Lee Tombs

The efficacy of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol in asthma is comparable with morning or evening dosing

AIM To investigate the effect of time of day of dosing (morning or evening) on lung function following administration of fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg. METHODS Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, three-way crossover study. Subjects with persistent asthma (N = 26) received FF/VI (morning or evening) or matching placebo once-daily for 14 (± 2 days) via dry powder inhaler (DPI). Weighted mean (0-24h) and pre-treatment FEV1 (morning and evening) were determined after the Day 14 evening dose, together with mean pre-treatment (morning and evening) peak expiratory flow (PEF) on Days 2-12. RESULTS FF/VI 100/25 administered morning or evening produced clinically significant increases in weighted mean FEV1: the differences [95% confidence interval (CI)] from placebo were 377 mL [293, 462] and 422 mL [337, 507], respectively; the difference between morning and evening dosing was -44 mL [-125, 36]. Day 14 pre-treatment morning FEV1 differences [95% CI] from placebo were 403 mL [272, 533] and 496 mL [369, 624] after morning and evening dosing, respectively; the morning:evening treatment difference was -94 mL [-221, 34]. Pre-treatment evening FEV1 differences [95% CI] from placebo were 275 mL [169, 380] and 309 mL [205, 413] after morning and evening dosing, respectively; the morning:evening treatment difference was -34 mL [-138, 70]. FF/VI (morning or evening) produced rapid increases in PEF with the full effect apparent after the first dose and maintained throughout the 14-day treatment period. CONCLUSION FF/VI 100/25 produces comparable improvements in lung function whether dosed in the morning or evening in subjects with persistent asthma.

Influence of Renal and Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Properties and Tolerability of Fluticasone Furoate and Vilanterol in Combination

BACKGROUND Renal and hepatic disease may lead to alterations in drug absorption, distribution, and elimination, and, therefore, the potential effect of renal and hepatic impairment should be investigated in drugs under development. OBJECTIVE To assess the effects of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and tolerability of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) administered in combination. METHODS Two open-label, parallel-group studies were conducted. Eligible study participants included adults with severe renal impairment (CrCl <30 mL/min) and those with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment (by Child-Pugh classification). Patients were matched with healthy subjects. Participants received 7 days of inhaled FF/VI 200/25 or 100/12.5 μg (severe hepatic impairment only) once daily in the morning. Lack of effect was defined as an upper 90% confidence limit of the C(max) and AUC geometric mean impaired:healthy ratios (GMRs) of <2. RESULTS Study participants included patients with severe renal impairment (n = 9) or with mild (n = 9), moderate (n = 9), or severe (n = 8) hepatic impairment, together with matched healthy subjects (n = 9 per study). Lack of effect of severe renal impairment was demonstrated with FF (GMRs [90% CI]: C(max), 0.96 [0.57-1.61]; AUC(0-24), 0.91 [0.60-1.38]) and VI (C(max), 0.70 [0.49-1.00]; AUC(0-24), 1.56 [1.27-1.92]). Day-7 dose-normalized FF AUC(0-24) was greater in the groups with mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment than in healthy subjects (GMRs [90% CI]: 1.34 [0.82-2.20], 1.83 [1.11-2.99], and 1.75 [1.05-2.91], respectively); lack of effect was not demonstrated. There was no effect of hepatic impairment on dose-normalized VI C(max) or AUC(0-24). Apart from reduced serum cortisol weighted mean (0-24 hour) in patients with moderate hepatic impairment (34% reduction [90% CI, 11%-51%] compared with healthy subjects), there was no evidence of a difference in heart rate, serum potassium, or 24-hour serum cortisol between patients with severe renal impairment of any hepatic impairment and healthy subjects. No safety concerns were identified in any of the groups with impairment or their matched healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS Severe renal impairment had no apparent clinically relevant effects on the pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic properties or tolerability of FF/VI. Hepatic impairment had no apparent effect on VI systemic exposure but increased FF exposure. Fluticasone furoate was associated with reduced serum cortisol in patients with moderate hepatic impairment. These data suggest that caution should be exercised when prescribing FF/VI in patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment due to a risk for unwanted systemic corticosteroid effects associated with increased FF systemic exposure. Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT01266941 and NCT01266980.

