The COPD Patient Management European Trial (COMET) investigated the efficacy and safety of a home-based COPD disease management intervention for severe COPD patients.The study was an international open-design clinical trial in COPD patients (forced expiratory volume in 1 s <50% of predicted value) randomised 1:1 to the disease management intervention or to the usual management practices at the study centre. The disease management intervention included a self-management programme, home telemonitoring, care coordination and medical management. The primary end-point was the number of unplanned all-cause hospitalisation days in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary end-points included acute care hospitalisation days, BODE (body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnoea and exercise) index and exacerbations. Safety end-points included adverse events and deaths.For the 157 (disease management) and 162 (usual management) patients eligible for ITT analyses, all-cause hospitalisation days per year (mean±sd) were 17.4±35.4 and 22.6±41.8, respectively (mean difference -5.3, 95% CI -13.7 to -3.1; p=0.16). The disease management group had fewer per-protocol acute care hospitalisation days per year (p=0.047), a lower BODE index (p=0.01) and a lower mortality rate (1.9% 14.2%; p<0.001), with no difference in exacerbation frequency. Patient profiles and hospitalisation practices varied substantially across countries.The COMET disease management intervention did not significantly reduce unplanned all-cause hospitalisation days, but reduced acute care hospitalisation days and mortality in severe COPD patients.
Background and Objectives: Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler (SMI) is an innovative device that offers improved lung deposition and is an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional, chlorofluorocarbon-containing metered-dose inhalers (CFC-MDIs). The aqueous formulations of bronchodilator drugs administered from Respimat SMI contain low concentrations of ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA), a stabilising agent, and benzalkonium chloride (BAC), an antibacterial agent, both of which have been associated with bronchoconstriction when administered via nebulisers. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to compare the incidence of paradoxical bronchoconstriction with bronchodilator drugs administered via Respimat SMI or a CFC-MDI in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: Nine randomised, active- and/or placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover studies, in which asthmatic and COPD patients (n = 444 and n = 216, respectively) received a β2-agonist and/or anticholinergic or placebo via Respimat SMI or CFC-MDI, were included in the analysis. The incidence of conditions indicative of paradoxical bronchoconstriction were collated and divided into four categories: (1) ‘bronchospasm’; (2) two or more of the following events: ‘other respiratory adverse events’, ‘rescue medication use’ or ‘asymptomatic drop in forced expiratory volume in one second’ (FEV1); (3) either ‘rescue medication use’ or ‘other respiratory adverse event’; (4) ‘asymptomatic drop in FEV1’. Results: The incidence of adverse events indicative of paradoxical bronchoconstriction was low in those patients using the Respimat SMI device, and similar to that seen in the CFC-MDI group. In addition, the incidence of adverse events indicative of paradoxical bronchoconstriction observed in the Respimat SMI group was similar for BAC + EDTA and BAC-only drug formulations. Conclusions: These studies demonstrate that, due to the extremely low absolute amounts of BAC and EDTA delivered to the lungs by the device, Respimat SMI is safe with regard to paradoxical bronchoconstriction in patients with asthma or COPD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.