Esther Garcia Gil

Efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in COPD patients: the ATTAIN study

The efficacy and safety of two doses of aclidinium bromide were evaluated in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this 24-week, double-blind trial, patients were randomised to twice-daily aclidinium (200 μg or 400 μg) or placebo. The primary efficacy end-point was change in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at week 24. Other end-points included peak FEV1, health status (St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire; SGRQ) and dyspnoea (Transitional Dyspnoea Index; TDI). Overall, 828 patients were randomised. At week 24, significant improvements from baseline were observed with aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg versus placebo for trough FEV1 (99 and 128 mL; both p<0.0001) and peak FEV1 (185 and 209 mL; both p<0.0001). Peak FEV1 improvements on day 1 were comparable with week 24. Aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg produced significant improvements over placebo in baseline-adjusted mean SGRQ total score (-3.8 and -4.6 units; p<0.001 and p<0.0001) and TDI focal score (0.6 and 1.0 units; p<0.05 and p<0.001) at week 24. With both aclidinium doses, the incidence of anticholinergic adverse events was low, and similar to placebo. Twice-daily aclidinium significantly improved bronchodilation, health status and dyspnoea, and was well tolerated in patients with COPD.

Efficacy and Safety of a 12-week Treatment with Twice-daily Aclidinium Bromide in COPD Patients (ACCORD COPD I)

Abstract Background: This Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg versus placebo in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD. Methods: In this 12-week, double-blind, multicenter trial, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to inhaled twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg, aclidinium 400 μg, or placebo. Primary and secondary endpoints were changes from baseline in trough FEV1 and peak FEV1 at Week 12, respectively. Health status (St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]), COPD symptoms (Transitional Dyspnea Index [TDI], night and early morning symptoms), and safety were also assessed. Results: A total of 561 patients (mean age, 64 ± 9 years) with a mean baseline FEV1 of 1.36 ± 0.54 L (47.2% of predicted value) were randomized. At Week 12, aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg showed significant improvements from baseline in mean (95% CI) trough FEV1 compared with placebo by 86 (45, 127) mL and 124 (83,164) mL, respectively, and in peak FEV1 by 146 (101, 190) mL and 192 (148, 236) mL, respectively (p ≤ 0.0001 for all). Both aclidinium doses also provided significant improvements in SGRQ, TDI and almost all COPD symptom scores compared with placebo (p < 0.05 for all). Incidences of adverse events (AEs) were similar across treatment groups. The incidence of anticholinergic AEs was low and similar across groups (dry mouth: 0.5%–1.6%; constipation: 0%-1.1%). Conclusions: Treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD patients with twice-daily aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg was associated with significant improvements in bronchodilation, health status, and COPD symptoms. Both doses were well tolerated and had safety profiles similar to placebo. Trial Registration: This ACCORD I study (AClidinium in Chronic Obstructive Respiratory Disease I) was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00891462) as “Efficacy and Safety of Aclidinium Bromide for Treatment of Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)”.

Efficacy of aclidinium bromide 400 μg twice daily compared with placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD.

BACKGROUND The efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide bid, a novel, long-acting, muscarinic antagonist, was assessed in patients with moderate to severe COPD. METHODS In this phase IIa randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover trial, patients with moderate to severe COPD received aclidinium 400 μg bid, tiotropium 8 μg once daily, and placebo for 15 days, with a 9- to 15-day washout between treatment periods. Treatments were administered through the Genuair or HandiHaler dry powder inhalers. The primary end point was mean change from baseline in FEV(1) AUC(0-12/12h) (area under the curve where the numbers represent the time period for which data were collected divided by the number of hours over which the data are averaged [eg, 0-12 h postdose divided by 12 h]) on day 15. Secondary end points were changes from baseline in FEV(1) AUC(12-24/12h), FEV(1) AUC(0-24/24h), morning predose FEV(1), peak FEV(1), and COPD symptom scores. RESULTS Thirty patients with COPD were randomized, and 27 completed the study. Mean change from baseline in FEV(1) AUC(0-12/12h) at day 15 was significantly greater for aclidinium and tiotropium over placebo (P < .0001). Mean changes from baseline in FEV(1) AUC(12-24/12h), FEV(1) AUC(0-24/24h), morning predose FEV(1), and peak FEV(1) at day 15 were significantly greater for aclidinium and tiotropium over placebo (P < .0001 for all except P < .001 for FEV(1) AUC(12-24/12h) tiotropium vs placebo). Improvements were significantly greater with aclidinium vs tiotropium on day 1 for all of the normalized AUC values of FEV(1) as well as on day 15 for FEV(1) AUC(12-24/12h) (P < .05 for all). COPD symptoms were significantly improved from baseline with aclidinium vs placebo (P < .05) but not with tiotropium. CONCLUSIONS In patients with COPD, aclidinium 400 μg bid compared with placebo provided clinically meaningful improvements in 24-h bronchodilation that generally were comparable to tiotropium 18 μg daily but with significant differences in favor of aclidinium observed in the average nighttime period. Larger studies with longer treatment duration are ongoing to confirm the efficacy of aclidinium 400 μg bid on bronchodilation and COPD symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRY ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00868231; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Efficacy and Safety of Aclidinium Bromide Compared with Placebo and Tiotropium in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Results from a 6-week, Randomized, Controlled Phase Iiib Study

