Randomized Trial of Nocturnal Oxygen in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND

Long-term oxygen therapy improves survival in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic severe daytime hypoxemia. However, the efficacy of oxygen therapy for the management of isolated nocturnal hypoxemia is uncertain.

METHODS

We designed this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to determine, in patients with COPD who have nocturnal arterial oxygen desaturation without qualifying for long-term oxygen therapy, whether nocturnal oxygen provided for a period of 3 to 4 years would decrease mortality or the worsening of disease such that patients meet current specifications for long-term oxygen therapy. Patients with an oxygen saturation of less than 90% for at least 30% of the recording time on nocturnal oximetry were assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive either nocturnal oxygen or ambient air from a sham concentrator (placebo). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or a requirement for long-term oxygen therapy as defined by the Nocturnal Oxygen Therapy Trial (NOTT) criteria in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Recruitment was stopped prematurely because of recruitment and retention difficulties after 243 patients, of a projected 600, had undergone randomization at 28 centers. At 3 years of follow-up, 39.0% of the patients assigned to nocturnal oxygen (48 of 123) and 42.0% of those assigned to placebo (50 of 119) met the NOTT-defined criteria for long-term oxygen therapy or had died (difference, −3.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −15.1 to 9.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Our underpowered trial provides no indication that nocturnal oxygen has a positive or negative effect on survival or progression to long-term oxygen therapy in patients with COPD. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; INOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01044628. opens in new tab.)

Reference: N Engl J Med 2020; 383:1129-1138

Triple Inhaled Therapy at Two Glucocorticoid Doses in Moderate-to-Very-Severe COPD

BACKGROUND

Triple fixed-dose regimens of an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been studied at single dose levels of inhaled glucocorticoid, but studies at two dose levels are lacking.

METHODS

In a 52-week, phase 3, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple therapy at two dose levels of inhaled glucocorticoid in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD and at least one exacerbation in the past year, we assigned patients in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive twice-daily inhaled doses of triple therapy (inhaled glucocorticoid [320 μg or 160 μg of budesonide], a LAMA [18 μg of glycopyrrolate], and a LABA [9.6 μg of formoterol]) or one of two dual therapies (18 μg of glycopyrrolate plus 9.6 μg of formoterol or 320 μg of budesonide plus 9.6 μg of formoterol). The primary end point was the annual rate (the estimated mean number per patient per year) of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations, as analyzed in the modified intention-to-treat population with the use of on-treatment data only.

RESULTS

The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 8509 patients. The annual rates of moderate or severe exacerbations were 1.08 in the 320-μg–budesonide triple-therapy group (2137 patients), 1.07 in the 160-μg–budesonide triple-therapy group (2121 patients), 1.42 in the glycopyrrolate–formoterol group (2120 patients), and 1.24 in the budesonide–formoterol group (2131 patients). The rate was significantly lower with 320-μg–budesonide triple therapy than with glycopyrrolate–formoterol (24% lower: rate ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.83; P<0.001) or budesonide–formoterol (13% lower: rate ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95; P=0.003). Similarly, the rate was significantly lower with 160-μg–budesonide triple therapy than with glycopyrrolate–formoterol (25% lower: rate ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.83; P<0.001) or budesonide–formoterol (14% lower: rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95; P=0.002). The incidence of any adverse event was similar across the treatment groups (range, 61.7 to 64.5%); the incidence of confirmed pneumonia ranged from 3.5 to 4.5% in the groups that included inhaled glucocorticoid use and was 2.3% in the glycopyrrolate–formoterol group.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy with twice-daily budesonide (at either the 160-μg or 320-μg dose), glycopyrrolate, and formoterol resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations than glycopyrrolate–formoterol or budesonide–formoterol. (Funded by AstraZeneca, ETHOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02465567. opens in new tab.)

Reference: N Engl J Med 2020; 383:35-48

Diagnosing and managing asthma attacks and people with COPD presenting in crisis during the UK Covid 19 epidemic

Primary Care Respiratory Society | April 2020 | Diagnosing and managing asthma attacks and people with COPD presenting in crisis during the UK Covid 19 epidemic

The Primary Care Respiratory Society have issued pragmatic guidance for the routine and crisis management of patients with asthma and COPD during the UK Covid-19 epidemic. The guide has been written to response to the questions that primary care colleagues are now asking, particularly around steroid use as Covid-19 cases continue to rise.

Diagnosing and managing asthma attacks and people with COPD presenting in crisis during the UK Covid 19 epidemic

 

Association of Home Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation With Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Question  In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnia, is the use of home noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) associated with better outcomes?

