Medic Goran, Lindner Leandro, van der Weijden Miriam, Karabis Andreas
Real World Strategy and Analytics, Mapi Group, Houten, The Netherlands.
AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain.
Adv Ther. 2016 Mar;33(3):379-99. doi: 10.1007/s12325-016-0299-4. Epub 2016 Feb 16.
The objective of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 μg twice daily compared to tiotropium 18 μg once daily in adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
A systematic literature review performed in March 2014, using a predefined search strategy in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, identified 17 randomized placebo-controlled trials, (tiotropium n = 15; aclidinium/formoterol n = 2). Outcomes of interest were: bronchodilation (peak and trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)), COPD symptoms [Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and % of responders (>1 unit improvement)] and Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) [St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and % responders (>4 unit improvement)], % of patients with ≥1 exacerbations, adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), hospitalization and mortality, all at 24 weeks. In the absence of head-to-head trials between aclidinium/formoterol and tiotropium, a Bayesian indirect treatment comparison (ITC) was used with placebo as common control.
Regarding bronchodilation, aclidinium/formoterol was found to be more efficacious than tiotropium at peak FEV1, with mean difference in change from baseline (DCFB) 143 mL [95% credible interval (CrI): 112, 174] and at trough FEV1 [DCFB 26 mL (95% CrI -2, 55)]. Aclidinium/formoterol is expected to be more efficacious than tiotropium in improving dyspnea symptoms measured by TDI [DCFB 0.54 points (95% CrI 0.09, 0.99); odds ratio (OR) of responders 1.51 (95% CrI 1.11, 2.06)]. SGRQ results are comparable for aclidinium/formoterol versus tiotropium [DCFB -0.52 (95% CrI -2.21, 1.17); OR of responders 1.16 (95% CrI 0.47, 2.87)]. The ITC results suggest similar safety profiles regarding AEs, SAEs and hospitalization.
Based on the ITC, aclidinium/formoterol is expected to be more efficacious than tiotropium in terms of lung function and symptom control while providing comparable HRQoL results and safety profile.
AstraZeneca.
本研究的目的是评估在中度至重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)成年患者中,每日两次使用固定剂量组合的阿地溴铵/福莫特罗400/12μg与每日一次使用噻托溴铵18μg相比的相对疗效和安全性。
2014年3月进行了一项系统文献综述,使用预先定义的检索策略在MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆中进行检索,共识别出17项随机安慰剂对照试验(噻托溴铵组n = 15;阿地溴铵/福莫特罗组n = 2)。感兴趣的结局指标包括:支气管扩张(第1秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)的峰值和谷值)、COPD症状[过渡性呼吸困难指数(TDI)局部评分和缓解者百分比(改善>1个单位)]以及健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)[圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)总分和缓解者百分比(改善>4个单位)]、≥1次加重的患者百分比、不良事件(AE)、严重不良事件(SAE)、住院率和死亡率,均在24周时评估。由于缺乏阿地溴铵/福莫特罗与噻托溴铵的直接对比试验,因此采用以安慰剂作为共同对照的贝叶斯间接治疗比较(ITC)。
在支气管扩张方面,发现阿地溴铵/福莫特罗在FEV1峰值时比噻托溴铵更有效,从基线变化的平均差异(DCFB)为143 mL [95%可信区间(CrI):112,174],在FEV1谷值时也更有效[DCFB 26 mL(95% CrI -2,55)]。预计阿地溴铵/福莫特罗在改善TDI测量的呼吸困难症状方面比噻托溴铵更有效[DCFB 0.54分(95% CrI 0.09,0.99);缓解者的优势比(OR)为1.51(95% CrI 1.11,2.06)]。阿地溴铵/福莫特罗与噻托溴铵的SGRQ结果相当[DCFB -0.52(95% CrI -2.21,1.17);缓解者的OR为1.16(95% CrI 0.47,2.87)]。ITC结果表明,在AE、SAE和住院方面,两者的安全性概况相似。
基于ITC,预计阿地溴铵/福莫特罗在肺功能和症状控制方面比噻托溴铵更有效,同时提供相当的HRQoL结果和安全性概况。
阿斯利康公司。