BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and is associated with substantial economic burden. There is a lack of data regarding COPD outcomes and costs in a real-world setting, particularly by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) severity.

BACKGROUND:The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) focuses on reducing existing symptoms, decreasing the risk of future exacerbations, and improving health status by recommending specific drug therapy based on exacerbation risk and symptoms. However, disparities exist between evidence-based recommendations and clinical practice. Research that quantifies the real-world effect of COPD regimen alignment with the GOLD recommendations on clinical and economic outcomes is needed. OBJECTIVE:To compare COPD-related health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs, as well as exacerbation rates, among patients with COPD on maintenance therapy based on 2017 GOLD treatment recommendation compliance status per GOLD ABCD risk group classification in a U.S. commercially insured/ Medicare Advantage population. METHODS:This retrospective cohort study utilized administrative claims data in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. The COPD population was identified using a previously validated claims-based predictive model. Among this population, patients with ≥ 1 claim for a COPD maintenance medication (earliest maintenance fill-date = index date) between January 1, 2014, and March 31, 2017, were identified. Patients were required to be aged ≥ 40 years, have ≥ 12 months of pre-index and ≥ 30 days of post-index health plan enrollment, with no diagnosis for asthma, cystic fibrosis, and/ or lung cancer at any time from January 1, 2013, to March 31, 2018. Patients were categorized into exacerbation risk/ symptomatology groups according to the 2017 GOLD ABCD assessment recommendations and were then classified into treatment-compliance status based on their maintenance therapy. Multivariable analyses were conducted to examine post-index COPD-related HRU, costs, and exacerbations by compliance status.

Background: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are recommended as first-line controller medications for persistent asthma. However, guidelines on the initial ICS doses, step-up and step-down algorithms, and when to switch to combination therapy vary. Objective: To understand the ideal starting doses of ICS therapy based on current evidence and to systematically compare low, moderate, and high starting doses of ICSs as monotherapy and in combination with long-acting b-agonists with respect to efficacy and safety.Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant English-language articles published from 1980 to November 17, 2018. Randomized controlled trials with adult, steroid-naive, ICS-free (for 4 weeks) patients with asthma and a duration of 4 weeks or longer with an ICS treatment arm (monotherapy or combination therapy) were included. Separate fixed-effects Bayesian network metaanalyses were conducted on the extracted data for peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, nighttime rescue medication use, nighttime symptom score, and study withdrawal because of an adverse event. Results: A total of 31 randomized controlled trials were analyzed. All starting doses of ICSs were comparable with respect to nighttime rescue medication use, nighttime symptom score, change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and study withdrawal because of an adverse event. Significant improvement in morning peak expiratory flow was observed with high-dose ICSs and with low-and moderate-dose ICSs and longacting b-agonists than with low-dose ICSs.

For personal use only. Permission required for all other uses.

Background: A step-up approach (increasing inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] dose and/or add-on treatment) is recommended for asthma that is uncontrolled despite ICS plus long-acting beta-2‐agonist (LABA) combination treatment. Understanding the impact of different treatment options on health outcomes can help guide treatment decision-making. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of add-on tiotropium 1.25 µg (two puffs once daily) versus an increased ICS plus LABA dose in a real-world cohort of patients with asthma initiated on ICS plus LABA. Methods: De-identified data from patients ages ≥12 years and with asthma who were initiated on ICS plus LABA, and then had tiotropium added (Tio group; index date) or an ICS plus LABA dose increased (inc-ICS group; index date) were collected from two medical and pharmacy claims data bases (2014‐2018). To account for population/group differences, propensity score matching was performed. The primary end point was the exacerbation risk after the index date. Secondary end points included exacerbation rates 6 and 12 months postindex, health-care resource utilization, costs, and short-acting beta-2‐agonist (SABA) refills 12 months postindex. Results: Overall, 7857 patients (Tio group, 2619; inc-ICS group, 5238) were included. The exacerbation risk was 35% lower in the Tio group than in the inc-ICS group (hazard ratio 0.65 [95% confidence interval, 0.43‐0.99]; p = 0.044). Exacerbation rates in the Tio group also were significantly lower within 6 and 12 months postindex (64% and 73%, respectively). All-cause and asthma-related emergency department (ED) visits were 47% and 74% lower, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both), and all-cause and asthma-related hospitalizations were 48% (p < 0.01) and 76% (p < 0.001) lower, respectively, in the Tio group. Also, significantly fewer patients in the Tio group versus the inc-ICS group required SABA refills (56% versus 67%, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Add-on tiotropium significantly decreased the risk and rate of exacerbations, decreased all-cause and asthma-related ED visits and hospitalizations, and reduced SABA refills compared with increasing the ICS plus LABA dose. The findings supported the use of add-on tiotropium for patients with uncontrolled asthma taking ICS plus LABA.

