Petra Moroni-Zentgraf

Tiotropium or salmeterol as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids for patients with moderate symptomatic asthma: two replicate, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, active-comparator, randomised trials

BACKGROUND In patients with severe asthma, tiotropium improves lung function and exacerbation risk when added to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2 agonists. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of tiotropium in patients with moderate asthma who were symptomatic despite treatment with medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS We did two 24-week, replicate, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, active-comparator trials at 233 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with symptomatic asthma and a pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 60-90% predicted despite use of medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids, and had never smoked or were ex-smokers for 1 year or more with 10 pack-years or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with computer-generated pseudorandom numbers, to receive once-daily tiotropium 5 μg or 2·5 μg, twice-daily salmeterol 50 μg, or placebo, while maintaining inhaled corticosteroids. Patients and study investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Prespecified co-primary endpoints, assessed at week 24 in the full analysis set, were peak FEV1 response, measured within the first 3 h after evening dosing; trough FEV1 response; and responder rate assessed according to the seven-question Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7). These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01172808 and NCT01172821. FINDINGS Between Aug 24, 2010, and Nov 13, 2012, we randomly assigned 2103 patients to the tiotropium 5 μg group (n=519), the tiotropium 2·5 μg group (n=520), the salmeterol group (n=541), or the placebo group (n=523); 1972 (94%) patients completed the study. Peak and trough FEV1 responses were significantly greater with tiotropium and salmeterol than with placebo and were similar in both studies. With pooled data, difference versus placebo in peak FEV1 was 185 mL (95% CI 146-223) in the tiotropium 5 μg group, 223 mL (185-262) in the tiotropium 2·5 μg group, and 196 mL (158-234) in the salmeterol group (all p<0·0001); difference in trough FEV1 was 146 mL (95% CI 105-188), 180 mL (138-221), and 114 mL (73-155; all p<0·0001), respectively. There were more ACQ-7 responders in the tiotropium 5 μg (OR 1·32, 95% CI 1·02-1·71; p=0·035) and 2·5 μg (1·33, 1·03-1·72; p=0·031) groups, and the salmeterol group (1·46, 1·13-1·89; p=0·0039), than in the placebo group. 48 (2%) of 2100 patients had serious adverse events (tiotropium 5 μg n=11, tiotropium 2·5 μg n=12, salmeterol n=11, placebo n=14). INTERPRETATION Once-daily tiotropium add-on to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids reduces airflow obstruction and improves asthma control in patients with moderate symptomatic asthma. Patterns of response with both tiotropium doses were similar to those of salmeterol, and all active compounds had good safety and tolerability. Tiotropium is a safe and effective bronchodilator, and an alternative to salmeterol in this patient population. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

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

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. Tiotropium add-on therapy provided numerical improvements in outcomes in adolescents with asthma http://ow.ly/eL8g304a9XV

Long-Term Once-Daily Tiotropium Respimat® Is Well Tolerated and Maintains Efficacy over 52 Weeks in Patients with Symptomatic Asthma in Japan: A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Study

Background This study assessed the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat, a long-acting inhaled anticholinergic bronchodilator, in asthma, added on to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with or without long-acting β2-agonist (LABA). Methods 285 patients with symptomatic asthma, despite treatment with ICS±LABA, were randomised 2:2:1 to once-daily tiotropium 5 μg, tiotropium 2.5 μg or placebo for 52 weeks (via the Respimat SoftMist inhaler) added on to ICS±LABA, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study (NCT01340209). Primary objective: to describe the long-term safety profile of tiotropium. Secondary end points included: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) response; peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) response; seven-question Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7) score. Results At Week 52, adverse-event (AE) rates with tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo were 88.6%, 86.8% and 89.5%, respectively. Commonly reported AEs with tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo were nasopharyngitis (48.2%, 44.7%, 42.1%), asthma (28.9%, 29.8%, 38.6%), decreased PEFR (15.8%, 7.9%, 21.1%), bronchitis (9.6%, 13.2%, 7.0%), pharyngitis (7.9%, 13.2%, 3.5%) and gastroenteritis (10.5%, 3.5%, 5.3%). In the tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo groups, 8.8%, 5.3% and 5.3% of patients reported drug-related AEs; 3.5%, 3.5% and 15.8% reported serious AEs. Asthma worsening was the only serious AE reported in more than one patient. At Week 52, adjusted mean trough FEV1 and trough PEFR responses were significantly higher with tiotropium 5 μg (but not 2.5 μg) versus placebo. ACQ-7 responder rates were higher with tiotropium 5 μg and 2.5 μg versus placebo at Week 24. Conclusions The long-term tiotropium Respimat safety profile was comparable with that of placebo Respimat, and associated with mild to moderate, non-serious AEs in patients with symptomatic asthma despite ICS±LABA therapy. Compared with placebo, tiotropium 5 μg, but not 2.5 μg, significantly improved lung function and symptoms, supporting the long-term efficacy of the 5 μg dose. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01340209