Abstract Background: This randomized, double-blind, Phase IIIb study evaluated the 24-hour bronchodilatory efficacy of aclidinium bromide versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: Patients received aclidinium 400 μg twice daily (morning and evening), tiotropium 18 μg once daily (morning), or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second area under the curve for the 24-hour period post-morning dose (FEV1 AUC0–24) at week 6. Secondary and additional endpoints included FEV1 AUC12–24, COPD symptoms (EXAcerbations of chronic pulmonary disease Tool-Respiratory Symptoms [E-RS] total score and additional symptoms questionnaire), and safety. Results: Overall, 414 patients were randomized and treated (FEV1 1.63 L [55.8% predicted]). Compared with placebo, FEV1 AUC0–24 and FEV1 AUC12–24 were significantly increased from baseline with aclidinium (∆ = 150 mL and 160 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001) and tiotropium (∆ = 140 mL and 123 mL, respectively; p < 0.0001) at week 6. Significant improvements in E-RS total scores over 6 weeks were numerically greater with aclidinium (p < 0.0001) than tiotropium (p < 0.05) versus placebo. Only aclidinium significantly reduced the severity of early-morning cough, wheeze, shortness of breath, and phlegm, and of nighttime symptoms versus placebo (p < 0.05). Adverse-event (AE) incidence (28%) was similar between treatments. Few anticholinergic AEs (<1.5%) or serious AEs (<3%) occurred in any group. Conclusions: Aclidinium provided significant 24-hour bronchodilation versus placebo from day 1 with comparable efficacy to tiotropium after 6 weeks. Improvements in COPD symptoms were consistently numerically greater with aclidinium versus tiotropium. Aclidinium was generally well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily aclidinium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BackgroundThe long-term efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide, a novel, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, were investigated in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).MethodsIn two double-blind, 52-week studies, ACCLAIM/COPD I (n = 843) and II (n = 804), patients were randomised to inhaled aclidinium 200 μg or placebo once-daily. Patients were required to have a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity ratio of ≤70% and FEV1 <80% of the predicted value. The primary endpoint was trough FEV1 at 12 and 28 weeks. Secondary endpoints were health status measured by St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation.ResultsAt 12 and 28 weeks, aclidinium improved trough FEV1 versus placebo in ACCLAIM/COPD I (by 61 and 67 mL; both p < 0.001) and ACCLAIM/COPD II (by 63 and 59 mL; both p < 0.001). More patients had a SGRQ improvement ≥4 units at 52 weeks with aclidinium versus placebo in ACCLAIM/COPD I (48.1% versus 39.5%; p = 0.025) and ACCLAIM/COPD II (39.0% versus 32.8%; p = 0.074). The time to first exacerbation was significantly delayed by aclidinium in ACCLAIM/COPD II (hazard ratio [HR] 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 0.92; p = 0.01), but not ACCLAIM/COPD I (HR 1.0; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.33; p = 0.9). Adverse events were minor in both studies.ConclusionAclidinium is effective and well tolerated in patients with moderate to severe COPD.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00363896 (ACCLAIM/COPD I) and NCT00358436 (ACCLAIM/COPD II).

