Background
Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary ...disease (COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.
Objectives
To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.
Selection criteria
We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.2.
Main results
This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 mcg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) ‐2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐3.35 to ‐2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one‐year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all‐cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non‐fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all‐cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).
Authors' conclusions
This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The trials included in this review showed a difference in the risk of mortality when compared with placebo depending on the type of tiotropium delivery device used. However, these results have not been confirmed in a recent trial when 2.5 mcg or 5 mcg of tiotropium via Respimat was used in a direct comparison to the 18 mcg Handihaler.
Background
Tiotropium and long‐acting beta2‐agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies ...which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs.
Objectives
To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.
To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost‐effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD.
Search methods
We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web‐based clinical trial registers.
Selection criteria
We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co‐administration of standard COPD therapy.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software.
Main results
Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long‐acting beta2‐agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.
In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.
For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all‐cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA‐treated participants. There was a lower rate of non‐fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).
We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost‐effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results.
Authors' conclusions
In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease‐related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long‐acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost‐effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.
Individuals with chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may suffer recurrent exacerbations with an increase in volume or purulence of sputum, or both. Personal and ...healthcare costs associated with exacerbations indicate that any therapy that reduces the occurrence of exacerbations is useful. A marked difference among countries in terms of prescribing of mucolytics reflects variation in perceptions of their effectiveness.
Primary objective• To determine whether treatment with mucolytics reduces frequency of exacerbations and/or days of disability in patients with chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Secondary objectives• To assess whether mucolytics lead to improvement in lung function or quality of life.• To determine frequency of adverse effects associated with use of mucolytics.
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles on 10 separate occasions, most recently in July 2014.
We included randomised studies that compared oral mucolytic therapy versus placebo for at least two months in adults with chronic bronchitis or COPD. We excluded studies of people with asthma and cystic fibrosis.
This review analysed summary data only, most derived from published studies. For earlier versions, one review author extracted data, which were rechecked in subsequent updates. In later versions, review authors double-checked extracted data and then entered data into RevMan for analysis.
We added four studies for the 2014 update. The review now includes 34 trials, recruiting a total of 9367 participants. Many studies did not clearly describe allocation concealment; hence selection bias may have inflated the results, which reduces our confidence in the findings.Results of 26 studies with 6233 participants show that the likelihood that a patient could be exacerbation-free during the study period was greater among mucolytic groups (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 1.94). However, more recent studies show less benefit of treatment than was reported in earlier studies in this review. The overall number needed to treat with mucolytics for an additional beneficial outcome for an average of 10 months - to keep an additional participant free from exacerbations - was eight (NNTB 8, 95% CI 7 to 10). Use of mucolytics was associated with a reduction of 0.03 exacerbations per participant per month (mean difference (MD) -0.03, 95% CI -0.04 to -0.03; participants = 7164; studies = 28; I(2) = 85%) compared with placebo, that is, about 0.36 per year, or one exacerbation every three years. Very high heterogeneity was noted for this outcome, so results need to be interpreted with caution. The type or dose of mucolytic did not seem to alter the effect size, nor did the severity of COPD, including exacerbation history. Longer studies showed smaller effects of mucolytics than were reported in shorter studies.Mucolytic use was associated with a reduction of 0.43 days of disability per participant per month compared with placebo (95% CI -0.56 to -0.30; studies = 13; I(2) = 61%). With mucolytics, the number of people with one or more hospitalisations was reduced, but study results were not consistent (Peto OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89; participants = 1788; studies = 4; I(2) = 58%). Investigators reported improved quality of life with mucolytics (MD -2.64, 95% CI -5.21 to -0.08; participants = 2231; studies = 5; I(2) = 51%). Although this mean difference did not reach the minimal clinically important difference of -4 units, we cannot assess the population impact, as we do not have the data needed to carry out a responder analysis. Mucolytic treatment was not associated with any significant increase in the total number of adverse effects, including mortality (Peto OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.52 to 2.03; participants = 2931; studies = 8; I(2) = 0%), but the confidence interval is too wide to confirm that the treatment has no effect on mortality.
