Search

Introduction: Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual maintenance therapies for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus other dual and mono-bronchodilator therapies in symptomatic patients with COPD.Methods: A systematic literature review (October 2015-November 2020) was performed to identify RCTs ≥ 8 weeks long in adult patients with COPD that compared LAMA/LABA combinations against any long-acting bronchodilator-containing dual therapy or monotherapy. Data extracted on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, rescue medication use and moderate/severe exacerbation rate were analysed using an NMA in a frequentist framework. The primary comparison was at 24 weeks. Fixed effects model results are presented.Results: The NMA included 69 full-length publications (including 10 GSK clinical study reports) reporting 49 studies. At 24 weeks, UMEC/VI provided statistically significant greater improvements in FEV1 versus all dual therapy and monotherapy comparators. UMEC/VI provided similar improvements in SGRQ total score compared with all other LAMA/LABAs, and significantly greater improvements versus UMEC 125 μg, glycopyrronium 50 μg, glycopyrronium 18 μg, tiotropium 18 μg and salmeterol 50 μg. UMEC/VI also provided significantly better outcomes versus some comparators for TDI focal score, rescue medication use, annualised moderate/severe exacerbation rate, and time to first moderate/severe exacerbation.Conclusion: UMEC/VI provided generally better outcomes compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and consistent improvements in lung function (measured by change from baseline in trough FEV1 at 24 weeks) versus dual therapies. Treatment with UMEC/VI may improve outcomes for symptomatic patients with COPD compared with alternative maintenance treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Smoking may reduce the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its impact on bronchodilator efficacy is unclear. This analysis of the EMAX trial explored efficacy and safety of dual- versus mono-bronchodilator therapy in current or former smokers with COPD. Methods: The 24-week EMAX trial evaluated lung function, symptoms, health status, exacerbations, clinically important deterioration, and safety with umeclidinium/vilanterol, umeclidinium, and salmeterol in symptomatic patients at low exacerbation risk who were not receiving ICS. Current and former smoker subgroups were defined by smoking status at screening. Results: The analysis included 1203 (50%) current smokers and 1221 (50%) former smokers. Both subgroups demonstrated greater improvements from baseline in trough FEV1 at week 24 (primary endpoint) with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium (least squares [LS] mean difference, mL [95% CI]; current: 84 [50, 117]; former: 49 [18, 80]) and salmeterol (current: 165 [132, 198]; former: 117 [86, 148]) and larger reductions in rescue medication inhalations/day over 24 weeks versus umeclidinium (LS mean difference [95% CI]; current: − 0.42 [− 0.63, − 0.20]; former: − 0.25 − 0.44, − 0.05]) and salmeterol (current: − 0.28 [− 0.49, − 0.06]; former: − 0.29 [− 0.49, − 0.09]). Umeclidinium/vilanterol increased the odds (odds ratio [95% CI]) of clinically significant improvement at week 24 in Transition Dyspnea Index versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.16, 2.06]; former: 1.32 [0.99, 1.75]) and salmeterol (current: 1.37 (1.03, 1.82]; former: 1.60 [1.20, 2.13]) and Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms–COPD versus umeclidinium (current: 1.54 [1.13, 2.09]; former: 1.50 [1.11, 2.04]) and salmeterol (current: 1.53 [1.13, 2.08]; former: 1.53 [1.12, 2.08]). All treatments were well tolerated in both subgroups. Conclusions: In current and former smokers, umeclidinium/vilanterol provided greater improvements in lung function and symptoms versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, supporting consideration of dual-bronchodilator therapy in symptomatic patients with COPD regardless of their smoking status. Plain Language Summary: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often require daily medication to control their COPD. Many patients with COPD are smokers, and smoking is one of the most common causes of COPD. This means that it is important to find out whether COPD medications are effective in both smokers and nonsmokers. We analyzed data from a clinical trial (EMAX) that investigated the use of a combination of two bronchodilators, which are inhaled medications that help to open the airways. We compared umeclidinium/vilanterol, a dual-bronchodilator combination, with a single bronchodilator (either umeclidinium or salmeterol) over 6 months. We found that both current and former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol had larger improvements in lung function than those receiving umeclidinium or salmeterol. Current or former smokers who were treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol used their reliever inhaler less than those treated with umeclidinium or salmeterol. Patients treated with umeclidinium/vilanterol were generally less likely to experience