Suissa Samy, Dell'Aniello Sophie, Ernst Pierre
Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute-Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
COPD. 2022 Dec;19(1):1-9. doi: 10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789. Epub 2021 Sep 21.
Randomized trials of triple therapy including an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) reported remarkable benefits on mortality compared with dual bronchodilators, likely resulting from ICS withdrawal at randomization. We compared triple therapy with dual bronchodilator combinations on major COPD outcomes in a real-world clinical practice setting. We identified a cohort of COPD patients, age 50 or older, treated during 2002-2018, from the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients initiating treatment with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) and an ICS on the same day, were compared with patients initiating a LAMA and LABA, weighted by fine stratification of propensity scores. Subjects were followed-up one year for all-cause mortality, severe exacerbation and pneumonia. The cohort included 117,729 new-users of LAMA-LABA-ICS and 26,666 of LAMA-LABA. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of all-cause mortality with LAMA-LABA-ICS compared with LAMA-LABA was 1.17 (95% CI: 1.04-1.31) while for severe exacerbation and pneumonia it was 1.19 (1.08-1.32) and 1.29 (1.16-1.45) respectively. However, mortality was not elevated with triple therapy among patients with asthma diagnosis (HR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.74-1.34), with two or more prior exacerbations (HR 0.88; 95% CI: 0.70-1.11), and with FEV percent predicted >30%. In a real-world setting of COPD treatment, triple therapy initiation was not more effective than dual bronchodilators at preventing all-cause mortality and severe COPD exacerbations. Triple therapy may be unsafe among patients without prior exacerbations, in whom ICS are not recommended, with no asthma diagnosis and with very severe airflow obstruction.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789 .
关于慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的三联疗法(包括吸入性糖皮质激素[ICS])的随机试验表明,与双联支气管扩张剂相比,其在死亡率方面有显著益处,这可能是由于随机分组时停用了ICS。我们在真实世界的临床实践环境中比较了三联疗法与双联支气管扩张剂组合对COPD主要转归的影响。我们从英国临床实践研究数据链中确定了一组2002年至2018年期间接受治疗的50岁及以上的COPD患者。将同一天开始使用长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)、长效β受体激动剂(LABA)和ICS进行治疗的患者,与开始使用LAMA和LABA的患者进行比较,并根据倾向评分进行精细分层加权。对受试者随访一年,观察全因死亡率、严重加重和肺炎情况。该队列包括117729名LAMA-LABA-ICS新使用者和26666名LAMA-LABA新使用者。与LAMA-LABA相比,LAMA-LABA-ICS的全因死亡率调整后风险比(HR)为1.17(95%CI:1.04-1.31),而严重加重和肺炎的调整后HR分别为1.19(1.08-1.32)和1.29(1.16-1.45)。然而,在有哮喘诊断的患者(HR 0.99;95%CI:0.74-1.34)、有两次或更多次既往加重的患者(HR 0.88;95%CI:0.70-1.11)以及预测FEV百分比>30%的患者中,三联疗法并未增加死亡率。在COPD治疗的真实世界环境中,开始三联疗法在预防全因死亡率和严重COPD加重方面并不比双联支气管扩张剂更有效。在没有既往加重、不推荐使用ICS、没有哮喘诊断且气流阻塞非常严重的患者中,三联疗法可能不安全。本文的补充数据可在网上获取,网址为https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789 。