We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Acute cardiovascular safety of two formulations of beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate in COPD patients: A single-dose, randomised, placebo-controlled crossover study.
Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2017 Februrary
INTRODUCTION: An extrafine combination of beclometasone dipropionate (BDP) and formoterol fumarate (FF) via a pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) has been commercially available for some years for the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulation of extrafine BDP/FF is now also available. This study evaluated the cardiovascular safety of BDP/FF DPI in comparison to BDP/FF pMDI and placebo.
METHODS: Single-dose, partially-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, 5-period crossover study. Main inclusion criteria: aged 40-75 years; moderate to severe COPD (post-bronchodilator FEV1 40-80% predicted, FEV1 /FVC <0.7). Patients received BDP/FF 200/12, 800/48 μg and placebo via DPI, and BDP/FF 200/12 and 800/48 μg via pMDI. In both devices, 200/12 μg is the therapeutic dose; 800/48 μg is supratherapeutic.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: to demonstrate non-inferiority between BDP/FF DPI and pMDI in average 4-h heart rate (HR0-4h ) at each dose level. Secondary variables included: HR0-12h , HR peak and individual timepoint; QTcF interval; SBP and DBP AUC0-12h ; and potassium and glucose AUC0-4h . Adverse events (AEs) were collected.
RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were randomised; 45 (92%) received all five treatments. Non-inferiority was demonstrated between the DPI and pMDI formulations at both doses (-0.2 bpm [95% CI -1.3, 0.9] for 200/12 μg and 0.6 bpm [-0.5, 1.7] for 800/48 μg). Although there were statistically significant treatment-placebo differences at both doses and with both devices (thus confirming assay sensitivity), these differences were small and well below 5 bpm for the 200/12 μg dose. The results for the secondary parameters (QTcF, glucose and potassium) further supported the therapeutic equivalence of the two treatments. At the therapeutic dose, there were no clinically relevant treatment-placebo differences in any parameter with either formulation. There was no increase in the proportion of patients reporting AEs whilst receiving therapeutic doses of BDF/FF (either formulation) compared with placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study provides reassurance over the cardiovascular safety of extrafine BDP/FF, both in a DPI and a pMDI formulation.
METHODS: Single-dose, partially-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, 5-period crossover study. Main inclusion criteria: aged 40-75 years; moderate to severe COPD (post-bronchodilator FEV1 40-80% predicted, FEV1 /FVC <0.7). Patients received BDP/FF 200/12, 800/48 μg and placebo via DPI, and BDP/FF 200/12 and 800/48 μg via pMDI. In both devices, 200/12 μg is the therapeutic dose; 800/48 μg is supratherapeutic.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: to demonstrate non-inferiority between BDP/FF DPI and pMDI in average 4-h heart rate (HR0-4h ) at each dose level. Secondary variables included: HR0-12h , HR peak and individual timepoint; QTcF interval; SBP and DBP AUC0-12h ; and potassium and glucose AUC0-4h . Adverse events (AEs) were collected.
RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were randomised; 45 (92%) received all five treatments. Non-inferiority was demonstrated between the DPI and pMDI formulations at both doses (-0.2 bpm [95% CI -1.3, 0.9] for 200/12 μg and 0.6 bpm [-0.5, 1.7] for 800/48 μg). Although there were statistically significant treatment-placebo differences at both doses and with both devices (thus confirming assay sensitivity), these differences were small and well below 5 bpm for the 200/12 μg dose. The results for the secondary parameters (QTcF, glucose and potassium) further supported the therapeutic equivalence of the two treatments. At the therapeutic dose, there were no clinically relevant treatment-placebo differences in any parameter with either formulation. There was no increase in the proportion of patients reporting AEs whilst receiving therapeutic doses of BDF/FF (either formulation) compared with placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study provides reassurance over the cardiovascular safety of extrafine BDP/FF, both in a DPI and a pMDI formulation.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app