disease worsening compared with umeclidinium or salmeterol if they were former smokers, or compared with salmeterol if they were current smokers. Our findings suggest that umeclidinium/vilanterol may be more effective than a single bronchodilator for daily treatment of patients with COPD who are current or former smokers. Physicians should consider prescribing a combination of two bronchodilators to patients who have symptoms, whether or not they currently smoke, as well as encouraging smoking cessation for all patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patients hospitalized for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are at risk of further readmissions, increased treatment costs, and excess mortality. This study evaluated inpatient admissions and readmissions in patients receiving initial maintenance therapy with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus tiotropium (TIO). Methods: This retrospective, matched cohort study identified patients with COPD who initiated maintenance therapy with UMEC/VI or TIO from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018 (index date defined as earliest dispensing). Eligibility criteria included: ≥ 1 medical claim for COPD pre-index or on the index date; ≥ 12 months of continuous eligibility pre-index; age ≥ 40 years at index; no pre- or post-index asthma diagnosis; and no pre-index claims for medications containing inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting β 2-agonists, or long-acting muscarinic antagonists. Outcomes included time to first on-treatment COPD-related inpatient admission, rate of on-treatment COPD-related admissions, and rate of all-cause and COPD-related readmissions within 30 and 90 days. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: Matched UMEC/VI and TIO cohorts each included 7997 patients and were balanced on baseline characteristics (mean age 70.9 years; female 47.1–47.6%). Over 12 months, patients initiating UMEC/VI had significantly reduced risk (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.87 [0.79, 0.96]; p = 0.006) and rates (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.80 [0.72, 0.92]; p = 0.008) of COPD-related inpatient admissions compared with TIO. While all-cause readmission rates were similar between treatment cohorts, readmission rates among patients with an initial admission length of stay of 1–3 days were numerically lower for UMEC/VI versus TIO (30-day readmissions: 10.5% vs. 12.4%; 90-day readmissions: 15.5% vs. 19.8%). Similar patterns were observed for COPD-related readmissions. Conclusions: These findings highlight the real-world benefits of dual therapy with UMEC/VI versus TIO in reducing inpatient admissions and readmissions in patients with COPD, which may translate to lower healthcare costs. Plain Language Summary: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who are admitted to the hospital are more likely to be readmitted in the future, have higher healthcare costs, and are more likely to die from their illness. Patients who are readmitted to hospital have even higher treatment costs. Identifying which treatments are best at reducing the number of patients with COPD who are admitted to the hospital may help to improve outcomes and reduce the cost of COPD treatment. We used US healthcare claims data to compare two daily treatments for COPD, umeclidinium/vilanterol and tiotropium. We aimed to find out which treatment was more effective at reducing hospital admissions due to COPD. We also compared how many patients on each treatment were readmitted within 30 or 90 days of their original hospital admission for COPD. We found that patients who started treatment with umeclidinium/vilanterol were less likely to be admitted to the hospital for COPD than patients who started treatment with tiotropium. Similar numbers of patients on each treatment were readmitted to the hospital within 30 or 90 days after they were discharged. However, among patients whose initial hospital stay was short (1–3 days), readmissions within 30 or 90 days were less common with umeclidinium/vilanterol than tiotropium. These findings suggest that umeclidinium/vilanterol may be more effective than tiotropium at reducing the number of patients with COPD who need to be admitted or readmitted to hospital. Starting COPD treatment with umeclidinium/vilanterol may lead to better health outcomes and lower costs than tiotropium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy report recommends long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) or long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) as first-line treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but many patients remain symptomatic on monotherapy and escalation to dual-bronchodilator therapy may be warranted. Methods: TONADO® 1&2 and OTEMTO® 1&2 assessed lung function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe (OTEMTO) or moderate-to-very-severe (TONADO) COPD. This pooled post hoc analysis included patients treated with LAMA monotherapy at baseline who were randomised to receive either 5 µg tiotropium (LAMA) or 5/5 µg tiotropium/olodaterol (LAMA/LABA). We assessed changes from