Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructivePhase 4NCT00267917
Evaluation of the Respimat Inhaler vs. a HFA MDI Using Berodual in Patients With COPD With Poor MDI Technique.
A Phase 4 study testing Berodual Respimat and Berodual HFA-MDI in people with Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive and Asthma, run by Boehringer Ingelheim at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
The objective of this trial is to compare the total and regional deposition of aerosol in the lungs and oropharynx of patients with COPD and known poor MDI inhalation technique following inhalation of Berodual delivered via the Respimat inhaler and Berodual delivered via an HFA-metered dose inhaler achieved with their… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Asthma
- What is being tested?
- Berodual Respimat and Berodual HFA-MDI
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 13 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- 17 Jan 2006to 27 Feb 2006
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 40 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- COPD patients: FEV1 less or equal 65% pre FEV1 less or equal 70% of FVC
Who cannot join
- Patients with any upper respiratory infection in the past 14 days prior to the screening visit (visit 1) Patients with any unstable or life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: A Randomised Open Label, Four Way, Cross-over Scintigraphic Evaluation of the Respimat Inhaler vs. a Metered Dose Inhaler (HFA-MDI) Using Berodual in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) With Poor MDI Technique.
The objective of this trial is to compare the total and regional deposition of aerosol in the lungs and oropharynx of patients with COPD and known poor MDI inhalation technique following inhalation of Berodual delivered via the Respimat inhaler and Berodual delivered via an HFA-metered dose inhaler achieved with their "natural" inhalation technique compared with taught "optimal" technique.
Read the detailed description
This is a single dose, randomised, active-controlled, four period, open-label cross-over trial in adult patients with COPD who have demonstrated a poor MDI technique. Berodual (fenoterol hydrobromide 50 μg + ipratropium bromide 20 μg) will be delivered via the Respimat inhaler on two test days and via the MDI on two test days. Test days with no instruction on correct usage will occur prior to the test days with taught technique, so that the patient's own technique will not be influenced by recent instruction.
Each device will thus first be used with no instructions on correct device use provided. On these no instruction test days each device will be demonstrated and patients will be allowed time to practice on their own with a placebo device. The second time each device is used full instructions will be provided on the correct usage with patients practicing with placebo either from the Respimat inhaler or from the MDI until they are judged competent. On these two test days the Respimat or MDI inhalers will be fired by the investigator one second after the patient has started to inhale. Thus on Test Days 1 and 2 patients will use their own natural inhalation technique without receiving any instruction on correct usage. On Test Days 3 and 4 patients will use a supervised optimal technique having received instruction on correct usage and with the investigator firing the device.
The primary analysis will be carried out using the Sign Test. This is a non-parametric analysis in which no assumptions are made about the shape of the distribution of the responses from the Respimat inhaler and from the MDI under the null hypothesis.
Study Hypothesis:
The null hypothesis is that poor technique has the same effect on the Respimat and MDI devices. The alternative hypothesis is that poor technique has a different effect on the Respimat inhaler than on the MDI. This means that under the null hypothesis the median of the differences between the Respimat inhaler and MDI pairs is zero i.e. the differences are equally likely to be positive or negative. Under the alternative hypothesis the median of the differences between the Respimat inhaler and MDI pairs is not zero i.e. the frequencies of the positive and negative signs are different.
Comparison(s):
Baseline comparability will be achieved by the use of a cross-over trial design with every patient receiving all four treatments and by ensuring at each test day that baseline lung function is within 15% of the value obtained at the first test day, pre-dose FEV1 is < 65% of predicted value and patients have abstained from inhaled bronchodilators for at least 4 hours prior to the visit. Treatment sequence will not be fitted as a term in the analysis of variance models.
- Conditions
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Asthma
- Being tested
- Berodual Respimat, Berodual HFA-MDI
- Medical subject headings
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Asthma
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Berodual RespimatDevice
Berodual HFA-MDIDevice
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The primary endpoint is the percentage of lung deposition achieved with natural inhaler technique compared with supervised optimal administration.
Measured: up to 6 weeks
Secondary outcomes (6)
Central lung zone deposition
Measured: 8 weeks
Intermediate lung zone deposition
Measured: 8 weeks
Peripheral lung zone deposition
Measured: 8 weeks
Ratio of peripheral lung zone to central lung zone deposition
Measured: 8 weeks
Oropharyngeal deposition
Measured: 8 weeks
FEV1 15, 30 and 60 minutes post-administration (safety only)
Measured: 8 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Dec 2005 (estimated)
- Study start17 Jan 2006
- Primary completion27 Feb 2006
- Study completion27 Feb 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Boehringer IngelheimThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 13 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Boehringer Ingelheim
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Boehringer Ingelheim Study Coordinator, Study chair, B.I. Pharma GmbH & Co. KG
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00267917
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 215.1365
- Status last verified
- Dec 2023
- First submitted
- 21 Dec 2005
- Last updated
- 14 Dec 2023
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Dec 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomised Open Label, Four Way, Cross-over Scintigraphic Evaluation of the Respimat Inhaler vs. a Metered Dose Inhaler (HFA-MDI) Using Berodual in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) With Poor MDI Technique.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00267917
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 215.1365
- Conditions
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Asthma
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 13 participants
- Lead sponsor
- Boehringer IngelheimIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 17 Jan 2006 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 27 Feb 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- 27 Feb 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Dec 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The objective of this trial is to compare the total and regional deposition of aerosol in the lungs and oropharynx of patients with COPD and known poor MDI inhalation technique following inhalation of Berodual delivered via the Respimat inhaler and Berodual delivered via an HFA-metered dose inhaler achieved with their "natural" inhalation technique compared with taught "optimal" technique.
