4.7 Article

Efficacy of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis across Prespecified Subgroups in INPULSIS

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201503-0562OC

关键词

disease progression; forced vital capacity; quality of life

资金

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: In the two replicate, placebo-controlled, 52-week, phase III INPULSIS trials, nintedanib 150 mg twice daily significantly reduced the annual rate of decline in FVC, the primary endpoint, in subjects with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). It is unknown if this effect was uniform across all subjects treated with nintedanib. Objectives: To investigate the potential association of demographic and clinical variables with the effect of nintedanib in subjects with IPF. Methods: Subgroup analyses of pooled data from the INPULSIS trials were prespecified. Subgroups were analyzed by sex, age (<65, >= 65 yr), race (white, Asian), baseline FVC percentage predicted (<= 70%, >70%), baseline St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (<= 40, >40), smoking status (never, ex/current), systemic corticosteroid use (yes/no), and bronchodilator use (yes/no). Measurements and Main Results: A total of 1,061 subjects were treated (nintedanib n = 638, placebo n = 423). There was no statistically significant difference in the effect of nintedanib for the primary endpoint or the key secondary endpoints of change from baseline in SGRQ total score or time to first acute exacerbation in any subgroup. Treatment effects for the key secondary endpoints seemed more pronounced in subjects with baseline FVC <= 70% predicted, because the majority of acute exacerbations and a greater deterioration in SGRQ total score occurred in placebo-treated subjects in this subgroup. Conclusions: Pooled data from the INPULSIS trials support a consistent effect of nintedanib across a range of IPF phenotypes by slowing disease progression across a number of prespecified subgroups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据