Formoterol Fumarate

富马酸福莫特罗
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:仅基于诊断标签的哮喘治疗并不能使患者同样受益。为了确定可能与常规吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)与短效β2激动剂缓解剂或ICS/福莫特罗治疗改善的治疗反应相关的患者特征,进行了系统文献综述(SLR).
    方法:搜索包括MEDLINE和Embase在内的数据库确定了哮喘患者的随机对照试验(RCT),年龄≥12岁,1998-2022年出版,包含≥1次常规ICS给药或含ICS/福莫特罗的治疗组,并报告患者特征和感兴趣的结果。提取相关数据并进行可行性评估,以确定是否适合进行荟萃分析。
    结果:SLR确定了72,740名患者和90个治疗组的39个随机对照试验,报告11个特征和11个结果。五个患者特征(年龄,身体质量指数,FEV1,吸烟史,哮喘控制)和五个结果(恶化率,肺功能,哮喘控制,坚持,至首次加重的时间)被认为可纳入荟萃分析,因为有足够的可比性报告。在16个RCTs中报告了按患者特征水平分层的临床结果亚组。
    结论:对常规ICS给药SABA或含ICS/福莫特罗的哮喘治疗策略的研究进行了系统综述,确定了五个特征和结果的一致报告,允许探索与治疗反应的关联。相反,许多其他特征和结果,虽然潜在相关,报告不一致,并且亚组报告有限,这意味着无法分析性状亚组的治疗反应。我们建议在呼吸道随机对照试验中对临床相关患者特征和结果进行更一致的测量和报告。
    BACKGROUND: Asthma treatments based solely on diagnostic label do not benefit patients equally. To identify patient traits that may be associated with improved treatment response to regular inhaled corticosteroid (ICSs) dosing with short-acting β2-agonist reliever or ICS/formoterol-containing therapy, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted.
    METHODS: Searches of databases including MEDLINE and Embase identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with asthma, aged ≥12 years, published 1998-2022, containing ≥1 regular ICS dosing or ICS/formoterol-containing treatment arm, and reporting patient traits and outcomes of interest. Relevant data was extracted and underwent a feasibility assessment to determine suitability for meta-analysis.
    RESULTS: The SLR identified 39 RCTs of 72,740 patients and 90 treatment arms, reporting 11 traits and 11 outcomes. Five patient traits (age, body mass index, FEV1, smoking history, asthma control) and five outcomes (exacerbation rate, lung function, asthma control, adherence, time to first exacerbation) were deemed feasible for inclusion in meta-analyses due to sufficient comparable reporting. Subgroups of clinical outcomes stratified by levels of patient traits were reported in 16 RCTs.
    CONCLUSIONS: A systematic review of studies of regular ICS dosing with SABA or ICS/formoterol-containing treatment strategies in asthma identified consistent reporting of five traits and outcomes, allowing exploration of associations with treatment response. Conversely, many other traits and outcomes, although being potentially relevant, were inconsistently reported and limited subgroup reporting meant analyses of treatment response for subgroups of traits was not possible. We recommend more consistent measurement and reporting of clinically relevant patient traits and outcomes in respiratory RCTs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    2020年,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是美国除COVID-19外的第五大死亡原因,其死亡负担自20世纪80年代以来一直在上升。戒烟,长期氧疗,无创通气,和肺减容手术对死亡率有有益的影响;然而,直到最近,药物治疗对全因死亡率的影响尚不清楚.COPD患者的吸入药物治疗包括长效毒蕈碱受体拮抗剂(LAMA)的组合,长效β2-激动剂(LABA),和吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)。最近的IMPACT和ETHOS临床试验报道了与LAMA/LABA双重疗法相比,ICS/LAMA/LABA三联疗法对死亡率的益处。在影响方面,糠酸氟替卡松/灭克地铵/维兰特罗治疗与灭克地铵/维兰特罗治疗相比,显著降低了全因死亡率的风险(风险比,0.72;95%CI,0.53至0.99;P=0.042)。ETHOS试验发现,用布地奈德/格隆溴铵/福莫特罗与格隆溴铵/福莫特罗治疗的患者的上/下治疗全因死亡率风险降低(风险比,0.51[0.33至0.80];标称P=.0035)。两项试验均纳入了有症状的COPD患者人群,这些患者将来有加重的风险较高。对最终检索到的生命状态数据进行的事后分析显示,观察到的死亡率获益是由ICS部分赋予的.总之,三联疗法可降低以中度或重度气流阻塞和近期有中度或重度加重史的有症状COPD患者的死亡风险.这种好处可能是由恶化的减少驱动的。未来的研究工作应集中在改善COPD患者的长期预后上。