Once-daily tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg is an efficacious 24-h bronchodilator in adults with symptomatic asthma

INTRODUCTION Once-daily tiotropium Respimat(®) 5 μg is an efficacious add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with or without long-acting β2-agonists in patients with symptomatic asthma. The objective of this study was to investigate whether the dosing regimen of tiotropium (once- versus twice-daily), delivered via the Respimat(®) SoftMist™ inhaler, affected 24-h bronchodilator efficacy and safety versus placebo Respimat(®) in patients with asthma who were symptomatic despite medium-dose ICS therapy. METHODS A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study with 4-week treatment periods of tiotropium 5 μg (once-daily, evening) and 2.5 μg (twice-daily, morning and evening). The primary efficacy end point was forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC)(0-24h) at the end of each treatment period. Secondary end points included peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s measured within 24 h of the last evening inhalation (peak FEV1(0-24h)), trough FEV1 measured prior to evening dosing, morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEFam and PEFpm) and pharmacokinetic assessments. RESULTS 94 patients were randomised (mean age 44.3 years; mean asthma duration 21.3 years) and 89 (94.7%) completed the study. Significant and comparable bronchodilation was achieved over a 24-h period with both tiotropium dosing regimens. FEV1 AUC(0-24h) response (mean ± standard error) was significantly greater with both tiotropium dosing regimens (once-daily 5 μg: 158 ± 24 mL; twice-daily 2.5 μg; 149 ± 24 mL; both p < 0.01) when compared with placebo. Improvements in peak FEV1(0-24h), trough FEV1 and pre-dose PEFam/pm with both dosing regimens versus placebo were statistically significant (all p < 0.01), with no statistically significant differences between the tiotropium treatment regimens. Total systemic exposure and tolerability were comparable between treatment regimens. CONCLUSIONS Lung function improvements with tiotropium Respimat(®) add-on to medium-dose ICS were sustained and similar for once-daily 5 μg and twice-daily 2.5 μg, supporting tiotropium Respimat(®) 5 μg as a once-daily bronchodilator that provides efficacy over the whole 24-h dosing interval in patients with symptomatic asthma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01152450.

A phase III randomized controlled trial of tiotropium add-on therapy in children with severe symptomatic asthma

Background Studies in adults and adolescents have demonstrated that tiotropium is efficacious as an add‐on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with or without other maintenance therapies in patients with moderate or severe symptomatic asthma. Objective We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of once‐daily tiotropium Respimat add‐on therapy to high‐dose ICS with 1 or more controller medications, or medium‐dose ICS with 2 or more controller medications, in the first phase III trial of tiotropium in children with severe symptomatic asthma. Methods In this 12‐week, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group trial, 401 participants aged 6 to 11 years were randomized to receive once‐daily tiotropium 5 &mgr;g (2 puffs of 2.5 &mgr;g) or 2.5 &mgr;g (2 puffs of 1.25 &mgr;g), or placebo (2 puffs), administered through the Respimat device as add‐on to background therapy. Results Compared with placebo, tiotropium 5 &mgr;g, but not 2.5 &mgr;g, add‐on therapy improved the primary end point, peak FEV1 within 3 hours after dosing (5 &mgr;g, 139 mL [95% CI, 75‐203; P < .001]; 2.5 &mgr;g, 35 mL [95% CI, −28 to 99; P = .27]), and the key secondary end point, trough FEV1 (5 &mgr;g, 87 mL [95% CI, 19‐154; P = .01]; 2.5 &mgr;g, 18 mL [95% CI, −48 to 85; P = .59]). The safety and tolerability of tiotropium were comparable with those of placebo. Conclusions Once‐daily tiotropium Respimat 5 &mgr;g improved lung function and was well tolerated as add‐on therapy to ICS with other maintenance therapies in children with severe symptomatic asthma. Graphical abstract Figure. No Caption available.