baseline and responder rates for trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Transition Dyspnoea Index (TDI). Results: Overall, 151 patients received tiotropium; 148 received tiotropium/olodaterol. Mean differences from baseline with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were + 0.074 l (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.033, 0.115; P = 0.0004) for trough FEV1, − 2.675 (95% CI − 5.060, − 0.291; P = 0.0280) for SGRQ and 1.148 (95% CI 0.564, 1.732; P = 0.0001) for TDI. Patients were more likely to respond when treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium for trough FEV1 (odds ratio [OR] 3.14, 95% CI 1.94, 5.06; P < 0.0001), SGRQ (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.93, 2.40; P = 0.0980) and TDI (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.71, 4.60; P < 0.0001). Minimum clinically important difference from baseline in any of the analysed outcomes (FEV1 ≥ 0.1 l, SGRQ ≥ 4.0 points or TDI ≥ 1.0 point) was more likely in patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32, 4.51; P = 0.0046). Conclusion: In patients with COPD receiving only LAMA monotherapy, treatment escalation to tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in lung function, health status and breathlessness. These results support early therapy optimisation to dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in patients receiving tiotropium alone. Trial Registration: TONADO® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431274). TONADO® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 9 September 2011 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01431287). OTEMTO® 1 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 17 October 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01964352). OTEMTO® 2 was registered in the US National Library of Medicine on 10 December 2013 (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02006732). Plain Language Summary: Global recommendations suggest that people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can start treatment with one of two types of inhaled medicine: either a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA). Doctors can also prescribe these treatments together (LAMA/LABA) if needed. To help doctors decide whether to prescribe single or combined treatment, we looked at people with COPD who were taking LAMA alone at the beginning of two large studies (TONADO® and OTEMTO®). In these studies, people with COPD could either stay on LAMA alone (tiotropium) or switch to combined LAMA/LABA treatment (tiotropium/olodaterol). We looked to see if there were any changes in the functioning of the lungs (measured using forced expiratory volume in 1 s), quality of life (measured using the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire) or breathlessness (measured using the Transition Dyspnoea Index) between the start of the study and after 12 weeks of treatment. We showed that lung function, health-related quality of life and breathlessness were significantly better in people taking tiotropium/olodaterol for 12 weeks compared with those on tiotropium alone. Overall, our results support global recommendations and suggest that many people with COPD who are treated with tiotropium could benefit from stepping up to tiotropium/olodaterol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Guidelines are mainly based on evidence of well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but there are limitations to the transferability of conclusions of RCTs to usual care mainly because the patients enrolled in RCTs are selected and not representative of the population encountered in daily practice; moreover, the research environment is substantially different from that of the real world. Because of the scarcity of data generated in large unselected populations in everyday clinical practice, the possibility of using meta-analyses can be considered. Recently, several meta-analyses have attempted to clarify the role of triple therapy containing a long-acting β-agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) delivered from a single inhaler in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also considering that there is a big difference in the use of triple therapy between what is recommended by COPD guidelines or strategies and the prescriptive behaviour of clinicians. Taking into account the results of the most recent meta-analyses, we believe that triple therapy provides modest clinical benefit in the general COPD population, but in patients on LABA/LAMA combination therapy, who still experience acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) and have blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells·μl−1, it is of clinical relevance. On the contrary, adding a LAMA to an ICS/LABA combination elicits relevant clinical benefit in the general COPD population, supporting the role of dual bronchodilation therapy for the treatment of COPD. The quantitative synthesis of the currently available clinical evidence seems to suggest that, in patients with COPD already on ICS/LABA combination, the therapy can be improved without an increase of