scholarly journals A randomised controlled trial of tiotropium in adolescents with severe symptomatic asthma

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 1601100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eckard Hamelmann ◽  
Jonathan A. Bernstein ◽  
Mark Vandewalker ◽  
Petra Moroni-Zentgraf ◽  
Daniela Verri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Asthma Control ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Symptomatic Asthma ◽  
Baseline Response ◽  
Randomised Controlled

We present results from the first phase III trial of once-daily tiotropium add-on to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) plus one or more controller therapies in adolescents with severe symptomatic asthma.In this double-blind, parallel-group trial (NCT01277523), 392 patients aged 12–17 years were randomised to receive once-daily tiotropium 5 µg or 2.5 µg, or placebo, as an add-on to ICS plus other controller therapies over 12 weeks. The primary and key secondary end-points were change from baseline (response) in peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) within 3 h post-dosing (FEV1(0–3h)) and trough FEV1, respectively, after 12 weeks of treatment.Tiotropium 5 µg provided numerical improvements in peak FEV1(0–3h) response, compared with placebo (90 mL; p=0.104), and significant improvements were observed with tiotropium 2.5 µg (111 mL; p=0.046). Numerical improvements in trough FEV1 response and asthma control were observed with both tiotropium doses, compared with placebo. The safety and tolerability of tiotropium were comparable with those of placebo.Once-daily tiotropium Respimat add-on to ICS plus one or more controller therapies in adolescents with severe symptomatic asthma was well tolerated. The primary end-point of efficacy was not met, although positive trends for improvements in lung function and asthma control were observed.

scholarly journals Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
François Maltais ◽  
Leif Bjermer ◽  
Edward M. Kerwin ◽  
Paul W. Jones ◽  
Michael L. Watkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Clinically Important Deterioration ◽  
Exacerbation Risk

Abstract Background Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Methods The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Week 24. The study was also powered for the secondary endpoint of Transition Dyspnoea Index at Week 24. Other efficacy assessments included spirometry, symptoms, heath status and short-term disease worsening measured by the composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration using three definitions. Results Change from baseline in trough FEV1 at Week 24 was 66 mL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 89) and 141 mL (95% CI: 118, 164) greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, respectively (both p < 0.001). Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated consistent improvements in Transition Dyspnoea Index versus both monotherapies at Week 24 (vs umeclidinium: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.68], p = 0.018; vs salmeterol: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.76], p = 0.004) and all other symptom measures at all time points. Regardless of the clinically important deterioration definition considered, umeclidinium/vilanterol significantly reduced the risk of a first clinically important deterioration compared with umeclidinium (by 16–25% [p < 0.01]) and salmeterol (by 26–41% [p < 0.001]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments. Conclusions Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group.

scholarly journals Tiotropium and olodaterol fixed-dose combinationversusmono-components in COPD (GOLD 2–4)

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 969-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Buhl ◽  
François Maltais ◽  
Roger Abrahams ◽  
Leif Bjermer ◽  
Eric Derom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Multicentre Phase ◽  
St George's Respiratory Questionnaire

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium+olodaterol fixed-dose combination (FDC) compared with the mono-components was evaluated in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in two replicate, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase III trials.Patients received tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 2.5/5 μg or 5/5 μg, tiotropium 2.5 μg or 5 μg, or olodaterol 5 μg delivered once-dailyviaRespimat inhaler over 52 weeks. Primary end points were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 3 h (AUC0–3) response, trough FEV1 response and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at 24 weeks.In total, 5162 patients (2624 in Study 1237.5 and 2538 in Study 1237.6) received treatment. Both FDCs significantly improved FEV1 AUC0–3 and trough FEV1 responseversusthe mono-components in both studies. Statistically significant improvements in SGRQ total scoreversusthe mono-components were only seen for tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 5/5 μg. Incidence of adverse events was comparable between the FDCs and the mono-components.These studies demonstrated significant improvements in lung function and health-related quality of life with once-daily tiotropium+olodaterol FDCversusmono-components over 1 year in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

scholarly journals Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial of omeprazole in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

Thorax ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 346-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prosenjit Dutta ◽  
Wendy Funston ◽  
Helen Mossop ◽  
Vicky Ryan ◽  
Rhys Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis ◽  
Pulmonary Fibrosis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Geometric Mean ◽  
Pilot Trial ◽  
Acid Reflux ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Cough Frequency ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundCough is a common, disabling symptom of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), which may be exacerbated by acid reflux. Inhibiting gastric acid secretion could potentially reduce cough. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of a larger, multicentre trial of omeprazole for cough in IPF, to assess safety and to quantify cough.MethodsSingle-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled pilot trial of the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole (20 mg twice daily for 3 months) in patients with IPF. Primary objectives were to assess feasibility and acceptability of trial procedures. The primary clinical outcome was cough frequency.ResultsForty-five participants were randomised (23 to omeprazole, 22 to placebo), with 40 (20 in each group) having cough monitoring before and after treatment. 280 patients were screened to yield these numbers, with barriers to discontinuing antacids the single biggest reason for non-recruitment. Recruitment averaged 1.5 participants per month. Geometric mean cough frequency at the end of treatment, adjusted for baseline, was 39.1% lower (95% CI 66.0% lower to 9.3% higher) in the omeprazole group compared with placebo. Omeprazole was well tolerated and adverse event profiles were similar in both groups, although there was a small excess of lower respiratory tract infection and a small fall in forced expiratory volume and forced vital capacity associated with omeprazole.ConclusionsA large randomised controlled trial of PPIs for cough in IPF appears feasible and justified but should address barriers to randomisation and incorporate safety assessments in relation to respiratory infection and changes in lung function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document