Cardiac safety of tiotropium in patients with cardiac events: a retrospective analysis of the UPLIFT® trial.

BackgroundTiotropium is an anticholinergic bronchodilator for symptom relief and reducing exacerbations with an established safety profile in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Using data from the 4-year Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT®) study, we re-evaluated the safety of tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients who experienced recent myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure or unstable rhythm disorder during the study.MethodsA post-hoc analysis of all-cause mortality and serious cardiac adverse events (cardiac SAEs), including cardiac deaths and death unknown, was conducted in patients who had experienced cardiac arrhythmia, MI or cardiac failure during UPLIFT® and who completed the study. Descriptive analyses were performed.ResultsMost patients experiencing cardiac events, for which they would have been excluded at baseline, remained in the trial. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed a trend to later occurrence of cardiac SAEs with tiotropium HandiHaler® versus placebo. Patients who experienced a cardiac event and continued in UPLIFT® were not found to be at subsequently increased risk of all-cause mortality or cardiac SAEs with tiotropium treatment. Evaluation of deaths by major adverse cardiac events composite endpoints also showed that patients treated with tiotropium were not at increased risk of mortality or cardiac SAEs compared with placebo.ConclusionsRisk of cardiac events, mortality or SAEs was not increased by tiotropium in patients experiencing cardiac events for which they would have been excluded at study baseline. The findings support the cardiac safety of tiotropium HandiHaler® in patients with COPD

Comorbidities of patients in tiotropium clinical trials : comparison with observational studies of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Acknowledgments The authors are fully responsible for all content and editorial decisions made, were involved at all stages of manuscript development, and have approved the final version for publication. Editorial assistance, supported financially by Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer, was provided by Godfrey Lisk of PAREXEL International during the preparation of this manuscript. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. Permissions beyond the scope of the License are administered by Dove Medical Press Limited.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Discordance in investigator-reported and adjudicated sudden death in TIOSPIR

Accurate and consistent determination of cause of death is challenging in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. TIOSPIR (N=17 135) compared the safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat 5/2.5 µg with HandiHaler 18 µg in COPD patients. All-cause mortality was a primary end-point. A mortality adjudication committee (MAC) assessed all deaths. We aimed to investigate causes of discordance in investigator-reported and MAC-adjudicated causes of death and their impact on results, especially cardiac and sudden death. The MAC provided independent, blinded assessment of investigator-reported deaths (n=1302) and assigned underlying cause of death. Discordance between causes of death was assessed descriptively (shift tables). There was agreement between investigator-reported and MAC-adjudicated deaths in 69.4% of cases at the system organ class level. Differences were mainly observed for cardiac deaths (16.4% investigator, 5.1% MAC) and deaths assigned to general disorders including sudden death (17.4% investigator, 24.6% MAC). Reasons for discrepancies included investigator attribution to the immediate (e.g. myocardial infarction (MI)) over the underlying cause of death (e.g. COPD) and insufficient information for a definitive cause. Cause-specific mortality varies in COPD, depending on the method of assignment. Sudden death, witnessed and unwitnessed, is common in COPD and often attributed to MI without supporting evidence

Does the 2013 GOLD classification improve the ability to predict lung function decline, exacerbations and mortality: a post-hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT trial

