Abstract
Current guidelines for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) establish that bronchodilator medications are central to the symptomatic treatment of the disease. Regular treatment with long-acting bronchodilators is recommended as more effective and convenient than short-acting bronchodilators, because the long-acting agents provide greater bronchodilator efficacy and symptomatic relief, increased tolerance to exercise, and improved rate of exacerbations and quality of life test scores. Dosing regimens requiring less frequent dosing also provide improved treatment compliance. Indacaterol is a novel once-daily ultra-long-acting β2-agonist bronchodilator now approved in the European Union for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of airflow obstruction in adult patients with COPD, to be administered as 150 or 300 µg once-daily dose by means of a single-dose dry powder inhaler. This review focuses on providing a clinical practice-oriented synopsis of the data generated from the randomized trials during the clinical development of indacaterol, published as of the time of writing. Indacaterol has been shown to provide effective 24-h bronchodilation and a fast onset of action, with an efficacy at least comparable or superior to current bronchodilator therapy standards and with a favourable safety and tolerability profile within the β2-agonist drug class.
Keywords
Introduction
The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD Executive and Scientific Committees) [GOLD, 2009] has established on the basis of an evidence A level that: (i) bronchodilator medications are central to the symptomatic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); (ii) the principal bronchodilator treatments are β2-agonists, anticholinergics and methylxanthines used singly or in combination; and (iii) regular treatment with long-acting bronchodilators is more effective and convenient than treatment with short-acting bronchodilators. Bronchodilators are therefore the cornerstone treatment for all COPD severity stages.
Upon the advent of long-acting bronchodilators, namely the twice-daily β2-agonists formoterol and salmeterol and the once-daily anticholinergic tiotropium, the regular use of these active principles was shown to be more effective and beneficial than treatment with short-acting bronchodilators for the management of COPD, in terms of providing greater bronchodilator efficacy and symptomatic relief, increased tolerance to exercise, and improved rate of exacerbations and quality of life test scores [Neder et al. 2007; Maltais et al. 2005; O’Donnell et al. 2004; Vincken et al. 2002; Dahl et al. 2001; Mahler et al. 1999]. Furthermore, dosing regimens requiring less-frequent dosing were shown to be associated with improved patient compliance with therapies [Claxton et al. 2001]. Therefore, an effective once-daily β2-agonist bronchodilator would add a significant advance to the therapeutic toolbox for COPD.
As of 30 November 2009, indacaterol (formerly QAB149) was approved in the European Union for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of airflow obstruction in adult patients with COPD [EMEA, 2009a], to be administered as a 150 or 300 µg indacaterol maleate once-daily dose and delivered by means of a single-dose dry powder inhaler (SDDPI). Since indacaterol has now become commercially available for prescription, the main focus of this review is on compiling and summarizing the published body of evidence generated as of today from the randomized trials performed along the clinical development of the drug as a COPD therapy, so as to contribute an independent, clinical practice-oriented synopsis.
Pharmacological profile and preclinical data
Sequential modifications of the chemical structure of catecholamines [Aranson and Rau, 1999] allowed the synthesis of agonists with improved selectivity for the β2-adrenoreceptor and led to the subsequent development of short-acting β2-bronchodilators such as fenoterol, salbutamol (albuterol) and terbutaline, and the long-acting β2-agonists salmeterol and formoterol. Figure 1 outlines the intracellular signalling pathways involved in the mechanism of action of β2-adrenergic bronchodilators.
Mechanism of action of β2-agonist bronchodilators. The diagram outlines the signalling pathways involved in airway smooth muscle contraction and β2-adrenoreceptor induced relaxation. Contractile agents such as acetylcholine (Ach), metacholine (MCh) or histamine (Hist) bind G-protein coupled receptors such as the muscarinic receptor or the histamine H2 receptor. Upon ligand interaction with the receptor, the α receptor subunit (Gsα) is activated through phosphorylation of its guanosine-diphosphate group (GDP) into GTP, which induces dissociation of the Gsα-GTP subunit from the receptor complex. The released Gsα-GTP subunit activates phospholipase C (PLC), which catalyses the hydrolysis of inositol-4,5-bisphosphate (IP2) into inositol-3,4,5-trisphosphate (IP3) and diacylglycerol (DAG). IP3 acts on the sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) to open calcium channels and induce calcium transients (a quick increase of cytosolic calcium concentration from about 10−7 to 10−5 M). The calcium transient promotes the binding of calmodulin to myosin light chain kinase (MLCK). As a result, MLCK is activated and phosphorylates the myosin light chain, which in turn triggers myocyte contraction. In addition, DAG activates protein kinase C (PKC), which inhibits the myosin light chain phosphatase (MLCP) thus preventing inactivation of the myosin light chain and favouring contraction. The β2-adrenoreceptor is a G-protein-coupled receptor as well. Upon binding of the receptor by physiological or pharmacological β2-agonists, the released Gsα-GTP subunit activates membrane-anchored adenylate cyclase (AC), which catalyses the conversion of adenosine trisphosphate (ATP) into cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP). The increase in cytosol cAMP activates protein kinase A (PKA), which in turn activates various pathways (K+ channels, Na+-K+ exchanger, Na+-K+ pump) leading to a state of membrane hyperpolarization. Concurrently, PKA inactivates MLCK and activates MLCP. These effects jointly result in myocyte relaxation.
