scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Primary Care COPD Patients Compared with Large Pharmaceutically-Sponsored COPD Studies : An UNLOCK Validation Study

TL;DR: Primary care COPD patients stand out from patients enrolled in LPCS in terms of gender, lung function, quality of life and exacerbations, as hitherto unknown GOLD I exacerbation characteristics are revealed.
Abstract: Background: Guideline recommendations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are based on the results of large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies (LPCS). There is a paucity of data on disease characteristics at the primary care level, while the majority of COPD patients are treated in primary care. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the external validity of six LPCS (ISOLDE, TRISTAN, TORCH, UPLIFT, ECLIPSE, POET-COPD) on which current guidelines are based, in relation to primary care COPD patients, in order to inform future clinical practice guidelines and trials. Methods: Baseline data of seven primary care databases (n = 3508) from Europe were compared to baseline data of the LPCS. In addition, we examined the proportion of primary care patients eligible to participate in the LPCS, based on inclusion criteria. Results: Overall, patients included in the LPCS were younger (mean difference (MD)-2.4; p = 0.03), predominantly male (MD 12.4; p = 0.1) with worse lung function (FEV1% MD -16.4; p = 1 and >= 2 exacerbations, although results were not statistically significant. Our findings add to the literature, as we revealed hitherto unknown GOLD I exacerbation characteristics, showing 34% of mild patients had >= 1 exacerbations per year and 12% had >= 2 exacerbations per year. The proportion of primary care patients eligible for inclusion in LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN) to 42% (ECLIPSE, UPLIFT). Conclusion: Primary care COPD patients stand out from patients enrolled in LPCS in terms of gender, lung function, quality of life and exacerbations. More research is needed to determine the effect of pharmacological treatment in mild to moderate patients. We encourage future guideline makers to involve primary care populations in their recommendations.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The relevant evidence generated from RCTs and observational studies with respect to the risk of cardiovascular disease with use of LABAs and LAMAs in management of COPD is detailed, and the contradictory findings in the literature are analyzed.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Each LABA/LAMA combination has a specific efficacy/safety profile that needs to be considered for personalized therapy in COPD even in the context of triple therapy.
Abstract: Triple therapy in COPD is becoming increasingly important with the cumulative documentation of its ability to reduce the risk of AECOPD However, it must be established which patients benefit most

8 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A protocol for an UNLOCK study from the IPCRG shows pharmacological randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to real-life asthma populations.
Abstract: Are pharmacological randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to real-life asthma populations? : A protocol for an UNLOCK study from the IPCRG

8 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This data indicates that asthma patients with a history of COPD and/or chronic bronchitis are at higher risk of developing obstructive bowel disease than the general population and should be considered for routine check-up.
Abstract: JWHK and JBS are Associate Editors of npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine, but were not involved in the editorial review of, nor the decision to publish, this article. None of the other authors declare any conflict of interest.

