Lung function improvements with twice-daily aclidinium/formoterol fixed-dose combination in two 24-week studies in patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Combining bronchodilators with complementary mechanisms of action may improve lung function in patients with COPD. A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist aclidinium bromide and the long-acting β 2 agonist formoterol fumarate is in clinical development. Aim: To assess bronchodilation with aclidinium/formoterol FDC in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Methods: In two multicentre, randomized Phase III studies (ACLIFORM and AUGMENT) patients were randomized to 24 weeks' double-blind treatment with inhaled aclidinium/formoterol FDC 400 µg/12 µg or 400 µg/6 µg, aclidinium 400 µg, formoterol 12 µg, or placebo, twice-daily. Co-primary endpoints at Week 24 were changes from baseline in 1-hr morning post-dose FEV 1 vs aclidinium and morning pre-dose (trough) FEV 1 vs formoterol. Results: Mean baseline FEV 1 was 1.38 L in ACLIFORM and 1.36 L in AUGMENT (54.2% and 53.5% predicted, respectively). Significant improvements in both co-primary endpoints were observed with both doses of the FDC at the first time-point assessed; these improvements were generally maintained at study end (Table). Additionally, each FDC produced clinically significant improvements in FEV 1 vs placebo from as early as 5 minutes post-dose on Day 1 (range: 100 – 128 mL, both p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Aclidinium/formoterol FDC 400/12 µg and 400/6 µg produced rapid, sustained improvements in bronchodilation compared with the monotherapies and placebo over six months in patients with COPD; the greatest improvements were seen with FDC 400/12 µg vs FDC 400/6 µg. Tab. 1: Improvements in bronchodilation with aclidinium/formoterol FDCs (ACLIFORM and AUGMENT studies; ITT population) *p < 0.05; a ACLIFORM (NCT01462942; aclidinium, n= 383; formoterol, n= 383; placebo, n = 194); bAUGMENT (NCT01437397; aclidinium, n= 337; formoterol, n= 332; placebo, n= 331); 'First time point assessed: ACLIFORM, Day 7; AUGMENT, Day 4; FDC, aclidinium/formoterol fixed-dose combination; FEV 1 , forced expiratory volume in 1 second; ITT, intent-to-treat; LSMD, least square mean difference; SE, standard error FDC 400/12 µg FDC 400/6 µg ACLIFORM AUGMENT ACLIFORM AUGMENT LSMD (SE), mL n = 385 a n = 335 b n = 381 a n = 333 b 1-hr morning post-dose FEV 1 vs aclidinium Day 1 45 (11)* 42 (11)* 26 (11)* 30 (11)* Week 24 125 (18)* 108 (18)* 69 (18)* 87 (18)* 1-hr morning post-dose FEV 1 vs placebo Day 1 210 (14)* 205 (11)* 191 (14)* 193 (11)* Week 24 299 (22)* 284 (19)* 244 (22)* 263 (18)* Morning pre-dose (trough) FEV 1 vs formoterol Week l c 64 (13)* 55 (12)* 52 (13)* 48 (12)* Week 24 85 (17)* 45 (17)* 53 (17)* 26 (17) Morning pre-dose (trough) FEV 1 vs placebo Week l c 147 (16)* 152 (12)* 134 (16)* 145 (12)* Week 24 143 (21)* 130 (18)* 111 (21)* 111 (18)* Funding: This study was supported by Almirall S.A., Barcelona, Spain and Forest Laboratories LLC, a subsidiary of Actavis plc, New York, NY, USA
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".