In vitro studies during the preclinical development of indacaterol [Battram et al. 2006] characterized this new agent as a having a high agonist efficacy at the human β2-adrenoreceptor, with a binding affinity similar to formoterol, an intrinsic activity higher than salmeterol, and a functional selectivity similar to formoterol over the β1-adrenoreceptor, and similar to formoterol and salbutamol over the β3-adrenoreceptor. In isolated superfused guinea pig trachea [Battram et al. 2006], small airways in human and rat slices [Trifilieff et al. 2006] and isolated human bronchi obtained from surgical lung specimens resected due to carcinoma [Naline et al. 2007], indacaterol showed a fast onset of action similar to salbutamol and formoterol but significantly faster than salmeterol, and a long duration of action. In vivo, indacaterol produced a prolonged bronchoprotective effect against pharmacologically induced bronchoconstriction, and showed an improved cardiovascular safety profile [Battram et al. 2006]. The preclinical data suggested therefore that indacaterol was suitable for clinical development aiming at once-daily dosing in humans.
Reports on pharmacokinetics [EMEA, 2009b; Rennard et al. 2008] showed that indacaterol is rapidly absorbed and distributed after inhalation, with a median time to reach peak serum concentrations of approximately 15 minutes after single or repeated inhaled doses, although systemic exposure results from a composite of pulmonary and intestinal absorption. The absolute bioavailability after an inhaled dose is on average 43%. The drug is detectable in serum in dose-dependent concentrations, and a slight accumulation occurs upon administration of multiple daily doses, which reaches a steady state within 12–14 days of treatment. The plasma protein binding fraction is 95.1–96.2% in humans. Unchanged indacaterol is the main component found in serum, and a hydroxylated derivative is its most prominent metabolite. The biliary excretion route is the major route of elimination of indacaterol and its metabolites, whereas renal excretion plays a minor role (about 2–5% of systemic clearance). Based on rat data, it is estimated that the maximum amount of indacaterol and/or its metabolites that a breast-fed infant could be exposed to by ingesting 1 L of milk daily is 0.18% of a 300 µg adult dose.
In the toxicological assessments [EMEA, 2009b], indacaterol was considered negative in the standard battery of in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests, and did not raise concerns regarding potential carcinogenicity. There was as well no evidence of teratogenicity in the embryo–foetal development studies. An analysis of the effect of age, gender and weight on systemic exposure after inhalation indicated that indacaterol can be used safely in all age and weight groups within the COPD population, and regardless of gender. No difference was suggested either between ethnic subgroups in the population analysed. Studies on the potential for drug–drug interaction, based of co-administration of indacaterol with pharmacological inhibitors of core enzymes involved in drug metabolism, raised no clinically relevant concerns for the authorized indacaterol doses.
Clinical development
Published clinical trial outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Entries are grouped by trial where appropriate, and listed from the year of the oldest report. Interventions are double blind unless specified as ‘open-label’.
AUC, standardized area under the curve; BID, bis in die (twice a day); FEV1, forced expiratory volume in one second; FVC, forced vital capacity; IC. inspiratory capacity; MDDPI, multiple-dose dry powder inhaler; PEF, peak expiratory flow; SDDPI, single-dose dry powder inhaler; SGRQ, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire; SID, semel in die (once a day); TDI, Transition Dyspnea Index.