Onset of Effect of Aclidinium, a Novel, Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist, in Patients with COPD

ABSTRACT Aclidinium bromide is a novel, long-acting, inhaled muscarinic antagonist in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this study was to assess the rate of onset of bronchodilation with aclidinium compared with placebo and tiotropium. This was a double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, crossover study in COPD patients with a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥30% and <60% predicted. On study days, patients received single doses of aclidinium 200 μg, tiotropium 18 μg, or placebo. Serial spirometry was conducted from 10 minutes to 3 hours post-dose. The primary variable was the percentage of patients with an increase in FEV1 of ≥10% above baseline at 30 minutes post-dose. Other assessments included change from baseline in FEV1 and dyspnea over 3 hours post-dose. A total of 115 patients entered the study. Significantly more patients had an increase in FEV1 of ≥10% above baseline at 30 minutes with aclidinium and tiotropium versus placebo (49.5% and 51.8% versus 13.8%; p < 0.0001). At 30 minutes, the relative increase from baseline in FEV1 was significantly higher for aclidinium and tiotropium versus placebo (12% and 11% versus 3%; p < 0.0001). Aclidinium and tiotropium also significantly increased FEV1 (p < 0.01) and improved the perception of dyspnea compared with placebo at all measured time points from 10 minutes to 3 hours post-dose. In conclusion, aclidinium provided effective bronchodilation, similar to that seen with tiotropium, with significant improvements compared with placebo observed from 10 minutes post-dose.

Characterisation and impact of reported and unreported exacerbations: results from ATTAIN

The frequency and impact of exacerbations identified using healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) or the EXAcerbations of Chronic pulmonary disease Tool (EXACT) were compared prospectively in a 24-week, phase III trial (ATTAIN). Patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease received twice-daily aclidinium 200 &mgr;g, aclidinium 400 &mgr;g or placebo. All HCRU events were reported to physicians. “EXACT-identified” events were categorised as “EXACT-reported” (detected by EXACT and reported to the physician) and “EXACT-unreported” (detected but not reported). Health status was measured using the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Annualised EXACT-identified event rates were higher in all study arms (placebo 1.39, aclidinium 200 &mgr;g 1.00 and aclidinium 400 &mgr;g 0.98 per patient per year) versus HCRU (placebo 0.60, aclidinium 200 &mgr;g 0.43 and aclidinium 400 &mgr;g 0.40 per patient per year). Concordance between methods was low (kappa 0.16). Aclidinium reduced EXACT-identified events (rate ratio versus placebo: aclidinium 200 &mgr;g 0.72 and aclidinium 400 &mgr;g 0.71; both p<0.05); HCRU events were similarly reduced. At week 24, SGRQ scores improved (-6.6 versus baseline) in patients with no event during weeks 1–12; improvements were significantly smaller in patients with HCRU events (-3.4; p=0.036) or EXACT-unreported events (-3.0; p=0.002). Unreported events were more frequent than reported events. Both had similar negative impact on health status. Aclidinium reduced the frequency of both types of event. There are twice as many unreported exacerbation events as reported events; both have similar impact on health status http://ow.ly/AwJVf

Long-term safety and efficacy of twice-daily aclidinium bromide in patients with COPD

BACKGROUND Aclidinium is a novel, long-acting muscarinic antagonist indicated for maintenance treatment of COPD. METHODS In this 52-week, parallel-group, double-blind study, patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized (1:1) to receive aclidinium twice-daily (BID) 200 μg or 400 μg via a novel, dry powder inhaler (Genuair(®)/Pressair(®)) [Registered trademarks of Almirall, SA, Barcelona, Spain for use within the European Union, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland as Genuair(®) and within the United States as Pressair(®)]. Safety, the primary objective, was assessed via adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and 12-lead electrocardiograms. Efficacy was evaluated using spirometry, SGRQ, and rescue medication use. RESULTS A total of 605 patients were randomized in the study. The percentage of patients reporting any treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) was comparable between groups; most TEAEs were mild or moderate. Anticholinergic TEAEs were reported by low percentages of patients in either treatment group (dry mouth: 200 μg, 1.3%; 400 μg, 2.7%; constipation: 200 μg, 2.9%; 400 μg, 1.7%). Cardiac TEAEs were also reported by a low percentage of patients (<2% for any event in any group) and did not appear to be dose dependent. There were no clinically relevant abnormalities in other safety outcomes. Both aclidinium 200 μg and 400 μg resulted in improvements from baseline to Week 52 in FEV1, with numerically greater increases observed with the higher dose. Clinically important improvements in SGRQ scores and a reduction in rescue medication use were observed throughout the study for both doses. CONCLUSIONS Long-term treatment with aclidinium 200 μg or 400 μg BID was well tolerated, with sustained benefits in lung function and health status in patients with COPD throughout the 1-year study.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of aclidinium bromide, a muscarinic antagonist, in adults with normal or impaired renal function: A phase I, open-label, single-dose clinical trial