Detailed description
This is a single dose, randomised, active-controlled, four period, open-label cross-over trial in adult patients with COPD who have demonstrated a poor MDI technique. Berodual (fenoterol hydrobromide 50 μg + ipratropium bromide 20 μg) will be delivered via the Respimat inhaler on two test days and via the MDI on two test days. Test days with no instruction on correct usage will occur prior to the test days with taught technique, so that the patient's own technique will not be influenced by recent instruction.
Each device will thus first be used with no instructions on correct device use provided. On these no instruction test days each device will be demonstrated and patients will be allowed time to practice on their own with a placebo device. The second time each device is used full instructions will be provided on the correct usage with patients practicing with placebo either from the Respimat inhaler or from the MDI until they are judged competent. On these two test days the Respimat or MDI inhalers will be fired by the investigator one second after the patient has started to inhale. Thus on Test Days 1 and 2 patients will use their own natural inhalation technique without receiving any instruction on correct usage. On Test Days 3 and 4 patients will use a supervised optimal technique having received instruction on correct usage and with the investigator firing the device.
The primary analysis will be carried out using the Sign Test. This is a non-parametric analysis in which no assumptions are made about the shape of the distribution of the responses from the Respimat inhaler and from the MDI under the null hypothesis.
Study Hypothesis:
The null hypothesis is that poor technique has the same effect on the Respimat and MDI devices. The alternative hypothesis is that poor technique has a different effect on the Respimat inhaler than on the MDI. This means that under the null hypothesis the median of the differences between the Respimat inhaler and MDI pairs is zero i.e. the differences are equally likely to be positive or negative. Under the alternative hypothesis the median of the differences between the Respimat inhaler and MDI pairs is not zero i.e. the frequencies of the positive and negative signs are different.
Comparison(s):
Baseline comparability will be achieved by the use of a cross-over trial design with every patient receiving all four treatments and by ensuring at each test day that baseline lung function is within 15% of the value obtained at the first test day, pre-dose FEV1 is < 65% of predicted value and patients have abstained from inhaled bronchodilators for at least 4 hours prior to the visit. Treatment sequence will not be fitted as a term in the analysis of variance models.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- COPD patients: FEV1 less or equal 65% pre FEV1 less or equal 70% of FVC
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with any upper respiratory infection in the past 14 days prior to the screening visit (visit 1) Patients with any unstable or life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Berodual Respimat | Device | – |
| Berodual HFA-MDI | Device | – |
Primary outcome
The primary endpoint is the percentage of lung deposition achieved with natural inhaler technique compared with supervised optimal administration.
Time frame: up to 6 weeks
6 secondary outcomes
Central lung zone deposition
Time frame: 8 weeks
Intermediate lung zone deposition
Time frame: 8 weeks
Peripheral lung zone deposition
Time frame: 8 weeks
Ratio of peripheral lung zone to central lung zone deposition
Time frame: 8 weeks
Oropharyngeal deposition
Time frame: 8 weeks
FEV1 15, 30 and 60 minutes post-administration (safety only)
Time frame: 8 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Dec 2023.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
Active, not recruiting
Symptoms and Functions in Patients With COPD and Chronic Bronchitis Switching From CIG to THS
COPD, Smoking
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
An Open-Label Extension Study to Evaluate Inhaled Treprostinil SMI in Participants With Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (PH-COPD)
Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Not yet recruiting
The Aim of the Study is to Decipher the Alterations in Signalling Pathways of Skeletal Muscle Stem Cells (Satellite Cells (SCs)) in Individuals With COPD, as Well as to Examine the Effect of Exercise Training on SCs.
COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), Sarcopenia in Elderly
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Study of Treprostinil Administered Via Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) in Participants With Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (PH-COPD)
Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of Belumosudil Compared With Best Available Therapy in Participants Aged 12 Years or Older With Chronic Graft-versus-host Disease
Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Boehringer Ingelheim Study Coordinator study chair
B.I. Pharma GmbH & Co. KG
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Berodual Respimat and Berodual HFA-MDI in people with Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive and Asthma, run by Boehringer Ingelheim at 1 site in Germany.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Dec 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The primary endpoint is the percentage of lung deposition achieved with natural inhaler technique compared with supervised optimal administration. (time frame: up to 6 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Dec 2023.