Efficacy of Once-Daily Indacaterol Relative to Alternative Bronchodilators in COPD: A Patient-Level Mixed Treatment Comparison

Abstract

Indacaterol is expected to be comparable to formoterol, salmeterol, and tiotropium, providing higher FEV(1) than formoterol and salmeterol and greater improvement in the SGRQ total score than tiotropium. Indacaterol 150 μg provided comparable improvement in dyspnea, while indacaterol 300 μg demonstrated the greatest response overall.

A comparative study of efficacy and safety of combination of indacaterol and tiotropium versus formoterol and budesonide in moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

“…The study by COPE et al compared indacaterol 150 vs FDC formoterol + budesonide, salmeterol + fluticasone, indacaterol was more efficacious. 5,13 In our study indacaterol + tiotropium achieved FEV 1 of 170ml after 12-24 weeks in 23.4% patients and in formoterol + budesonide group in 13.3% patients. 10 Dahl et al used indacaterol 150 mcg and formoterol 12 mcg for 1 year in COPD patient found indacaterol more efficacious.…”

“…10 Adverse effects are low in both as tiotropium and budesonide have low systemic bioavailability. 5 Outcome of this study showed improved FEV 1 lung functions with both the treatment but efficacy was more with indacaterol + tiotropium OD DPI compared to formoterol + budesonide BD DPI. These observations are in agreement with other studies.…”

A process for assessing the feasibility of a network meta-analysis: a case study of everolimus in combination with hormonal therapy versus chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer

“…Depending on how the research question was defined, it may be important to assess whether additional indirect evidence may be available by broadening the comparators of interest, although this consideration should be offset by the risk of introducing different populations in terms of the distribution of treatment effect modifiers. Similarly, it may be possible to integrate non-randomized evidence using more informative prior distributions [4] or individual patient data from RCTs [5,76-78] or non-randomized studies [79-81], which may influence the feasibility of an analysis. Furthermore, it may be possible to elicit bias distributions when there is insufficient data for a meta-regression where experts provide information regarding internal and external biases in order to adjust the study-specific treatment effect [82] as cited in [20].…”

Is ‘GOLD’ standard for the management of COPD in clinical practice?

“…Therefore, the FDA chose to approve only the 75-μg dose in the USA. Most studies comparing once-daily and twice-daily LABAs have reported drug efficacy to be equivalent [39], but other studies have reported that indacaterol may have greater improvement in QoL as measured by the SGRQ or decreased rescue inhaler use over a 12-week period [17, 40]. For most COPD patients, a 12-week period is very short compared with years of medication use.…”