Prevention of clinically important deteriorations in COPD with umeclidinium/vilanterol

Background Minimizing the risk of disease progression and exacerbations is the key goal of COPD management, as these are well-established indicators of poor COPD prognosis. We developed a novel composite end point assessing three important aspects (lung function, health status, and exacerbations) of worsening in COPD. The objective was to determine whether dual bronchodilation with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) reduces clinically important deteriorations (CIDs) in COPD versus placebo or bronchodilator monotherapy. Methods This study is a post hoc analysis of two 24-week trials comparing UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg with UMEC 62.5 µg, VI 25 µg, or placebo (Study A; NCT01313650), or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg with tiotropium (TIO) 18 µg (Study B; NCT01777334) in patients with symptomatic COPD, without a history of frequent exacerbations. Deterioration was assessed as the time to a first CID, a composite measure defined as a decrease of ≥100 mL in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second or ≥4-unit increase in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire total score or an on-treatment moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation. Results In Study A, fewer patients experienced a first CID with UMEC/VI (44%) versus UMEC (50%), VI (56%), and placebo (75%). The risk of a first CID was reduced with UMEC/VI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.37 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.30, 0.45]), UMEC (HR: 0.46 [95% CI: 0.38, 0.56]), and VI (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.45, 0.66]; all P<0.001) versus placebo, and with UMEC/VI versus UMEC (HR: 0.80 [95% CI: 0.65, 0.97]; P<0.05) and versus VI (HR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.55, 0.81]; P<0.001). In Study B, fewer patients experienced a first CID with UMEC/VI (41%) versus TIO (59%). UMEC/VI reduced the risk of a first composite CID by 43% versus TIO (HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.47, 0.69]; P<0.001). Conclusion This exploratory analysis, using a new assessment of clinical deterioration in COPD, revealed that a majority of symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk experienced a deterioration during the 24-week study periods. UMEC/VI reduces the risk of a first CID versus placebo or bronchodilator monotherapy.

Tolerability of Fluticasone Furoate/Vilanterol Combination Therapy in Children Aged 5 to 11 Years With Persistent Asthma

BACKGROUND Asthma is a chronic disease afflicting millions of children worldwide. Short-acting β2-agonist reliever medications and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance therapies are effective treatments; however, many children remain uncontrolled with short-acting β2-agonist and ICS treatment, in which case guidelines recommend adding a long-acting β2-agonist. OBJECTIVE We sought to investigate the safety profile, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of the long-acting β2-agonist vilanterol (VI) combined with the ICS fluticasone furoate (FF) administered via the ELLIPTA dry powder inhaler (GlaxoSmithKline, London, United Kingdom) in children aged 5 to 11 years with persistent asthma. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, repeated-dose, 2-way crossover study, data from 8- to 11-year-old children with asthma were reviewed before those from 5- to 7-year-old children with asthma. Patients received once-daily FF/VI, 100/25 µg, or FF, 100 µg, in the morning for 14 days, followed by a ≥7-day washout period before switching to the other treatment for 14 days; the study duration was ≤11 weeks. Primary end points were adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory measurements, peak expiratory flow, maximum heart rate, blood pressure, and electrocardiographic parameters. Secondary end points comprised PK (AUC0-4, Cmax) and PD (serum potassium [0-4 hours], serum cortisol [0-12 hours], and glucose [0-4 hours]) parameters on day 14. RESULTS Twenty-six children were randomized (58% boys; mean age, 8.1 years). No clinically significant changes in the primary end points were observed. Five patients reported 4 and 2 AEs with FF/VI and FF therapy, respectively. After FF/VI or FF treatment, the geometric mean ratios (90% CIs) for FF AUC0-4 (1.02 [0.86-1.22]) and FF Cmax (0.98 [0.65-1.48]) were similar. For serum glucose (0-4 hours) concentration, a difference of 0.50 mM (95% CI, 0.19-0.82 mM) was observed for FF/VI versus FF; no differences were observed for other PD parameters. No AEs were judged to be serious or treatment related. The PK profile of FF did not seem to be altered by VI and was not affected by age or sex. The significance of an increased serum glucose level is difficult to judge as measurements were taken from nonfasted patients. Results can be compared only with active treatment, and the ability to generalize is limited by the small number of patients in this single-center study. CONCLUSIONS Once-daily repeated dosing of FF/VI, 100/25 µg, using the ELLIPTA dry powder inhaler was as well tolerated as FF, 100 µg, in this small, selected population of 5- to 11-year-old, mostly white/caucasian children with persistent asthma.

