of whom completed the 2-year visit. The mean age of these patients was 65.6 years, 59% were male, 69% had mild or moderate airflow limitation, and their mean COPD Assessment Test (CAT) total score was 20.3. Overall, there was a trend towards decreasing COPD exacerbation rates over the 2-year follow-up period, with rates of 0.390 during Year 1 and 0.347 during Year 2. Rates were lower in patients with no exacerbation during the 6 months prior to entry (0.263 and 0.251 during Years 1 and 2, respectively), with 51.6% of patients having no exacerbation during the 6 months prior to entry and over the 2-year follow-up. Approximately 50% of the overall population experienced a clinically relevant improvement from baseline in CAT total score at Year 1 and 2. When assessed by treatment class (or classes), persistence to medication was high (77.8% in Year 1 and 71.4% in Year 2).
Conclusions: Overall, the 2-year follow-up data from DACCORD suggest that for most patients with COPD exacerbations are a rare event. For the majority of patients, the focus should be on managing symptoms, and the impact that these symptoms have on their daily lives. Even for those patients who do exacerbate, although prevention of exacerbations is an important factor, management of symptoms should be a key consideration. DACCORD also suggests that COPD disease progression is not inevitable – providing patients are receiving pharmacological treatment.