Chest
Original Research: COPDSafety of Long-Acting β-Agonists in Stable COPD
Section snippets
Search Strategy and Selection Criteria
The search was conducted using three strategies. Firstly, we queried MEDLINE (1966 to April 2007), EMBASE (1974 to April 2007), and CINAHL (1982 to April 2007) databases using the following medical subject headings, full text, and key word terms: long-acting β2 adrenoceptor agonist OR salmeterol OR formoterol OR eformoterol AND COPD OR COPD OR chronic bronchitis OR emphysema. Secondly, a search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL; first quarter 2007) was completed using the
Data Analysis
Binary outcomes were pooled using common relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Trials that reported no respiratory deaths were included in an analysis of the absolute risk difference. If pooled-effect estimates for dichotomous outcomes were significantly different between groups, we calculated the number needed to treat (NNT). For continuous outcomes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) [for variables using the same unit of measure] and 95% CI were calculated. The results of
Results
A total of 27 randomized controlled trials13141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940 met inclusion criteria and were selected for analysis (Fig 1). Two studies4142 were excluded from analysis because they included results for patients enrolled in previous trials. Thus, Brusasco et al16 presented combined results of Donohue et al41 and a similar unpublished trial, and van Noord et al37 reported the same data from the study of Rutten van Molken et al.42 All trials were of good
Exacerbations
Fourteen studies comparing LABA with placebo evaluated the incidence of severe COPD exacerbations. The overall cumulative incidence was 7.5% in the LABA group and 10.8% in the placebo group, with a significant exacerbation rate reduction of 3.3% (95% CI, 1.9 to 4.8) [Fig 2]. The RR reduction was similar with a fixed model (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.91) or a random model (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.92). The NNT was 30 (95% CI, 20 to 52). The fail-safe N test, which is the number of
Mortality
Thirteen studies141617203032333435 reported all-cause mortality during the length of protocol. The analysis of the trials that reported one or more deaths did not show significant differences between LABA and placebo (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.06; p = 0.20; I2 = 0%; fixed-effects model). When trials23272931 that did not report any death were incorporated in the analysis, LABAs patients presented an absolute risk reduction of 1.6% (95% CI, 0.8 to 2.4) [LABAs mortality rate, 4.9%; placebo,
Secondary Outcomes
Thirteen studies showed that the mean change from baseline of postbronchodilator FEV1 was greater in patients treated with LABAs (WMD, 0.13 L; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.15; p = 0.0001, I2 = 92%; random-effect model) compared with placebo. Patients reversible to salbutamol who were treated with salmeterol showed a significantly greater increase in mean change FEV1 from baseline compared with poorly reversible patients treated with the same agent (0.18 L; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.22; vs 0.10 L; 95% CI, 0.07 to
Discussion
This review found that compared with placebo, LABAs reduced severe exacerbations by 21% (NNT = 30). More important, LABAs patients did not differ in all-cause mortality rate, and contrary to a previous review4 they did not present differences in the rate of all and respiratory mortality, compared with placebo patients (98 reported respiratory deaths in 4,316 patients in the LABA-treated group and 88 deaths in of 3,733 patients in the placebo group). The analysis including those studies without
Strengths and Shortcomings
This study met most of the methodologic criteria suggested for scientific reviews.45 All of the included studies were randomized and double blinded, and combined with quite homogeneous clinical characteristics of the studied samples (namely GOLD stages 3 and 4). We also used the fail-safe N test to adjust for publication bias. Thus, it is unlikely that 23 studies and 14 studies (number of negative studies that would be required to reverse our conclusions regarding COPD exacerbations and
Clinical Implications
This review supports the beneficial effects of the use of LABAs in patients with stable moderate and severe COPD. This benefit was evident in both poorly reversible and reversible patients. Compared to placebo, inhaled LABAs (salmeterol, 50 to 100 μg; formoterol, 4.5 to 18 μg bid) produce a 21% reduction of severe COPD exacerbations. Unlike a previous review,4 our analysis did not confirm an increased risk for respiratory deaths. Furthermore, this current study showed significant changes in
References (45)
- et al.
Cardiovascular effects of β-agonists in patients with asthma and COPD: a meta-analysis
Chest
(2004) - et al.
The St. George's respiratory questionnaire
Respir Med
(1991) - et al.
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials: is blinding necessary?