Findings  In this meta-analysis that included 51 085 patients with COPD and hypercapnia, home use of bilevel positive airway pressure, compared with no device, was significantly associated with lower risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.66), fewer patients with hospital admissions (OR, 0.22), and lower need for intubation (OR, 0.34), but no significant difference in quality of life. Noninvasive home mechanical ventilator, compared with no device, was significantly associated with lower risk of hospital admission (rate ratio, 0.50), but there was no significant difference in mortality risk. However, the evidence was low to moderate in quality.

Meaning  Among patients with COPD and hypercapnia, home NIPPV, compared with no device use, was significantly associated with better clinical outcomes and no significant difference in quality of life. However, the evidence was low to moderate in quality, the evidence on quality of life was insufficient, and the analyses for some outcomes were based on small numbers of studies.

Reference: JAMA. 2020;323(5):455-465. 

Metoprolol for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of COPD

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest that beta-blockers may reduce the risk of exacerbations and death in patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but these findings have not been confirmed in randomized trials.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized trial, we assigned patients between the ages of 40 and 85 years who had COPD to receive either a beta-blocker (extended-release metoprolol) or placebo. All the patients had a clinical history of COPD, along with moderate airflow limitation and an increased risk of exacerbations, as evidenced by a history of exacerbations during the previous year or the prescribed use of supplemental oxygen. We excluded patients who were already taking a beta-blocker or who had an established indication for the use of such drugs. The primary end point was the time until the first exacerbation of COPD during the treatment period, which ranged from 336 to 350 days, depending on the adjusted dose of metoprolol.

RESULTS

A total of 532 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 65.0±7.8 years; the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) was 41.1±16.3% of the predicted value. The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safety concerns. There was no significant between-group difference in the median time until the first exacerbation, which was 202 days in the metoprolol group and 222 days in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metoprolol vs. placebo, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; P=0.66). Metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of exacerbation leading to hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.83). The frequency of side effects that were possibly related to metoprolol was similar in the two groups, as was the overall rate of nonrespiratory serious adverse events. During the treatment period, there were 11 deaths in the metoprolol group and 5 in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with moderate or severe COPD who did not have an established indication for beta-blocker use, the time until the first COPD exacerbation was similar in the metoprolol group and the placebo group. Hospitalization for exacerbation was more common among the patients treated with metoprolol. (Funded by the Department of Defense; BLOCK COPD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02587351. opens in new tab.)

Reference: N Engl J Med 2019; 381:2304-2314

Benralizumab for the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of benralizumab, an interleukin-5 receptor alpha–directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody, for the prevention of exacerbations in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are not known.

METHODS

In the GALATHEA and TERRANOVA trials, we enrolled patients with COPD (at a ratio of approximately 2:1 on the basis of eosinophil count [≥220 per cubic millimeter vs. <220 per cubic millimeter]) who had frequent exacerbations despite receiving guideline-based inhaled treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive benralizumab (30 or 100 mg in GALATHEA; 10, 30, or 100 mg in TERRANOVA) every 8 weeks (every 4 weeks for the first three doses) or placebo. The primary end point was the treatment effect of benralizumab, measured as the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratio (benralizumab vs. placebo) at week 56 in patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

In GALATHEA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate were 1.19 per year (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.36) in the 30-mg benralizumab group, 1.03 per year (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19) in the 100-mg benralizumab group, and 1.24 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.42) in the placebo group; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.96 for 30 mg of benralizumab (P=0.65) and 0.83 for 100 mg of benralizumab (P=0.05). In TERRANOVA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate for 10 mg, 30 mg, and 100 mg of benralizumab and for placebo were 0.99 per year (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.13), 1.21 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.37), 1.09 per year (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.23), and 1.17 per year (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32), respectively; the corresponding rate ratios were 0.85 (P=0.06), 1.04 (P=0.66), and 0.93 (P=0.40). At 56 weeks, none of the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratios for any dose of benralizumab as compared with placebo reached significance in either trial. Types and frequencies of adverse events were similar with benralizumab and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Add-on benralizumab was not associated with a lower annualized rate of COPD exacerbations than placebo among patients with moderate to very severe COPD, a history of frequent moderate or severe exacerbations, and blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater (Funded by AstraZeneca [GALATHEA and TERRANOVA] and Kyowa Hakko Kirin [GALATHEA]; GALATHEA and TERRANOVA ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02138916. opens in new tab and NCT02155660. opens in new tab.)

Reference N Engl J Med 2019; 381:1023-1034

C-Reactive Protein Testing to Guide Antibiotic Prescribing for COPD Exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care testing of C-reactive protein (CRP) may be a way to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics without harming patients who have acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with a diagnosis of COPD in their primary care clinical record who consulted a clinician at 1 of 86 general medical practices in England and Wales for an acute exacerbation of COPD. The patients were assigned to receive usual care guided by CRP point-of-care testing (CRP-guided group) or usual care alone (usual-care group). The primary outcomes were patient-reported use of antibiotics for acute exacerbations of COPD within 4 weeks after randomization (to show superiority) and COPD-related health status at 2 weeks after randomization, as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, a 10-item scale with scores ranging from 0 (very good COPD health status) to 6 (extremely poor COPD health status) (to show noninferiority).