    In 2020, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was the fifth leading cause of death in the United States excluding COVID-19, and its mortality burden has been rising since the 1980s. Smoking cessation, long-term oxygen therapy, noninvasive ventilation, and lung volume reduction surgery have had a beneficial effect on mortality; however, until recently, the effects of pharmacologic therapies on all-cause mortality have been unclear. Inhaled pharmacologic treatments for patients with COPD include combinations of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), long-acting-β2-agonists (LABAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The recent IMPACT and ETHOS clinical trials reported mortality benefits with ICS/LAMA/LABA triple therapy compared with LAMA/LABA dual therapy. In IMPACT, fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol therapy significantly reduced the risk of on-/off-treatment all-cause mortality vs umeclidinium/vilanterol (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.99; P=.042). The ETHOS trial found a reduction in the risk of on-/off-treatment all-cause mortality in patients treated with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol vs glycopyrrolate/formoterol (hazard ratio, 0.51 [0.33 to 0.80]; nominal P=.0035). Both trials included populations of patients with symptomatic COPD at high risk of future exacerbations, and a post hoc analysis of the final retrieved vital status data suggested that the observed mortality benefits are conferred by the ICS component. In conclusion, triple therapy reduces the risk of mortality in patients with symptomatic COPD characterized by moderate or severe airflow obstruction and a recent history of moderate or severe exacerbations. This benefit is likely to be driven by reductions in exacerbations. Future research efforts should focus on improving the long-term prognosis of patients living with COPD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Review
    全球哮喘倡议(GINA)推荐低剂量吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)/福莫特罗比短效β2-激动剂(SABA)更适合青少年和成人哮喘患者的缓解疗法。在哮喘严重程度的范围内。这项建议代表了几十年来哮喘管理中最根本的变化。在这篇评论中,我们回顾了ICS/福莫特罗联合治疗的基本原理,提出这项建议的证据,证据的局限性,在临床实践中实施基于ICS/福莫特罗缓解剂的方案相关的实际问题,以及ICS/沙丁胺醇联合治疗方案疗效和安全性的新证据。
    The Global Initiative for Asthma recommends that low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol be preferred to short-acting beta2-agonists as reliever therapy in adolescents and adults with asthma, across the range of asthma severity. This recommendation represents the most fundamental change in asthma management for many decades. In this commentary, we review the rationale for combination ICS/formoterol therapy, the evidence on which this recommendation has been made, the limitations in the evidence, the practical issues relevant to the implementation of ICS/formoterol reliever-based regimens in clinical practice, and the emerging evidence for the efficacy and safety of combination ICS/salbutamol reliever therapy regimens.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    背景:SaintAlphonsus卫生系统(SAHS)的医院已经实施了计量剂量吸入器(MDI)到雾化治疗互换计划,其中沙丁胺醇/异丙托铵和吸入皮质类固醇/长效β激动剂(ICS/LABA)MDI的所有订单都通过药房与雾化器进行治疗互换。
