A. were involved in the acquisition of data and data interpretation. S.B. and P.D. were involved in conception/design and data analysis/interpretation. C.R. and P.D. were involved in conception/design, the acquisition of data, and data interpretation.
Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist combination therapy is a recommended treatment option for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and increased exacerbation risk, particularly those with elevated blood eosinophil levels. SOPHOS (NCT02727660) evaluated the efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate metered dose inhaler (BFF MDI) versus formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) MDI, each delivered using co-suspension delivery technology, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations.In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 12–52-week, variable length study, patients received twice-daily BFF MDI 320/10 µg or 160/10 µg, or FF MDI 10 µg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at week 12. Secondary and other endpoints included assessments of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and safety.The primary analysis (modified intent-to-treat) population included 1843 patients (BFF MDI 320/10 µg, n=619; BFF MDI 160/10 µg, n=617; and FF MDI, n=607). BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved morning pre-dose trough FEV1 at week 12 versus FF MDI (least squares mean differences 34 mL [p=0.0081] and 32 mL [p=0.0134], respectively), increased time to first exacerbation (hazard ratios 0.827 [p=0.0441] and 0.803 [p=0.0198], respectively) and reduced exacerbation rate (rate ratios 0.67 [p=0.0001] and 0.71 [p=0.0010], respectively). Lung function and exacerbation benefits were driven by patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells·mm−3. The incidence of adverse events was similar, and pneumonia rates were low (≤2.4%) across treatments.SOPHOS demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD at increased risk of exacerbations.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of three doses of glycopyrrolate metered dose inhaler (GP MDI) in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β 2 -agonists (ICS/LABA) with or without tiotropium, to characterize the benefit of triple therapy. Method: This phase II/III, double-blind study randomized patients to 24 weeks' treatment with twice-daily GP MDI 36 µg, 18 µg, 9 µg, or placebo MDI (all delivered via Aerosphere inhalers), or once-daily open-label tiotropium 2.5 µg. Patients continued their own ICS/LABA regimen throughout the study. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) area under the curve from 0 − 4 h (AUC 0 − 4 ) at Week 24. Secondary endpoints included patient questionnaires to measure asthma control or symptoms. Safety was also assessed. Results: The primary analysis (modified intent-to-treat) population included 1066 patients. The primary study endpoint was not met (changes from baseline in FEV 1 AUC 0 − 4 at Week 24 were 294 mL, 284 mL, 308 mL, 240 mL, and 347 mL for GP MDI 36 µg, GP MDI 18 µg, GP MDI 9 µg, placebo, and open-label tiotropium, respectively). There were no significant differences between treatment and placebo in secondary endpoints at Week 24. Post-hoc analyses using post-bronchodilator FEV 1 as the baseline measurement, or averaging values across multiple baseline visits, showed a dose-related response to GP MDI. The incidence of adverse events was low and similar across treatments. Conclusion: Although this study did not meet its primary endpoint, post hoc analyses identified a dose-related response to GP MDI when alternative definitions of baseline FEV 1 were used in the analyses.
Background and Objectives Co-suspension Delivery™ Technology has been developed for the administration of albuterol sulfate pressurised inhalation suspension via metered-dose inhaler (AS MDI, PT007). We assessed the efficacy and safety of AS MDI versus Proventil ® in order to determine the optimal dose of AS MDI to take to Phase III clinical trials. Methods ASPEN (NCT03371459) and ANTORA (NCT03364608) were Phase II, randomised, crossover, multicentre studies of AS MDI versus Proventil ® in patients with persistent asthma. In ASPEN, 46 patients received cumulative-dose treatments (90 μg/inhalation using 1 + 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 inhalations at 30-minute intervals) in 1 of 2 possible sequences: AS MDI/Proventil or Proventil/AS MDI. In ANTORA, 86 patients were randomised to one of 10 treatment sequences of AS MDI (90 μg or 180 μg), placebo MDI, or Proventil (90 μg or 180 μg). The primary endpoints were baseline-adjusted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV 1 ) 30 minutes after each cumulative dose (ASPEN) and change from baseline in FEV 1 area under the curve from 0 to 6 h (ANTORA). Safety was assessed in both studies. Results In ASPEN, AS MDI was equivalent to Proventil (within pre-specified bounds of ± 200 mL) following cumulative doses of albuterol up to 1440 μg for the primary endpoint. In ANTORA, 90 μg and 180 μg doses of AS MDI and Proventil were significantly superior to placebo MDI (p < 0.0001), and AS MDI was non-inferior to Proventil at both doses, based on a margin of 100 mL. No new safety concerns were identified.
ConclusionThe effects of albuterol delivered via AS MDI and Proventil on bronchodilation were equivalent, supporting the selection of AS MDI 180 µg to be taken into Phase III clinical trials, either alone or in combination with an inhaled corticosteroid. Trial Registration number ASPEN (NCT03371459); Date of registration: 29/12/2017. ANTORA (NCT03364608); Date of registration: 15/12/2017.
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.