In participants with chronic bronchitis or COPD, we are moderately confident that treatment with mucolytics may produce a small reduction in acute exacerbations and a small effect on overall quality of life. Our confidence in the results is reduced by the fact that effects on exacerbations shown in early trials were larger than those reported by more recent studies, possibly because the earlier smaller trials were at greater risk of selection or publication bias, thus benefits of treatment may not be as great as was suggested by previous evidence.
Population-level administrative data provides a cost-effective means of monitoring health outcomes and service needs of clinical populations. This study aimed to present a method for case ...identification of non-traumatic brain injury in population-level data and to examine the association with sociodemographic factors.
An estimated resident population of youth aged 0-24 years was constructed using population-level datasets within the New Zealand Integrated Data Infrastructure. A clinical consensus committee reviewed the International Classification of Diseases Ninth and Tenth Editions codes and Read codes for inclusion in a case definition. Cases were those with at least one non-traumatic brain injury code present in the five years up until 30 June 2018 in one of four databases in the Integrated Data Infrastructure. Rates of non-traumatic brain injury were examined, both including and excluding birth injury codes and across age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic deprivation groups.
Of the 1 579 089 youth aged 0-24 years on 30 June 2018, 8154 (0.52%) were identified as having one of the brain injury codes in the five-years to 30 June 2018. Rates of non-traumatic brain injury were higher in males, children aged 0-4 years, Māori and Pacific young people, and youth living with high levels of social deprivation.
This study presents a comprehensive method for case identification of non-traumatic brain injury using national population-level administrative data.
Background
International guidelines advocate using daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of children and adults with persistent asthma. However, in real world clinical settings, these ...medicines are often used at irregular intervals by patients. Recent evidence suggests that the use of intermittent ICS, with treatment initiated at the time of early symptoms, may still have benefits for reducing the severity of an asthma exacerbation.
Objectives
To compare the efficacy and safety of intermittent ICS versus placebo in the management of children and adults diagnosed with, or suspected to have, symptoms of mild persistent asthma.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), the ClinicalTrials.gov website and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal in March 2015.
Selection criteria
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared intermittent ICS versus placebo in children and adults with symptoms of persistent asthma. No co‐interventions were permitted other than rescue relievers and oral corticosteroids used during exacerbations.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, methodological quality and extracted data. The primary efficacy outcome was the risk of asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids and the primary safety outcome was serious adverse health events. Secondary outcomes included exacerbations, lung function tests, asthma control, adverse effects, and withdrawal rates. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.
Main results
Six trials (representing 490 preschool children, 145 school‐aged children and 240 adults) met the inclusion criteria. Study durations were 12 to 52 weeks. Results for preschool children were presented in a separate analysis as this represents a distinct clinical condition, not necessarily related to the development of long term asthma.
There was a reduction in the risk of patients experiencing one or more exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids in older children (145 participants, odds ratio (OR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 1.12, low quality evidence) and adults with asthma (240 participants, OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01 to 1.95, low quality evidence). These analyses were each based on the findings of a single study. No group difference was observed in the risk of serious adverse health events (385 participants; OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.14 to 7.25, moderate quality evidence). Compared to the placebo group, there was an insufficient number of participants to make firm conclusions whether the intermittent ICS group displayed any reduction in the rate of hospitalisations, day time and night time symptoms scores, or adverse events. Lung function tests reported by a single study favoured the use of ICS. There was no significant group difference in growth rate of children, or overall withdrawals.
In preschool children with frequent wheezing episodes, the use of intermittent ICS at the onset of early symptoms reduced the likelihood of requiring rescue oral corticosteroids by half (490 participants; OR: 0.48; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.73, moderate quality evidence with minimal heterogeneity). Intermittent therapy was associated with fewer serious adverse events (439 participants; OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.02, low quality evidence). There was no significant difference in hospitalisations or in a single study measuring parent perceived quality of life. However, intermittent therapy was associated with improvements in both day time and night time symptoms. There was no increase in the rates of withdrawals, and overall and treatment‐specific adverse events.
