Triple Therapy in COPD in Real Life: Is It Better to Use Single or Multiple Inhalers?

<b>Background:</b> Today, single-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA (SITT) COPD therapies are available. It is unclear whether they are more effective than multiple-device triple therapies (MITT) in improving COPD outcomes. <b>Methods</b>: We retrospectively considered patients on SITT/MITT in 2019/2020 who were prescribed >7 packages of ICS/LABA/LAMA or ICS/LAMA (+LAMA). The two treatments were compared concerning systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics, salbutamol, antifungal prescriptions, and number of emergency room visits/hospitalizations (ERV/Hs). We studied 292 MITT patients (Group A) during 2019, switching to SITT in 2020, and 366 subjects (Group B) who took SITT during 2019, and 206 MITT individuals (Group C) in 2020. <b>Results:</b> ICS/LABA + LAMA (MITT) package use was 8.2 ± 4.2 and 7.85 ± 4 in 2019, switching to 11.2 ± 3.2 when patients shifted to SITT in 2020 (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). Group A MITT package use was lower than in SITT patients in 2019 (9.31 ± 2.71, <i>p</i> = 0.0001; Group B). Throughout 2020, Group C (10.3 ± 6.1 packs) adherence to ICS/LABA was similar to SITT adherence in Group A (<i>p</i> = 0.270), whereas LAMA package use (9.1 ± 5) was lower (<i>p</i> = 0.0038). Patients using systemic corticosteroids/antibiotics were fewer in SITT in 2020, compared to the MITT results in 2019. Subjects with fewer ERV/Hs were observed with SITT rather than with MITT. Particularly, 13.8% of patients needed ≥2 ERV/Hs when treated with SITT, whereas 19.2% needed ≥2 ERV/Hs with MITT in 2019 (<i>p</i> = 0.08). Multivariate analysis, adjusted for all confounding factors including treatment adherence, showed that MITT (vs. SITT) can have an increased risk of at least one ERV/H (subjects receiving MITT during 2019 passing to SITT in 2020, OR: 1.718 [1.010-2.924], <i>p</i> = 0.046; Group A/MITT/2019 vs. Group B/SITT/2019, OR: 1.650 [0.973-3.153], <i>p</i> = 0.056; Group C/MITT/2020 vs. Group B/SITT/2019, OR: 1.908 [1.018-3.577], <i>p</i> = 0.044). <b>Conclusions:</b> SITT therapy may promote treatment adherence more effectively, therefore, reducing COPD exacerbations better than MITT. A possible synergistic effect of ICS/LABA/LAMA intake with a single device might be another cause of SITT's greater efficacy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2024-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13206191
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.26
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Triple Therapy in COPD in Real Life: Is It Better to Use Single or Multiple Inhalers?

E. Petrucci, Bruno Sposato, Pasquale Baratta, Alberto Cresti et al.
3 citations
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
1.26
article

Triple Therapy in COPD in Real Life: Is It Better to Use Single or Multiple Inhalers?

E. Petrucci, Bruno Sposato, Pasquale Baratta, Alberto Cresti, Marco Scalese, Antonio Perrella, Leonardo Gianluca Lacerenza, Alberto Rícci, Andrea Serafini
article en
3 citations

Abstract

<b>Background:</b> Today, single-inhaler ICS/LAMA/LABA (SITT) COPD therapies are available. It is unclear whether they are more effective than multiple-device triple therapies (MITT) in improving COPD outcomes. <b>Methods</b>: We retrospectively considered patients on SITT/MITT in 2019/2020 who were prescribed >7 packages of ICS/LABA/LAMA or ICS/LAMA (+LAMA). The two treatments were compared concerning systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics, salbutamol, antifungal prescriptions, and number of emergency room visits/hospitalizations (ERV/Hs). We studied 292 MITT patients (Group A) during 2019, switching to SITT in 2020, and 366 subjects (Group B) who took SITT during 2019, and 206 MITT individuals (Group C) in 2020. <b>Results:</b> ICS/LABA + LAMA (MITT) package use was 8.2 ± 4.2 and 7.85 ± 4 in 2019, switching to 11.2 ± 3.2 when patients shifted to SITT in 2020 (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). Group A MITT package use was lower than in SITT patients in 2019 (9.31 ± 2.71, <i>p</i> = 0.0001; Group B). Throughout 2020, Group C (10.3 ± 6.1 packs) adherence to ICS/LABA was similar to SITT adherence in Group A (<i>p</i> = 0.270), whereas LAMA package use (9.1 ± 5) was lower (<i>p</i> = 0.0038). Patients using systemic corticosteroids/antibiotics were fewer in SITT in 2020, compared to the MITT results in 2019. Subjects with fewer ERV/Hs were observed with SITT rather than with MITT. Particularly, 13.8% of patients needed ≥2 ERV/Hs when treated with SITT, whereas 19.2% needed ≥2 ERV/Hs with MITT in 2019 (<i>p</i> = 0.08). Multivariate analysis, adjusted for all confounding factors including treatment adherence, showed that MITT (vs. SITT) can have an increased risk of at least one ERV/H (subjects receiving MITT during 2019 passing to SITT in 2020, OR: 1.718 [1.010-2.924], <i>p</i> = 0.046; Group A/MITT/2019 vs. Group B/SITT/2019, OR: 1.650 [0.973-3.153], <i>p</i> = 0.056; Group C/MITT/2020 vs. Group B/SITT/2019, OR: 1.908 [1.018-3.577], <i>p</i> = 0.044). <b>Conclusions:</b> SITT therapy may promote treatment adherence more effectively, therefore, reducing COPD exacerbations better than MITT. A possible synergistic effect of ICS/LABA/LAMA intake with a single device might be another cause of SITT's greater efficacy.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 13(20)
Istituto di Fisiologia Clinica (IT), Ospedale Misericordia - Grosseto (IT), National Research Council (IT), Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
1.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.