Evidence Hub

Once-daily single-inhaler versus twice-daily multiple-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD: lung function and health status results from two replicate randomized controlled trials

G. Ferguson, N. Brown, C. Compton, T. Corbridge, K. Dorais, C. Fogarty, Catherine Harvey, M. Kaisermann et al.

Respiratory Research, 2020

720 participants · 41 citations

Abstract

Background The comparative efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β 2 -agonist (ICS/LAMA/LABA) triple therapy administered via single or multiple inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been evaluated comprehensively. We conducted two replicate trials comparing single- with multiple-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA combination in COPD. Methods 207608 and 207609 were Phase IV, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy non-inferiority trials comparing once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg via Ellipta inhaler, with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400/12 μg via metered-dose inhaler plus once-daily tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg via HandiHaler. Patients had symptomatic COPD and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) < 50% predicted, or FEV 1 < 80% predicted and ≥ 2 moderate or 1 severe exacerbations in the prior year. The primary endpoint in both trials was weighted mean change from baseline (wmCFB) in 0–24-h FEV 1 at Week 12. Secondary endpoints included CFB in trough FEV 1 at Day 84 and 85. Other endpoints included serial FEV 1 and health status outcomes at Week 12. Safety was evaluated descriptively. Results The modified per-protocol population included 720 and 711 patients in studies 207608 and 207609 (intent-to-treat population: 728 and 732). FF/UMEC/VI was non-inferior to BUD/FOR+TIO for wmCFB in 0–24-h FEV 1 at Week 12 (Study 207608 treatment…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 720 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