The inspiratory capacity (IC), both at rest and during constant-load exercise on cycle ergometer, was evaluated in some of the trials. Despite the established role of the FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratio in assessing the diagnosis and severity of COPD, the changes in spirometric values do not correlate well with the level of exertional dyspnoea and exercise capacity, and have been shown to be limited as predictors of clinical improvement in response to bronchodilators [O’Donnell et al. 1999]. The IC at rest is an indirect indicator of functional residual capacity and therefore the degree of resting hyperinflation, and is a good predictor of the extent of dynamic hyperinflation during exercise [Boni et al. 2002; O’Donnell et al. 2001]. In fact, reduction of dyspnoea during exercise and improved exercise tolerance upon the administration of a bronchodilator are closely related to the bronchodilator-induced change in IC at rest [Boni et al. 2002]. Moreover, an increased IC as measured by serial determinations during exercise serves as an index of reduced dynamic hyperinflation that best reflects the improvements in exercise endurance and the relief of exertional dyspnoea following β2-agonist or anticholinergic therapy [O’Donnell et al. 1998; Belman et al. 1996]. The IC has therefore been proposed to be used in conjunction with the FEV1 to evaluate therapeutic responses in patients with COPD. A single 300 µg indacaterol dose improved IC at rest significantly at all time points from 5 minutes to 24 hours, providing a mean peak IC increment of 380 ml over placebo and 31% over predose baseline [Beier et al. 2009]. After a 2-week treatment with indacaterol 300 µg daily, mean peak- and iso-time IC during constant-load cycle-ergometer exercise were increased by 317 and 268 ml over placebo, respectively, which exceeded a predefined clinically relevant difference of 200 ml [Beeh et al. 2009a, 2009b; Khindri et al. 2009a].
Beyond lung function parameters, patient-oriented clinical endpoints reflecting quality of life, symptoms and exacerbation rates are also relevant in the long-term evaluation of therapies for COPD. Indacaterol led to improved scores in: questionnaires such as the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale; risk assessment by means of the BODE (body-mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnoea and exercise capacity) index [Celli et al. 2004]; home monitoring of morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF); recording of the use of rescue medication; follow up of COPD exacerbations (frequency, time to first exacerbation, mean number of exacerbations); and other quality-of-life-related variables such as the numbers of nights with no awakenings, days with no symptoms, days with no rescue medication and days able to perform usual activities.
In addition to the placebo-controlled assessments of the therapeutic efficacy of indacaterol, noninferiority and superiority hypotheses were tested to compare indacaterol with the long-acting β2-agonists salmeterol and formoterol, and the long-acting anticholinergic tiotropium. Different approaches were employed for the comparative trials, including parallel-group and crossover designs, and the use of double-blind interventions and open-label treatments. Formoterol 12 µg and salmeterol 50 µg, twice daily, were comparators as both open-label and double-blind treatments in various trials. In double-blind trials, indacaterol 300 µg once daily was reported to produce a significantly greater trough FEV1 compared with formoterol, on day 1 and weeks 12, 26 and 52 in different studies [Barnes et al. 2010; Dahl et al. 2010; Bauwens et al. 2009]. The AUC(30 min-4 h) was reported as similar to formoterol in a single-dose study [Bauwens et al. 2009]. Also in a double-blind fashion, the trough FEV1 at weeks 12 and 26 was significantly higher with indacaterol 150 µg daily versus salmeterol [Kornmann et al. 2010]. Comparisons with formoterol or salmeterol also resulted in a favourable view regarding indacaterol in other endpoints such as improvements beyond minimum clinically important difference in the mean TDI, time point at which differences versus placebo reached clinical relevance in the SGRQ, decrease of use of rescue medication, PEF increases, nights with no awakenings, days with no daytime symptoms, and days able to perform usual activities.
