Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial.
Administration, Inhalation
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
/ administration & dosage
Aged
Benzyl Alcohols
/ administration & dosage
Bronchodilator Agents
/ therapeutic use
Chlorobenzenes
/ administration & dosage
Double-Blind Method
Drug Therapy, Combination
Female
Forced Expiratory Volume
/ drug effects
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
/ drug therapy
Quinuclidines
/ administration & dosage
Salmeterol Xinafoate
/ therapeutic use
Treatment Outcome
Bronchodilator therapy
COPD
Clinically important deterioration
Dyspnoea
Lung function
Journal
Respiratory research
ISSN: 1465-993X
Titre abrégé: Respir Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101090633
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Oct 2019
30 Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
26
06
2019
accepted:
20
09
2019
entrez:
1
11
2019
pubmed:
2
11
2019
medline:
24
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV Change from baseline in trough FEV Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids.
METHODS
METHODS
The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV
RESULTS
RESULTS
Change from baseline in trough FEV
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31666084
doi: 10.1186/s12931-019-1193-9
pii: 10.1186/s12931-019-1193-9
pmc: PMC6821007
doi:
Substances chimiques
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
0
Benzyl Alcohols
0
Bronchodilator Agents
0
Chlorobenzenes
0
GSK573719
0
Quinuclidines
0
vilanterol
028LZY775B
Salmeterol Xinafoate
6EW8Q962A5
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
238Références
Lancet Respir Med. 2014 Mar;2(3):195-203
pubmed: 24621681
Thorax. 2016 Jan;71(1):15-25
pubmed: 26490732
COPD. 2005 Mar;2(1):99-103
pubmed: 17136969
Chest. 2016 May;149(5):1181-96
pubmed: 26923629
Lancet Respir Med. 2013 May;1(3):199-209
pubmed: 24429126
Adv Ther. 2018 Oct;35(10):1626-1638
pubmed: 30191464
Adv Ther. 2017 Jan;33(12):2188-2199
pubmed: 27796912
Respir Med. 2013 Oct;107(10):1538-46
pubmed: 23830094
Eur Respir J. 2013 Dec;42(6):1484-94
pubmed: 23722616
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Jun 24;11:1413-24
pubmed: 27445468
ERJ Open Res. 2018 Oct 03;4(4):
pubmed: 30302335
Lancet Respir Med. 2018 Mar;6(3):204-212
pubmed: 29331311
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Apr 07;11:719-30
pubmed: 27103795
Prim Care Respir J. 2011 Mar;20(1):46-53
pubmed: 20886200
Pulm Ther. 2017 Dec;3(2):297-316
pubmed: 32026346
Lancet Respir Med. 2018 May;6(5):337-344
pubmed: 29605624
Lancet Respir Med. 2014 Jun;2(6):472-86
pubmed: 24835833
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Sep 15;176(6):532-55
pubmed: 17507545
Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Apr;49:11-19
pubmed: 29277690
Eur Respir J. 2002 Mar;19(3):398-404
pubmed: 11936514
Respir Med. 2016 Mar;112:65-74
pubmed: 26797016
Respir Res. 2018 Nov 20;19(1):222
pubmed: 30453972
Respir Res. 2014 Oct 07;15:124
pubmed: 25287629
Respir Res. 2018 Jun 20;19(1):121
pubmed: 29925383
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017 May 04;12:1325-1337
pubmed: 28496316
Respir Res. 2019 Mar 26;20(1):60
pubmed: 30914064
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 Jun 1;185(11):1218-24
pubmed: 22281834
Eur Respir J. 2013 Sep;42(3):636-46
pubmed: 23766334
Chest. 2014 May;145(5):981-991
pubmed: 24385182