cardiovascular severe adverse events (SAEs) when a LAMA is added to the combination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (GFF MDI), formulated using co-suspension delivery technology, is the only approved fixed-dose combination long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) delivered via MDI. Direct comparisons of GFF MDI versus other LAMA/LABAs have not previously been performed. We assessed the efficacy and safety of GFF MDI relative to umeclidinium/vilanterol dry powder inhaler (UV DPI) in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Methods: In this phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, 24-week study, patients received GFF MDI 18/9.6 μg (equivalent to glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate 14.4/10 μg; two inhalations per dose, twice-daily; n = 559) or UV DPI 62.5/25 μg (one inhalation, once-daily; n = 560). Primary endpoints were change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and peak change from baseline in FEV1 within 2 h post-dose, both over 24 weeks. Additional lung function, symptom and safety endpoints were also assessed.Results: For the primary endpoints, GFF MDI was non-inferior to UV DPI (using a margin of - 50 mL) for peak FEV1 (least squares mean [LSM] difference - 3.4 mL, 97.5% confidence interval [CI] - 32.8, 25.9) but not for trough FEV1 (LSM difference - 87.2 mL; - 117.0, - 57.4). GFF MDI was nominally superior to UV DPI for onset of action (p < 0.0001) and was nominally non-inferior to UV DPI for all symptom endpoints (Transition Dyspnea Index focal score, Early Morning/Night-Time Symptoms COPD instrument scores, and COPD Assessment Test score). Exacerbation and safety findings were similar between groups.Conclusions: Over 24 weeks of treatment, GFF MDI was non-inferior to UV DPI for peak FEV1, but not for morning pre-dose trough FEV1. GFF MDI had a faster onset of action versus UV DPI. There were no clinically meaningful differences between treatments in symptom endpoints. Both treatments were well tolerated with similar safety profiles.Trial Registration: NCT03162055 (Clinicaltrials.gov) FUNDING: AstraZeneca. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inhaled fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of a long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) have become the cornerstone for the maintenance treatment of symptomatic COPD patients. In this regard, global COPD treatment guidelines have recognized the importance of inhaler devices as integral contributors to the effectiveness of LABA/LAMA FDCs and recommend regular assessment of inhaler device use by the patients in order to improve long-term clinical outcomes. Optimal disease control is also highly dependent upon patient preferences and adherence to inhaler devices. This review objectively examines and compares the major inhaler devices used to deliver different LABA/LAMA FDCs, discusses the inhaler device characteristics that determine drug deposition in the airways, real-life preference for inhaler devices, and handling of inhaler devices that impact the results of the long-term management of COPD. The introduction of new LABA/LAMA FDCs, new inhaler devices, and more clinical studies have created confusion among physicians in choosing the optimal inhaled therapy for COPD patients; in this context, this review attempts to provide an evidence-based framework for informed decision-making with a particular focus on the inhaler devices. Funding. The preparation of this manuscript was funded by Novartis Pharma AG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Depending on the increase in the world population and climate changes, the number of disasters have increased gradually. To cope with natural hazards, comprehensive disaster management strategies must be developed and implemented. Among the natural hazards, landslides are one of the most harmful and they cause serious economic losses and human deaths throughout the world. To reduce these losses, comprehensive regional landslide susceptibility and hazard assessments must be performed and the mechanism of landslides must be understood clearly. If a landslide inventory database is inaccurate and incomplete both spatially and temporally, assessment of regional landslide susceptibility and hazard includes more or less uncertainties. Consequently, new approaches are needed to reduce or even to eliminate the uncertainties. For this reason, the purposes of the present study are to describe the potential role of Citizen Science (CitSci) in landslide researches and to present a simple and user-friendly mobile app for the collection of the essential data from landslides. It is expected that the use of CitSci in landslide researches would increase and help greatly for the provision of comprehensive data. In addition, the spatial distribution of the data to be collected may be correlated with the human population and the settlement density. