Feldman Gregory, Maltais François, Khindri Sanjeev, Vahdati-Bolouri Mitra, Church Alison, Fahy William A, Trivedi Roopa
S. Carolina Pharmaceutical Research, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Quebec, QC, Canada.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Apr 7;11:719-30. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S102494. eCollection 2016.
The long-acting muscarinic antagonists umeclidinium (UMEC) and tiotropium (TIO) are approved once-daily maintenance therapies for COPD. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of UMEC versus TIO in COPD.
This was a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group, non-inferiority study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to UMEC 62.5 μg plus placebo or TIO 18 μg plus placebo. The primary end point was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at day 85 (non-inferiority margin -50 mL; per-protocol [PP] population). Other end points included weighted mean FEV1 over 0-24 and 12-24 hours post-dose. Patient-reported outcomes comprised Transition Dyspnea Index score, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score, and COPD Assessment Test score. Adverse events were also assessed.
In total, 1,017 patients were randomized to treatment. In the PP population, 489 and 487 patients received UMEC and TIO, respectively. In the PP population, change from baseline in trough FEV1 was greater with UMEC versus TIO at day 85, meeting non-inferiority and superiority margins (difference: 59 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 29-88; P<0.001). Similar results were observed in the intent-to-treat analysis of trough FEV1 at day 85 (53 mL, 95% CI: 25-81; P<0.001). Improvements in weighted mean FEV1 over 0-24 hours post-dose at day 84 were similar with UMEC and TIO but significantly greater with UMEC versus TIO over 12-24 hours post-dose (70 mL; P=0.015). Clinically meaningful improvements in Transition Dyspnea Index and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire were observed with both treatments at all time points. No differences were observed between UMEC and TIO in patient-reported outcomes. Overall incidences of adverse events were similar for UMEC and TIO.
UMEC 62.5 μg demonstrated superior efficacy to TIO 18 μg on the primary end point of trough FEV1 at day 85. Safety profiles were similar for both treatments.
长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂乌美溴铵(UMEC)和噻托溴铵(TIO)已被批准用于慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的每日一次维持治疗。本研究调查了UMEC与TIO治疗COPD的疗效和安全性。
这是一项为期12周的多中心、随机、双盲、双模拟、平行组、非劣效性研究。患者按1:1随机分为接受62.5μg乌美溴铵加安慰剂或18μg噻托溴铵加安慰剂治疗。主要终点是第85天的1秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)谷值(非劣效界值为-50 mL;符合方案[PP]人群)。其他终点包括给药后0至24小时和12至24小时的FEV1加权平均值。患者报告的结局包括过渡性呼吸困难指数评分、圣乔治呼吸问卷总分和慢性阻塞性肺疾病评估测试评分。还评估了不良事件。
共有1017例患者被随机分配接受治疗。在符合方案人群中,分别有489例和487例患者接受了UMEC和TIO治疗。在符合方案人群中,第85天时UMEC组的FEV1谷值较基线的变化大于TIO组,达到非劣效性和优效性界值(差异:59 mL;95%置信区间[CI]:29 - 88;P<0.001)。在第85天对FEV1谷值的意向性分析中也观察到了类似结果(53 mL,95%CI:25 - 81;P<0.001)。第84天给药后0至24小时,UMEC和TIO的FEV1加权平均值改善情况相似,但给药后12至24小时UMEC组的改善明显大于TIO组(70 mL;P = 0.015)。在所有时间点,两种治疗方法在过渡性呼吸困难指数和圣乔治呼吸问卷方面均观察到具有临床意义的改善。在患者报告的结局方面,UMEC和TIO之间未观察到差异。UMEC和TIO的不良事件总体发生率相似。
在第85天FEV1谷值的主要终点上,62.5μg乌美溴铵的疗效优于18μg噻托溴铵。两种治疗方法的安全性相似。