32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safety and tolerability of once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 mcg and umeclidinium 125 mcg in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) umeclidinium (UMEC) and the combination of UMEC with the long-acting β 2-agonist (LABA) vilanterol (UMEC/VI) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the US and EU. They are not indicated for the treatment of asthma.

          Methods

          In this 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group safety study (GSK study DB2113359; NCT01316887), patients were randomized 2:2:1 to UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg, UMEC 125 mcg, or placebo. Study endpoints included adverse events (AEs), clinical chemistry and hematology parameters, vital signs, 12-lead, and 24-hour Holter electrocardiograms. COPD exacerbations and rescue medication use were assessed as safety parameters; lung function was also evaluated.

          Results

          The incidence of on-treatment AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), and drug-related AEs was similar between treatment groups (AEs: 52–58%; SAEs: 6–7%; drug-related AEs: 12–13%). Headache was the most common AE in each treatment group (8–11%). AEs associated with the LAMA and LABA pharmacologic classes occurred at a low incidence across treatment groups. No clinically meaningful effects on vital signs or laboratory assessments were reported for active treatments versus placebo. The incidences of atrial arrhythmias with UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg were similar to placebo; for UMEC 125 mcg, the incidences of ectopic supraventricular beats, sustained supraventricular tachycardia, and ectopic supraventricular rhythm were ≥2% greater than placebo. With active treatments, COPD exacerbations were fewer (13–15% of patients reporting ≥1 exacerbation) and on average less rescue medication was required (1.6–2.2 puffs/day) versus placebo (24% reporting ≥1 exacerbation, 2.6 puffs/day). Both active treatments improved lung function versus placebo.

          Conclusion

          UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg and UMEC 125 mcg were well tolerated over 12 months in patients with COPD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper.

          W MacNee, , B Celli (2004)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

            Currently available inhaled bronchodilators used as therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) necessitate multiple daily dosing. The present study evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium, a new once-daily anticholinergic in COPD. Patients with stable COPD (age 65.2+/-8.7 yrs (mean+/-SD), n=921) were enrolled in two identical randomized double-blind placebo-controlled 1-yr studies. Patients inhaled tiotropium 18 microg or placebo (mean screening forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 1.01 versus 0.99 L, 39.1 and 38.1% of the predicted value) once daily as a dry powder. The primary spirometric outcome was trough FEV1 (i.e. FEV1 prior to dosing). Changes in dyspnoea were measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index, and health status with the disease-specific St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the generic Short Form 36. Medication use and adverse events were recorded. Tiotropium provided significantly superior bronchodilation relative to placebo for trough FEV1 response (approximately 12% over baseline) (p<0.01) and mean response during the 3 h following dosing (approximately 22% over baseline) (p<0.001) over the 12-month period. Tiotropium recipients showed less dyspnoea (p<0.001), superior health status scores, and fewer COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations (p<0.05). Adverse events were comparable with placebo, except for dry mouth incidence (tiotropium 16.0% versus placebo 2.7%, p<0.05). Tiotropium is an effective, once-daily bronchodilator that reduces dyspnoea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation frequency and improves health status. This suggests that tiotropium will make an important contribution to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Dosing Frequency and Medication Adherence in Chronic Disease

              BACKGROUND: Prior research has shown a decrease in medication adherence as dosing frequency increases; however, meta-analyses have not been able to demonstrate a significant inverse relationship between dosing frequency and adherence when comparing twice-daily versus once-daily dosing. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of scheduled dosing frequency on medication adherence in patients with chronic diseases. METHODS: A systematic literature search of Medline and Embase from January 1986 to December 2011 and a hand search of references were performed to identify eligible studies. Randomized and observational studies were included if they utilized a prospective design, assessed adult patients with chronic diseases, evaluated scheduled oral medications taken 1 to 4 times daily, and measured medication adherence for at least 1 month using an electronic monitoring device. Manual searches of reference sections of identified studies and systematic reviews were also performed to find other potentially relevant articles. Standard definitions for medication taking, regimen, and timing adherence were used and evaluated. Studies were pooled using a multivariate linear mixed-model method to conduct meta-regression accounting for both random and fixed effects, weighted 
by the inverse of the variance of medication adherence. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies, comprising 65, 76, and 47 dosing frequency arms for the taking, regimen, and timing adherence endpoints were included. Unadjusted adherence estimates were highest when the least stringent definition, taking adherence, was used (range for dosing frequencies: 80.1%-93.0%) and lowest when the most stringent definition, timing adherence, was used (range for dosing frequencies: 18.8%-76.9%). In multivariate meta-regression analyses, the adjusted weighted mean percentage adherence rates for all regimens dosed more frequently than once per day were significantly lower compared with once-daily regimens (for 2-times, 3-times, and 4-times daily regimens, respectively: differences for taking adherence: –6.7%, –13.5%, and –19.2%; regimen adherence: –13.1%, –24.9%, and –23.1%; and timing adherence: –26.7%, –39.0%, and –54.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic diseases appear to be more adherent with once-daily compared with more frequently scheduled medication regimens. The use of more stringent definitions of adherence magnified these findings.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Respir Res
                Respir. Res
                Respiratory Research
                BioMed Central
                1465-9921
                1465-993X
                2014
                11 July 2014
                : 15
                : 1
                : 78
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
                [2 ]VA Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA
                [3 ]GlaxoSmithKline, Respiratory Medicines Development Centre, Stockley Park, Uxbridge, UK
                [4 ]Research & Development, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA
                Article
                1465-9921-15-78
                10.1186/1465-9921-15-78
                4113670
                25015176
                3df98157-499a-4177-ba65-cc3b71c4fc6b
                Copyright © 2014 Donohue et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 12 February 2014
                : 4 July 2014
                Categories
                Research

                Respiratory medicine
                bronchodilator,long-acting muscarinic antagonist,long-acting β2-adrenergic agonist,combination

                Comments

                Comment on this article