» Articles » PMID: 31666084

Efficacy of Umeclidinium/vilanterol Versus Umeclidinium and Salmeterol Monotherapies in Symptomatic Patients with COPD Not Receiving Inhaled Corticosteroids: the EMAX Randomised Trial

Overview
Journal Respir Res
Specialty Pulmonary Medicine
Date 2019 Nov 1
PMID 31666084
Citations 46
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids.

Methods: The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV) at Week 24. The study was also powered for the secondary endpoint of Transition Dyspnoea Index at Week 24. Other efficacy assessments included spirometry, symptoms, heath status and short-term disease worsening measured by the composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration using three definitions.

Results: Change from baseline in trough FEV at Week 24 was 66 mL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 89) and 141 mL (95% CI: 118, 164) greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, respectively (both p < 0.001). Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated consistent improvements in Transition Dyspnoea Index versus both monotherapies at Week 24 (vs umeclidinium: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.68], p = 0.018; vs salmeterol: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.76], p = 0.004) and all other symptom measures at all time points. Regardless of the clinically important deterioration definition considered, umeclidinium/vilanterol significantly reduced the risk of a first clinically important deterioration compared with umeclidinium (by 16-25% [p < 0.01]) and salmeterol (by 26-41% [p < 0.001]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments.

Conclusions: Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group.

Citing Articles

The Saudi Thoracic Society Evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Al-Jahdali H, Al-Lehebi R, Lababidi H, Alhejaili F, Habis Y, Alsowayan W Ann Thorac Med. 2025; 20(1):1-35.

PMID: 39926399 PMC: 11804957. DOI: 10.4103/atm.atm_155_24.


Improving Patient-Centric COPD Management.

Yawn B Fed Pract. 2025; 41(Suppl 6):S35-S40.

PMID: 39839063 PMC: 11745468. DOI: 10.12788/fp.0534.


Evaluation of comparative efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus other bronchodilators in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.

Zhu H, Lei J, Gao F, Guo Y, Zhao L BMC Pulm Med. 2024; 24(1):609.

PMID: 39696097 PMC: 11654331. DOI: 10.1186/s12890-024-03445-4.


Race-Based Pulmonary Function Testing Correction in COPD Inhaler Therapy Trials: A Systematic Review.

Wang J, Chow R, Shin S, Yang S, Ambade P, Jama S Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2024; 19:2285-2297.

PMID: 39416876 PMC: 11481996. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S475875.


Long-acting muscarinic antagonist and long-acting β-agonist combination for the treatment of maintenance therapy-naïve patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a narrative review.

Buhl R, Miravitlles M, Anzueto A, Brunton S Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2024; 18:17534666241279115.

PMID: 39352722 PMC: 11456191. DOI: 10.1177/17534666241279115.


References
1.
Kon S, Canavan J, Jones S, M Nolan C, Clark A, Dickson M . Minimum clinically important difference for the COPD Assessment Test: a prospective analysis. Lancet Respir Med. 2014; 2(3):195-203. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70001-3. View

2.
Oba Y, Sarva S, Dias S . Efficacy and safety of long-acting β-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist combinations in COPD: a network meta-analysis. Thorax. 2015; 71(1):15-25. DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-206732. View

3.
Mahler D, Witek Jr T . The MCID of the transition dyspnea index is a total score of one unit. COPD. 2006; 2(1):99-103. DOI: 10.1081/copd-200050666. View

4.
Donohue J, Jones P, Bartels C, Marvel J, DAndrea P, Banerji D . Correlations between FEV1 and patient-reported outcomes: A pooled analysis of 23 clinical trials in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2017; 49:11-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.pupt.2017.12.005. View

5.
Calzetta L, Rogliani P, Matera M, Cazzola M . A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Dual Bronchodilation With LAMA/LABA for the Treatment of Stable COPD. Chest. 2016; 149(5):1181-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.646. View