Tiotropium 18 µg once daily was employed as an open-label treatment in all comparative trials published at the time of writing, with one exception [Vogelmeier et al. 2010] where a double-blind procedure was applied. The first study that compared indacaterol with tiotropium [Rennard et al. 2008] applied an indirect approach with two treatment periods: (i) a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 7-day dose-ranging trial of indacaterol; and (ii) a subsequent 8-day extension with open-label tiotropium. The indacaterol doses assessed during the dose-ranging block of the study (50, 100, 200 or 400 µg once daily) provided a FEV1 AUC comparable or superior to subsequent open-label tiotropium 18 µg, at 0–4 hours on day 1, and at 0–4 and 22–24 hours on days 7 and 8, respectively. The serial postdose FEV1 mean values were consistent with the FEV1 AUC trend and exceeded a 120 ml difference over tiotropium for indacaterol 400 µg, administered via a SDDPI device. Bearing the limitations of being a short trial where tiotropium was administered in an open-label fashion, as an extension treatment block for all subjects in the absence of a randomized crossover design, the results were interpreted as suggestive of a greater efficacy of indacaterol that warranted further trials specifically designed to address this comparison. Two subsequent trials included a tiotropium arm also in an open-label fashion, but with a parallel-group design and a duration of 26 weeks [Barnes et al. 2010; Donohue et al. 2010]. In the study reported by Donohue and colleagues the increment over placebo of trough FEV1 attained with indacaterol 300 and 600 µg was significantly greater than that of open-label tiotropium at week 12, but not at week 26. Total SGRQ scores improved significantly over placebo with indacaterol, but not with open-label tiotropium, at four assessment time points; the percentage of nights with no awakenings, days with no symptoms and days with no rescue medication was significantly greater with indacaterol versus open-label tiotropium. The study by Barnes and colleagues employed an open-label tiotropium arm as a reference of bronchodilator efficacy for an indacaterol dose-finding trial stage, and the data analysis strategy did not aim at drawing conclusions on an indacaterol versus tiotropium comparison. The data on day 15 (end of the dose-finding stage) reflect, however, on the basis of 95% confidence intervals, a higher mean trough FEV1 difference versus placebo for indacaterol 300 and 600 µg, and a higher FEV1 AUC(1–4 h) for indacaterol 300 µg, in comparison with tiotropium. In the trial reported by Vogelmeier and colleagues a double-blind comparison was conducted by means of a three 14-day period (incomplete block) crossover design, where the patients were randomized into one of four treatment sequences combining indacaterol 150 or 300 µg, tiotropium 12 µg and placebo. After 14 days of treatment, the trough FEV1 was numerically greater versus tiotropium for both indacaterol doses and significantly higher for the 150 µg dose. Serial FEV1 measurements from –50 minutes predose to 14 hours postdose were numerically greater for both indacaterol doses versus tiotropium at all time points assessed, and significantly higher for the 150 µg dose at –50 to 30 minutes, 12 hours, and 23 hours and 10 minutes. As per the onset of bronchodilator effect on day 1, the increases from baseline at 5 minutes postdose were 60 ml with tiotropium, 130 ml with indacaterol 150 µg, and 140 ml with indacaterol 300 µg, significant versus tiotropium for both indacaterol doses. The difference in the increments remained significant for both indacaterol doses versus tiotropium at 15 minutes postdose, and for the 300 µg indacaterol dose at 30 and 60 minutes. Overall, the data from this double-blind trial were consistent with prior results using tiotropium as open label, and were reported as confirmatory of a clinically relevant 24-h bronchodilator effect of indacaterol at least as effective as tiotropium, with a faster onset of action.
Safety profile and side effects
Systemic bioavailability of β2-agonist bronchodilators can elicit known β2-adrenoceptor-mediated cardiovascular effects [Sears, 2002; Maconochie and Foster, 1992; Wong et al. 1990; Crane et al. 1989; Scheinin et al. 1987], such as palpitations, tachycardia, changes in blood pressure and electrocardiographic abnormalities such as a prolonged QT interval, as well as hypokalemia, hyperglycaemia, headache, and skeletal muscle tremor. The available data for indacaterol support overall an excellent safety profile, with no relevance of its long duration of action in terms of side effects.
In asthma (an indication under development), two studies where the indacaterol daily doses were scaled up to 800 µg [Yang et al. 2007] and 1000 µg [Brookman et al. 2007], respectively, yielded results consistent with the good safety profile shown for therapeutic doses in other studies. In the study by Yang and colleagues with 144 patients randomized, two patients had a serious adverse event reported thought to be related to the study drug, which was described as bronchospasm associated with dyspnoea and wheezing. The episodes occurred shortly after dosing with no obvious link with decreased FEV1. No serious adverse events occurred in the study by Brookman and colleagues where 1000 µg doses were tested.
In COPD patients, a large data set was generated from various studies primarily aimed at dose ranging and safety analysis [Feldman et al. 2010; Chung et al. 2009a, 2009b; Khindri et al. 2009b, 2009c; Worth et al. 2009; Beier et al. 2008, 2007; Rennard et al. 2008; Pascoe et al. 2007]. Safety variables were also secondary endpoints in all studies primarily aimed at efficacy endpoints. Overall, the rate of adverse events was low and similar across treatment groups in the different trials. There was no evidence of drug- or dose-related changes in haematological parameters, and no clinically relevant differences were observed between treatment groups in any of the biochemical variables measured. Statistically significant differences versus placebo in postdose blood glucose and potassium levels occurred occasionally at particular doses and isolated time points and were considered not clinically relevant [Rennard et al. 2008]. The incidence of other β2-agonist-related effects, including muscle spasm, headache and tremor, was comparable between indacaterol and placebo groups. Data generated across a wide dose range support a good cardiovascular safety, with no clinically significant differences in mean pulse rate, no drug-related trends in systolic or diastolic blood pressure, no statistically significant differences in mean QTc interval, and no differences in the numbers of subjects with notable QTc interval increases. Serious adverse events in subjects receiving indacaterol occurred with frequencies similar or inferior to placebo groups, and none were classed as suspected to be related to the study drug in COPD patients, in the trials reported. In a study that assessed the safety and tolerability of supra-therapeutic doses of indacaterol up to 3000 µg [Pascoe et al. 2007], most adverse events were mild or moderate, with none considered serious or leading to withdrawal. Minimal effects reported on potassium, glucose, heart rate and QTc interval, were considered within safe limits.