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Appropriate timing for dual bronchodilator therapy initiation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management is uncertain. Combination therapy is recommended as step-up from monotherapy or first-line treatment in patients with persistent symptoms. In this setting, umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) demonstrated improved lung function and reduced rescue medication use over tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO). This subgroup analysis explored efficacy differences between these combinations in patients naïve to COPD maintenance therapy before study entry.Methods: Post hoc analysis of an 8-week, randomized, open-label, assessor-blind, two-period crossover study (204990; NCT02799784) comparing UMEC/VI 62.5/25 mcg and TIO/OLO 5/5 mcg, focused on maintenance-naïve (MN) patients with moderate COPD and persistent symptoms (modified Medical Research Council dyspnea score ≥ 2). Change from baseline (CFB) in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), percentage of FEV1 responders (CFB ≥ 100 ml), rescue medication use and safety were evaluated.Results: The MN population comprised 63% of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (148/236 patients) and had similar baseline demographics. At week 8, adjusted mean (standard error) improvements in trough FEV1 from baseline were clinically meaningful for both combinations (UMEC/VI: 167 [17] ml; TIO/OLO 110 [18] ml; adjusted mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 57 [23-92] ml; p = 0.001; %CFB: 11 vs. 8%). Proportion of FEV1 responders was greater with UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO at week 8 (60 vs. 42%; odds ratio [95% CI] 1.90 [1.12-3.22]; p = 0.018). Reduction in rescue medication use was 0.20 (95% CI 0.07-0.34) puffs/day greater with UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO over weeks 1-8 (p = 0.003). Adverse events incidence was similar (UMEC/VI: 24%; TIO/OLO: 29%).Conclusions: These results highlight that the efficacy difference between UMEC/VI and TIO/OLO demonstrated in the ITT population is maintained in MN patients. Greater lung function improvements with UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO were accompanied by symptom improvements, as reflected in a significantly lower need for supplemental rescue medication.Funding: GSK.Trial registration: NCT02799784 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Comparative data on the efficacies of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β-agonist (LABA) combinations for the treatment of moderate-to-very-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited. The aim of this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) is to assess the relative efficacies of available open combinations (delivered via separate inhalers) and fixed-dose combinations (FDCs, delivered via a single inhaler). Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ≥8-week duration in adults aged ≥40 years with COPD that compared LAMA + LABA combinations with each other, with tiotropium (TIO), or with placebo. Data on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV) and on St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score, and rescue medication use at 12 and 24 weeks were extracted from these RCTs and analyzed using a NMA in a Bayesian framework. Results: Data from 44 RCTs were included in the NMA. All FDCs showed improvements relative to placebo in terms of trough FEV, SGRQ total score, and TDI focal score above clinically relevant thresholds, with the exception of TIO/olodaterol and aclidinium/formoterol, both of which failed to show clinically relevant improvements in SGRQ score at 24 weeks. All FDCs demonstrated reduced rescue medication use versus placebo. Open combinations demonstrated improved efficacy in all outcomes versus placebo, but these improvements did not consistently exceed clinically relevant thresholds for SGRQ and TDI scores. All once-daily FDCs showed improved efficacy versus TIO, but improvements were less consistently observed versus TIO with open dual combinations and combinations containing formoterol or salmeterol administered twice daily. Relative probabilities of improvement between FDCs highlighted potential between-class differences for trough FEV but suggested little potential for differences in patient-reported outcomes. Conclusion: LAMA + LABA combinations generally showed improved outcomes versus placebo and TIO. FDCs appeared to perform better than open dual combinations. A potential effectiveness gradient was observed between FDCs for objectively assessed functional outcomes, although further prospective trials are required to confirm these findings. Funding: GSK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We report the results of the first direct comparison of the once-daily fixed-dose long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) combinations umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) and tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) in patients with COPD.Methods: This was a randomized, two-period crossover open-label study in symptomatic patients with COPD [age 40 years or older, postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 70% or less and 50% or more of predicted normal values, and modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale score of 