Comparative Effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FORM in Patients with COPD Stepping Up From Dual Therapy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Recent data suggest differences in effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapies (SITTs) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, data specifically from patients previously treated with dual bronchodilator therapy are lacking. This real-world comparative effectiveness study assessed patients with COPD treated with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) and budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BUD/GLY/FORM) who stepped up from dual therapy. This retrospective study used healthcare claims from the Komodo Research database to identify patients with COPD and Medicare Fee-for-Service insurance on dual therapy as their most recent treatment in the 90 days pre-index, stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI or BUD/GLY/FORM between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2023. Primary outcome was annualized rate of moderate–severe exacerbations per patient-year (PPY) compared using rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from Poisson regression models after adjustment with overlap weighting. Secondary outcomes were time to first moderate–severe exacerbation (analyzed as a composite and separately), reported using Kaplan–Meier (KM) analysis and compared using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs from weighted Cox regression models. All-cause mortality (KM analysis) was included as an exploratory outcome. Overall, 10,093 FF/UMEC/VI and 3926 BUD/GLY/FORM patients stepping up from dual therapy were included. Patients stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI experienced an 18% significantly lower rate of moderate–severe COPD exacerbations compared with BUD/GLY/FORM [0.80 vs. 0.98 PPY; RR (95% CI) 0.82 (0.77, 0.88); P < 0.001]. Stepping up to FF/UMEC/VI was also associated with a 14% lower risk of moderate–severe COPD exacerbations [HR (95% CI) 0.86 (0.81, 0.92); P < 0.001] and 18% lower risk of all-cause mortality [HR (95% CI) 0.82 (0.68, 0.99); P = 0.040] at 12 months compared with BUD/GLY/FORM. In this real-world study, SITT with FF/UMEC/VI was associated with a significantly lower rate and risk of exacerbations compared with BUD/GLY/FORM in patients stepping up from dual therapy. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive respiratory disease and one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Triple therapy (a combination of three molecules) in a single inhaler is a recommended treatment option for patients with COPD to control COPD attacks; two such single-inhaler triple therapies are available in the United States (US), Europe, and elsewhere; however, information is limited on how they compare in controlling COPD attacks in patients who have previously been treated with dual therapy (a combination of two molecules). This study assessed the effect of treatment with the single-inhaler triple therapies fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) or budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BUD/GLY/FORM) in patients with COPD in the US who had previously used dual therapy as their most recent treatment for 90 days; a healthcare claims database was used to identify the patients. The results of the study suggest that single-inhaler triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI was associated with a significantly lower rate and risk of COPD attacks compared with BUD/GLY/FORM in patients who had previously used dual therapy. Patients stepping up to triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI had an 18% lower rate of COPD attacks compared with BUD/GLY/FORM, a 14% lower risk of COPD attacks a year after step up, and an 18% lower risk of death in an exploratory endpoint. These results may help healthcare providers choose the most appropriate treatment for patients with COPD who are inadequately controlled with dual therapy and require treatment with single-inhaler triple therapy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».