Control Clin Trials
(1996) - et al.
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
Control Clin Trials
(1986) - et al.
Improved daytime spirometric efficacy of tiotropium compared with salmeterol in patients with COPD
Pulm Pharmacol Ther
(2005) - et al.
Combined salmeterol and fluticasone in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized controlled trial
Lancet
(2003) - et al.
Formoterol for maintenance and as-needed treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Respir Med
(2005) - et al.
Salmeterol & fluticasone 50 microg/250 microg bid in combination provides a better long-term control than salmeterol 50 microg bid alone and placebo in COPD patients already treated with theophylline
Pulm Pharmacol Ther
(2003) - et al.
The efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate (250 μg)/salmeterol (50 μg) combined in the Diskus inhaler for the treatment of COPD
Chest
(2003) - et al.
Efficacy of salmeterol xinafoate in the treatment of COPD
Chest
(1999)
Effect of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol on lung hyperinflation and exercise endurance in COPD
Chest
Comparison of the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of formoterol dry powder and oral, slow-release theophylline in the treatment of COPD
Chest
A 6-month, placebo-controlled study comparing lung function and health status changes in COPD patients treated with tiotropium or salmeterol
Chest
Tiotropium for the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Pulm Pharmacol Ther
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement
Lancet
ATS/ERS Task Force: standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD; a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper
Eur Respir J
Mata-analysis: anticholinergics, but not β-agonists, reduce severe exacerbations and respiratory mortality in COPD
J Gen Intern Med
Long-acting β2-agonists for poorly reversible chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates
BMJ
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
BMJ
Cited by (89)
Aspirin Use and Respiratory Morbidity in COPD: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis in Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study
2019, ChestCitation Excerpt :Findings of this study add to the existing literature by highlighting that aspirin use is also associated with reduced respiratory morbidity across several domains—including exacerbation risk, quality of life, and dyspnea—factors related to patient well-being and health-care utilization. Notably, however, the difference in SGRQ and CAT scores between aspirin users and nonusers at baseline (3 and 1.1, respectively), while statistically significant, did not reach the minimal clinically important difference of these surveys (4 and 2, respectively)34,35; although similar effect sizes have been reported in most studies evaluating mean SGRQ difference with long-acting muscarinic antagonist36 and long-acting β-agonist.37,38 COPD phenotyping in this study allows for the identification of subgroup effects that inform future studies.
Are inhaled longacting β<inf>2</inf> agonists detrimental to asthma?
2013, The Lancet Respiratory MedicineIndacaterol (arcapta) for COPD
2014, American Family PhysicianCitation Excerpt :It is important to note that a starting dosage of indacaterol is 75 mcg per day, but there are no comparative studies using this dosage. There is some evidence that suggests indacaterol is superior to the other agents in decreasing the need for rescue medications, but the differences are small and may not be clinically relevant.2,4,6,7 A one-month supply of indacaterol (75 mcg per day) costs approximately $198.
Overuse and Misuse of Inhaled Corticosteroids Among Veterans with COPD: a Cross-sectional Study Evaluating Targets for De-implementation
2020, Journal of General Internal MedicineEffects of lama/laba alone and in combination on cardiac safety
2020, International Journal of COPD
Reproduction of this article is prohibited without written permission from the American College of Chest Physicians (www.chestjournal.org/misc/reprints.shtml).
Funding for this study came from salary support for Dr. Rodrigo. No sponsorship from institutions or pharmaceutical industry was provided to conduct this study.
Dr. Rodrigo has participated as a lecturer and speaker in scientific meetings and courses under the sponsorship of Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, and Dr. Esteve SA, and consulted for CYDEX Inc. and Discovery Laboratories. Dr. Nannini has participated as a lecturer and speaker in scientific meetings and courses under the sponsorship of AstraZeneca and Altana. Dr. Rodriguez-Roisin has participated as a lecturer and speaker in scientific meetings and courses under the sponsorship of Almirall, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer; consulted with several pharmaceutical companies with relevance to the topics discussed in the present article (Altana, AstraZeneca, Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Laboratorios Dr. Esteve SA, Novartis, Pfizer, Viechi and Zambon); serves on advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, and Procter & Gamble; has been sponsored for several clinical trials; and has received laboratory research support from Almirall, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Laboratorios Dr Esteve SA, and Pfizer.