A 4-Year Trial of Tiotropium in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1690,USA.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 10/2008; 359(15):1543-54. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805800
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Previous studies showing that tiotropium improves multiple end points in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) led us to examine the long-term effects of tiotropium therapy.
In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared 4 years of therapy with either tiotropium or placebo in patients with COPD who were permitted to use all respiratory medications except inhaled anticholinergic drugs. The patients were at least 40 years of age, with a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) of 70% or less after bronchodilation and a ratio of FEV(1) to forced vital capacity (FVC) of 70% or less. Coprimary end points were the rate of decline in the mean FEV(1) before and after bronchodilation beginning on day 30. Secondary end points included measures of FVC, changes in response on St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), exacerbations of COPD, and mortality.
Of a total of 5993 patients (mean age, 65+/-8 years) with a mean FEV(1) of 1.32+/-0.44 liters after bronchodilation (48% of predicted value), we randomly assigned 2987 to the tiotropium group and 3006 to the placebo group. Mean absolute improvements in FEV(1) in the tiotropium group were maintained throughout the trial (ranging from 87 to 103 ml before bronchodilation and from 47 to 65 ml after bronchodilation), as compared with the placebo group (P<0.001). After day 30, the differences between the two groups in the rate of decline in the mean FEV(1) before and after bronchodilation were not significant. The mean absolute total score on the SGRQ was improved (lower) in the tiotropium group, as compared with the placebo group, at each time point throughout the 4-year period (ranging from 2.3 to 3.3 units, P<0.001). At 4 years and 30 days, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the risks of exacerbations, related hospitalizations, and respiratory failure.
In patients with COPD, therapy with tiotropium was associated with improvements in lung function, quality of life, and exacerbations during a 4-year period but did not significantly reduce the rate of decline in FEV(1). ( number, NCT00144339.)

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background To further assess the safety profile of the fixed-dose combination of indacaterol and glycopyrronium (QVA149) and its monocomponents; we investigated the impact of individual patient-level factors and time by integrating the patient-level safety data from the QVA149 clinical programme with relevant information from the independent indacaterol and glycopyrronium safety databases. Methods Data from 11,404 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were pooled from 14 clinical studies of QVA149, indacaterol and glycopyrronium of ≥3 month’s duration with at least two of the treatment groups: QVA149 110/50 μg, glycopyrronium 50 μg, indacaterol 150 μg, placebo or tiotropium 18 μg. Overall hazard ratio (HR) was assessed between the active treatments and placebo and in various subgroups related to severity of airways obstruction, inhaled corticosteroid use, cardiovascular risk factors, sex, age and body mass index for death, serious cases of cardio- and cerebrovascular (CCV) events, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), pneumonia, COPD exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or atrial flutter/fibrillation (AF/F). Results The HR for QVA149 versus placebo showed no significant increase in the overall risk for death (HR [95% confidence interval]: 0.93 [0.34–2.54]); CCV events (0.60 [0.29–1.24]); MACE (1.04 [0.45–2.42]); pneumonia (1.10 [0.54–2.25]); COPD exacerbations (0.60 [0.40–0.91]); and AF/F (1.03 [0.49–2.18]). Similar results were observed for indacaterol, glycopyrronium and tiotropium versus placebo for overall risk and in analysed subgroups. Conclusions There was no increase in the risk for the investigated safety endpoints for the fixed-dose combination QVA149, and it had a comparable safety profile as its monocomponents and tiotropium versus placebo.
    Respiratory Medicine 10/2014; 108(10). DOI:10.1016/j.rmed.2014.07.011 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study characterised the in vitro and in vivo profiles of two novel long-acting muscarinic antagonists, aclidinium bromide and glycopyrronium bromide, using tiotropium bromide and ipratropium bromide as comparators. All four antagonists had high affinity for the five muscarinic receptor sub-types (M1–M5); aclidinium had comparable affinity to tiotropium but higher affinity than glycopyrronium and ipratropium for all receptors. Glycopyrronium dissociated faster from recombinant M3 receptors than aclidinium and tiotropium but more slowly than ipratropium; all four compounds dissociated more rapidly from M2 receptors than from M3 receptors. In vitro, aclidinium, glycopyrronium and tiotropium had a long duration of action at native M3 receptors (>8 h versus 42 min for ipratropium). In vivo, all compounds were equi-potent at reversing acetylcholine-induced bronchoconstriction. Aclidinium, glycopyrronium and ipratropium had a faster onset of bronchodilator action than tiotropium. Aclidinium had a longer duration of action than glycopyronnium (time to 50% recovery of effect [t½ offset] = 29 h and 13 h, respectively); these compare with a t½ offset of 64 h and 8 h for tiotropium and ipratropium, respectively. Aclidinium was less potent than glycopyrronium and tiotropium at inhibiting salivation in conscious rats (dose required to produce half-maximal effect [ED50] = 38, 0.74 and 0.88 μg/kg, respectively) and was more rapidly hydrolysed in rat, guinea pig and human plasma compared with glycopyrronium or tiotropium. These results indicate that while aclidinium and glycopyrronium are both potent antagonists at muscarinic receptors with similar kinetic selectivity for M3 receptors versus M2, aclidinium has a longer dissociation half-life at M3 receptors and a longer duration of bronchodilator action in vivo than glycopyrronium. The rapid plasma hydrolysis of aclidinium, coupled to its kinetic selectivity, may confer a reduced propensity for systemic anticholinergic side effects with aclidinium versus glycopyrronium and tiotropium.
    Pulmonary Pharmacology &amp Therapeutics 08/2014; 28(2). DOI:10.1016/j.pupt.2014.05.005 · 2.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To establish the cost-effectiveness of long-term humidification therapy (LTHT) added to usual care for patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis. Methods Resource usage in a 12-month clinical trial of LTHT was estimated from hospital records, patient diaries, and the equipment supplier. Health state utility values were derived from the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score. All patients who remained in the trial for 12 months and who had at least 90 days of diary records were included (87 of 108). Results Clinical costs were NZ $3973 (95% confidence interval [CI] $1614–$6332) for the control group and NZ $3331 (95% CI $948–$6920) for the intervention group. The mean health benefit per patient was −6.9 SGRQ units (95% CI −13.0 to −7.2; P < 0.05) or +0.0678 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI 0.001–0.135). With the intervention costing NZ $2059 annually, the mean cost per quality-adjusted life-year was NZ $20,902 (US $18,907) and the bootstrap median was NZ $19,749 (2.5th percentile −$40,923, 97.5th percentile $221,275). At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of NZ $30,000, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 61%, ranging from 49% to 72% as the cost of LTHT was varied by ±30%. At a WTP of NZ $20,000, the probability was 49% (range 34%–61%). Conclusions LTHT is moderately cost-effective for patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis at a WTP threshold that is acceptable for public funding of medicines in New Zealand. These findings must be interpreted with caution because of the modest size of the clinical study, necessary lack of blinding in the clinical trial, and uncertainty in estimating health state utility from the SQRQ.
    Value in Health 06/2014; 17(4):320–327. DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.007 · 2.89 Impact Factor


Available from