Authors' conclusions
In children and adults with mild persistent asthma, two studies have shown that the use of intermittent ICS at the time of exacerbation reduced the chances of needing oral corticosteroids by half. This result is statistically significant if we assume that the effect size is the same for each study population (fixed effects model), but is not statistically significant when using a random effects model. However, the paucity of published evidence limits our conclusions towards the 'as‐needed' use of this medication. The small number of studies and participants were the major reasons for downgrading the overall quality of the findings. A corresponding result was found in preschool children with wheeze. In this age group, an improvement in day time and night time asthma symptoms score and parental perceived quality of life of children similarly favoured the ICS group. However, there was no statistical difference in hospitalisation rates in any group. This treatment was not associated with any significant increase in adverse events. There was no growth suppression noted with the use of intermittent ICS in either preschool or school‐aged children. Considering the limited number of available studies, we emphasise the need for more randomised controlled studies in order to confirm these findings.
Two cases of listeria rhombencephalitis Mansbridge, Christopher Thomas; Grecu, Irina; Li Voon Chong, Jimmy SW ...
IDCases,
01/2018, Volume:
11, Issue:
C
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Listeria rhombencephalitis (LRE) is a rare encephalitis of the hindbrain that can present with a variety of neurological symptoms. It is a diagnostic challenge, but prompt antimicrobial therapy is ...important to prevent high rates of mortality and morbidity. We report two cases of LRE, with several contrasting clinical features and different disease courses. Despite being rare, it is important to consider listeria in patients with possible meningoencephalitis, even if cultures are negative. Empirical treatment of meningoencephalitis should provide coverage for listeria, especially if the patient is at risk of listeriosis or there is a potential history of listeria exposure.
(1) Background: Respiratory disease is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and poor quality of life in children with cerebral palsy (CP). This study describes the prevalence of CP-related ...respiratory disease and the non-modifiable risk factors for respiratory-related hospital admissions in the Aotearoa New Zealand population. (2) Methods: New Zealand Cerebral Palsy Register (NZCPR) participant data and de-identified data from the National Minimum Dataset and Pharmaceutical Dispensing Collections were linked to identify all respiratory-related hospital admissions and respiratory illness-related antibiotic exposure over 5 years in individuals with CP (0−26 years). (3) Results: Risk factors for respiratory-related hospital admissions included being classified Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) IV or V compared to GMFCS I OR = 4.37 (2.90−6.58), p < 0.0001; OR = 11.8 (7.69−18.10), p < 0.0001, respectively,; having ≥2 antibiotics dispensed per year OR = 4.42 (3.01−6.48), p < 0.0001; and being of Māori ethnicity OR = 1.47 (1.13−1.93), p < 0.0047. Māori experienced health inequities compared to non-Māori, with greater functional disability, and also experienced greater antibiotic dispensing than the general population. (4) Conclusion: Māori children and young adults have a higher risk of respiratory-related illness. Priority should be given to the screening for potentially modifiable risk factors for all children with CP from diagnosis onwards in a way that ensures Māori health equity.
Background
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with cough, sputum production or dyspnoea and a reduction in lung function, quality of life and life expectancy. Apart from ...smoking cessation, there are no other treatments that slow lung function decline. Roflumilast and cilomilast are oral phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitors proposed to reduce the airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction seen in COPD. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and updated in 2013.
Objectives
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral PDE4 inhibitors in the management of stable COPD.
Search methods
We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register (date of last search October 2016). We found other trials from web‐based clinical trials registers.
Selection criteria
We included RCTs if they compared oral PDE4 inhibitors with placebo in people with COPD. We allowed co‐administration of standard COPD therapy.
Data collection and analysis
One review author extracted data and a second review author checked the data. We reported pooled data in Review Manager as mean differences (MD), standardised mean differences (SMD) or odds ratios (OR). We converted the odds ratios into absolute treatment effects in a 'Summary of findings' table.
Main results
Thirty‐four separate RCTs studying roflumilast (20 trials with 17,627 participants) or cilomilast (14 trials with 6457 participants) met the inclusion criteria, with a duration of between six weeks and one year. These included people across international study centres with moderate to very severe COPD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) grades II‐IV), with a mean age of 64 years.
