Respiratory Medicine, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials (CHaRT), University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2019 Jul;23(37):1-146. doi: 10.3310/hta23370.
Despite widespread use of therapies such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continue to suffer, have reduced life expectancy and utilise considerable NHS resources. Laboratory investigations have demonstrated that at low plasma concentrations (1-5 mg/l) theophylline markedly enhances the anti-inflammatory effects of corticosteroids in COPD.
To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding low-dose theophylline to a drug regimen containing ICSs in people with COPD at high risk of exacerbation.
A multicentre, pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
The trial was conducted in 121 UK primary and secondary care sites.
People with COPD [i.e. who have a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV)/forced vital capacity (FVC) of < 0.7] currently on a drug regimen including ICSs with a history of two or more exacerbations treated with antibiotics and/or oral corticosteroids (OCSs) in the previous year.
Participants were randomised (1 : 1) to receive either low-dose theophylline or placebo for 1 year. The dose of theophylline (200 mg once or twice a day) was determined by ideal body weight and smoking status.
The number of participant-reported exacerbations in the 1-year treatment period that were treated with antibiotics and/or OCSs.
A total of 1578 people were randomised (60% from primary care): 791 to theophylline and 787 to placebo. There were 11 post-randomisation exclusions. Trial medication was prescribed to 1567 participants: 788 in the theophylline arm and 779 in the placebo arm. Participants in the trial arms were well balanced in terms of characteristics. The mean age was 68.4 [standard deviation (SD) 8.4] years, 54% were male, 32% smoked and mean FEV was 51.7% (SD 20.0%) predicted. Primary outcome data were available for 98% of participants: 772 in the theophylline arm and 764 in the placebo arm. There were 1489 person-years of follow-up data. The mean number of exacerbations was 2.24 (SD 1.99) for participants allocated to theophylline and 2.23 (SD 1.97) for participants allocated to placebo [adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.08]. Low-dose theophylline had no significant effects on lung function (i.e. FEV), incidence of pneumonia, mortality, breathlessness or measures of quality of life or disease impact. Hospital admissions due to COPD exacerbation were less frequent with low-dose theophylline (adjusted IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.94). However, 39 of the 51 excess hospital admissions in the placebo group were accounted for by 10 participants having three or more exacerbations. There were no differences in the reporting of theophylline side effects between the theophylline and placebo arms.
A higher than expected percentage of participants (26%) ceased trial medication; this was balanced between the theophylline and placebo arms and mitigated by over-recruitment ( = 154 additional participants were recruited) and the high rate of follow-up. The limitation of not using documented exacerbations is addressed by evidence that patient recall is highly reliable and the results of a small within-trial validation study.
For people with COPD at high risk of exacerbation, the addition of low-dose oral theophylline to a drug regimen that includes ICSs confers no overall clinical or health economic benefit. This result was evident from the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses.
To promote consideration of the findings of this trial in national and international COPD guidelines.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN27066620.
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 23, No. 37. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
尽管广泛使用了吸入性皮质类固醇(ICSs)等疗法,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者仍在遭受病痛,预期寿命缩短,并消耗大量国民保健服务(NHS)资源。实验室研究表明,在低血浆浓度(1-5mg/L)下,茶碱可显著增强 COPD 患者皮质类固醇的抗炎作用。
确定在有高恶化风险的 COPD 患者中,在包含 ICSs 的药物方案中添加低剂量茶碱是否具有临床有效性和成本效益。
一项多中心、实用、双盲、随机、安慰剂对照临床试验。
该试验在英国 121 个初级和二级保健场所进行。
目前正在接受包含 ICSs 的药物方案治疗的 COPD 患者[即第一秒用力呼气量(FEV)/用力肺活量(FVC)<0.7],且在过去一年中因 COPD 恶化而接受过两次或两次以上抗生素和/或口服皮质类固醇(OCS)治疗的患者。
参与者被随机(1:1)接受低剂量茶碱或安慰剂治疗 1 年。茶碱(200mg 每日一次或两次)的剂量根据理想体重和吸烟状况确定。
在 1 年治疗期间,参与者报告的需要用抗生素和/或 OCSs 治疗的恶化次数。
共有 1578 人被随机分组(60%来自初级保健):791 人接受茶碱治疗,787 人接受安慰剂治疗。有 11 人在随机分组后被排除。试验药物开给了 1567 名参与者:788 人在茶碱组,779 人在安慰剂组。试验组的参与者在特征方面平衡良好。平均年龄为 68.4[标准差(SD)8.4]岁,54%为男性,32%吸烟,平均 FEV 为预测值的 51.7%(SD 20.0%)。主要结局数据可用于 98%的参与者:772 人在茶碱组,764 人在安慰剂组。有 1489 人年的随访数据。接受茶碱治疗的参与者的恶化次数平均为 2.24(SD 1.99),接受安慰剂治疗的参与者为 2.23(SD 1.97)[调整后的发病率比(IRR)0.99,95%置信区间(CI)0.91 至 1.08]。低剂量茶碱对肺功能(即 FEV)、肺炎发生率、死亡率、呼吸困难或生活质量或疾病影响的衡量标准没有显著影响。因 COPD 恶化而住院的情况因低剂量茶碱而较少发生(调整后的 IRR 0.72,95%CI 0.55 至 0.94)。然而,安慰剂组中 51 例额外住院的情况中有 39 例是由 10 名患者发生了三次或更多次恶化引起的。茶碱组和安慰剂组的茶碱副作用报告没有差异。
超过预期比例的参与者(26%)停止了试验药物;这种情况在茶碱组和安慰剂组之间平衡,并通过过度招募(增加了 154 名额外的参与者)和高随访率得到缓解。不使用记录的恶化情况的限制是通过证据解决的,即患者回忆非常可靠,并且进行了一项小型内部验证研究。
对于有高恶化风险的 COPD 患者,在包含 ICSs 的药物方案中添加低剂量口服茶碱不会带来整体的临床或健康经济效益。这一结果从意向治疗和方案分析中得出。
促进在国家和国际 COPD 指南中考虑这项试验的结果。
当前对照试验 ISRCTN27066620。
该项目由英国国家卫生研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划资助,将在 ; Vol. 23, No. 37 中全文发表。请访问 NIHR 期刊库网站,以获取更多项目信息。