BACKGROUND Aclidinium bromide is an inhaled, long-acting muscarinic antagonist currently in development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Renal impairment may affect drug clearance. OBJECTIVE This study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, safety, and tolerability of aclidinium bromide and its metabolites in patients with normal and impaired renal function to determine whether dosing adjustments are required when renal dysfunction is present. METHODS This was a Phase I, open-label, single-center, single-dose clinical trial conducted in Munich, Germany. Adults with varying degrees of renal function were assigned to 4 groups (n = 6 for each) based on creatinine clearance, including normal renal function (>80 mL/ min), mild renal insufficiency (>50-≤80 mL/min), moderate renal insufficiency (>30-≤50 mL/min), and severe renal insufficiency (<30 mL/min). Single doses of aclidinium bromide 400 μg were administered using a multidose dry powder inhaler. Blood and urine samples were obtained before dosing and at various time points up to 48 hours after dosing to analyze the PK parameters of aclidinium bromide and its metabolites. Plasma PK Parameters were AUC₀₋(t), MJC₀₋(∞) C(max), T(max), t(½) CL/F and apparent volume of distribution during the terminal phase Xz; urinary parameters were the amount of aclidinium or acid or alcohol metabolite excreted in urine, the percentage of the dose excreted in urine (fe), and renal clearance (CL(R)). Tolerability was assessed using physical examination, vital signs, 12-lead ECG recordings, laboratory tests, and adverse-event (AE) reports. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare the median PK values between the normal and impaired renal function groups. Pearson correlation coefficients and linear regression models were used to analyze the relationship between creatinine clearance and AUC₀₋(∞) and between creatinine clearance and CL(R) for aclidinium and its metabolites. RESULTS A total of 16 men and 8 women were included in the study. All participants were white; mean (SD) age was 55 (10.7) years and weight was 70.8 (9.2) kg. Aclidinium Cmax was observed in plasma by 5 minutes after dosing (ie, median Tmax) and did not differ significantly among the renal function groups. Plasma concentrations of aclidinium declined after reaching Cmax, with median t(½) values ranging from 2.07 to 4.18 hours across all renal function groups. Most of the individual t(½) values were between 1.5 and 3.5 hours, regardless of the degree of renal insufficiency. No significant relationship between AUC₀₋(∞)) and creatinine clearance was observed (Pearson correlation coefficient = -0.0446; P = NS). Urinary excretion of aclidinium was very low, with a mean 0.090% (median 0.078%) of the dose recovered from the urine in participants with normal renal function. Eight AEs were reported in 7 participants after drug administration; all were mild to moderate in severity and resolved spontaneously. There were no serious drug-related AEs and no deaths. CONCLUSIONS The plasma PK parameters of aclidinium bromide were not significantly altered after a single inhaled dose of aclidinium bromide 400 μg in this small group of patients with various degrees of impaired renal function. The very low urinary excretion of aclidinium in all renal function groups indicates that renal function plays a minor role in aclidinium plasma clearance. Aclidinium appeared well tolerated in the population studied. These results suggest that aclidinium dose adjustment on the basis of renal function may not be necessary.

Aclidinium Bromide, a Long-Acting Antimuscarinic, Does Not Affect QT Interval in Healthy Subjects

In this phase I trial, the effect of aclidinium, a novel, inhaled long‐acting muscarinic antagonist, on QT interval was evaluated, and its cardiovascular safety was assessed in 272 healthy subjects. Aclidinium 200 μg, aclidinium 800 μg, matching placebo, or open‐label moxifloxacin 400 mg was administered daily for 3 days. The primary outcome was mean change in individual heart rate‐corrected QT interval (QTcI). Secondary measures included Bazettcorrected QT interval (QTcB), Fridericia‐corrected (QTcF) intervals, 12‐lead electrocardiogram (ECG) readings, and 24‐hour 12‐lead Holter ECG parameters. Adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory and pharmacokinetic parameters were also assessed. Maximum mean QTcI change from time‐matched baseline on day 3 was −1.0 milliseconds at 2 hours for aclidinium 200 μg, −1.8 milliseconds at 5 minutes for 800 μg, +11.0 milliseconds at 4 hours for moxifloxacin, and −1.2 milliseconds at 23.5 hours for placebo. Aclidinium had no significant effects on secondary ECG measures. Aclidinium plasma concentrations were generally below the lower limit of quantitation (0.05 ng/mL) after 200 μg and were detected only up to 1 hour after the 800‐μg dose in the majority of cases. It is concluded that aclidinium bromide, at doses up to 800 μg, has a favorable cardiovascular safety profile with no effect on QT interval.