BACKGROUND: The 2013 GOLD classification system for COPD distinguishes four stages: A (low symptoms, low exacerbation risk), B (high symptoms, low risk), C (low symptoms, high risk) and D (high symptoms, high risk). Assessment of risk is based on exacerbation history and airflow obstruction, whatever results in a higher risk grouping. The previous system was solely based on airflow obstruction. Earlier studies compared the predictive performance of new and old classification systems with regards to mortality and exacerbations. The objective of this study was to compare the ability of both classifications to predict the number of future (total and severe) exacerbations and mortality in a different patient population, and to add an outcome measure to the comparison: lung function decline.METHODS: Patient-level data from the UPLIFT trial were used to analyze 4-year survival in a Weibull model, with GOLD stages at baseline as covariates. A generalized linear model was used to compare the numbers of exacerbations (total and severe) per stage. Analyses were repeated with stages C and D divided into substages depending on lung function and exacerbation history. Lung function decline was analysed in a repeated measures model.RESULTS: Mortality increased from A to D, but there was no difference between B and C. For the previous GOLD stages 2-4, survival curves were clearly separated. Yearly exacerbation rates were: 0.53, 0.72 and 0.80 for stages 2-4; and 0.35, 0.45, 0.58 and 0.74 for A-D. Annual rates of lung function decline were: 47, 38 and 26 ml for stages 2-4 and 44, 48, 38 and 39 for stages A-D. With regards to model fit, the new system performed worse at predicting mortality and lung function decline, and better at predicting exacerbations. Distinguishing between the sub-stages of high-risk led to substantial improvements.CONCLUSIONS: The new classification system is a modest step towards a phenotype approach. It is probably an improvement for the prediction of exacerbations, but a deterioration for predicting mortality and lung function decline.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00144339 (September 2, 2005)

Mortality and Exacerbation Risk by Body Mass Index in Patients with COPD in TIOSPIR and UPLIFT

RATIONALE: There is an association between body mass index (BMI) and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with underweight individuals having higher mortality risk. Mortality and exacerbation risks among individuals with higher BMI are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes in COPD. METHODS: This post hoc analysis included data from TIOSPIR (Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat) (N = 17,116) and tiotropium-treated patients in UPLIFT (Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium) (N = 2,986). BMI classes (underweight [BMI < 20 kg/m(2)], normal weight [BMI 20 to <25 kg/m(2)], overweight [BMI 25 to <30 kg/m(2)], obesity class I [BMI 30 to <35 kg/m(2)], obesity class II [BMI 35 to <40 kg/m(2)], and obesity class III [BMI ⩾ 40 kg/m(2)]) were examined for adjusted associations with mortality, exacerbation, and nonfatal cardiovascular event risk using over 50,000 patient-years of cumulative follow-up data. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox regression models. RESULTS: In TIOSPIR, obesity prevalence was 22%, overweight 32%, and underweight 12%. The proportion of females was highest in obesity classes II and III. Overweight and obese participants had better baseline lung function versus other BMI classes; underweight participants were more likely to be current smokers. Underweight participants had a significantly higher risk of death (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.62–2.20; P < 0.0001) and severe exacerbations (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16–1.47; P < 0.0001) versus normal-weight participants; however, overweight and obese participants were at lower to no additional risk. Results from UPLIFT were similar to TIOSPIR. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that there is a strong association between body weight, COPD events, and risk of death. A holistic management approach taking into account respiratory and cardiovascular risk factors and nutritional status is needed to improve the general well-being of patients with COPD

Tiotropium might improve survival in subjects with COPD at high risk of mortality

Abstract Background Inhaled therapies reduce risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations, but their effect on mortality is less well established. We hypothesized that heterogeneity in baseline mortality risk influenced the results of drug trials assessing mortality in COPD. Methods The 5706 patients with COPD from the Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT®) study that had complete clinical information for variables associated with mortality (age, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire, pack-years and body mass index) were classified by cluster analysis. Baseline risk of mortality between clusters, and impact of tiotropium were evaluated during the 4-yr follow up. Results Four clusters were identified, including low-risk (low mortality rate) patients (n = 2339; 41%; cluster 2), and high-risk patients (n = 1022; 18%; cluster 3), who had a 2.6- and a six-fold increase in all-cause and respiratory mortality compared with cluster 2, respectively. Tiotropium reduced exacerbations in all clusters, and reduced hospitalizations in high-risk patients (p < 0.05). The beneficial effect of tiotropium on all-cause mortality in the overall population (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.75–1.00, p = 0.054) was explained by a 21% reduction in cluster 3 (p = 0.07), with no effect in other clusters. Conclusions Large variations in baseline risks of mortality existed among patients in the UPLIFT® study. Inclusion of numerous low-risk patients may have reduced the ability to show beneficial effect on mortality. Future clinical trials should consider selective inclusion of high-risk patients