In various trials, cough upon treatment dosing was reported with a mean frequency ranging from 2.9% to 17.8% in indacaterol groups and 0.9% to 7.3% in placebo groups. The cough was described [Feldman et al. 2010] as occurring within 15 seconds following drug inhalation, with a median duration of 6 seconds, and with no association with bronchospasm or increased study discontinuation rates. In a dose-ranging trial where 635 patients were randomized to receive indacaterol 50, 100, 200 or 400 µg or placebo via a MDDPI, or indacaterol 400 µg via SDDPI, once daily for 7 days [Rennard et al. 2008], the occurrence of cough did not persist with continued treatment, and by day 7 the incidence of cough with indacaterol matched that of placebo. In this study, headache was reported with a frequency comparable across treatment groups (3.6–6.7%), except for a higher incidence (11.4%) in the 200 µg group.
Regarding former concerns on the safety of long-acting β2-agonists in asthma in terms of an association with an increase in asthma-related deaths and life-threatening episodes [Martinez, 2006, 2005], no issues of this nature have been raised in COPD. In asthma, current disease management guidelines [GINA, 2009] establish that long-acting β2-agonists should never be used as monotherapy, whereas they provide therapeutic benefit when combined with inhaled glucocorticosteroids, and this combination therapy is the preferred treatment when a medium dose of inhaled glucocorticosteroid alone fails to achieve control of asthma. In COPD, the GOLD guidelines [GOLD, 2009] establish long-acting bronchodilators as first-line therapy (added to a short-acting rescue bronchodilator when needed) for subjects with moderate or upper severity disease stages.
Conclusions
Indacaterol, a novel once-daily ultra-long-acting β2-agonist bronchodilator now approved in the European Union for COPD, provides effective 24-h bronchodilation and a fast onset of action with an efficacy at least comparable or superior to current bronchodilator therapy standards. The data from clinical development support a favourable safety and tolerability profile within the β2-agonist drug class, with no relevant issues identified. The recommended dose is 150 µg once daily, delivered with a SDDPI device. A 300 µg per capsule presentation for once-daily dosing is also approved and may provide additional clinical benefit for patients with severe COPD. The maximum dose is 300 µg once daily. Current evidence supports that indacaterol is suitable for use as first-line monotherapy in those COPD patients with moderate disease (GOLD Stage II) and beyond that do not require inhaled corticosteroids as per GOLD guidelines, or in combination with an inhaled corticosteroid in severe or very severe patients with repeated exacerbations. As with long-acting bronchodilators, a short-acting bronchodilator such as salbutamol/albuterol can be employed as on-demand rescue medication if needed. Further research should provide evidence on the benefits and safety profile of combining indacaterol with a long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator.
Footnotes
Funding
NSB is supported by the Government of Galicia (Xunta de Galicia), Rx + D + i Program (INCITE09-916-360PR), Spain. OA-C is the recipient of a graduate research training contract from the Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria (FIS, fund # FI07/00399) of the Ministry of Science and Innovation, Spain. DR-B is supported by an investigator contract with the National Health System of Spain (FIS fund # CP04/00313) and is an adjunct professor at the Department of Medicine of McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Conflict of interest statement
N.S. Brienza (registered respiratory therapist, certified clinical research coordinator, MSc) provides institutional logistic support for the execution of respiratory clinical trials sponsored by Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, Nycomed, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Amgen. O. Amor-Carro (BSc/Biolgy, MSc) has no conflict of interest statements. D. Ramos-Barbón has received travel support for attendance at meetings and conferences and/or noncommercial lecture fees from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis and Almirall; has received consulting fees as an expert panel member from GlaxoSmithKline; and is a site investigator in clinical trials sponsored by Novartis, AstraZeneca and Amgen. The authors declare that no current or potential conflict of interest exists related to commercial outcomes of indacaterol or other therapies for respiratory disease.
