4.1 Review

Benefit/Risk Profile of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in COPD

Publisher

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S291967

Keywords

all-cause mortality; exacerbations; hospitalizations; ICS; LABA; LAMA

Funding

  1. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a significant healthcare and socioeconomic burden, with recommended personalized treatment methods that can significantly reduce symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Clinical trials of single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) show benefits in improving lung function and reducing the risk of exacerbations and hospitalizations in COPD patients, although the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may come with the reported risk of pneumonia.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with major healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. International consortia recommend a personalized approach to treatment and management that aims to reduce both symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Recent clinical trials have investigated single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting beta(2) -agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for patients with symptomatic COPD. Here, we review evidence from randomized controlled trials showing the benefits of SITT and weigh these against the reported risk of pneumonia with ICS use. We highlight the challenges associated with crosstrial comparisons of benefit/risk, discuss blood eosinophils as a marker of ICS responsiveness, and summarize current treatment recommendations and the position of SITT in the management of COPD, including potential advantages in terms of improving patient adherence. Evidence from trials of SITT versus dual therapies in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and increased risk of exacerbations shows benefits in lung function and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, the key benefits reported with SITT are significant reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations, with data also suggesting reduced all-cause mortality. These benefits outweigh the ICS-class effect of higher incidence of study-reported pneumonia compared with LAMA/LABA. Important differences in trial design, baseline population characteristics, such as exacerbation history, and assessment of outcomes, have significant implications for interpreting data from cross-trial comparisons. Current understanding interprets the blood eosinophil count as a continuum that can help predict response to ICS and has utility alongside other clinical factors to aid treatment decision-making. We conclude that treatment decisions in COPD should be guided by an approach that considers benefit versus risk, with early optimization of treatment essential for maximizing long-term benefits and patient outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available