...
首页> 外文期刊>Lung. >Dual Bronchodilation with Indacaterol Maleate/Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Umeclidinium Bromide/Vilanterol in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe COPD: Results from Two Randomized, Controlled, Cross-over Studies
【24h】

Dual Bronchodilation with Indacaterol Maleate/Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Umeclidinium Bromide/Vilanterol in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe COPD: Results from Two Randomized, Controlled, Cross-over Studies

机译:与中度至严重的COPD患者的UmeClidinium / Viltronium溴化物与吲哚替米替米酸甲酸酯/糖酮醇的双支气管扩张:由两种随机,控制,交叉研究的结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of two long-acting dual bronchodilator combinations: indacaterol/glycopyrrolate (IND/GLY) versus umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI). Methods Studies A2349 and A2350 were replicate, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, cross-over studies in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients were randomized to sequential 12-week treatments of twice-daily IND/GLY 27.5/15.6?μg and once-daily UMEC/VI 62.5/25?μg, each separated by a 3-week washout. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of IND/GLY compared with UMEC/VI in terms of the 24-h forced expiratory volume in 1?s profile at week 12 (FEV 1 AUC 0–24 ). Rescue medication use, symptom control, and safety were assessed throughout. Results Both treatments delivered substantial bronchodilation over 12?weeks, with improvements in FEV 1 AUC 0–24h at week 12 of 232 and 185?mL for IND/GLY, and 244 and 203?mL with UMEC/VI in Studies A2349 and A2350, respectively. The primary efficacy objective of non-inferiority of IND/GLY relative to UMEC/VI was not met as the lower bound of the confidence interval for the LS treatment comparison was below the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of ?20?mL in both studies: ?26.9 and ?34.2?mL, respectively (LS mean between-treatment differences: ?11.5 and ?18.2?mL). Both drugs were well tolerated, with AE profiles consistent with their respective prescribing information. Conclusions IND/GLY and UMEC/VI provided clinically meaningful and comparable bronchodilation. Non-inferiority of IND/GLY to UMEC/VI could not be declared although between-treatment differences were not clinically relevant. The data support the use of IND/GLY as an efficacious and well tolerated treatment option in patients with COPD. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02487446 and NCT02487498)
机译:摘要目的,用于比较两种长效双支气管扩张剂组合的疗效和安全性:吲哚替氏醇/甘吡咯醇(IND / GLY)与UMECLIDINIUM / VILANTEROL(UMEC / VI)。方法研究A2349和A2350重复,随机,双盲,双伪,中度至重度COPD患者的交叉研究。患者被随机化为序贯的12周处理两次IND / GLY 27.5 / 15.6/15.5 /15.6Ω,每次每日UMEC / VI 62.5 /25≤μg,每次通过3周的冲洗。主要目的是在第12周(FEV 1 AUC 0-24)中,与UMEC / VI相比,与UMEC / VI相比,与UMEC / VI相比,与UMEC / VI相比。拯救药物使用,症状控制和安全性得到评估。结果这两种治疗均为大约12℃的大量支气管扩张,在232和185?ml的第12周的FEV 1 AUC 0-24h中的改进,具有UMEC / VI的IND / GLY,144和203μm,分别。由于LS治疗比较的置信区间的置信区间的下限低于预先指定的非劣势裕度,因此不符合IND / GLY相对于UMEC / VI的初级疗效目标。研究:26.9和?34.2?ml(Ls平均治疗差异:α11.5和?18.2?ml)。两种药物耐受良好,AE型材与各自的处方信息一致。结论IND / GLY和UMEC / VI提供临床有意义和可比的支气管扩张。尽管治疗差异在临床上没有临床相关性,但不能宣布IND / GLY对UMEC / VI的非自卑感。数据支持使用Ind / Gly作为COPD患者的有效且耐受性的治疗选择。 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02487446和NCT02487498)

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号