RESULTS

A total of 653 patients underwent randomization. Fewer patients in the CRP-guided group reported antibiotic use than in the usual-care group (57.0% vs. 77.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.47). The adjusted mean difference in the total score on the Clinical COPD Questionnaire at 2 weeks was −0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI, −0.33 to −0.05) in favor of the CRP-guided group. The antibiotic prescribing decisions made by clinicians at the initial consultation were ascertained for all but 1 patient, and antibiotic prescriptions issued over the first 4 weeks of follow-up were ascertained for 96.9% of the patients. A lower percentage of patients in the CRP-guided group than in the usual-care group received an antibiotic prescription at the initial consultation (47.7% vs. 69.7%, for a difference of 22.0 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.45) and during the first 4 weeks of follow-up (59.1% vs. 79.7%, for a difference of 20.6 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.46). Two patients in the usual-care group died within 4 weeks after randomization from causes considered by the investigators to be unrelated to trial participation.

CONCLUSIONS

CRP-guided prescribing of antibiotics for exacerbations of COPD in primary care clinics resulted in a lower percentage of patients who reported antibiotic use and who received antibiotic prescriptions from clinicians, with no evidence of harm. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Program; PACE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN24346473opens in new tab.)

Reference N Engl J Med 2019; 381:111-120

Triple therapy in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To compare the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations between triple therapy and dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and clinical trial registries searched from inception to April 2018.

Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing triple therapy with dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with COPD were eligible. Efficacy and safety outcomes of interest were also available.Data extraction and synthesis Data were collected independently. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate rate ratios, hazard ratios, risk ratios, and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methodology (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation).

Results 21 trials (19 publications) were included. Triple therapy consisted of a long acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long acting β agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). Triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced rate of moderate or severe exacerbations compared with LAMA monotherapy (rate ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.85), LAMA and LABA (0.78, 0.70 to 0.88), and ICS and LABA (0.77, 0.66 to 0.91). Trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and quality of life were favourable with triple therapy. The overall safety profile of triple therapy is reassuring, but pneumonia was significantly higher with triple therapy than with dual therapy of LAMA and LABA (relative risk 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 1.87).

Conclusions Use of triple therapy resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe exacerbations of COPD, better lung function, and better health related quality of life than dual therapy or monotherapy in patients with advanced COPD.Study registration Prospero CRD42018077033.

Reference: BMJ 2018;363:k4388

Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Therapy in Patients with COPD

BACKGROUND

The benefits of triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA), as compared with dual therapy (either inhaled glucocorticoid–LABA or LAMA–LABA), are uncertain.

METHODS

In this randomized trial involving 10,355 patients with COPD, we compared 52 weeks of a once-daily combination of fluticasone furoate (an inhaled glucocorticoid) at a dose of 100 μg, umeclidinium (a LAMA) at a dose of 62.5 μg, and vilanterol (a LABA) at a dose of 25 μg (triple therapy) with fluticasone furoate–vilanterol (at doses of 100 μg and 25 μg, respectively) and umeclidinium–vilanterol (at doses of 62.5 μg and 25 μg, respectively). Each regimen was administered in a single Ellipta inhaler. The primary outcome was the annual rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations during treatment.

RESULTS

The rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in the triple-therapy group was 0.91 per year, as compared with 1.07 per year in the fluticasone furoate–vilanterol group (rate ratio with triple therapy, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.90; 15% difference; P<0.001) and 1.21 per year in the umeclidinium–vilanterol group (rate ratio with triple therapy, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81; 25% difference; P<0.001). The annual rate of severe exacerbations resulting in hospitalization in the triple-therapy group was 0.13, as compared with 0.19 in the umeclidinium–vilanterol group (rate ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.78; 34% difference; P<0.001). There was a higher incidence of pneumonia in the inhaled-glucocorticoid groups than in the umeclidinium–vilanterol group, and the risk of clinician-diagnosed pneumonia was significantly higher with triple therapy than with umeclidinium–vilanterol, as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.92; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol resulted in a lower rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations than fluticasone furoate–vilanterol or umeclidinium–vilanterol in this population. Triple therapy also resulted in a lower rate of hospitalization due to COPD than umeclidinium–vilanterol. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; IMPACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02164513.)

Reference: N Engl J Med 2018; 378:1671-1680

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease pathway

NHS RightCare has published RightCare Pathway: COPD.  This pathway defines the core components of an optimal service for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).  It includes resources to support local health economise to concentrate their improvement efforts where there is greatest opportunity to address variation and improve population health.  It contains a number of key messages for commissioners.

Additional link: NHS England press release