Background: Inhaled bronchodilator therapy is currently the mainstay of treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Some inhalers require patients to achieve certain inhalation efforts either to activate the device or to deliver medication to the site of action. For dry powder inhalers, low peak inspiratory flow (PIF) can result in poor medication delivery but the clinical significance of this is not well understood. Methods: TRONARTO was a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group study which stratified patients with moderate-to-severe COPD according to their PIF against medium-low resistance at screening. Patients were randomized to receive tiotropium/olodaterol (5 μg/5 μg) or matched placebo delivered via the Respimat ® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI). After 4 weeks of treatment, we assessed change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) area under the curve 0-3 hours (FEV 1 AUC 0-3h ) and trough FEV 1 . Results: Overall, 213 patients were randomized, of whom 106 received tiotropium/olodaterol (PIF <60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥60 L/min, 51) and 107 received placebo (PIF <60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥60 L/min, 52). For FEV 1 AUC 0-3h , the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 336 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 246-425 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF <60 L/min group and 321 mL (95% CI 233-409 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF ≥60 L/min group. For trough FEV 1 , the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 201 mL (95% CI 117-286 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF <60 L/min group and 217 mL (95% CI 135-299 mL; P<0.0001) in the PIF ≥60 L/min group. Conclusion:In the TRONARTO study, which included patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and varying inspiratory flow abilities, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in significant lung function improvements versus placebo. This SMI can be used irrespective of the PIF that a patient can generate.

The Advancing the Patient Experience (APEX) in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) registry (https:// www.apexcopd.org/) is the first primary care health system-based COPD registry in the United States. While its ultimate goal is to improve the care of patients diagnosed with COPD, the registry is also designed to describe real-life experiences of people with COPD, track key outcomes longitudinally, and assess the effectiveness of interventions. It will retrospectively and prospectively collect information from 3000 patients enrolled in 5 health care organizations. Information will be obtained from electronic health records, and from extended annual and brief questionnaires completed by patients before clinic visits. Core variables to be collected into the APEX COPD registry were agreed on by Delphi consensus and fall into 3 domains: demographics, COPD monitoring, and treatment. Main strengths of the registry include: 1) its size and scope (in terms of patient numbers, geographic spread and use of multiple information sources including patient-reported information); 2) collection of variables which are clinically relevant and practical to collect within primary care; 3) use of electronic data capture systems to ensure high-quality data and minimization of data-entry requirements; 4) inclusion of clinical, database development, management and communication experts; 5) regular sharing of key findings, both at international/national congresses and in peer-reviewed publications; and 6) a robust organizational structure to ensure continuance of the registry, and that research outputs are ethical, relevant and continue to bring value to both patients and physicians.

This substudy of a large, randomized, controlled trial (NCT01072396) examined tiotropium (18 μg qd) effects on dynamic hyperinflation during constant work rate treadmill exercise. Areas-under-the-spontaneous expiratory flow-volume (SEFV)-curves were compared in 20 COPD patients and 16 age-matched untreated controls, using rectangular area ratio (RAR) between peak intrabreath and end-expiratory flow. Seven patients exhibited SEFV curve concavity with RAR ≤ 0.5 (RAR) in ≥1 test without tiotropium; (mean ± SD FEV: 1.60 ± 0.59 L; 63.4 ± 14.0%predicted). In RAR patients, tiotropium increased end-exercise inspiratory capacity (IC, 2.10 ± 0.05 vs. 1.89 ± 0.05 L, tiotropium vs. placebo; p = 0.045) and RAR (0.57 ± 0.02 vs. 0.53 ± 0.02; p < 0.001). Patients without SEFV curve concavity with RAR > 0.5 (n = 13; RAR), had higher screening FEV (2.15 ± 0.47 L; 79.6 ± 10.1%predicted) versus RAR patients and no difference in end-exercise IC and RAR between tiotropium and placebo (IC: 2.24 ± 0.03 vs. 2.17 ± 0.03 L; RAR: 0.63 ± 0.005 vs. 0.62 ± 0.005). RAR and%predicted IC at peak exercise were positively correlated in RAR patients (R = 0.43, p = 0.0002). Tiotropium increased exercise RAR in GOLD 1-2 patients with SEFV curve concavity.