一项关于umeclidinium glycopyrronium治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的随机、开放标签研究。
A randomised, open-label study of umeclidinium glycopyrronium in patients with COPD.
作者信息
Rheault Tara, Khindri Sanjeev, Vahdati-Bolouri Mitra, Church Alison, Fahy William A
机构信息
GSK, Respiratory and Immuno-Inflammation, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
GSK, Respiratory Research and Development, Middlesex, UK.
出版信息
ERJ Open Res. 2016 Apr 27;2(2). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00101-2015. eCollection 2016 Apr.
This study compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily umeclidinium 62.5 µg with once-daily glycopyrronium 50 µg in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This was a 12-week, multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group study (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02236611). Patients were randomised 1:1 to umeclidinium 62.5 µg or glycopyrronium 50 µg administered Ellipta or Breezhaler dry powder inhaler, respectively. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV) at day 85 in the per-protocol population. Other endpoints included: weighted mean FEV over 0-24 h and patient-reported outcomes (transition dyspnoea index score and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score). Adverse events were also assessed. A total of 1037 patients were randomised to treatment. Umeclidinium was non-inferior (margin: -50 mL) to glycopyrronium (trough FEV at day 85 treatment difference: 24 mL, 95% confidence intervals: -5-54). Improvements in other endpoints were similar between treatments. Adverse event incidences were similar for umeclidinium (37%) and glycopyrronium (36%). Once-daily umeclidinium was non-inferior to once-daily glycopyrronium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in trough FEV at day 85. Patient-reported outcomes and safety profiles were similar for both treatments.
本研究比较了每日一次吸入62.5μg乌美溴铵与每日一次吸入50μg格隆溴铵在中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者中的疗效和安全性。这是一项为期12周的多中心、随机、开放标签、平行组研究(Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT02236611)。患者按1:1随机分组,分别使用Ellipta或Breezhaler干粉吸入器吸入62.5μg乌美溴铵或50μg格隆溴铵。主要终点是符合方案人群在第85天时的1秒用力呼气容积(FEV)谷值。其他终点包括:0至24小时的FEV加权平均值以及患者报告的结局(过渡性呼吸困难指数评分和圣乔治呼吸问卷总分)。还评估了不良事件。共有1037例患者被随机分配接受治疗。乌美溴铵在非劣效性方面(界值:-50 mL)不低于格隆溴铵(第85天FEV谷值的治疗差异:24 mL,95%置信区间:-5至54)。两种治疗在其他终点方面的改善相似。乌美溴铵(37%)和格隆溴铵(36%)的不良事件发生率相似。在慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者中,每日一次的乌美溴铵在第85天时的FEV谷值方面不劣于每日一次的格隆溴铵。两种治疗的患者报告结局和安全性概况相似。