    目的:主要结果指标是评估沙丁胺醇/异丙托铵和ICS/LABA吸入剂与雾化溶液的治疗性交换百分比。次要结果包括再入院率的评估,使用适当MDI出院的患者百分比,以及对治疗互换计划实施的财务分析。
    方法:这项回顾性观察队列研究获得了系统机构审查委员会的批准,于2019年10月15日至2020年2月15日进行。有哮喘或COPD病史的成年患者因订购异丙托溴铵/沙丁胺醇而进入SAHS医院之一,氟替卡松/沙美特罗,莫米松/福莫特罗,或布地奈德/福莫特罗MDI符合纳入条件。如果患者被推定为COVID-19或检测呈阳性,则被排除在外。
    结果:本次评估中94.3%的患者成功完成了治疗性互换。排放差异发生在评估的订单的14.3%中。出院差异与30天再入院之间没有相关性。MDI与雾化溶液互换在样本人群中节省了13,908.16美元的药物成本。
    结论:实施SAHS吸入器至雾化器治疗互换计划的第一阶段在操作和临床上都是成功的。该计划预计将继续减少药物浪费,并为卫生系统节省成本。
    Background: The hospitals of the Saint Alphonsus Health System (SAHS) have implemented a metered dose inhaler (MDI) to nebulization therapeutic interchange program in which all orders for albuterol/ipratropium and inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta agonists (ICS/LABA) MDIs are therapeutically interchanged to nebulizers by pharmacy. Objectives: The primary outcome measure is to assess the percent of albuterol/ipratropium and ICS/LABA inhalers therapeutically interchanged to nebulized solutions. Secondary outcomes include assessment of readmission rates, the percentage of patients discharged with the appropriate MDI, and a financial analysis of the implementation of the therapeutic interchange program. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study was approved by the system\'s institutional review board and conducted between October 15, 2019, and February 15, 2020. Adult patients with history of asthma or COPD admitted to one of the SAHS hosptials with an order placed for ipratropium/albuterol, fluticasone/salmeterol, mometasone/formoterol, or budesonide/formoterol MDIs were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if they were presumed to have or tested positive for COVID-19. Results: Therapeutic interchanges were successfully completed in 94.3% of the orders included in this evaluation. Discharge discrepancies occurred in 14.3% of orders assessed. No correlation was found between discharge discrepancies and 30-day readmissions. The MDI to nebulized solution interchanges saved $13,908.16 in medication cost in the sample population. Conclusion: The first phase of implementing the SAHS inhaler to nebulizer therapeutic interchange program was operationally and clinically successful. The program is projected to continue to reduce medication waste and provide cost savings for the health system.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    全球哮喘倡议(GINA)为接受第3至5步治疗的患者推荐了2种替代疗法:单一吸入器联合吸入皮质类固醇-福莫特罗作为维持和缓解剂(SMART)或吸入皮质类固醇长效β2激动剂作为维持剂加上短效β2激动剂作为缓解剂。
    评估在哮喘控制不佳的患者中,与增加或继续GINA治疗步骤并维持吸入性皮质类固醇长效β2激动剂加短效β2激动剂缓解相比,转换为SMART是否与首次重度哮喘加重的时间更长有关。
    对于本系统综述和荟萃分析,文学,阿斯利康和新西兰医学研究所的内部研究数据库,本研究检索了之前关于SMART的系统评价和荟萃分析的参考文献,以确定1990年1月至2018年2月发表的随机临床试验,这些试验比较了通过SMART进行布地奈德-福莫特罗与维持吸入性皮质类固醇长效β2激动剂+短效β2激动剂缓解剂.