Effects of Moderate Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetic Properties and Tolerability of Umeclidinium and Vilanterol in Inhalational Umeclidinium Monotherapy and Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Combination Therapy: An Open-Label, Nonrandomized Study

BACKGROUND The long-acting muscarinic antagonist umeclidinium (UMEC) is approved as a monotherapy, and in combination with the long-acting β2-agonist vilanterol (VI), as a once-daily inhaled maintenance bronchodilator therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the US and EU; they are not indicated for the treatment of asthma. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that UMEC and VI are predominantly eliminated by the liver. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the study were to evaluate the effects of moderate hepatic impairment on the plasma and urinary pharmacokinetic properties of each drug, and on the tolerability of inhalational UMEC/VI 125/25 µg and UMEC 125 µg. METHODS This open-label, nonrandomized study was conducted in patients with moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh score, 7-9) and in healthy volunteers (control). Patients and volunteers were administered a single dose of UMEC/VI 125/25 µg, and, after a 7- to 14-day washout period, repeat-dose UMEC 125 µg once daily for 7 days. Primary end points were the plasma pharmacokinetic properties of single- and repeat-dose UMEC and VI. Secondary end points were the urinary pharmacokinetic properties of UMEC, and the tolerability of each treatment. RESULTS All 18 enrolled patients and volunteers (12 men, 6 women; mean age, 53.6 years) completed the study. Mean systemic exposures of UMEC and VI were similar or numerically lower in patients with moderate hepatic impairment compared with those in healthy volunteers, but the differences were not clinically significant. UMEC accumulations with 7-day dosing of UMEC were similar between patients with moderate hepatic impairment and healthy volunteers. UMEC/VI 125/25 µg and UMEC 125 µg were well-tolerated, with no safety concerns identified. CONCLUSIONS The administration of UMEC/VI 125/25 µg or UMEC 125 µg in patients with moderate hepatic impairment did not result in clinically relevant increases in UMEC or VI exposures compared with those in healthy volunteers. Based on these findings, no dose adjustment for UMEC/VI or UMEC is warranted in patients with moderate hepatic impairment.

Effect of severe renal impairment on umeclidinium and umeclidinium/vilanterol pharmacokinetics and safety: a single-blind, nonrandomized study

Background Umeclidinium and vilanterol, long-acting bronchodilators for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, are primarily eliminated via the hepatic route; however, severe renal impairment may adversely affect some elimination pathways other than the kidney. Objectives To evaluate the effect of severe renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of umeclidinium and umeclidinium/vilanterol. Methods Nine patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance <30 mL/min) and nine matched healthy volunteers received a single dose of umeclidinium 125 μg; and after a 7- to 14-day washout, a single dose of umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 μg. Results No clinically relevant increases in plasma umeclidinium or vilanterol systemic exposure (area under the curve or maximum observed plasma concentration) were observed following umeclidinium 125 μg or umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 μg administration. On average, the amount of umeclidinium excreted in 24 hours in urine (90% confidence interval) was 88% (81%–93%) and 89% (81%–93%) lower in patients with severe renal impairment compared with healthy volunteers following umeclidinium 125 μg and umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 μg administration, respectively. Treatments were well tolerated in both populations. Conclusion Umeclidinium 125 μg or umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 μg administration to patients with severe renal impairment did not demonstrate clinically relevant increases in systemic exposure compared with healthy volunteers. No dose adjustment for umeclidinium and umeclidinium/vilanterol is warranted in patients with severe renal impairment.

Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Vilanterol, a Novel Inhaled Long-Acting β-Agonist, in Children Aged 5–11 Years with Persistent Asthma: A Randomized Trial

This multi‐center, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, two‐way crossover study was designed to characterize the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profile of single and once‐daily repeat doses of vilanterol 25 µg in children aged 5–11 years. Twenty‐eight children with persistent asthma received a single inhaled dose of vilanterol 25 µg or placebo via the ELLIPTA™ dry powder inhaler (DPI) on Day 1, followed 7 days later by once‐daily treatment for 7 days. Nine (33%) subjects reported adverse events (AEs) with vilanterol 25 µg and 6 (23%) with placebo. No serious or drug‐related AEs were reported; 3 subjects experienced upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) with vilanterol 25 µg versus none with placebo. Similar pharmacokinetic profiles of vilanterol 25 µg were observed irrespective of age or gender. No clinically relevant changes in heart rate, Fridericias correction (QTcF), maximum glucose or minimum potassium parameters were observed during treatment with vilanterol 25 µg compared with placebo treatment. Vilanterol was well‐tolerated and no long‐acting ß2‐agonist (LABA)‐mediated AEs were observed. The pharmacokinetic profile of vilanterol 25 µg suggests exposure is similar regardless of age or gender in a pediatric population aged 5–11 years.

Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Fluticasone Furoate, a Novel Inhaled Corticosteroid, in Children Aged 5-11 Years With Persistent Asthma: A Randomized Trial

This multi‐center, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, two‐way crossover study characterized the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of fluticasone furoate (FF) in children (5–11 years) with persistent asthma. Twenty‐seven children received inhaled FF 100 µg or placebo via the ELLIPTA™ dry powder inhaler once daily for 14 days, with a ≥7 day washout period. Adverse events (AEs) were reported by eight (31%) and four (16%) subjects during FF 100 µg and placebo treatment, respectively. Headache was reported by three subjects during FF 100 µg treatment and by no subjects during placebo treatment, all other AEs were reported by only one subject on either treatment; there were no serious AEs. Following repeat dosing, the arithmetic mean (SD) FF Cmax was 26.71 pg/mL (9.16) at 31 minutes post‐dose. Arithmetic mean (SD) FF AUC(0–t) was 121.44 pg h/mL (83.04). Arithmetic mean values for weighted mean (SD) serum cortisol (0–12 hours) on day 14 were 56.49 (16.51) and 67.57 (20.66) ng/mL for FF 100 µg and placebo, respectively. No clinically significant effect of FF on serum cortisol levels was observed. FF was well tolerated. Pharmacokinetic profiles were well defined and did not differ between age groups in the study population, and no clinically significant suppression of serum cortisol was observed.

Effects of umeclidinium/vilanterol on exercise endurance in COPD: a randomised study

This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period crossover study assessed the effect of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) on exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using the endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT). Patients were randomised 1:1 to one of two treatment sequences: 1) UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg followed by placebo or 2) placebo followed by UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg. Each treatment was taken once daily for 12 weeks. The primary end-point was 3-h post-dose exercise endurance time (EET) at week 12. Secondary end-points included trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and 3-h post-dose functional residual capacity (FRC), both at week 12. COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score at week 12 was also assessed. UMEC/VI treatment did not result in a statistically significant improvement in EET change from baseline at week 12 versus placebo (p=0.790). However, improvements were observed in trough FEV1 (206 mL, 95% CI 167–246), 3-h post-dose FRC (−346 mL, 95% CI −487 to −204) and CAT score (−1.07 units, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.05) versus placebo at week 12. UMEC/VI did not result in improvements in EET at week 12 versus placebo, despite improvements in measures of lung function, hyperinflation and health status. Umeclidinium/vilanterol: no significant improvements in exercise endurance in COPD versus placebo after 12 weeks http://ow.ly/tc9i30gudVc

Relationship between exercise endurance and static hyperinflation in a post hoc analysis of two clinical trials in patients with COPD

Background Lung hyperinflation and exercise intolerance are hallmarks of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, their relationship remains uncertain. A combined analysis of two placebo-controlled, randomized studies examined the effects of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist umeclidinium (UMEC) and long-acting β2-agonist vilanterol (VI) separately and in combination on static hyperinflation, exercise endurance time (EET), and their relationship in patients with COPD. Methods Patients with moderate-to-severe stable COPD and resting functional residual capacity >120% predicted were randomized to UMEC/VI 62.5/25 μg, UMEC 62.5 μg, VI 25 μg, or placebo for 12 weeks. Inspiratory capacity (IC), residual volume (RV), total lung capacity (TLC), and EET in an endurance shuttle-walk test were measured. In this post hoc analysis, IC/TLC, RV/TLC, and IC were used as hyperinflation markers. Results After 12 weeks, UMEC/VI and UMEC and VI showed significant improvements in hyperinflation versus placebo when measured by absolute change from baseline in IC/TLC (trough and 3 hours postdose [P≤0.011]). UMEC/VI showed significant improvements versus UMEC and VI in absolute changes in IC/TLC (trough and 3 hours postdose [P≤0.001]). Statistical significance for comparisons with placebo and between treatments for absolute changes in IC and percentage changes in RV/TLC followed similar patterns to those for absolute changes in IC/TLC. UMEC/VI showed significant improvements in EET versus placebo at day 2 and week 12, measured as change from baseline in seconds (P≤0.002) and as a percentage from baseline (P≤0.005). There was a lack of evidence to suggest a correlation between improvements in static hyperinflation and EET at any time point. Conclusion Although the dual bronchodilator UMEC/VI demonstrated greater improvements in static hyperinflation markers than UMEC or VI and significant improvements in exercise endurance, no direct relationship was observed between static hyperinflation and exercise endurance.