Suppr超能文献

阿地溴铵/福莫特罗与噻托溴铵治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的疗效和安全性:间接治疗比较结果

Efficacy and Safety of Aclidinium/Formoterol versus Tiotropium in COPD: Results of an Indirect Treatment Comparison.

作者信息

Medic Goran, Lindner Leandro, van der Weijden Miriam, Karabis Andreas

机构信息

Real World Strategy and Analytics, Mapi Group, Houten, The Netherlands.

AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Adv Ther. 2016 Mar;33(3):379-99. doi: 10.1007/s12325-016-0299-4. Epub 2016 Feb 16.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

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).

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSION

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.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

摘要

引言

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。

方法

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)。

结果

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。

结论

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。

资助

阿斯利康公司。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/49f0/4833795/da5550825bef/12325_2016_299_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验