Peter D'Andrea

Analysis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations with the dual bronchodilator QVA149 compared with glycopyrronium and tiotropium (SPARK): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study

BACKGROUND We evaluated the effect of dual, longacting inhaled bronchodilator treatment on exacerbations in patients with severe and very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS In this parallel-group study, 2224 patients (aged ≥40 years, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stages III-IV, and one or more moderate COPD exacerbation in the past year) were randomly assigned (1:1:1; via interactive voice response or web system; stratified for smoking status) to once-daily QVA149 (fixed-dose combination of indacaterol 110 μg and glycopyrronium 50 μg), glycopyrronium 50 μg, or tiotropium 18 μg for 64 weeks. Assignment to QVA149 and glycopyrronium was double-blind; tiotropium was open-label. Efficacy was assessed in all patients randomly assigned to treatment groups who received at least one dose of study drug; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose whether or not they were assigned to a group. The primary objective was to show superiority of QVA149 versus glycopyrronium for rate of moderate to severe COPD exacerbations (defined by worsening symptoms and categorised by treatment requirements) during treatment. This completed trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01120691. FINDINGS Between April 27, 2010, and July 11, 2012, 741 patients were randomly assigned to receive QVA149, 741 to receive glycopyrronium, and 742 to receive tiotropium (729, 739, and 737 patients, respectively, analysed for efficacy). QVA149 significantly reduced the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations versus glycopyrronium by 12% (annualised rate of exacerbations 0·84 [95% CI 0·75-0·94] vs 0·95 [0·85-1·06]; rate ratio 0·88, 95% CI 0·77-0·99, p=0·038). Adverse events (including exacerbations) were reported for 678 (93%) of 729 patients on QVA149, 694 (94%) of 740 on glycopyrronium, and 686 (93%) of 737 on tiotropium. Incidence of serious adverse events was similar between groups (167 [23%] patients on QVA149, 179 [24%] on glycopyrronium, and 165 [22%] on tiotropium); COPD worsening was the most frequent serious adverse event (107 [15%] patients on QVA149, 116 [16%] on glycopyrronium, 87 [12%] on tiotropium). INTERPRETATIONS The dual bronchodilator QVA149 was superior in preventing moderate to severe COPD exacerbations compared with the single longacting antimuscarinic bronchodilator glycopyrronium, with concomitant improvements in lung function and health status. These results indicate the potential of dual bronchodilation as a treatment option for patients with severe and very severe COPD. FUNDING Novartis Pharma AG.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily QVA149 compared with twice-daily salmeterol–fluticasone in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ILLUMINATE): a randomised, double-blind, parallel group study

BACKGROUND QVA149 is an inhaled fixed-dose combination therapy under development for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It combines indacaterol (a longacting β2-agonist) with glycopyrronium (a longacting muscarinic antagonist) as a dual bronchodilator. We aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of QVA149 versus salmeterol-fluticasone (SFC) over 26 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. METHODS In this multicentre double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, 523 patients (age 40 years or older, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stages II-III, without exacerbations in the previous year) were randomly assigned (1:1; via automated, interactive response technology and stratified for smoking status) to once-daily QVA149 110/50 μg or twice-daily SFC 50/500 μg for 26 weeks. Efficacy was assessed in the full analysis set (randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug); safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate the superiority of QVA149 compared with SFC for the standardised area under the curve from 0 to 12 h post dose for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 AUC0-12h) after 26 weeks of treatment. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT01315249. FINDINGS Between March 25, 2011, and March 12, 2012, 259 patients were randomly assigned to receive QVA149 and 264 to receive SFC. At week 26, FEV1 AUC0-12h was significantly higher with QVA149 than with SFC (treatment difference 0·138 L; 95% CI 0·100-0·176; p<0·0001). Overall incidence of adverse events (including COPD exacerbations) was 55·4% (143 of 258) for the QVA149 group and 60·2% (159 of 264) for the SFC group. Incidence of serious adverse events was similar between treatment groups (QVA149, 13 of 258 [5·0%]; SFC 14 of 264 [5·3%]); COPD worsening was the most frequent serious adverse event (one of 13 [0·4%] and three of 14 [1·1%], respectively). INTERPRETATION Once-daily QVA149 provides significant, sustained, and clinically meaningful improvements in lung function versus twice-daily SFC, with significant symptomatic benefit. These results indicate the potential of dual bronchodilation as a treatment option for non-exacerbating symptomatic COPD patients. FUNDING Novartis Pharma AG.

