Suppr超能文献

氟替卡松为基础与布地奈德为基础三联疗法治疗 COPD:真实世界的比较有效性和安全性。

Fluticasone-Based versus Budesonide-Based Triple Therapies in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety.

机构信息

Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute-Jewish General Hospital; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

COPD. 2022;19(1):109-117. doi: 10.1080/15412555.2022.2035705.

Abstract

Triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is recommended for some patients, but the inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may differ in effectiveness and safety. We compared budesonide-based and fluticasone-based triple therapy given in two inhalers on the incidence of exacerbation, mortality and severe pneumonia, using an observational study approach. We identified a cohort of patients with COPD, new users of triple therapy given in two inhalers during 2002-2018, age 50 or older, from the UK's CPRD database, and followed for one year. The hazard ratio (HR) of exacerbation, all-cause death and pneumonia was estimated using the Cox regression model, weighted by fine stratification of the propensity score of treatment initiation. The cohort included 29,716 new users of fluticasone-based triple therapy and 9,646 of budesonide-based. The HR of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with budesonide-based triple therapy was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-1.03), relative to fluticasone-based, while for a severe exacerbation it was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87-1.07). The incidence of all-cause death was lower with budesonide-based therapy among patients with no prior exacerbations (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.66-0.98). The HR of severe pneumonia with budesonide-based therapy was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.75-0.95). In a real-world clinical setting of COPD treatment, budesonide-based triple therapy given in two inhalers was generally as effective at reducing exacerbations as fluticasone-based triple therapy. However, the budesonide-based triple therapy was associated with a lower incidence of severe pneumonia and possibly also of all-cause death, especially among patients with no prior exacerbations for whom triple therapy is not recommended.

摘要

三联疗法治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)适用于某些患者,但吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)的疗效和安全性可能存在差异。我们采用观察性研究方法,比较了两种吸入器中布地奈德和氟替卡松为基础的三联疗法在加重、死亡率和严重肺炎发生率方面的差异。我们从英国 CPRD 数据库中确定了一组 COPD 患者队列,这些患者在 2002 年至 2018 年间新使用了两种吸入器的三联疗法,年龄在 50 岁或以上,并随访了一年。使用 Cox 回归模型估计了加重、全因死亡和肺炎的风险比(HR),并对治疗起始倾向的精细分层进行了加权。该队列包括 29716 例新使用氟替卡松为基础的三联疗法和 9646 例布地奈德为基础的三联疗法。与氟替卡松为基础的三联疗法相比,布地奈德为基础的三联疗法首次出现中度或重度加重的 HR 为 0.98(95%CI:0.94-1.03),而重度加重的 HR 为 0.97(95%CI:0.87-1.07)。对于无既往加重的患者,布地奈德为基础的三联疗法降低了全因死亡率(HR 0.80;95%CI:0.66-0.98)。布地奈德为基础的三联疗法的严重肺炎发生率 HR 为 0.84(95%CI:0.75-0.95)。在 COPD 治疗的真实临床环境中,两种吸入器中布地奈德为基础的三联疗法在降低加重方面的疗效与氟替卡松为基础的三联疗法大致相当。然而,布地奈德为基础的三联疗法与严重肺炎发生率降低相关,并且可能还与全因死亡率降低相关,尤其是对于不推荐使用三联疗法的无既往加重的患者。

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