7 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
31 Jul 2017
TL;DR: Evidence synthesis suggested that depression, but not anxiety, is a predictor of use of unscheduled care in patients with LTCs, and low-intensity complex interventions reduce unscheduling care use in people with asthma and COPD.
Abstract: Background: Over 70% of the health-care budget in England is spent on the care of people with long-term conditions (LTCs), and a major cost component is unscheduled health care. Psychological morbidity is high in people with LTCs and is associated with a range of adverse outcomes, including increased mortality, poorer physical health outcomes, increased health costs and service utilisation. Objectives: The aim of this programme of research was to examine the relationship between psychological morbidity and use of unscheduled care in people with LTCs, and to develop a psychosocial intervention that would have the potential to reduce unscheduled care use. We focused largely on emergency hospital admissions (EHAs) and attendances at emergency departments (EDs). Design: A three-phase mixed-methods study. Research methods included systematic reviews; a longitudinal prospective cohort study in primary care to identify people with LTCs at risk of EHA or ED admission; a replication study in primary care using routinely collected data; an exploratory and feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care; and qualitative studies to identify personal reasons for the use of unscheduled care and factors in routine consultations in primary care that may influence health-care use. People with lived experience of LTCs worked closely with the research team. Setting: Primary care. Manchester and London. Participants: People aged ≥ 18 years with at least one of four common LTCs: asthma, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and diabetes. Participants also included health-care staff. Results: Evidence synthesis suggested that depression, but not anxiety, is a predictor of use of unscheduled care in patients with LTCs, and low-intensity complex interventions reduce unscheduled care use in people with asthma and COPD. The results of the prospective study were that depression, not having a partner and life stressors, in addition to prior use of unscheduled care, severity of illness and multimorbidity, were independent predictors of EHA and ED admission. Approximately half of the cost of health care for people with LTCs was accounted for by use of unscheduled care. The results of the replication study, carried out in London, broadly supported our findings for risk of ED attendances, but not EHAs. This was most likely due to low rates of detection of depression in general practitioner (GP) data sets. Qualitative work showed that patients were reluctant to use unscheduled care, deciding to do so when they perceived a serious and urgent need for care, and following previous experience that unscheduled care had successfully and unquestioningly met similar needs in the past. In general, emergency and primary care doctors did not regard unscheduled care as problematic. We found there are missed opportunities to identify and discuss psychosocial issues during routine consultations in primary care due to the ‘overmechanisation’ of routine health-care reviews. The feasibility trial examined two levels of an intervention for people with COPD: we tried to improve the way in which practices manage patients with COPD and developed a targeted psychosocial treatment for patients at risk of using unscheduled care. The former had low acceptability, whereas the latter had high acceptability. Exploratory health economic analyses suggested that the practice-level intervention would be unlikely to be cost-effective, limiting the value of detailed health economic modelling. Limitations: The findings of this programme may not apply to all people with LTCs. It was conducted in an area of high social deprivation, which may limit the generalisability to more affluent areas. The response rate to the prospective longitudinal study was low. The feasibility trial focused solely on people with COPD. Conclusions: Prior use of unscheduled care is the most powerful predictor of unscheduled care use in people with LTCs. However, psychosocial factors, particularly depression, are important additional predictors of use of unscheduled care in patients with LTCs, independent of severity and multimorbidity. Patients and health-care practitioners are unaware that psychosocial factors influence health-care use, and such factors are rarely acknowledged or addressed in consultations or discussions about use of unscheduled care. A targeted patient intervention for people with LTCs and comorbid depression has shown high levels of acceptability when delivered in a primary care context. An intervention at the level of the GP practice showed little evidence of acceptability or cost-effectiveness. Future work: The potential benefits of case-finding for depression in patients with LTCs in primary care need to be evaluated, in addition to further evaluation of the targeted patient intervention.

7 citations


Cites result from "Primary Care COPD Patients Compared..."

  • ...The range of severity of COPD (using the GOLD criteria) in our patient sample was similar to that in other studies on COPD conducted in primary care.(322) Baseline data from seven primary care databases reveal that the proportion of COPD patients with mild, moderate, severe and very severe disease is 20....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is recommended that spirometry is required for the clinical diagnosis of COPD to avoid misdiagnosis and to ensure proper evaluation of severity of airflow limitation.
Abstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major public health problem. It is the fourth leading cause of chronic morbidity and mortality in the United States, and is projected to rank fifth in 2020 in burden of disease worldwide, according to a study published by the World Bank/World Health Organization. Yet, COPD remains relatively unknown or ignored by the public as well as public health and government officials. In 1998, in an effort to bring more attention to COPD, its management, and its prevention, a committed group of scientists encouraged the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the World Health Organization to form the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Among the important objectives of GOLD are to increase awareness of COPD and to help the millions of people who suffer from this disease and die prematurely of it or its complications. The first step in the GOLD program was to prepare a consensus report, Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of COPD, published in 2001. The present, newly revised document follows the same format as the original consensus report, but has been updated to reflect the many publications on COPD that have appeared. GOLD national leaders, a network of international experts, have initiated investigations of the causes and prevalence of COPD in their countries, and developed innovative approaches for the dissemination and implementation of COPD management guidelines. We appreciate the enormous amount of work the GOLD national leaders have done on behalf of their patients with COPD. Despite the achievements in the 5 years since the GOLD report was originally published, considerable additional work is ahead of us if we are to control this major public health problem. The GOLD initiative will continue to bring COPD to the attention of governments, public health officials, health care workers, and the general public, but a concerted effort by all involved in health care will be necessary.

17,023 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Representatives from many countries serve as a network for the dissemination and implementation of programs for diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD.
Abstract: Representatives from many countries serve as a network for the dissemination and implementation of programs for diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD. The GOLD Board of Directors is grateful to the many GOLD National Leaders who participated in discussions of concepts that appear in GOLD reports.