    如果报告GINA治疗步骤的基线数据,则包括至少24周的试验,哮喘控制状态,和严重加重的疗效指标。纳入的患者包括患有哮喘和基线哮喘控制问卷5项版本评分为1.5或更高的成人和青少年。
    患者水平的数据通过独立提取来识别,并使用固定效应模型进行分析。数据分析于2018年8月至2021年11月进行。
    主要结果是与每种治疗相关的首次严重哮喘发作的时间,采用Cox比例风险回归分析。
    总的来说,纳入4863例患者(3034例[62.4%]女性;平均年龄[SD],39.8[16.3]年)。在GINA步骤3(n=1950)将未控制的哮喘患者转换为步骤3或步骤4的SMART与首次严重哮喘加重的时间延长有关。与步骤4吸入性皮质类固醇长效β2-激动剂维持加短效β2-激动剂缓解相比,风险降低29%(危险比,0.71;95%CI,0.52-0.97)。对于第3步和第4步未控制的哮喘患者(n=2913),与保持相同的治疗步骤相比,切换到SMART与第一次严重哮喘加重的时间延长和风险降低30%相关(风险比,0.70;95%CI,0.58-0.85)。
    在这篇系统综述和荟萃分析中,对于控制不佳的哮喘患者,与增加或继续GINA步骤并维持吸入性皮质类固醇长效β2激动剂加短效β2激动剂缓解相比,SMART与首次严重哮喘加重的时间更长相关。这些结果表明,如果在GINA步骤3或4接受治疗的成人或青少年哮喘控制不佳,优选改用SMART方案,而不是增加或继续GINA治疗步骤,同时维持吸入性皮质类固醇-长效β2激动剂+短效β2激动剂缓解疗法.
    The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) recommends 2 alternative treatments for patients receiving treatment at steps 3 to 5: single inhaler combination inhaled corticosteroid-formoterol as both maintenance and reliever (SMART) or inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist as maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist as reliever.
    To assess whether switching to SMART is associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever among patients with poorly controlled asthma.
    For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the literature, internal study databases at AstraZeneca and the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, and references from a previous systematic review and meta-analysis on SMART were searched to identify randomized clinical trials published from January 1990 to February 2018, that compared budesonide-formoterol by SMART with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever.
    Trials of at least 24 weeks\' duration were included if they reported baseline data on GINA treatment step, asthma control status, and efficacy measures of severe exacerbations. Included patients were adults and adolescents with asthma and baseline Asthma Control Questionnaire 5-item version scores of 1.5 or higher.
    Patient-level data were identified by independent extraction, and analyses were performed using a fixed-effect model. Data analysis was performed from August 2018 to November 2021.
    The primary outcome was time to first severe asthma exacerbation associated with each treatment, analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression.
    Overall, 4863 patients were included (3034 [62.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 39.8 [16.3] years). Switching patients with uncontrolled asthma at GINA step 3 (n = 1950) to SMART at either step 3 or 4 was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation, with a 29% reduced risk compared with stepping up to step 4 inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist maintenance plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97). For patients with uncontrolled asthma at step 3 and step 4 (n = 2913), switching to SMART was associated with a prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation and a 30% reduced risk compared with remaining at the same treatment step (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.85).
    In this systematic review and meta-analysis, for patients with poorly controlled asthma, SMART was associated with longer time to first severe asthma exacerbation compared with a step up or continuation of GINA step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever. These findings suggest that if an adult or adolescent receiving treatment at GINA step 3 or 4 has poorly controlled asthma, it is preferable to switch to the SMART regimen rather than to step up or continue the GINA treatment step with maintenance inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting β2-agonist plus short-acting β2-agonist reliever therapy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    总结所有现有研究的主要发现,这些研究评估了间歇性或按需使用吸入糖皮质激素(ICS)作为短效β2激动剂(SABA)或速效β2激动剂(FABA)的附加疗法在小儿哮喘患者中。研究可以包括或省略在疾病的稳定期期间使用ICS。
    电子数据库MEDLINE,EMBASE,CINAHL,Scopus,和Cochrane系统评论数据库从成立到2021年2月。
    到2021年2月发表的文献中的相关文章。
    在已确定的294个参考文件中,包括14项研究。在间歇或按需基础上使用ICS(作为SABA的附加疗法)已被证明比单独使用SABA的治疗更有效,并且与常规的每日ICS给药相比效果类似或更低。此外,仅在需要时增加ICS剂量的策略(作为福莫特罗的附加疗法,aFABA),并在疾病的稳定阶段保持较低(即单一维持和缓解治疗,SMART)已被证明与比较器类似或更有效。
    间歇性或按需使用ICS作为SABA或FABA的附加疗法,在小儿哮喘患者的疾病稳定期使用或不使用ICS,包括几种有效的治疗策略。
    To summarize the principal findings of all available studies that have evaluated the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on an intermittent or as-needed basis as an add-on therapy to short-acting β2-agonists (SABAs) or fast-acting β2-agonists (FABAs) in pediatric asthmatic patients. Studies could either include or omit the use of ICS during stable periods of the disease.
    Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to February 2021.
    Relevant articles in the literature published by February 2021.
    Of 294 references identified, 14 studies were included. The use of ICS on an intermittent or as-needed basis (as an add-on therapy to SABAs) has been shown to be more effective than treatment with SABA alone and to be similarly or less effective compared to regular daily ICS administration. Furthermore, strategies involving increasing the dose of ICS only when needed (as an add-on therapy to formoterol, a FABA) and keeping it low during stable stages of the disease (i.e. single maintenance and reliever therapy, SMART) have been shown to be similarly or more effective than comparators.
    The use of ICS on an intermittent or as-needed basis as an add-on therapy to SABAs or FABAs, with or without ICS use during stable periods of the disease in pediatric asthmatic patients, encompasses several effective treatment strategies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    哮喘的气道炎症不仅涉及中央气道,还延伸到外周气道。肺沉积可能是哮喘适当治疗的关键。我们比较了氟代氢氟烷(HFA)-倍氯米松-福莫特罗(BDP-F)与等效剂量的非氟代氢吸入糖皮质激素和长效β2激动剂(ICS-LABA)联合治疗哮喘的临床效果。
    我们通过对PubMed的全面文献检索确定了符合条件的研究,EMBASE和Cochrane中央对照试验登记册(中央)。数据分析使用ReviewManager5.3.5软件(CochraneIMS,2014).
    共纳入10项已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)中的2326名哮喘患者进行分析。早晨给药前呼气流量峰值(PEF)相对于基线的变化,夜间给药前PEF和1秒用力呼气量(FEV1)在外用HFA-BDP-F和非外用ICS-LABA之间没有显著差异(分别为p=0.23,p=0.99和p=0.23).在25%至75%的用力肺活量(FEF25-75%)之间,超细HFA-BDP-F对用力呼气流量没有显示出更大的益处。关于周围气道的参数(MD0.03L/s,p=0.65;n=877)。在呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)水平或肺泡分数方面,干预措施之间没有实质性差异。总体分析显示,在改善哮喘控制测试(ACT)评分(p=0.30)或减少抢救药物使用的抽吸次数(p=0.16)方面,外用HFA-BDP-F与非外用ICS-LABA相比没有显着益处。超微HFA-BDP-F并未导致比非超微ICS-LABA更少的恶化(RR0.61,95%CI:0.31至1.20;I2=0;p=0.15)。
    在改善中央气道或外周气道的肺功能方面,与非外用ICS-LABA的等效组合相比,外用HFA-BDP-F的登记RCT没有显着优势。改善哮喘症状控制或降低恶化率。
    Airway inflammation in asthma involves not only the central airways but extends to peripheral airways. Lung deposition may be key for an appropriate treatment of asthma. We compared the clinical effects of extrafine hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone-formoterol (BDP-F) versus equipotent doses of nonextrafine combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long acting β2-agonist (ICS-LABA) in asthma.
    We identified eligible studies by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Data analysis was performed with the Review Manager 5.3.5 software (Cochrane IMS, 2014).
    A total of 2326 patients with asthma from ten published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled for analysis. Change from baseline in morning pre-dose peak expiratory flow (PEF), evening pre-dose PEF and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) were detected no significant differences between extrafine HFA-BDP-F and nonextrafine ICS-LABAs (p = 0.23, p = 0.99 and p = 0.23, respectively). Extrafine HFA-BDP-F did not show any greater benefit in forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of forced vital capacity (FEF25-75%), the parameter concerning peripheral airways (MD 0.03L/s, p = 0.65; n = 877). There were no substantial differences between interventions in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) levels or in its alveolar fraction. The overall analysis showed no significant benefit of extrafine HFA-BDP-F over nonextrafine ICS-LABA in improving Asthma Control Test (ACT) score (p = 0.30) or decreasing the number of puffs of rescue medication use (p = 0.16). Extrafine HFA-BDP-F did not lead to less exacerbations than nonextrafine ICS-LABA (RR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.20; I2 = 0; p = 0.15).