We considered that the methodological quality of the 34 published and unpublished trials was acceptable overall. Treatment with a PDE4 inhibitor was associated with a significant improvement in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) over the trial period compared with placebo (MD 51.53 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI) 43.17 to 59.90, 27 trials with 20,585 participants, moderate‐quality evidence due to moderate levels of heterogeneity and risk of reporting bias). There were small improvements in quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), MD ‐1.06 units, 95% CI ‐1.68 to ‐0.43, 11 trials with 7645 participants, moderate‐quality evidence due to moderate levels of heterogeneity and risk of reporting bias) and COPD‐related symptoms, but no significant change in exercise tolerance. Treatment with a PDE4 inhibitor was associated with a reduced likelihood of COPD exacerbation (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.83; 23 trials with 19,948 participants, high‐quality evidence). For every 100 people treated with PDE4 inhibitors, five more remained exacerbation‐free during the study period compared with placebo (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 20, 95% CI 16 to 26). More participants in the treatment groups experienced non‐serious adverse events compared with controls, particularly a range of gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting or dyspepsia. For every 100 people treated with PDE4 inhibitors, seven more suffered from diarrhoea during the study period compared with placebo (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 15, 95% CI 13 to 17). Roflumilast in particular was associated with weight loss during the trial period and an increase in insomnia and depressive mood symptoms. There was no significant effect of treatment on non‐fatal serious adverse events (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07) or mortality (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.23), although mortality was a rare event during the trials. Participants treated with PDE4 inhibitors were more likely to withdraw from the trials because of adverse effects; on average 14% in the treatment groups withdrew compared with 8% in the control groups.
Authors' conclusions
In people with COPD, PDE4 inhibitors offered benefit over placebo in improving lung function and reducing the likelihood of exacerbations; however, they had little impact on quality of life or symptoms. Gastrointestinal adverse effects and weight loss were common, and safety data submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have raised concerns over psychiatric adverse events with roflumilast. The findings of this review give cautious support to the use of PDE4 inhibitors in COPD. They may be best used as add‐on therapy in a subgroup of people with persistent symptoms or exacerbations despite optimal COPD management. This is in accordance with the GOLD 2017 guidelines. Longer‐term trials are needed to determine whether or not PDE4 inhibitors modify FEV1 decline, hospitalisation or mortality in COPD.
For the current issue of the Journal, we asked Drs Jimmy Chong and Bhupendrasinh Chauhan to comment on and put into context the Cochrane Review on the efficacy and safety of adding antileukotriene ...agents (LTRAs) to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in children with persistent asthma (1).
In the treatment of children with mild persistent asthma, low-dose ICS are recommended as the preferred monotherapy (referred to as step 2 of therapy). In children with inadequate asthma control on low doses of ICS (step 2), asthma management guidelines recommend adding an LTRA to existing ICS as one of three therapeutic options to intensify therapy (step 3).
Trials were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographical databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED and CINAHL, and a manual search of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts, as well as the web-site www.clinicaltrials.gov. The search was conducted until January 2013.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved children and adolescents one to 18 years of age, with asthma, who remained symptomatic despite the use of a stable maintenance dose of ICS, and in whom LTRAs were added to ICS and compared with the same, an increased or a tapering dose of ICS for at least four weeks were considered for inclusion.
Sandard methods outlined by The Cochrane Collaboration were used.
Five paediatric (parallel group or cross-over) trials met the inclusion criteria. Two (40%) trials were considered to be at a low risk for bias. Four published trials, representing 559 children (≥6 years of age) and adolescents with mild-to-moderate asthma, contributed data to the review. No trial enrolled preschool-age children. All trials used montelukast as the LTRA, administered for between four and 16 weeks. Three trials evaluated the combination of LTRAs and ICS compared with the same dose of ICS alone (step 3 versus step 2). No statistically significant group difference was observed in the only trial reporting participants with exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids over four weeks (n=268 participants; RR 0.80 95% CI 0.34 to 1.91). There was also no statistically significant difference in percent change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) in this trial, with a mean difference (MD) of 1.3 (95% CI -0.09 to 2.69); however, a significant group difference was observed in the morning and evening peak expiratory flow rates: n=218 participants; MD 9.70 L/min (95% CI 1.27 L/min to 18.13 L/min) and MD 10.70 L/min (95% CI 2.41 L/min to 18.99 L/min), respectively. One trial compared the combination of LTRAs and ICS with a higher dose of ICS (step 3 versus step 3). No significant group difference was observed in this trial for participants with exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids over a 16-week period (n=182 participants; RR 0.82 95% CI 0.54 to 1.25), nor was there any significant difference in exacerbations requiring hospitalization. There was no statistically significant group difference in withdrawals overall or because of any cause with either protocol. No trial explored the impact of adding LTRAs as a means to taper the dose of ICS.
