S'abonner

Indacaterol vs tiotropium in COPD patients classified as GOLD A and B - 30/07/15

Doi : 10.1016/j.rmed.2015.05.012 
Donald A. Mahler a, , Huib A.M. Kerstjens b, c , James F. Donohue d , Roland Buhl e , David Lawrence f , Pablo Altman f
a Section of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH 03755, USA 
b University of Groningen, Department of Pulmonary Medicine and Tuberculosis, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands 
c University of Groningen, Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands 
d Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, CB# 7020, 130 Mason Farm Rd, 4th Floor Bioinformatics Building, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA 
e Pulmonary Department, Mainz University Hospital, Langenbeckstrasse 1, Mainz D-55131, Germany 
f Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA 

Corresponding author.

Summary

Introduction

According to current GOLD strategy, patients with COPD classified as groups A and B may be treated with inhaled bronchodilators, either long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) or long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA). However, there is little guidance on which class of agent is preferred and a lack of prospective data to differentiate the two.

Methods

In this study, we performed post-hoc analyses of pooled data from two prospective, controlled clinical trials comparing the LABA indacaterol and LAMA tiotropium in 1422 patients with moderate airflow limitation and no history of exacerbations in the previous year. This population fits the definitions of GOLD A and B groups and could be further stratified by symptom severity using Baseline Dyspnea Index (i.e. modeling GOLD A or B) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use at baseline. Outcomes measured after 12 weeks of treatment were lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FEV1), health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire; SGRQ), symptoms (Transition Dyspnea Index; TDI) and rescue medication use.

Results

In ‘GOLD A’ patients not receiving ICS, differences favored indacaterol versus tiotropium (trough FEV1 0.05 L; rescue medication use −0.41 puffs/day; TDI total score 0.94 points; SGRQ total score −3.13 units, all p < 0.01). In ‘GOLD B, no ICS’ patients, compared with tiotropium, indacaterol treatment increased trough FEV1 (0.055 L, p < 0.05) and permitted a larger reduction in rescue medication use (−0.81 puffs/day, p = 0.004). In all patients, and in patients not using ICS, differences favored indacaterol for all variables.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that patients in GOLD groups A and B may experience greater benefits with indacaterol than with tiotropium.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Indacaterol, Tiotropium, COPD, GOLD, Efficacy


Plan


© 2015  The Authors. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 109 - N° 8

P. 1031-1039 - août 2015 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Comorbidity between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and type 2 diabetes: A nation-wide cohort twin study
  • Howraman Meteran, Vibeke Backer, Kirsten Ohm Kyvik, Axel Skytthe, Simon Francis Thomsen
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • COPD prevalence in a north-eastern Italian general population
  • Massimo Guerriero, Marco Caminati, Giovanni Viegi, Gianenrico Senna, Giancarlo Cesana, Carlo Pomari

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?