    Enrolled RCTs of extrafine HFA-BDP-F have demonstrated no significant advantages over the equivalent combination of nonextrafine ICS-LABA in improving pulmonary function concerning central airways or peripheral airways, improving asthma symptom control or reducing exacerbation rate.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    布地奈德/格隆溴铵/福莫特罗(BREZTRIAEROSPHERE™;TRIXEOAEROSPHERE™)是吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)的吸入固定剂量组合,长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)格隆溴铵和长效β2激动剂(LABA)富马酸福莫特罗被批准用于慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的维持治疗。它通过加压计量剂量Aerosphere吸入器输送,并使用共悬浮输送技术配制。在两项为期24-52周的关键III期试验中,与布地奈德/福莫特罗和/或格隆铵/福莫特罗相比,布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗降低了中度/重度COPD加重的发生率并改善了肺功能。布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗对呼吸困难也有有益作用,救援药物需求和健康相关生活质量(HR-QOL),并降低了全因死亡的风险。布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗的耐受性普遍良好,耐受性曲线通常与单个组件的耐受性曲线相似。布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗为COPD的维持治疗提供了一种有用且方便的选择,包括使用双ICS/LABA或LAMA/LABA治疗不能充分控制疾病的患者。
    慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是一种炎症性肺疾病,其特征是慢性气流受限和持续的呼吸道症状。一种结合吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)的强化治疗方法,长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)和长效β2受体激动剂(LABA)可能为COPD患者提供临床获益,这些患者的疾病通过双重疗法(ICS/LABA或LAMA/LABA)得到充分控制.布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗(BREZTRIAEROSPHERE™;TRIXEOAEROSPHERE™)是一种固定剂量的ICS/LAMA/LABA组合,被批准用于COPD的维持治疗。每天两次通过单个加压计量剂量的Aerosphere吸入器给药。接受布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗治疗的中度至非常重度COPD患者的中度或重度COPD加重较少,肺功能改善,与接受ICS/LABA或LAMA/LABA治疗的患者相比,呼吸道症状和生活质量。与接受LAMA/LABA治疗的患者相比,死亡风险降低。布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗的耐受性普遍良好,与双重治疗相似的不良事件发生率。布地奈德/格隆铵/福莫特罗是COPD维持治疗的一种有用且方便的选择。
    Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (BREZTRI AEROSPHERE™; TRIXEO AEROSPHERE™) is an inhaled fixed-dose combination of the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) budesonide, the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) glycopyrronium bromide and the long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) formoterol fumarate approved for the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is delivered via a pressurized metered-dose Aerosphere inhaler and is formulated using co-suspension delivery technology. In two pivotal phase III trials of 24-52 weeks\' duration, budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol reduced the rates of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and improved lung function to a greater extent than budesonide/formoterol and/or glycopyrronium/formoterol. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol also demonstrated beneficial effects on dyspnoea, rescue medication requirements and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL), and reduced the risk of all-cause mortality. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol was generally well tolerated, with the tolerability profile being generally similar to that of the individual components. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol provides a useful and convenient option for the maintenance treatment of COPD, including for patients whose disease is inadequately controlled with dual ICS/LABA or LAMA/LABA therapy.
