Evidence Hub

Frequent productive cough in COPD relates to exacerbation risk and treatment benefit from budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate: a post hoc analysis of KRONOS.

Patel M, Marshall J, Martinez FJ, Mushunje A, Bowen K, Jenkins M

Respiratory medicine, 2025

1,411 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Frequent productive cough (FPC) is associated with increased exacerbation risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). These post hoc analyses examined COPD exacerbations in participants without a recent exacerbation history by baseline FPC status (defined as COPD Assessment Test [CAT] subscores ≥2 for both cough and sputum) and for budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF) versus dual therapies.

METHODS: KRONOS (NCT02497001) was a 24-week, double-blind, parallel-group, multi-center, Phase III, randomized study in symptomatic people with moderate-to-very severe COPD; COPD exacerbation in the preceding 12 months was not required. Participants were randomized 2:2:1:1 to receive BGF 320/18/9.6 μg, glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) 18/9.6 μg, budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BFF) 320/9.6 μg via metered-dose inhaler, or open-label budesonide/formoterol fumarate 400/12 μg via dry-powder inhaler (BUD/FORM), as two inhalations twice-daily.

RESULTS: Of 1411 participants in the modified intent-to-treat population without a recent COPD exacerbation history, 965 (68.4 %) had baseline FPC. Moderate/severe exacerbation rates were higher in those with versus without FPC (BGF, 0.47 vs 0.29; BFF, 0.45 vs 0.37; BUD/FORM, 0.67 vs 0.14), except for GFF (0.79 vs 0.83). BGF was associated with reduced moderate/severe exacerbation rates among those with FPC (41 % reduction) and without FPC (65 % reduction) at baseline versus GFF, with similar findings observed…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,411 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free