Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- COPD (4) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
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.
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.
Background: The objective of the FAVOR study was to evaluate the effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) versus tiotropium on peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and also to investigate patient satisfaction and treatment preference.
Methods: Patients with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation (FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio of <0.70), those with a COPD assessment test score of ≥10, and those who were maintained on tiotropium HandiHaler® therapy prior to enrollment were recruited for the study, and randomized (1:1) to receive either 4 weeks open-label IND/GLY (110/50 µg) once daily followed by 4 weeks of tiotropium (18 µg) once daily or vice versa. The primary endpoint was FEV1 1 h post-inhalation after 4 weeks of treatment. Other endpoints included patient’s and physician’s preference for treatment, patient’s satisfaction evaluated using a study-specific questionnaire and the abbreviated Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication, and safety and tolerability.
Results: Eighty-seven out of 88 randomized patients completed the study and showed significantly higher FEV1 1 h post-inhalation after 4 weeks of treatment with IND/GLY versus tiotropium (treatment difference =0.081 L; p=0.0017). IND/GLY was preferred over tiotropium among the patients (69.4% versus 30.6%, p=0.0004) and the physicians (81.6% versus 18.4%, p<0.0001). A higher proportion of the patients stated they were very satisfied or satisfied with IND/GLY versus tiotropium with regard to dyspnea reduction (79.3% versus 58.0%, respectively) and reduction of dyspnea on exertion (72.4% versus 43.2%, respectively). Patients treated with IND/GLY showed significant improvement in Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication domain scores versus tiotropium. IND/GLY demonstrated a good safety and tolerability profile.
Conclusion: This study indicated that, beyond FEV1, important patient-reported outcomes improved with the open-label dual bronchodilator IND/GLY when compared with tiotropium. This study suggests that individual patients felt the lung function benefits with IND/GLY compared with tiotropium, which, in turn, may also have contributed to the preference for IND/GLY.
Practical considerations when prescribing a long-acting muscarinic antagonist for patients with COPD
(2018)
COPD is characterized by persistent airflow limitation, progressive breathlessness, cough, and sputum production. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are one of the recommended first-choice therapeutic options for patients with COPD, and several new agents have been developed in recent years. A literature search identified 14 published randomized, placebo-controlled studies of the efficacy and safety of LAMAs in patients with COPD, with improvements seen in lung function, exacerbations, breathlessness, and health status. A greater weight of evidence currently exists for glycopyrronium (GLY) and tiotropium than for umeclidinium and aclidinium, especially in terms of exacerbation reductions. To date, there have been few head-to-head clinical studies of the different LAMAs. Available data indicate that GLY and aclidinium have similar efficacy to tiotropium in terms of improving lung function, dyspnea, exacerbations, and health status. Overall, evidence demonstrates that currently available LAMAs provide effective and generally well-tolerated therapy for patients with COPD. Delivery devices for the different LAMAs vary, which may affect individual patient’s adherence to and preference for treatment. Subtle differences between individual therapeutic options may be important to individual patients and the final treatment choice should involve physician’s and patient’s experiences and preferences.