Magnitude of effect of asthma treatments on Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and Asthma Control Questionnaire scores: Systematic review and network meta-analysis:

BACKGROUND The Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) are widely used in asthma research; however, in studies of newer asthma treatments, mean improvements in these measures compared with placebo arms do not exceed the minimal important difference (MID), particularly when a new treatment is added to current treatment. OBJECTIVE We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to examine the magnitude of AQLQ and ACQ responses achieved with commonly used asthma drugs and factors influencing these end points in clinical trials. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted to identify blinded randomized controlled trials reporting AQLQ or ACQ results. Mixed treatment comparisons, combined with meta-regression, were then performed. RESULTS Of the 64 randomized controlled trials (42,527 patients) identified, 54 included the AQLQ and 11 included the ACQ as end points. The presence of a run-in period, the nature of treatment during the run-in period, concurrent treatment during the treatment period, and instrument version significantly influenced the change in AQLQ score from baseline and whether it exceeded the MID. When compared with placebo, only inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), with or without a long-acting β-agonist, achieved the MID. The ACQ results were comparable with those of the AQLQ: no differences from placebo exceeded the MID, and ICS-based treatments provided the greatest improvements. CONCLUSION The established within-patient MID for the ACQ and AQLQ is not achievable as a group-wise efficacy threshold between treatment arms in clinical studies in which controllers are added to ICS treatment. Thus in addition to reporting mean changes of the instruments, other measurement criteria should be considered, including responder analyses.

Testing two different doses of tiotropium Respimat® in cystic fibrosis: Phase 2 randomized trial results

Background Tiotropium is a once-daily, long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator with the potential to alleviate airway obstruction in cystic fibrosis. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2.5 and 5 µg once-daily tiotropium delivered via the Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler vs. placebo in people with cystic fibrosis. Methods This phase 2, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study of tiotropium Respimat as add-on to usual cystic fibrosis maintenance therapy included people with cystic fibrosis with pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥25% predicted. Co-primary efficacy end points were change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 4 hours (FEV1 AUC0–4h), and trough FEV1 at the end of week 12. Findings A total of 510 subjects with cystic fibrosis aged 5–69 years were randomized. Both doses of tiotropium resulted in significant improvement compared with placebo in the co-primary efficacy end points at the end of week 12 (change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV1 AUC0–4h: 2.5 µg: 2.94%, 95% confidence interval 1.19–4.70, p = 0.001; 5 µg: 3.39%, 95% confidence interval 1.67–5.12, p = 0.0001; in percent-predicted trough FEV1∶2.5 µg: 2.24%, p = 0.2; 5 µg: 2.22%, p = 0.02). There was a greater benefit with tiotropium 5 vs. 2.5 µg. No treatment-related adverse events or unexpected safety findings were observed in patients taking tiotropium. Conclusions Tiotropium significantly improved lung function in people with cystic fibrosis. The improvement was greater with the higher dose than the lower dose, with no difference in adverse events. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00737100 EudraCT 2008-001156-43.

