What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD?

Peter MA Calverley, Stephen Israel Rennard

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

54 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although the development of effective treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been seen as a high priority, the past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of clinical studies examining different treatments for this disease. Large studies are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of treatment because of the chronic nature of the disease and the intermittent occurrence of some key outcomes such as exacerbations. Data from randomised controlled trials show that treatment improves exercise performance by increasing lung volume rather than changing expiratory flow. Although assessment of lung function remains the cornerstone of drug assessment, improvements in health status, the number of exacerbations and admissions to hospital are now recognised as important treatment outcomes. Randomised controlled trial data provide the best evidence for treatment efficacy, but results of these studies can be affected by differences in inclusion criteria and patient dropout during the study. Bronchodilator reversibility testing does not reliably define subgroups that will respond to a particular treatment. Carefully done and adequately powered clinical trials continue to inform, not only our views about treatment, but also our understanding of COPD and how it is best assessed and managed. Ensuring that these expensive studies are done objectively to the highest standard is an important goal for the next decade.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)774-785
Number of pages12
JournalLancet
Volume370
Issue number9589
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2007

Fingerprint

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Randomized Controlled Trials
Therapeutics
Lung
Patient Dropouts
Bronchodilator Agents
Health Status
Chronic Disease
Clinical Trials
Exercise

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD? / Calverley, Peter MA; Rennard, Stephen Israel.

In: Lancet, Vol. 370, No. 9589, 01.09.2007, p. 774-785.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Calverley, Peter MA ; Rennard, Stephen Israel. / What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD?. In: Lancet. 2007 ; Vol. 370, No. 9589. pp. 774-785.
@article{7b2161d6a3dd4d728970a7105722f5d2,
title = "What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD?",
abstract = "Although the development of effective treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been seen as a high priority, the past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of clinical studies examining different treatments for this disease. Large studies are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of treatment because of the chronic nature of the disease and the intermittent occurrence of some key outcomes such as exacerbations. Data from randomised controlled trials show that treatment improves exercise performance by increasing lung volume rather than changing expiratory flow. Although assessment of lung function remains the cornerstone of drug assessment, improvements in health status, the number of exacerbations and admissions to hospital are now recognised as important treatment outcomes. Randomised controlled trial data provide the best evidence for treatment efficacy, but results of these studies can be affected by differences in inclusion criteria and patient dropout during the study. Bronchodilator reversibility testing does not reliably define subgroups that will respond to a particular treatment. Carefully done and adequately powered clinical trials continue to inform, not only our views about treatment, but also our understanding of COPD and how it is best assessed and managed. Ensuring that these expensive studies are done objectively to the highest standard is an important goal for the next decade.",
author = "Calverley, {Peter MA} and Rennard, {Stephen Israel}",
year = "2007",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61381-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "370",
pages = "774--785",
journal = "The Lancet",
issn = "0140-6736",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "9589",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What have we learned from large drug treatment trials in COPD?

AU - Calverley, Peter MA

AU - Rennard, Stephen Israel

PY - 2007/9/1

Y1 - 2007/9/1

N2 - Although the development of effective treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been seen as a high priority, the past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of clinical studies examining different treatments for this disease. Large studies are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of treatment because of the chronic nature of the disease and the intermittent occurrence of some key outcomes such as exacerbations. Data from randomised controlled trials show that treatment improves exercise performance by increasing lung volume rather than changing expiratory flow. Although assessment of lung function remains the cornerstone of drug assessment, improvements in health status, the number of exacerbations and admissions to hospital are now recognised as important treatment outcomes. Randomised controlled trial data provide the best evidence for treatment efficacy, but results of these studies can be affected by differences in inclusion criteria and patient dropout during the study. Bronchodilator reversibility testing does not reliably define subgroups that will respond to a particular treatment. Carefully done and adequately powered clinical trials continue to inform, not only our views about treatment, but also our understanding of COPD and how it is best assessed and managed. Ensuring that these expensive studies are done objectively to the highest standard is an important goal for the next decade.

AB - Although the development of effective treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been seen as a high priority, the past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of clinical studies examining different treatments for this disease. Large studies are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of treatment because of the chronic nature of the disease and the intermittent occurrence of some key outcomes such as exacerbations. Data from randomised controlled trials show that treatment improves exercise performance by increasing lung volume rather than changing expiratory flow. Although assessment of lung function remains the cornerstone of drug assessment, improvements in health status, the number of exacerbations and admissions to hospital are now recognised as important treatment outcomes. Randomised controlled trial data provide the best evidence for treatment efficacy, but results of these studies can be affected by differences in inclusion criteria and patient dropout during the study. Bronchodilator reversibility testing does not reliably define subgroups that will respond to a particular treatment. Carefully done and adequately powered clinical trials continue to inform, not only our views about treatment, but also our understanding of COPD and how it is best assessed and managed. Ensuring that these expensive studies are done objectively to the highest standard is an important goal for the next decade.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548227410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548227410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61381-6

DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61381-6

M3 - Review article

VL - 370

SP - 774

EP - 785

JO - The Lancet

JF - The Lancet

SN - 0140-6736

IS - 9589

ER -