Effect of QVA149 on lung volumes and exercise tolerance in COPD patients: The BRIGHT study

INTRODUCTION QVA149 is a novel, inhaled, once-daily dual bronchodilator containing a fixed-dose combination of the long-acting β2-agonist indacaterol and the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium (NVA237), for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the effects of QVA149 on exercise tolerance, hyperinflation, lung function and lung volumes versus placebo and tiotropium. METHODS Patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomized to QVA149 110/50 μg, placebo or tiotropium 18 μg once daily in a blinded, 3-period crossover study for 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was exercise endurance time at Day 21 for QVA149 versus placebo. RESULTS Eighty-five patients were randomized; 86% completed the study. QVA149 significantly improved exercise endurance time at Day 21 compared with placebo (least squares mean treatment difference 60 s [p = 0.006]). No significant improvements in exercise endurance time at Day 21 between QVA149 and tiotropium were found. Dynamic inspiratory capacity (IC) at exercise isotime, trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, residual volume and functional residual capacity showed significant improvements with QVA149 from Day 1 of treatment that were maintained throughout the study. The safety profiles were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, once-daily QVA149 significantly improved exercise endurance time compared with placebo which was associated with sustained reductions of lung hyperinflation as indicated by significant improvement in IC at rest and during exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01294787. TAKE HOME MESSAGE Dual bronchodilation with QVA149 decreases lung hyperinflation and improves exercise tolerance and lung function in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD.

Safety of inhaled glycopyrronium in patients with COPD: a comprehensive analysis of clinical studies and post-marketing data

Background Chronic use of inhaled anticholinergics by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has raised long-term safety concerns, particularly cardiovascular. Glycopyrronium is a once-daily anticholinergic with greater receptor selectivity than previously available agents. Methods We assessed the safety of inhaled glycopyrronium using data pooled from two analysis sets, involving six clinical studies and over 4,000 patients with COPD who received one of the following treatments: glycopyrronium 50μg, placebo (both delivered via the Breezhaler® device), or tiotropium 18 μg (delivered via the HandiHaler® device). Data were pooled from studies that varied in their duration and severity of COPD of the patients (ie, ≤12 weeks duration with patients having moderate or severe COPD; and >1 year duration with patients having severe and very severe COPD). Safety comparisons were made for glycopyrronium vs tiotropium or placebo. Poisson regression was used to assess the relative risk for either active drug or placebo (and between drugs where placebo was not available) for assessing the incidence of safety events. During post-marketing surveillance (PMS), safety was assessed by obtaining reports from various sources, and disproportionality scores were computed using EMPIRICA™. In particular, the cardiac safety of glycopyrronium during the post-marketing phase was evaluated. Results The overall incidence of adverse events and deaths was similar across groups, while the incidence of serious adverse events was numerically higher in placebo. Furthermore, glycopyrronium did not result in an increased risk of cerebro-cardiovascular events vs placebo. There were no new safety reports during the PMS phase that suggested an increased risk compared to results from the clinical studies. Moreover, the cardiac safety of glycopyrronium during the PMS phase was also consistent with the clinical data. Conclusion The overall safety profile of glycopyrronium was similar to its comparators indicating no increase in the overall risk for any of the investigated safety end points.

Addressing unmet needs in the treatment of COPD.

The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is considerable, both socially and economically. Central to COPD management is the use of long-acting bronchodilators, which provide patients with optimal bronchodilation and improvements in symptoms. The once-daily, long-acting &bgr;2-agonist indacaterol, the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium, and the indacaterol/glycopyrronium fixed-dose combination QVA149 have all been shown to significantly improve lung function and patient-reported outcomes. The ability to take medication appropriately is important. Easy to use, low resistance devices may help patients take their medication and achieve good drug deposition. There is a need to optimise COPD management by treating the right patients with the right therapy at the right time during the course of their disease. Herein, we present a view on the current COPD management landscape and current unmet needs, and look to the future of COPD treatment and how patient care can be optimised.