The addition of LTRAs to ICS is not associated with a statistically significant reduction in the need for rescue oral corticosteroids or hospital admission compared with the same or an increased dose of ICS in children and adolescents with mild to moderate asthma. Although LTRAs have been licensed for use in children for >10 years, the paucity of paediatric trials, the absence of data regarding preschool-age children and the variability in the reporting of relevant clinical outcomes considerably limit firm conclusions. At present, there is no firm evidence to support the efficacy and safety of LTRAs as add-on therapy to ICS as a step 3 option in the therapeutic arsenal for children with uncontrolled asthma symptoms on low-dose ICS. The full text of the Cochrane Review is available in The Cochrane Library (1).
Tiotropium is an anticholinergic agent which has gained widespread acceptance as a once daily maintenance therapy for symptoms and exacerbations of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ...(COPD). In the past few years there have been several systematic reviews of the efficacy of tiotropium, however, several new trials have compared tiotropium treatment with placebo, including those of a soft mist inhaler, making an update necessary.
To evaluate data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tiotropium and placebo in patients with COPD, upon clinically important endpoints.
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR) and ClinicalTrials.gov up to February 2012.
We included parallel group RCTs of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium against placebo for patients with COPD.
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and then extracted data on study quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information, and collected information on adverse effects from all trials. We analysed the data using Cochrane Review Manager 5, RevMan 5.1.
This review included 22 studies of good methodological quality that had enrolled 23,309 participants with COPD. The studies used similar designs, however, the duration varied from three months to four years. In 19 of the studies, 18 μg tiotropium once daily via the Handihaler dry powder inhaler was evaluated, and in three studies, 5 or 10 μg tiotropium once daily via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was evaluated. Compared to placebo, tiotropium treatment significantly improved the mean quality of life (mean difference (MD) -2.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.35 to -2.44), increased the number of participants with a clinically significant improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.38 to 1.68), and reduced the number of participants with a clinically significant deterioration (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) in quality of life (measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)). Tiotropium treatment significantly reduced the number of participants suffering from exacerbations (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87). This corresponds to a need to treat 16 patients (95% CI 10 to 36) with tiotropium for a year in order to avoid one additional patient suffering exacerbations, based on the average placebo event rate of 44% from one-year studies. Tiotropium treatment led to fewer hospitalisations due to exacerbations (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00), but there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause hospitalisations (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13) or non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the tiotropium and placebo groups (Peto OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11). However, subgroup analysis found a significant difference between the studies using a dry powder inhaler and those with a soft mist inhaler (test for subgroup differences: P = 0.01). With the dry powder inhaler there were fewer deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 2.8%), but with the soft mist inhaler there were significantly more deaths in the tiotropium group (Peto OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08) than in the placebo group (yearly rate 1.8%). It is noted that the rates of patients discontinuing study treatment were uneven, with significantly fewer participants withdrawing from tiotropium treatment than from placebo treatment (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73). Participants on tiotropium had improved lung function at the end of the study compared with those on placebo (trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) MD 118.92 mL; 95% CI 113.07 to 124.77).
This review shows that tiotropium treatment was associated with a significant improvement in patients' quality of life and it reduced the risk of exacerbations, with a number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 16 to prevent one exacerbation. Tiotropium also reduced exacerbations leading to hospitalisation but no significant difference was found for hospitalisation of any cause or mortality. Thus, tiotropium appears to be a reasonable choice for the management of patients with stable COPD, as proposed in guidelines. The review however, shows that tiotropium delivered via the Respimat soft mist inhaler was associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality compared with placebo, which calls for caution with this device whilst awaiting the results of an ongoing head-to-head trial comparing tiotropium delivery devices and doses.
PDF