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an inflammatory lung disease that is characterized by chronic airflow limitation and persistent respiratory symptoms. A step-up treatment approach combining an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) may provide clinical benefits in patients with COPD whose disease is inadequately controlled by dual therapies (ICS/LABA or LAMA/LABA). Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (BREZTRI AEROSPHERE™; TRIXEO AEROSPHERE™) is a fixed-dose ICS/LAMA/LABA combination approved for the maintenance treatment of COPD. It is administered twice daily via a single pressurized metered-dose Aerosphere inhaler. Patients with moderate to very severe COPD receiving budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol had fewer moderate or severe COPD exacerbations and improved lung function, respiratory symptoms and quality of life compared with patients receiving ICS/LABA or LAMA/LABA therapy. The risk of death was reduced compared with that of patients receiving LAMA/LABA therapy. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol was generally well tolerated, with similar rates of adverse events to dual therapy. Budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol is a useful and convenient option for the maintenance treatment of COPD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者出现进一步恶化或症状,尽管服用了双重长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)/长效β2激动剂(LABA)或吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)/LABA治疗,建议使用ICS/LAMA/LABA三联疗法。先前的网络荟萃分析显示,ICS/LAMA/LABA的疗效相当,布地奈德/格隆溴铵/富马酸福莫特罗(BUD/GLY/FOR)320/18/9.6µg,COPD患者在24周时接受其他固定剂量和开放联合三联疗法。随后,ETHOS的研究发表了,包括8509名患者的数据,评估BUD/GLY/FOR超过52周的疗效和安全性。这项网络荟萃分析(NMA)是为了比较相对疗效,安全,BUD/GLY/FOR320/18/9.6µg与其他固定剂量和开放联合三联疗法在COPD52周内的耐受性,包括来自ETHOS的数据。进行了系统的文献综述,以确定≥10周的随机对照试验,包括≥1个固定剂量或开放联合三联疗法组,在中度至非常重度COPD患者中。评估纳入研究的方法学质量和偏倚风险。使用三级分层贝叶斯NMA模型结合研究结果,以评估24周和52周或以上的疗效和安全性结果。Meta回归和敏感性分析用于评估不同研究的异质性。19项研究(n=37,741名患者)符合审查的纳入标准;15项有助于基本病例网络。将LAMA/LABA双重组合组合为单个治疗组以创建连接的网络。在所有恶化的结果中,肺功能,症状,与健康相关的生活质量,安全,和耐受性,BUD/GLY/FOR在24周和52周或以上时的疗效和安全性与其他三联ICS/LAMA/LABA固定剂量(糠酸氟替卡松/米地铵/维兰特罗和二丙酸倍氯米松/格隆溴铵/富马酸福莫特罗)和开放联合用药相当.急性加重结局的敏感性分析和荟萃回归结果与基本病例NMA基本一致。在这个NMA中,BUD/GLY/FOR320/18/9.6μg与其他ICS/LAMA/LABA固定剂量或开放联合疗法在降低恶化率和改善肺功能方面表现出相当的疗效。中度至非常重度COPD患者的症状和健康相关生活质量,与先前发表的COPD三联用药的荟萃分析结果一致.还发现BUD/GLY/FOR的安全性和耐受性特征与其他三联疗法相当。
    In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who experience further exacerbations or symptoms, despite being prescribed dual long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) or inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA therapies, triple ICS/LAMA/LABA therapy is recommended. A previous network meta-analysis showed comparable efficacy of the ICS/LAMA/LABA, budesonide/glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol fumarate (BUD/GLY/FOR) 320/18/9.6 µg, to other fixed-dose and open combination triple therapies at 24 weeks in COPD. Subsequently, the ETHOS study was published, including data for 8509 patients, assessing the efficacy and safety of BUD/GLY/FOR over 52 weeks. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the relative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of BUD/GLY/FOR 320/18/9.6 µg with other fixed-dose and open combination triple therapies in COPD over 52 weeks, including data from ETHOS. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify ≥ 10-week randomized controlled trials, including ≥ 1 fixed-dose or open combination triple-therapy arm, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. The methodologic quality and risk of bias of included studies were assessed. Study results were combined using a three-level hierarchical Bayesian NMA model to assess efficacy and safety outcomes at or over 24 and 52 weeks. Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were used to assess heterogeneity across studies. Nineteen studies (n = 37,741 patients) met the inclusion criteria of the review; 15 contributed to the base case network. LAMA/LABA dual combinations were combined as a single treatment group to create a connected network. Across all outcomes for exacerbations, lung function, symptoms, health-related quality of life, safety, and tolerability, the efficacy and safety of BUD/GLY/FOR were comparable to those of other triple ICS/LAMA/LABA fixed-dose (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol and beclomethasone dipropionate/glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol fumarate) and open combinations at or over 24 and 52 weeks. Sensitivity analyses and meta-regression results for exacerbation outcomes were broadly in line with the base case NMA. In this NMA, BUD/GLY/FOR 320/18/9.6 μg showed comparable efficacy versus other ICS/LAMA/LABA fixed-dose or open combination therapies in terms of reducing exacerbation rates and improving lung function, symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, in line with previously published meta-analysis results of triple combinations in COPD. The safety and tolerability profile of BUD/GLY/FOR was also found to be comparable to other triple combination therapies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    定量吸入器(MDI)是用于递送吸入治疗的最常见的装置类型之一。然而,在这些药物的开发和药物输送方面存在一些技术挑战。特别是,悬浮型计量吸入器易受悬浮异质性影响,体外药物-药物相互作用,和病人处理错误,这些都可能影响药物输送。为了克服这些挑战,需要新的制定方法。AerospherTM吸入器,使用共悬浮输送技术配制,将药物晶体与多孔磷脂颗粒结合以产生稳定的,均匀的悬浮液一旦到达气道就会溶解。已经开发了使用该技术的两种组合疗法用于治疗COPD:格隆溴铵/富马酸福莫特罗(GFFMDI;双重组合)和布地奈德/格隆溴铵/富马酸福莫特罗(BGFMDI;三重组合)。这里,我们回顾了证据,重点是评估剂量递送的研究,肺沉积,以及对气道几何形状的影响。体外评估表明,Aerosphere吸入器提供一致的剂量输送,即使在模拟病人处理错误的存在。用这种技术递送的组合疗法还显示出一致的细颗粒分数(FPF)和用于递送至中央和外周气道的最佳粒度分布,即使当多种药物经由同一吸入器递送时也是如此。使用伽玛闪烁显像和功能性呼吸成像的研究表明,GFFMDI有效地沉积在中央和周围气道中,并为整个肺部的气道容量和阻力提供有临床意义的益处。总的来说,研究表明,Aerosphere吸入器,使用共悬浮输送技术配制,可能比传统配方更有优势,包括在患者处理条件下持续交付多个组件,最佳粒径和FPF,并有效输送至中央和外周气道。未来的研究可能会提供更多的证据来进一步表征MDI药物递送中这些技术改进的临床益处。
    Metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are one of the most common device types for delivering inhaled therapies. However, there are several technical challenges in development and drug delivery of these medications. In particular, suspension-based MDIs are susceptible to suspension heterogeneity, in vitro drug-drug interactions, and patient handling errors, which may all affect drug delivery. To overcome these challenges, new formulation approaches are required. The AerosphereTM inhaler, formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, combines drug crystals with porous phospholipid particles to create stable, homogenous suspensions that dissolve once they reach the airways. Two combination therapies using this technology have been developed for the treatment of COPD: glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF MDI; dual combination) and budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF MDI; triple combination). Here, we review the evidence with a focus on studies assessing dose delivery, lung deposition, and effects on airway geometry. In vitro assessments have demonstrated that the Aerosphere inhaler provides consistent dose delivery, even in the presence of simulated patient handling errors. Combination therapies delivered with this technology also show a consistent fine particle fraction (FPF) and an optimal particle size distribution for delivery to the central and peripheral airways even when multiple drugs are delivered via the same inhaler. Studies using gamma scintigraphy and functional respiratory imaging have demonstrated that GFF MDI is effectively deposited in the central and peripheral airways, and provides clinically meaningful benefits on airway volume and resistance throughout the lung. Overall, studies suggest that the Aerosphere inhaler, formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, may offer advantages over traditional formulations, including consistent delivery of multiple components across patient handling conditions, optimal particle size and FPF, and effective delivery to the central and peripheral airways. Future studies may provide additional evidence to further characterize the clinical benefits of these technical improvements in MDI drug delivery.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号