A Handling Study to Assess Use of the Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler in Children Under 5 Years Old

Abstract Background: Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler (SMI) is a hand-held device that generates an aerosol with a high, fine-particle fraction, enabling efficient lung deposition. The study objective was to assess inhalation success among children using Respimat SMI, and the requirement for assistance by the parent/caregiver and/or a valved holding chamber (VHC). Methods: This open-label study enrolled patients aged <5 years with respiratory disease and history of coughing and/or recurrent wheezing. Patients inhaled from the Respimat SMI (air only; no aerosol) using a stepwise configuration: “1” (dose released by child); “2” (dose released by parent/caregiver), and “3” (Respimat SMI with VHC, facemask, and parent/caregiver help). Co-primary endpoints included the ability to perform successful inhalation as assessed by the investigators using a standardized handling questionnaire and evaluation of the reasons for success. Inhalation profile in the successful handling configuration was verified with a pneumotachograph. Patient satisfaction and preferences were investigated in a questionnaire. Results: Of the children aged 4 to <5 years (n=27) and 3 to <4 years (n=30), 55.6% and 30.0%, respectively, achieved success without a VHC or help; with assistance, another 29.6% and 10.0%, respectively, achieved success, and the remaining children were successful with VHC. All children aged 2 to <3 years (n=20) achieved success with the Respimat SMI and VHC. Of those aged <2 years (n=22), 95.5% had successful handling of the Respimat SMI with VHC and parent/caregiver help. Inhalation flow profiles generally confirmed the outcome of the handling assessment by the investigators. Most parent/caregiver and/or child respondents were satisfied with operation, instructions for use, handling, and ease of holding the Respimat SMI with or without a VHC. Conclusions: The Respimat SMI is suitable for children aged <5 years; however, children aged <5 years are advised to add a VHC to complement its use.

Safety and efficacy of the once-daily anticholinergic BEA2180 compared with tiotropium in patients with COPD

BACKGROUND To determine the safety and efficacy of BEA2180, an anticholinergic agent in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS Smokers or ex-smokers ≥40 years with COPD and a postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) <80% predicted and FEV1/forced vital capacity ≤70% participated in this multinational, randomised, double-blind, parallel study. Patients received BEA2180 (50, 100 or 200 μg), tiotropium (5 μg) or placebo once daily via Respimat Soft Mist™. The primary endpoint was trough FEV1 after 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, exacerbations and adverse events. RESULTS Patients (n = 2080, 64.5% male) had a mean age of 64.2 years and a baseline FEV1 of 1.2 L. Trough FEV1 at 24 weeks with all BEA2180 doses (0.044-0.087 L) and tiotropium 5 μg (0.092 L) was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) than placebo (-0.034 L) and BEA2180 (200 μg) was noninferior to tiotropium. Mean TDI focal scores were higher with BEA2180 (1.43-1.48) or tiotropium (1.46) versus placebo (0.94; p ≤ 0.01 for all). Mean SGRQ total scores also improved with BEA2180 (40.1-40.7) or tiotropium (39.5) compared with placebo (43.0, p < 0.01 for all). COPD exacerbation rates were reduced for all active treatments, reaching statistical significance for BEA2180 (50 and 200 μg) (p < 0.05, for both). CONCLUSION All study doses of BEA2180 improved lung function, reduced symptoms and exacerbations, and improved health status in COPD; all treatments were well tolerated. Clinical trial identifier: NCT00528996.

Tiotropium Respimat® in cystic fibrosis: Phase 3 and Pooled phase 2/3 randomized trials

BACKGROUND Tiotropium Respimat improved lung function in a phase 2 trial in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). We investigated its efficacy and safety in a phase 3 trial, including a pre-specified pooled analysis of the phase 2 and 3 trials. METHODS 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of tiotropium Respimat 5 μg once daily in patients with CF (N=463). RESULTS Co-primary efficacy endpoints showed no statistical difference between tiotropium and placebo: percent-predicted forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0-4h (AUC0-4h) (95% CI): 1.64% (0.27,3.55; p=0.092); percent-predicted trough FEV1 (95% CI) 1.40% (0.50,3.30; p=0.15). Adverse events were similar between groups. Pooled phase 2/3 trial results showed a treatment difference in favor of tiotropium: percent-predicted FEV1 AUC0-4h (95% CI): 2.62% (1.34,3.90). CONCLUSION Tiotropium was well tolerated in patients with CF; lung function improvements compared with placebo were not statistically significant in the phase 3 trial. CLINICAL TRIALS These studies are registered with clinical trial identifier numbers NCT00737100 and NCT01179347 NCT00737100 NCT01179347. These studies are also registered with the EudraCT number: 2008-001156-43 and 2010-019802-17.