Correlations between FEV1 and patient-reported outcomes: A pooled analysis of 23 clinical trials in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND In clinical trials of inhaled bronchodilators, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines recommend that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are assessed alongside lung function. How these endpoints are related is unclear. METHODS Pooled longitudinal data from 23 randomised controlled COPD studies were analyzed (N = 23,213). Treatments included long-acting β2 agonists, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABAs or LAMAs) and the LABA/LAMA combination QVA149. Outcome measures were Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) and St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores, COPD exacerbation frequency and rescue medication use. Relationships between changes in trough forced expiratory volume in one second (ΔFEV1) and outcomes following treatment were assessed using correlations of data summaries and model-based analysis: generalized linear mixed-effect regression modelling to determine if ΔFEV1 could predict patient outcomes with different treatments. RESULTS Mean age was 64 years, 73% were male, and most had moderate (45%) or severe (52%) disease. Statistically significant correlations were observed between ΔFEV1 and each outcome measure (exacerbations Rs = 0.05; rescue medication, SGRQ, TDI, r = 0.11-0.16; all p < .001). Patients with greater improvements in trough FEV1 had on average better SGRQ and TDI scores, fewer exacerbations, and used less rescue medication. For SGRQ and TDI scores, minimal clinically important differences were observed over the range of pooled ΔFEV1 values. Model-based predictions confirmed the treatment effect was partly explained by changes in FEV1 from baseline with improvements in PROs observed across all treatments when trough FEV1 improved. Across all endpoints active treatments were better than placebo (p < .0001), and LABA/LAMA treatment resulted in numerically better treatment outcomes than either monocomponent. CONCLUSIONS These data suggest that FEV1 improvements post-bronchodilation correlate with PRO improvements. Further improvements in patient outcomes may be expected by maximizing lung function improvements. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registration details for the 23 randomised controlled studies used in this pooled analysis are supplied in Additional File 4.

P233 Efficacy and safety of once-daily glycopyrronium compared with blinded tiotropium in patients with COPD: the GLOW5 study

Background Glycopyrronium, a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), has demonstrated a similar efficacy and safety profile to open-label tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).1 The GLOW5 study compared the efficacy and safety of glycopyrronium with blinded tiotropium. Methods In this multicentre, 12-week, blinded study, patients ≥ 40 years with moderate-to-severe COPD (post-bronchodilator FEV1 ≥ 30% and < 80% of the predicted normal, post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC < 0.70) and a smoking history of ≥10 pack-years were randomised to glycopyrronium 50μg (via Breezhaler® device) or tiotropium 18μg (via HandiHaler® device). The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of glycopyrronium versus tiotropium for trough FEV1 at Week 12 (non-inferiority margin: –50 mL). Other endpoints included FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 4 hours (AUC0–4hr) on Day 1, Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI), St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), rescue medication use, exacerbation rate, safety and tolerability. Results Of the 657 patients randomised, (glycopyrronium [n = 327]; tiotropium [n = 330]; mean age: 63.5 years, mean post-bronchodilator FEV1: 53.5% predicted), 95.9% completed the study. Glycopyrronium demonstrated non-inferiority to tiotropium for trough FEV1 at Week 12 (Least Squares Mean [LSM] = 1.41L for both the groups; 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.032, 0.031L). Glycopyrronium had a rapid onset of bronchodilation in the morning as demonstrated by a higher FEV1 AUC0–4hr on Day 1 compared to tiotropium (LSM treatment difference [Td] = 58mL; p < 0.001). At Week 12, TDI total score (Td = –0.188; p = 0.385), SGRQ total score (Td = 0.65; p = 0.488) and percentage of days with no rescue medication use (Td = –1.5; p = 0.528) were comparable between the groups. No significant treatment difference was observed with respect to rate of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations per year (glycopyrronium 0.38 versus tiotropium 0.35 [rate ratio = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.62, 1.93]; p = 0.754). Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar in the glycopyrronium (40.4%) and tiotropium (40.6%) groups. Conclusion Glycopyrronium and blinded tiotropium showed similar improvements in lung function, dyspnoea, health status, exacerbation rate and rescue medication use, with a similar safety and tolerability profile. Onset of bronchodilation with glycopyrronium was significantly more rapid following the first dose. Reference Kerwin, E. et al. Eur Resp J 2012;40:1106–1114.

QVA149 versus glycopyrronium for COPD – Authors' reply

www.thelancet.com/respiratory Vol 1 July 2013 e23 Second, the authors underscore the importance of early detection and therapy of all events and exacerbations not treated might have a negative eff ect on the patients’ quality of life. However, the careful methodology used to detect all COPD exacerbations (an e-diary) failed to demonstrate an impact on quality of life. Indeed, percentages of patients achieving the minimum clinically signifi cant diff erence (4 points on St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire) at the end of the study (at week 64) were not statistically diff erent between the three groups. Moreover, COPD worsening was similar between groups (15% with QVA149, 16% with glycopyrronium, and 12% with tiotropium). Likewise, the mortality rate was 3% in each group. The absence of statistical diff erence for these three secondary outcomes, which are essential for COPD patients, raises additional doubts about the effi cacy of the new treatment compared to both other therapeutic options.