2 or greater] not receiving inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Patients were randomized to receive UMEC/VI (62.5/25 µg once daily) via a multidose dry powder inhaler (ELLIPTA) followed by TIO/OLO (5/5 µg once daily) via a soft mist inhaler (Respimat), each for 8 weeks with an interim 3-week washout or vice versa. The primary end point was the change from baseline in trough FEV1 at week 8 with a noninferiority margin of - 50 mL in the per-protocol (PP) population. The incidence of adverse events was also assessed.Results: In total, 236 patients (mean age 64.4 years, 60% male) were included in the intent-to-treat population and 227 were included in the PP population. UMEC/VI treatment was noninferior in the PP population and superior in the intent-to-treat population to TIO/OLO treatment with regard to trough FEV1 at week 8 [FEV1 change from baseline 180 mL vs 128 mL; difference 52 mL (95% confidence interval 28-77 mL); p < 0.001]. Patients receiving UMEC/VI had twofold increased odds of experiencing a clinically meaningful increase (100 mL or more) from baseline in trough FEV1 at week 8 compared with patients receiving TIO/OLO (odds ratio 2.05; 95% confidence interval 1.34-3.14). Adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the UMEC/VI group and in 31% of patients in the TIO/OLO group.Conclusion: In this first direct comparison of two once-daily fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combinations, superiority was observed for the primary end point of trough FEV1 at week 8 with UMEC/VI compared with TIO/OLO in patients with symptomatic COPD. Both treatments had similar safety profiles. These findings confirm the results of previous indirect LAMA/LABA comparisons, and show that an efficacy gradient exists within the LAMA/LABA class.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02799784.Funding: GlaxoSmithKline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In all current guidelines and recommendations of the management of COPD, inhaled bronchodilators are the pillar of therapy at each stage of the disease. Dual bronchodilation with long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β-agonist (LABA) is always more effective than the LAMA or LABA alone in terms of the improvement in trough FEV, and transitional dyspnea index and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores. Indacaterol/glycopyrronium has been the first LABA/LAMA to be developed and approved as a maintenance bronchodilator treatment to relieve symptoms in adult patients with COPD. It has received approval from numerous regulatory authorities around the world because of the results of the pivotal Phase III programs IGNITE, which explored indacaterol/glycopyrronium 110/50 μg once-daily across 52 countries, and EXPEDITION, which explored indacaterol/glycopyrronium 27.5/15.6 μg twice-daily in US. Although guidelines and recommendations suggest a 'slow' gradual therapeutic strategy, we advocate the need to start immediately, until the time of diagnosis, the treatment of COPD patients with indacaterol/glycopyrronium in order to optimize bronchodilation, because we strongly believe the rapid improvement in symptoms that it is able to elicit could help patients' adherence to treatment, which may be otherwise discouraged by a 'slow' gradual therapeutic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. COPD is typified by persistent, progressive airflow limitation and a range of respiratory and systemic symptoms such as breathlessness, coughing, wheezing, depression, anxiety, general fatigue, and sleeping difficulties. Despite receiving treatment for COPD, many patients suffer from regular symptoms that affect their daily lives and lead to increased morbidity. These symptoms vary in severity, frequency, and type, and can occur at any time throughout the 24-h day, with over half of patients with COPD experiencing symptoms in the morning, during the day, and at nighttime. Despite the prevalence of symptoms, patient and physician perception of the impact of COPD symptoms on patients' lives is not always in concordance. Dual bronchodilator therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting beta agonist (LABA) has the potential to treat the symptoms of COPD in addition to improving lung function. This review therefore examines the burden of symptoms experienced throughout the day by patients with COPD and the evidence for combined LAMA/LABA treatment in terms of symptom management. As patients with COPD experience varying symptoms throughout the course of their disease, the role of tailoring treatment to the individual needs of the patient is also examined. We conclude that the symptoms of COPD are troublesome, variable, can occur during all parts of the 24-h day, and have a substantial impact on patients' health status and quality of life. In order to provide effective, patient-orientated care, patients with COPD should be evaluated on the basis of lung function, the frequency of symptoms, and patient-perceived impact of symptoms on their lives. Therapy should be chosen carefully based on individualized assessment, ensuring personalization to the individual needs of