3,165 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The reduction in death from all causes among patients with COPD in the combination-therapy group did not reach the predetermined level of statistical significance, and there were significant benefits in all other outcomes among these patients.
Abstract: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing salmeterol at a dose of 50 μg plus fluticasone propionate at a dose of 500 μg twice daily (combination regimen), administered with a single inhaler, with placebo, salmeterol alone, or fluticasone propionate alone for a period of 3 years. The primary outcome was death from any cause for the comparison between the combination regimen and placebo; the frequency of exacerbations, health status, and spirometric values were also assessed. Results Of 6112 patients in the efficacy population, 875 died within 3 years after the start of the study treatment. All-cause mortality rates were 12.6% in the combinationtherapy group, 15.2% in the placebo group, 13.5% in the salmeterol group, and 16.0% in the fluticasone group. The hazard ratio for death in the combination-therapy group, as compared with the placebo group, was 0.825 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.681 to 1.002; P = 0.052, adjusted for the interim analyses), corresponding to a difference of 2.6 percentage points or a reduction in the risk of death of 17.5%. The mortality rate for salmeterol alone or fluticasone propionate alone did not differ significantly from that for placebo. As compared with placebo, the combination regimen reduced the annual rate of exacerbations from 1.13 to 0.85 and improved health status and spirometric values (P<0.001 for all comparisons with placebo). There was no difference in the incidence of ocular or bone side effects. The probability of having pneumonia reported as an adverse event was higher among patients receiving medications containing fluticasone propionate (19.6% in the combination-therapy group and 18.3% in the fluticasone group) than in the placebo group (12.3%, P<0.001 for comparisons between these treatments and placebo). Conclusions The reduction in death from all causes among patients with COPD in the combinationtherapy group did not reach the predetermined level of statistical significance. There were significant benefits in all other outcomes among these patients. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00268216.)

3,037 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire is a standardized self-completed questionnaire for measuring impaired health and perceived well-being in airways disease and the background and rationale for its development are discussed together with an analysis of its performance.

2,621 citations


"Primary Care COPD Patients Compared..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...We used the St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) which is designed to measure health- related quality of life in patients with asthma and COPD [34]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Although exacerbations become more frequent and more severe as COPD progresses, the rate at which they occur appears to reflect an independent susceptibility phenotype, which has implications for the targeting of exacerbation-prevention strategies across the spectrum of disease severity.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Although we know that exacerbations are key events in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), our understanding of their frequency, determinants, and effects is incomplete. In a large observational cohort, we tested the hypothesis that there is a frequent-exacerbation phenotype of COPD that is independent of disease severity. METHODS: We analyzed the frequency and associations of exacerbation in 2138 patients enrolled in the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study. Exacerbations were defined as events that led a care provider to prescribe antibiotics or corticosteroids (or both) or that led to hospitalization (severe exacerbations). Exacerbation frequency was observed over a period of 3 years. RESULTS: Exacerbations became more frequent (and more severe) as the severity of COPD increased; exacerbation rates in the first year of follow-up were 0.85 per person for patients with stage 2 COPD (with stage defined in accordance with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stages), 1.34 for patients with stage 3, and 2.00 for patients with stage 4. Overall, 22% of patients with stage 2 disease, 33% with stage 3, and 47% with stage 4 had frequent exacerbations (two or more in the first year of follow-up). The single best predictor of exacerbations, across all GOLD stages, was a history of exacerbations. The frequent-exacerbation phenotype appeared to be relatively stable over a period of 3 years and could be predicted on the basis of the patient's recall of previous treated events. In addition to its association with more severe disease and prior exacerbations, the phenotype was independently associated with a history of gastroesophageal reflux or heartburn, poorer quality of life, and elevated white-cell count. CONCLUSIONS: Although exacerbations become more frequent and more severe as COPD progresses, the rate at which they occur appears to reflect an independent susceptibility phenotype. This has implications for the targeting of exacerbation-prevention strategies across the spectrum of disease severity. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00292552.)

2,459 citations


"Primary Care COPD Patients Compared..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Selection for large COPD studies The proportion of patients from primary care that would be eligible to be included in the LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN trial) to 42% (ECLIPSE and UPLIFT study) (Table 7)....

    [...]

  • ...In addition to five large trials, we decided to include the ECLIPSE cohort study as well, because this is an important observational study often cited in guidelines, especially with regard to exacerbation frequency patterns....

    [...]

  • ...Exacerbation data Individual datasets: UNLOCK studies reporting exacerbation data were compared with baseline data of the ISOLDE, TRISTAN, TORCH, UPLIFT and ECLIPSE studies (Table 3)....

    [...]

  • ...The proportion of primary care patients eligible for inclusion in LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN) to 42% (ECLIPSE, UPLIFT)....

    [...]

  • ...Overall mean MRC scores were similar in the UNLOCK studies compared to ECLIPSE: 2.1 (0.8) and 2.7 (1.1), respectively....

    [...]

Related Papers (5)