The Effect of Tiotropium in Symptomatic Asthma Despite Low- to Medium-Dose Inhaled Corticosteroids: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BackgroundTiotropium, a once-daily long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with asthma who were symptomatic despite treatment with medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium Respimat (5 μg or 2.5 μg), compared with placebo Respimat, as add-on therapy to low- to medium-dose ICS for adults with symptomatic asthma.MethodsA phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted (NCT01316380). Adults with symptomatic asthma receiving low- to medium-dose ICS (200-400 μg budesonide or equivalent dose) and a pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥60% and ≤90% of predicted normal were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with once-daily tiotropium Respimat 5 μg or 2.5 μg, or placebo Respimat, as add-on therapy to ICS. The primary endpoint was peak FEV1(0-3h) response.ResultsIn total, 464 patients were randomized (61% female; mean age 43 years; mean baseline FEV1 78% of predicted normal). After 12 weeks, both tiotropium Respimat doses were superior to placebo (adjusted mean difference from placebo: 5 μg, 128 mL; 2.5 μg, 159 mL; both P < .001). Both doses of tiotropium Respimat were also superior to placebo with regard to the secondary endpoints of adjusted mean trough FEV1 and FEV1 area under the curve(0-3h) responses, and the other endpoints of morning and evening peak expiratory flow. Adverse events were comparable across the treatment groups.ConclusionsOnce-daily tiotropium Respimat add-on therapy to low- to medium-dose ICS in adults with symptomatic asthma is an efficacious bronchodilator, and its safety and tolerability are comparable with those of placebo Respimat

Efficacy and safety of ipratropium bromide/albuterol compared with albuterol in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Many patients with asthma require frequent rescue medication for acute symptoms despite appropriate controller therapies. Thus, determining the most effective relief regimen is important in the management of more severe asthma. This study’s objective was to evaluate whether ipratropium bromide/albuterol metered-dose inhaler (CVT-MDI) provides more effective acute relief of bronchospasm in moderate-to-severe asthma than albuterol hydrofluoroalkaline (ALB-HFA) alone after 4 weeks. Methods In this double-blind, crossover study, patients who had been diagnosed with asthma for ≥1 year were randomized to two sequences of study medication “as needed” for symptom relief (1–7 day washout before second 4-week treatment period): CVT-MDI/ALB-HFA or ALB-HFA/CVT-MDI. On days 1 and 29 of each sequence, 6-hour serial spirometry was performed after administration of the study drug. Co-primary endpoints were FEV 1 area under the curve (AUC 0–6 ) and peak (post-dose) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) response (change from test day baseline) after 4 weeks. The effects of “as needed” treatment with ALB-HFA/CVT-MDI were analyzed using mixed effect model repeated measures (MMRM). Results A total of 226 patients, ≥18 years old, with inadequately controlled, moderate-to-severe asthma were randomized. The study met both co-primary endpoints demonstrating a statistically significant treatment benefit of CVT-MDI versus ALB-HFA. FEV 1 AUC 0-6h response was 167 ml for ALB-HFA, 252 ml for CVT-MDI (p <0.0001); peak FEV 1 response was 357 ml for ALB-HFA, 434 ml for CVT-MDI (p <0.0001). Adverse events were comparable across groups. Conclusions CVT-MDI significantly improved acute bronchodilation over ALB-HFA alone after 4 weeks of “as-needed” use for symptom relief, with a similar safety profile. This suggests additive bronchodilator effects of β 2 -agonist and anticholinergic treatment in moderate-to-severe, symptomatic asthma. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov No.: NCT00818454; Registered November 16, 2009

Consistent improvement in health-related quality of life with tiotropium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Novel and conventional responder analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in COPD patients is an important pharmacotherapeutic objective. This study investigated the extent, consistency, and durability of tiotropium maintenance therapy impact on HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD. METHODS: Patients received once-daily tiotropium 18 μg (n = 5244) or placebo (n = 4799) via HandiHaler(®) (10 trials), or once-daily tiotropium 5 μg (n = 2622) or placebo (n = 2618) via Respimat(®) inhaler (3 trials). St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores were measured at baseline, and 6 months (13 trials) and 1 year (9 trials) from treatment start. Adjusted mean differences between treatments for change from baseline in total scores were calculated at each time-point for each trial. Responder and deteriorator rates (decrease or increase in score ≥4 units from baseline, respectively), net benefit (responder rate increase plus deteriorator rate decrease), and cumulative improvement and deterioration were determined. RESULTS: Adjusted mean total score differences between treatments for change from baseline were significant (p < 0.05) in favor of tiotropium in 10/13 trials at 6 months and in 8/9 trials at 1 year. In all trials, estimated differences in responder rates between treatments favored tiotropium (significant [p < 0.05]: 5/13 trials at 6 months; 8/9 trials at 1 year). Net benefit favored tiotropium and cumulative improvement rates were consistently greater and deterioration rates consistently lower for tiotropium versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium maintenance therapy significantly and consistently improved HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD patients in a durable manner. These results may provide a benchmark for assessing benefits on HRQoL of other COPD treatments