the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on previous observations, the 1950-nm diode laser seems to be an ideal wavelength for laser microvascular anastomoses. The data presented here, part of a larger ongoing study, assess its use in emergency hand surgery. Between 2011 and 2014, 11 patients were operated on for hand trauma with laser-assisted microanastomoses (LAMA) and prospectively analysed. LAMA was performed with a 1950-nm diode laser after placement of equidistant stitches. For vessel size <1.5 mm, the following laser parameters were used: spot size 400 μm, five spots for each wall, power 125 mW, and arterial/venous fluence 100/90 J/cm (spot duration 1/0.9 s). Mean operating time for arterial and venous microanastomoses was 7.3 ± 1.4 and 8.7 ± 1.0 min, respectively. Three anastomoses required a secondary laser application. Arterial and venous patency rates were 100 % at the time of surgery. The success rate for the 11 procedures assessed clinically and with the Doppler was 100 %. The technique is compared to the current literature. The 1950-nm LAMA is a reliable tool with excellent results in emergency hand surgery. The system is very compact and transportable for utilization in the emergency operating room. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deep tissue infection is a serious sequela that often demands intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment. With respect to IV drug users (IDU's), research and lived experience demonstrates a trend of failed treatment outcomes, most notably associated with leaving hospital against medical advice (LAMA) prior to treatment completion, increased adverse outcomes and patient hardship. This paper examines an alternative model for delivering and completing IV antibiotic treatment to IDU's in a community care setting. A retrospective study was designed to review client characteristics. A total of 33 in-depth interviews were conducted with clients, clinicians and with staff. The impact of treatment adherence and completion, as well as client satisfaction of care was explored. A total of 165 patients were admitted during the study period. Osteomyelitis was the primary cause for IV antibiotics. Risk of leaving AMA was significantly lower for community model (p value <0.0000). Qualitative narrative analysis is also described with respect to satisfaction, stigma and the need for better models of care. With lower rates of LAMA a community model ought to be considered on a wider scale for provision of comprehensive support for populations with complex underlying health needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we describe the implementation of an AMG solver for a hybrid cluster that exploits distributed and shared memory parallelization and uses the available GPU accelerators on each node. This solver has been written by using LAMA (Library for Accelerated Math Applications). This library does not only provide an easy-to-use framework for solvers that might run on different devices with different matrix formats, but also comes with features to optimize and hide communication and memory transfers between CPUs and GPUs. These features are explained and their impact on the efficiency of the AMG solver is shown in this paper. The benchmark results show that an efficient use of hybrid clusters is even possible for multi-level methods like AMG where fast solutions are needed on all levels for multiple problem sizes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many numerical simulation codes the backbone of the application covers the solution of linear systems of equations. Often, being created via a discretization of differential equations, the corresponding matrices are very sparse. One popular way to solve these sparse linear systems are multigrid methods-in particular AMG-because of their numerical scalability. But looking at modern multi-core architectures, also the parallel scalability has to be taken into account. With the memory bandwidth usually being the bottleneck of sparse matrix operations these linear solvers can't always benefit from increasing numbers of cores. To exploit the available aggregated memory bandwidth on larger scale NUMA machines evenly distributed data is often more an issue than load balancing. Additionally, using a threading model like OpenMP, one has to ensure the data locality manually by explicit placement of memory pages. On non uniform data it is always a trade-off between these three principles, while the ideal strategy is strongly machine- and application dependent. In this paper we want to present some benchmarks of an AMG implementation based on a new performance library. Main focus is on the comparability to state-of-the-art solver packages regarding sequential performance as well as parallel scalability on common NUMA machines. To maximize throughput on standard model problems, several thread and memory configurations have been evaluated. We will show that even on large scale multi-core architectures easy parallel programming models, like OpenMP, can achieve a competitive performance compared to more complex programming models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]