Triple Inhaler versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Effectiveness on Mortality.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Samy Suissa, Sophie Dell'Aniello, Pierre Ernst
{"title":"Triple Inhaler versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Effectiveness on Mortality.","authors":"Samy Suissa,&nbsp;Sophie Dell'Aniello,&nbsp;Pierre Ernst","doi":"10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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<sub>2</sub>-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<sub>1</sub> 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 .</p>","PeriodicalId":10704,"journal":{"name":"COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

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 beta2-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 FEV1 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 .

慢性阻塞性肺病患者的三重吸入器与双重支气管扩张剂治疗:对死亡率的实际有效性。
包括吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)在内的三联治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的随机试验报告,与双支气管扩张剂相比,三联治疗在死亡率上有显著的益处,这可能是由于随机停用ICS所致。在现实世界的临床实践中,我们比较了三联治疗和双支气管扩张剂联合治疗对COPD主要结局的影响。我们从英国临床实践研究数据链中确定了一组年龄在50岁或以上的COPD患者,他们在2002-2018年期间接受了治疗。在同一天开始使用长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)、长效β - 2激动剂(LABA)和ICS治疗的患者与开始使用LAMA和LABA治疗的患者进行比较,并通过倾向评分的精细分层进行加权。随访一年,观察全因死亡率、严重恶化和肺炎情况。该队列包括117,729名LAMA-LABA- ics新用户和26,666名LAMA-LABA新用户。与LAMA-LABA- ics相比,LAMA-LABA- ics的全因死亡率校正危险比(HR)为1.17 (95% CI: 1.04-1.31),严重加重和肺炎的校正危险比分别为1.19(1.08-1.32)和1.29(1.16-1.45)。然而,在诊断为哮喘的患者中,三联疗法的死亡率没有升高(HR 0.99;95% CI: 0.74-1.34),既往有两次或两次以上加重(HR 0.88;95% CI: 0.70-1.11), fev1%预测>30%。在COPD治疗的现实环境中,三联治疗在预防全因死亡率和严重COPD恶化方面并不比双支气管扩张剂更有效。三联疗法对于先前没有加重的患者可能是不安全的,这些患者不建议使用ICS,没有哮喘诊断并且有非常严重的气流阻塞。本文的补充数据可在https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1977789上在线获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: From pathophysiology and cell biology to pharmacology and psychosocial impact, COPD: Journal Of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease publishes a wide range of original research, reviews, case studies, and conference proceedings to promote advances in the pathophysiology, diagnosis, management, and control of lung and airway disease and inflammation - providing a unique forum for the discussion, design, and evaluation of more efficient and effective strategies in patient care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信